News Jessica Rabbit's Car Toon Spin

[Dear Prudence]

NOT DISNEY ignoring the MULTIPLE sexual harassment/ assault accounts that have been released by actual, living breathing cast members (many of whom who have recently quit because of them) to focus on a ride literally everyone forgets existed. Not virtue signaling instead of dealing with issues, such as sexual harassment and racial profiling of living, breathing cast members and guests.

Like, you want to spend money that way, fine. But fix other issues first.

 

[el_super]

My intentions when I post and complain are just to discuss things with other fans though, I never consider it some sort of attempt to change Disney's mind.

Only money can change them. The Walt Disney Company has certainly seen significantly less money from my family since June 2020. It's not even a tough choice or boycott, it's literally just me / my wife losing interest as a result of their bad decision making.

I think that's fine. I don't want to try to stop discussion at all... but considering the broader context of where the decision making is coming from, labeling these decisions as stupid and petty, would suggest being dismissive of the broader social implications and sometimes downright inflammatory.

I think there's room to dislike a change to something you like, and also still acknowledge that things have to change as society progresses. Like I've said, what feels like a million times now, you don't have to be a racist to be sad that Splash Mountain is being removed.

I think what gets me in this case though is... Cartoon Spin isn't Splash Mountain.

 

[el_super]

And I’m frankly not sure if any of this juice is worth the squeeze or if this is going to silence the Abigail Disney’s of the world either, since all this looks like to me (as a Disney fan and shareholder) is an executive committee fiddling around with new spending while Rome burns.

Changing a figure on a ride is a far cheaper and easier endeavor than reviewing employee compensation. I do find their political spending to be troubling, but of course I am encouraged by their efforts toward diversity and inclusion. I don't want to pretend that one really offsets the other, but a centrist Disney is probably in everyone's best interest.

Overall I think Disney should be really worried about their corporate image, and specifically the image of the parks as throwbacks to a "simpler time." Society is progressing at a pretty fast pace now, and the parks can't afford to be monuments to a time period that the newer generations are embarrassed by.

 

[mickEblu]

 

[britain]

I put this in the other thread, but I think it's obvious that Jessica Rabbit is going to get some new wardrobe.

Out with the 1940's Glamour Girl look that made complete sense in the movie, and in with Miss Marple tweed designed to please the 2020's New Puritans who would never lower themselves to go to Disneyland to begin with.

Miss Marple, the design inspiration for the new Jessica Rabbit...

Eh, more like this…

 

[CaptainAmerica]

They're going to close Small World in the next ten years. Absolutely guaranteed.

 

[CaptainAmerica]

Certainly seems like a specifically tailored/targeted strategy to decimate attractions built from the mid-1980s to 2005 (post-Eisner, when Iger became CEO).

Iger tried to prevent crap like this. He's a California liberal, but he's not a progressive culture warrior. Iger's mentality was along the lines of Michael Jordan's "Republicans buy sneakers too." He consciously kept the woke stuff in check. Now that he's gone, nobody with any spine is left to stand up to the HR types.

 

[mickEblu]

Will she still look like Jessica Rabbit? I’m expecting something Hilary Clintonesque in suit pants.

 

[mickEblu]

It’s interesting that none of us saw this coming. That’s when you know it’s getting crazy

 

[el_super]

They're going to close Small World in the next ten years. Absolutely guaranteed.

They don't need to close it, just re-do it. Have people from the cultures represented actually tell their stories, rather than let someone else decide what represents them.

 

[el_super]

What does this even mean? Tell their stories? It's not a documentary.

Nevermind what you think the intent of it is, if someone can take something away from the ride that portrays a people in a way that they have no say in, it's wrong.

 

[MoonRakerSCM]

And people say the slippery slope doesn't exist.

Assuming this goes the way it appears to be, maybe they can play the Strong Woman song from South Park in the ride.

 

[BuzzedPotatoHead89]

Nevermind what you think the intent of it is, if someone can take something away from the ride that portrays a people in a way that they have no say in, it's wrong.

Intent is very important. When you live in a pluralistic society that is a cultural melting pot like ours imitation can be a form of flattery.

