Future Plans For WDW's Fantasyland

[Atlantica]

I dont get all the hate for Tink on here, and everyone calling her a 'fad'. Her movies are wonderful, and open up Tinks world, which is full of fun, magic and adventure. That, to me, is ideal for the Disney parks,

[WonderlandFever]

I hope to God they don't get rid of SWSA! I have been worried about this since they talked about that Dwarf coaster

[WonderlandFever]

I would love it if they would make an area themed to Wonderland btw it makes sense and it really does appeal to boys and girls!

[Margos]

I dont get all the hate for Tink on here, and everyone calling her a 'fad'. Her movies are wonderful, and open up Tinks world, which is full of fun, magic and adventure. That, to me, is ideal for the Disney parks,

I totally agree. You know, I think I have to say it: As far as the "worlds" of different Disney movies go... I think Pixie Hollow would be among my favorites to visit. It's so beautiful and inviting. Plus, it would be great to see the imagineers design things the way the people who designed it in the films did: Mostly natural elements, with enlarged versions of small man-made objects only appearing occasionally (except in anything that Tink has built, in which man-made objects would be extremely prevelant).

[slave2moonlight]

I don't think they will ever add a Roger Rabbit ride, not with some legal, contractual namby-pamby getting in the way.

Well, I gave up hope for that a long time ago, but we should also keep in mind that supposedly a Roger sequel is finally in the works...

Anyways, I don't remember if I mentioned this, but while I'm thrilled we are getting Ariel's ride, and while I'd do back flips if Florida got Roger, Alice, Indy, and Pinocchio rides (I didn't even know there was a Pinocchio ride besides the Storybookland boat ride I remember well from childhood), I do think it's smart to not have a lot of ride repeats between the two American parks. Right now, there are a nice handful of reasons I would LOVE to get out to California. Mainly the ones I mentioned and also the Matterhorn. I've never been on the Matterhorn, nor on the Indy or Roger rides, and those latter two are two of my fave subjects. However, that doesn't mean I applaud the removal of good rides that are already in existence. Most specifically Mr. Toad. That was too popular to remove! And I feel both parks should have the Country Bears too, but they were removed from California as I understand it. And I'm glad the treehouse at WDW is still the Swiss Family Robinson Treehouse (right?), as it's my understanding that it's Tarzan's in California. Since I really feel there should be SOME acknowledgement of Disney live-action classics in the parks, it'll break my heart if/when this changes or goes, or the Liberty Tree too (Am I forgetting anything? Well, Pirates of the Caribbean with it's film theming now, ha).

[slave2moonlight]

Slave2moonlight, I finally get why the meet and greets as they were may have been hard for guys like you to see them. I actually planned on sitting and making birthday cards for Aurora, and I never thought it would only those activities, I thought grown-ups would get their turns to meet characters while the kids did something else or got their turns. What if there was a "grown-up table" at the cottage?

Anyway, we were not saying Tinker Bell shouldn't have her own place, just not the place from the direct to video movies. We were saying her Fairies franchise, not her own popularity by herself, was a fad. She could still have her own place, preferably in Neverland, but I wouldn't mind her just having her magic tree in there, just one thing so there's room for other, more gender-neutral or boyish things.

A grown up table would be nice, but I don't expect anything for grown ups to do (if they have no kids) except watch and smile, and trying to muscle in for your own photo probably would be as difficult as embarrassing. As lame as Santa Claus-like lines are, at least you're just another person waiting for your turn. Actually though, I'm hoping to get my pictures by going to my first ever character dining experiences.

As for the Tink subject, the Fairies franchise helps to build a situation to place Tink in. She's a tricky character to set up a logical meet 'n' greet with. Bottom line, you have to shrink to her size, so right there, she's got to be in her own fairy world. Sticking her in a corner of an area, like Aladdin in Adventureland or Morocco, just isn't going to work. But, as much as I would love them to create a whole Neverland, that would be a much bigger deal than creating Pixie Hollow, and then you have to still find/set up a logical Tink meeting within it. The thing is, you don't need to have seen the Tink movies to enjoy Pixie Hollow, just know that you're where fairies live, so you're meeting Tink and some fairy friends of hers. Heck, even the books and films have a different set of friends she hangs with. It doesn't matter if you call it Pixie Hollow or Fairyland, or whatever, but Pixie Hollow would be the sensible choice since all the fleshing out of that world has been done already in movies and books. It's the best way to do a TinkerBell meet 'n' greet until they can make a believable Tink that could fit inside Peter's hat. But for us guys with a crush on Tink, that won't be as nice either, ha. Much better would be going to Pixie Hollow and meeting Tink and even more gorgeous fairies that are big enough to hug. *drool* Basically, I'm saying, it doesn't matter if the franchise is remembered or not, this is basically an idea for an area for TinkerBell fans, most of which will be familiar with the franchise these days, but it still works even if they are not, because children and many adults alike love fairies, and the more the merrier, so they might as well be the same ones in the films, which, frankly, I get the impression are seen more like canon by Tink fans (and maybe even Disney) than any other DTVs are by their respective fans. Plus, the fairy friends are multicultural, and I'm sure Disney would like to have at least one more set of multicultural characters besides the princesses and their princes.

