Jungle Cruise Re-Imagining

[1HAPPYGHOSTHOST]

The level of ignorance here is astounding: who the Andamanese/Sentinelese are; the genetic heritage of the people; the history of outside interactions with them; why they're an awful example to hold up as a supposed real-world example of Jungle Cruise representations.

Fortunately, nobody is under any obligation to correct you. It's more fun to let people make fools of themselves online, anyway.

ok, sure.

 

[1HAPPYGHOSTHOST]

The level of ignorance here is astounding: who the Andamanese/Sentinelese are; the genetic heritage of the people; the history of outside interactions with them; why they're an awful example to hold up as a supposed real-world example of Jungle Cruise representations.

Fortunately, nobody is under any obligation to correct you. It's more fun to let people make fools of themselves online, anyway.

You didn't understand my original point or why I brought up the example that I did. Their argument was that Natives did not act like how they do on the ride. That it is not historically accurate or correct. My point is not only that they did but they still do to this day. That how the natives are used and represented on the ride in theme and context for the time period the ride takes place in is appropriate. You just want to argue minor geographical semantics.

 

[Touchdown]

You didn't understand my original point or why I brought up the example that I did. Their argument was that Natives did not act like how they do on the ride. That it is not historically accurate or correct. My point is not only that they did but they still do to this day. That how the natives are used and represented on the ride in theme and context for the time period the ride takes place in is appropriate. You just want to argue minor geographical semantics.

Natives are not equal nor the same depending on geography, the idea that they are is again flawed. Human culture is very much built on a shared experience of that group that is dependent on their environment, dangers, and successes. Again you are being extremely ignorant this is not a minor geographical quibble.

 

[1HAPPYGHOSTHOST]

Natives are not equal nor the same depending on geography, the idea that they are is again flawed. Human culture is very much built on a shared experience of that group that is dependent on their environment, dangers, and successes. Again you are being extremely ignorant this is not a minor geographical quibble.

Ok, sure. Have a nice day pal.

 

[TalkingHead]

These Jungle Cruise changes are only at DL and WDW, right? But doesn't the Hong Kong ride also have indigenous figures pointing spears at the boats? Why isn't that version of the ride getting addressed?

 

[networkpro]

The biggest issue I have with SEA is the imperialism/colonialism. Maybe that is the fault of the current iteration of SEA being mostly white Europeans, but I'm not entirely sold on the idea that changing their skin color and convoluting their backstories will excuse their transgressions. It's still, at it's core, a group of people who essentially plundered other cultures for their artifacts, and then rewrote the stories of those cultures under their own perceptions. It's the antithesis of the idea of empowering cultures to tell their own stories, by again emphasizing the idea that the white explorer is more deserving of having their story told than the people who live there. The very concept that an area where a culture has lived for thousands of years has to be "explored," is just ... not a great look.

Can it be fixed? I don't know. I have a strong feeling that the new Jungle Cruise is going to put more emphasis on man versus nature and more likely the folly of man for trying to exert dominance over the Jungle. Maybe in that regard SEA gets incorporated as an antagonist, or maybe like a comic foil. A cautionary tale on the dangers of hubris. Not sure if that will work, and whether the current living members would care for it.

Not a strong case. Empires/cultures have risen and fallen across recorded history assimilating, acculturating, or even eliminating others that came in contact with them. Pick any culture, they've all got things that are repugnant when viewed through other value systems.

 

[1HAPPYGHOSTHOST]

These Jungle Cruise changes are only at DL and WDW, right? But doesn't the Hong Kong ride also have indigenous figures pointing spears at the boats? Why isn't that version of the ride getting addressed?

Disney does not own that park. It is run by a different company.

 

[TalkingHead]

Knew that was the case for Tokyo, but didn't know if it was for the China parks. Seems likely Disney would have a say in what's represented in those parks since it's their brand name. My guess is they think these specific representation issues concern American audiences more than the Asians audiences. Which raises more questions about the performative nature of it all.

 

[Animaniac93-98]

These Jungle Cruise changes are only at DL and WDW, right? But doesn't the Hong Kong ride also have indigenous figures pointing spears at the boats? Why isn't that version of the ride getting addressed?

Disney only owns outright the parks in USA and DLP. They can only make these decisions unilaterally on them, and DLP doesn't have a Jungle Cruise.

TDL and HKDL have the natives, but nothing has been said about them (and I don't expect them to change).

