Fantasyland too "girlie," Frontierland Could Be the Balancer

[GothMickey]

Word around the Disney Company is many are not thrilled that the Fantasyland expansion leans heavily on the girlie side. The location of Dumbo and the addition of Pixie Hollow flip flop daily. However, FRONTIERLAND could be the land that provides the balance. Word is executives are seriously considering an "expansion" of sorts in Frontierland. Just what could be coming? Who knows. But talk has centered on Tom Sawyer Island and the patch of land by Big Thunder Mountain Railroad. Club D23 has posted about this. Check it out.

[Tekneek]

I hope they don't axe the Fantasyland expansion because it is "too girlie." That would be really absurd.

Expanding Frontierland? Western River Expedition here we come! :mickey:

[brownie]

I hope they don't axe the Fantasyland expansion because it is "too girlie." That would be really absurd.

I believe it's a little late for Disney to be considering cancelling the Fantasyland expansion.

[BellesRose]

An expansion to Frontierland would be wonderful! But what about Liberty Square? I think that area needs something...the Haunted Mansion is my favorite ride ever, but that's the only thing there that I do. At least there's always tons to do in Fantasyland and Frontierland.

[DizneyFreak2002]

Pixie Hollow is the only thing in the Fantasyland refurbishment that may be getting the axe... As GM said, higher ups feel it is too "girlie..." Whatever this means to FLE, we'll have to wait and see... Um, what is the western themed river ride in Hong Kong Disneyland??? I think I read somewhere about that being a possibility... But it is all conjecture right now... +

[JPL]

I have been hearing that Mickey's Toontown Fair might be spared the wrecking ball. Plans are calling to add Dumbo and change it to a circus theme with the Circus coming to Toontown. Not sure how accurate this is but there has been some rumors floating about this.

[DizneyFreak2002]

I have been hearing that Mickey's Toontown Fair might be spared the wrecking ball. Plans are calling to add Dumbo and change it to a circus theme with the Circus coming to Toontown. Not sure how accurate this is but there has been some rumors floating about this.

I hope not... Demolish it!!!! Plus, they are still working on the M&G areas on Main Street... Toontown Fair is going... The last thing to go, but gone nonetheless....

[plutoboy]

I'm sorry but when the original poster refers to Club 23 are they speaking about Disney23? I was interested in reading the article. Have to admit I'm a little behind on things.

[BrerGnat]

Pixie Hollow IS girlie. They have one in Disneyland.

Disneyland also has a "Princess Fantasy Faire", which is a combo Princess Meet and greet, improvisational BBB, and princess merchandise EXPLOSION.

To balance this, Disneyland's Tom Sawyer island has been, for some time, "Pirate's Lair". I assume any talk about updating WDW's Tom Sawyer Island would result in its renovation to something similar. Also, they have Tarzan's Treehouse, Indiana Jones Adventure, the Nemo Subs, Star Tours, etc.

I am all for them leaving Mickey's Toontown Fair as is, and adding the Dumbo "circus" over there. I agree that the Fantasyland refurb is overly "girly" and not well balanced by other aspects of Magic Kingdom.

They would do well to shadow Disneyland somewhat, which is extremely well balanced as far as "girly" and "boy friendly" attractions are concerned.

[DizneyFreak2002]

I'm sorry but when the original poster refers to Club 23 are they speaking about Disney23? I was interested in reading the article. Have to admit I'm a little behind on things.

Google it.... Like Intercot, it is an unofficial fan site... However, they aren't the only site where members posted that rumor... others have well.. Hmm, wonder if there really is anything to it???

[Tekneek]

I don't mind if Fantasyland tilts more toward the "girlie" side with this stuff. The Dumbo stuff is probably more boyish, although it would appeal to both.

When it comes to big problems at WDW, I'm more concerned about how Tomorrowland at MK and Future World at Epcot have lost their way.

[DizneyFreak2002]

I don't mind if Fantasyland tilts more toward the "girlie" side with this stuff. The Dumbo stuff is probably more boyish, although it would appeal to both.

When it comes to big problems at WDW, I'm more concerned about how Tomorrowland at MK and Future World at Epcot have lost their way.

I agree with you about Tomorrowland and Future World... We need Tomorrowland fixed... Imagination, Wonders of Life, even to some degree Universe of Energy need to be fixed.... I will also venture to say DHS and AK need more before Frontierland gets any expansion...

[Tekneek]

I will also venture to say DHS and AK need more before Frontierland gets any expansion...

Unless they're going to do something huge in Frontierland, like reviving one of the old Thunder Mesa / Western River Expedition type concepts, I am 100% in agreement... On second thought, I'm not even sure I want them pouring that kind of money into Frontierland for that...but I could be sold for something grand like that.

[DizneyFreak2002]

Unless they're going to do something huge in Frontierland, like reviving one of the old Thunder Mesa / Western River Expedition type concepts, I am 100% in agreement... On second thought, I'm not even sure I want them pouring that kind of money into Frontierland for that...but I could be sold for something grand like that.

