Future Plans For WDW's Fantasyland

[Super Aurora]

Are Disney's plans for WDW's Fantasyland Forest now being revised?
http://jimhillmedia.com/Editor_In_Chief ... vised.aspx

Which is why Tom would supposedly like to step away from the previously announced expansion plan (which relies far too heavily on the Disney Princess franchise for his taste) and then go with an assortment of new rides & attractions for the Magic Kingdom that would have far broader appeal. That could be all things to all people, rather than betting the farm on a single franchise.

...

The only previously-announced Fantasyland Forest expansion project that's absolutely positively going forward at this point is "The Little Mermaid: Ariel's Undersea Adventure."


...

But as for the rest of the Fantasyland Forest project ... With the exception of "The Little Mermaid: Ariel's Undersea Adventure" and the "Be Our Guest" restaurant (which Magic Kingdom officials are hoping will take some of the heat off of Cinderella's Royal Table. So that returning WDW visitors who are looking for a memorable dining experience will opt to eat at this 552-seat venue rather than angling for yet another reservation at that 130-seat restaurant high up in Cinderella Castle), everything else is kind of in flux right now.

Good- before that paragraph, I was worried about the Be Our Guest restaurant. That & the TLM ride are the 2 things that I'm excited about for the Expansion (I'm curious about Gaston's tavern, though).

YES. Granted the design for Cinderella's house and Aurora's cottage look beautiful, i'm more hoping this would be their chance to install Pinocchio, Alice in wonderland, etc. would look badassly awesome. Hopefully they'll also scrap the Pixie hollow too.

[Big Disney Fan]

Are Disney's plans for WDW's Fantasyland Forest now being revised?
http://jimhillmedia.com/Editor_In_Chief ... vised.aspx

Which is why Tom would supposedly like to step away from the previously announced expansion plan (which relies far too heavily on the Disney Princess franchise for his taste) and then go with an assortment of new rides & attractions for the Magic Kingdom that would have far broader appeal. That could be all things to all people, rather than betting the farm on a single franchise.

...

The only previously-announced Fantasyland Forest expansion project that's absolutely positively going forward at this point is "The Little Mermaid: Ariel's Undersea Adventure."


...

But as for the rest of the Fantasyland Forest project ... With the exception of "The Little Mermaid: Ariel's Undersea Adventure" and the "Be Our Guest" restaurant (which Magic Kingdom officials are hoping will take some of the heat off of Cinderella's Royal Table. So that returning WDW visitors who are looking for a memorable dining experience will opt to eat at this 552-seat venue rather than angling for yet another reservation at that 130-seat restaurant high up in Cinderella Castle), everything else is kind of in flux right now.

Does that include the Dumbo-themed area, too?

[Disney Duster]

They already have been working on a very new, advanced, allegedly amazing effect for Cinderella's exhibit, which Jim Hill also gave a few details on.

This was going to be an exciting attraction too, and if you think about it, just as exciting as Be Our Guest Restraunt. Because that restaraunt is really just dining with live characters and special effects. Cinderella's attraction was that, just without the dining.

So can anyone tell me what you think of these options:

Keep Cinderella's exhibit in WDW, but not Aurora's. Cinderella's was more exciting, including having magic effects and knight training that would appeal to boys a little more along with the girls, though younger boys do also like drawing and coloring (the birthday cards), just not as exciting.

Aurora's could possibly be moved to Disneyland, where her castle is. It makes sense to have Cinderella's old house where her castle is because it's then "part of the same kingdom", and Aurora's old house where her castle is as "part of that same kingdom".

Or, move Cinderella's to Disneyland because there's no Cinderella place there, and keep Aurora's in Disney World because there's no Sleeping Beauty place there.

Or, make Cinderella Castle have Cinderella's transformation, and all the other effects from her attraction that would fit (and some more Be Our Guest Restaraunt-like effects) at her Royal Table dining.

