An Untouchable’s Eventual Fate?

[Trackmaster]

Is song of the south not disney IP? We’re starting to move this thread into rough waters as well!

But its not in the name, and its only loosely referred to. Plus they don't even allow access to the movie anymore so they're obviously isn't any cross marketing opportunities. I don't consider Splash to be an IP the same way that a ride like Frozen or 7DMT would be. I don't consider Splash to be an IP ride at all. Its a WDW and DLR ride that people enjoy. Not a complicated concept.

 

[UNCgolf]

JC could go. I get not everyone goes to AK, but JC isn’t needed. Put a boat ride with real animals in AK and use JC plot plus the expansion pad to make a great, modern Adventureland. IMO it’s only saving grace is it’s a ride that infants can go on.

I've said the same thing here before. I think it's essentially a pointless ride now -- and I actually think Walt would agree and want it replaced if he were still running the show, because Animal Kingdom supersedes it. It's basically just become a place to hear bad puns. They could do so much with that real estate.

It still gets decent lines, though, and more importantly, they have another available plot of land they can use. They should use that land before they eliminate JC, although I think JC should be on the chopping block sometime down the road whenever they actually do run out of space.

 

[Homemade Imagineering]

One more thing to note about the IASW situation. Two years ago when TWDC considered its removal along with ToonTown, Bob Chapek was spearheading the Disney Parks, Experiences and Products division of the company, and now that Iger is out of the picture and D’Amaro is in Chapek’s position, I feel that D’Amaro would vouch for the attraction to stay or at least receive an extensive refurbishment. In other words, there would be more resistance if they tried considering something like that again.

 

[LastoneOn]

I understand your first statement, I was trying to capture the OP's intent that rides can be viewed as works of art created by Imagineers and so many talented people. Imagineers who built these rides really paid attention to the details to create them. Similar to how a painter puts so much effort into a painting.

As per your second statement, we know what the OP's intent was, and "considered too important to be changed" is a definition of the word "sacred." It does, however, have religious meaning when used in different context as well, but that is not the case here so it isn't a misuse of the word, IMO. A bit to strong of a word for a theme park attraction? Perhaps, yes

And why can't a ride at Disney, be considered a masterpiece, or heritage quality, and symbolic of a time, art style, method etc. If the Mona Lisa is a masterpiece why can't JC or IASW be considered that? Some of these rides, attractions that are old, a couple fairly recent, are masterpieces of design, engineering, and can't be replicated because they were in fact envisioned and created by unique individuals. To some a ride at Disney is just paint, steel, whatever no big deal. Well, there are a whole heck of a lot of people who feel the same way about the Mona Lisa. It's all about "the eye of the beholder"

 

[LastoneOn]

I feel that D’Amaro would vouch for the attraction to stay or at least receive an extensive refurbishment.

Even a proposed refurbishment of anything lately flits with disaster. Not because something is held dearly but there is real doubt about most anything coming out of imagineering now. They just seem to be off half a cog and unable to please anybody. Some say, and with strong evidence, that it's exec interference and others point to new generation that doesn't respect methods and philosophy proven to deliver positive results (regardless of the target demo all of that). Ideas are off, timing is off, sensibility is off, execution is off. This was going on before 2020.

 

[JustAFan]

One more thing. When I refer to the “sacred attractions”, I am talking about the most untouchable attractions ever. This list is small, and only comprises of four main attractions that immediately came to mind (IASW, POTC, HM, JC). So for those of you comparing the Splash Mountain retheme to this, your comparison is invalid in this case since I’m referring to the core, pure sacred Disney attractions.

1. You can't invalidate another's opinion.
2. Your definition of "core, pure sacred Disney attractions" could be different then someone else's.

Simply saying you're opening yourself up for a lot of disagreement and arguing with that stance.

 

[Homemade Imagineering]

1. You can't invalidate another's opinion.
2. Your definition of "core, pure sacred Disney attractions" could be different then someone else's.

Simply saying you're opening yourself up for a lot of disagreement and arguing with that stance.

1. Maybe I was a little harsh. I said this because I’d rather not have the Splash Mountain discussion overtake this thread, since I understand it’s still a bit of an elephant in the room. Still, I respect everyone’s opinion, and so if I came across as a little harsh then I apologize.

2. Yes, I understand that, and I’m willing to discuss that with everyone here, as long as they decide to remain civil towards me of course. That’s all. This is an opinionated thread, and I fully encourage everyone to share their opinions here.