Western River is dead... Ain't happening I am afraid... I wish I were wrong but I fear I am not... Frontierland really only has Splash Mountain and Big Thunder Mountain... The land does lack something... Sure, Tom Sawyer Island is there, but, the land just doesn't scream out to me, and I am sure plenty of other guests... I ride SM and BTMR and leave... I'm just trying to figure out what they could possibly bring to Frontierland...

Why do I have a feeling they are thinking of a Woody's Round-up/Toy Story mini land like in Hong Kong Disneyland????

[Tekneek]

Why do I have a feeling they are thinking of a Woody's Round-up/Toy Story mini land like in Hong Kong Disneyland????

Because everybody loves another Pixar attraction! :party:

I take it back. I don't want them doing anything with Frontierland if it isn't going to be big. The already mentioned TLC that Tomorrowland & Future World needs is going to top my list.

[DizneyFreak2002]

Tek, the good thing is, even though this has been looked at over the course of the last few years, nothing is greenlit so maybe this is all typical internet rumor/drive up our hits ploy from newly formed fan sites/summer is here, school is out and I am bored wishful thinking... LOL...

[Tekneek]

Tek, the good thing is, even though this has been looked at over the course of the last few years, nothing is greenlit so maybe this is all typical internet rumor/drive up our hits ploy from newly formed fan sites/summer is here, school is out and I am bored wishful thinking... LOL...

Lately I've been thinking a lot about how I would like to re-imagine/FIX things like Tomorrowland and Future World, so this didn't help. :)

[WDWfanatic742]

Frontierland is probably the only land/section in the entire resort that really doesn't need an expansion. Re-do Tomorrowland after they messed it up again even after the expansion in the 90's, or even Adventureland and change the area around the carpets and maybe add one more ride there.

From what I have seen, they've been looking at expanding Frontierland for years and years but nothing has ever got greenlit.

[Ian]

Big article about this over at Jim Hill today, so it must have some legs at least.

I don't know why they don't just bring Carsland over to WDW and add the princesses, as well.

Then you'd have great balance between "boys stuff" and "girls stuff."

[BrerGnat]

Big article about this over at Jim Hill today, so it must have some legs at least.

I don't know why they don't just bring Carsland over to WDW and add the princesses, as well.

Then you'd have great balance between "boys stuff" and "girls stuff."

Seriously. But, I don't think MK has the room for Carsland. UNLESS, they were were to use all of Toontown plus the Indy Speedway...

Just for comparison, the space being used for Carsland at DCA is the size of the current Tomorrowland at MK. It's a large area.

They could completely demolish Lights, Motors, Action AND the "Backlot Tour" and build Carsland there, but somehow I doubt they'd consider that...

My guess is that, if they are really intent on leveling the playing field at MK, they will do the following:

-Convert Tom Sawyer Island to "Pirate's Lair" (an easy thing to do with an existing attraction, although personally, I hate the Pirate thing as much as I hate the Princess thing)

-Add some sort of interactive/scavenger hunt type attraction at MK for "techie boys", a la Kim Possible Mission. Perhaps with an Indiana Jones type theme?

-Somehow, work the Toy Story "woody's roundup" theme into Frontierland.

[DizneyFreak2002]

Carland over by Speedway is a nice idea, but, how does that fit into Tomorrowland??? at least Monsters are Sci-Fi... Unless you want to consider animated talking cars sci-fi.. I wouldn't.. Carsland belongs in DHS, off of Pixar Place, replacing Back lot Tour...

Tom Skaggs is the man apparently... Jay Rasulo, as was stated on this site plenty of times, was clueless... I'm liking this Skaggs guy... Seems like he may have it... Seems like he may know what something just isn't right... I am all for this FLE, but, Pixie Hollow just wasn't sitting right...

Pixie Hollow is dead and that is good news... Bad news is, TDO will probably want an open grassy knoll there....

[BrerGnat]

Carland over by Speedway is a nice idea, but, how does that fit into Tomorrowland??? at least Monsters are Sci-Fi... Unless you want to consider animated talking cars sci-fi.. I wouldn't.. Carsland belongs in DHS, off of Pixar Place, replacing Back lot Tour...




I agree. It belongs in DHS. But, I have never really considered the speedway part of Tomorrowland. Sure, that is its official place of residence on the maps, but it is SO close to Fantasyland, that I have always thought it belonged there (I mean, the idea of kids driving race cars is MUCH more "fantasy" than "tomorrow"). If they were to use the speedway and Toontown Fair and turn it into a NEW land (Carsland), that would be fine by me. Or, it could just as easily be integrated into Fantasyland, since all those attractions are also based on movies (except for Small World, but you get the idea).

[Tekneek]

After reading some more biographical/historical books and other materials, I think I understand better why those cars have been in Tomorrowland historically. That is "tomorrow" for the kids that the attraction is intended for. Fairly simplistic, but I am beginning to suspect that is how they ended up in that section in multiple parks.

[joonyer]

The "speedway" (originally called Grand Prix Raceway) is in Tomorrowland at MK because it is basically a duplicate of the "Autopia" attraction which was installed in Tomorrowland at Disneyland when it was first opened in 1955.

From wikipedia:

Autopia – This attraction was to represent the future of what would become America’s multilane limited-access highways, which were still being developed at the time of the park’s opening. It also provided young ones the experience of getting behind the wheel of a real gas-powered vehicle, although a small one.

