Splash Mountain re-theme announced

[thomas998]

I don’t think you understand how songs are written. It would be like, they need a song that would sound like something of the era of Reconstruction or before. They see this song and take from “Zip-a-Duden” and give it their own spin to avoid straight up plagiarism. They put a happy spin on it because that’s what they’re trying to do. They may even be trying to take something bad and make something good out of it.

But my point is simply people don’t generally use that terminology by happy coincidence and it makes perfect sense in the context of having to write a song for the movie.

You can give them bonus points if you think they were trying to make something good out of something bad. If that makes you feel better. But that’s what this ride was also trying to do.

I'm quite aware of how songs are written, I started my life as music major in undergrad... so I'm pretty sure I know much more than you could ever imagine about music, music theory and how songs are written. There is no evidence that the one song came from another.

Your problem is that like all the other woke warriors you went out looking to find a connection to slavery and racism and guess what... if you look for something hard enough you'll manage to convince yourself that something exist when the fact is it is only in our imagination. There has NEVER been any real evidence that lyricist of the song ever heard of the other one. Do you honestly think a guy from Connecticut that moved to California is going to have come into contact with racially charged songs from the Deep South?

There are things known as coincidence and when you have the words, "zip" and "day" in two songs that is hardly proof that one sprang from the other. Frankly the word day is so common you really can't include that so you have one unique word, "zip" used in two songs, the reality is your mind is not going to be changed because you want to believe that a person is guilty until proven innocent. I prefer to believe a person is innocent until proven guilty. So go ahead and condemn people with no evidence, and just pray no one does the same to you.

 

[Smiley/OCD]

I have a few thoughts.

Despite my handle here, I'm a Californian by birth and have spent probably more hours at Disneyland than Magic Kingdom (and I've only ever been on two trips to Orlando total.) I think this renovation could be very good in Disneyland. DL is a park that occasionally resorts to awkward visual barriers to keep lands from clashing TOO much, and while they don't do too much to separate the Mansion from Chickapin Hill they do use some obstructive trees when the exteriors could look closer to a match. Being able to extend New Orleans Square's design from the city to the bayou adjacent to the Columbia landing is a thing that makes me happy to think about.

Splash felt like a square peg in a round hole at MK, and it's going to require even more atmospheric work as part of the old south. I would actually hold off on changing MK's ride until the money is found for more extensive work. It's not like the whole mountain needs to come down, but the area looks a little too rustic.

I have never seen Song of the South or Princess and the Frog, but as my west-coast upbringing leaves me with no feels for Horizons or Journey Into Imagination except envy, this one hurts like few closures do. Most people's reactions seem to be cut along whether one is more interested in booking a visit around the old theme's closure, or the new theme's open. I'll admit I'm of the former, but mostly due to my increasing cynicism around the company's leadership. It's nice to see Tony Baxter get one last rodeo to fix his most problematic legacy ride, even if he's not super-involved, but Disneyland lost a fantastic Tomorrowland on an underfunded mandate to change that had Tony's name affixed to it. He's an excellent Imagineer but even he was not a miracle worker, and Splash is a concrete behemoth that will give that masoleum vibe if all the physical props and AAs are replaced with projections and screens.

I actually don't envy Tony Baxter right now...he's either going to go out with a last hurrah, as the savior that made PatF a monumental hit attraction, or the company's scapegoat if the attraction is an AA-less, screen filled flop.

 

[thomas998]

Please forgive me, I’m trying to read my way through this thread and am currently on page 138! It seems to be growing faster than I can read and I’m a quick reader but just wanted to add my ideas from what I’ve surmised so far.
Far from seeing 2 opposing views I think there are three and can appreciate all of them.
1. The people of all diversities who accept that Splash Mountain needs to be eradicated because of the long established connection to the film Song of the South and the unacceptable view of African Americans as portrayed in that film.
2. The people of all diversities who wish to retain Splash Mountain as a truly great ride and feel that the connection to the film is tenuous because of the way the ride has been imagined.
3. The people of all diversities who acknowledge the racist overtones within the ride but feel that retaining it, with education about the historical context of the story and the celebration of the African American oral story telling culture, could be of more benefit to people of all diversities in giving a greater understanding of the past and what needs to change going forward.
In my opinion each have some merit though given a choice I’d vote for number 3!
I have never seen Princess and the Frog (I’m 62 years old so a little old for Princess movies) but feel that the idea of replacing a racially sensitive ride with a “token” black princess could be regarded as patronising. Think- we’ve got rid of Song of the South and given “them” (the public) Tiana, that should stop the moaning for a bit. Or maybe I’m just old and twisted but feel that Disney’s first black Princess deserves better than to be a band aid over the problematical Splash Mountain.

The bottom line is Tiana was a poor choice for a black Disney princess. She is really nothing more than a copy of Cinderella with different colored skin and hair. At least when you see Mulan or Moana you can tell that they tried to capture some sense of the ethnicity of the character. Tiana is more of an insult, it is as if Mattel decided to make black barbies by just changing the color of the plastic and color of the hair... Quite pathetic, yet I'm sure it was easier for Disney to do it that way than to try and develop a real character representative to the black girls in America

 

[Matt_Black]

First you say "They don't mean literally", then you admit that the characters in question DO have magical powers, thus contradicting yourself, and then you try to spin it as "incidental", blah blah blah.

