Originally Posted By dznydad Just as a caveat, I love Pixar and their films. Cars may not be my favorite of them all, but I enjoyed it (especially the look of the first film). The aesthetic of the animated Route 66 makes me excited to see Carsland (and, ironically, the apparent lack of it not so excited to see Cars 2). I am sure I will love walking into that neon lit Route 66 at night. All this said, I was thinking about how John Lasseter recently asked the Imagineers to "focus" the area to exclusively Cars (it was originally more all over the place, and I understand his reasoning). However, this made me think again (gotta stop that habit); how many lands in the California parks are EXCLUSIVELY dedicated to one film? Bugsland and Carsland. The rigid positioning of keeping a land exclusive to one film rules out future creativity in developing unique rides that are not based on that single film (back in the day - POTC, HM). Imagine if instead of building Fantasyland in 55, it had been "Snow White Land?" All the rides would have had to be based on that one film (no Dumbos, no Casey Jr, no Alice, etc). By creating an open-ended idea of a land (Frontierland, Adventureland) you allow for the addition of limitless possibilities.
Originally Posted By dznydad Just as a caveat, I love Pixar and their films. Cars may not be my favorite of them all, but I enjoyed it (especially the look of the first film). The aesthetic of the animated Route 66 makes me excited to see Carsland (and, ironically, the apparent lack of it not so excited to see Cars 2). I am sure I will love walking into that neon lit Route 66 at night. All this said, I was thinking about how John Lasseter recently asked the Imagineers to "focus" the area to exclusively Cars (it was originally more all over the place, and I understand his reasoning). However, this made me think again (gotta stop that habit); how many lands in the California parks are EXCLUSIVELY dedicated to one film? Bugsland and Carsland. The rigid positioning of keeping a land exclusive to one film rules out future creativity in developing unique rides that are not based on that single film (back in the day - POTC, HM). Imagine if instead of building Fantasyland in 55, it had been "Snow White Land?" All the rides would have had to be based on that one film (no Dumbos, no Casey Jr, no Alice, etc). By creating an open-ended idea of a land (Frontierland, Adventureland) you allow for the addition of limitless possibilities.
Originally Posted By DlandDug >>...how many lands in the California parks are EXCLUSIVELY dedicated to one film?<< The first was Mickey's Toontown, dedicated to Who Framed Roger Rabbit. But it also holds Gadget's Go-coaster and Donald's Boat. "Bug's Land" encompasses it's tough to be a bug, which already existed, and used to hold the Bountiful Valley Farm. It would seem to me that anything that "fits" a theme would be allowed.
Originally Posted By FerretAfros I understand that Mickey's Toontown was based on the Toontown in Who Framed Roger Rabbit, but the version in the film was based on all the old cartoons, so I feel like it gives them a lot more flexibility with what's included. Heck, according to the name it belongs to Mickey, yet he only makes a cameo appearance in the film. I guess technically, Cars was based on all of Route 66, but the way that everything was stylized for the film (which makes the film a very cohesive unit) does preclude a lot of other development. Toontown, on the otherhand, was comprised of a lot of footage taken directly from the original shorts and features, giving a much wider range of possibilities. Although from a completely different era than what's in the film, Gadget is able to fit into Mickey's Toontown; I'm not sure if non-Cars-themed car-based attractions (like Autopia, Test Track, or SciFi Dine-In) would fit as well into Carsland. >>Waiting for the anti-John crowd to jump onto this one...<< I can't blame him for a bug's land, but his influence on the Carsland project can't be denied. I suspect his involvement began right around the same time that he significantly increased the budget on the Nemo Subs redo (which runs at capactiy, but rarely has a line longer than 15 minutes these days). It is just a little supect to me. And for what it's worth, there is another single-film-based land in the Disney empire that is often overlooked in these debates: Mermaid Lagoon at TDS. The indoor/outdoor land is based entirely on The Little Mermaid, with nearly a dozen attractions. Other lands in TDS (technically 'ports of call') are also based on pretty narrow theme, like the Jules Verne-based Mysterious Island and heavily-Aladdin-inspired Arabian Coast. Those areas are all very well done, so it does give me hope for Carsland, even if the the theme itself doesn't get me too excited.
Originally Posted By DlandDug >>I'm not sure if non-Cars-themed car-based attractions (like Autopia, Test Track, or SciFi Dine-In) would fit as well into Carsland.<< Test Track is the basis of Radiator Springs Racers, and SciFi Dine-In was originally part of Carsland, and could be added yet.