 

[BuzzedPotatoHead89]

The very concept that an area where a culture has lived for thousands of years has to be "explored," is just ... not a great look.

Can it be fixed? I don't know. I have a strong feeling that the new Jungle Cruise is going to put more emphasis on man versus nature and more likely the folly of man for trying to exert dominance over the Jungle. Maybe in that regard SEA gets incorporated as an antagonist, or maybe like a comic foil. A cautionary tale on the dangers of hubris. Not sure if that will work, and whether the current living members would care for it.

Agree in part, but the more I think about it I do see SEA as ultimately part of a needle threading exercise in retaining the park’s original (non-film) “real” IP which is a laudable goal.

Exploration as a concept is very prevalent as an overarching theme of the domestic and international Magic Kingdom parks as well as TDS, DAK, and even Epcot to a lesser extent. That’s a broader universal theme of the theme park division than just SEA so I would expect TWDC to try to want frame a template to frame their narrative exploration stories through the template they have in place given to meet the expectations of a their existing audience, while at the same time meeting the demands of new cultural and political sensibilities.

Also, from a nuanced perspective, while exploration has undoubtedly led to historical ills, the concept of exploration and discovery in its amoral form is not wholly worth shunning if approached in a nuanced way particularly when mindful of the target theme park audience (families and children). Can it be argued there is nothing wrong with piquing interest in “exploration” if it encourages children to become archeologists, scientists, conservationists, astronauts, etc.? This can/could be reflected in the characters of SEA.

With SEA serving as an extension of the Parks original IP for most audiences, I think there is enough room for a nuanced expansion of the current universe, both with new heroes and villains and some combination of the two, including antiheroes and/or cautionary tales for purposes of new parks branded “lore”.

The Jungle Cruise proposed changes may serve as an example of a “cautionary tale” of exploration run amok when the “jungle strikes back”(with the Chimp/boat scene overtaking the skippers boat). In this way preserving the current parks “classics” and lands within the paradigm of this evolution seems positive, and it even reduces the risk of furthering the movie-based IP encroachment into the existing lands.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Knew that was the case for Tokyo, but didn't know if it was for the China parks. Seems likely Disney would have a say in what's represented in those parks since it's their brand name. My guess is they think these specific representation issues concern American audiences more than the Asians audiences. Which raises more questions about the performative nature of it all.

It is not the case for the Chinese parks. Disney has a minority interest in them and the joint venture with the local government hires Disney to operate the parks. There was a similar arrangement with Euro Disney SCA before Disney’s complete acquisition of Disneyland Paris. This is why Disney employees get shuffled in and out of running those parks. Changes desired by Disney at Hong Kong Disneyland would either have to get the agreement of the government for funding or Disney would have to offer to cover all costs. At Tokyo Disneyland the usual arrangement is that Oriental Land Company pays for everything so Disney would again have to convince them to spend the money or offer to cover the costs.

 

[TalkingHead]

Disney only owns outright the parks in USA and DLP. They can only make these decisions unilaterally on them, and DLP doesn't have a Jungle Cruise.

TDL and HKDL have the natives, but nothing has been said about them (and I don't expect them to change).

Interesting. I would've thought Disney retained some control over what's displayed in the Disney-branded parks. I'd never thought about it before but if Chinese ownership wanted to put something offensive in the park, would Disney not have recourse to prevent that from happening?

From a distance, it does make it appear that these issues are selectively corrected -- it calls to mind how Song of the South remained in circulation in Japan well after it was yanked from distribution in the US.

I noticed that headlines in the American press openly said the changes are to correct the racism in the ride. The NPR headline was "Disney Revamp of Jungle Cruise Ride Removes Racist Depictions of Indigenous People." It stands to reason if the scenes in question exist in other Disney-branded parks, there's a bit of a mixed message being sent.
https://www.npr.org/2021/01/29/9621...-removes-racist-depictions-of-indigenous-peop

 

[Animaniac93-98]

Interesting. I would've thought Disney retained some control over what's displayed in the Disney-branded parks. I'd never thought about it before but if Chinese ownership wanted to put something offensive in the park, would Disney not have recourse to prevent that from happening?

From a distance, it does make it appear that these issues are selectively corrected -- it calls to mind how Song of the South remained in circulation in Japan well after it was yanked from distribution in the US.

