• Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
    Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.You can use your Twitter or Facebook account to sign up, or register directly.

Jungle Cruise Update

Mac Tonight

Well-Known Member
Honestly why is anyone surprised or even against Disney trying to create backstory to connect all the Disney Parks together. A connective narrative across all Disney Parks is something that a lot of Disney Park fans will likely eat up. I can understand how DL purists want DL to remain unique and independent but that isn't who Disney is anymore (and hasn't been for at least 5 decades now).

My honest opinion is this is something the storyteller in Walt would have enjoyed. Others may not agree but that is my opinion. Had he lived to see his empire grow to multiple resorts around the world it would have made sense to connect them via a backstory in someway. Now the backstory might have been better, but its very likely a backstory would have been created.

Also remember this is Disney trying to drive attendance up around the world. It gives incentives for Disney Park goers to watch the D+ shows, book trips to various resorts around the world, and to be part of the story. Its part of Disney's DNA as a company.

Personally I'm interested to see where they go with this. And for DL purists, I wouldn't worry, I highly doubt that its going to be anything more than references in the various queues around the resort. Just look at Tropical Hideaway as an example with its references to S.E.A already in place now for a couple years.
To the average guest, I believe a “connective narrative” pretty much already exists between all the parks simply by the fact that they are all Disney Theme Parks. Beyond that, I believe each park should be striving to maintain as much individual identity as possible to give guests more incentive to venture out and see what unique things they have to offer.

Simply put, when I’m in Epcot, I want to be focused on the story of Epcot and not be bombarded with “backstory” about how it also connects to Magic Kingdom, California Adventure, or Shanghai Disneyland. If that is truly the focus of WDI moving forward, then I think that’s backwards.

The parks do not need to be homogenized any more than they already are, by what equates to a bunch of Easter Eggs that might connect certain characters with certain attractions (not entire parks).

And quite frankly, if Disney feels like they have to bank on the continued implementation of things like S.E.A. in an effort to get more guests excited to visit the parks, then something is off at a pretty basic level.
 

Nirya

Well-Known Member
Honestly, if S.E.A. was just this background thing that maybe showed up from time to time but wasn't core to any story they wanted to tell, I'd probably be more OK with it. Like, if you had just put a picture of S.E.A. members up in the Tropical Hideaway and didn't make a big deal about it, that'd be fine. But writing a new backstory for an attraction and shoehorning this whole concept into it just feels incredibly wrong.
 

SteveAZee

Well-Known Member
No need to be surprised–I’m full of lame responses!

More than trying to justify garbage, I’m saying that I think there’s an audience for S.E.A. backstories (and Disney+ series) and that the whole thing is geared towards a different (and smaller) audience—a new kind of Disney geek. Whether it will resonate with that audience remains to be seen, but I believe Disney is trying to build a fandom.
To a degree it reminds of the show 'Lost'. The backstory kept getting deeper and deeper. Some stopped watching the series early because they thought it was more an adventure about crash survivors on an island, but then when there was a whole lot of 'sci'fi' stuff happening they left. Toward the end, others were annoyed by the spiritual aspect of the final episodes. I think you're right that S.E.A.'s not for everyone, but it'll appeal to some people. I think finding some interesting, deeper backstory to events that you've only seen the surface of has appeal to some people, even if it's contrived after the fact, if it's done well. People just like to find meaning in things.
 

_caleb

Well-Known Member
To a degree it reminds of the show 'Lost'. The backstory kept getting deeper and deeper. Some stopped watching the series early because they thought it was more an adventure about crash survivors on an island, but then when there was a whole lot of 'sci'fi' stuff happening they left. Toward the end, others were annoyed by the spiritual aspect of the final episodes. I think you're right that S.E.A.'s not for everyone, but it'll appeal to some people. I think finding some interesting, deeper backstory to events that you've only seen the surface of has appeal to some people, even if it's contrived after the fact, if it's done well. People just like to find meaning in things.
LOST is a good example. To many (most?) viewers, it was just too much— too convoluted and unrealistic. But I remember watching it when it aired, and we had so much fun looking for easter eggs, speculating about plot twists, and finding connections (even some that weren’t really there).
 

SteveAZee

Well-Known Member
LOST is a good example. To many (most?) viewers, it was just too much— too convoluted and unrealistic. But I remember watching it when it aired, and we had so much fun looking for easter eggs, speculating about plot twists, and finding connections (even some that weren’t really there).
Yes, and tons of fan sites breaking down each episode, ordering events chronologically back to the start of the island, character histories... I think I still have some of the links. 😁
 

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
No need to be surprised–I’m full of lame responses!

