Splash Mountain re-theme announced

[Chi84]

on that comment i was strictly addressing the poster who said that people just ride for the log flume itself.

I do think the new theme will be off putting to a lot of boys,
When I told my 10 year about the change, his response was “Another girl thing?! Ugh. I don’t want a stupid princess ride there. Why can’t they just make a new one?”

That said, I know he’ll still ride it.. but I doubt it will remain a favorite.We really enjoy the music in the current Splash, that’s our favorite part.

I sympathize about the stupid princess thing, but is he waxing poetic about Brer Rabbit? There's no point in arguing this, I guess. I just don't see what's so great about the current theme - clearly there will always be an argument over whether Disney relies too heavily on princesses.

 

[thomas998]

Why is Disney spending so much money to change the theme of a beloved ride solely in response to a twenty thousand signature petition?

Because DIsney is being run by clueless idiots. There are countless videos on Youtube where people set about getting signatures for ridiculous petitions, one of the more absurd was a petition against Women's Suffrage. I have no doubt if you started a petition to have Mickey Mouse's statute removed you could get thousands to sign it.

 

[Brer Oswald]

Agreed on Tiana. No one gave a darn about Splash Mountain souvenirs (not us, people, NOT US) until they announced the re-theme.

I’ve got 5 Splash T-Shirts, Several plushes, a playset, mugs, figurines.
By the “not us”, I’m unsure if you mean “we didn’t care” or that we did care. I assume the latter?

 

[orlandogal22]

It is not that anything has to happpen. It’s that it IS. And it’s a good thing.

Removing the theme won’t fix what happened and many will be clueless to its origin but as long as there are those like myself and my friends who will look it up online and look down at the company it will continue to carry with it the weight of America’s past atrocities. It is perfectly fine to have a conversation about the movie and animated segments. But it is head scratching to justify that we’re building rides out of them in a place that is supposed to be an escape from those realities

Where’s the Disney Magic in that?

But I would argue we're not - in 2020 - building rides out of "them" in a present-day sense. The ride was originally conceived by Baxter in the very early 80s and wasn't opened until '89. 30-40 years ago in totality.

Again, I would argue that the average parkgoer - I include international here as well - is unaware of the origin of the source material, nor would they ever care (for better or for worse) of the origin of the source material as they progress throughout their life, nor would they immediately disassociate themselves with riding the ride as based on a movie from the 1940s as the ride's source material.

Furthermore, as I referenced, removing it will not solve, nor heal anything. Anti-SM / SotS folks will just move on to their next target. That's the reality of this situation, whether or not it's deemed wholly appropriate or laudatory to remove or not.

 

[Kate F]

Can we all just agree that the good things about Splash Mountain far outweigh the bad?

 

[thomas998]

What makes you think it's just a "small insignificant minority" who are upset by Splash Mountain's association with Song of the South? Or the number of people who were offended by the Redhead scene in Pirates?

Surely you can see that reasonable people might be upset by racially insensitive content and that changing that content isn't necessarily the beginning of sweeping change that will lead to the removal of everything that anyone might find remotely offensive.

The fact hat a petition to get rid of Splash Mountain gained only 20,000 signatures is pretty much proof enough. Even if you were only look at the population of the US it's less than a percent of the people. That is the very definition of insignificant. Show me a march of thousands picketing the front gate of Disney to have the redhead removed and you might have a point. Otherwise there is simply no evidence to support the insignificant chorus of harpies that love to be offended by anything and everything.

 

[_caleb]

A few counterpoints, playing devil's advocate -

a. I wasn't informed the animated segments were "forever tainted" until I was told they were. I surmise most parkgoers on any given day are the same way as I was when I first rode that ride. The average parkgoer - international included - just knows it as a fun ride.

b. Why would everything need to evolve - or progress - notably in a heavily themed theme park with distinct lands that are just that - "frozen in time" - or, better yet, a snapshot of a particular era of Americana. Should Haunted Mansion evolve too? Should we modernize it?

c. Removing a theme park ride and replacing it with another will not help to move past any racist history our country - or any country has. It will not solve any issue. As long as there is free will and free thought, there will be racists in the world. (note - I said world; we are not exempt; no race is exempt). Sad to say, but it's the truth. Taking that into perspective, if everything is deemed racist in some capacity, nothing is racist.

a. Just because you didn't know doesn't mean it isn't true or that it wasn't hurtful to other guests. Now that you know, you've got to decide whether you care.

b. The parks "evolve" in response to consumer demand. They aren't supposed to present a realistic "snapshot" of an era, but an idealized version of a time/place. It's the "ideal" that changes in society, and Disney's model is to try to change with it in oder to stay relevant. (They're not always successful in this, of course!)

c. The issues being solved are Disney's standing with its audience (and emerging audiences). Changing Splash Mountain is a very good solution to this problem because it further distances the company from Song of the South and also gives attention to a film that is popular with a good portion of the audience that was offended by the old theme's association to the film.

 

[21stamps]

I sympathize about the stupid princess thing, but is he waxing poetic about Brer Rabbit? There's no point in arguing this, I guess. I just don't see what's so great about the current theme - clearly there will always be an argument over whether Disney relies too heavily on princesses.

No, I don’t think Brer Rabbit has some deep special meaning to him..but as mentioned previously, Zip ah dee doo da is a favorite Disney song of ours, we sing it on the ride and after. I think it was as simple as having that replaced with a princess.