[David S.]

Okay, I'm going to share my thoughts, and my apologies if I kill another thread. Since I started posting on this webboard, my posts often seem to end threads, for reasons beyond me. It's a large part of why I often feel no one here likes me, ha.

I enjoy your posts

Most specifically Mr. Toad. That was too popular to remove!

I agree, and Florida has the room to have kept Toad and built a new building for Pooh!

And I feel both parks should have the Country Bears too, but they were removed from California as I understand it.

Yes, sadly the Bears were removed from DL (they are one of my MK favorites!) There were faint internet rumours a while back that they may one day resurface in the Grizzly Peak section of Disney's California Adventure, but I am not sure if there was/is any substance to this or just fan wishes.

And I'm glad the treehouse at WDW is still the Swiss Family Robinson Treehouse (right?), as it's my understanding that it's Tarzan's in California.)

Yes, the treehouse is still Swiss Family Treehouse in Magic Kingdom, Tokyo Disneyland, and Disneyland Paris! It's Tarzan's Treehouse in Disneyland and Hong Kong Disneyland.

[blackcauldron85]

http://thedisneyblog.com/2010/08/25/mor ... -wackadoo/

Finally, here’s a video from CSPAN where Jack Blitch from Disney Imagineering, talks about the process of WDI, and some of its plans for the future. In the video we get a peak at 3-D models of “Under the Sea: Journey of the Little Mermaid” and the entire Beauty and the Beast section. Basically phase one of the expansion.

[Disney Duster]

You know, any changes to plans go against what the head of this project offcially said, that they were keeping the original homes, just making them better, more appealing to everyone, and adding a new ride.

Once again, if these plans are right, so Belle gets her own meet and greet, home with activity, and village, Ariel gets her own meet and greet, and home with ride, and the other princesses get shoved in one little space?

Slave2moonlight, we actually have discussed how within Neverland, you could get shrunk to Tink's size. Think about how you are walking from Belle's village and some effect must shrink you into Tink's world. The same concept would happen with Neverland, you are walking and then an effect shrink's you into Tink's home, or perhaps a less expansive Pixie Hollow within Neverland.

Because if Pixie Hollow was as it was, it would be much bigger than the other worlds of the princesses or Dumbo, except Belle's world which has a lot to explore with Belle's home, the village, and the castle, with Gaston, the Beast, and enchanted objects appealing to boys, it is quite different from Pixie Hollow, full of Tink and...fairies not many people know, in their own sections that make people go "Why is there such big sections for these characters we don't know? I just wanted to see Tink!"

[Atlantica]

Just an FYI Duster, I was a student teacher (till I changed courses) and children know ALOT about the world of Pixie Hollow and the various faries that live there.

They were actually used in one of the schools I was in for a project about nature; its purpose was to educate children about how important it is, and Tink and her friends were used to get the point across to great effect. Just a heads up if you wonder about how many people know of them

[slave2moonlight]

Thanks, David S.

Just an FYI Duster, I was a student teacher (till I changed courses) and children know ALOT about the world of Pixie Hollow and the various faries that live there.

Yeah, ha, I was just about to post that I suspect most kids these days are more familiar with the Tink films than Disney's Peter Pan. I honestly just don't buy that kids don't know or like these characters or will forget them that easily. Like it or not, the Tink films are not in the same breed as the old "Disney direct to video sequel". And building a whole Neverland area to celebrate the popularity of Tink just doesn't seem very logical. As much as many of us would LOVE a Neverland area, that brings up so many other issues, like that it would probably mean removing Peter Pan's Flight, it would probably make more sense as a theme park of its own or at least a whole new land of its own, and setting up a shrinking scenario just to meet one character seems excessive. Though, they could come up with a Tiny Kingdom area of Fantasyland in which you shrink and go into a land of oversized items and grass and all to meet 'n' greet not only Tink (and her friends for as long as they're popular), but also the Rescuers, Basil and Dawson, the Rescue Rangers, the A Bug's Life gang, costumed Remy, frog versions of Naveen and Tiana, Cinderella's mice, and other's of that stature... Alice could even show up there now and then in her shrunken form, ha.

