DAK 'Encanto' and 'Indiana Jones'-themed experiences at Animal Kingdom

[BlakeW39]

Glad to see you and your sane takes here again. I’m on the exact same page as you. Indy is never seeking out animals…they are always incidental to what he is looking for…which is almost always something manmade, which really doesn’t fit Animal Kingdom at all

Thank you, glad to see you here as well.

Something funny: I remember when the Indy rumors were circling around on this board the first time, and back then, people seemed to correctly understand that Indiana Jones did not fit Animal Kingdom. And that DAK isn't just a big Adventureland, in the same way EPCOT isn't just a big Tomorrowland.

It's very clear that everyone's standards have kind of just gotten lower as people have coped with the ubiquity of the IP mandate. Indy is good enough because we literally can't do any better. But it's pretty obvious why Indy doesn't fit.. and yes you can distort, mold, and reshape it to kind of fit... but you could do that with any IP.

 

[BlakeW39]

I haven't seen a single poster here say either property is a "perfect fit" for AK - I think many are accepting there are ways to tie it in depending on the story line

And also that they are better than the initial plan of Moana and the full Zootopia cityscape area

I swear some of you have never watched these movies with the way you all speak about all of the ways the ride can't work at DAK. It's a pretty perfect fit.

 

[James Alucobond]

DAK is about man's relationship with nature. Indy is about man's relationship with man. Avatar was about man's relationship with nature. Indy isn't. Indy taking place in a jungle with crumbling buildings doesn't mean it shares similar themes with Animal Kingdom. Trying to make an Indiana Jones narrative about wildlife conservation is definitely a contortion of Indy as an IP.

Indy is actually more frequently focused on man’s relationship with the supernatural or inexplicable, which can take many forms. Pocahontas is probably more accurately man versus man with its clash of cultures narrative, yet it was an early attraction for AK that extracted a man/nature component from the larger unrelated film.

 

[BlakeW39]

Indy is actually more frequently focused on man’s relationship with the supernatural or inexplicable, which can take many forms. Pocahantas is probably more accurately man versus man with its clash of cultures narrative, yet it was an early attraction for AK that extracted a man/nature component from the larger unrelated film.

1. The supernatural is an extension of man. It's a product of man's imagination and does not exist outside of him.

2. Raiders is more about Indy vs nazis, than it is Indy vs the supernatural forces of the ark. Nazis provide the primary thematic contrast and physical conflict for Indy. Ditto for the Last Crusade. Even Temple of Doom is often largely about good Indy vs bad criminals. Crystal Skull I haven't seen since around when it came out though, and I haven't seen Dial either, so perhaps those films lean off of human conflict.

3. the supernatural is more antithetical to the natural than man is, so even if this were true, it wouldn't make Indy a better fit for DAK.

 

[James Alucobond]

1. The supernatural is an extension of man. It's a product of man's imagination and does not exist outside of him.

2. Raiders is more about Indy vs nazis, than it is Indy vs the supernatural forces of the ark. Nazis provide the primary thematic contrast and physical conflict for Indy. IDitto for the Last Crusade. Even Temple of Doom is often largely about good Indy vs bad criminals. Crystal Skull I haven't seen since around when it came out though, and I haven't seen Dial either, so perhaps those films lean off of human conflict.

3. the supernatural is more antithetical to the natural than man is, so even if this were true, it wouldn't make Indy a better fit for DAK.

The cryptozoological and the supernatural often overlap. This is even a theme of Everest’s queue with various deifying depictions of the yeti.

 

[BlakeW39]

The cryptozoological and the supernatural often overlap. This is even a theme of Everest’s queue with various deifying depictions of the yeti.

That's true, but Indiana Jones is an archaeologist, and deals with the supernatural as an extension of archaeology (mythology) rather than as an extension of zoology (cryptozoology). He never studies or interacts with the supernatural in a way that has subtext about nature, and the moral of his stories never involves him learning a lesson about nature or learning to value or protect it.

 

[James Alucobond]

That's true, but Indiana Jones is an archaeologist, and deals with the supernatural as an extension of archaeology (mythology) rather than as an extension of zoology (cryptozoology). He never studies or interacts with the supernatural in a way that has subtext about nature, and the moral of his stories never involves him learning a lesson about nature or learning to value or protect it.

I agree that Indiana Jones, as a character, doesn’t really “fit” Animal Kingdom. However, Jones and his interpersonal conflicts have not been the focus of any IJ attraction anywhere in the world. It’s been purely a series of escape adventures in which he shows up very briefly. And even if he inexplicably narrated the entire ride, he’d basically just be Dr. Seeker 2.0. That said, while it’s obvious that not all Indiana Jones adventures would work in Animal Kingdom, I think it’s possible to make an Animal Kingdom-appropriate adventure in which Jones’s appearance would not be out of place, which is the needle they need to thread.

