Jungle Cruise Update

[1HAPPYGHOSTHOST]

I'll take a stab at it.

A theme is a loose guiding principle. Things are selected that blend together and fit appropriately, but there's not necessarily a concern that the details inform one another or are of any specific importance other than to set a mood, establish an ambiance, or be consistent with the parameters of the area or scene.

A backstory, by contrast, attempts to specifically tie together and quantify each of these items and give them individual importance and a history. It tries to answer why, specifically, each prop is chosen, where it came from, what greater signficance it has, what the history of the building the prop is in has been up to this point, how that building fits in with what's around it and why, etc.

You might consider two Frontierlands as a contrast of these two approaches.

Frontierland, Disneyland, themed: It's the wild west! Therefore, anything that might fit your idea of the wild west is appropriate.

Frontierland, Disneyland Paris, backstoried: It's an old western town called Thunder Mesa, established in year _____ by the Ravenswoods, who set up a gold mine in Big Thunder Mountain, and it's now year ____. Oh, by the way, their house is over there on the hill, but you'll want to stay away as strange things have happened there, and...

When done well, a theme is freeing because you have more options available to you, and many visitors don't care about the backstories anyway. But it may not necessarily be as focused. Undoubtedly there are people at WDI now who seem to feel they NEED that focus to go forward.

Backstories CAN be done well-pretty much all of Disneyland Paris is a shining example of that-but can become convoluted and samey very easily or become fanservice-y in a detrimental way; see, IMO, the continued expansion of SEAS. After a certain point it often becomes more information than the average person needs to appreciate the thing, and then it might seem like too much exposition. It might also put unnecessary or arbitrary limitations on something in a way that a theme would not-the 1930's setting of Jungle Cruise, as an example, or become more important than the actual guest experience. It's my view that modern Imagineers too often forget the power of simplicity with their focus on backstories, and part of the reason the old classics work is that they are presented in a way that is straightforward.

Hopefully that makes sense.

Damn. Well said and explained.

 

[mickEblu]

And you want it open but seem to hate everything they are putting into it? Weird.




Space Mountain has a backstory. Every Disney attraction does. If I put a bunch of broken space ship parts around the Jungle Cruise is it space themed?

Why is that weird? Do their current decisions suddenly erase the 55+ good years that came before?

 

[Kram Sacul]

Wait until you see how Immersive they make it when Alberta Falls is actually Red's sister. One became a River Boat Captain, the other a Pirate. But both were...Empowered Women! And they'll meet in The Haunted Mansion where Constance Hatchaway, their grandmother, once resided!

This is so dumb and brilliant I’m sure the marketing nerds have already thought of it and are ready to slap it on a t-shirt.

Constance, Redd and now Alberta. Maybe they’ll come up with another badly written shoehorned female character for Big Thunder someday to complete the set.

 

[Nirya]

My opinion on backstory is that the Silmarillion ruined writing for the next century by convincing a generation of writers that having a huge backstory was important.

 

[Brer Oswald]

Why is that weird? Do their current decisions suddenly erase the 55+ good years that came before?

Yes. If you don’t worship Star Wars and Marvel, you are not a real Disney fan.

Or at least...that’s what it’s felt like for the past 6 years.

 

[Disney Irish]

BTW, in case no one has picked up on it. The likely reason for a lot of these "backstory updates" to a lot of classic attractions is to add connective tissue for this:

Ronald D. Moore to Develop Magic Kingdom TV Universe at Disney Plus

Ronald D. Moore is in the process of developing TV projects at Disney Plus that will be set in Disney's Magic Kingdom

variety.com

More things in the Parks are going to lead into D+, and D+ is going to lead more into the Parks. Its like the classic days of ABC and Disneyland.

Anyways just thought I'd bring it up, carry on.

 

[_caleb]

Perhaps. I'm still not convinced that a backstory solves all of their problems though. I think too much backstory runs the risk of pinning down an attraction that's always been, to a point, open-ended.

I think you’re right, a backstory will not solve ALL the problems. But it seems to me that the open-endedness of the Jungle Cruise has been a big part of the cultural/racial insensitivity problems that the new changes are trying to address. If the attraction had more of a story (and an established backstory), maybe there would have been some context given to the questionable scenes (natives, excursion party on a pole, etc.). This is kind of what Trader Sam’s backstory (through the tiki bars/Skipper Canteen) tried to do.

 

[1HAPPYGHOSTHOST]

I think you’re right, a backstory will not solve ALL the problems. But it seems to me that the open-endedness of the Jungle Cruise has been a big part of the cultural/racial insensitivity problems that the new changes are trying to address. If the attraction had more of a story (and an established backstory), maybe there would have been some context given to the questionable scenes (natives, excursion party on a pole, etc.). This is kind of what Trader Sam’s backstory (through the tiki bars/Skipper Canteen) tried to do.

 

[George Lucas on a Bench]

This is so dumb and brilliant I’m sure the marketing nerds have already thought of it and are ready to slap it on a t-shirt.

Constance, Redd and now Alberta. Maybe they’ll come up with another badly written shoehorned female character for Big Thunder someday to complete the set.

A Calamity Jane type, but far sexier and marketable, probably biracial and unrealistically progressive to really score some Woke Points. Maybe a Mexican Senorita who is the greatest gunfighter with the biggest sombrero The West has ever seen. And she owns a chicken farm that exports to the Caribbean...