 

[Parker in NYC]

I’ve got 5 Splash T-Shirts, Several plushes, a playset, mugs, figurines.
By the “not us”, I’m unsure if you mean “we didn’t care” or that we did care. I assume the latter?

What do you think I meant? Good lord. I meant ASIDE FROM US. Brer Oswald.

 

[lebeau]

Well, I cant say for certain of course, but I do think promoting a brand as progressive is beneficial to brands in this climate. Personally, I question their sincerity though.

Disney walks a fine line. It knows it has customers on both sides of the political divide.

 

[MotherOfBirds]

 

[RoysCabin]

Hate to think of where we'd be as a nation without "the Declaration'

Yup!!!!

Not quite sure what you're saying; the Declaration of Independence was a non-governing document and more of a statement of what was already apparent: that the war was not going to result in reconciliation between the two sides, and American victory would mean separation. Jefferson's prose in it is iconic in its usage of John Locke's natural rights principles and applying them to the current circumstances in 1776, but the dye was already cast, and the effort and work on the Declaration was the work of the entire Continental Congress and the specific committee (Jefferson, Adams, Franklin, Sherman, Livingston), not just Jefferson himself.

EDIT: And to parrot what some others are saying, I agree that there's basically a near-zero chance that Disney made this alteration because of a change.org petition. No company Disney's size pays attention to those outside of the most extreme circumstances. This was likely a long-time in the making internal decision, but the announcement likely got bumped up a little sooner given current circumstances. To think it's more than that is really grasping at conspiracy theory-laden straws.

 

[lebeau]

Well, it helps combat the negative press they’re going to get from reopening so soon. It will help sell more merch. It will give them reason to rationalize the cutbacks to Epcot. It will also allow them to cut back on the animatronics and practical effects for a cheaper to maintain attraction. You’re getting screen mountain whether you think you are or not.

Step outside the theme park community mindset for a second. Most people won't care about any of those things.

 

[21stamps]

I love Race For Your Life, Charlie Brown but it's no Splash Mountain.

The hill itself is definitely not, but the whole track is a little more exhilarating with the twists and small rapids.. Once upon a time there used to be a bigger (and better) log flume where Diamondback now sits.

 

[thomas998]

Do you think so? Do you think Disney's going to make a lot of money off of the messaging?

It's possible Tiana toys will sell more than Br'er Rabbit dolls, but I don't see "virtue" as a big profit-generator.

Tiana toys didn't sell that well when the movie was new, I distinctly remember the local Walmart had tons of the Princess and the Frog stuff on the clearance isles, I doubt a ride is going to do much to move more merchandise.

 

[lebeau]

Correct. What's wrong with that?

Eddie Van Halen took baroque etudes and played them on guitar. EVH cashed that check.

William Faulkner did practically the same thing as Joel C. Harris, but Faulkner is celebrated. His black characters, like Dilsey in The Sound and the Fury, are not unlike Uncle Remus: the conscience of the story. Uncle Remus and Dilsey are the only truly "whole" people in either world. They are good, while everyone else is flawed - especially the whites (in Faulkner).

Nothing is wrong with that. I was responding to a few people bemoaning the idea that Splash Mountain was based on African American folklore which will no longer be represented. That's not exactly accurate. The folklore was appropriated by a white author who added the controversial storyteller character of Uncle Remus. Then the books were adapted by another white guy, Walt Disney, who sought out the advice of the NAACP before releasing his movie and chose to ignore it when he didn't like what they said.

So nuance.

 

[Father Robinson]

Why is Disney spending so much money to change the theme of a beloved ride solely in response to a twenty thousand signature petition?

I've said it before, I'll say it again, bad press. If you think the timing and circumstances of this aren't the most coincidental things, perhaps ever in the history of the parks, then there's no use debating it further.

 

[orlandogal22]

a. Just because you didn't know doesn't mean it isn't true or that it wasn't hurtful to other guests. Now that you know, you've got to decide whether you care.

b. The parks "evolve" in response to consumer demand. They aren't supposed to present a realistic "snapshot" of an era, but an idealized version of a time/place. It's the "ideal" that changes in society, and Disney's model is to try to change with it in oder to stay relevant. (They're not always successful in this, of course!)

c. The issues being solved are Disney's standing with its audience (and emerging audiences). Changing Splash Mountain is a very good solution to this problem because it further distances the company from Song of the South and also gives attention to a film that is popular with a good portion of the audience that was offended by the old theme's association to the film.

Counterpoint again -

a. But couldn't we say that about virtually anything? Couldn't virtually anything be hurtful to the "right" person? Are we all to live in a bubble world?

b. I believe we're splitting hairs here with semantics - snapshot versus idealized version. However, you cannot change / evolve Frontierland without completely doing away with Frontierland itself. Frontierland, itself, is designed to be stuck in time.

c. I'd wager to say your average American and average domestic / international theme park goer never was offended by the film because they never saw the film, nor even realized it was connected to SM.

 

[Parker in NYC]

Tiana toys didn't sell that well when the movie was new, I distinctly remember the local Walmart had tons of the Princess and the Frog stuff on the clearance isles, I doubt a ride is going to do much to move more merchandise.

Disney's The Princess and the Frog Merchandise in High Demand Weeks before Film's Debut!

GLENDALE, Calif.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Weeks before the theatrical release of Disney’s upcoming animated feature The Princess and the Frog , th...

wdccduckman.blogspot.com

 

[Brer Oswald]

Step outside the theme park community mindset for a second. Most people won't care about any of those things.

Then why would they do it if nobody cares? None of what you’re saying makes sense.