Or, maybe Tokyo Disneyland really is getting the same Cinderella effects that were going to be in the WDW attraction, and I'll wait for Tokyo's then.

But if both Cinderella's and Aurora's rides are killed, I hope to someday see all the great concept art for Cinderella's and Aurora's rides, as far as they ever got.

Oh, and make Pixie Hollow Neverland or something else. Geeze.

[blackcauldron85]

So can anyone tell me what you think of these options:

Keep Cinderella's exhibit in WDW, but not Aurora's. Cinderella's was more exciting, including having magic effects and knight training that would appeal to boys a little more along with the girls, though younger boys do also like drawing and coloring (the birthday cards), just not as exciting.

I'm fine with that. The birthday card thing doesn't excite me. No offense to Aurora, though.

Aurora's could possibly be moved to Disneyland, where her castle is. It makes sense to have Cinderella's old house where her castle is because it's then "part of the same kingdom", and Aurora's old house where her castle is as "part of that same kingdom".

That does make more sense, and maybe that would work. Although from comments I've read online, some people don't like the idea that Cinderella will have a castle AND a house, although the house is the Tremaines' house, right?

Or, move Cinderella's to Disneyland because there's no Cinderella place there, and keep Aurora's in Disney World because there's no Sleeping Beauty place there.

I think I like this idea the best, in terms of what would make the best sense...yeah, that's not bad. Although if Cinderella's house were to be the Tremaines' house, it might be really fun (and funny!) visiting them...

Or, make Cinderella Castle have Cinderella's transformation, and all the other effects from her attraction that would fit (and some more Be Our Guest Restaraunt-like effects) at her Royal Table dining.

Would they have space in there? It's kind of crowded as is...? But maybe in the lobby or something? Not a bad idea at all, actually. I think that would be quite magical, actually...yes, I like this idea very much!

Or, maybe Tokyo Disneyland really is getting the same Cinderella effects that were going to be in the WDW attraction, and I'll wait for Tokyo's then.

I'm all for the different parks having unique attractions...but I like the above idea better...I mean, I don't recall right now, is Tokyo getting a Fantasyland Expansion-type thing? Or where are you saying they would use these Cinderella effects?

But if both Cinderella's and Aurora's rides are killed, I hope to someday see all the great concept art for Cinderella's and Aurora's rides, as far as they ever got.

Well, they're not rides. Attractions, meet and greets...but not rides. I WISH they were rides!!!!! XD Then they could have the homes and the rides and it'd be extra magical.

Oh, and make Pixie Hollow Neverland or something else. Geeze.

A lot of commenters, myself included, on Jim Hill's article mentioned Never Land, too. I think that that would be the best for everyone, since it has the fairies, as well as mermaids, for the girls, and pirates and, if included, Native Americans, for the boys (but, of course boys and girls can enjoy everything). A couple or more people mentioned, it must've been on the Jim Hill article, about moving Peter Pan's Flight, or making a whole new, updated attraction, and putting it in Never Land (if they included Never Land, that is)...

[Super Aurora]

As boring as the attraction for Aurora's house is, There is hardly no Sleeping Beauty content at all in WDW. The forest cottage is a welcoming change. The birthday surprise thing is boring and lame. It should have something else like a ride or something.

As for pixie forest, I'm more thinking Alice in wonderland section be there. The tea cup, just like the dumbo ride is, can more there. This also give more room for people to walk, where those two rides previously were.

With up coming Rapunzel, and supposedly new Jack in Beanstalk rumored be made, those two have potential to be located there too.

I'm more for the Alice in wonderland ride and Pinocchio ride

[blackcauldron85]

As boring as the attraction for Aurora's house is, There is hardly no Sleeping Beauty content at all in WDW. The forest cottage is a welcoming change. The birthday surprise thing is boring and lame. It should have something else like a ride or something.