More than trying to justify garbage, I’m saying that I think there’s an audience for S.E.A. backstories (and Disney+ series) and that the whole thing is geared towards a different (and smaller) audience—a new kind of Disney geek. Whether it will resonate with that audience remains to be seen, but I believe Disney is trying to build a fandom.
I’m not saying people won’t get into backstories but in order to really hook people you need meaningful content. So far SEA isn’t appealing to some “new” fan but the large contingent of Disney fans that obsess over “obscure” things (e.g. Orange Bird or Oswald). Despite being a thing for over a decade now it’s still little more than “these things are actually connected” like a lame fan theory that seeks to connect a bunch of tv shows and movies. Yeah, they may actually come up with some big grand story that really works and has interesting content but the past 15+ years has been increasingly bad character names and an insistence that they are totally connected to each other in some way.
 

_caleb

Well-Known Member
I’m not saying people won’t get into backstories but in order to really hook people you need meaningful content. So far SEA isn’t appealing to some “new” fan but the large contingent of Disney fans that obsess over “obscure” things (e.g. Orange Bird or Oswald). Despite being a thing for over a decade now it’s still little more than “these things are actually connected” like a lame fan theory that seeks to connect a bunch of tv shows and movies. Yeah, they may actually come up with some big grand story that really works and has interesting content but the past 15+ years has been increasingly bad character names and an insistence that they are totally connected to each other in some way.
I totally agree with this! When I say the S.E.A. is for a new audience, I mean a new kind of audience compared to the “It’s just a fun ride at Disneyland-no backstory needed” crowd.

The S.E.A. backstory could go either way; some things point to it being done well (subtle-almost hidden reference in the parks, not required to follow a ride’s story), other things point to it being really corny and dumb (like you said–the names of the characters, literally everything being connected, etc.).

I’m hopeful that by making it a Disney+ series they can properly craft it all as a vaguely-connected storyline that kids get excited about.
 

Disney Irish

Premium Member
To the average guest, I believe a “connective narrative” pretty much already exists between all the parks simply by the fact that they are all Disney Theme Parks. Beyond that, I believe each park should be striving to maintain as much individual identity as possible to give guests more incentive to venture out and see what unique things they have to offer.

Simply put, when I’m in Epcot, I want to be focused on the story of Epcot and not be bombarded with “backstory” about how it also connects to Magic Kingdom, California Adventure, or Shanghai Disneyland. If that is truly the focus of WDI moving forward, then I think that’s backwards.

The parks do not need to be homogenized any more than they already are, by what equates to a bunch of Easter Eggs that might connect certain characters with certain attractions (not entire parks).

And quite frankly, if Disney feels like they have to bank on the continued implementation of things like S.E.A. in an effort to get more guests excited to visit the parks, then something is off at a pretty basic level.
Except we aren't talking about entire parks like you mention, but rather individual attractions within the Parks that would be connected together via Easter eggs.

Also at this point what is the "story" of EPCOT? Its lost most if not all of what its original story was, but I digress.
 

aliceismad

Well-Known Member
The parks do not need to be homogenized any more than they already are, by what equates to a bunch of Easter Eggs that might connect certain characters with certain attractions (not entire parks).
Is there something wrong with Easter Eggs though? Some people love them. They love the Master Gracey and bride narrative of the Haunted Mansion. They love the history of Mary Blair in small world. They love Walt's office. They love tiny things no one notices like the little man of Disneyland. They love the basketball court in the Matterhorn. They love overlaps in Disney and Pixar films. For people who don't care, they can enjoy the rides without noticing or hearing about any Easter Eggs, but they're there for the people who hunt. Like hidden Mickeys.
 
Last edited:

Mac Tonight

Well-Known Member
Except we aren't talking about entire parks like you mention, but rather individual attractions within the Parks that would be connected together via Easter eggs.

Also at this point what is the "story" of EPCOT? Its lost most if not all of what its original story was, but I digress.
Forgive me, I must have misinterpreted when you suggested "a connective narrative across all Disney Parks" to mean the parks themselves. Having said that, I really don't think all the Jungle Cruises across the world need to be "linked together" as you say, any more than they already are by proxy of being, well, Jungle Cruises.