 

[Robert Waldbauer]

Now, it’s been discussed before what makes an attraction sacred, or what makes an attraction retain its longevity. After a few days of doing some thinking, the question has popped into my mind, and that is, if anything is really sacred. Now, I say this because technology and interest is always evolving, and a 15 minute untouchable such as IASW or POTC May eventually lose the general public’s interest (minus us Disney fans) and at that point Disney may feel the need to replace them. So here is my question. Do you think that an attraction’s continued existence
will benefit the attraction as time goes on, since as it becomes older and older it gains a more sacred value to it, or do you think that an attraction’s continued existence will hurt itself and continue to make the attraction look less impressive as technology evolves.

Even if Disney goes back and updates these sacred attractions with the latest tech, I feel like there will be a point someday in the future, where so much is evolved and more advanced technologies become more accessible to us humans, that these sacred attractions just fall out of everyone’s interest? Also, it’s important to note that at a certain point in the future, there will no longer be people on this planet who have the nostalgia from visiting HM or POTC back in the 60s or 70s when they were revolutionary, because eventually every generation passes away, and a new generation fills their spot. Will the next generations continue to hold appreciation for these sacred attractions, or will Walt himself along with these sacred attractions be forgotten completely.


All of this sounds insane, I know, and I think the pandemic just has me constantly thinking of crazy scenarios, but this is something I worry about in the future, and I’d hate so lose any of the sacred attractions. Also, I’m aware that the age level of posting is very much all over the place, and I will let you guys know that I am a younger person writing this, so I am not among those who may never see any of what I’m talking about come to fruition (since you older folks may not care as much since my scenario will most likely take place a long time from now, that is, if it ever does).


One more thing. When I refer to the “sacred attractions”, I am talking about the most untouchable attractions ever. This list is small, and only comprises of four main attractions that immediately came to mind (IASW, POTC, HM, JC). So for those of you comparing the Splash Mountain retheme to this, your comparison is invalid in this case since I’m referring to the core, pure sacred Disney attractions. I hope that makes sense. Anyways, feel free to discuss this, and I want to know what everyone thinks of my crazy scenario.

Personally, I'd like to see old attractions updated to new tech, but expand the park itself with new attractions.

 

[Homemade Imagineering]

Personally, I'd like to see old attractions updated to new tech, but expand the park itself with new attractions.

My thoughts exactly! Just imagine IASW with Sinbad’s Storybook Voyage style animatronics, or interactive eye tracking animal A-1000s at the jungle cruise, giving the illusion of a Tiger stalking you. You can do some pretty amazing things with current technology, while also being respectful to an attraction’s original design.

 

[EagleScout610]

But its not in the name, and its only loosely referred to. Plus they don't even allow access to the movie anymore so they're obviously isn't any cross marketing opportunities. -

That's why I personally think Splash is one of the best IP-based attractions. It doesn't smother you in the IP, and every second isn't focused on "HEY LOOK AT US!" It just takes you through a cartoony valley

 

[TrainsOfDisney]

Some say, and with strong evidence, that it's exec interference and others point to new generation that doesn't respect methods and philosophy proven to deliver positive results (regardless of the target demo all of that).

I’m guessing it’s exec.’s - Trowbridge designed my favorite theme park attraction to date, with an IP I’m not particular fond of. Everything that’s missing from Rise, is in Spider-Man (physical effects, legit thrill, etc.)

My thoughts exactly! Just imagine IASW with Sinbad’s Storybook Voyage style animatronics, or interactive eye tracking animal A-1000s at the jungle cruise, giving the illusion of a Tiger stalking you. You can do some pretty amazing things with current technology, while also being respectful to an attraction’s original design.

Check out Tokyo’s Jungle Cruise upgrade for a great example.

 

[Homemade Imagineering]

Check out Tokyo’s Jungle Cruise upgrade for a great example.

Wow! I'm currently watching a ride through at the moment! they did an amazing job with the projection mapping effects! You see, this is how a classic attraction should be updated. Sadly, it shows how much more superior OLC's treatment of the park is compared to TDA's treatment of DLR. The fact that they'd even consider, for a moment, paving over IASW for something else, is completely utterly asinine, and a complete offense to Marry Blair and Rolly Crump.

 

[Capt. Hook]

I used to hold the belief that certain attractions held a magical cloak of invincibility, and would never even be considered for alteration or removal. They would never age or seem outdated. Their magic would always remain as I first experienced. Now I wonder.

I'll never forget my level of amazement when first riding HM as a child. Such mystery and wonder. Are those real ghosts? How are they dancing? I can see right THROUGH THEM! Now we're moving backwards. What??? It was utopia for a child's imagination.

As for my two daughters when they first rode this amazing ride a few years ago, they seemed "meh" at best, and unimpressed at worst. I feel as if I failed as a father.

 

[Trackmaster]

Personally, I'd like to see old attractions updated to new tech, but expand the park itself with new attractions.