I think that that's a good point, that SB isn't well-represented at all at Magic Kingdom, while all of the other main princesses are (or at least their movies are). I like the idea of a ride...or really even a walk-through exhibit on the film. Anything but making birthday cards, really, IMO.

As for pixie forest, I'm more thinking Alice in wonderland section be there. The tea cup, just like the dumbo ride is, can more there. This also give more room for people to walk, where those two rides previously were.

WONDERLAND!!! That sounds like an AMAZING idea for a land! OMG, can you imagine if they made a Wonderland and a Never Land!!! OMG OMG OMG OMG Disney PLEASSSSSSEEEEEEE!!!!! I know I shouldn't get my hopes up, but those would be PERFECTTTTTTTT!!! And gender-neutral!!

With up coming Rapunzel, and supposedly new Jack in Beanstalk rumored be made, those two have potential to be located there too.

Well, we'll see how sucessful Tangled will be, and apparently Jack in the Beanstalk may or may not be in the works...

I'm more for the Alice in wonderland ride and Pinocchio ride

Part of me says yes, I agree, but at the same time, those make Disneyland more special...I mean, unless they were new Alice and Pinocchio rides and not clones of Disneyland's...

[Super Aurora]

Part of me says yes, I agree, but at the same time, those make Disneyland more special...I mean, unless they were new Alice and Pinocchio rides and not clones of Disneyland's...

You maybe right with Alice in Wonderland ride, but Pinocchio right is in Tokyo and in Paris, so I don't see why WDW can't have it either.

[Big Disney Fan]

Part of me says yes, I agree, but at the same time, those make Disneyland more special...I mean, unless they were new Alice and Pinocchio rides and not clones of Disneyland's...

You maybe right with Alice in Wonderland ride, but Pinocchio right is in Tokyo and in Paris, so I don't see why WDW can't have it either.

I thought of having the Pinocchio ride be in WDW, too. However, it would not just be another clone of California's, it would be bigger, longer and more elaborate, like the Pooh ride in Tokyo.

Of course, Pinocchio isn't in Hong Kong...

[Margos]

Why don't they just make a seperate park containing DAC universes at this point?

[blackcauldron85]

Why don't they just make a seperate park containing DAC universes at this point?

I mean, Magic Kindgom definitely is, to an extent...I don't think that they should necessarily exclude the live-action films, if any lend themselves to theme park attractions...it just depends how successful they have been...I mean, I would love to go on a Newsies dark ride, but maybe not that many other people would...

[Big Disney Fan]

I mean, Magic Kindgom definitely is, to an extent...I don't think that they should necessarily exclude the live-action films, if any lend themselves to theme park attractions...it just depends how successful they have been...I mean, I would love to go on a Newsies dark ride, but maybe not that many other people would...

Ain't that the truth! As David Koenig said in his book "Mouse Under Glass", "The subject must endure or be reconfigured to appeal to current audiences."

[Super Aurora]

Of course, Pinocchio isn't in Hong Kong...

Hong Kong hardly have anything. So it's a moot point.

[Escapay]

I would love to go on a Newsies dark ride

They should have a Newsies Square with live stage shows and hourly strikes (give guests cardboard signs and flyers, have a fake Joseph Pulitzer at the top of a building, etc.).

albert

[blackcauldron85]

I would love to go on a Newsies dark ride

They should have a Newsies Square with live stage shows and hourly strikes (give guests cardboard signs and flyers, have a fake Joseph Pulitzer at the top of a building, etc.).

As long as there is pelvis thrusting, I'm so there.

[Escapay]

They should have a Newsies Square with live stage shows and hourly strikes (give guests cardboard signs and flyers, have a fake Joseph Pulitzer at the top of a building, etc.).

As long as there is pelvis thrusting, I'm so there.

Now, now, this is a family-friendly park. Pelvic thrusts are only allowed in the movies.

Instead, the newsies will do the much-more-family-friendly hokey-pokey.



albert

[blackcauldron85]

As long as I can hokey-pokey with them...

