(RUMOR) Rivers Of Light to end in 2020 replaced with new show featuring Disney characters

[tribbleorlfl]

That would be a shame, since what I've seen and heard of the show makes it sound wonderful (tried to see it 2 weeks ago but standby seating was filled). It does, however, seem a bit "high concept" and I can understand if the story and theme are being lost on the younger set. That doesn't mean you scrap the show completely in favor of IP and characters, though, you just tweak the show to make it more accessible to more people.

 

[HMF]

I think if people don't understand the theme behind the show (Millenium turning over) they still feel emotional while watching it for other reasons. Possibly because they are inside the show rather than just watching it while facing one direction?

There is nothing in the show explicitly about the Millennium change which is why it has lasted 17 years later. It's about the history of our planet and how together we can create a better future. That's timeless and would be a very devastating loss if it were to be replaced especially with world events lately.

 

[raven]

There is nothing in the show explicitly about the Millennium change which is why it has lasted 17 years later. It's about the history of our planet and how together we can create a better future. That's timeless and would be a very devastating loss if it were to be replaced especially with world events lately.

The only reference to the Milennium, not caught by many, is the phrase "another thousand circles 'round the sun" from the song Promise which is usually played after the show. But yes, the show has a resounding we-can-achieve-this-together theme which is wonderful.

 

[Lets Respect]

I haven't seen RoL, although I did watch it a few times on YT. It didn't seem that great. The reviews seemed meh too.

I could see this getting switched out for more characters

I don't think it's just about the toddler demographic though. A lot of adults go to WDW for the characters and movies.

This show just seems to be a flop for some reason. That's ok. Not everything will work

 

[rushtest4echo]

BREAKING:
In several years a show may or may not go away and we may see something that goes in a new direction creatively and may cut/use technology that people may or may not like.

Can be applied to any park at any time. This is one of the most worthless rumors I've ever seen. We've been hearing the exact same thing at Magic Kingdom for years (which is finally happening). We've been hearing it for over a decade at EPCOT (remains to be seen). We've even seem Sorcery in the Sky come and go on an off again before bowing out for Frozen/Star Wars. Disney's other resorts usually swap and re-do night time shows with much higher frequency than WDW so it wouldn't be surprising at all for them to at least PLAN for Rivers of Light to be updated and/or completely redone after a 4 or 5 year run.

We already know that Disney's night time shows over the past decade have a shorter shelf life than Fantasmic, Reflections of Earth or Fantasy in the Sky- why would Rivers of Light be any different? Rivers of Light (once everything is reliable) is about as changeable as World of Color. Remove/retheme the petals from the lotus floats, overlay the storyteller's boats, and come up with some appropriate overlay/redo for the Animal floats and you've got a blank canvas for a new show.


By the way, did anyone catch the show stop on Saturday night's second show? Seemed to stop at exactly the same moment that it did during the second night of previews. I was near the bridge and didn't notice if the floats bumped again (the bridge, BTW, actually has the very best view of the big water screens- the clarity from there is somewhat of a revelation compared to the color blobs seen around much of the normal seating areas).

They didn't attempt a restart since the park had already been closed for 45 minutes. Has there been any other show stops since previews, and have they ever not restarted one?

 

[brb1006]

That would be a shame, since what I've seen and heard of the show makes it sound wonderful (tried to see it 2 weeks ago but standby seating was filled). It does, however, seem a bit "high concept" and I can understand if the story and theme are being lost on the younger set. That doesn't mean you scrap the show completely in favor of IP and characters, though, you just tweak the show to make it more accessible to more people.

I better Tokyo Disneysea could do a better version of this show.

 

[Magenta Panther]

In today's recent episode of @lentesta's of Disney Dish Podcast with Jim Hill titled "Stories We'll Tell in 2018" for Walt Disney World . Jim brought up that Rivers Of Life will run until 2020 at Animal Kingdom. What's also brought up is that a new show featuring Disney characters is set to debut in 2021 in time for Walt Disney World's 50th Anniversary. Not that much is know about this show so far.

It's also reported that Rivers Of Light is doing poorly with preschool aged children which is the key demographic for the company.

I do not agree that preschool-age children are THE key demo for the Walt Disney Company. Do the suits at Disney really believe that?

 

[Magenta Panther]

Another reminder of why being dead focused on little kids leads to terrible decisions: Kids being bored during test screenings almost lead to The Little Mermaid losing "Part of Your World". Howard Ashman fought Katzenberg hard in order to keep that number in the movie and it paid off.

That's a great story, isn't it? Reminiscent of how "Over The Rainbow" was cut 2 times during pre-screenings of "The Wizard of Oz". Thank God that in both cases wiser heads prevailed.

 

[rushtest4echo]

I better Tokyo Disneysea could do a better version of this show.