I think that the problem is that when Disney runs an attraction, they really staff it to the teeth compared to other parks. A typical major regional amusement park up north may advertise 60+ rides, but many of those rides may have 1-2 employees running them at a time. Even many of the major rides (the roller coasters in their case) may have a staff of 6-8 at the most. With Disney, you'll see staffs of 15+ employees just on a little flat ride, and 30-40 on a major ride. And for many of those rides, they hire people just to wave guests along.

If Disney ever really wanted to expand their ride collection and keep all of those rides running, they'd have to find a way to better automate the attraction and cut down on the staffing. Its a catch-22, I appreciate how Disney's philosophy is to keep all of their rides to high standards and provide great service, but on the other hand, some of the parks are getting pretty thin when it comes to their ride collection (it wasn't too long ago that Slinky was the hot ticket at DHS... that's saying something).

 

[Homemade Imagineering]

May I mention. Something people tend to forget, is that Walt always wanted to have one foot in the past. In my eyes, bulldozing a beloved classic completely takes that foot out of the past and into the future, because you’re destroying something that has proven to be successful for at least 50 years or so, and if something has been standing the test of time, that thing must be popular enough that generations of people have made memories at those attractions. You can always remove and replace attractions like Buzz Lightyear, or the Astro Orbiter since they’re not as iconic or special to many, but to destroy a timeless classic is a complete disservice to the fans.

 

[Trackmaster]

May I mention. Something people tend to forget, is that Walt always wanted to have one foot in the past. In my eyes, bulldozing a beloved classic completely takes that foot out of the past and into the future, because you’re destroying something that has proven to be successful for at least 50 years or so, and if something has been standing the test of time, that thing must be popular enough that generations of people have made memories at those attractions. You can always remove and replace attractions like Buzz Lightyear, or the Astro Orbiter since they’re not as iconic or special to many, but to destroy a timeless classic is a complete disservice to the fans.

Pretty well put. There needs to be a balance of the old and new. It can't be completely on one side or the other. But with the old, its important that it never declines in quality, and is always held to a high standard.

 

[ppete1975]

I think the biggest example of this is cop. People have walked out of it while it was running. I love it for its history and what it means to disney, but its a long ride that at times has very few people on it or show.. however you want to classify it. It needs a refurb and a good cleaning, and its evident disney doesnt really care to put too much money into it and im afraid if it ever had any serious issues it would be shut down. That being said, its almost a museum piece, with the history, the view on america, and what it means to disney.. if its ever removed.. i really hope they offer it to someone. Either the walt disney museum, marceline, or even a new musuem dedicated to amusement parks (either disney or all parks), heck with the amusement parks florida has lost throughout the years something really cool could be done, esp if they got universal and disney to sponsor it when they remove rides.
And we know it can be moved.. its been done before.

And tomorrowland speedway is a classic to me.. even if you all hate it

 

[Trackmaster]

I think the biggest example of this is cop. People have walked out of it while it was running. I love it for its history and what it means to disney, but its a long ride that at times has very few people on it or show.. however you want to classify it. It needs a refurb and a good cleaning, and its evident disney doesnt really care to put too much money into it and im afraid if it ever had any serious issues it would be shut down. That being said, its almost a museum piece, with the history, the view on america, and what it means to disney.. if its ever removed.. i really hope they offer it to someone. Either the walt disney museum, marceline, or even a new musuem dedicated to amusement parks (either disney or all parks), heck with the amusement parks florida has lost throughout the years something really cool could be done, esp if they got universal and disney to sponsor it when they remove rides.
And we know it can be moved.. its been done before.

And tomorrowland speedway is a classic to me.. even if you all hate it

A good idea might be to move it to Epcot. That park is bleeding for rides, and it looks like the park expansion is pretty much gone now. That part of the park in Tomorrowland just takes up very valuable space that could be used for something.

 

[ppete1975]

A good idea might be to move it to Epcot. That park is bleeding for rides, and it looks like the park expansion is pretty much gone now. That part of the park in Tomorrowland just takes up very valuable space that could be used for something.

Why Epcot? At this point its a museum piece, if you are going to spend millions to move it why put it in a park that also needs space for new attractions and new experiences. I hope COP stays in world for ever, but if that decision is made then it needs to be put in a museum (maybe even smithsonian), the only way it would work in another florida park would be redo one mans dream and add it to that, in another corner of hollywood studios, or the magic kingdom (which unless you want to do major construction prob doesnt have the room unless you keep it in its current space.

 

[Homemade Imagineering]

its important that it never declines in quality, and is always held to a high standard.

Exactly. However, I feel that Disney management has a very twisted view of "plussing". In their eyes, plussing is straying away from an attraction's original design, in favor of the hottest IP. We've seen this through the PotC movie additions, as well as the Disney characters being added to IASW.