I said "many", I did not say "all".

 

[Bleed0range]

I'm quite aware of how songs are written, I started my life as music major in undergrad... so I'm pretty sure I know much more than you could ever imagine about music, music theory and how songs are written. There is no evidence that the one song came from another.

Your problem is that like all the other woke warriors you went out looking to find a connection to slavery and racism and guess what... if you look for something hard enough you'll manage to convince yourself that something exist when the fact is it is only in our imagination. There has NEVER been any real evidence that lyricist of the song ever heard of the other one. Do you honestly think a guy from Connecticut that moved to California is going to have come into contact with racially charged songs from the Deep South?

There are things known as coincidence and when you have the words, "zip" and "day" in two songs that is hardly proof that one sprang from the other. Frankly the word day is so common you really can't include that so you have one unique word, "zip" used in two songs, the reality is your mind is not going to be changed because you want to believe that a person is guilty until proven innocent. I prefer to believe a person is innocent until proven guilty. So go ahead and condemn people with no evidence, and just pray no one does the same to you.

I dunno why you’re calling me a “woke warrior” or whatever nonsense. I never even said a word about changing the ride. I’m merely reacting to the reality that it is changing and I’m saying I think it’s a good thing. I’m pretty sure there’s a connection here and you can argue for it just as easily as against.

 

[Father Robinson]

At one of our beaches today. Nobody complaining.

 

[Bairstow]

The bottom line is Tiana was a poor choice for a black Disney princess. She is really nothing more than a copy of Cinderella with different colored skin and hair. At least when you see Mulan or Moana you can tell that they tried to capture some sense of the ethnicity of the character. Tiana is more of an insult, it is as if Mattel decided to make black barbies by just changing the color of the plastic and color of the hair... Quite pathetic, yet I'm sure it was easier for Disney to do it that way than to try and develop a real character representative to the black girls in America

So what should Disney have done to make Tiana more "black" in your eyes.
Be specific, please.

 

[thomas998]

I dunno why you’re calling me a “woke warrior” or whatever nonsense. I never even said a word about changing the ride. I’m merely reacting to the reality that it is changing and I’m saying I think it’s a good thing. I’m pretty sure there’s a connection here and you can argue for it just as easily as against.

You're insinuation that the song was spawned from the racist song is not harmless at all as by doing so you are furthering a meritless accusation. The more times someone continues to spout off nonsense the better the chance of others to start simply believing the accusation. You made a decision to keep peddling the nonsense, now as you claim changing the ride is a good thing it is pretty obvious you're in the whole corner.

 

[Kate F]

Doesn’t MK have capacity issues?

 

[21stamps]

How I view the past month-

The USA witnesses a man being murdered by a bad cop.

Most in the USA- “Holy Jiminy Cricket. We need to do something. We’re all feeling disgusted what can we do? Police reform, teaching our children better, coming together to talk and listen?”

Answer- NO! Let’s riot, loot, murder, tear down statues, deface monuments, abolish the police, search for any connection to any black stereotype ever.. and destroy all of it!!!!
We also need Black news channels, Black publications, Black YouTube channels, etc etc— and white as well!!! Let’s bring segregation back, and call it progress!!! Let’s make enemies based on the color of one’s skin. Let’s wipe the face of history from public view. This is forward thinking!!

“But, um, what if we just wanted police reform and unity, meaningful change?“
Answer- Racist!!!!!!!

 

[Bairstow]

Still wonder why the Irish aren't all offended because their mascot is a drunken midget who likes to fight?

Ever here an Irishman complain>

It shouldn't be confusing. The University Notre Dame, an institution historically composed of people of Irish decent, chose their own mascot. Do you see why this is a different situation from an all-white institution picking a caricature of a different, more marginalized ethnicity to promote their sports team?

That being said, not all Irish people find the mascot inoffensive. You may notice that people from the same group can have different opinions about things.

 

[Phil12]

I dunno why you’re calling me a “woke warrior” or whatever nonsense. I never even said a word about changing the ride. I’m merely reacting to the reality that it is changing and I’m saying I think it’s a good thing. I’m pretty sure there’s a connection here and you can argue for it just as easily as against.

It's easier to call people with whom they disagree names rather than have accurate information.

 

[ImperfectPixie]

It shouldn't be confusing. The University Notre Dame, an institution historically composed of people of Irish decent, chose their own mascot. Do you see why this is a different situation from an all-white institution picking a caricature of a different, more marginalized ethnicity to promote their sports team?

That being said, not all Irish people find the mascot inoffensive. You may notice that people from the same group can have different opinions about things.

The question then becomes, should everyone do without something because a relative few are offended by it? I'm Irish, and to me, the "fighting Irish" stereotype can be perceived as a good thing as well - perseverance, toughness, determination, etc.

 

[Sue_Vongello]

I didn't read through the whole thread and I am sure it has been mentioned but it does bear mentioning again, especially to all the Disney Shills that are on these boards ...

