News Disneyland to give Snow White’s Scary Adventures dark ride a major facelift in 2020

[Californian Elitist]

I just want you all to know that everything is going to be ok. Not for you guys but for me because my sister is bringing me back a peanut butter Blondie from Craftsman today. I’ve been jonesing for one but wasn’t going to be staying at the GCH anytime soon. I even tried making some during the dark days of 2020 and they came out terrible.

View attachment 555178

Where’s Craftsman?

 

[mickEblu]

Where’s Craftsman?

It’s the place formerly known as Whitewater Snacks at the Grand Californian. But it’s only open to hotel guests for the time being.

 

[el_super]

Are you even a Disney fan?

Are you?

Walt Disney's original feature Snow White should be removed? It only started the entire feature film animation industry.

You finally admit the endgame and it is offensive as well. You don't think the article ridiculous because it all aligns with your worldview perfectly.

There are a lot of options between removing the ride entirely, and correcting the problematic scenes.

At the end of the day, Disneyland has to be entertaining to survive, and if enough people are bothered by something, Disneyland must remove it. Disneyland must conform to the majority worldview, whether you agree with it or not.

I like the insinuation though, that only true fans would like to see Disneyland preserved as a museum, even if it means the place eventually goes bankrupt and is forced to close because no one likes it anymore. Ride or die right?

So offensive? Here I go, back into the Twilight Zone. I’m going to be taking permanent residence there pretty soon.

They already removed the Twilight Zone.

 

[CaptinEO]

Are you?





There are a lot of options between removing the ride entirely, and correcting the problematic scenes.

At the end of the day, Disneyland has to be entertaining to survive, and if enough people are bothered by something, Disneyland must remove it. Disneyland must conform to the majority worldview, whether you agree with it or not.

I like the insinuation though, that only true fans would like to see Disneyland preserved as a museum, even if it means the place eventually goes bankrupt and is forced to close because no one likes it anymore. Ride or die right?

You clearly have no respect for Walt Disney, Disney, or Disneyland history if you believe the first feature film Snow White which was also an opening day attraction should be removed from the park.

I never mentioned the park should stay museum, but the first thing that started the company's success? The pioneer innovation of a feature length animated cartoon?

You want that gone to be spoonfed more advertisements by the current Walt Disney Company?

I'm glad that a company as out of touch with their history as The Walt Disney Company even understands the significance of Snow White by redoing the ride, creating a new Disney World ride, and building the Carthay Circle Restaraunt to honor the film's premier.

You want a theme park that only reflects what's popular and current? Go to California Adventure. I would've never been able to ride thing like Pirates, Small World, or Haunted Mansion if Disneyland constantly redid itself to reflect what's popular.

 

[Disney Analyst]

I have said it earlier but again, consent is important. It’s a discussion to be had with your kids. If this ride becomes your way of bringing up that conversation, go for it.

But do I personally believe this kiss scene is problematic? Not really.

Perhaps the way the story was written is an issue, but that’s the story. The only way to break the spell is true loves kiss. No one knows this apart from The Queen. And everyone thinks Snow is dead.

I personally think a situation like this is relatively normal and fine, the prince is simply offering a loving kiss to someone he wanted in his life, to say goodbye. Little did he know he was saving her from a spell where she would have slowly starved to death in this coma and then actually died… the dwarfs did not hook up any life support machines after all.

But for me the fact she woke up, that in a way implies consent, when looked at through the lense of a fairytale. Which this is.

I do not believe anything needs to be changed, but a nuanced conversation can certainly be had without devolving into trying to insult anyone with concerns by calling them “leftists” (as if that is even an insult)…

 

[el_super]

You clearly have no respect for Walt Disney, Disney, or Disneyland history if you believe the first feature film Snow White which was also an opening day attraction should be removed from the park.

I didn't say I wanted to see it removed, but it's definitely a possibility. Anything and everything can be removed from the park, because the park as a concept is bigger than its individual components. If you can't see that, and the real purpose of Disneyland, then you are not a true fan.

I'm glad that a company as out of touch with their history as The Walt Disney Company even understands the significance of Snow White by redoing the ride, creating a new Disney World ride, and building the Carthay Circle Restaraunt to honor the film's premier.

You just brought up how Walt Disney World was able to build a Snow White ride without inciting controversy.