Originally Posted By plpeters70 <<and SciFi Dine-In was originally part of Carsland, and could be added yet.>> But wouldn't it have to be themed to the Cars film? I don't really think the SciFi Dine-In, as currently themed, would fit. They would have to give it a "Cars"-overlay.
Originally Posted By DlandDug Well yes. Just as Test Track became Radiator Springs Racers. But a drive-in is a drive-in, no?
Originally Posted By leemac <<I understand that Mickey's Toontown was based on the Toontown in Who Framed Roger Rabbit, but the version in the film was based on all the old cartoons, so I feel like it gives them a lot more flexibility with what's included. Heck, according to the name it belongs to Mickey, yet he only makes a cameo appearance in the film.>> I guess it is semantics but ToonTown is only inspired by WFRR? The backstory is that it is the place where toons live (the counterpoint is Toon Studios at WDSP where the toons work). Therefore I wouldn't necessarily put it in the same bracket as CarsLand.
Originally Posted By dznydad (FYI - I am NOT a "John hater," though I realize the last minute naming of my post could make it seem that way - hey, maybe it will draw more discussion.) I would LOVE to see Sci-Fi diner in Carsland, it would not have to be re-themed (I wouldn't think). I honestly love old B-movies, I would hope they would show actual trailers and not Car-ified fake ones (dang, I just put that out in the universe). Mermaid Lagoon is fine, but I did say "California" parks. ToonTown is not "Roger Rabbit Town." Just saying. It's a circle of life thing; 1930's cartoons influenced the look of the RR film which influenced the look of ToonTown which features Disney characters that grew in popularity during the 1930s' . . . ToonTown is agreeable to the addition of any ...toon. As I said, I'm not a hater - I like Bugsland (though I'd love to see something more done with Heimlich's Choo Choo - an interior portion? Longer?). But can you see something non-Bugs Life added to that land? Then again, since things are bug-sized there, wouldn't that have been a better location for Pixie's Hollow?
Originally Posted By dznydad "Waiting for the anti-John crowd to jump onto this one..." Bad choice of topic title, sorry. I love the guy and the films.
Originally Posted By davewasbaloo Especially Paris - cars quatre roue rallie, crush coaster and toy story playland - blech.
Originally Posted By DlandDug >>I guess it is semantics but ToonTown is only inspired by WFRR? The backstory is that it is the place where toons live...<< The backstory for Mickey's Toontown was adjusted after the land had been designed and announced. Eisner was very proud of "his" comic creation, and really wanted to showcase Roger and the gang. Yes, Toontown was inspired by Who Framed Roger Rabbit, specifically the Toontown sequence. Cooler heads prevailed, however, and eventually it was decided that Toontown would be the home of all the classic toons. And "Mickey's" was added to the name, somewhat clumsily in my opinion.
Originally Posted By FerretAfros >>Well yes. Just as Test Track became Radiator Springs Racers.<< I understand that the technology behind TT became RSR, but the attraction itself (with the showcase of how cars are tested) wouldn't fit. Although they would need to change the facades some, I could see how any of the Fantasyland darkrides could fit into Toontown. Even DCA's Animation building could work there (though it might present some questions of how the toons are living there, if they're drawn frame-by-frame). Toontown doesn't need to have the theme of attractions substantially modified to fit. Carsland doesn't have that same flexibility. >>Cooler heads prevailed...<< It's a shame that didn't happen this time, with the much larger investment (both in money and the resort's remaining expansion space).
Originally Posted By DlandDug >>Carsland doesn't have that same flexibility.<< Not to say it couldn't change one day in the future. Bear Country, home of the Country Bears, became Critter Country when Splash Mountain was built.
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt "I love most of what john does on screen. Not so much in the parks... Especially Paris - cars quatre roue rallie, crush coaster and toy story playland - blech." Yep. You'd think that Lasseter and Pixar, along with parent Disney, would be more protective of the Pixar franchise and not allow such a dumbed down experience based on their enormously popular films to be built in the park. Not only once, but twice, at HKDL too!
Originally Posted By CDF1 Crush coaster doesn't seem like a "dumbed down" experience - from what I have seen on the internet (since I only have been to Paris twice and DLP once some 5 years ago) it looks like they tried to do something a bit more interesting than a Pooh or Snow White dark ride. Blending the Test Track concept into a Cars attraction seems like a pretty logical way to provide something new and interesting to DCA. I suppose they could have seen if Tim Burton wanted to do something like "A Nightmare on the 405" or the like but Carland fits the bill for an area that should have a lot of fun detail and secondary attractions as opposed to just dropping in a backstage ride like a RocknRoller Coaster that presents only a storefront appearance and would appeal only to the upside-down coaster set.
