Disney World’s Dilemma: Balancing Nostalgia and Innovation

by

As a seasoned movie critic, I’ve seen firsthand how Walt Disney World never stays static; it’s a dynamic, evolving entity. Just as Walt Disney envisioned Disneyland to “never be finished, but always be in a state of becoming,” this philosophy has resonated not just for Disneyland, but for all Disney Parks worldwide. The parks are constantly reinventing themselves, introducing new attractions and experiences that sparkle and shine. However, to make room for the new, sometimes old treasures must be gently laid to rest.

In summary, I’ve often favored introducing novel attractions in parks over preserving everything as it is, even though letting go of cherished classics can be disheartening. I consider this trade-off worthwhile for the opportunity to experience fresh, cutting-edge designs in a theme park setting.

To be honest, I’ve had a bit of a shift in perspective lately when it comes to this specific subject. Let me explain.

Theme Parks Are Not Museums, But Maybe Some Parts Should Act Like Them

As a cinephile, I often find myself echoing the statement that theme parks aren’t like museums. In many aspects, this sentiment resonates with me deeply. Museums are all about delving into the past, but Disney Parks, while they do evoke nostalgia, are also about gazing forward. They’re not just time capsules; they’re dynamic storytellers, constantly weaving new tales and creating future memories.

It’s hard for me to envision a Disney Park staying static and unchanging. The thought of stepping into Magic Kingdom years apart, only to find the same experience, seems incredibly dull. What excites me about Disney World is the constant innovation – there’s always something fresh and exciting when I return, which keeps each visit feeling unique and enjoyable.

Later, I got an opportunity to converse with Joshua Bailey, who directed the recently released documentary film titled “Stolen Kingdom”. Although most parts of this new production focus on the urban exploration of abandoned Disney World attractions and the underground trade of illicit items, it’s worth noting that these themes are, in some capacity, intertwined with the sentiment that iconic Disney World attractions deserve preservation. As movie critic Seth Kubersky expresses in the documentary: “The film delves into the exploration of abandoned Disney World attractions and the black market for stolen goods, but it also touches upon the idea that classic Disney World attractions should be safeguarded.

If you say a theme park is not a museum, you’re also implying that themed attractions are not art.

Reframing my perspective, I’ve come to see that taking away a themed attraction isn’t just about eliminating a guest experience; it’s also about erasing a piece of art crafted collectively by a team of talented artists and ingenious inventors.

As someone who finds no issue with the existence of the Star Wars Special Edition, but feels disheartened that the original version of the Star Wars trilogy seems to have vanished, I can’t help but feel a sense of hypocrisy when it comes to themed entertainment. This leads me to discuss what we realistically should anticipate.

Disney World Only Expanding Isn’t Realistic

Thematic attractions can be seen as forms of artistic expression, a point that, while widely accepted, raises complexities regarding their conservation. The question becomes: How does one decide which attractions merit preservation and which do not? If all attractions have value in the long run, then how can growth be facilitated?

It’s clear that Walt Disney World boasts an impressive amount of space, leaving room for potential development of new attractions. For instance, Magic Kingdom is set to introduce Villains Land in the near future. Interestingly, even Disneyland, despite having significantly less space, is planning a substantial expansion. However, the notion that all existing parks can remain untouched and everything new can simply be added as an extension doesn’t sit well with me either.

Expanding Magic Kingdom to the size of Queens within Disney World might theoretically be achievable, but it would require eliminating existing attractions or areas – a process fraught with difficulty. Since creating new experiences often means phasing out old ones, such decisions become challenging.

A Balance Between Preservation And Invention At Disney World Will Always Be Difficult

In certain instances, conservation can be less complicated. When Disney’s Hollywood Studios announced the closure of Muppet*Vision 3D, they mentioned they were exploring methods to save the attraction somehow.

At this point, I’m not entirely sure what that implies. On a basic level, it could be about making the movie available on Disney+ or even in Blu-ray format so people can continue enjoying it. If we consider more extreme possibilities, there might also be plans to reopen the attraction in a different location at some point in the future. For an attraction that primarily consists of a film, preservation is generally easier to manage.

When discussing the potential removal of the Rivers of America from Frontierland, preservation becomes extremely challenging. Despite my excitement for the changes in Frontierland, I recognize that radical transformation isn’t inherently negative. In this case, Disney World is not just swapping attractions; it’s redefining the very layout of the park, which carries both positive and negative consequences.

As a devoted admirer, I can’t help but feel a deep sense of melancholy about the Rivers of America. With the official announcement of its transformation, it seems the window for its survival may have closed. Yet, I cling to the hope that the new Frontierland will be extraordinary, a testament to our collective imagination. However, the inevitable loss that comes with this transformation is something we’ll never recover – and that thought is bittersweet.

I Still Don’t Think Theme Parks Should Be Entirely Static

Although I’m beginning to soften my stance on shutting down historical attractions, it doesn’t imply a complete shift in my viewpoint. I remain convinced about the importance of introducing new attractions, and I still believe they are essential. Additionally, there are times when closing older attractions might be necessary for this purpose.

It’s unclear what the appropriate approach should be. I can’t seem to figure out the ideal equilibrium, but I do believe there must be one. Shutting down existing attractions isn’t necessarily a mistake, yet introducing new ones may not always be the best decision either.

There’s a term called anemoia, which refers to a longing for a period in history that you personally didn’t live through. Coincidentally, this word resonates with me as I often feel nostalgic about eras of Disney parks I never visited myself. Even though some original Disneyland World and Disneyland attractions from the opening day still exist, there are many others that no longer do. Regrettably, I’ll never get to experience those rides, but I will always yearn for the chance.

The disappearance of theme park attractions represents a unique form of art that can never be replicated anew. It signifies the loss of a one-of-a-kind experience that may never be relived or may cease to exist altogether. While I hope Disney Parks continue to innovate, I’ll always remember what they’ve chosen to leave behind as well.

Read More

2025-03-09 14:08