Splash Mountain re-theme announced

[LittleBuford]

Because it’s said Walt was anti-Semitic and misogynistic.

I think what the comparison misses is that the parks‘ attractions are “living” in a way that statues aren’t. If a modern ride reflects (what some people perceive as) outdated attitudes, it is very likely that that ride will be modified or overhauled in some way. We’ve seen it happen many times before. The major difference this time around is that the opposition to Splash Mountain wasn’t nearly enough for any of us to expect this change.

 

[Sue_Vongello]

I think what the comparison misses is that the parks‘ attractions are “living” in a way that statues aren’t. If a modern ride reflects (what some people perceive as) outdated attitudes, it is very likely that that ride will be modified or overhauled in some way. We’ve seen it happen many times before. The major difference this time around is that the opposition to Splash Mountain wasn’t nearly enough for any of us to expect this change.

I agree! Thats the issue and I think that’s why people (including myself) take issue with the change. Here’s the fundamental truths:

1. You can’t control perceptions and nothing will ever please anyone 100%.

2. There has to be an acceptable reasonable amount of opposition.

In Splash Mountain’s case the opposition was so insignificant compared to everyone else. So the fear is where does it stop? That’s why Walt was brought up, that’s why Peter Pan is referenced, and Jungle Cruise, and Snow White and on and on ... there are problematics elements to everything, there are things that can offend anyone in anything ... so there has to be a line at some point.

 

[BoarderPhreak]

Very few people correlate Splash Mountain and Song of the South and even less have seen the latter. The ride is as uncontroversial as Disney could make it, even by today's standards, when compared to the movie. To that end, you could say it's its own, separate IP and identity. That said, I get it. I can understand why people want it changed and I can understand Disney's reason for doing it. Minor changes wouldn't be enough because it would still be sourced from the movie. And what exactly, would you change anyway? All that's left are a song and the animated characters.

Best to start clean with more modern IP, as much as it pains me to say that (despite always being an IP ride) or that Disney should change a classic ride. The replacement IP sounds fitting, uplifting and wouldn't degrade the experience if done right; it sounds like they've been working on it for a while, so not a rushed makeover (as I feel FEA in Norway was).

But really, there are good points to both sides. This is a tough one. The main consideration being, "where is the line?"

 

[Willmark]

Ford isn't getting renamed, and Henry Ford was pen pals with Hitler. Can we please calm down with the slippery slope arguments?

1. Clock is ticking for anyone.
2. Slippery slope seems absurd until it’s reality.

 

[Willmark]

Because it’s said Walt was anti-Semitic and misogynistic.

Precisely the point I was making,

 

[Willmark]

That's not what I was getting at.

I was actually saying the opposite: according to today's thinking, we are all born guilty.

It is somewhat akin to the idea of original sin.

Though it appears some people are born more guilty than others. The current thinking isn't quite clear on how much guilt each person is supposed to feel. I haven't seen any clear metrics.

It is very Orwellian, VERY dystopian, and not at all in alignment with freedom of thought. Those who disagree are labeled thought criminals.

Impossible to like this post enough.

 

[Musical Mermaid]

Disney should retheme Peter Pan’s Flight if their logic for closing Splash Mountain is that Song of the South has some issues. Splash Mountain already had its so called problematic elements from the movie removed before it was open to the public. People could say, “Well, let’s just remove the issues from the Peter Pan ride?” Why? That reasoning wasn’t good enough for Splash Mountain. What if people get upset from riding Peter Pan’s Flight because they can’t enjoy the ride for what it is and only think of the racial insensitivity in the film? It may sound ridiculous, but apparently people were crying about Splash Mountain over things that weren’t in that ride either.

 

[LittleBuford]

Disney should retheme Peter Pan’s Flight if their logic for closing Splash Mountain is that Song of the South has some issues. Splash Mountain already had its so called problematic elements from the movie removed before it was open to the public. People could say, “Well, let’s just remove the issues from the Peter Pan ride?” Why? That reasoning wasn’t good enough for Splash Mountain. What if people get upset from riding Peter Pan’s Flight because they can’t enjoy the ride for what it is and only think of the racial insensitivity in the film? It may sound ridiculous, but apparently people were crying about Splash Mountain over things that weren’t in that ride either.