 

[CaptinEO]

I didn't say I wanted to see it removed, but it's definitely a possibility. Anything and everything can be removed from the park, because the park as a concept is bigger than its individual components. If you can't see that, and the real purpose of Disneyland, then you are not a true fan.

You certainly suggested its removal for something "less offensive".

You show a lack of compassion for Disney's original attractions. I get that everyone likes something different, but I'll absolutely defend Snow White and Walt Disney.

It is a pioneering film by one of the greatest entertainers of all time.

Disneyland is great because you get both historical and new rides all in one place. You can go on a ride based on a 1930s film and then go on a ride based on films made almost a century later.

Disneyland's appeal is its diversity and range of rides and history. Walt made the Snow White ride 17 years after the movie came out and understood the significance of paying tribute to your history.

 

[Stevek]

Considering only two paragraphs of a ten paragraph positive review had anything to do with the kiss scene, it seems odd that he "read several complete paragraphs of this ridiculous Woke journalists eye-rolling nonsense from San Francisco." Must have been really hard for him to do. Are we considering two paragraphs "several" now?

Imagine getting that worked up about two paragraphs of opinion from the Disneyland Editor of the SFGate. How pathetic.

But the two paragraphs are exactly what the article is about and what people will take away with it...she can say all the great things she wants about it but nobody will remember anything but those last 2.

I think the article (the last 2 paragraphs as you say) is horse#$%^ and just another example of the overcorrection we are seeing in many aspects of society today. Better get rid of the poison apple because if people think true love's kiss is bad, they really should think that poisoning someone with an apple far more offensive.

Time to pull enchanted off the airwaves as well as not one, but two men kiss a sleeping Giselle.

 

[DanielBB8]

But for me the fact she woke up, that in a way implies consent, when looked at through the lense of a fairytale. Which this is.

That's a good way of looking at it. If he was a cad, then there's no reciprocal love and she would remain asleep and never wake up. This is a one time kiss. No one else kissed her, not even the dwarves.

This is the second reason the kiss is appropriate. The first reason is she's presumed dead.

Let's think of some more.

 

[Stevek]

You just brought up how Walt Disney World was able to build a Snow White ride without inciting controversy.

This shouldn't even be a controversy. We have a subset of society looking for anything and everything to latch on to now. As a society, we are literally at a point where we all are walking on eggshells.

 

[Stevek]

The best part about all of this is how clear it is that none of them have read the article they're all so mad about, and apparently are arguing under the impression that it was some long expose on rape culture at Disneyland, when it's literally just a really positive review of the new ride that mentioned one aspect of it they found odd.

The headline literally says. The last line is the true clickbait.

Disneyland's new Snow White ride adds magic, but also a new problem​

 

[lazyboy97o]

Perhaps the way the story was written is an issue, but that’s the story. The only way to break the spell is true loves kiss. No one knows this apart from The Queen. And everyone thinks Snow is dead.

If anything, the movie is less creepy than the recorded folktale. One of the oldest criticisms of Disney’s animated fairy tales is that they clean up and sanitize the stories, making them more palatable to a more conservative American audience. Disney’s Pinocchio is charmingly naive and easily led astray whereas Collodi’s Pinocchio is a terrifying little sadist.

 

[el_super]

You certainly suggested its removal for something "less offensive".

I was referring specifically to the scene and not the entire attraction.

Disneyland's appeal is its diversity and range of rides and history. Walt made the Snow White ride 17 years after the movie came out and understood the significance of paying tribute to your history.

So what happens when the audience rejects that history? Does it have to stay on and stay open even if no one is riding it? Snow White's Scary Adventure always had the shortest wait in Fantasyland. I'd dare to suggest that will be true again in a few months time. If a ride is not entertaining, it doesn't belong in the park. Period. Walt knew the value of removing attractions that don't work, so why can't you?

The point of this discussing the controversy is that it opens up the possibility that a time will come when audiences reject what the current Snow White offers as an attraction and DO demand it's replacement. Then what do you do?

 

[Stevek]

The point of this discussing the controversy is that it opens up the possibility that a time will come when audiences reject what the current Snow White offers as an attraction and DO demand it's replacement. Then what do you do?

You replace any attraction that is no longer popular as they have done many times...America Sings, Adventure Thru Innerspace, Horizons, World of Motion, etc. It's not going to be unpopular because of the kiss scene though.