If, from their inception they had been designed at the same time as JC1, JC2, JC3, etc where, when combined, they helped tell a larger narrative, that would be one thing. But they weren't, and I think Disney is trying too hard to retcon in these "connective narratives" and acting like it was always meant to be that way. (Pixar Theory anyone?) Not everyone will have the luxury of visiting every Park across the globe, so bottom line, they need to be focusing on making each individual experience the best it can be. Once that's accomplished, fine, throw in an Easter Egg to people "in the know", but don't try to make it the main story and let it distract from the base product.

As far as Epcot goes... that was a poor example. Don't get me started :/
 

Disney Irish

Premium Member
Forgive me, I must have misinterpreted when you suggested "a connective narrative across all Disney Parks" to mean the parks themselves. Having said that, I really don't think all the Jungle Cruises across the world need to be "linked together" as you say, any more than they already are by proxy of being, well, Jungle Cruises.

If, from their inception they had been designed at the same time as JC1, JC2, JC3, etc where, when combined, they helped tell a larger narrative, that would be one thing. But they weren't, and I think Disney is trying too hard to retcon in these "connective narratives" and acting like it was always meant to be that way. (Pixar Theory anyone?) Not everyone will have the luxury of visiting every Park across the globe, so bottom line, they need to be focusing on making each individual experience the best it can be. Once that's accomplished, fine, throw in an Easter Egg to people "in the know", but don't try to make it the main story and let it distract from the base product.

As far as Epcot goes... that was a poor example. Don't get me started :/
Once again that is not what is being talked about here, its not linking ALL JC rides around the world. What is being talked about is providing backstory for various attractions around the globe to be linked together into one larger story about S.E.A. This is already being done at Disney Parks around the world including DLR itself with BTMRR and Tropical Hideaway, its just now expanding the backstory for JC at DLR and WDW.

I suggest reading up on S.E.A if you want more information:

 

Mac Tonight

Well-Known Member
Is there something wrong with Easter Eggs though? Some people love them. They love the Master Gracey and bride narrative of the Haunted Mansion. They love the history of Mary Blair in small world. They love Walt's office. They love tiny things no one notices like the little man of Disneyland. They love the basketball court in the Matterhorn. They love overlaps in Disney and Pixar films. For people who don't care, they can enjoy the rides without noticing or heard in about any Easter Eggs, but they're there for the people who hunt. Like hidden Mickeys.
Don't get me wrong, I love a good Easter Egg. In fact, I try and spot them whenever I'm at the parks.
But, that's all they should be. Bits of insider trivia, or "blink and you'll miss it" moments in the background. Once they transition from that to the foreground and become part of the main narrative, then they cease to be Easter Eggs.

We know there is a half-basketball court inside the Matterhorn, but the Yeti doesn't wear a jersey or bounce a ball around.
After all, there's a reason they're called Hidden Mickeys. :)
 

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
Is there something wrong with Easter Eggs though? Some people love them. They love the Master Gracey and bride narrative of the Haunted Mansion. They love the history of Mary Blair in small world. They love Walt's office. They love tiny things no one notices like the little man of Disneyland. They love the basketball court in the Matterhorn. They love overlaps in Disney and Pixar films. For people who don't care, they can enjoy the rides without noticing or heard in about any Easter Eggs, but they're there for the people who hunt. Like hidden Mickeys.
I think Hidden Mickeys are a great example of Easter Eggs gone awry. It has gone from this thing done here and there, actually hidden and placed by the designer, often when a circular motif was being used to something intentionally forced into all sorts of places. Easter eggs shouldn’t be something required and they should not displace details, those small things that further the story.
 
Last edited:

Mac Tonight

Well-Known Member
Once again that is not what is being talked about here, its not linking ALL JC rides around the world. What is being talked about is providing backstory for various attractions around the globe to be linked together into one larger story about S.E.A. This is already being done at Disney Parks around the world including DLR itself with BTMRR and Tropical Hideaway, its just now including a larger backstory for JC.

I suggest reading up on S.E.A if you want more information:

Thanks, but I fully know about S.E.A and it's integration around the world (I provided that same link already ;) )

Ultimately, this just boils down to taste, and all I'm saying is I feel it's mainstream implementation is unnecessary outside of background trivia. Obviously there is a show in the works so it's a losing battle. What can you do?
 

