Where should Disney build its Zootopia land next?

If I had to choose, I'd go with Animal Kingdom since, as much as I like Dinosaur personally, that whole land needs a revamp. Really, all of World needs a revamp or update, I feel Disneyland's two parks are way more content filled than World's four, so any of the ones over in Florida should take precedence in my opinion.

Speaking of, should we expect the D23 expo in a week or so to have new news on their plans? I've been putting my hopes on them having a better showing than the "maybe we'll make this, maybe we won't" lands from last time, but I'm not even too sure if that is something we should be expecting.

Nowhere. Zootopia came and went with a flash, no one is clamoring for an entire land built around it. I read in the other thread that sequel is planned, but for whom? I never see Zootopia merch at the Disney stores, it seems to attract less attention than Big Hero 6 or Wreck it Ralph, even (which also dropped off hard).

Disney has two dozen properties that are more popular, why reach deep into the barrel for this one?

I am planning something tomorrow on what to expect (and hope for!) from Saturday's Destination D23 presentation.

DAK fans and Joe Rhode say Zootopia doesn’t fit the conservation theme of the park though most guests will expect Zootopia to be in the zoo park.

I’m betting the ride will be a reskin of Dinosaur since Shanghai will have an exclusivity window on the ride and it’s too similar to Rise of the Resistance.

This is a tough one, but let's give it a try...

First off, if it's California or Florida, I think the latter makes more sense for Zootopia. While I do think it would be a valuable addition to both resorts, Florida definitely has a lot more options for how to incorporate it reasonably well.

At Walt Disney World, I'd say Hollywood Studios would be the best park for the land from a thematic perspective, but with both Rise of the Resistance and Runaway Railway in that park, a third trackless dark ride probably isn't the best option in a park with a limited attraction selection. Therefore, impact-wise, I'd say the land is best placed in Animal Kingdom. In an ideal world, I'd keep Dinosaur and repurpose the rest of the land into Zootopia, but if the land was done as a reskin this idea is far less compelling. The other idea would be to make it accessible via the Wildlife Express as a remote area of the park, which does come with capacity issues but would solve the issue of it being a strange fit in the park thematically as those not interested would never see it. A distant third choice is Epcot, where it could either serve as a replacement for Imagination or as a fictional World Showcase pavilion, though neither of those are great. Magic Kingdom would be my last choice, not because it doesn't fit there (though a single IP land isn't great there), but because that's the park least in need of a new headliner right now.

Over in California, I've previously said that Toontown should have been redone as Zootopia to add it to Disneyland, and seeing the pictures from Shanghai it actually would have been a pretty solid match. Unfortunately, as that land has just been refurbished, I don't see anywhere else in Disneyland Park where the land would make sense. Therefore, if it were to come in California, I'd think the most likely option would be as a replacement for Hollywood Land, which is underutilized and would be easier to change over than anywhere else in the park.

Zooptopia does not fix DAKs theming at all, the whole point of the park is to celebrate the natural world and promote conservation. Zootopia has nothing to do with any of that, its a big city and the story is a message about humanity, but just happens to use animals as the characters (like many cartoons). I would be extremely dissapointed if they decide to shoehorn Zootopia in there "because animals." But Guardians of the Galaxy and Frozen have nothing to do with Epcot and they shoehorned those in there anyway, so I wouldn't put it past them.

I agree with the_man3. Just because they are animals, it doesn’t mean they fit in with the theming of the park. A bunch of cartoonish looking, faux skyscrapers would heavily clash with the aesthetic that Animal Kingdom presents. I really feel like Zootopia would be better placed in Hollywood Studios, that park is in desperate need of more attractions and expansion. I do think Animal Kingdom needs to add in more things as well, just trying to think what would work in the area that is now Dinoland. It could be re-themed to South America, but Disney wants IP based attractions. So perhaps Encanto could be put there. Though I wish they could keep dinosaurs to some extent in the park.

