Rumor: DinoLand, USA to become Indiana Jones Land?

I know someone already floated the idea on this thread but if it is Indy set in South America that could be cool. Rain Forest is one habitat not fully represented in AK so could have an animal trail with that theme and maybe do a kids splash area or something else water related - and maybe one more related attraction or show
Indy or not, a new continent is what I'd like to see. South America would be an interesting choice and a lot of possibilities. The architecture and feel for that type of area would also be cohesive with adjacent lands. Take something like Amazonia at the National Zoo and make it bigger and better.

Now cue the comments that South America would draw all the BTGs, starting in 3, 2, 1 ......
 
I don't think they will ever do Australia because it would fit better in Epcot, so South America and an IP focussed retheming are really the only options...did someone say Beastly Kingdom???
 
Why would Australia fit EPCOT better than AK? just curious your reasons. Think it could work in either personally, but they have enough iconic things to use with a Great Barrier Reef themed aquatic animal section, koalas, kangaroos, wallabies, Tazmanian devils, penguins wombats, dingos, certain snakes, etc. Plus could relocate the Nemo musical to that area in a Sydney Opera house themed building. Then that would leave the current Theater in the Wild location for expansion with a retheme of Dinorama.
 
Last edited:
Why woudl Australia fit EPCOT better than AK? jsut curious your reasons. Think it coudl work in either personally, but they have enough iconic things to use with a Great Barrier Reef themed aquatic animal sections, koalas, kangaroos, wallabies, Tazmanian devils, penguins wombats, dingos, certain snakes, etc. Plsu could relocate the Nemo musical to that area in a Sydney Opera house themed building. Thent hat woudl leave the current Theater in the Wild location for expansion with a retheme of Dinorama.
That actually sounds really smart, just not your typing of it
 


Just because they made their reason clear doesn't mean it's a good reason, lol. There are other Disney movies that have better conservation messages that could have been used, and since they bought the rights to Avatar it really could have been any conservation movie. It was about money because at the end of the day, Disney is a corporation. Which is fine. It's just my opinion that they could've done something else there that I personally would've enjoyed more, but Disney doesn't listen to me. :P
From it's initial conception, AK was always supposed to have a land about imaginary beasts right where Pandora was eventually built. There's a dragon at the center of the stinkin' park logo, after all. It just so happens the plan changed from the original concept of dragons and unicorns to the imaginary beasts of Pandora instead. Both rides they built are really all about exploring the imaginary flora and fauna of this land. I think it fits very well with the theme of the park and it fulfills part of the original overall concept.
 
I would say no because it doesn't fit the theme at all, but after they put Avatar in there, the theme went flying out the window. I wish they would have put a mythological animal section in AK! There are unicorns on the lamps and stuff (and we have the Yeti in Asia) so that would have been really neat. I think if they had split DHS by studios (Pixar, LucasFilm, etc) that would have opened up sooooooooo many doors for them in that park. And then Avatar could be there (which makes sense because movie-making wise people were really into it) instead of in AK. Butttt it's in Animal Kingdom.

From it's initial conception, AK was always supposed to have a land about imaginary beasts right where Pandora was eventually built. There's a dragon at the center of the stinkin' park logo, after all. It just so happens the plan changed from the original concept of dragons and unicorns to the imaginary beasts of Pandora instead. Both rides they built are really all about exploring the imaginary flora and fauna of this land. I think it fits very well with the theme of the park and it fulfills part of the original overall concept.

If you haven't already researched what could have been, WDW Radio has a great episode with Jim Korkis (I love that guy) about Beastly Kingdom.

I can't link to the actual website as it's blocked at work but here's an alternative link:

WDW Radio #481 - Beastly Kingdom - The Walt Disney World That Never Was
 


Does Florida have the environment to support Australian wildlife? I understand Africa and FL are different but they always seemed similar enough to make habitat recreation possible. If so, do Australia absolutely. No question
 
Just my 2 cents.... I'm curious if those that say that Pandora doesn't fit AK have actually ever been to Pandora yet and rode the rides? It fits... trust me. Plus it is amazingly immersive and beautiful. Also, I guess I'm of the minority but we love DinoLand. Last week was our first trip my daughter was 38 inches, so this time she got to ride Kali. But before that, triceratops spin and the boneyard were big parts of our AK days and the kids loved it and I actually loved the theming too. The boneyard is fantastic. I personally would have loved MORE carnival rides so that the littles would have more to ride! I'm not a huge IJ fan... I'd rather see the Dino's stay. IJ would fit better in DHS I think.
 
Even before Pandora, DAK wasn't exactly holding true to its name and original concept. The "conservation" storyline of Kali River Rapids is about as thin as it gets. To the average guest, it probably looks like the area was recently struck by a Florida wildfire.

And Everest belongs in an "animal" park because of...the yeti, I suppose???

They should just rename the park "Disney's Adventure Kingdom" and be done with it. Then the Indy area fits much better, not to mention Pandora, Kali, Everest, etc.

The stunt show at Hollywood Studios has run its course. Repurpose that space plus Star Tours for something new and different.
 
Even before Pandora, DAK wasn't exactly holding true to its name and original concept. The "conservation" storyline of Kali River Rapids is about as thin as it gets. To the average guest, it probably looks like the area was recently struck by a Florida wildfire.

And Everest belongs in an "animal" park because of...the yeti, I suppose???

They should just rename the park "Disney's Adventure Kingdom" and be done with it. Then the Indy area fits much better, not to mention Pandora, Kali, Everest, etc.

