News Zootopia and Moana Blue Sky concepts for Disney's Animal Kingdom

[Goofy213]

Why can't they go back to regions instead of specific lands. We already have Africa and Asia which are the 2 largest regions of the parks. Then you have Discovery Island which is mainly the Tree of Life and Tough to be a Bug. Of course Pandora is technically not a region of Earth, but has become it's own land like Batuu. The Nemo stage show is off on it's own and then Dinoland that never really fit at all. I would prefer a South American region, or Australian, or if you want Moana an Asian Pacfic region in the park. Ok I understand IPs have their place when it comes to meet and greets and attractions, but can we focus on regions and environments on earth that are unique to there region. Yes, attractions like the Safari and Lion King fit in Africa, and Everest and Kali fit in Asia, but the original focus was the exploration trails in both those lands and the unique creatures from those regions. Moana is a great Ip to market off of, but what animals can it focus on in the park. A chicken, a giant crab, or a half man half shark, non of this makes sense. As hated as the film was can we switch the area to South American and change Dinosaur to an Indy Attraction (as it originally was designed for) and use the truck chase scene in the 4th movie for a theme for the ride. Then we would be able to bring in animals from South America and create a new trail where the Dino Spin coaster was. The other option would be Australia which would tie in both Nemo and Dinosaur as they are and would provide the opportunity to bring in unique creatures like Kangroos, Koalas, and Crocs to the area. A new aquarium would be great as well and could be themed to the Great Barrier reef in place of the old coaster. I apologize for the lengthy rant, but there is always hope someone from Disney themselves could see some of these suggestions. Thank you for allowing me to speak up.

 

[doctornick]

Why can't they go back to regions instead of specific lands. We already have Africa and Asia which are the 2 largest regions of the parks. Then you have Discovery Island which is mainly the Tree of Life and Tough to be a Bug. Of course Pandora is technically not a region of Earth, but has become it's own land like Batuu. The Nemo stage show is off on it's own and then Dinoland that never really fit at all. I would prefer a South American region, or Australian, or if you want Moana an Asian Pacfic region in the park.

Who knows if that will come to pass, but that’s exactly what is being discussed with Nemo + Moana (located on the Dinorama plot) being designated as a new land like Oceania or something similar

 

[BlakeW39]

So, again, by that logic would WALL-E fit in Animal Kingdom?

No, WALL-E doesn't fit in Animal Kingdom. While it does have an environmental subtext, the film is largely not set on earth and the inclusion of nature is relegated to one small plant. There are no animals featured throughout the entire film. WALL-E's subject matter differs considerably from DAK, to the point where no amount of imagineering could make it work in the park. Just because a film has similar themes to DAK does not mean it can automatically fit, when the subject matter, art style etc. differ so greatly.

And I still don't think the Te Fiti plotline automatically means that Moana and Maui belong in Animal Kingdom. Surely there are other IPs that both focus on animals AND the "intrinsic value of nature, psychological transformation of nature, and a personal call to conservational action".

And this is one of the fundamental problems with the IP mandate. It's extremely limiting to what imagineering can do. No dinosaur IP? No dinosaurs in DAK

There really are not that many IPs in Disney's library that are based on the same subject matter and themes as DAK. Moana has similar themes so you could make it work so long as you shifted the subject matter to focus more on animals. Like was done with Pandora. But obviously a true non-IP Oceania themed land, similar to Harambe or Anandapur, would be far superior to a Moana anything. I think pretty much every fan of DAK would agree to that.

 

[Incomudro]

No, WALL-E doesn't fit in Animal Kingdom. While it does have an environmental subtext, the film is largely not set on earth and the inclusion of nature is relegated to a small plant. There are no animals featured throughout the entire film. WALL-E's subject matter differs considerably from DAK, to the point where no amount of imagineering could make it work in the park. Just because a film has similar themes to DAK does not mean it can automatically fit, when the subject matter, art style etc. differ so greatly.



And this is one of the fundamental problems with only using existing IPs in the parks. It's extremely limiting to what imagineering can do. No dinosaur IP? No dinosaurs in DAK

There really are not that many IPs in Disney's library that are based on the same subject matter and themes as DAK. Moana has similar themes so you could make it work so long as you shifted the subject matter to focus more on animals. Like was done with Pandora. But obviously a true non-IP Oceania themed land, similar to Harambe or Anandapur, would be far superior to a Moana anything. I think pretty much every fan of DAK would agree to that.

WALL-E belongs,and should be represented in Epcot.
I've said before much as I'm ok with the Guardian's coaster, that it should have been a WALL-E coaster.
The coaster portion could have been a homage to the flying/fire extinguisher sequence in the film.