 

[truecoat]

I have said it earlier but again, consent is important. It’s a discussion to be had with your kids. If this ride becomes your way of bringing up that conversation, go for it.

Now kids, if Snow White was only sleeping, what he's doing is wrong but she's a dead body in his eyes so it's ok. Sleeping girl, not ok. Dead body, ok. Kiss away.

 

[CaptinEO]

So what happens when the audience rejects that history? Does it have to stay on and stay open even if no one is riding it? Snow White's Scary Adventure always had the shortest wait in Fantasyland. I'd dare to suggest that will be true again in a few months time. If a ride is not entertaining, it doesn't belong in the park. Period. Walt knew the value of removing attractions that don't work, so why can't you?

I'd all but guarantee you that Snow White sees more riders a day than Rise of the Resistance and Peter Pan.

 

[el_super]

You replace any attraction that is no longer popular as they have done many times...America Sings, Adventure Thru Innerspace, Horizons, World of Motion, etc. It's not going to be unpopular because of the kiss scene though.

Maybe not the kiss scene on it's own, I agree. But the portrayal of women and "Princesses" and the lessons of Snow White are definitely falling out of favor with the public as a whole. I brought this up in this thread awhile back, about finding a balance between keeping Snow White in the park, but distancing the actual entertainment from the movie. It's a fine line and there's probably not a great answer that would be widely accepted today, but ten or twenty years from now... maybe?

No one has to do anything. Disney can do what they want at any time and I'm thankful people with your mindset aren't making these decisions for them as we'd have nothing in the parks that wasn't from the last 5 years.

The people making the decisions are more progressive than I am. I didn't really have much of a problem with the skulls in Adventureland or the guns in Frontierland, but here we are.

 

[Sharon&Susan]

The people making the decisions are more progressive than I am. I didn't really have much of a problem with the skulls in Adventureland or the guns in Frontierland, but here we are.

When did you hear the shooting gallery is being closed permanently? Both DL and WDW's websites are listing it as "Temporarily Unavailable".

 

[BuzzedPotatoHead89]

I was referring specifically to the scene and not the entire attraction.



So what happens when the audience rejects that history? Does it have to stay on and stay open even if no one is riding it? Snow White's Scary Adventure always had the shortest wait in Fantasyland. I'd dare to suggest that will be true again in a few months time. If a ride is not entertaining, it doesn't belong in the park. Period. Walt knew the value of removing attractions that don't work, so why can't you?

The point of this discussing the controversy is that it opens up the possibility that a time will come when audiences reject what the current Snow White offers as an attraction and DO demand it's replacement. Then what do you do?

I do think there are instances where IPs will be replaced and or retired, but I will say I think the article and the reaction to is much ado about nothing. There is not a wholesale rejection of SW7Ds as a franchise. The characters themselves are still marketable and selling and by all measures the newly built and refreshed attractions - including 7DMT at Magic Kingdom are very with the general population.

Even if I accept the underlying thesis that the consent issue is problematic, at best this is very much akin to Peter Pan or Dumbo - and quite unlikely to yield the wholesale IP removal. Using this logic there are serious consent concerns with newer films like B&TB, TLM, and even P&TF as well. But in no case would I argue the source material itself rotten to its core enough to warrant cancellation.

As I and others have said, it’s a delicate balance. And at least at this juncture or wouldn’t make sense to throw out Snow White as a franchise given its critical importance for the company and continued commercial appeal.

I’ll close with: It’s also important to remember that while a squeaky wheel may get the grease, a few loud voices with a megaphone does not a majority make. I’ll reiterate that it’s important to appeal to the broadest audience possible... both the new generation and the “legacy” customers who are nostalgic for the franchises they grew up on. Since it’s neither a museum nor shopping mall, a theme park can be both an evolving product and the sum of all its parts. The two are not mutually exclusive, in fact both are necessary to maintain the broadest possible audience.

 

[lazyboy97o]

I'd all but guarantee you that Snow White sees more riders a day than Rise of the Resistance and Peter Pan.

These dark rides don’t have very high capacity, and unless they added more vehicles the reduction in speed means reduced capacity.

And at least at this juncture or wouldn’t make sense to throw out Snow White as a franchise given its critical importance for the company and continued commercial appeal.

who has suggested anything close to this?