 

[1HAPPYGHOSTHOST]

A Calamity Jane type, but far sexier and marketable, probably biracial and unrealistically progressive to really score some Woke Points. Maybe a Mexican Senorita who is the greatest gunfighter with the biggest sombrero The West has ever seen. And she owns a chicken farm that exports to the Caribbean...

and a lesbian because you know, empowerment.

 

[SuddenStorm]

We enjoy ourselves here, despite some of us not being happy with the direction Disneyland is going here. I don’t see you often here in the DL forum but the vibe is different here. We can be negative and miserable but have good and interesting discussions.

In fact, being negative and miserable is what we're known for over here. It's our claim to fame.

Literally a hive of miserable bastards.

 

[Kram Sacul]

and a lesbian because you know, empowerment.

Put a baseball cap on her and a boys name for extra stunning and brave points.

 

[Darkbeer1]

Chicken Farm, or a Chicken Ranch?

Bet it is located in Pahrump, Nevada.

 

[Californian Elitist]

In fact, being negative and miserable is what we're known for over here. It's our claim to fame.

Literally a hive of miserable bastards.

And I wouldn’t have it any other way. I’ve taken a peek at the overly hyped, extremely positive and giddy forums elsewhere and they’re nauseating. The blind fondness for any and everything Disney puts out is a lot sometimes. I’d rather discuss with folks who can critique and give intelligent, sound opinions regarding the parks and Disney in general, even if I might disagree with them.

 

[BayouShack]

A Calamity Jane type, but far sexier and marketable, probably biracial and unrealistically progressive to really score some Woke Points. Maybe a Mexican Senorita who is the greatest gunfighter with the biggest sombrero The West has ever seen. And she owns a chicken farm that exports to the Caribbean...

and a lesbian because you know, empowerment.

Good thing they didn’t build Thunder Mountains in the Chinese parks. That would ruin our chances of the first LGBTQ character in the Disney theme park shared universe.

 

[SuddenStorm]

Ok but promise me if I go that you ll learn the difference between a backstory and theme? I just couldn’t bear to leave this site thinking that someone that spends this much time here doesn’t know how to distinguish between the two.

Thank you for mentioning the chicken dialogue. And the auction scene in general, because it shows WDI's lack of ability to create a scene that reads instantly- which was perhaps Marc Davis's greatest strength.

Here's the original auction scene-

Floating through, the scene reads visually instantaneously. They're auctioning the ladies, and the auctioneer is trying to sell the bigger one, while the onlookers want the more traditionally beautiful one. Riders don't tend to listen to the dialogue on rides, it has to read visually with the audio acting as reinforcement. And the original script for this scene does a wonderful job strengthening the gag with witty humor. Not to mention Paul Frees's voice acting.

When redesigning the scene WDI didn't seem to care that the staging was done for that single gag. So without that gag, the scene is now a confusing mess that doesn't read visually at all. It's not immediately apparent that she's holding chickens, or that they're auctioning chickens. It's confusing, and makes less sense the more you think about it- the pirates are auctioning stolen goods to other pirates? Why would pirates want chickens? What's Redd doing there? Why are they saying they want rum when they all already have bottles? Not to mention Redd's lack of exaggerated features found on the other pirates, creating an artistic clash. And, the awful voice acting.

The scene's revision was to 1) Remove a gag that's considered outdated and 2) Introduce a strong female character so young girls can see someone aspirational in the ride. Both were done poorly and the scene is far worse then what Marc Davis was able to dream up in the '60s. So now the scene won't offend anyone, but it's also boring and forgettable.

I worry the Jungle Cruise will suffer a similar fate. The additions won't be offensive to anyone- but what they're replaced with will be boring, forgettable, and poorly executed. This Alberta Falls nonsense doesn't give me hope. Also, I guarantee you she'll be a walk around character like Redd. Jungle Cruise as it stands reads visually instantly.

 

[celluloid]

Well said. Unless something is really special in quality, no one is likely going to ride the new version after years of not going or never going before and think it was anything more amazing than what was there prior.

Guests are smarter than many executive leadership choices give them credit for. People know what they like and what they don't like. Going genuine is always better than simply pandering.

 

[el_super]

Both were done poorly and the scene is far worse then what Marc Davis was able to dream up in the '60s.

Weird take. I would say that the design of a scene that is so offense it has to be removed would meet the criteria for poorly done... Right?

 

[el_super]

Guests are smarter than many executive leadership choices give them credit for. People know what they like and what they don't like. Going genuine is always better than simply pandering.

At some level I agree, but the problem is that we probably disagree with who we think they are pandering to. Jungle Cruise has problems that need to be fixed, but because of their reliance on history and nostalgia, they are still trying to salvage the Jungle Cruise IP instead of just ripping it out entirely.

They people they are pandering to are Disney fans.

 

[PiratesMansion]

Weird take. I would say that the design of a scene that is so offense it has to be removed would meet the criteria for poorly done... Right?

His point is that the original scene was much easier to understand immediately.

So even if you take issue with the content and/or message of the scene, it was better designed because the point was directly conveyed to the audience. There's too much going on in the scene that exists now-what is the message? How is it conveyed? Even if you like the scene that exists now, it's certainly more muddled and less straightforward than what was there before.