But at MK, the Grand Prix Raceway was based on an international car race rather than the futuristic roadways of Autopia. The original sponsor was Goodyear, as it supplied all of the tires on the Mark VII vehicles.

The ride was expanded in 1973 and remained unchanged until the 1994 remodel of Tomorrowland. Part of the track was also shortened to make room for Mickey's Birthdayland (now Toon Town Fair) sometime between late 1987 to early 1988. The Grand Prix theme and name was dropped in favor of Tomorrowland Indy Speedway, but the track and vehicles remained the same, as new theming to coincide with the "New Tomorrowland" overlay was installed."

In my opinion, thereis no logical reason for this attraction to be in Tomorrowland; its there because the "autopia was in tomoorlwland in Disneyland in 1955. That was 55 years ago. While "Autopia" may have been representative of the future of automobile travel in 1955, it certainly no longer is futuristic in any way, shape or form in 2010, nor was it even in 1971, when MK opened, thus the change of the name by Disney for the MK version to the "GP Raceway". The only reason it is in Tomorrowland is because of TRADITION

If you think about it, there is really no logical reason for this obsolete and common amusement park ride to be anywhere in a modern Disney Theme park, except for tradition. By contrast, the Carousel of Progress is old and traditional also, but at least it is UNIQUE to Disney. No so the lame speedway cars and track. It is outdated and bettered by most car rides at every two- bit cheesy local amusement park.

I wish Disney would replace it with something more fun for kids of ALL ages.

[Ian]

I'd be perfectly fine with them installing Carsland in where the Speedway and Toontown are now and then annexing it into Fantasyland. That would work.

[Tekneek]

I'd be perfectly fine with them installing Carsland in where the Speedway and Toontown are now and then annexing it into Fantasyland. That would work.

That kind of re-imagining is probably years away, if ever.

[BrerGnat]

That kind of re-imagining is probably years away, if ever.

I would not be so sure of that. Carsland at DCA will be the barometer of the popularity of this type of thing at OTHER Disney parks. If it's an overwhelming success, you can bet that it will reappear SOMEWHERE at WDW in the future. As it stands, DCA is almost 50% a clone of DHS...and they are already putting that idea to practical use by putting in identical Little Mermaid attractions on both coasts.

Disney is no stranger to recycling attractions in recent years:

Soarin
Fantasmic
Tower of Terror
Toy Story Midway Mania
Star Tours
Buzz Lightyear Astro Blasters/Space Ranger Spin

And probably more that I am missing.

The point is, I would wager a fair amount of money on the idea of Carsland showing up at WDW.

[Tekneek]

Ugh. Personally, I can see the benefit of doing this new Little Mermaid concept at both parks, and some things here and there. What I don't look forward to are their attempts to duplicate every new thing on both coasts. I know there are people out there, besides me, who hoped we had moved beyond that being standard practice once Eisner was shown the door. Looks like the current crew likes the idea even more than Michael did.

I would rather see Tomorrowland take on more of the Discoveryland concepts that were shelved years ago. I wouldn't mind seeing the Tomorrowland Speedway and Monsters, Inc. Laugh Floor depart in order to implement it either. The Laugh Floor seems like a better fit for DCA and DHS's Pixar area anyway, rather than Tomorrowland. I understand that most people appear to be thrilled with as much Pixar in the parks as possible, but not me.

[Laughin' place]

May be a traditionalist (read, "old fogey"), but howzabout we keep MK a little more traditional or theme - consistent ?
This would mean time, and focus, and patience, and most of all - money. But I would like to see Tomorrowland shoot for a fanciful vision of TOMORROW. When I was a kid in the 60s and 70s, SM, Mission to the Moon/Mars, and the like were visions of tomorrow. I dont want to hear the old, "its too hard to keep pace with tomorrow line". Dream, imagine , do, darn it! Cull the stuff that doesnt fit, and try to bring us the future thru the eyes of Disney. Walt, and the Company, were once great at that. Likewise, make Frontierland an Experience, with attractions and consistent themeing and etc. Same in Fantasyland. I know Im dreaming, but isnt WDW the place to do just that ?

[Tekneek]

Walt, and the Company, were once great at that.

I'm not trying to put down on everyone at WED/WDI and Disney over the past 4 decades, but Walt was the kind of visionary that knew what people wanted before they knew they wanted it and the company has been missing that ever since his death. He had a feel for what people wanted and the drive to make it happen, even if it made the finances scary for a little while.

The way Disney rides the latest trends right into the ground is indicative of the way they do things now. I've recently been reading a biography on Walt and in many ways the Disney company is now like all those companies that were initially turning Walt away. Disney, of today, waits for the public to tell them what they want and then hits them over the head with it in every possible way for the next half-dozen years (much like all the big studios 80-90 years ago who passed on Mickey Mouse initially). I think it explains why it takes things like Pixar to get brand new attractions into the parks and why a decidedly anti-Walt Disney concept like Golden Oak was given the green light.

[DizneyFreak2002]

I'd be perfectly fine with them installing Carsland in where the Speedway and Toontown are now and then annexing it into Fantasyland. That would work.