I voted for Hollywood Studios cause like you said even with Galaxy's Edge the park doesn't feel like a whole park. I think with Zootopia it would finally feel like a "real" park.

I wouldn't be mad about Animal Kingdom getting this land either. Unlike others on here just because there's real animals in the park doesn't mean Disney can't add anything else to it. I mean they've technically already ruined the theme with Avatar anyways.

Getting rid of Dino USA would also be a huge bonus to that park. Right now that land is so disappointing and to think that Disney ever thought they could pull off dinosaurs when Universal had already built Jurassic Park was quite delusional of them.

@Colonel: Posted this reply to you in the other thread, but in case you missed it:
Might need to rent/stream it for your kids again. At the very least, you should be entertained by the voice talent and Easter eggs. Idris Elba and Jason Bateman steal the show.

While Pandora may have a theme of conservation, it definitely lacks the realism as much of the rest of the park. Same can be said for Expedition Everest (if you don't believe in yeti) and time travel in Dinosaur.

I voted with the majority and think it fits with DAK, but I would happily see it in DHS as a second choice.

There are 2 areas that make sense, AK and DHS. In AK, DinoLand is, um, bad. It's just really, really bad. It needs to be fixed, and while Zootopia doesn't quite fit the theme perfectly, it does match as well as can be.

DHS has the most land, either by working the Indiana Jones/Star Tours area, as both attractions could be replaced, or by utilizing the Star Cruiser area, or by going behind Rock n' Rollercoaster and building there. DHS has the most available to it, even if it is not in theme. Well, it is in theme as a movie, but that is such a super open theme it ain't funny.

MK is a maybe, but I really want a villains land there. DL, DCA and EPCOT all don't realistically work at present.

Put me down for another not DAK. DAK already has a “fantasy animals” area, Zootopia would duplicate that. Find some other way of delivering “animals of the past”.

The most problematic part of Zootopia is that the best place for it to fit thematically would be as a replacement for Rafiki's Planet Watch. The setting for Zootopia is a bustling city, which doesn't really fit the aesthetic of a majority of DAK, even Dinoland. However, transporting guests to Zootopia by train (or other conveyance replacing the current train) would create the right transition. The problem then becomes a major new land disconnected from the rest of the park, which has always been an issue with Rafiki's, and then placing this major ride-centric land smack dab in the middle of the animal care and backstage area. That pretty much makes the best thematic choice a no-go, and instead puts the focus back on Dinoland.

The problem with Dinoland, is that it just does have the adequate transitions to allow for this bustling city to emerge from the fringes of Discovery Island. It would be a massive undertaking to regrade and redesign the current area to be able to depict Zootopia accurately. I fear if they tried to do a simple reskin of Dinoland with Zootopia, it would look too much like Mickey's Toontown at DL, and not the modern, bustling urban center at the core of Zootopia. Unless Disney wants to put a Pandora-level effort into the project (i.e. over $1 billion), I just don't think Zootopia is a good match in DAK even though it's the park with the biggest need of improvement right now.

That's also why DHS is probably another poor choice to add Zootopia, because it's the WDW park with the least need of additional work. Yes, the Hollywood Backlot area is problematic, and the park could definitely use an expansion just to allow guests to disperse a little more. However, DHS has received 2 massive additions over the past 5+ years with TSL and GE, and has other areas of the park that could use tweaking before adding an entirely new land (Indy Stunt Show, sound stages, and RNR). Zootopia at DHS right now would be putting too many eggs into one basket, and would likely not impact the park's attendance dramatically to justify the investment it would take to add the IP to the park.

I guess if you were willing to give up the perfection of World Showcase, you could put Zootopia on the empty pad between Germany and China, but it would completely ruin the non-fiction based heart of EPCOT without a connection to reality that other IPs use to link to EPCOT's foundation.

