I really liked the River of Dreams night parade idea, but I actually wondered about the space issue during my last visit to DAK.  The decision feels right.  DAK has, moved in recent years, to become a "must visit" for my family during our time at WDW.  We still believe that they need more to do and always schedule ourselves from 9-3 in the park, and combine it with another activity.  A new family friendly area like Beastly Kingdom would be a great decision.  

The idea sounded great, but if it would have reeked havoc on the horticulture, I'm glad they though otherwise. DAK had a huge problem when it first opened with insufficient shade and overheated guests. Now that the place has finally grown in, it would be a shame to remove the plantings.

It's good they decided not to rip out all the scenery that makes Animal Kingdom so unique from other Disney parks. As for Beastly Kingdom, wasn't the original plan centered around dragons and mythical creatures? Which Disney characters fit that bill? It's probably too much to ask for a non-Epcot Figment attraction.

This is exciting! With the addition of a new land, DAK is just going to get better and better.  

I agree with and respect the decision they made to not tear out a lot of AK's lush and beautiful greenery to make way for guests to watch a parade on the water. From the sound of it though, it was shaping up to be a great parade. Perhaps they could squeeze it in somewhere else on property, like maybe seven seas lagoon?

I am quite curious about the re-birth of the plans and ideas for Beastly Kingdomme, nice tease there. It sounds like things are very early in this process, so I'm sure if it turns out to be true, we'll be hearing more to come further down the road.

I'll take new attractions over a parade, any day.    I'll re-ride attractions over and over.  I'll see a parade once (if ever).

I'm glad they didn't rip out the plants for the parade, but why couldn't they just move the parade to Epcot?  

I'm so glad that they nixed ROL at AK.  Of all the parks, AK has the best "feel" for me.  They should save ROL for when they build DisneySea at WDW :)  .   As for characters in Beastly Kingdom, my hope is that they will go with Maleficient's dragon over Pete's Dragon.  Anyone else think that Belle's Beast will become the new land's mascot?

I agree, the parade description sounds like a great concept.  And the EPCOT would be a great alternative choice.  I still miss Tapestry of Nations.  They just need to work on the "rivers of light" name.  It just sounds like it should take place on the water.  John Q. Public would be very confused by that name.  I know I would be if i were a casual park visitor.

Joe Rohde continues to impress me.  I'm sure he lobbied hard to avoid having some "entertainment suit" come in and rip up his park.  Thank god for that.  I think Beastly Kingdom is better suited in Joe's hands.  My head swims with the knowledge that he could guide this expansion project.  Unfortunately, Disney has now dragged their feet too long on this project and the casual observer may now see this as Disney's attempted answer to Universal's Harry Potter.

I'm still not behind this whole Night Kingdomn concept.  They will really need to wow us with some incredible experiences to pull it off.  The Disney Institute sounded great in theory too but the execution didnt match the publics interests and quickly folded.  It's interesting to hear the Downtown Disney location floated as the proposed location of this "5th gate" considering the history of the Disney Institute in that area.  And now it sounds like the new "Downtown Disney", Flamingo Crossing will serve as a gateway to Night Kingdom.  Hey, maybe they can relocate The Adventurer's Club to Flamingo Crossing!!!!

Okay...so what kind of process is Disney using anyway?

Seems that from the pretty early stages, it would have been apparent to just about anyone that to pull off a for-real pagent in DAK, pathways would have to be widened, trees would have to go, and much of the park's "character" would be lost.  

This being the case, why in the heck has Rivers of Light been bandied about for as long as it has?  Was there some kind of internal fight going on--some people pushing to do this show and rip the park apart, others putting up barriers?  I'd be interested in knowing.

Either way, I think the WDW people need to wake up and realize that there is a vocal part of its audience that recognizes the unique character that DAK's trees, narrow paths, etc. bring to that park.   And those people HATE the trees, narrow paths, etc., citing that walkways are always crowded, that foliage blocks sightlines and makes the park a mess to navigate.  Those folks would have loved to see a new parade that opened things up.

AB

When in cyberspace visit http://www.plausible-impossible.com

I'm thrilled to hear that Disney kept the park's (and therefore the guests) best interests in mind with this decision. Whomever is responsible for this should be applauded.

I'm keeping my fingers crossed that the Beastly Kingdom plan goes through!

And I agree with Pudge the Fish, this whole Night Kingdom thing just doesn't do it for me. Maybe I just don't get it, but so far, from what I've heard... I don't like it.

Not doing the Rivers of Light sounds like a good idea.  It seems that the World of Color show is going to really be an unpleasant intrusion into DCA with a Mickey face staring at you all day.