It could... But then how would you explain Radiator Springs at the edge of Fantasyland Forest??? I think Wonderland is a much better fit in that area... yes, I advocate getting rid of Tomrrowland Speedway altogether....

[DizneyFreak2002]

Ugh. Personally, I can see the benefit of doing this new Little Mermaid concept at both parks, and some things here and there. What I don't look forward to are their attempts to duplicate every new thing on both coasts. I know there are people out there, besides me, who hoped we had moved beyond that being standard practice once Eisner was shown the door. Looks like the current crew likes the idea even more than Michael did.

I would rather see Tomorrowland take on more of the Discoveryland concepts that were shelved years ago. I wouldn't mind seeing the Tomorrowland Speedway and Monsters, Inc. Laugh Floor depart in order to implement it either. The Laugh Floor seems like a better fit for DCA and DHS's Pixar area anyway, rather than Tomorrowland. I understand that most people appear to be thrilled with as much Pixar in the parks as possible, but not me.

I think it has been said before... Monster's Inc. Laugh Floor should be the pre-show or the end show to the Monster's Inc. Roller Coaster that will, hopefully soon to be announced, take residence over in Pixar Place... You sit through a 5 minute pre-show of monsters telling jokes, then you board their tram for a tour of their factory, and Boo escapes.. All holy heck breaks loose and Mike and Sully send you on a coaster ride through the factory... Just my story here, not what the ride may actually be like... Yes, arm chair Imagineering!!!!

[Mickey91]

Well, Woody would fit the frontierland theming but don't we have enough Toy Story? Why not revive some of the old Davy Crocket and Daniel Boone stories?
Also, I like the fairies of Pixie Hollow more than the princesses. I hope this isn't truly dead. I mean, how does x-ing it even help the "too girly" aspect?
I think it would be so cool to drive the Cars characters instead of the Indy Speedyway cars and with it right next to Toontown anyway, it could fit right in with very little redoing. Toontown could lose the Fair and be truly a collection of all the cool toons with a new ride or two and still keep Mickey and the gang. :mickey:

[Buttercup]

A few thoughts:
- I like the idea of Carsland taking over the Speedway and part of Toontown. As for the transition between Fantasyland Forest & Carsland; easy! Think about it: they transition between the jungles of Adventureland, the old west of Frontierland and the colonial times of Liberty Square easily & seamlessly. Couldn't there be a wall of trees in the forest that from the Cars side it looks like some trees in the distance of Radiator Springs? I think this idea could work.
- As for Tom Sawyer's Island, I think it's too far away from the ride to be considered for a Pirate's Lair area. I sort-of like it remaining as an old Fort, but maybe really play up the Cowboys and old Davie Crockett themes -- why does everything have to be based on new Disney movies? What happened to inventing a ride that doesn't have a movie behind it, a la Thunder Mountain, Haunted Mansion, IASM, Country Bear Jamboree, etc. :confused:

I agree with the previous poster: Disney used to always dream it, and do it! Sort-of like the narrative from the old Horizons: "If we can dream it, we can do it." :mickey:

[BrerGnat]

-- why does everything have to be based on new Disney movies? What happened to inventing a ride that doesn't have a movie behind it, a la Thunder Mountain, Haunted Mansion, IASM, Country Bear Jamboree, etc. :confused:


Perhaps you've forgotten the original premise of Disneyland...

Walt wanted to use the park as a commercial, more or less, for all his movies and television shows. Every ride in the original Disneyland tied directly or indirectly to a Disney movie, World's Fair Exhibit or Disney produced television show.

All these attractions with their own stories...those came later.

It can be said that every ride at WDW *should* come from a movie or other Disney inspired entertainment. In my opinion, it seems WDI is going back to this concept, as this is what Walt set out to do originally.

As for the junction between Carsland and Fantasyland...why is that an issue? There really is no obvious transition between Fantasyland and Tomorrowland now anyway...why consider one in the future?

[SBETigg]

I'm just trying to imagine a world where people feel the need to balance things out because something strikes them as "too boyish." Of course, I like the idea of adding to Frontierland, too.

[Ian]

It could... But then how would you explain Radiator Springs at the edge of Fantasyland Forest??? I think Wonderland is a much better fit in that area... yes, I advocate getting rid of Tomrrowland Speedway altogether....Eh ... that's a non-issue, IMO. Disney has handled tougher transitions than that with ease in the past and I'm confident they could do it again.

[Tekneek]

Perhaps you've forgotten the original premise of Disneyland...

Walt wanted to use the park as a commercial, more or less, for all his movies and television shows. Every ride in the original Disneyland tied directly or indirectly to a Disney movie, World's Fair Exhibit or Disney produced television show.

Not sure about that in general, but I will reserve full judgment until I have completed some more books in my reading list. If that was his clear intention, it will surely reveal itself in my research.

My recollection is that Fantasyland was the only land ever really dominated by connections to movies/shows. Adventureland, Tomorrowland, and Frontierland had looser connections.

[Stu29573]

Every ride in the original Disneyland tied directly or indirectly to a Disney movie, World's Fair Exhibit or Disney produced television show.