[Wonderlicious]

NOTE: This post is an almost replica of what I posted as a comment to the article on Jim Hill's website. Anything new is underlined.

I am pretty glad that Disney has realised that their current Fantasyland Forest idea is somewhat flawed. The main problem is precisely that there is too much in the way of Princess related stuff. The original intention of Fantasyland was to be a big homage to the greatest legends and fairy-tales ever told as opposed to being an elaborate toy advertisement aimed squarely at girls. If they were going to do a revamped Fantasyland at WDW, I would base it somewhat on the Fantasylands at both Disneyland in California and Disneyland Paris (i.e. storybook villages akin to the illustrations of Arthur Rackham and Gustav Tenngren), while still retaining the idea of an enchanted forest to give the idea that there's "a great, wide somewhere" full of enchantment and fantasy beyond the picture-postcard "petit village", and that the imagination can have no boundaries. I'm going to elaborate my ideas in some detail now, taking both personal desire and business sense into account.

1. Get rid of the incessant use of meet-and-greet in the original plan. Do we need to visit Cinderella's Château when her real castle is a two minute walk away? Are kids really dying to make birthday cards for Sleeping Beauty? Do kids really need to go on a walking tour and engage in amateur theatre with Belle? I'm all for the characters having elaborate meet-and-greet areas, but they don't need whole playtime areas. The Cinderella transformation scene sounds cool, but it could easily be staged in the castle (as it is/will be in Tokyo), and with just autographs and photos at the end. The Sleeping Beauty cottage is a waste of space, and Belle's cottage isn't really something. Small scale areas are fine for the meet-and-greets of the most popular characters (Mickey's House) or for those who need some scene-setting as some sort of context (Ariel's Grotto is an example, as she can't otherwise walk). Equally, it makes sense for characters to appear mostly near the attraction based around them (e.g. Alice in Wonderland characters near the tea cups, Brer Rabbit near Splash Mountain). Yet I doubt that, aside from the most eager children (and I really mean "most eager"), the majority of young ones would not feel that their trip to Disney World has been ruined due to the fact that they couldn't put on a play for Belle or couldn't be one of Cinderella's knights.

2. Make the exteriors to the dark rides surrounding the castle courtyard feel as though they seem inspired by the artwork of the original film, or by the countries from which the original stories originate. Overall, it would add a more storybook village feel to the castle courtyard area, as the current tent façades look a bit dull and tacky. For Mickey's Phillharmagic, a sort of mock-Tudor façade could be used (referencing Shakespeare's Globe theatre), and It's a Small World could either have a new façade similar to a Hanseatic customs house (giving it a subtle maritime feel) or stay with its tent look.

3. As for the dark rides around the castle, they could do with freshening up. I understand that Pooh is relatively new (and a huge pull), so it would make sense keeping that, but the others are really only sacred in that they are original rides from opening day. Before budget cuts back in the late 60s and early 70s meant clones, the Magic Kingdom was going to receive new dark rides anyway. Snow White could easily be replaced by another "pretty princess in peril" dark ride, possibly by a Sleeping Beauty adventure (since that was one of the ones that was planned anyway), which could either have a royal French exterior keeping in line with the castle, or with an exterior based around the Fairies' cottage. Even Peter Pan's Flight could go (read my expansion plans in the next point and you'll perhaps understand why - I do have a soft spot for PPF), being replaced by another ride involving flight (Aladdin, Mary Poppins) or a ride based around an interactive game à la Buzz Lightyear (perhaps involving villains, or a variety of famous Disney scenes and characters). The nearby shops and restaurants could also get some redressing to tie them in to their neighbouring attractions (e.g. if there were a Sleeping Beauty ride, Mrs Pots' Cupoard could be re-themed around the three fairies).

4. For the forest part, I'd make it seem like a walk-around Storybook Land. I'll add for good measure that I'm basing my layout on one of the models that has appeared on the Internet. I'm going to start to the west and make my way east.