Personally, I just can't think of anywhere else that Zootopia would fit either size-wise or thematically within the US Disney parks. Perhaps they could use it to give DLP something new since everyone complains how that park has been static for decades.

Definitely not Animal Kingdom. It goes against the vision of the park. Hollywood Studios would be the best fit in Florida, but I would rather see it go to DCA or built nowhere else.

And Moana was the right fit for Epcot…please.

I am a firm believer that a Zootopia land, if done correctly, could be a perfect fit for Animal Kingdom. First off, in the eyes of the general public, they would see Zootopia at Animal Kingdom and go "ah yes, animals." They won't be questioning the thematic integrity or whether or not this land belongs in Animal Kingdom. And on the subject of thematic integrity, would anyone like to tell me how Dinorama fits the core theme of "conservation" or how a carnival to prop up a failing museum is not a "human message in an animal theme park"? Yes, Zootopia is a movie about animals with people problems and has a pretty on-the-nose anti-racism message, but it also shows the many differences between animals and how they adapt to specific ecosystems (or in the movie's case, how they build the city around them to fit their adaptations). I swear a lot of Zootopia at Animal Kingdom deniers just think this way because "um Joe Rohde said so." Did you all know that Joe Rohde also said Australia doesn't fit because it "looks too similar to Africa"? I respect Joe Rohde for what he's done, but creators aren't always 100% correct with the things they create. Look at George Lucas and the Star Wars Prequels.

jpb1703: "First off, in the eyes of the general public, they would see Zootopia at Animal Kingdom and go "ah yes, animals." They won't be questioning the thematic integrity or whether or not this land belongs in Animal Kingdom".

Me: Nailed it! Theme parks are designed for waders, swimmers and divers. Which one of those groups do you think makes up the largest pie slice when it comes to park revenue/traffic?

I happen to agree. And Robert’s original point about the southern side of the park housing the more fantastical representation area of the animal kingdom is a compelling enough point to allow it to fit thematically IMO. Keep the Dinosaur ride and restaurant, as well as the Boneyard playground. But the el cheapo Dinorama carnival should be carved out like Jack Skellington’s head

AK, I mean who the hell gets a Dinoland to work, right. Kids don't like dinosaurs and stuff, we could have Indie but well we know how that latest movie did so clearly no one likes Indie anymore for whatever reason. And the logo for AK could adjusted with sci-fi animals and anthropomorphic animals, I see no problem in that. If it was up to me all safari animals would be replaced with well know ip animals and the ride would end in a Walmart size souvenir shop.

I agree to a certain extent with TH and jbp1703, but there's still that urban setting of Zootopia that grates against the overall design aesthetic of DAK. Pandora works because it's very natural looking, though still alien. Other areas of the park work because they're grounded in Earth-based natural locations with minimal human improvements. Heck, even Dinoland USA kind of worked because it was supposed to look like a traveling carnival setting up shop in an otherwise non-descript area. Zootopia has animals, yes, but it's also a massive, bustling city that isn't natural at all. It's true all those buildings in Zootopia are theoretically built by the animals, but do not present a natural setting that forms the core of the architecture and inspiration for DAK.

I think Imagineers could figure out a way to make it work, but it would cost a ton to make it right and to isolate Zootopia from the surrounding areas and create the proper transitions into and out of the land to make it fit the overall themes and designs of DAK.

It's natural to thing Zootopia=Aniamals=perfect fit for DAK (i.e. Notazoo), and the GP probably wouldn't get the nuance if you just reskinned Dinoland USA with Zootopia characters. However, Imagineers are not about taking shortcuts or undermining previous work just to conveniently wedge an IP into an empty pad in a park. I feel that they want to push themes, ideas, and designs to inspire and reach guests from different backgrounds, so if they just design to the lowest common denominator, they might as well contract themselves out to Six Flags. If WDI is going to design something of the magnitude needed to replace Dinoland USA (hundreds of millions of dollars), they might as well do it right.