Originally Posted By 2001DLFan <<Skellington88: Well its called Cars land or Carland or whatever instead of Radiator Springs because the land ties to California's Car Culture with a large portion going towards the movie CARS. But there will be a section unrelated to the movie that will feature a reasturant themed to a drive-in theater that will let you eat inside cars while you watch car related short films. It also gives them the option to expand the area later with say...a herbie ride or something else that is related to cars and car culture.>> It’s called Carsland (or whatever) NOT because it embraces ANYTHING related to California’s Car Culture, but because it is, at this point, entirely dedicated to Pixar’s Cars film. If they really wanted to provide flexibility to the area, they should have named it Route 66. THAT relates more to CCC and provides flexibility to include everything from Pixar’s Cars (still a stretch) to drive in theaters, Herbie, cruise nights, etc.
Originally Posted By BlueOhanaTerror >>>It’s called Carsland (or whatever) NOT because it embraces ANYTHING related to California’s Car Culture, but because it is, at this point, entirely dedicated to Pixar’s Cars film. If they really wanted to provide flexibility to the area, they should have named it Route 66. THAT relates more to CCC and provides flexibility to include everything from Pixar’s Cars (still a stretch) to drive in theaters, Herbie, cruise nights, etc.<<< Yeah, it's not looking like the whole "california car culture" is being addressed in theme at all... A whole land based on a single movie's fine, if that movie is broad enough and universally regarded as strong (LITTLE MERMAID, for instance). CARS.... eh. My least favorite of the Pixar films. I know many others love it, and kids love cars (Autopia is hard to justify occupying all that land, but kids love cars). How I'd love to see a HERBIE ride of some sort. That would be a nice segue to the Wharf or some other district. It could straddle the border between two lands.
Originally Posted By dshyates Herbie using the Indy tech would be cool. But it would have to be in the S.F area.
Originally Posted By dshyates "Herbie? Seriously?" Sure, A $200 million Herbie ride would be a hoot. I can see blasting through a chinese restaurant in a VW bug.
Originally Posted By EighthDwarf "Only if there is a life size AA of Lindsay Lohan!" That's the only thing that would be appealing about it! (and welcome to the boards bro!) "Sure, A $200 million Herbie ride would be a hoot. I can see blasting through a chinese restaurant in a VW bug." I'm (admittedly) a bit narrow-minded, but putting an attraction linked to Herbie (another film) in DCA doesn't sound appealing to me. However, the ride system, based on any number of exisiting systems in the Disney arsenal, could provide for a fun ride, no matter what the theme. The Herbie concept just sounds a little too Universal Studios to me.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 If they really wanted to bring in Herbie, it makes a lot more sense for a MM re-do than "Goofy's Flying School." Didn't Herbie drive down Lombard street in one of the films? Theme the top portion of MM to Lombard Street, and then the hill section is, of course, the hills of SF. Make the already-smallish MM vehicles looks like VW's, and voila. I'd still rather see MM enclosed (or removed), but hey... if it's going to stay, Herbie makes more sense than Goofy.
Originally Posted By BlueOhanaTerror >>>If they really wanted to bring in Herbie, it makes a lot more sense for a MM re-do than "Goofy's Flying School." Didn't Herbie drive down Lombard street in one of the films?<<< That's actually a really great solution. Wish I'd read it earlier; I would have jotted it on an index card, and dropped it on someone's desk...
Originally Posted By oneyepete My goodness. I have just read 168 posts and not one negative comment toward or about someone in the whole lot. Great discussion and points of view. (not like some other threads)
Originally Posted By PetesDraggin In order to make MM a decent ride, they would have to enclose it, make the cars remotely comfortable (I'm not a big guy, but last time I rode this it hurt!), give it a good theme, and change the whole track layout so that it is enjoyable. Basically, turn it into a completely different ride. I hope they tear it down and sell it to Six Flags as a package with the Maliboomer and Orange Stinger.
Originally Posted By BlueOhanaTerror Someone else made a very good point regarding MM - with the DVC wing being built in very close proximity, a lot of guests are going to find it very annoying, whether in its current form, or with Goofy. If it were enclosed, the exterior facades could be made appealing, but otherwise, this ride has always had the aura of "temporary".