 

[Brer Panther]

Do the hardcore Encanto fans even WANT the first attraction based on the film (I'm guessing the sing-along in EPCOT doesn't count) to be focused on Antonio?

 

[James Alucobond]

Do the hardcore Encanto fans even WANT the first attraction based on the film (I'm guessing the sing-along in EPCOT doesn't count) to be focused on Antonio?

I think most actually wanted a Mystic Manor-esque focus on Casita rather than more of any of the characters.

 

[AidenRodriguez731]

Do the hardcore Encanto fans even WANT the first attraction based on the film (I'm guessing the sing-along in EPCOT doesn't count) to be focused on Antonio?

I'm a super hardcore Encanto fan and yeah I want it.

 

[Gremlin Gus]

Do the hardcore Encanto fans even WANT the first attraction based on the film to be focused on Antonio?

As a hardcore Encanto fan *wink wink, signature , I can't speak for every single fan of the film, but personally speaking, I honestly don't really mind what it specifically is, the ride could've been a book report telling of the film, a ride that takes place after the film, or even being centered around Antonio. Now seeing as the attraction is going to be in AK, yeah it'll probably be centered around Antonio, but honestly, I'm fine with whatever it as long as the ride and the story is good and it fits the theme of the land.

(I'm guessing the sing-along in EPCOT doesn't count)

I mean, it's a sing-a-long and dance party, that really doesn't count as an attraction

 

[BrianLo]

Do the hardcore Encanto fans even WANT the first attraction based on the film (I'm guessing the sing-along in EPCOT doesn't count) to be focused on Antonio?

His door day is the narrative crux around us being there. It's not "Antonio-the ride".

You are invited inside for his door ceremony, pre-show occurs. Animals flood into the house. Get sent around the casita by Mirabelle on a tour to acclimate things for the animals, see the core cast interacting with the newfound relationship with said animals and end in his room for the finale.

I realize you are asking this question for the 100th time though and likely this is a meaningless explanation.

 

[BlakeW39]

I agree that Indiana Jones, as a character, doesn’t really “fit” Animal Kingdom. However, Jones and his interpersonal conflicts have not been the focus of any IJ attraction anywhere in the world. It’s been purely a series of escape adventures in which he shows up very briefly. And even if he inexplicably narrated the entire ride, he’d basically just be Dr. Seeker 2.0. That said, while it’s obvious that not all Indiana Jones adventures would work in Animal Kingdom, I think it’s possible to make an Animal Kingdom-appropriate adventure in which Jones’s appearance would not be out of place, which is the needle they need to thread.

The existing IJA rides don't tell character driven narratives, so yeah, Indy as a character isn't as important there as he is in his films. But the IJA rides still operate within the conventions of the Indiana Jones IP, which would be a problem for DAK.

Let's pull back. Rohde himself claimed DAK has three themes: the intrinsic value of nature, philosophical transformation through adventure (towards to conservationist's philososphy), and a call to conservational action. Indiana Jones as an IP doesn't possess any of those themes. Can you make up some story where Indy touches on those themes? Yes, of course you can. Actually, you can do that with almost any IP. But in order to do it, you would have to stretch Indiana Jones beyond what the IP is about. Which is why it's not a good fit for DAK. It simply does not naturally lend itself to the themes of AK. Trying to get some conservationist message out of Indiana Jones is extremely contrived and not something the IP would ever be asked to do under normal circumstances.

 

[Incomudro]

It's weird that people keep flip flopping on wanting book reports vs not. But imo bringing Facilier back would be the one thing missing from TBA that I would really want. But I probably wouldn't even bring him back, I would bring his shadow back in a little (mostly projection) based fight as you rise up the lift hill with Mama Odie's magic being the final push to send you down the hill to get you away. To add to it, the shadow would be seen creeping in the background in certain scenes as it tracks you down.

As for me, I have never flip flopped on the book report ride thing.
I like book report rides.

 

[Incomudro]

Very few people are arguing that we shouldn't maintain healthy skepticism. Probably 95% of the people in this thread have expressed reservations. That said, there are ways to make these things work, as was done with Pandora, and the few details we have thus far at least indicate there is decent directionality with regard to attraction scenario framing. Regardless, being skeptical doesn't necessitate constant negativity.

