el_super
Well-Known Member
You're engaging in cancel culture by trying to cancel the question.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
News Disneyland to give Snow White’s Scary Adventures dark ride a major facelift in 2020
- Thread starter Communicora
- Start date
You're engaging in cancel culture by trying to cancel the question.
To answer it means you're already engaging in cancel culture and don't realize it. Or it is what you intent to do.
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
Sometimes you can’t fix stupid.
el_super
Well-Known Member
So if you engage in cancel culture by answering the question, and engage in cancel culture by not answering it, that basically means everyone engages in cancel culture all the time. So why so much fear surrounding something that's occurring every day by virtually literally everyone?
SirLink
Well-Known Member
Amen, that is a good life lesson.
Both sides at the moment feel like we are living in a medieval mob. Its like let society gradually change don't try and change it overnight.
el_super
Well-Known Member
I like the idea that things should change gradually over time, but that can't happen if we can't have discussions today.
The idea that the ending of Snow White, is not appropriate to some people today, doesn't mean action needs to occur now. Or even five years or ten years from now. All it means is exactly what it has been framed as: a question on why they choose to keep that ending.
It's a fascinating question that I really think we won't have the answer to. Did they add it back in, simply as a tribute to Walt's original feature film? Did they add it in, overcompensating for the complaints about the previous ending? Did the DLR specific team want to correct the mistakes of their friends in the 1980s and were oblivious to any decisions regarding sensitivity coming from Glendale? Maybe they understood what they were doing and were staging their own anti-change movement.
It is really strange, that, with social progress coming out from Josh D'Amaro and WDI, that this would have just either fallen through the cracks or purposefully been passed over.
Maybe this signifies that change is still coming slowly through the Disney organization. The question is, was that on purpose or something that needs to be corrected?
SirLink
Well-Known Member
I think 'organically' may be a better word to use. Like there are things being pushed today that in 10/20/30 years people will laugh at us saying 'you were doing that then, oh jeez lol'.
As to your point why they chose the ending is that it is simply the ending of the movie. Nothing wrong with that. This is all a fairy tale, but a good extensional question: If someone has been poisoned and is in a coma and that person can't give consent, how does this person come out of the coma.
Or is it way more straight than that: The Dwarfs perceived the Witch killed Snow White, and overcome with grief can't bury her. The Kingdom sent the Prince to find Snow White. Comes across Snow Whites glass coffin and as a mark of mourning kisses her corpse. Then she awakes.
The Aracuan Bird
Well-Known Member
I think it’s only a strange decision if you’re still looking at the Disney Company as your friend. They are going to change and add whatever they want to. There is no consistent commitment across the board. There is no folding to pressure from news outlets. At the end of the day, they have the greatest control over how the public views their content. So really, they can and will do as they please.
BuzzedPotatoHead89
Well-Known Member
You pose a great question here so to hopefully elevate the discussion I’ll engage since I appreciate the discussion even when we don’t see eye-to-eye.
If I’m envisioning a response in this instance I think the answer is two-fold:
1) By making the ride more “family friendly” WDI does believe that they are making the attraction “more inclusive” by definition. I recently heard on one of the WDI webinars about the parks that as part of the committee reviewing attractions there is inclusion of child psychology experts, I suspect this is why we are seeing the elimination of some of the macabre events of these original “spook house”-inspired dark rides. In addition, the scene does introduce multi sensory effects in terms of both visual appeal in terms of new projection mapping/colorful effects and floral scents that are appealing to young children.
2) Regardless of these complaints, on balance the addition is “additive”. By playing homage to a classic scene from the film, WDC is “shoring up its fan base” of loyalists. Princesses sell merchandise, and nostalgia is still important. Astute politicians and businesspeople often say making necessary change is like rowing a canoe, you have to paddle to the left and you have to paddle to the right if you want to keep moving forward and appeal to the broadest segment of the audience possible. Similarly neither innovation nor nostalgia alone will keep the park and the company chugging forward, and in this instance an “homage to the past” is likely not seen as high risk or offensive enough to warrant wholesale change to the IP or even the end scene. Based on the social media reaction I might argue WDC has actually shored up even more support for this change among their loyalists than before.
Hence on balance for the short-to-medium term future these changes make sense.
el_super
Well-Known Member
Oh yeah absolutely. I do think it's important to realize, even if you like something or don't like something, the voices of the future get to determine whether things stick around or not. Disneyland belongs to everyone, not just one generation.