Fantasmic over there is a complete train wreck. Far worse than DHS's is compared to the original (which may end up a train wreck too in a few months). DHS may in fact actually have the best Fantasmic soon enough ironically. Don't let the effects and concept arts at Disneysea fool you about Fantasmic. The show is a complete disaster flow/story/music wise.

I'd love to see some of their effects imported over to the US, but the show as a whole is garbage. Even Tokyo's show-obsessed fans don't care for it. When you can't do a character parade masked as a show at Tokyo properly, you've got major problems.

BTW, If you don't want IP crammed into shows that have no business having IP, STAY AWAY FROM TDS.

 

[21stamps]

I do not agree that preschool-age children are THE key demo for the Walt Disney Company. Do the suits at Disney really believe that?

I would say their key demographic is families..especially with younger children.
There's not much that has more power in making someone open their wallet than their own child's Wishes and Requests.lol
From pirate cruises, pirate's league, to BBB, to character meals, merchandise, movies, and the request for the trip itself. A trip to Disney is almost like a right of passage for a child...the company has tricked us into believing that

 

[the.dreamfinder]

BTW, If you don't want IP crammed into shows that have no business having IP, STAY AWAY FROM TDS.

Rivers of Duffy

 

[Cmdr_Crimson]

Maybe they can finally have a better use for Pocahontas for it...Instead of the obscure use in Fantasmic..

 

[rushtest4echo]

By the way, in addition to the show stop on Saturday, I noticed something quite amazing with the subpar lasers/projections.

This show needs to be experienced when the wind is blowing steadily toward the audience. The projections and lasers looked stunning in windy conditions. It's funny, because I've seen various shows of World of Color and Fantasmic in the wind and the screens suffer- but here it adds so much to their abilities. The wind blew mist toward the theater, causing the lasers to fan out over the audience during the aurora and the lotus segments. It reminded me of IllumiNations newer lasers and how they play with the hanging smoke to create a much wider landscape of light. It was beautiful. Even the lights on the smaller lotus floats played with the mist and the big spotlights were far more visible than normal. I recall seeing a picture where people were questioning whether or not they were using smoke/fog effects to help the lighting out better- I'm assuming that instead of it being effects like that, the photo in question was taken on another windy way. Maybe they could rig up some massive blowers behind the water screens to achieve this effect more often. The projections all around looked brighter and more clear (somewhat odd. but it happened).

Now if they could just make the screens meet in the middle properly throughout the entire show!

 

[the.dreamfinder]

Maybe they can finally have a better use for Pocahontas for it...Instead of the obscure use in Fantasmic..

Pocahontas is an underrated gem IMHO.

 

[Oddysey]

I waited an hour and was lucky enough to get a front row seat for the Saturday's 10:00pm showing. It was nice and I really enjoyed the ambiance of the theater. However, in my opinion, the show is much weaker than Fantasmic, and RoE. In fact, they are not even in the same league. Although this is likely by design as to not upset the sleeping patterns of Animal Kingdoms tenants with pyrotechnics.

All said, I must admit that the show abruptly ending 3/4 of the way through may have impacted my opinion. Even though I missed the last 1/4 I do not have any plans to wait for another viewing. Because of this I can only conclude that I was underwhelmed.

 

[DDLand]

This is probably a silly rumor, but it still raises eyebrows.

Wasn't Disney's Animal Kingdom designed to be more of a mature artistic park in the first place? It dealt with themes like death, man's hubris, and the potentially lethal power of nature. There have been poachers, Dinosaurs, Angry Mystical Beasts, and illegal deforestation. There's relics of colonialism, destructive exploitation in nature, unethical scienctific methods, and blatant disregard for cultural and even legal customs.

Man's relationship with the Earth can be messy and even scary. Sometimes nature itself can be destructive. While a crucial part of Animal Kingdom is learning to appreciate these nuances, the park remains strikingly mature. Perhaps even PG-13 in certain regards.

So all of a sudden they're going to back down from the direction they've taken for nearly two decades and sell out?

Seems strange.

 

[Figments Friend]

I do not agree that preschool-age children are THE key demo for the Walt Disney Company. Do the suits at Disney really believe that?

From a business perspective, targeting toddlers and their young parents is a demographic that is often associated with people willing to 'spend out' more on a vacation then those with older children or teens.

Mommy and Daddy will likely be more open to spending quite a bit of money on adorable little tykes' 'first trip to WDW' with extra money being thrown at character dining experiences, Princess makeovers, merchandise sales, and all the other trappings directly marketed to them.

I've seen it myself many times in the Parks over the years....obviously new parents going crazy in the spending department to indulge their little one(s) in what they feel needs to be done or bought....for a kid so young he / she will likely not even remember it in the future.
A lot of new parents really go nuts for the brood at WDW.