But...more cartoon characters?  I don't care if they have surveys saying people want to see them, because common sense is going to tell you those surveys are wrong.  The park is filled with people anyway.  Somehow they are going to attract more with this sort of thing?

It's enough.  Who is running this place now?  They are so single minded and unable to do anything that is not character based?

STOP with this line already.  Can't Disney figure out that doing things to death is not the best way to go about things?

What DAK needs is an Australia and a South America section, long before they need to add Beastly Kingdom.  This place could be their greatest park, but instead, they're now going to crap it up with these cartoon shenanigans.

What a shame that the place is run by people who are so blatantly inept.  It is absolutely appalling how terrible a job they are doing.

I'll agree with most evryone so far that ditching the idea of a night-time parade seems sound. I just hope that the characters are woven into the theme and character of the theme park well. I have high hopes, as Animal Kingdom has done a good job of using characters tastefully so far.

Parades are a dime a dozen at the Theme Parks; they are well done parades but over used events. I think it was a good move to eliminate DAK's nigtly parade especially since it would destroy the atmosphere of the eco-friendly wild theme there.

"Beastlie Kingdomme" sounds like something unique for that park and hope it fleshes out. Each park needs its unique drawing points and not a redundant set of events that get stale. However, I do think that the intergration of Disney characters throughout DAK and all parks is important. The children want the warm, fuzzy characters and baby-boomers want the nostalgiic presence of childhood favorites. Intergrating them into "It's A Small World", however,  is a bad idea in my opinion.  

Allow a clarification. I am for the Disney characters apppearing in the parks, but in smallways. They do not need plastred everywhere you look. Some  costumed animal characrters are appriopriate and a ride maybe, but not added ad nauseam.

CHARACTER-based Beastly Kingdom? Hmmm...

You're right, the Mouse hasn't made too many films with unicorns or dragons in them. But the way I see it, there's two kinds of nerds in the world - those who like to SOLVE problems, and those who like to simply point out that they exist. As a member of the former group, I'd like to list a number of Disney films that COULD potentially spawn Beastly Kingdom attractions (some by the skin of their teeth), listed from most to least likely.

- THE CHRONICLES OF NARNIA series. Sure, not all the animals were terribly mystical (lion, badger, mouse, wolves) but they also had minotaurs, centaurs, unicorns and fauns, and the stories and universe are CERTAINLY fantastical enough to spawn several potential thrill rides or dark rides. I'd say it's more than likely, especially if "Prince Caspian" does well, that Beastly Kingdom will become a Narnia-based land.

- MONSTERS, INC. Technically, monsters ARE fantastical creatures. Maybe a clone of DCA's "Mike and Sulley to the Rescue?" Or even better, an EPCOT pavillion-esque replica of the Monsters, Inc. factory, with a thrill ride through the big door room, and a central atrium complete with animatronic Celia going "Monsters Inc., please hold, Monsters Inc., please hold..."?

- THE LITTLE MERMAID. Maybe a whole land devoted to mermaids and the undersea kingdom? Maybe with a clone of that Mermaid dark ride they're building in DCA?

- UP! I know, nobody quite knows the plot of Pixar's 2009 animated Pete Docter-helmed release yet...but apparently it has something to do with an old man fighting off mystical beasts. This could maybe qualify.

- ALICE IN WONDERLAND. If the 2009 Tim Burton film actually INCLUDES things like the mock turtle, the gryffin and the jabberwock, they could certainly fashion "Wonderland" around that (the 1951 animated version not so much...though I suppose if they cloned the Disneyland dark ride as well, it wouldn't be TOO out of place).

- FANTASIA. Specifically the Pastoral Symphony. THIS would undoubtedly make the most logical sense for theming...though Fantasia isn't exactly recognized as the Platinum title it deserves to be (besides, I think a Pastoral Symphony theme was the original plan for Beastly Kingdom, and now that they're starting fresh, out the window it goes).

- PETER PAN. With the Tinkerbell movie coming out, pixies are expected to get hyped up the wazoo. But do pixies really count as "animals"?

- BEAUTY AND THE BEAST. The beast is a mythical creature...kind of...maybe? No.

- ENCHANTED. Specifically, the animated world in the first part of the film. It's a nice big recent hit, and it had that big ogre thing, that's kind of mystical, right?

- HERCULES. Barely makes it by the skin of its teeth by nature of Pegasus. But Hercules is hardly considered an A-list Disney classic these days, so I don't think it's terribly likely.

- ATLANTIS: THE LOST EMPIRE. See last paragraph, replace Pegasus with The Leviathan.