All these attractions with their own stories...those came later.


This is a common misconception. Let's look at the first year (1955) attraction lineup. "No link" means the attraction has no real link to any Disney movie or TV show:

Main Street USA

Main Street Shooting Gallery- No link
Vehicles- No link
Various Shops- No link
Cinema- Movie
Railroad- No link

Tomorrowland

Autopia- No link
Circarama USA- No link
Clock of the World- No link
Monsanto Hall of Chemistry- No link
Space Station X-1- promoted on Disneyland TV show
Rocket to the Moon- promoted on Disneyland TV show
Phantom Boats- No link
The World Beneath Us- No link
20,000 Leagues Under the Sea Exhibit- Movie
Flight Circle- No link
Hobbyland- No link
Art Corner- No link
Aluminum Hall of Fame- No link
Dutch Boy Color Gallery- No link


Fantasyland

Canal Boats of the World- No link (later movie)
Casey Jr. Circus Train- Movie
Dumbo Flying Elephants- Movie
King Arthur Carrousel- No link
Mickey Mouse Club Theater- TV
Mickey Mouse Club Circus- TV
Merlin's Magic Shop- probably no link
Mad Tea Party- Movie
Snow White's Adventures- Movie
Mr. Toad's Wild Ride- Movie
Peter Pan's Flight- Movie
Pirate Ship- Movie

Frontierland

Conestoga Wagon- No link
Davy Crockett Museum- TV
Golden Horseshoe Review- No link
Indian Village- No link
Mark Twain Riverboat- No link
Mike Fink Keel Boats- TV
Pack Mules- No link
Stagecoach Ride- No link

Adventureland

Jungle Cruise- Movie(s)

Therefore, out of 41 attractions, 24 had no link. That's 58% in my book... In addition, many of the Walt Disney approved future attractions, such as Pirates of the Caribbean and the Haunted Mansion had no link either. Walt did not see his park as a "commercial," but as a place where families could experience adventures together.

[BrerGnat]

I did not mean that LITERALLY every single attraction in DL had a tie in. BUT, I have read a lot of historical accounts of Walt Disney's life and the development of the parks. I'm fairly certain that Walt developed Disneyland to, MOSTLY promote the Disney brand. Otherwise, it would just be another carnival, which we all know he was NOT fond of.

In the early days of the park, the Wonderful World of Disney show promoted Disneyland, while Disneyland promoted the shows on WWoD. It was a back and forth type of promotion/marketing. First of its kind.

To expect Disney to continue to "create" stories and attractions that have NO tie in is not consistent with the original goal of Walt Disney himself. There needs to be a balance, and I believe we've gotten a LOT of "original" stories/attractions in the recent past.

[Stu29573]

I did not mean that LITERALLY every single attraction in DL had a tie in. BUT, I have read a lot of historical accounts of Walt Disney's life and the development of the parks. I'm fairly certain that Walt developed Disneyland to, MOSTLY promote the Disney brand. Otherwise, it would just be another carnival, which we all know he was NOT fond of.

In the early days of the park, the Wonderful World of Disney show promoted Disneyland, while Disneyland promoted the shows on WWoD. It was a back and forth type of promotion/marketing. First of its kind.

To expect Disney to continue to "create" stories and attractions that have NO tie in is not consistent with the original goal of Walt Disney himself. There needs to be a balance, and I believe we've gotten a LOT of "original" stories/attractions in the recent past.

Actually, I don't see your point. Disneyland was a big part of the "Disney brand" and, therefore, telling stories that had not appeared in movies or on TV was seen as another creative outlet (and money maker) for the company. Yes, the TV show Disneyland was created to support the park, and, therefore, featured various parts of it, but that is an example of 2D product following 3D experience, not the other way around (something to think about when someone starts to bemoan the latest Disney movie based on an attraction. It was done from the beginning)

The point is that Disney didn't need or want the park to simply mimic what was being done on the big (or little) screen. If one looks at the original attractions, one can see that it was intended as an additional way to tell stories, and some of those stories were brand new and original to the park. Walt was even quoted as saying that he preferred telling his stories through the park because they could evolve and change. It was never "in the can" like a film would be.

For further study, I would suggest any of Jason Surrell's wonderful books, Bob Thomas' biography, The Disney "Treasures" DVD sets of Disneyland, Secrets, Stories, and Magic and Disneyland U.S.A. for starters...

[BrerGnat]

I was simply responding to the question of "why does every new attraction have to be based on a movie? " that was posed earlier.

My point was to show that THIS was the original plan for Disneyland theme park...to showcase Walt's movies, t.v. show themes, and other productions (i.e. animal documentaries).

I completely understand the concept that the more elaborate attractions were their OWN stories. I get that. My point was, Walt Disney did not set out to open a generic carnival type park. He set out to open a THEME park, the world's first, and he did.

THEME being the operative word here.

[Stu29573]

I was simply responding to the question of "why does every new attraction have to be based on a movie? " that was posed earlier.

My point was to show that THIS was the original plan for Disneyland theme park...to showcase Walt's movies, t.v. show themes, and other productions (i.e. animal documentaries).