Unless we plan to get inside everyone’s individual heads, sometimes you have to assume the best.

 

[denyuntilcaught]

I'm missing the reason for the outrage here beyond "I don't like it because it's not what I'm used to."

 

[VJ]

I'm missing the reason for the outrage here beyond "I don't like it because it's not what I'm used to."

i'm just trying to figure out what the reason for the change in general is

 

[el_super]

It's not a historical showcase.

That shouldn't be an excuse for racial stereotyping. [See: Jungle Cruise]

Intent is very important. When you live in a pluralistic society that is a cultural melting pot like ours imitation can be a form of flattery.

Unless we plan to get inside everyone’s individual heads, sometimes you have to assume the best.

I know, like most things in the park, the intent was never to really be malicious in their portrayals. That doesn't mean that they are still appropriate though. The concept of having someone from Africa come in and decorate the Africa section of the ride was probably something that Walt though inconceivable in the 1960s, but it's certainly something that can be done today.

It's also worth noting that they already made some changes to the ride due to the dated portrayals.

 

[denyuntilcaught]

i'm just trying to figure out what the reason for the change in general is

Well IMO:

1. Because they want to.
2. To tone down the sexual overtures prevalent in the attraction, largely driven by Jessica's presence and design.

Whether or not I agree with them isn't my point, personally, but I can see why someone at Disney found this to be an issue. It's not a reach and today's audiences are soft. But this level of outrage I think is a bit melodramatic but as to be expected from this fandom.

 

[DavidDL]

Everyone's tolerances are different. The more I think about this potential change (provided they actually do a good job), the less I am upset about it (similar to Splash's update). Whereas changes like the removal of the Tower of Terror, I am still upset about. Does this bode well for things I wouldn't change, like the Ghost Host in the stretching room? Probably not. But like that potential change, I will deal with this when/if it happens and judge it for myself when I see it. If the changes coming to Car Toon Spin aren't to my liking, I will simply avoid the attraction. If enough changes come to the park where I find myself unable to enjoy what's left or find value in a trip, then I will simply take my money elsewhere.

But people like Jessica Rabbit, right? Sure, it's mostly because she's an *ahem* appealing character but I feel like I see more love for her than I do for Roger. Roger never had his own store in WDW or got the same kind of merchandising Jessica did. I don't see the idea of more of her being a bad thing. Yesterday folks were upset that she was gone, now they're upset that she's going to be taking center stage? I'm just happy to know that Toontown is finally getting touched up in preparation for the opening of Runaway Railway. A new attraction, updated Car Toon Spin plus (hopefully) much love given to the other areas of the land would really go a long way to breathing new life into the area.

Provided, of course, that they do a good job. I don't think putting Jessica in the drivers seat of the opening scene Benny and slapping "Private Investigator" onto her doorway in the queue would be quite enough. If they do this, I want them to go all the way.

 

[Dead2009]

I wonder who this is actually relevant to like the articles are saying. First Splash Mountain and now this.

 

[BuzzedPotatoHead89]

I know, like most things in the park, the intent was never to really be malicious in their portrayals. That doesn't mean that they are still appropriate though. The concept of having someone from Africa come in and decorate the Africa section of the ride was probably something that Walt though inconceivable in the 1960s, but it's certainly something that can be done today.

It's also worth nothing that they already made some changes to the ride due to the dated portrayals.

Those are all fair points. As I’ve noted before, I think the evolution of Rivers of America has been one of the best projects of lately. i also think the recent changes to the FL dark rides as well have been well-executed.

Similarly if WDI do want to reimagine CarToon spin a new story centered around “agent Jessica” is fine with me too. My only hope is this extends to the rest of ToonTown as part of the relaunch in 2023.

As I’ve said before I do think sometimes modern Disney does a poor job doing when communicating these changes in a respectful light. Whether it be the 1988 Roger Rabbit film or the 1964 Small World attraction I see that in both cases the intent of the creators is not one of malice but how storytelling is interpreted at different time periods. And as society evolves, and Disney marketing/HR pushes the envelope it’s important to keep this in mind.