I had a feeling they still weren’t done with the railing yet! (Photos from @Drew the Disney Dude and @DCBaker)
View attachment 783145View attachment 783146
A month-or-so ago one of the dates we expected news on passed and I wasn't at my computer so I decided to check Twitter and see if there was anything on the project.
Really put things on this board into context. Makes everyone feel much more reasonable and open-minded. But I wouldn't suggest anyone ever stick their head in that den of scum and villainy.
DL's set is pretty swampy as is. Probably why the retheme fits far more naturally there.From what I was told, and what we've seen of Magic Kingdom's, both are keeping alot of Splash's sets, albiet redressed due to the fast turnaround. They don't have the time/money to completely gut it.
The technical term for this is “floofifying”. Look how floofy!Yep! They installed the initial back layer, now they are filling in gaps, thickening it out, making it look natural.
I agree with pretty much all of this, but in view of the fact that @eddie104 gave @Disney Analyst's post a love reaction, I think he was actually trying to agree with and elaborate on his point, though I can see why it looked like he was doing the opposite. It could just be a misunderstanding that's led to the spat between the two of you.Didn't really seem like that, considering you quoted someone's post and bolded the part that most related to your own comment. That seemed to suggest pretty fairly that you were attempting to undercut their assessment rather than merely offering your own separate one.
On top of that, I don't see anyone "pretending they don't criticize incomplete projects" - certainly not the poster you quoted. So that's the mischaracterization.
The issue people take here isn't just that there's any amount of criticism of a work in progress. There's a decent amount of healthy critique in this thread that no one really has a problem with. The issue is, as has been stated many times, the outrageous amount of overzealous destructive criticism of elements that are not even yet known to us. While it can get a little tiresome when someone comments for the 20th time about how they don't like the look of the facade, it's at least understandable to be developing an opinion of what's visible. But those overextending their own imaginations and continuing their tirades about set pieces that haven't yet been revealed or story points that they merely assume must exist can't reasonably expect to be taken seriously.
For literal years now there has been so much obsessive and ugly pre-emptive condemnation of choices that people simply imagine WDI is making for this ride, many of which have already been disproven by the continued construction. The outrage about the Green Fence that was obviously going to be hidden is a recent example (and a relatively benign one!). This thread has had to be so heavily moderated that at this point reading what remains doesn't paint a full picture of how contentious and nasty the timbre of it has often gotten, so if you haven't seen that in real time it can be hard to understand why people seem to get their hackles up so quickly. But for anyone who has been following closely throughout, @Disney Analyst 's comment about "years and years of constant pile ons" is unfortunately very apt. This pattern can be seen in discussion about this ride all across the internet - criticism of rides in development is not unique to Tiana's Bayou Adventure, but the level of aggressive, overt, and misplaced vitriol is absolutely unique, and pointedly consistent for a ride about a princess and her musical animal friends in a magical swamp.
It is so painfully clear that the problem runs much deeper than people thinking the plastic flowers look cheap or that some of the paint choices seem odd. When we've reached the point of pathological fault-finding that loses touch with what's even actually happening it becomes unsurprising that people would feel the need to push back against posts that don't seem to correctly assess the content they're responding to.
Thank you for understanding where I was coming from.I agree with pretty much all of this, but in view of the fact that @eddie104 gave @Disney Analyst's post a love reaction, I think he was actually trying to agree with and elaborate on his point, though I can see why it looked like he was doing the opposite. It could just be a misunderstanding that's led to the spat between the two of you.
The technical term for this is “floofifying”. Look how floofy!
The signage feels very off for this place settingHere’s a look inside Critter Co-Op (the curtains were open for some reason).
View attachment 783205View attachment 783206View attachment 783207View attachment 783208View attachment 783209
As do the nonsensical briar roots under a swamp.The signage feels very off for this place setting
I wish whoever was assigned to do the posters and sign for the shop had been on the main team. These look so much better than their counterparts on the attraction itself!
I disagree! They look jazzy and ’30s to me.The signage feels very off for this place setting
My wife takes that job very seriously while I’m ready to be likeVery true. I’m a master floofifyer when it comes to our Christmas tree!
If someone took a photo of it when it first goes up, they’d be ashamed, but give me a couple hours and it’s pretty lush when I’m done
The store was called the Briar Patch. It'd make sense to have the store be covered in them.As do the nonsensical briar roots under a swamp.
Now?The store was called the Briar Patch. It'd make sense to have the store be covered in them.
Yes. Was.The store was called the Briar Patch. It'd make sense to have the store be covered in them.
Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.