I completely understand the concept that the more elaborate attractions were their OWN stories. I get that. My point was, Walt Disney did not set out to open a generic carnival type park. He set out to open a THEME park, the world's first, and he did.

THEME being the operative word here.

Ok, I understand you more now, and I agree to a point. However, my point is that not every new attraction should be themed to a movie and the "themes" in Disneyland were based on the "lands" (i.e. modern myths) as much as the movies and television shows.

[Mickey91]

I did not mean that LITERALLY every single attraction in DL had a tie in. BUT, I have read a lot of historical accounts of Walt Disney's life and the development of the parks. I'm fairly certain that Walt developed Disneyland to, MOSTLY promote the Disney brand. Otherwise, it would just be another carnival, which we all know he was NOT fond of.

In the early days of the park, the Wonderful World of Disney show promoted Disneyland, while Disneyland promoted the shows on WWoD. It was a back and forth type of promotion/marketing. First of its kind.

To expect Disney to continue to "create" stories and attractions that have NO tie in is not consistent with the original goal of Walt Disney himself. There needs to be a balance, and I believe we've gotten a LOT of "original" stories/attractions in the recent past.

The only one I can think of right off is Everest...But on the flip side:
Laugh Floor
Stitch's great escape
Living Seas with Nemo
Buzz Light Year Space Ranger Spin
Toy Story Midway Mania
All the new Fantasyland attractions

I think we are due for some originality.

[Ian]

I've researched the history of The Walt Disney Company extensively and yes ... one of Walt's main goals for Disneyland was to be a place where he could showcase his new movies and films.

But it was never his intention for every single ride and attraction to have a movie tie-in. You can see that just by looking at the vast majority of rides and attractions he had a hand in designing before he died. Virtually none of them outside of Fantasyland had any movie tie-in at all.

Walt was more about theme, so that's why you see attractions with generic movie themes like pirates or haunted houses or missions to outerspace or jungle cruises or even broader themes like It's a Small World or American history (a la Great Moments With Mr. Lincoln) or progress (a la the Carousel of Progress).

Even look at the attractions he did for the World's Fair. Not a one of them had the slightest thing to do with a Walt Disney film.

There's a great blog post over at the Re-Imagineering website that talks about this very thing. It's called "The Myth of the Story." PM me if you want a link to it or you can just Google "Imagineering The Myth of the Story" and it's the first article that comes up.

[Stu29573]

I've researched the history of The Walt Disney Company extensively and yes ... one of Walt's main goals for Disneyland was to be a place where he could showcase his new movies and films.

But it was never his intention for every single ride and attraction to have a movie tie-in. You can see that just by looking at the vast majority of rides and attractions he had a hand in designing before he died. Virtually none of them outside of Fantasyland had any movie tie-in at all.

Walt was more about theme, so that's why you see attractions with generic movie themes like pirates or haunted houses or missions to outerspace or jungle cruises or even broader themes like It's a Small World or American history (a la Great Moments With Mr. Lincoln) or progress (a la the Carousel of Progress).

Even look at the attractions he did for the World's Fair. Not a one of them had the slightest thing to do with a Walt Disney film.

There's a great blog post over at the Re-Imagineering website that talks about this very thing. It's called "The Myth of the Story." PM me if you want a link to it or you can just Google "Imagineering The Myth of the Story" and it's the first article that comes up.

Exactly, Ian. While there was synergy between the parks and the movies and tv shows, it was never meant to only be about the film product.

[BrerGnat]

But for all those attractions that ARE based on movies, there have been quite a few that are NOT.

By "recent" past, I mean in the past 10-15 years.

The majority of Animal Kingdom park does not have movie tie ins. Look at the list of attractions. In fact, one can argue that BECAUSE there weren't more obvious "Disney" tie ins, AK suffered as a result. People didn't "get it". You are dealing with the masses here. If they don't see Mickey mouse plastered all over the place, or can't tie an attraction to something obviously "Disney", it doesn't register on their radar.

Look at Alien Encounter, which WAS a brilliant attraction. Problem was, people didn't flock to it. They were confused as to what it was, and then the feedback about it being too intense, scary, and so obviously NOT something that belonged in the "Magic" Kingdom caused Disney to eventually shut it down. The addition of Stitch was, probably, the worst thing that has ever happened to an attraction in MY opinion. But, people LOVE it. It's far more popular than it used to be. THAT is why Disney tends to err on the side of "theme it to a movie" these days. People, in general, expect that. They want that.

You have to remember that back in the early days of the parks (even up into the 70's, when WDW was being built) it was a different culture in the U.S. Movies and entertainment generally revolved around more imagination, and kids of the time didn't sit glued to the t.v. and have every new movie on DVD within months of its theater release. They played outside; they made up games. They PLAYED "cowboys and Indians", "space man", and stuff like that. So, naturally, creating a theme park based on these sorts of themes worked BACK THEN.

These days, kids play imaginary games based on cartoon superheroes, video games, and movies. So, it stands to reason that the direction of theme park attraction development will follow the trends of the PRESENT.

Not that I like it. But, I understand it. :(

[Tekneek]

So, it stands to reason that the direction of theme park attraction development will follow the trends of the PRESENT.

