General Discussion of Tiana's Bayou Adventure

[Drdcm]

Good point. Interesting. Magic Kingdom closed early the other night for an event though.

Could have been the cast member event for sure. The crowds seem low for what would be highly popular characters as well. Definitely possible it’s legit as well. Maybe someone with chime in eventually if they were there for it.

 

[haveyoumetmark]

Well, most I’ve seen have not just negative, but sarcastically mocking and bitterly derisive.

It’s been kind of melodramatic, lacking empathy and self-awareness as well. Lots of finger-pointing at Disney—accusing them of not getting it—from people who don’t get what Disney is doing.

But an employee owned co op built out of a Salt Mine missing a needed ingredient to sell hot sauce on the way to Mardi Gras is convoluted, tough to understand, and will be even harder to translate into attraction form.

It’s convenient to distill Splash to its most basic barebones premise (leaving and appreciating home) while including all the very specific extraneous details of the new Tiana storyline to prove your point. It’s not a fair comparison and we don’t yet know everything about what the flume journey portion of Tiana’s ride will be like (but so far, fetching something for a party seems pretty easy to understand).

Not everyone has it or will have watched it. It's quite a leap to assume the characters (beyond what was in the original movie) will be well known or loved. It's a series, so plenty of people who have D+ won't even invest the time to watch (like they might have for a movie).

Like they did Song of the South.

Most won’t ever see it even know about that show.

Like they did Song of the South.

People are trying to complicate this to defend this:

It’s only fair though since more people are also complicating it to criticize it.

I think they are likely quite shocked by the negative reaction. Because you don't design something for a theme park you think people will react negatively to. They thought everyone would be as excited as they are.

I think it’s pretty predictable. It’d be much tougher to go online and find positive warm reactions to this kind of thing. I’m sure it was anticipated and considered every step of the way, including how, what and when information is released. Resisting change is human nature and Disney gets the brunt of it when making even the most minor changes, let alone something as major as this.

As is quite clear from all the doubt surrounding this project, not allowing Tony to give plentiful reassurance on his involvement is a mistake. But given the reasons this project exists, they're likely skittish about allowing him (again an "old white man" who created the ride they're so desperately trying to purge) to take any attention away from Carter.

Appreciate your POV and all the background info you’re sharing. I think the framing as fear-driven or skittish could be a mischaracterization. Tony makes sense as a consultant on this project, but centering him wouldn’t. I see it more affirmatively, like it’s less about obscuring Tony’s involvement and more about just centering Carter as the lead on the project.

 

[Tha Realest]

It’s been kind of melodramatic, lacking empathy and self-awareness as well. Lots of finger-pointing at Disney—accusing them of not getting it—from people who don’t get what Disney is doing.

A lot of veiled references to “you don’t get what Disney is doing” and “you’re not the intended audience.”

Do what are they trying to do?

Who is the intended audience?

 

[Unbanshee]

Is this legit? The video says it was uploaded a few days ago but it looks like the villains special event. Maybe a previous closure for refurbishment? The construction walls don’t have the salt mine stamp or the Tiana posters. Maybe I missed it?

It's during the Cast Member service celebration event

 

[celluloid]

A lot of veiled references to “you don’t get what Disney is doing” and “you’re not the intended audience.”

Do what are they trying to do?

Who is the intended audience?

It is apparently the new "It is a rather nuanced thing" and just explaining you would not understand.

 

[celluloid]

It’s only fair though since more people are also complicating it to criticize it.

Something being complicated to be obtuse vs criticzing the source and going by the source is not fairness.

Disney was always honest, even if later not bragging about Splash being based on the cartoon segment fables of Song of The South.
This is based on a new home watched series. Since the show is not out yet, and the attraction had to be designed as this show was in production or even before that changed, we can only go by what the source has given us.

Most people's negativity are about what is released and promoted

Others complicating it trying to compare this backstory essay to Chickapin hill's simple reason for being flooded are not the same.

This is the story of Tiana's Bayou Adventure, oficially from the company.

Intentionally complicating it and saying it is fair is rather silly.


The funny thing about all of this, if you really want to get technical:

SOTS once had critiques on story, and it succeeded, was highly remembered from parts even if not for a sum of its parts. Disney's first feature film with live action.

Splash Mountain: Perhaps an odd choice and people not sure what Disney was going to do with the property, but the characters were legendary by that point. We got a fantastic product that people loved to and beyond its closing day. A huge kick and backing to support what was The Disney Decade

Tiana: Lots of criticisms now, and to be fair, again even keel, it could provide a fantastic experience the same way the other two have. The difference is faith in how the company designs and operates its theme parks a lot of the time, in particular to rethemes of existing ride dynamics, but also often in general. Instead of going beyond the problems of the source material, they invited irony in with Co-Op business operations and a conveluded backstory and story. The staging is not known, but the story is seen as very bad by the majority.

