5th Theme Park

figment34786 · Post by **figment34786** » May Sun 04, 2008 9:50 am

bluesky481 wrote:As cool as it would be to have another park...I'd also really like to see Disney refurb./add attractions to the 4 present parks, especially AK and HS.

Absolutely!

natatomic · Post by **natatomic** » May Sun 04, 2008 10:52 am

It IS possible to theme high-thrill rides. Think The Amazing Adventures of Spiderman just down the street at IOA, as well as Dueling Dragons, and Men In Black at USO. And sure, you might thing that for DD it's only possible to theme the queue for such roller coasters, but take a look at Nemesis at Alton Towers (http://rcdb.com/ig776.htm), and Big Bad Wolf at Busch Gardens Europe as it swings through the mock village (http://rcdb.com/ig111.htm?picture=2).

Parks like Universal and Busch Gardens to tend to have far more thrill rides than over-all "family" rides, yet these parks still do well and stay in business. Six Flags have the thrills, but little theming, and that's partially why they fail (among a host of other things - uncleanliness, rude employees, poor park layouts, etc.)

I'm personally not a fan of the Night Kingdom, mainly because it blatantly caters to the wealthy and has the potential to be booked months in advance, making it much more difficult for the average-joe's family to enjoy. As for the Villains park, it's open to everyone, and the only reason one wouldn't go is because the type of attractions they either like or don't like, which is based solely on opinion and is basically what attracts (or doesn't attract) people as to certain places as it is. I know plenty of people that opt to go to Universal over Disney *because* that's where the bigger thrills are. Part of the reasoning behind the Villains thrill park, would be to attract the people who look at Disney as being to "tame."

I would think that the fact that parks like UOF and BGA exist, and exist SUCCESSFULLY, should show that a Villains park would indeed work. And because Disney imagineers would be the ones creating this park, they'd probably be able to think of something that would make it work BETTER.

Captain Schnemo · Post by **Captain Schnemo** » May Sun 04, 2008 7:35 pm

natatomic wrote:It IS possible to theme high-thrill rides. Think The Amazing Adventures of Spiderman just down the street at IOA...

Spider-Man is only just barely a "thrill" ride. It's really just the next generation of dark ride. The thrills are in your head, where they're supposed to be.

I would think that the fact that parks like UOF and BGA exist, and exist SUCCESSFULLY, should show that a Villains park would indeed work.

I don't think there's any doubt that they could make money, it's just a matter of whether they should be on Disney property. There are lots of vice-based businesses, for example, that are extremely profitable that just don't belong on Disney ground.

natatomic · Post by **natatomic** » May Sun 04, 2008 8:58 pm

Captain Schnemo wrote: Spider-Man is only just barely a "thrill" ride. It's really just the next generation of dark ride. The thrills are in your head, where they're supposed to be.

True, but like any other park, they'll need a variety of levels of thrills. Even if it is SOLELY a thrill park, I don't think every attraction would be the wet-your-pants, make-you-cry, write-your-will-beforehand kind of thrill. I'm sure the imagineers would still strive to make the set attractions well-rounded within the context of "thrilling."

Captain Schnemo wrote: I don't think there's any doubt that they could make money, it's just a matter of whether they should be on Disney property. There are lots of vice-based businesses, for example, that are extremely profitable that just don't belong on Disney ground.

Also true, but (and this is a totally random comparison, so forgive me), but I would think Walt would sooner approve of a more thrilling theme park before he'd approve of an entire strip of night clubs (i.e. Pleasure Island). Talk about not being family-oriented! Of course, I could be way off base to assume what Walt would want, but I don't think the Villains-themed park would be the worst thing Disney has done since his death. Just my humble opinion.

Captain Schnemo · Post by **Captain Schnemo** » May Sun 04, 2008 10:46 pm

natatomic wrote:...I would think Walt would sooner approve of a more thrilling theme park before he'd approve of an entire strip of night clubs (i.e. Pleasure Island).

I agree with you there. I've never liked the concept of Pleasure Island. The idea that the first place I ever heard "Smack My B**** Up" was on Disney property is a little gross.

...I don't think the Villains-themed park would be the worst thing Disney has done since his death.

I also agree there, although I don't think that's much of a standard on which to base a new endeavor!

GhostHost · Post by **GhostHost** » May Mon 05, 2008 8:10 am

I had to vote "neither" because I could not sign off on something that would inevitably cause the current parks to suffer even more neglect. Disney needs to focus on what made them great. Polish the rusty silver of Magic Kingdom and Epcot to bring them back to their former luster and shine. There is so much good that could be done to what we already have without venturing out into new territory simply to please the "drive-by Disney" visitor. Walt was always thinking ahead but he also knew enough to protect what he had already worked so hard for.

natatomic · Post by **natatomic** » May Mon 05, 2008 10:19 am

Captain Schnemo wrote: I also agree there, although I don't think that's much of a standard on which to base a new endeavor!

Yep. I agree. But it looks like Disney is going to build one of these no matter what - actually it looks like their already dead set on the Night Kingdom, but I definitely think that the Villains Park would be the lesser of two evils (ironically enough!

)

Post by **subsonic** » May Mon 05, 2008 11:49 am

Next thing we know, Disney's form of "ambiance" will be TV screens throughout the queues and that's all.

Captain Schnemo · Post by **Captain Schnemo** » May Mon 05, 2008 4:32 pm

natatomic wrote:...it looks like their already dead set on the Night Kingdom, but I definitely think that the Villains Park would be the lesser of two evils

I'd prefer the Night park, since most people wouldn't even notice its existence. It'd be much like Typhoon and Blizzard.

Although I understand the rationale for saying "neither" since the 4 existing parks need so much attention.

Breton · Post by **Breton** » May Mon 05, 2008 5:26 pm

Yea I agree we should fix some of the rides at Disney first, such as Space Mountain.

SimonTemplar · Post by **SimonTemplar** » Jun Wed 04, 2008 9:39 pm

All info seems to point toward NK being built for a 2011 opening (WDW 40th). I totally agree that they need to spend the $$ on upgrading/refurbing what's already in the 4 existing parks before they expand to a 5th.

metsofny · Post by **metsofny** » Jun Tue 10, 2008 1:41 pm

I think they should work on hollywood studios. It needs the most help. Not enough rides, so the lines are out of control. A section of kids rides would help kind of like dinoland in AK.

metsofny · Post by **metsofny** » Jun Tue 10, 2008 1:43 pm

I think they should work on hollywood studios. It needs the most help. Not enough rides, so the lines are out of control. A section of kids rides would help kind of like dinoland in AK.

MetalRage · Post by **MetalRage** » Feb Wed 18, 2009 8:47 pm

i voted neither because they should continue working with Disney's Hollywood Studios and Animal Kingdom before they open a new park.

Jacca5660 · Post by **Jacca5660** » Feb Thu 19, 2009 6:07 am

Captain Schnemo wrote:A thrill ride park is an exclusionary anti-Disney park. Bad idea.

I voted for the Villain park. It would save me a trip to Universal. My DS's are teens now and want the thrill rides. I think it would be good for Disney to have something to directly against Universal.

Captain, I can't wait for your dissertation on this one.

Subsonic Radio

5th Theme Park

What is a better idea for a 5th theme park at WDW?