 

[BlakeW39]

WALL-E belongs,and should be represented in Epcot.
I've said before much much as I'm ok with the Guardian's coaster, that it should have been a WALL-E coaster.
The coaster portion could have been a homage to the flying/fire extinguisher sequence in the film.

Yeah, I hear ya, I think WALL-E would be a good fit for the land pavillion (not saying it should replace the classic dark ride, though). Guardians in my opinion is a huge misfire, I don't love it all that much as an attraction AND it doesn't fit the themes and subject matter of EPCOT. It's just a typical GotG romp, save the galaxy from big monster....the 'Wonders of Xandar' pavillion doesn't even play an important role in the plot of the ride.

 

[SpectreJordan]

The Rescuers Down Under not only takes place in Australia but was specifically about poaching, conservation, etc. -- but as you mentioned, "popular" is likely the most important factor in Disney choosing/approving IP usage. The movie wasn't especially successful (although the original Rescuers was a big hit) and seems basically forgotten today, so it's probably not on the list of acceptable concepts.

I think Disney would rather create something new for once than use an obscure IP lmao

There are a couple, like Dinosaur, The Lion King, and Jungle Book, but I'm not sure I can think of any modern ones that could warrant a theme park land. Like I said, Moana is probably one of the better outcomes, certainly better than Indiana Jones or Zootopia or something.

It's pretty crazy that they have no plans for a Lion King ride. The IP is still really popular almost 30 years later. Maybe they'd want it in Africa & there's no expansion room there? I couldn't really think of anywhere in that section, but I'm not too familiar with expansion pads & backstage areas tbh.

The theme of Animal Kingdom isn't specifically animals, it's the relationship between man and nature (both animals and the environment)

Kali River Rapids isn't about animals either, it's about the human destruction of the environment

The central themes of Moana are a better fit for DAK than a bunch of other movies that are either already at the park or people always suggest for it (a Bug's Life, Up, Jungle Book)

I think Up fits in pretty well. It's not the central theme of the movie, but a major part of that movie involved saving an endangered animal & returning her to her babies. You could definitely have conservation be a major part of an Up ride.

 

[Suspirian]

I think Disney would rather create something new for once than use an obscure IP lmao

It's pretty crazy that they have no plans for a Lion King ride. The IP is still really popular almost 30 years later. Maybe they'd want it in Africa & there's no expansion room there? I couldn't really think of anywhere in that section, but I'm not too familiar with expansion pads & backstage areas tbh.

I just think current management has tunnel vision and is blind to any IP that is over 10 years old.

 

[SpectreJordan]

I just think current management has tunnel vision and is blind to any IP that is over 10 years old.

You're probably right. They definitely focus on "new" more than they should especially when the Renaissance classics don't have any major rides at WDW (besides that mediocre Mermaid ride). I understand not focusing as much on the films Walt worked on since their popularity is winding down, but the Renaissance films are still really popular.

 

[BlakeW39]

You're probably right. They definitely focus on "new" more than they should especially when the Renaissance classics don't have any major rides at WDW (besides that mediocre Mermaid ride). I understand not focusing as much on the films Walt worked on since their popularity is winding down, but the Renaissance films are still really popular.

"more timeless, MORE RELEVANT, and more Disney"

 

[JustInTime]

What if existing lands get rethemed eventually? Africa becomes a lion King land and Asia becomes Mulan. Nobody else have this nightmare? Haha

 

[BlakeW39]

What if existing lands get rethemed eventually? Africa becomes a lion King land and Asia becomes Mulan. Nobody else have this nightmare? Haha

Makes my skin crawl.

 

[UNCgolf]

I think Disney would rather create something new for once than use an obscure IP lmao

Well yeah, there's a 0% chance they use the Rescuers Down Under, and I'd prefer they create something new.

My point was that not all IP is truly on the table even when they have something that's a good fit. Also, it's only really obscure because Disney has chosen to make it obscure -- as I said, the original Rescuers was one of Disney's biggest hits (at the time). That's why it got a sequel.

 

[Suspirian]

You're probably right. They definitely focus on "new" more than they should especially when the Renaissance classics don't have any major rides at WDW (besides that mediocre Mermaid ride). I understand not focusing as much on the films Walt worked on since their popularity is winding down, but the Renaissance films are still really popular.

Its so bizarre. They're in this weird IP war with universal and have a slew of legacy titles that they can use and yet…

 

[MagicHappens1971]

Its so bizarre. They're in this weird IP war with universal and have a slew of legacy titles that they can use and yet…

They’re not in an “IP war”, they are just following the trends.