So, sounds like this is a case of Disney chasing the whims of the public? Maybe the bigger problem is the inability of Disney to be one step ahead of the public. They need a visionary that can give them something the public does not yet know they want. The company was built on being a leader, not a follower.

[antngoof89]

So does anybody hope that they take some of this money that it sounds like they're gonna cut from the fantasyland budget and spend it on Epcot updates or Hollywood Studios?

I feel like adding a few rides to fantasyland is a great idea, but they should place money on the entire World, not just one park. Of course, the money is still gonna end up staying in Magic Kingdom no matter what they decided to do in the end.

[DizneyFreak2002]

So does anybody hope that they take some of this money that it sounds like they're gonna cut from the fantasyland budget and spend it on Epcot updates or Hollywood Studios?

I feel like adding a few rides to fantasyland is a great idea, but they should place money on the entire World, not just one park. Of course, the money is still gonna end up staying in Magic Kingdom no matter what they decided to do in the end.

Nope... Any money being saved at the moment from Pixie Hollow will be allocated into Fantasyland expansion one way or another...

[Mickey91]

The majority of Animal Kingdom park does not have movie tie ins. Look at the list of attractions. In fact, one can argue that BECAUSE there weren't more obvious "Disney" tie ins, AK suffered as a result. People didn't "get it". You are dealing with the masses here. If they don't see Mickey mouse plastered all over the place, or can't tie an attraction to something obviously "Disney", it doesn't register on their radar.

Look at Alien Encounter, which WAS a brilliant attraction. Problem was, people didn't flock to it. They were confused as to what it was, and then the feedback about it being too intense, scary, and so obviously NOT something that belonged in the "Magic" Kingdom caused Disney to eventually shut it down. The addition of Stitch was, probably, the worst thing that has ever happened to an attraction in MY opinion. But, people LOVE it. It's far more popular than it used to be. THAT is why Disney tends to err on the side of "theme it to a movie" these days. People, in general, expect that. They want that.



I think the biggest problem with Animal Kingdom is they rushed to open it. Even today, there isn't a whole lot to see that would require me to use an all day ticket. We do some of the rides and Festival of the Lion King but petting farm animals and riding rides that are in every amusement park in VA isn't why I drive 13 hours to WDW. It needs to be Disney themed and imagined, not necessarily themed from a movie. Some of my favorite rides at WDW are not tied to any movie or TV show. TTA, CoP, IASW, WDWRR, PoC, original Tiki Room,all of the ORIGINAL Future World attractions, World Show Case, it doesn't have to tie to a movie for people to get it, it just has to be original Disney quality and not something just thrown at us.

Alien Encounter's fate was probably more about location (MK) than people not "getting it". You don't expect something to be that terrifying in the MK. I bet it would have survived at DHS.

[Mickey91]

So does anybody hope that they take some of this money that it sounds like they're gonna cut from the fantasyland budget and spend it on Epcot updates or Hollywood Studios?

I feel like adding a few rides to fantasyland is a great idea, but they should place money on the entire World, not just one park. Of course, the money is still gonna end up staying in Magic Kingdom no matter what they decided to do in the end.
I certainly hope they don't "update" anything else at EPCOT. They have ruined everything they've touched so far.

[Figment78]

Hmmmm..... I love the idea of incorporating Woody's Roundup into Frontierland. But I'm biased because I think that the Toy Story movies are some of the best movies made in the last 15 years or so. (Not just animated).

I struggle with Tomorrowland too. I don't mind any of the attractions there - we actually enjoy all of them, including Stitch's great escape (I love stitch), but we enjoyed Alien Encounter too. It was a really well done psychological thrill ride. But I do think it was too scary for the Magic Kingdom masses and it received quite a beating in the public arena. However I DO think that Tomorrowland should continue to evolve. I know it's impossible to keep up with Tomorrow. But I think that's because it's hard to imagine what Tomorrow will bring. But if we, or Disney, could figure it out - it would really make Tomorrowland a hit.

And thus, since we are arm-chair imagineering... what is your wild imaginings for "tomorrow?" Yes, there is overlap in the idea of Tomorrowland and Future World, but that doesn't mean that Tomorrowland can't have a cool futuristic ride(s) too.

So what's "tomorrow"? Is it in transportation? Communication? What's the next technology? What's the new frontier?

Maybe some sort of ride that takes you through types of transportation and ends with you feeling like your "driving" in the sky (like a star tours simulator?) who knows.... I'm not an imagineer sort, more of a make someone elses ideas happen person...

What about communicating with people at other Disney parks around the world, with some translation software? I know that's more Epcot, but hey... Or how about "playing" against riders on TSMM in California?

Other thoughts?!??

[Tekneek]

The "speedway", should it stay, should have vehicles that take on more of the look and feel of future personal vehicles, maybe following the CityCar concept and certainly powering them in a non-fossil fuel way. Not that the raceway is about personal vehicles, but it shows a future vehicle and powers it in a new way.