First of all, I'd take away the proposed castle walls, as they seem to differentiate too much between old and new. The forest would start around the Pinocchio Village Haus area, as that area already has an alpine feel about it. Instead of Belle's House, one would first encounter the Dwarfs' Mine, which would house a mine cart ride through its jewel-lit caverns - think of a tame rollercoaster, a sort of Junior Matterhorn. Near this, there could be a Dwarfs' cottage, which could house a little café, and often feature appearances from the Snow White characters (including some of the dwarfs who hardly come out).

As planned, one would eventually hit the Beast's Castle/Be Our Guest restaurant, and one would still be able to visit Belle's village next; there would still be a Gaston tavern, and there would also be shops and stalls like in the film, such as a bookshop and a bakery. Towards the east of the village, it would start to feel more like a harbour, blending the world of Beauty and the Beast with that of The Little Mermaid, which is where one would find the Ariel dark ride, as well as presumably her grotto.

Instead of just Pixie Hollow, one would find a more general Neverland setting; this could be like a fantastical version of Tom Sawyer's Island, similar to Adventure Isle at Disneyland Paris. Hook's ship and Skull Rock could be represented, as could a series of caves and other walk-thru exhibits. Within the Neverland volcano would be a Pixie Hollow area, with the magic tree at its centre in a whimsical cavern, and there would be a meet-and-greet area similar to what exists in California.

The circus, while still retaining the expanded Dumbo, could probably become an all purpose "Carnival of the Toons"; Dumbo would be the star, but some of the evictees from Mickey's ToonTown Fair could also feature in this funfair environment (I'd put Donald and Goofy in charge, with help from Chip n Dale, Roger Rabbit and other funny animals). The Barnstormer could be given a circus theme, while still retaining a character such as Goofy as its proprietor (as opposed to potentially creepy clowns or to a scaled back Casey Junior).

Across from that would be an open-air "theatre in the forest", possibly involving a Mickey Mouse Clubhouse show, where Mickey and friends get lost in an enchanted forest, which I should add is simply a placeholder; it could eventually be redeveloped into an attraction based around a successful future film. If we were to forget Cinderella's Château (as I've said, if I had my way, her transformation show would take place in the castle as it will do in Tokyo) there would be a number of possibilities that we could discuss for hours and hours. My choice be a Wonderland woodland, with a relocated Tea Cup ride as well as a new, updated version of the Alice in Wonderland dark ride. If anything, the Wonderland area, with its repositioning of the tea cups, would help distance the major sights of Fantasyland from the Speedway and Tomorrowland.

I realise that I've been rambling, and I could honestly go on and on with various alternate ideas for the Magic Kindgom (or Disneyland Paris, if you want me to), but I'll stop for now. Essentially, I don't want Fantasyland to become one big advertisement for the Disney Princess brand, but to become an homage to the general magic of Disney fantasy.

[Margos]

Am I the only one who was seriously excited for the updates being what they were going to be? I really, really want to see places I love from the movies, like Belle's cottage, and the Tremaine chateau, and yes, Pixie Hollow! When I read about these things for the first time, I was just so excited that I couldn't wait to get to WDW again to see all these things. Now, not only are they crushing those dreams, but all of a sudden, it's "cool" to defend their sudden reluctance to embrace more feminine franchises? I definitely don't agree with this. I don't see why they don't just stick to what they were originally going to do.

[DisneyJedi]

I have no idea what is going on. But it seems from what I'm reading, they're ditching the Fantasyland expansion. At least, from what I understand. Is this true??

[Big Disney Fan]

I have no idea what is going on. But it seems from what I'm reading, they're ditching the Fantasyland expansion. At least, from what I understand. Is this true??

No, it can't be true. If it was being ditched, they wouldn't be going forward with any part of it. The Little Mermaid ride and the Be Our Guest restaurant are going forward. I think more of it is not so much the money (although that is a factor) as that the Princess franchise is in decline...