 

[TheMaxRebo]

They’re not in an “IP war”, they are just following the trends.

And at least for Moana there seems to be lasting power. That segment always seems to get some of the largest cheers during any of the recent nighttime shows and is consistently one of the most streamed movies

I think they are picking which of the more recent films they see as having lasting appeal, and Moana is one of them (Encanto is another they have referred to as a "franchise" and obviously Frozen)

 

[Brer Panther]

the film is largely not set on earth

Technically, neither is Avatar.

There are no animals featured throughout the entire film.

What about the cockroach? Yeah, he's a minor character, but so are the pig, chicken, and giant crab in Moana and that's apparently a PERFECT fit for Animal Kingdom!

Just because a film has similar themes to DAK does not mean it can automatically fit, when the subject matter, art style etc. differ so greatly.

Yes, and just because Moana has similar themes to Animal Kingdom does not mean it automatically fits in Animal Kingdom. That is my point.

Moana has similar themes so you could make it work so long as you shifted the subject matter to focus more on animals.

It is extremely unlikely that Disney would do that (remember how people were claiming that maybe Frozen Ever After would teach riders about Norway?) since A) modern day parkgoers are simpletons who hate edutainment and there's apparently no way to make learning something fun (that's why EPCOT had to be turned into an IP-filled construction zone, right?) and B) it's kind of pointless to use the Moana IP if you're just going to use the characters to teach a moral that the film wasn't about. It's like building an Tangled ride in EPCOT and having it be about Rapunzel and Flynn teaching you about baking strudel or something.

 

[BlakeW39]

Technically, neither is Avatar.

Lol okay, let me rephrase. WALL-E is not set on a life sustaining celestial body. It is set in the vacuum of outer space. Therefore it can't fit in DAK because the film's setting can't include wildlife.

What about the cockroach? Yeah, he's a minor character, but so are the pig, chicken, and giant crab in Moana and that's apparently a PERFECT fit for Animal Kingdom!

Yes, and just because Moana has similar themes to Animal Kingdom does not mean it automatically fits in Animal Kingdom. That is my point.

It is extremely unlikely that Disney would do that (remember how people were claiming that maybe Frozen Ever After would teach riders about Norway?) since A) modern day parkgoers are simpletons who hate edutainment and there's apparently no way to make learning something fun (that's why EPCOT had to be turned into an IP-filled construction zone, right?) and B) it's kind of pointless to use the Moana IP if you're just going to use the characters to teach a moral that the film wasn't about. It's like building an Tangled ride in EPCOT and having it be about Rapunzel and Flynn teaching you about baking strudel or something.

Nobody's claiming Moana is a perfect fit. I'm certainly not. I'm just being realistic. We all know Disney is only gonna build a new land or attraction if it's based on IP. I'm simply stating that Moana is one of the only IPs Disney has in its library that could be made to fit in Animal Kingdom. No, the 2016 film itself would not fit. It's about human characters exclusively, the role of animals is very minimal. But the IP is malleable enough so that Disney could adapt it for Animal Kingdom. I'm not saying they will do this. Certainly Disney has failed to do so in the past, namely with attractions in EPCOT. But they did do it with Pandora. So there is some precedent there.

Yes I agree from a creative stand point there is no good justification to drop Moana in Animal Kingdom. There are a million better ideas you or I could come up with. But in terms of popular IP....I fail to see a better alternative, and I think it's pretty telling that even you have not been able to come up with one.

 

[Brer Panther]

I fail to see a better alternative, and I think it's pretty telling that even you have not been able to come up with one.

The Lion King is popular, isn't it? Are Up and The Jungle Book not popular enough to justify getting attractions in the parks?

 

[BlakeW39]

The Lion King is popular, isn't it? Are Up and The Jungle Book not popular enough to justify getting attractions in the parks?

The Lion King and The Jungle Book don't warrant their own lands. Africa and Asia already exist in the park. And Up doesn't fit in the park as well as Moana does, from a thematic standpoint.

 

[Stumpos]

The Lion King is popular, isn't it? Are Up and The Jungle Book not popular enough to justify getting attractions in the parks?

Lion King did have some attractions in the parks already and Up has Up! A Great Bird Adventure.

Would Dumbo, Bambi, Lady and the Tramp, 101 Dalmatians, Aristocats, Robin Hood, Rescuers, Fox and the Hound, Great Mouse Detective, and Oliver and Company be better Animal Kingdom attraction ideas too with their animal movies?