 

[haveyoumetmark]

I don’t disagree that some of the details released have been a little bit unusual or weird, but there has been some overreaction and reaching to tear this project down and justify visceral emotional reactions to this change. There’s so much we don’t know yet.

Based on what we do know, it looks like we are getting a cute ride (thinking 7DMT, FEA, MMRR) with some richer modern story elements (introducing food co-ops, cooking skills) that could appeal to the slightly older audience for this ride (thrill ride = teens, big kids). Many charming aspects similar to Splash will remain (animal animatronics, fun music, the endearing little root vegetable gardens, etc).

 

[Disney Analyst]

I very much doubt geographical accuracy is a big concern for most visitors to the Magic Kingdom. One of the mistakes the Imagineers made was taking the elevation "problem" seriously in the first place; that's how we ended up with the salt mine.

I agree. It’s over complicating something that doesn’t need complication.

This is the entrance to POTC in Disneyland:

I’m magically transported from entering a normal looking building, into a bayou, down waterfalls into caverns, and suddenly into the outdoor evening air, in the midst of a battle.

All of this happens without a second thought. It’s just what Disney does. Takes the seemingly normal, and transports you somewhere beyond your imagination.

Yes, some experiences fully benefit from total immersion, see RotR.

But it’s not a prerequisite. Splash was as much the same premise for me as Pirates at Disneyland. Yes you see this hill like structure, but once I dive down the first falls, I’m suddenly transported to an unexpected locale, a cartoon and magical world.

Tiana’s Bayou Adventure can be the same, and I hope it is. With everything before the first falls being based on more realism (the backstory), transformed mine, equipment etc, then diving into a magical cartoon world.

But the hill really doesn’t need that much explanation. Who cares?

 

[Brer Oswald]

The concept art they’ve released—even recently—suggests otherwise, which is why I’m holding out hope that the backstory relates mostly to the queue.

Part of me has to wonder how much the existing sets are actually going to change. I think they must’ve realized how much work it was going to take to alter the interior, which caused change sin the story.

The Laughing Place was basically a “dark mine” in the Florida version, so that will become the salt mine. The recently released backstory mentioned “boutique farms”, and as I have pointed out before, much of the HDYD section features rolling farm lands in the background. I don’t know how much of this is going to technically be a “bayou”. I’m sure they’re assuming most people will just think “trees + water = bayou” and most probably will think that.

 

[celluloid]

I don’t disagree that some of the details released have been a little bit unusual or weird, but there has been some overreaction and reaching to tear this project down and justify visceral emotional reactions to this change. There’s so much we don’t know yet.

Based on what we do know, it looks like we are getting a cute ride (thinking 7DMT, FEA, MMRR) with some richer modern story elements (introducing food co-ops, cooking skills) that could appeal to the slightly older audience for this ride (thrill ride = teens, big kids). Many charming aspects similar to Splash will remain (animal animatronics, fun music, the endearing little root vegetable gardens, etc).

There will always be extremes, but for the most part, It has been pretty even keel but the situation. FEA is not a good example of a long closure with good storytelling. MMRR was a mixed review situation as well as it removed a ride that it did not have to.

This is replacing an iconic and loved attraction. It did not have the dwindling crowds that GMR did and that still had plenty of ridership.

So to see a ride replaced with a supposed avoidance of backlash to open with a Food Co-Op as the business itself is being opposite of that, is very tone deaf.

 

[_caleb]

That would have been great. A good table service cajun style restaurant and ride themed to the existing movie within (like Mexican pavilion). Oh well

Creole?

 

[Tha Realest]

It is apparently the new "It is a rather nuanced thing" and just explaining you would not understand.

I think they know very well what they’re implying. They probably don’t want to make that explicit allegation because it would likely run afoul of the rules on the forum, so instead they dance around it and act haughty.

 

[celluloid]

No I think they know very well what they’re implying. They probably don’t want to make that explicit allegation because it would likely run afoul of the rules on the forum, so instead they dance around it and act haughty.

I was trying to say the same thing. I agree.

 

[celluloid]

Creole?

Why not Cajun and Creole Food? Both are very much a part of the state of LA and its heritage.

 

[_caleb]

A lot of veiled references to “you don’t get what Disney is doing” and “you’re not the intended audience.”

Do what are they trying to do?

Who is the intended audience?

I gave my thoughts about these questions in one of the other threads:

That's a good question. I imagine they have in mind:

• African Americans: food, culture, community, history
• Foodies: hot sauce, beignets, cooking
• Fans of local business/entrepreneurship: the whole co-op thing
• Women/girls: empowerment, leadership, creativity
• History buffs: 1920's business models, salt mines, New Orleans
• "Geeks" who get into story and theming details (similar to fans of S.E.A., etc.)
• And, of course fans of Princess and the Frog who might care about what happens next w/Tiana

I think Disney intentionally put a Black woman in charge of the retheme and much of this is a result of her vision for how they might use Tiana in the parks. I think this will likely make the whole thing less readily/immediately appealing to people who are culturally distant from her perspective.

