Cars Land is in Disney's California Adventure -- er, sorry, DISNEY California Adventure.
But central to Cars Land is Radiator Springs.
And Radiator Springs most decidedly is NOT in California, unless I completely mis-remember the movie?
So, what the heck is Radiator Springs doing in California Adventure?
Many have asked the same question.
Answer: Marketing
Quote by Al:
-Al LutzTo that end I'd like the Internet community to join me in reminding the Disney company that "it all started with Walt." As you can see below we've created some T-shirts, plus a few simple graphics that you can copy and paste into your websites to let folks know how you feel.
Serving its function of marketing the Cars brand to the boy demographic.Originally Posted by EC82
"With the acquisition of Marvel and now of Lucasfilm,
Disney may have finally found the grail. You don't need
imagination or art. All you need is a brand."
- Neil Gabler
Because they wanted to add a desert area....Cars makes money...and so they made Carsland.
I was against it at one point but if you see the pictures and are not impressed...then I have no clue why you go to the Disney Parks its one of the best themed lands in any of the parks worldwide
[/U]
I'm impressed by the look. Less so by the flat-out marketing ploy for a mediocre film that ended up being really successful. When you think about what this COULD have been, keeping the desert theme, keeping the cars, keeping it all ... just not being so flat-out commercial. The mind boggles.
If it looks and feels good, I'm good with it.....I love the Desert and honestly its a land I really have wanted for a long time (not cars but a real desert)
So for me I could care less why they built to and as long as its amazing I will enjoy it and not be like so many bugged by marketing over having fun
Yeah what it could have been was the hodge podge land they originally planned and presented about and showed concept art for at D23. The original plan, Car Land, was a more generic land themed to Route 66 and car culture...same mountains (less expansive in original concept) and basically same look as what we're getting with Cars Land but definitely lacked focus and was a hodge podge; Goofys driving attraction over here, Cars themed attraction and RSR over there, junkyard band that way, and realistic Route 66 diner and stuff over there....just a mess of things. With Cars Land you get the same Route 66 theming and car culture, which is totally relevant to California, with the advantage of clear focus, familiar characters and places with new stories, and yeah, you can market it. Best of all worlds. Radiator Springs itself has no location and was inspired by Route 66 towns all across the Southwest including California. The animators for the movie and the Imagineers for the land made trips and spent days doing research on Route 66 to bring that enviornment to life. It'll be great and I guess I don't understand too much why the movie connection bothers so many...they could have built the same exact land with original characters and such and it would have been the same.
Glass half full: It's closer to the California theme than "A Bug's Land" will ever get.
Toonaspie: I have Asperger's. I like cartoons. Toonaspie!
Radiator Springs is on Route 66, vaguely somewhere in Arizona, and Route 66 is the famous road to California. Southern California was also the destination Lightning McQueen was trying to get to when the whole thing started.
Cars Land "belongs" in DCA no more than Pirates of the Caribbean belongs in New Orleans Square, as you somehow are transported 1500 miles across an ocean from New Orleans' French Quarter to the Caribbean Sea just after passing into the attraction building on Royal Street.
Or, how the heck do you jump around the thousands of miles and multiple continents from the Nile River to the Mekong River to the Amazon River, passing by a Bengalese temple of some forbidden eye for good measure, all during a 7 minute boat ride on the Jungle Cruise? The 1860's river steamboat and the 1790's sailing ship both inhabiting various themed rivers in North America (AKA Rivers of America) also gets thematically and geographically messy very quickly.
If you get hung up on exact geography and the logistics of physical space, a lot of Disney's most famous attractions and environments fall apart after just a few moments of pondering "why?". It's best to just keep it light and fun and don't think about it too much. And a healthy dollop of marketing never hurt, either.
Because the California theme has been greatly marginalized, thats why! Others said it, CL is a representation of Car culture and Route 66 which had influence in California, but like most attractions in DCA, direct representation of California is minimum now!
End of the day, it doesnt matter how much it has to do with California, just how well it fits the theme of the land. I mean what doe TLM have to do with California? Nothing! But it fits perfectly in Paradise Pier and the pier represents a part of California culture so it fits from that POV.