The difference is that Peter Pan is a much-loved film that contains only a few problematic scenes. One’s main association with the movie isn’t the historical treatment of Native Americans (leaving aside the fact that the Indians of Neverland are fantastical anyway). Song of the South, by contrast, is much more difficult to disentangle from the historical and ideological issues that render it problematic in many people’s eyes, which is why Disney has essentially disowned the film these past thirty years (at least in the US).

 

[Kate F]

“You shouldn’t be angry,” Who does this guy think he is?

 

[Sue_Vongello]

The difference is that Peter Pan is a much-loved film that contains only a few problematic scenes. One’s main association with the movie isn’t the historical treatment of Native Americans (leaving aside the fact that the Indians of Neverland are fantastical anyway). Song of the South, by contrast, is much more difficult to disentangle from the historical and ideological issues that render it problematic in many people’s eyes, which is why Disney has essentially disowned the film these past thirty years (at least in the US).

The key phrase in your sentence is "in many people's eyes" ... which does not correlate to what is, to quote Splash Mountain, "actual, factual, and satisfactual." Song of the South has a bad legacy, that is a fact. But does it deserve that legacy? You can argue that if Disney hadn't buried it for so long, most likely the fervor against it wouldn't be what is is today. There's no way of knowing. Does it have a bad legacy? Yes. Does the actual film and intent of the film merit that legacy? Probably not.

But Disney already disentangled SotS from Splash Mountain. It's ostensibly about animated woodland creatures, nothing more. So to say that Splash Mountain is too tied to SotS is inaccurate, because the vast majority of people would never even know that. I'd be willing to bet that more people know of the "red man" in Pan (because its in the ride) than of Splash Mountain's origins (of which aren't in the ride).

Perception is everything but again I go back to where do we draw the line? It's fair to mention Pan and all the other examples because they happened, they have things that could make people offended. I mean take for instance, your user name, its taken from a song that advocates child abuse or child murder, right? Where do we draw the line?

 

[Model3 McQueen]

On change.org there's now 65k signatures to save Splash, compared to the 21k to change it. The poll started by @TJ Vazquez almost shows the same result in that 2 of 3 voters don't necessarily approve of the change.

 

[eliza61nyc]

The key phrase in your sentence is "in many people's eyes" ... which does not correlate to what is, to quote Splash Mountain, "actual, factual, and satisfactual." Song of the South has a bad legacy, that is a fact. But does it deserve that legacy? You can argue that if Disney hadn't buried it for so long, most likely the fervor against it wouldn't be what is is today. There's no way of knowing. Does it have a bad legacy? Yes. Does the actual film and intent of the film merit that legacy? Probably not.

But Disney already disentangled SotS from Splash Mountain. It's ostensibly about animated woodland creatures, nothing more. So to say that Splash Mountain is too tied to SotS is inaccurate, because the vast majority of people would never even know that. I'd be willing to bet that more people know of the "red man" in Pan (because its in the ride) than of Splash Mountain's origins (of which aren't in the ride).

Perception is everything but again I go back to where do we draw the line? It's fair to mention Pan and all the other examples because they happened, they have things that could make people offended. I mean take for instance, your user name, its taken from a song that advocates child abuse or child murder, right? Where do we draw the line?

lol, I don't know they have always been showing GWTW and it's still a racist piece of dog poo . time has definitely not warmed it up to the hearts of black folks.

now I didn't want splash mtn changed because I don't think it was necessary but as a black person I definitely do not see a story about "friendship" between a boy and a man when I watch SotS.

 

[Sue_Vongello]

lol, I don't know they have always been showing GWTW and it's still a racist piece of dog poo . time has definitely not warmed it up to the hearts of black folks.

Yeah but GwtW is waaaaaaaaaay worse than SotS. My point is if people actually saw it and it was available and contextualized and people weren't feeding off other people's opinions ... then maybe it would be viewed differently.

 

[eliza61nyc]

Yeah but GwtW is waaaaaaaaaay worse than SotS. My point is if people actually saw it and it was available and contextualized and people weren't feeding off other people's opinions ... then maybe it would be viewed differently.

lol you aren't wrong about that.

 

[LittleBuford]

Does it have a bad legacy? Yes. Does the actual film and intent of the film merit that legacy? Probably not.

The bolded is an opinion. I don’t agree with it. (And it’s fine that we disagree.)

But Disney already disentangled SotS from Splash Mountain. It's ostensibly about animated woodland creatures, nothing more. So to say that Splash Mountain is too tied to SotS is inaccurate, because the vast majority of people would never even know that. I'd be willing to bet that more people know of the "red man" in Pan than of Splash Mountain's origins.