[Wonderlicious]

They were actually used in one of the schools I was in for a project about nature; its purpose was to educate children about how important it is, and Tink and her friends were used to get the point across to great effect. Just a heads up if you wonder about how many people know of them

This is going off topic, but has anyone also seen the public information ads that sometimes pop up on this site? One of them featured Tinker Bell (in her "Disney Fairies" look) encouraging people to not waste electricity. I've also seen Ariel in another such ad, I believe promoting keeping the oceans clean.

[Wonderlicious]

Since I've been away from this thread generally over the past week (due to a busy week in the real world), I'll now give my thoughts on what has happened with the development.

The fact that "Snow White's Scary Adventures" is going doesn't bother me itself, especially since there'll be a new Snow White area, featuring a mine ride, and presumably the Dwarfs' cottage as well. A few years ago (according to Jim Hill), they toyed with replacing "Snow White's Scary Adventures" with a dark ride based on Beauty and the Beast, but then adding a mine cart ride based around the Seven Dwarfs so as to give some reference to Walt's first feature within Fantasyland. Having said that, the fact that they're replacing the original ride with a meet-and-greet area is just as bad as having a well themed but ultimately off-putting attraction like "Sleeping Beauty Cottage" as a new, centrepiece attraction. True, there'll still be three movie-based dark rides in Fantasyland (the new one will have a "pretty princess" theme), and there's also "Mickey's Philharmagic" in the immediate castle area as another character-based, non-carnival attraction. But since they're building so many new shops and restaurants, couldn't they at least not be so greedy and convert one of them into a meet-and-greet area, especially since two of them are based on Beauty and the Beast?

Also, call me anal, but I still want to see new exteriors for the existing dark rides and similar ("Mickey's Philharmagic" and "It's a small world").

[Big Disney Fan]

Here's the irony of it all: when WDW was being built, they initially considered not having the Snow White ride there at all, that they considered theming the dark rides to entirely different movies. But Roy Disney objected to this, saying that they remain as faithful as possible to Walt's original thinking for Disneyland, meaning that the Peter Pan, Snow White and Mr. Toad rides would be retained. However, the Imagineers did make the rides themselves a shade different than in Disneyland. Of course, Mr. Toad is gone now, but that's beside the point.

Oh, well, it could be worse. At least the Snow White ride will be gone from Walt Disney World instead of Disneyland.

[blackcauldron85]

Slow goings for Fantasyland expansion...
http://orlandoparksnews.blogspot.com/20 ... pdate.html
(via disneyreport.com)

[Disney Duster]

Two things...

One is, I heard that the case was that the guy who unveiled the first plans of this expansion at D23 was the head of Imagineering, but he left, and now this new guy is the head and he is changing the plans?

If that is so, does anyone wonder if the plans would have stayed the same if he didn't reveal them early, because maybe they are only chnaging plans because of the early complaints?

The other thing is, I can see Belle's village in pictures on the construction walls. And I heard that Cinderella's and Aurora's homes also used to be in pictures on the walls but they were taken down. Anyone know if that's true and have any pics of when they were on the wall?

[blackcauldron85]

^ For the first thing, I can believe that...I mean, it wouldn't be the first time Disney tweaked plans due to public outcry *cough *The Princess and the Frog* cough*

As for the second thing, apparently I hadn't been to Magic Kingdom in a while, because I've only been there twice, I think, since I've seen pictures on the walls...the only ones I remember seeing are for the TLM ride and the Be Our Guest restaurant...

[blackcauldron85]

10/13/10 Fantasyland Expansion Video Update
http://www.wdwnewstoday.com/2010/10/14/ ... eo-update/
(via disneyreport.com)

[blackcauldron85]

Winnie The Pooh attraction at Magic Kingdom opens with new Queue
http://thedisneyblog.com/2010/11/23/win ... new-queue/

[reyquila]

^ For the first thing, I can believe that...I mean, it wouldn't be the first time Disney tweaked plans due to public outcry *cough *The Princess and the Frog* cough*

As for the second thing, apparently I hadn't been to Magic Kingdom in a while, because I've only been there twice, I think, since I've seen pictures on the walls...the only ones I remember seeing are for the TLM ride and the Be Our Guest restaurant...

I was there today and there was a big poster announcing another Beauty and the Beast area that appears to be Belle's House. I missed the Winnie the Pooh new area because the kid did not wanted to visit that attraction. I spent a great day though!