Originally Posted By EighthDwarf "I hope they tear it down and sell it to Six Flags as a package with the Maliboomer and Orange Stinger." Don't forget Jumping Jellyfish and that obscene Dinosaur!! Make it a Salvation Army deal - they can have all the junk for free as long as they come and pick it up themselves.
Originally Posted By Brown Monkey Ok so I cheated and skipped to the very end of this topic to comment. So forgive me if this has already been addressed, but lately alot of people have been complaining as to why they are devoting 12 acres all to a single movie. But what I'd like to ask is if anyone knows just how much of these 12 acres will be devoted specifically for the big E-Ticket attraction known as Radiator Springs Racers? Keeping in mind that this ride will probably use up ALOT of space for the "test track" system, I am assuming that the feel of the walkable area will be significantly smaller than what people are expecting. Thoughts??
Originally Posted By ArchtMig If you look at the screen captures of the model of Radiator Springs, and especially the LA Times version of the map, it appears that there is a lot more going on than just the test track ride and the two other C or D ticket rides. There seems to be other buildings that may be shops, or dining establishments, or whatever. I suspect that the area will be diverse enough that you'll want to spend a lot of time there. Maybe it's all just based on one movie. But at least there is more going on than all of Grizzly Peak, which is only based on one single RIDE.
Originally Posted By Brown Monkey Well, to be fair, Grizzly Peak does have the Challenge Trail and a store. But I see your point.
Originally Posted By jeffshultz Yeah, it's criminal how they limit the use of Grizzly Peak to just one ride - why, that's just like the Matterhorn or Big Thunder Mountain! Sheesh.
Originally Posted By ArchtMig >>>Yeah, it's criminal how they limit the use of Grizzly Peak to just one ride - why, that's just like the Matterhorn or Big Thunder Mountain! Sheesh.<<< Go to Google Maps or Google Earth and look at an aerial photo of Disneyland/DCA, and just compare the land area devoted to each of those three attractions. Just by simple observation, it is plain to see that you can fit 4 or 5 Matterhorn footprints into the area covered by Grizzly Mountain, and 2 or 2-1/2 Big Thunders in the same space. Even if Disneyland had never expanded beyond its original 55 acres, Big Thunder and Matterhorn taken together do not cover as high a percentage of the whole park as Grizzly alone covers of DCA's acreage. Grizzly covers approximately the same acreage as the portion of Tomorrowland that serves the Autopia, Submarines, majority of the in-park loop of the Monorail, and most of the Peoplemover. And the old Motorboat Cruise. There have been many instances where past Imagineers overlaid, intertwined and layered multiple attractions together in Disneyland. DCA has nothing like that to claim. Even when they added Bugs Land, they couldn't take Heimlick's train and wind it all around the land and over and under other attractions in the same area. A relevant precedent is Storybookland, where Casey Jr. travels within and around and over the Canal Boats. The reason that the new WDI team in charge is even contemplating adding overlay attractions to Grizzly Peak is that the area is ripe for that, and there is value in doing so that goes beyond just the extra attractions themselves. So what then is your beef?
Originally Posted By FerretAfros But at the same time, it takes up about the same ammount of space as the Jungle Cruise, or the northern half of TSI and ROA (not counting the theming on the shore). While there are plenty of different attractions that take you through ROA, they are all essentially the same thing. Just because they can build multilayered stuff doesn't mean that it'd going to happen. Sure, DL has some great examples of well used space, but it also has some terrible examples of it. Unfortunately, DCA seems to have more of the second than the first, but it certainly isn't the first park to do so. I just hope they don't make the same mistake again with the Radiator Springs Racers that appear to take up a huge space for just one attraction.
Originally Posted By bartholomewneff Cars Land has three attractions. The main one being the racing one based on the third generation technology used in the Test Track and Journey To The Center of the Earth, as well as the two C plussed tickets, Luigi's Tires, based on the old Flying Saucers ride at DL and Mater's Tow, which is like the Teacups at DL or Whirlpool ride at TDS. There is room for at least one more ride, possibly two, but starting off with three is a good thing. Let's make sure we congratulate WDI for creating good rides with great theming and go ride them when they are open. That will show the management that if they build great/fun/well themed rides we will come. And more importantly, we will spend money.