[MidnTPK]

From the Orlando Sentinel's Daily Disney:

Disney says Fantasyland expansion plans are changing

Posted By Jason Garcia On August 12, 2010 @ 6:03 pm

Disney is redrawing the sweeping Fantasyland expansion plans it laid out last year, even as bulldozers clear land for the project inside the Magic Kingdom.

With the revisions, begun under new Walt Disney Parks and Resorts Chairman Tom Staggs, designers are attempting to rebalance the plans, which initially tilted heavily towards young girls by emphasizing attractions and experiences built around Disney’s stable of animated-movie princesses.

“We took a hard look at it amongst a number of us and said, ‘Can we make the appeal broader? Can we make it even better?’ “ Staggs said during an interview this week with the Orlando Sentinel.

The Fantasyland expansion is a critically important project for Disney. The Magic Kingdom, the busiest theme park in the world, now draws more than 17 million visitors a year and needs added capacity to ease pressure on crowds inside the park. The project, billed as the largest expansion in Magic Kingdom history, also comes as Disney World faces heightened competition from Universal Orlando, where the new Wizarding World of Harry Potter has drawn rave reviews — and enormous crowds — since opening in June.

Staggs declined to discuss specific changes to the Fantasyland plans, saying Disney would unveil them “in due course.”

The original plans called for a lavish indoor ride based on the movie The Little Mermaid, a trio of interactive princess character-greeting areas, an elaborately themed Beauty and the Beast restaurant, an expanded Dumbo attraction for young children, and a vaguely defined fairies-themed area.

Staggs said much of what was included in the original plans will be incorporated into the final product and that the changes are “improving it on the margin.” He characterized the revisions as part of any creative project’s natural evolution. As an example, Disney cited Hong Kong Disneyland, where early blueprints included an area dubbed “Glacier Peak” that was eventually replaced with a section themed around the company’s Toy Story film franchise.

“Our process is always iterative and always goes through changes as it goes along,” said Staggs, who was the Walt Disney Co.’s chief financial officer when he switched places with parks-and-resorts chief Jay Rasulo at the start of this year. Staggs added: “I believe one of my most important jobs is to make sure that I’m enabling and challenging our creative process to create the best possible result.”

Disney first announced the Fantasyland expansion plans 11 months ago, with Rasulo personally unveiling them during a convention in Anaheim, Calif., for a company-sponsored, $75-a-year fan club. Staggs is now running the theme-park division and Rasulo is CFO following an executive shuffle orchestrated by Disney President and Chief Executive Officer Bob Iger.

The Fantasyland construction is well underway: Yellow backhoes and mountains of dirt are visible behind temporary construction walls erected inside the Magic Kingdom.

But rumors have been building for weeks that changes were afoot, fueled by reports from a pair of well-known Disney bloggers, Jim Hill of Jim Hill Media and Al Lutz of MiceAge.com.

Company followers say there have been two pivotal developments since the Fantasyland plans were first announced: Staggs was installed as head of Walt Disney Parks and Resorts, and Universal opened the Wizarding World of Harry Potter.

Staggs, who has three young sons, is said to have expressed concerns that the initial plans for Fantasyland were too narrowly tailored to girls. The Wizarding World, meanwhile, has delivered impressive early returns for Universal Orlando since formally opening June 18.

The more than $200 million addition to Universal’s Islands of Adventure theme park powered the resort to a 2 percent attendance gain during the second quarter, its first quarterly increase in two years. Attendance at Disney World sank 2 percent during a similar period.

“I think Harry Potter helped” push Disney executives to revisit their approach with Fantasyland, said Lutz, of MiceAge.com. “I think it had an influence to say, ‘Hey, this is something that can be done on this level, and it’s not at a Disney property.’ “

Staggs said Wizarding World has not been a factor in Disney’s Fantasyland plans. “I don’t see evidence that somehow that has changed anyone’s direction or made them think differently,” he said.

But he said Disney is trying to broaden the project’s overall appeal. For instance, plans for three interactive princess meet-and-greets — where children could dance with Cinderella, celebrate Sleeping Beauty’s 16th birthday or play a role in a story with Belle of Beauty and the Beast — are being altered.

“One of the things that I thought the early design did fantastically was delivered on that princess experience. And that does tend to skew towards girls. … We’ve kept that intact — not exactly, necessarily, the way it was presented, but that appeal is there,” Staggs said. “I think we’ve added some things that aren’t just princess-focused, and that’s a good positive.”

Staggs said planners are also reviewing the Fantasyland expansion with an eye toward blending “aspirational rides” — rides that offer thrills or tension — with attractions designed for guests of all ages. And he said they want to ensure that the additions are flexible and can be updated or adapted over time.

The revisions are not expected to substantially alter the construction timetable; most of the Fantasyland additions are still scheduled to open in 2012 and 2013. Staggs said the project’s price tag will “not materially” change with the revisions, though a slight increase is likely because of certain additions. He would not provide specific figures.

Staggs said none of the changes should be interpreted as an indictment of the original Fantasyland expansion plans.

“We had a number of different people look at it and say, ‘Is it accomplishing what we want to from a guest experience standpoint? Is it accomplishing that in a way that is operationally great? Is it as broad as it can be in its appeal?’” he said. “The answer is, it largely did. But we thought we could continue to play with it and make it better.”