Jungle Cruise Re-Imagining

[Brer Oswald]

I think it was the imagery of the humorous 'native' that was the issue with Florida's Sam. I always assumed he was supposed to be South American from the hat & from having seen shrunken heads in Ecuador where I know this was practiced, though I don't know if it was also practiced historically elsewhere.

As for Trader Sam's, I don't think we need to take a "cut off your nose to spite your face" attitude and demand they change everything if they're going to change anything. Surely we can be happy if they take a reasoned and selective approach to updating attractions whether we agree with each decision rather than demanding they take a blowtorch to anything that can be read as problematic?

I think the “reasoned” approach has long been thrown out the window. People seem to go with the flow, or look for something they just don’t care for, rather than understanding the issues with particular attractions, and addressing them in a positive and reasonable approach.

 

[_caleb]

Disgusting. That’s all I have to say about the removal of Trader Sam.

“Here on Disney Jungle Cruise, park of Magic Kingdom Park at Walt Disney World Resort, we bring you the finest jokes curated from the best and brightest minds in our Diverse and Inclusive PR department. No one will be offended, but if you are, please let us know in a non-threatening manner via our online feedback form and we’ll be sure to remove the offending joke the next day. And we know funny - We currently have over 3 jokes to tell!”

Sounds like you’re offended.

 

[Smiley/OCD]

... Which is one of those things I'll really never understand.

They remove the figure but like, "We'll keep the reference so those of you in the 'know' will know - wink, wink." but who does that impress?

If it's so offensive that the character has to go, why keep any reference at all?

It's also kind of how I feel about the wench auction scene. (I'm going to bring that one up but bear with me)

Okay, times have changed and they want to get rid of that because society doesn't find the gag and the jokes appropriate anymore.

That alone should make sense to a reasonable person, even if nostalgia and innocently not having seen it as triggering to a very specific group of people until it was bluntly pointed out, made them sorry and unhappy to see it go, right?*†

Why replace it with a lame scene with no humor that has coy references to what they removed rather than just totally get rid of the original reference and replace the whole scene with something better Or in this case with Jungle Cruse, leave something behind with a reference to the character to **** people off when it reminds of them of the change they weren't thrilled with?

I feel like these changes while leaving throwback reference to what they've deemed too offensive to continue existing only ensures the controversy with fans will live on long after the changes have been made and for what?





*My first gut reaction with the bride auction, being a guy, was why is it okay to keep this mirror of that scene which reveals the fate of the men from the village while removing the woman one? The simple answer is, men being tortured for information by being lowered into a well with death as a possible outcome isn't a problem in most places while the modern day parallels for the women's scene which has both something literal and something implied going on are both not only horrible but together or individually, still a problem nearly everywhere in the world.

†Sort of like that offensive joke an old relative told you when you were a child that you didn't realize was inappropriate until many years later when you thought about the actual meaning - "but wait, what's wrong with?.. oh... I see it now "

I don't know...a MAN being lowered into a well for information kinda sounds like olden times water boarding...It's just a matter of time...

 

[Sir_Cliff]

I think the “reasoned” approach has long been thrown out the window. People seem to go with the flow, or look for something they just don’t care for, rather than understanding the issues with particular attractions, and addressing them in a positive and reasonable approach.

If that were the case, both Adventureland and Frontierland would be toast as mere concepts. They don't seem to be going quite that far.

 

[yensidtlaw1969]

Who cares though? If they wanted this obese animatronic out on a river let them. Some people may not like it but that doesn’t mean they have to get it removed.

The point is that they don't WANT to. Disney is the one looking and saying "this isn't what we want to represent".

Remember when the announcement was made about the Redhead changing? People asked "How many guests ACTUALLY ever complained about that scene??" - and the answer was . . . practically nobody. That wasn't the problem. The problem was that Disney looked and said "WE don't want to be showing people this, whether they're actively complaining about it or not".

 

[Smiley/OCD]

If Trader Sam is being auctioned off, I bid $1.