The petition to save Splash Mountain far exceeds all of the petitions to retheme Splash Mountain combined.

But we all know petitions mean nothing ...

Although I will put one thing in perspective ... the total number of people who have signed all the re-theme Splash Mountain petitions combined equates to about 30K people. WDW alone gets 58M visitors a year and Disneyland is 19M ... therefore the people that want Splash Mountain re-themed equates to approximately 0.0003% of the park going population.

Disney Corporate Executives, Disney Shills, and whoever is paid by Disney to read these boards ... I am sure you factored those numbers into your decisions, right?

The numbers are irrefutable, the overwhelming majority do not want this change to happen- and here's something else shocking, not everyone that doesn't want it to happen is a racist. Some people are just sick of losing classic e-ticket attractions, some people want ADDITIONS to the park not re-themes because that doesn't help with crowd control, some people are scared at the prospect of losing an attraction with 100 AAs (a dying art) which will undoubtedly be replaced by an attraction with considerably less (maybe) ...

My point is this- there is a way to have this discussion with civility and grace and without assuming what someone's motives may be behind what they want to see happen here but at the end of the day there are two big arguments for both sides that come from these numbers:

1. Disney is clearly making a decision that goes against the numbers, maybe that means something, maybe they think they are doing the right thing? (Although maybe its a marketing ploy to detract from the park delays)

2. The people that don't want it changed is the OVERWHELMING majority, so maybe those that do want it changed shouldn't think all of those people are crazy or racist or un-woke or whatever.

That's all.

 

[21stamps]

There has always been an ugly side to humanity.. one that values hate and division over the nitty gritty of actually solving a problem.

We put divisive people on a platform, we destroy those who preach unity and meaningful change.

I keep thinking that someday we will evolve from repeating those same mistakes which get us nowhere..but it’s not looking good.

 

[Bairstow]

The question then becomes, should everyone do without something because a relative few are offended by it? I'm Irish, and to me, the "fighting Irish" stereotype can be perceived as a good thing as well - perseverance, toughness, determination, etc.

The pertinent question isn't whether something should be changed because X-percentage of people are offended, but rather, knowing that the issue in question reflects certain moral deficiencies, does it it reflect the moral character the company or institution wants to present?

There's not some kind of empirical "how many people of X group(s) say they are offended" tipping point that has to be reached, if that's what you're asking.

 

[21stamps]

The pertinent question isn't whether something should be changed because X-percentage of people are offended, but rather, knowing that the issue in question reflects certain moral deficiencies, does it it reflect the moral character the company or institution wants to present?

There's not some kind of empirical "how many people of X group(s) say they are offended" tipping point that has to be reached, if that's what you're asking.

Well, we all better pack our bags and head back to wherever our ancestors came from.. oh wait, but what before that.. Maybe we could find a new planet to inhabit, and start fresh.. no history to ever acknowledge.

 

[Bairstow]

Well, we all better pack our bags and head back to wherever our ancestors came from.. oh wait, but what before that.. Maybe we could find a new planet to inhabit, and start fresh.. no history to ever acknowledge.

You are so bothered by the prospect of confronting uncomfortable parts of history that you just want to throw your hands up?

 

[ImperfectPixie]

The pertinent question isn't whether something should be changed because X-percentage of people are offended, but rather, knowing that the issue in question reflects certain moral deficiencies, does it it reflect the moral character the company or institution wants to present?

There's not some kind of empirical "how many people of X group(s) say they are offended" tipping point that has to be reached, if that's what you're asking.

My point is that if you look hard enough, you can find something to be offended by virtually everywhere. There are people whose mindset causes them to see negativity everywhere...it's the same sort of thing.

 

[Sue_Vongello]

The pertinent question isn't whether something should be changed because X-percentage of people are offended, but rather, knowing that the issue in question reflects certain moral deficiencies, does it it reflect the moral character the company or institution wants to present?

There's not some kind of empirical "how many people of X group(s) say they are offended" tipping point that has to be reached, if that's what you're asking.

Yes I agree with a vast majority of what you have said in your posts but I do disagree about the numbers ... and I admit that maybe I am too analytical and "numbers driven" (product of my career) but there DOES have to be a certain number that equates to a tipping point or else there would be utter anarchy.

Let's put it in practical application - Imagine if your HOA operated like that - imagine one homeowner says they are offended by the cars you own and the HOA forces you to buy new cars or move? Surely, you'd want some governing or limiting factors or sheer numbers to back up the reasons why you're being forced to change. If one person (yes that's an extreme number) can claim offense to anything and force change then what's the point of ever doing anything?

Again going back to my numbers - in my profession we accept a certain percentage of negative feedback as acceptable, why? Because it's impossible to get 100% positive feedback on anything. We would accept 20% negative feedback or below as the benchmark for success. There just has to be a number because 100% is just not possible, so if 80% of the people were happy then we do it.

Disney appears to be operating at a much smaller margin judging by the numbers ... they are aiming for 100% which is unrealistic. That's the argument I think most people are trying to make - if that is their target, then when does it end?