I noticed that headlines in the American press openly said the changes are to correct the racism in the ride. The NPR headline was "Disney Revamp of Jungle Cruise Ride Removes Racist Depictions of Indigenous People." It stands to reason if the scenes in question exist in other Disney-branded parks, there's a bit of a mixed message being sent.
https://www.npr.org/2021/01/29/9621...-removes-racist-depictions-of-indigenous-peop

These PC changes usually happen in the American parks first and then later overseas, but not always in the others.

The chase scene in Pirates of the Caribbean, for example, was altered in 1997 stateside...but not until 20 years later in Paris. Tokyo as of now still has the Pirates chasing the girls and the original auction scene, just Johnny Depp in the barrel.

It's mixed messaging to a degree, but Disney gets away with it because the foreign audience isn't as interested in seeing these changes happen and the press doesn't care about the international parks.

 

[flynnibus]

Natives are not equal nor the same depending on geography, the idea that they are is again flawed. Human culture is very much built on a shared experience of that group that is dependent on their environment, dangers, and successes. Again you are being extremely ignorant this is not a minor geographical quibble.

So you are saying if the setting were accurate ... these characterizations would be accurate and then not problematic?

Or is it really that the location is irrelevant and people would have problems with the characters period?

Point being... you are arguing semantics that don’t actually bound what people would use to decide if its acceptable or not. Hence pointless.

 

[TalkingHead]

These PC changes usually happen in the American parks first and then later overseas, but not always in the others.

The chase scene in Pirates of the Caribbean, for example, was altered in 1997 stateside...but not until 20 years later in Paris. Tokyo as of now still has the Pirates chasing the girls and the original auction scene, just Johnny Depp in the barrel.

It's mixed messaging to a degree, but Disney gets away with it because the foreign audience isn't as interested in seeing these changes happen and the press doesn't care about the international parks.

Disney’s logic is it’s dehumanizing to include these images in the American parks where impressionable children can absorb the negative messaging. But it’s not worth addressing whether children overseas absorb those same messages because, uh, reasons. It’s kinda cynically amusing, that’s all.

 

[Kram Sacul]

Because people overseas who run the parks realize it is just a theme park ride and nothing to get butt hurt over.

The guests seem to understand this as well. No whining about inclusion and what could possibly be offensive to a handful of people on the internet. Imagine that.

 

[LittleBuford]

There’s very little whining and hyperbole coming from those in this thread who are openminded about the changes and an awful lot coming from those who are staunchly opposed to them. It’s ironic that the people repeatedly accusing others of fragility and indignation are the very ones most guilty of these behaviours.

 

[TraderSam]

Opens thread.

Looks around.

 

[Swedish Chef]

Attractions like Indiana Jones Adventure and Revenge of the Mummy are full of exaggerated or made up religious tropes, nativism and exotic otherness. Who knows if one day they'll be removed or altered too for being considered in poor taste.

But those movies are clearly depicting fictional peoples and myths, unlike JC.
Practically everyone knows there is no such thing, nor ever was such a thing, as an Army of Anubis, resurrected mummy corpses, or Brendan Fraser.

 

[Disneyson]

S.E.A. be White.

But, at least there's one woman, who has her own attraction: Mary Oceaneer.

And one of the SEA members got his comeuppance for his hubris and plundering of foreign countries: Hightower.

In The Skippers' Canteen, there are names of SEA members that seem to be African, Native Hawaiian, and Japanese.

If the new movie has any SEA connection, then with The Rock joining, it becomes less White.

And Camilia Falco, from Tokyo's Soarin', and the women in the Adventurers Club. The nasty men in the Adventurer's Club often got their comeuppance, too, especially Hathaway Browne and Otis T. Wren.

Alberta Falls, the presumed current runner of the Jungle Cruise and Skipper Canteen, as seen in the restaurant, is presumably mixed race, with her (presumably white) father, Albert Falls Jr. marrying Sneh Falls (hah hah), whose name indicates she is probably Indian and might have meet Albert Falls Jr. in a colonized India, or else elsewhere on the Mekong River, and then shipped her off to live with her grandfather in... Adventureland...

I mean I can't believe I'm going into the weeds on this, but I definitely think this would be a fun story to build out, and certainly would bring some diversity to the forefront. The only thing I can see going wrong is the overuse of a pre-recorded spiel. I think it would be helpful for some of the... less enthusiastic skippers... to hit a button during a traffic jam and have Alberta spit some joke out about the missing party. I personally really enjoyed the Mrs. Jobson storyline in KS, but I was definitely the minority. I would be really ticked if a per-recorded spiel took over the entire show, I personally think it would kill the ride in the way that it killed Movie Ride.