My post was specifically about the films, not the rides derived from them. I too feel (or at least felt) that Splash Mountain is sufficiently divorced from Song of the South to pass muster, but I can see why some feel differently and am trying to understand rather than simply dismiss their concerns.

Perception is everything but again I go back to where do we draw the line? It's fair to mention Pan and all the other examples because they happened, they have things that could make people offended. I mean take for instance, your user name, its taken from a song that advocates child abuse or child murder, right? Where do we draw the line?

If I had feedback from posters here (and I mean sincere feedback rather than trolling) telling me that my username was upsetting to them, I would change it. I regard the song from which it’s taken as so plainly comical and absurd as to be inoffensive, but I’m willing to hear others out if I’m mistaken in my belief.

 

[LittleBuford]

Yeah but GwtW is waaaaaaaaaay worse than SotS. My point is if people actually saw it and it was available and contextualized and people weren't feeding off other people's opinions ... then maybe it would be viewed differently.

As I mentioned upthread, Gone with the Wind is generally deemed a great film, whereas Song of the South isn’t, which is why efforts have been made to contextualise it for modern audiences.

 

[thomas998]

I think that if there's one thing we can all agree on, it's that racism is a horrible thing.

Not so fast. You exist today because your ancestors were racist. Think back to earlier times, if you happened to look one way and wandered into a neighboring tribes area that looked completely different you could be in a world of hurt if you weren't somewhat racist and tried to avoid the humans that didn't look like you. Nature gave an advantage to humans that were racist and preferred sticking to similar humans, the humans that were happy to go hug every human they saw even when they looked completely different probably ended up being dinner that night.

Most people are to some degree racist, consider you were attracted to your significant other in part because you found them attractive. Race plays a big part in how humans look and if you had a soft spot for darker skin you would probably not be attracted to the folks from Scandinavia... just like if you liked blue eyed blondes you would probably not be going gaga over the typical person from China. That preference is because you think that those traits are preferable to the other traits which is racist. Nothing wrong with it in and of itself. The only problem is when you decide to treat someone worse because of their race. To me that is when you cross a line that is a problem. But I don't think you can say racism is a horrible thing across the board, only when it starts impacting how you treat someone.

 

[LittleBuford]

Nature gave an advantage to humans that were racist and preferred sticking to similar humans, the humans that were happy to go hug every human they saw even when they looked completely different probably ended up being dinner that night.

 

[Sue_Vongello]

The bolded is an opinion. I don’t agree with it. (And it’s fine that we disagree.)



My post was specifically about the films, not the rides derived from them. I too feel (or at least felt) that Splash Mountain is sufficiently divorced from Song of the South to pass muster, but I can see why some feel differently and am trying to understand rather than simply dismiss their concerns.



If I had feedback from posters here (and I mean sincere feedback rather than trolling) telling me that my username was upsetting to them, I would change it. I regard the song from which it’s taken as so plainly comical and absurd as to be inoffensive, but I’m willing to hear others out if I’m mistaken in my belief.

I appreciate the civil back and forth with you and the way you have approached our discussion. So thank you for that, and yes its okay we disagree on some issues ... but please don't change your username, ever. At some point we have to force people to think critically rather than us changing our lives based on personal whims that have no bearing on reality.

 

[seascape]

Crowther of the NYT likewise thought the film was set in the antebellum South. From the TCM piece I shared earlier:

​

While Harris' stories identify "Uncle Remus" as a former slave, the film does not clearly establish Remus' status nor the exact time period of the story. According to the film's file in the MPAA/PCA Collection at the AMPAS Library, PCA officials advised the studio that in order to minimize "adverse reactions from certain Negro groups," they should "be certain that the frontispiece of the book (appearing in the opening credits) establishes the date in the 1870s." Despite Breen's admonition, the frontispiece does not specify the time period, and both contemporary and modern sources disagree as to whether the film is set before or after the Civil War.​

The fact that Uncle Remus is free to leave the plantation settles the matter, of course, but the film isn’t as explicit as it might be in this regard, and the relationship between the black and white characters certainly perpetuates an idealised master-slave dynamic.

Bosley Crowther never wrote a review of a movie he didn't see. He was a cousin of mine and I had the pleasure of going to many movies with him and his wife during Summers at Martha's Vineyard. He taught me a great deal about early movies. He knew there were problems with Song of the South and many other movies from that time.