I think they know very well what they’re implying. They probably don’t want to make that explicit allegation because it would likely run afoul of the rules on the forum, so instead they dance around it and act haughty.

I’m not sure if you have me in mind for this, but I’m not trying to imply anything at all. It’s true that I don’t want to run afoul of forum rules. But I’m not dancing around anything.

 

[GhostHost1000]

Why not Cajun and Creole Food? Both are very much a part of the state of LA and its heritage.

Bingo. Could be a nice restaurant menu as well. Lots of good options

 

[haveyoumetmark]

A lot of veiled references to “you don’t get what Disney is doing” and “you’re not the intended audience.”

Do what are they trying to do?

Who is the intended audience?

No veiled references from me. I think it’s pretty clear that most people don’t get what Disney is doing. It’s evident in their reactions. Sentiments such as “what are they doing,” “why would they do that,” “what is the point of this,” “what are they trying to do with this,” etc, as well as all the uproar and debate around the story are all very clear and direct expressions of not getting it.

I’m not sure I get it yet either because it’s all still coming together and we have few details. I have an idea of what they’re going for like I mentioned in an earlier post, but I don’t really know that one can fully ‘get it’ until all is said and done.

I think they know very well what they’re implying. They probably don’t want to make that explicit allegation because it would likely run afoul of the rules on the forum, so instead they dance around it and act haughty.

This is projecting, as in, you are doing the very thing you are accusing others of doing. I have made statements. You are making an implication.

I get that it’s an unpopular opinion to wait and see, give the benefit of the doubt, but that’s all I’m doing.

 

[celluloid]

I get that it’s an unpopular opinion to wait and see, give the benefit of the doubt, but that’s all I’m doing.

Waiting and seeing how much people enjoy the ride and judging the writing based on the fact that it is a bad promotion are two seperate things.

A new Star Wars trailer could have "Rey, something stinks in the Galaxy, and we have to fix it" for a silly example sake, no need to look int the random too much. But it is not very well written, and people could still say "wait and see, they have an entire movie and that is just a line of a movie, a poster, a tagline etc..."

We know what they want us to know, and to be excited about, and the critique is of that.

One can just say no comment instead of waiting and seeing or not reply at all.

People waited to see the next Disney official release, and they did. We can now critique that. You don't have to wait and see for everything to give an opinion on something.

 

[LittleBuford]

No veiled references from me. I think it’s pretty clear that most people don’t get what Disney is doing. It’s evident in their reactions. Sentiments such as “what are they doing,” “why would they do that,” “what is the point of this,” “what are they trying to do with this,” etc, as well as all the uproar and debate around the story are all very clear and direct expressions of not getting it.

I'm not sure if I fall into the category you're describing here, because while I totally understand what Disney was doing by retheming Splash Mountain and why they opted to focus on Tiana's post-film life and success, I have been baffled ever since they first announced the salt-mine backstory and all that came with it. My concerns have nothing to do with unease about change, or "agendas", or anything like that, but rather with what seems to me the tonal "offness" of what they're sharing with us.

First, it feels discordant with even the most Disneyfied version of Tiana's world. While I'm not expecting historical accuracy from a Magic Kingdom attraction, their framing of the backstory is so strikingly anachronistic that it prevents me from being in any way convinced of the time and place they're ostensibly trying to conjure. The sense of dissonance is all the more pronounced because of the Imagineers' insistence that their decisions are underpinned by thorough research.

Second, the backstory feels discordant with the ride itself. The foregrounding of such themes as entrepreneurship, fair employment practices, and farming and commerce might have made sense for an Epcot attraction but seems very out of keeping with a Magic Kingdom log flume.

As I've said already, I hope my fears prove unfounded and the ride itself does not skimp on the sense of wonder, magic, and enjoyment that all of us, no matter where we stand ideologically, would want for it.

 

[celluloid]

First, it feels discordant with even the most Disneyfied version of Tiana's world. While I'm not expecting historical accuracy from a Magic Kingdom attraction, their framing of the backstory is so strikingly anachronistic that it prevents me from being in any way convinced of the time and place they're ostensibly trying to conjure. The sense of dissonance is all the more pronounced because of the Imagineers' insistence that their decisions are underpinned by thorough research.

Second, the backstory feels discordant with the ride itself. The foregrounding of such themes as entrepreneurship, fair employment practices, and farming and commerce might have made sense for an Epcot attraction but seems very out of keeping with a Magic Kingdom log flume.

Well put. It is interesting you note this, because thinking about it, this would have worked as a layover or retheme of Living with The Land more than the dynamic the ride and park are in with Splash Mountain.
It is almost as if this were a plan for that, and they decided to give her the Splash Mountain venue instead of the character put into EPCOT. Which would have fit right in with the other movie IPs that have been going in.