- PIRATES OF THE CARIBBEAN series. Maybe do something with the Kraken?

- SLEEPING BEAUTY. Maybe do something with the Maleficent dragon?

- THE SWORD AND THE STONE. Maybe do something with the Wizard's Duel and the Madam Mim purple dragon?

- MULAN. Technically, Mushu WAS a dragon. But the architecture of a Mulan-themed land might be redundant with EPCOT's China pavillion, and an excessively Mushu-based attraction might be redundant with the Magic of Disney Animation show at Disney-MGM...er, Disney's Hollywood Studios (I will NEVER get used to calling it that). Which wouldn't matter if Mulan were a more ubiquitous Disney franchise (along the lines of Lion King or Nemo), but it's not.

- PETE'S DRAGON. Not too many young people remember this movie (for good reason), but still, it DID have a dragon. Maybe just a dragon-based attraction about all the Disney dragons, combined?

- THE RELUCTANT DRAGON. See last paragraph.

- THE MANY ADVENTURES OF WINNIE THE POOH. Maybe they could turn that area into the Hundred Acre Wood, move the Pooh dark ride there, and put Mr. Toad back in Fantasyland where it belongs. (Hey, a man can dream, right?)

- THE BLACK CAULDRON. Absolutely not. If Disney hasn't based an attraction off this 1985 bomb by now, they never will. Just thought I'd mention it because it DOES have mystical creatures in it.

- THE SANTA CLAUSE series. Unlikely. Got reindeer and elves (stretching it, I know) but nobody wants to ride a Christmas attraction when it's not Christmas.

Lilo and Stitch and Treasure Planet don't count because those were ALIENS, not mystical beasts.

Of course, the problem with ALL of these options is, WHAT'S TO BE DONE WITH FESTIVAL OF THE LION KING? It was originally intended as a cheap stopgap attraction, but it's grown into one of DAK's most popular - so much so that they cloned it in Hong Kong Disneyland, right in the heart of Adventureland. On the one hand, it's too popular to be torn down willy-nilly...on the other hand, it wouldn't fit with ANY Beastly Kingdom theming (of course Finding Nemo doesn't fit with Tomorrowland either, but let's stick to one thing at a time here). I think I might have a solution, though...just MOVE it! Let's face it, the design of FOTLK doesn't involve heavy architecture or anything...it's basically a big tent-like building with bleachers in it, in which performers perform. It seems to me that if they could move the Mad Tea Party to the other side of Fantasyland in Disneyland in 1983, I don't see why they couldn't dismantle the Lion King show and reassemble it somewhere in Africa (perhaps to replace Flights Of Wonder?)

Just my two cents. Keep the change.

P.S. Disney characters in It's A Small World? Boo freakin hoo. That's always been the worst attraction in any park (I went on it ONCE when I was six and never again, and I've been to the parks dozens of times)

I just thought of something else. If Disney WAS to theme Beastly Kingdom to Narnia, and get the land up and running fast enough, then it would directly compete with Universal's Harry Potter land. Yeah, I know Harry Potter is a bigger name than Narnia, but Disney is a bigger name than Universal so it all evens out. Besides, there's such a crossover audience between the two book-turned-movie series that few of the tourists who come to experience the Harry Potter land will be able to resist popping over to Disney for the Narnia experience, too.

And I don't think Disney has to worry about Prince Caspian doing well. The Christian audience in this country will supplement ticket sales. Having said that, I DO think Disney should rethink releasing them in the summer - "The Lion, The Witch and the Wardrobe" became an enormous blockbuster in part BECAUSE it was released in December, and had the entire month of January to sell even more tickets.

I'm glad to hear that Beastly Kingdom is back under consideration. While I would love to see an Australia addition to AK, frankly it wouldn't do anything to solve the problem of keeping people at this park into the evening. (Of course a good table service restaurant would help--they tried and failed miserably with Yak and Yeti).

Well, this sounds much better than what I've been hearing about the Night Kingdom.

A nightly river extravaganza isn't worth ripping up the entire park. And it would just be downright wrong to waste all that greenery.

I heard rumors that WDI was considering re-doing the entrance and front area of AK to provide more a central village street type theme, albeit with plenty of folliage around, and interesting one of a kind shops, . . . this large street was supposed to solve the problem of where to hold parade in the park.  One big problem is that without a central well known seatting area, like how Mainstreet was a central seatting area for the main street electrical parade in Disneyland, guests would really have to use their maps to figure out where the parade would start and where the parade route would be, which would be very narrow at points and make a lot turns . . . another alternative is to have a sort of river of light parade on the now defunct river that circles the Tree of Life, there is almost enough viewing around this river (with some minor clearing of foliage and construction of viewing areas) and everyone can locate it easily and the floats and various items wouldn't have to compete with walkways with guests.  Eventually another "land" will be added to AK to try to make the park into something on the level of MK or EPCOT in sheer scope of theme . . . most likely an Australian themed area which will add some still needed attractions to theme park.  