The stunt show at Hollywood Studios has run its course. Repurpose that space plus Star Tours for something new and different.
I strongly disagree.

Each area of Animal Kingdom is highly themed and arguably the most detailed park in the US. Kali's storyline has to do with deforestation which directly affects animals. As for Everest that goes along with the old folklore of the people of Asia and Mt. Everest. Everything in Everest is based on real things.

Here is the dedication plaque for AK

"Welcome to a kingdom of animals... real, ancient and imagined: a kingdom ruled by lions, dinosaurs and dragons; a kingdom of balance, harmony and survival; a kingdom we enter to share in the wonder, gaze at the beauty, thrill at the drama, and learn."
 
From it's initial conception, AK was always supposed to have a land about imaginary beasts right where Pandora was eventually built. There's a dragon at the center of the stinkin' park logo, after all. It just so happens the plan changed from the original concept of dragons and unicorns to the imaginary beasts of Pandora instead. Both rides they built are really all about exploring the imaginary flora and fauna of this land. I think it fits very well with the theme of the park and it fulfills part of the original overall concept.
Oh I know, that's why I said that a mythological land would have been neat, I even mentioned the unicorns on the lamps and the Yeti. I just like that idea (things like cherubim, unicorns, dragons, etc) better than Pandora, because those have historical & cultural ties. It's something I'd been hoping to see in AK from the start so I'm disappointed that it won't be happening. Also someone mentioned that Australia would've been a really cool addition and I agree!
 
If you haven't already researched what could have been, WDW Radio has a great episode with Jim Korkis (I love that guy) about Beastly Kingdom.

I can't link to the actual website as it's blocked at work but here's an alternative link:

WDW Radio #481 - Beastly Kingdom - The Walt Disney World That Never Was
Yes yes yes! That's exactly what I'm talking about, that would have been soooooooooo cool. And then Universal put the Lost Continent into Islands of Adventure and I loved it, aaaaaaaaaand then they retconned it into Harry Potter. :'( And then killed the dragon ride altogether. Sad day for dragons.
 
I strongly disagree.

Each area of Animal Kingdom is highly themed and arguably the most detailed park in the US.

I never said otherwise.

Kali's storyline has to do with deforestation which directly affects animals.

Except that it's poorly executed. I understand the ideas behind it. But the average guest doesn't. There's little to convey that storyline.

As for Everest that goes along with the old folklore of the people of Asia and Mt. Everest. Everything in Everest is based on real things.

'Real folklore' is a bit of an oxymoron.

I suppose Pandora and Indiana Jones are examples of real American folklore.

Here is the dedication plaque for AK

"Welcome to a kingdom of animals... real, ancient and imagined: a kingdom ruled by lions, dinosaurs and dragons; a kingdom of balance, harmony and survival; a kingdom we enter to share in the wonder, gaze at the beauty, thrill at the drama, and learn."

Clearly you are more passionate about this than I am. However, I would still argue that the "animal" connections have grown increasingly tenuous over the years. Kali is about conservation. Pandora is about conservation. Everest is about folklore. I guess all we need is an Indiana Jones ride with some snakes & spiders, and perhaps an image of Indy throwing the Holy Grail in a recycling bin.
 
Last edited:
Wasn't Kali initially planned to be a much longer Asian river safari with real animals?
 
Wasn't Kali initially planned to be a much longer Asian river safari with real animals?
It could hardly be shorter. I swear the sole purpose of that ride is to get people really wet. It's not particularly fun or interesting, but it is guaranteed to get you soaked. Which makes it perfect in that park in June, July and August, when it feels sweltering, but less fun during the holiday season. Generally we skip it, though my daughter insisted we ride in December. My wife and I wore ponchos. My daughter refused and, like all good parents teaching an object lesson about listening to us, we let her teeth chatter for a few minutes after we got off before buying her a spare t-shirt to change into. I don't think she'll have much interest in doing it again.
 
Indiana Jones would not make sense in AK. They already have it at Hollywood Studios, so why not build it there? If anything, they need to demolish the carnival area, which is never popular, and use that space for more Dino attractions (actual Dino stuff). Dinosaur is such a unique ride and makes you feel like you're actually in the prehistoric era. Hopefully this is just a stupid rumor.
 
I would think if they want to cheaply update dinoland they would add some Arlo to it. Though Kali fits The Good Dinosaur theme perfectly (I even explained to my 4 year old how we were going to "follow the river home" when trying to explain the ride to him). The Everest backdrop which looks seemingly like mountain from the movie too). My boys LOVE dinosaurs. I would hate to see them take that theme out of AK. Dinosaur was my 4 year olds favorite ride. The animatronics that other parks are using for dinosaurs now are great and could definitely be used in a walk through like attraction. I agree that the carnival stuff is a little cheesy but keep the dinosaurs!
 
Dak is an animal park...it has to be. The existence of the safari ride really kinda makes it so.

What they didn't do correctly is that they tried to "downplay" the animal aspect because zoos are not universally loved or more importantly - bought.

I think that's part of the problem: embrace it. We live on a planet dominated by biology and a diverse ecoculture...if that's not "people's things"...then I don't care about them. Grow up and use your Brain. It's not always about cartoons...ahem...Epcot....but whatever.

The key is to just build a fantastic animal park with lots of other offerings...and it will work itself out.
 
Last edited:

GET A DISNEY VACATION QUOTE

Dreams Unlimited Travel is committed to providing you with the very best vacation planning experience possible. Our Vacation Planners are experts and will share their honest advice to help you have a magical vacation.

Let us help you with your next Disney Vacation!





Top