Too late...it's already in Spike's garage...waiting to list it on eBay...

 

[UNCgolf]

People who live in Mexico don't experience the U.S. tourist version of Mexico. Thus, it's not a very good presentation of Mexican culture.

Remember, EPCOT's supposed to educate, not reinforce the American-abroad tourist trap experience.

Precisely.

It's the same reason the American Adventure doesn't include a tacky roadside tourist trap selling cheap hats and t-shirts (although you can see that at Animal Kingdom if you want!). Those things are all over the United States, but it's not really what you'd want to represent as American culture.

 

[LittleBuford]

Now the bar names feel out of place.

Thematically, the bars align more with the Enchanted Tiki Room than they do with the Jungle Cruise anyway, despite the Trader Sam connection.

 

[ToTBellHop]

Thematically, the bars align more with the Enchanted Tiki Room than they do with the Jungle Cruise anyway, despite the Trader Sam connection.

True. Change out “Trader Sam’s” for “Jose’s” in each moniker and it works.

 

[LittleBuford]

True. Change out “Trader Sam’s” for “Jose’s” in each moniker and it works.

Or just leave the current name in use for the bars, which is what Disney (apparently) intends to do anyway.

I think removing the character himself from the attraction was the right move. The reactions over the last several pages (which I’m still working through) are a little surprising to me, as I thought it was already clear that Sam, in his current form at least, would not survive the planned changes.

 

[LittleBuford]

Florida’s Sam is a cartoony man with tanned skin, long hair, and a top hat. His background is ambiguous and irrelevant.

He was intended as a South American “native” and has always read that way to me.

 

[LittleBuford]

I think the “reasoned” approach has long been thrown out the window. People seem to go with the flow, or look for something they just don’t care for, rather than understanding the issues with particular attractions, and addressing them in a positive and reasonable approach.

I consider what they’re doing to the Jungle Cruise well reasoned. It’s selective and in keeping with the attraction’s original feel.

 

[LittleBuford]

Serious question: Is anyone’s enjoyment of the Jungle Cruise really contingent on the presence of this one character? People are acting as if the heart and soul of the ride have been ripped out.

 

[Brer Oswald]

I consider what they’re doing to the Jungle Cruise well reasoned. It’s selective and in keeping with the attraction’s original feel.

So do I. I think I’ve made it clear on numerous occasions that the Jungle Cruise alterations were logical, well reasoned, and the first things they should have looked at.

 

[owlsandcoffee]

Interesting. “Trader Sam” may not even be “Trader Sam” after all.

There's a delightful post on Passport2Dreams called "On Integrity" that mentions the Chief Namee saga, amongst other things.

 

[ToTBellHop]

Serious question: Is anyone’s enjoyment of the Jungle Cruise really contingent on the presence of this one character? People are acting as if the heart and soul of the ride have been ripped out.

 

[LittleBuford]

View attachment 545593

Not my intention at all! I'm genuinely curious to understand the strength of feeling expressed here about this one character.

 

[GaBoy]

Precisely.

It's the same reason the American Adventure doesn't include a tacky roadside tourist trap selling cheap hats and t-shirts (although you can see that at Animal Kingdom if you want!). Those things are all over the United States, but it's not really what you'd want to represent as American culture.

I dont know. Those tacky roadside stands were a pretty special part of my childhood. Lots of pecan logs and alligator heads putchased in my youth.

 

[ToTBellHop]

Not my intention at all! I'm genuinely curious to understand the strength of feeling expressed here about this one character.

I was joking. Seen Princess Bride?

I don’t care that deeply about Sam. As long as the new jokes are as funny as the old, I’m game. Trader Sam wasn’t the original character in MK, anyway.

 

[Giss Neric]

It would be so nice if these people who complained actually followed through on their threats to never come back to the parks again.

“There are worst things in the world than focusing on removing an animatronic”

Honey, it probably took two workers, a drill and a dolly.