Jungle Cruise Update

[_caleb]

This is going to sound harsh, so apologies in advance.

Who cares?

I’ve never questioned why I’m in an old boat in a jungle. I just am. I’m sure most people don’t question it either. Does anyone question why they’re in a Mickey Mouse cartoon? Or why they’re in Snow White world? Most just go along with it.

You can add a deep backstory to explain the “why”, but unless it was visually incorporated into the attraction from the start, it’s a bit of a wasted effort.

I do! It’s ok if you don’t though.

Stuff like this isn’t wasted on me. And I’m not alone—lots of fans like me enjoy imaginative world-building. Star Trek, Buffy the Vampire Slayer, every comic book story ever—these all have elaborate backstories and lore that make them fun for fans who care about that sort of thing. JRR Tolkien literally invented a new language as part of the backstory for his Middle Earth books. What a waste of time!

It’s fine.

 

[el_super]

I’ve never questioned why I’m in an old boat in a jungle. I just am. I’m sure most people don’t question it either. Does anyone question why they’re in a Mickey Mouse cartoon? Or why they’re in Snow White world? Most just go along with it.

So why wouldn't the opposite also be true: who cares if they add one?

You can add a deep backstory to explain the “why”, but unless it was visually incorporated into the attraction from the start, it’s a bit of a wasted effort.

Jungle Cruise always had an intricate backstory. They just ripped it off from the African Queen, so Disney didn't talk about it much.

 

[Sharon&Susan]

Jungle Cruise always had an intricate backstory. They just ripped it off from the African Queen, so Disney didn't talk about it much.

I've never heard a backstory for the Jungle Cruise that involves English missionaries or WWI Germans, please do tell.

 

[mickEblu]

So why wouldn't the opposite also be true: who cares if they add one?



Jungle Cruise always had an intricate backstory. They just ripped it off from the African Queen, so Disney didn't talk about it much.

It’s incredible. I’ve never met anyone in the universe that had the opposite take on EVERY SINGLE THING. This is like some “Unbreakable” thing right. Like am I Bruce Willis and you re Mr. Glass?

 

[el_super]

I've never heard a backstory for the Jungle Cruise that involves English missionaries or WWI Germans, please do tell.

They used the movie as the reference for designing the ride. You're right it never overtly referenced it (probably due to copyright), but the ideas behind the movie inspired the ride. So there never had to be any questions about rhe who what or why... They were in the eyes of the designers, all inspired by the movie.

It’s incredible. I’ve never met anyone in the universe that had the opposite take on EVERY SINGLE THING. This is like some “Unbreakable” thing right. Like am I Bruce Willis and you re Mr. Glass?

I dunno, maybe the bigger issue here is that you seem to take offense to every decision Disney makes?

 

[PiratesMansion]

I agree that detailed backstories shared with the public are a newer phenomenon in Disney attractions. But don’t you think the Haunted Mansion has always had a backstory? It doesn’t really have a “story” at all, does it? In a recent post, didn’t @TP2000 say something about how the Jungle Cruise doesn’t have a story? What about Big Thunder? They don’t NEED stories in order to work, but adding stories can—for some fans—make the ride more interesting and fun.

I get it, old-school fans were happy with the way things were. And these stories can be ridiculous and they always seem to try way too hard and “fill in” way too many “blanks.” But these days, fandoms run deep. Fans care about lore, canon, history, and world-building (see Star Wars, Harry Potter, Marvel, etc. etc. etc. The vast majority will indeed never even know about the backstory. But some will care about it, and they will be drawn in (as is already happening with the S.E.A. storyline in other parks).

Bloated, yes. Unnecessary, yes. But maybe fun (except for cranky people in the DL boards)!

I'd argue that the Mansion has a conceit rather than a story. There's a house that's home to 999 ghosts that you explore. It's haunted. That's really it.

There's no clear backstory beyond that, it's just a series of theories thrown into the pot by a combination of CM and guest heresay and internet pontificating that may or may not cohere together. The reason they don't cohere is that WED didn't care if there was a backstory or not. So there isn't one.

Certainly there's a series of events but I don't know if I'd call it a story.

In the development of the attraction there were discussions about scenes, about mood, but never talk of anything truly cohesive. Marc Davis, one of the ride's two designers, is on record saying that rides are not a very good story telling medium.

I get that some people enjoy the backstories. I just feel as though modern Imagineering is more interested in thinking about the backstory than how the ride experience-the thing that matters-actually fits together as a whole and with what's around it. The Imagineers of old were very much the opposite.

 

[el_super]

I get that some people enjoy the backstories. I just feel as though modern Imagineering is more interested in thinking about the backstory than how the ride experience-the thing that matters-actually fits together as a whole and with what's around it. The Imagineers of old were very much the opposite.

I don't really think backstories make much of a difference and I would agree WDI spends way more time on backstories and story bibles than they should.

But the flip side to that are the complaints that X ride doesn't make sense, doesn't belong in Y land/park, or isn't well themed or detailed. The two complaints seem really at odds.

 

[Disney Analyst]

I think a backstory developed to help influence the story they are creating is great, if it further builds the world they are trying to convey. Sometimes this is just internal for development purposes.

But it can often be sprinkled throughout the queue to help build the story before the ride.

Either way, it works for me.

 

[Brer Oswald]

So why wouldn't the opposite also be true: who cares if they add one?

Jungle Cruise always had an intricate backstory. They just ripped it off from the African Queen, so Disney didn't talk about it much.

Firstly. I don’t. As long as it isn’t a substitute for something that should be present in the attraction itself (such that I don’t need this extra context to understand the story while riding), backstory away.