I've seen some back and forth that indicated that people shouldn't have a problem with the ride, because it just follows the movie, and if people were to have a problem, it is with the original movie. To some degree I think that's fair, but I also realize the movie was made in 1937 and is (relatively) this finished, unchanging work of art. We can accept artwork from the past as flawed because we realize that time changes, perceptions change, and something can be relevant to the time it was created. It basically becomes a study in history: a museum piece.
But the decision to add this scene to the ride is something that occurred in 2020 (maybe a little earlier). If we explore the idea that the ride is now problematic (and I don't personally think it is), it calls into question how much a theme park ride being operated in 2021, can lean on problematic source material with the ride operators basically saying "don't blame us, that's what was written." That argument certainly hasn't worked for Splash Mountain. People still have to ride it today, they still have to operate it today, and like it or not, as it exists in the park it represents the company of today.
If over the next 10, 20 or 30 years there is a bigger audience that find these scenes troublesome and problematic, it would suggest that Disney's best course is to eventually replace these with newer IP. New stories that are more aligned to culture sensitivities of the day. But sometimes the fans hate that, and would rather the thing become a museum piece.
It comes down to a vital argument in what Disneyland is supposed to be: a place for families (even future ones) to have fun, or a museum dedicated to a certain time period and certain generation. There is a sort of obvious, if not too easy answer ...
.. and the easy answer is that they will do what the biggest audience demands. They're not really able to do whatever they want. The cynical nature of running a business would demand that they DO NOTHING. Spend no money to change anything ever, and keep raking in the profits. They can't do that because the audience changes. Tastes change, expectations change. There IS a consistent commitment and it's to making sure people keep coming to the park.
Snow White's Scary Adventures had problems. It was always the shortest wait of the classic Fantasyland dark rides. The tone of the ride didn't mesh with the story of the film and it didn't follow with the marketing expectation of Snow White as a princess. It was an oddball attraction that had problems going all the way back to 1955. They had to change it because, like any business, they already invested money in building the attraction and wanted it to continue being of value to the overall experience.
They took a gamble and said that adding this Enchanted Wish (which calling it that frankly, is just as problematic as the kiss itself) would help it align closer to expectations people had for seeing Snow White and being closer to the film.
And now we're all left to wonder what value the film still has in our society today. It certainly doesn't have the same value as Mr. Toad.
SuddenStorm
Well-Known Member
Whatever happened to reading body language?
The Aracuan Bird
Well-Known Member
Doing nothing doesn’t maximize profits.
Tastes change. While they could keep everything the same, and many would still be satisfied, investing in certain things can bring new attendance to the park, and can help them sell targeted products and merchandise.
Additionally, technology changes. There is a certain expectation of quality that remains constant with guests, but it can be hard to keep up with that using older effects and tech. Parts stop becoming manufactured, they become expensive. Sometimes it’s easier to make a change to modernize it and make quality preservation much much easier.
In the event of Snow White, the changes they made allow them to market the ride as new. They aren’t going to change the scene they just put in because of a few news articles. They put effort and money into it. In the event that publicity gets bad, they will put out PR that will get them out of it. Or they will just ignore it until it blows over. If this was an old scene in a ride that hadn’t been updated, perhaps they would take the opportunity to make changes. But it’s brand new.
If Snow White didn't want to be kissed, she shouldn't have had her presumed dead corpse pose such a come hither look.
Practical Pig
Well-Known Member
I believe that is a coma-hither look.
Castle Cake Apologist
Well-Known Member
I just want to move into it! This is a great view of it, but I cannot figure it out! It looks to be behind glass / with a mirror, and there is a "pit" at the immediate beginning of the tunnel, that I'm assuming has the actual "tunnel" in it, which is reflected to appear much longer above?
yensidtlaw1969
Well-Known Member
Spoiler Tags aren't working for me, so just skip the bottom of this post if you don't want to know how it's done . . .
.
.
.
.
.
.
The Mine Shaft is built Vertically, with a mirror angled 45 degrees to reflect it "outwards" instead of upwards. The back of the mine in the photo is actually the top of it, reflected. There's actually a wall right there behind the mirror, and it's the edge of the showbuilding. But there was some vertical space in the Mine Scene that was free to reclaim, so they built up instead of out. By doing this they create the illusion that this tunnel extends out deeply, without having to actually go beyond the edge of the show building.
yensidtlaw1969
Well-Known Member
You're definitely proving how level-headed your opinion is here.