Disney Resorts visited:
Disneyland Resort: 40+ times
Tokyo Disneyland Resort: 20+ times
Hong Kong Disneyland Resort: 3 times
Walt Disney World Resort: 2 times
Disneyland Paris Resort: 2 times
So, why don't they just change the name of the park to Pixar Land (which would probably be MUCH more honest AND successful), slightly retheme Soarin' to be a more Pixar-themed attraction, create some Pixar shorts based on Tower of Terror and a generic roller coaster, and call it a day? It would be much more authentic, I think.
The California theme HAS been marginalized. It wasn't a bad idea, despite what the detractors say. But that ship has sailed. It now has about as much to do with California as the Gateway Arch does. I don't mind the concept of Cars Land ... I just mind that Disney has fallen so short of its original ambition for the park.
Hate to think what Disney's America would have become!
---------- Post added 05-13-2012 at 03:09 PM ----------
WorldDisney -- not only does The Little Mermaid have nothing to do with California, they took an iconic California landmark and put a clown face on it!
Believe me, many have asked that question countless times! People have proposed many different variations, from Pixar to an animation park. At the end of the day I guess most of whats in there now still fits in the California theme, even if its just loosely. And to be fair, they added BVS which is really a strong element for the California theme! And it even has a story now with Walt arriving in California for the first time. Oddly if they went that route the FIRST time they couldve had a very interesting park and got people more excited about it than what they came up with.
And if DCA was a sucess like they hoped, it probably wouldve stayed to its original roots, giving people an insight about the state and more attractions wouldve been stronger tied to the theme. Same time though I'm sure more Pixar and other toons wouldve came. People have to remember when DCA was being formed, Pixar was brand new. They had 1-2 movies at that point, Toy Story and A Bug's Life, so by the time it opened, there just wasnt much there! Even then A Bugs Life was still represented. So in time as Pixar got bigger, I'm sure more of it wouldve went into the park regardless, but the emphasis would be on California as well IF the original park didnt fail!
But for the most part, I like what they are doing with the new park. There are way too many movie and toon tie ins (oddly enough the original park had next to nothing in that regards) but they are well done! I never had a real issue with CL, I just didnt understand why they couldnt go with their original idea of just having a Rt 66 and some of the movie in the land. But that said looking at the ideas they originally came up with, its not much difference, they just infused all their ideas they had and translated it with the movie.
But yes, the California theme has basically died. It has the names and buildings from California, but the attractions and shows have nothing to do with it, ie, they are no longer trying to tell you what California is about anymore, just a nice backdrop in a theme park basically.
Last edited by WorldDisney; 05-13-2012 at 12:33 PM.
Disney Resorts visited:
Disneyland Resort: 40+ times
Tokyo Disneyland Resort: 20+ times
Hong Kong Disneyland Resort: 3 times
Walt Disney World Resort: 2 times
Disneyland Paris Resort: 2 times
Marginalized? Disney is adding an entirely new entrance based off 1920s/30s Los Angeles, and is going to completely redo areas of the park to evoke 1940s Hollywood and a 1950s era California national park. How is that marginalizing the California theme?
Carsland combines California car culture, with Route 66, and a successful Disney brand. Hardly "marginalizing" the California theme.
Radiator Springs and Ornament Valley are amalgamations of small towns along Route 66 and scenery of the desert southwest. Radiator Springs and Ornament Valley are most decidedly in California... and Arizona and New Mexico and Texas and... even Utah and Nevada. Detaching California from them is impossible.
Additionally, Route 66 and cars are cultures that are not tied to any one geographic point. Think outside the box.
Find me a mountain range in California that looks like that. That's Arizona or Utah!
With all due respect, it's Imagineering and Parks & Resorts that needs to be thinking "outside the box," not me.
There's nothing California about it. That's quite all right, in its way. As a huge fan of "Journey to the Center of the Earth" at Tokyo DisneySea, I'm looking forward to the ride itself. But even using the somewhat questionable logic of the " Cars" movies, Radiator Springs isn't in California. If I remember correctly (and I only saw the movie once), I think part of the plot revolves around them getting TO California?
Posting Permissions
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Bookmarks