Second. Is that true? Or is it just loosely inspired by it in theme and visuals?

 

[Brer Oswald]

I do! It’s ok if you don’t though.

Stuff like this isn’t wasted on me. And I’m not alone—lots of fans like me enjoy imaginative world-building. Star Trek, Buffy the Vampire Slayer, every comic book story ever—these all have elaborate backstories and lore that make them fun for fans who care about that sort of thing. JRR Tolkien literally invented a new language as part of the backstory for his Middle Earth books. What a waste of time!

It’s fine.

Fair enough.

 

[George Lucas on a Bench]

Interesting. I remember seeing a ride through of Kong and thinking it’s a little bit of a let down as a stand-alone attraction. Unlike here where it’s part of a 1 hour long tram ride. They do have the 1 AA though

And an awesome waiting line. I like it and I'm not really a fan of most recent Universal Studios attractions and I think almost everything put out by Disney since 1996 is crap, so Skull Island has to be alright.

 

[BayouShack]

I need a backstory explaining why a lush jungle outpost is just steps away from a middle America town.

I would be much more immersed if the bridge to Adventureland became a steampunk “portal” (works by taking advantage of a magical mineral found only under Missouri) designed by a Missourian inventor who wanted to give his hometown a quick way of getting to a remote outpost he fell in love with. Of course, the outpost is a fictitious island, to explain the strange juxtaposition of cultures. Oh, and then another portal takes you to the antebellum South.

I might even be inclined to buy a spirit jersey with a Mary-Blair-knockoff image of said portal!

 

[mickEblu]

They used the movie as the reference for designing the ride. You're right it never overtly referenced it (probably due to copyright), but the ideas behind the movie inspired the ride. So there never had to be any questions about rhe who what or why... They were in the eyes of the designers, all inspired by the movie.



I dunno, maybe the bigger issue here is that you seem to take offense to every decision Disney makes?

So on the flip side that would mean you are fine with every decision Disney makes? And yet seem to be content with the it staying closed forever. Curioser and curioser

Anyway, there are plenty of non Disney topics that have come on these boards, especially in this last year and I can’t recall one we agreed on. It’s just uncanny, that’s all.

 

[mickEblu]

I don't really think backstories make much of a difference and I would agree WDI spends way more time on backstories and story bibles than they should.

But the flip side to that are the complaints that X ride doesn't make sense, doesn't belong in Y land/park, or isn't well themed or detailed. The two complaints seem really at odds.

So if I say “Space Mountain doesn’t belong in Adventureland” that’s at odds with thinking back stories are annoying and pointless? I don’t get it.

 

[Zorro]

I wouldn't be surprised to find audio animatronics of Henry Winkler and the shark included in this refurb.

 

[Too Many Hats]

Okay, sure, create some characters for Jungle Cruise. IMO the attraction is long overdue for a refresh, and the recently-released artwork for the upgraded scenes actually looks pretty solid.

But Alberta Falls seems like a misfire. What is engaging or memorable about a highly competent, beautiful small business owner? Why can't she be eccentric or funny? Or a distinctive archetype, like Charlie Allnutt or Rose Sayer?

The good news is that this change will likely be scarcely noticeable. It's a missed opportunity, however.

 

[1HAPPYGHOSTHOST]

I wouldn't be surprised to find audio animatronics of Henry Winkler and the shark included in this refurb.

 

[Mac Tonight]

No offense to anyone here, but if someone legitimately needs a backstory to help explain everything they're experiencing at the park, then maybe Disneyland isn't for them.

As a writer myself, "backstory" is useful in the creation process to help really nail those details and keep me on track, BUT, if too much is needed in the finished product, I know I haven't done a good enough job communicating my vision.

Likewise, the Imagineers are and have 100% come up with lore and "backstory" for these attractions, but the true greats understood that they didn't need to hit the guests over the head with it to make the attraction work.

 

[Kram Sacul]

This is just a bad joke. And not a good-bad joke from the Jungle Cruise, but just bad-bad.

Alberta Falls and her backstory appears to be created by Imagineers who have absolutely no idea how the Jungle Cruise works. And more importantly, no idea how the audience experiences the attraction as they wait in line, load into boats, and then pivot and strain to get 4 or 5 second glimpses at the animals and funny little vignettes along the river. While a CM delivers one-liner jokes and bad puns that can be understood over the roar of diesel engine by anyone older than 8.

This new Alberta Falls backstory, even if they try and hit us over the head with it via some new queue pre-show or blatant animatronic dialogue by a riverbank Skipper, will be ignored and/or missed by 99.5% of the audience. It doesn't matter what race or ethnicity Alberta Falls is, or isn't, she won't enter the audiences mind in the least.

And then there's the poor CM's who will be forced to tell a couple of new jokes that aren't that funny but mandatorily mention Alberta Falls. No joke created by a committee from HR will ever be funny. Ever.

This is yet another example of WDI losing complete sight of how the park works, and how its audience experiences it.

Bingo. They had god knows how much time to develop something and this is the best they can come up with? I guess it’s a theme with Disney nowadays.

 

[mickEblu]

No offense to anyone here, but if someone legitimately needs a backstory to help explain everything they're experiencing at the park, then maybe Disneyland isn't for them.

As a writer myself, "backstory" is useful in the creation process to help really nail those details and keep me on track, BUT, if too much is needed in the finished product, I know I haven't done a good enough job communicating my vision.

Likewise, the Imagineers are and have 100% come up with lore and "backstory" for these attractions, but the true greats understood that they didn't need to hit the guests over the head with it to make the attraction work.

And how lame is it that they think it’s a cute and funny idea to name her Alberta Falls?