It is no surprise Disney targets this demographic...there are truckloads of potential money to be made there.
The marketing for taking your toddler to the Parks really kicked in about ten to twelve years ago....the ads used to make me gag a little.
Drippy, sticky cute imagery with slogans along the lines of 'take them now while they still believe'....' Don't let them miss the Magic!' .....etc.

Disney Marketing was sending the message loud and clear that WDW is for little kids and their parents who want to enjoy seeing their child enjoy the Parks.
Anyone older then 6 or 8 is considerd 'too old' by this twisted thought process and more likely to want to go to Universal instead.
Yes, this was the mentality...and still is for some.

WDW is for everyone, no matter the age, but so many have been led to believe otherwise due to this king of marketing.



The reality of course is that taking a toddler to WDW is incredibly overwhelming in many cases for the poor child..not to mention a real tap on the energy and sanity of the parents.
We have all seen the scene of the toddler passed out cold, asleep in a stroller while the parents watch the nightly fireworks.
We have all seen 'commando touring' families get stressed out and start yelling at each other...and fussy, hot n' tired toddlers.
What kind of vacation is that...?

I tell everyone who asks me when is a good time to take kids to WDW - wait until your child is at least 6 before even considering it.
8 to 10 is a good time, as they are aware of things, will remember experiences, and in most cases are tall enough to ride all of the Attractions.

-

 

[Figments Friend]

I would say their key demographic is families..especially with younger children.
There's not much that has more power in making someone open their wallet than their own child's Wishes and Requests.lol
From pirate cruises, pirate's league, to BBB, to character meals, merchandise, movies, and the request for the trip itself. A trip to Disney is almost like a right of passage for a child...the company has tricked us into believing that

Yep.
All of this.
Sums up what I was trying to get across above.

You did a better job ( and in a shorter post! ) then I did!



-

 

[Figments Friend]

Another reminder of why being dead focused on little kids leads to terrible decisions: Kids being bored during test screenings almost lead to The Little Mermaid losing "Part of Your World". Howard Ashman fought Katzenberg hard in order to keep that number in the movie and it paid off.

Glen Keane also played a role in getting that sequence reinstated.

Katzenberg was reading far too much into the test audience and panicked when a kid dropped his popcorn box during the song.
He forgot that kids drop stuff...and focus in and out of things attention wise constantly.

It was a bad call to suggest cutting the song just based on that response.
Those involved with the project knew it.
So Glen along with the films' directors convinced Jeffery to show the film again with another test audience and then decide the sequences fate.
He thankfully agree, and the rest is history.



-

 

[21stamps]

Yep.
All of this.
Sums up what I was trying to get across above.

You did a better job ( and in a shorter post! ) then I did!



-

Thanks, but I thoroughly agree with your post!!..

From a business perspective, targeting toddlers and their young parents is a demographic that is often associated with people willing to 'spend out' more on a vacation then those with older children or teens.

Mommy and Daddy will likely be more open to spending quite a bit of money on adorable little tykes' 'first trip to WDW' with extra money being thrown at character dining experiences, Princess makeovers, merchandise sales, and all the other trappings directly marketed to them.

I've seen it myself many times in the Parks over the years....obviously new parents going crazy in the spending department to indulge their little one(s) in what they feel needs to be done or bought....for a kid so young he / she will likely not even remember it in the future.
A lot of new parents really go nuts for the brood at WDW.

It is no surprise Disney targets this demographic...there are truckloads of potential money to be made there.
The marketing for taking your toddler to the Parks really kicked in about ten to twelve years ago....the ads used to make me gag a little.
Drippy, sticky cute imagery with slogans along the lines of 'take them now while they still believe'....' Don't let them miss the Magic!' .....etc.

Disney Marketing was sending the message loud and clear that WDW is for little kids and their parents who want to enjoy seeing their child enjoy the Parks.
Anyone older then 6 or 8 is considerd 'too old' by this twisted thought process and more likely to want to go to Universal instead.
Yes, this was the mentality...and still is for some.

WDW is for everyone, no matter the age, but so many have been led to believe otherwise due to this king of marketing.



The reality of course is that taking a toddler to WDW is incredibly overwhelming in many cases for the poor child..not to mention a real tap on the energy and sanity of the parents.
We have all seen the scene of the toddler passed out cold, asleep in a stroller while the parents watch the nightly fireworks.
We have all seen 'commando touring' families get stressed out and start yelling at each other...and fussy, hot n' tired toddlers.
What kind of vacation is that...?

I tell everyone who asks me when is a good time to take kids to WDW - wait until your child is at least 6 before even considering it.
8 to 10 is a good time, as they are aware of things, will remember experiences, and in most cases are tall enough to ride all of the Attractions.

-

I contemplated at 1, then 2, then 3 then 4...finally did it at 5, and I was one of those parents that you described above.lol
I'm glad I did at 5, but 6 was much better!

Re: Univeral- I've always considered it "for the older kids" as in 54" and up. At Disney kids can do all of the rides at 48", and most of them even before then.