PiratesMansion

Well-Known Member
Forgive me, I must have misinterpreted when you suggested "a connective narrative across all Disney Parks" to mean the parks themselves. Having said that, I really don't think all the Jungle Cruises across the world need to be "linked together" as you say, any more than they already are by proxy of being, well, Jungle Cruises.

If, from their inception they had been designed at the same time as JC1, JC2, JC3, etc where, when combined, they helped tell a larger narrative, that would be one thing. But they weren't, and I think Disney is trying too hard to retcon in these "connective narratives" and acting like it was always meant to be that way. (Pixar Theory anyone?) Not everyone will have the luxury of visiting every Park across the globe, so bottom line, they need to be focusing on making each individual experience the best it can be. Once that's accomplished, fine, throw in an Easter Egg to people "in the know", but don't try to make it the main story and let it distract from the base product.

As far as Epcot goes... that was a poor example. Don't get me started :/
I don't think the intention was ever to link the Jungle Cruises specifically, just to link different (ostensibly) thematically-similar attractions together. So far there's something of a common adventure theme linking the SEA attractions.

While I agree that they should be focusing on making the individual experience the best it can be, I don't see the harm necessarily in trying to make people aware of and want to visit the other parks around the globe; indeed, I think so much of this fandom is overly provincial in regards to *THEIR* park above all others, how dare anyone even entertain the idea that anything could possibly be better at another park or work just fine when it's not exactly like what they know and love? But SEA isn't the thing to change that, especially as it becomes more and more submerged in the worst instincts and decisions of modern WDI.
 

Mac Tonight

Well-Known Member
I don't think the intention was ever to link the Jungle Cruises specifically, just to link different (ostensibly) thematically-similar attractions together. So far there's something of a common adventure theme linking the SEA attractions.

While I agree that they should be focusing on making the individual experience the best it can be, I don't see the harm necessarily in trying to make people aware of and want to visit the other parks around the globe; indeed, I think so much of this fandom is overly provincial in regards to *THEIR* park above all others. But SEA isn't the thing to change that, especially as it becomes more and more submerged in the worst instincts and decisions of modern WDI.
Oh trust me, S.E.A implementation is among my least concern with modern WDI.

And it would make sense for all Adventure themed attractions to be associated with the Society of Explorers and Adventurers ;)
 

Disney Irish

Premium Member
Thanks, but I fully know about S.E.A and it's integration around the world (I provided that same link already ;) )

Ultimately, this just boils down to taste, and all I'm saying is I feel it's mainstream implementation is unnecessary outside of background trivia. Obviously there is a show in the works so it's a losing battle. What can you do?
Then if you know about S.E.A and understand there is a TV show in the works, then I don't understand where you think this is linking all JC attractions together around the globe. That isn't what is happening, and not at all what I posted.

Anyways, I agree it all boils down to preference. My original point was that its not likely to be anything more than some Easter Eggs in the queues anyways, so its not going to ruin any experience for those that don't want to participate.
 

el_super

Well-Known Member
I don't think the intention was ever to link the Jungle Cruises specifically, just to link different (ostensibly) thematically-similar attractions together. So far there's something of a common adventure theme linking the SEA attractions.

In a meta way it was meant to connect all the attractions, because the attractions were all created by WDI, and SEA was in part, a way of giving credit to some of the Imagineers at WDI. Like many other WDI projects, the "backstory" came about mostly as a way of explaining the simple in-universe credits being given out.
 

mandstaft

Well-Known Member
Why didn’t they just go all out and make the new Jungle Cruise a story about all S.E.A. characters? Was that not a missed opportunity compared to the one that will be told?
 

Mac Tonight

Well-Known Member
Then if you know about S.E.A and understand there is a TV show in the works, then I don't understand where you think this is linking all JC attractions together around the globe. That isn't what is happening, and not at all what I posted.

Anyways, I agree it all boils down to preference. My original point was that its not likely to be anything more than some Easter Eggs in the queues anyways, so its not going to ruin any experience for those that don't want to participate.
Once again, I probably misinterpreted what you said: "We aren't talking about entire parks like you mention, but rather individual attractions within the Parks that would be connected together via Easter eggs."

It's not a huge leap to assume that if S.E.A is going to be connected with one Jungle Cruise in one park, it would also need to be linked to all the other Jungle Cruises. Per that website, both Big Thunder Mountain Railroads have the same S.E.A connection in DL and MK. Though surprisingly, there is no mention of anything relating to the Big Thunder's in Tokyo or Paris.
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Top Bottom