Pandora's message is an ecological one.
Different planet, same message.
Neither Raider's - ESPECIALLY Raider's nor Encanto are fits with AK.
As I said, they will make them fit, and perhaps (hopefully) do a good job.

 

[Brer Panther]

Funny thing is, I remember when I was complaining about the plan to put Moana in Animal Kingdom because that movie isn't about animals, I had people constantly telling me that Animal Kingdom wasn't actually about animals but rather about humans' relationship with nature or whatever. But because the Encanto attraction will supposedly focus on animals, it fits in Animal Kingdom?

 

[Incomudro]

Thank you, glad to see you here as well.

Something funny: I remember when the Indy rumors were circling around on this board the first time, and back then, people seemed to correctly understand that Indiana Jones did not fit Animal Kingdom. And that DAK isn't just a big Adventureland, in the same way EPCOT isn't just a big Tomorrowland.

It's very clear that everyone's standards have kind of just gotten lower as people have coped with the ubiquity of the IP mandate. Indy is good enough because we literally can't do any better. But it's pretty obvious why Indy doesn't fit.. and yes you can distort, mold, and reshape it to kind of fit... but you could do that with any IP.

"Animal Kingdom isn't just a big Adventureland."
That is perfect.
Well... It shouldn't be, but Disney doesn't see it that way.
Indy shares the same ride system as Dinosaur, so as far as Disney goes: "Indy ride system/crumbly buildings resemble other crumbly buildings in AK - make it fit."
Now, I'm sure the place will look great, and though I love Dinosaur the Ride (and Dinosaurs) it looks to me that the Indiana Jones ride is the better ride.
So will I still enjoy this area?
Yeah, sure.
But it's one of many examples of Disney chipping away.

 

[TheMaxRebo]

Funny thing is, I remember when I was complaining about the plan to put Moana in Animal Kingdom because that movie isn't about animals, I had people constantly telling me that Animal Kingdom wasn't actually about animals but rather about humans' relationship with nature or whatever. But because the Encanto attraction will supposedly focus on animals, it fits in Animal Kingdom?

I don't think either IP fits AK perfectly - and I don't think AK isn't about animals, it isn't*just* about animals but more nature - including animals and their habitats - conservationist, etc

So Moana could have fit it the story was around her relationship with water as shown in the movies and now covered by Journey of Water and Encanto can fit too if they focus on connection to animals and their environment - but neither IP is a perfect fit in a vacuum

Big issue I had with the first plan was Zootopia and having an area with the cityscape, etc. I think that was the big discussion - Zootopia, just b/c it has animals doesn't mean it fits b/c it doesn't have them acting like animals - they act like humans and are proxies for humans

 

[James Alucobond]

Can you make up some story where Indy touches on those themes? Yes, of course you can. Actually, you can do that with almost any IP. But in order to do it, you would have to stretch Indiana Jones beyond what the IP is about. Which is why it's not a good fit for DAK. It simply does not naturally lend itself to the themes of AK. Trying to get some conservationist message out of Indiana Jones is extremely contrived and not something the IP would ever be asked to do under normal circumstances.

They have been contorting IP a lot lately to try to puzzle it in since they must. That's the outcome of the IP mandate. It's not ideal, but the point is that a ride including Jones can fit. That does not mean IJ (especially as a character) is a natural fit for the park. Rather, it means that it's pretty easy to imagine a path by which they can reasonably get away with his inclusion in a much more organic, straightforward, and elegant manner than with, say, Tiana or Cars in Frontierland.

Funny thing is, I remember when I was complaining about the plan to put Moana in Animal Kingdom because that movie isn't about animals, I had people constantly telling me that Animal Kingdom wasn't actually about animals but rather about humans' relationship with nature or whatever. But because the Encanto attraction will supposedly focus on animals, it fits in Animal Kingdom?

Your reading comprehension is poor. What people were telling you was that centering animal characters or nature does not immediately make something fit Animal Kingdom. You insisted, for instance, that a Lion King book report would work perfectly even though the story of the film is a human narrative transposed onto animal characters. The park isn't about imagining animals or nature with human-like mindsets, values, or qualities; it's about exploring them as they are, experiencing the sense of wonder and adventure they provide, understanding our relationship with them, and learning to appreciate and conserve them.

 

[jmuboy]

I feel bad but we really disliked the updated Nemo show. It just felt like it was created for very young children and my girls aged out. Most of the shows, I'd put it in the rotation but I can't see us revisiting this show.

I wouldn't mind seeing something new in this space, but I'm also okay with it sticking around for the toddlers.

I think this show could be an updated to a living dinosaur sort of show to continue the dinosaur theme somehow.