Disney's Night Kingdom project may likely beome largely a special after hours "tour" of Animal Kingdom mostly because Disney doesn't want to build an entirely separate theme park that only the well-to-do can attend!  What would the slogan of MK become, "Where dreams come true for the plebians?"  Even the whole "extra-magic" hours ideas has irked some guests who could afford to let their kids play in MK an extra hour while other families are kicked out.  Disney's Night Kingdom must become something more than just a response to what other theme parks are doing in Orlando or Disney will lose some of their family fun for everyone image. In the end Night Kingdom may have several different elements, things all families have included in the park hopper, in addition to special behind the scene tours of animals in AK with night vision goggles, likely a special night time version of "Pleasure Island" that is more family oriented that can be entered for a lower price than special tours.  $500 million doesn't build as much as it once did, look at DCA for evidence of that, . . . especially if that includes a new hotel experience . . .

Magic Kingdom, Beastly Kingdom, Night Kingdom.....gosh, I guess this obsession with royalty is what happens when "Disney's America" gets shot down, huh? (Smile)

But seriously, re. the questions some have had about why it took so long for the parade-viewing park-ripping plans to be kiboshed....you folks HAVE to understand that there is a HUGE and ONGOING and CULTURAL rivalry inside the "kingdom" of Disney between the "Walt Disney ENTERTAINMENT" folks who run park parades and shows and the "Walt Disney IMAGINEERING" folks who create the attractions. When one leans into the other's arena, as has happened a lot in the budgetary-emphasis leaner years because Entertainment's attraction-esque things are always cheaper than WDI's, there is HUGE friction and turf warfare behind the scenes. So how could this project go down its road so long and far before such a decision to pull the plug was made when the problems re. changing the character of the park were so evident from the get go? Simple: Nobody at the top said "NO WAY" early enough and both sides went on about their plans, spending budgets and allocating personnel and investing personal capital into the parade because nobody in charge clearly wanted to slap 'em down in the misguided managemental hope that "the best ideas will rise to the top" if they are left to stew and percolate long enough....all the while expending resources and man-hours and moolah, of course.

IF management at the top had a clearer focus and a clearer set of values and just plain KNEW that the character of AK is all ABOUT its wonderfully DIFFERENT feel due to the foliage, narrow paths, and UN-themepark-like aspects, they'd have said "Great idea, wrong venue, thanks--move on" a long time ago. But of course, in all of the turmoil and flux in Burbank from the last several Eisner years onwards, such basic, core, and guiding principles have had no real home EXCEPT in the hearts of people like Rohde, Baxter, etc. etc. whose political clout within the company has risen, fallen, risen again, and....well, the bean-counters are always out there folks. That's the nature of the multinational corporation that the once-upon-a-time-workshop-of-Walt has become.

Big companies are, by their nature and for some good reasons, too, inherently averse to RISK. But when you are a big company that is big BECAUSE it has risked audaciously and creatively as its very modus operandi all through its best years, there's a natural schism in the executive suites going on that, as we've all seen, sometimes really screws things up.

So let's be thankful this time it didn't. AK is not just a wonderful Disney park, which sets it apart from all other parks by other creators, but a totally UNIQUE-within-the-Disney-Park-Universe (I refuse to say "kingdom", let alone "domme" or however the mismarketers plan on spelling that beastly thing) "animal" and happily this time the "environmentalist conservationists" have SAVED AK from becoming, in its classic form, extinct.

But it, like all the good stuff at WDW and beyond, is still an "endangered species" folks....so keep your eyes open and support your local Imagineer. The "Entertainment" side of the house is inherently an amateur- or minor-league group of creative minds, unfortunately. And that means they make up what they lack in creativity with the minor-leaguer's penchant for corporate gamesmanship and butt-kissing that the artists of WDI sometimes fail to give a damn about because THEIR nature says "That's bullshit--its about the ART!"

I've said it before and I'll say it again...the one Disney property that would fit both Animal Kingdom AND the idea of a "Beastly Kingdomme" is...NARNIA. You've got your "lion king", you've got unicorns and dragons, you've got natural-looking yet talking animals, you've got an appreciation for wild nature...Narnia is a perfect fit. I hope for crying out loud that Disney will consider Narnia for AK. If they do and build something decent, I'll visit AK a HECK of a lot more than I do now.

"Night Kingdom's construction site is actually located in the upper northwest corner of WDW property, to the west of the Magic Kingdom."

Aw man...  That's like right behind my neighborhood...  I'm going to have to move...

If they're still going to call it Beastly Kingdomme,  I doubt it would just be Narnia. Probably have a dragon like they have in Paris... It'd be nice if they did something with Gargoyles but for that to happen, it would probably have to be all over Hot Topic like NBXmas is- HT just got its first Gargoyles item ever a couple weeks back- a Goliath tee- and hopefully they'll make more. In any case, a major Gargs attraction is unlikely but I think having something that would draw the hardcores who go to cons each year just for that one show... Nuture it right, get some coverage on the fan activity,  and you can build up to something as big as Potter or Star Trek- out of something the company already owns.

The parade sounded like a great idea and Im sure Joe rhode will handle beastly kingdomme with care like he has the rest of the growth of the park.  If characters are added they will be relevant   and tied nicely within the story ...     As for its a small world   bad idea   btw I came across this site  and found it interesting  www.saveitsasmallworld.com/phpPETITION

"Im sure Joe rhode will handle beastly kingdomme with care like he has the rest of the growth of the park. "

Have you seen Chester & Hester's blight on DAK?  It's appalling.  

Name an area of Magic Kingdom Epcot  and Disney Hollywood studios  disneyland etc that you think is wrong or misthemed    i think every park has its flaw or sore spot. That is animal kingdoms sorespot.

Animal Kingdom is our family's favorite of the WDW parks.  It's theming is beyond compare.  But the parade they have now is hands-down the worst on property.

Anything would be an improvement.

But jonvn the genius of Dino-rama is that its "supposed" to look like a cheap, tacky, garish side show dump....that was the "plan" and they succeeded in spades.. now if you will excuse me...this talk of Dino-rama.....I now feel the need to vomit..

http://www.raymation.net

Might WDW bring a version of Sleeping Beauty's castle to Beastly Kingdom?  I am thinking more like the version in Disneyland Paris with the dragon in the dungeon.  Also, here are some other attractions I'd love to see: a kid's ride featuring Elliott from Pete's Dragon, a log flume or rapid ride featuring the craken, a dark ride featuring Jafar (he could constantly change form as you try to evade him), and something featuring Gonzo and Animal.

I hope they don't build a Narnia land in DAK. Animal Kingdom is about animals, not Hollywood. There's a whole other park not far away that's dedicated to movies. Narnia doesn't fit in with DAK's theme of conservation. That said, I'm sure Joe Rhodes will come up with something that will fit with the park. Yeah, Dino-rama isn't the best section of a Disney park, but the man is also responsible for Expedition Everest.

Folks, Dino-rama certainly DOES fit the theme of the park because it is about a certain animal's attitude and "take" on the extinct members of the animal kingdom. In short, the "animal" being examined in all of its cultural, habitat, and other aspects is....MANKIND!  

But JohnWayne...using that argument, they shouldnt dump the trashcans or clean up the park to show how man has polluted the earth.  If you walk around AK..every land blends...most of Dinoland works just fine...until you run into Dino-rama...but if you dig it..hey thats cool...

http://www.raymation.net

Uh, no. Mankind's attitude towards trash isn't necessarily relevant to his attitude towards extinct dinosaur relics at roadside attractions, but hey, maybe you can peddle the idea to Pixar? They could call it "Dino-E" or something (smile.)

Wait - Disney spend those hundreds of millions on Animal Kingdom, and neglected to plan a parade route?!? That's just crazy.

Also, I disagree that people want character-based rides. Look at PotC (before the movies), Space Mountain, Haunted Mansion, Autopia, IASW, BTMRR, Jungle Cruise, Matterhorn, Everest, Spaceship Earth, ToT... these are some of the most popular Disney rides, and none of these are based on previously-established characters.

I'd go so far as to say that the non-character-based rides are generally much more popular than the character-based ones.

I know I'm a little late posting a response, but I've been busy with school. Anyway, I'm very happy to hear that Disney didn't rip up DAK just to install a parade. That's the correct move in my opinion. As far as a character based Beastly, well like anything else (character based or not) the attraction needs to be good, and frankly I can't think of anything character or not that beats the original plans, but that's just me. As far as character based attractions in general, I think it only works when the characters fit seamlessly. For example, I think the Jack Sparrow fit great in POTC (And pirates has been my favorite ride since I was a child, and I'm very aware and well-read on it's history), but fir every good fit there's a Tiki Room: Under New Management.