Splash Mountain re-theme announced

[Kate F]

I daresay, I think the decision is rushed. I'm sure Disney doesn't want people protesting at the park entrance, and that could very well happen if they don't do something significant in the very near future. They need to address this topic, I'm just not sure this is the best we can do.

I like the suggestion of finding an acceptable way to improve the attraction. Maybe fantasy on my part, but the very best solution would be if WDW could find a way to validate both those who want change, and those who like the ride as it has been.

Compromise is hard though.

How about retheming DL's and keeping WDW's the way it is?

 

[Bairstow]

If PatF's representation is so important, why didn't they make something for Tiana a decade ago when the film was released?

1. Because a decade ago Disney was devoting most of the Magic Kingdom's expansion money to the New Fantasyland project that was already in the works.
2. When the movie came out the country wasn't in a period of racial soul-searching in the wake of several high-profile murders of black people by police.

 

[Father Robinson]

Neat cover art, never seen it before

It's very classic looking!

 

[Animaniac93-98]

Since PatF's representation is so important, why didn't they make something for Tiana a decade ago when the film was released?

There was a show on the Riverboat and since then she has appeared in park entertainment and meet and greets.

Certainly there were and are many ways in which the movie could be represented beyond a ride re skin, but the same could have been said of Frozen.

 

[Bairstow]

According to the internet, the song has racist roots.. though no one told Berry Gordy or Disney about that.

The song very well may have racist roots, but I don't recall Disney announcing they were going to stop using it.

 

[lazyboy97o]

So when the company said they were making her project lead they were lying?

No, but the decision to make this change was entirely up to white men. She does not get final say on the content of the attraction and must get the approval of a hierarchy of white men. To top it all off, her involvement was before the fact by the publication of the creative involvement of the white man who developed the problematic attraction she is tasked with replacing.

2. When the movie came out the country wasn't in a period of racial soul-searching in the wake of several high-profile murders of black people by police.

There was also some hesitancy around the movie by white men that had to be retooled because of its racially insensitive content. The movie was considered a failure and most definitely does not meet the definition of a franchise but there are also not many others Disney can chose.

 

[Bairstow]

No, but the decision to make this change was entirely up to white men. She does not get final say on the content of the attraction and must get the approval of a hierarchy of white men. To top it all off, her involvement was before the fact by the publication of the creative involvement of the white man who developed the problematic attraction she is tasked with replacing.

So if that offends you, what do you think the company should do instead of making Carter the project lead?

 

[wdwmagic]

Funny how you managed to remove my post complaining about what was staying up...yet you leave up posts that I did report accusing others of being “Marxists” and what not.

Again, seems you are actively moderating, but only to favor one side of this debate. I expected more from WDWMagic.

Nothing funny about it. See number 10 at https://forums.wdwmagic.com/help/terms/

 

[manmythlegend]

How about retheming DL's and keeping WDW's the way it is?

Yup! I've suggested this several times and nobody ever responded.

 

[21stamps]

Yep. Huck Finn turns societal norms on its head by highlighting the friendship of Huck and Jim. But there are movements to ban it because — well everyone knows why.

The banning of Huckleberry Finn and To Kill a Mockingbird just always makes my head spin.
I’ve come to realize that people don’t even understand what they’re banning or destroying... and everyone suffers as a result.

 

[Giss Neric]

How about retheming DL's and keeping WDW's the way it is?

This is unfortunately an American problem not just a coast to coast problem. People will criticize them for changing only one and not the other. Tokyo's Splash will still be the same cause they're not easily offended but I guess if the new re-themed ride is a success here then maybe they will bring it back there, BUT Princess and the Frog ain't really a thing there when I went.

 

[SirLink]

Since PatF's representation is so important, why didn't they make something for Tiana a decade ago when the film was released?

Because in house they were complaining of the poor box office which is a fair point now to being up when anyone said a film did poorly at the box office Disney has now used up its excuse.

 

[Bairstow]

How about retheming DL's and keeping WDW's the way it is?

There's a lot of good reasons to do this. Frog's a better thematic fit at Disneyland, you'd have ride diversity across the parks, and Disneyland fans, who are generally more receptive to changed rides, would be better-served by the change than WDW guests. Beyond that, if the overlay doesn't turn out so hot they won't have ruined two attractions.

 

[manmythlegend]

This is unfortunately an American problem not just a coast to coast problem. People will criticize them for changing only one and not the other. Tokyo's Splash will still be the same cause they're not easily offended but I guess if the new re-themed ride is a success here then maybe they will bring it back there, BUT Princess and the Frog ain't really a thing there when I went.

It's about compromise.

 

[lazyboy97o]

So if that offends you, what do you think the company should do instead of making Carter the project lead?

Who said anything about being offended?

 

[Giss Neric]

There's a lot of good reasons to do this. Frog's a better thematic fit at Disneyland, you'd have ride diversity across the parks, and Disneyland fans, who are generally more receptive to changed rides, would be better-served by the change than WDW guests. Beyond that, if the overlay doesn't turn out so hot they won't have ruined two attractions.

Basically to sum it up, Disneyland/Californians are mostly liberals while WDW guests are locals and tourists around the world which really don't give a ___ about the ride's past.

Disneyland fans weren't really receptive to Pixar Pier or Tower of Terror turning to Guardians.

 

[Animaniac93-98]

most definitely does not meet the definition of a franchise

It's a part of the Disney Princess brand, which is good enough for Disney.

 

[jt04]

I haven’t ridden MMRR, but from my understanding, it’s not really blowing people away.

The traditionalists, who never want any changes, are reinforcing that trope. It is just an echo chamber on these boards and other social media. They were unhappy from the announcement that GMR was closing. Most of the reviews I have heard have been overwhelmingly positive from the 99% of casual fans that aren't really representative of the fans like you find here.

I'm just happy never to have to sit through the Oz finale again.

PS- I have been very impressed by what I have seen and heard about mmrr. Much better than I hoped for.

 

[DubyooDeeDubyoo]

She used to work in Disneyland. She's an amateur park historian (like 25% of this message board). She's an expert.

I find it weird to call Splash an "old ride". It's WDW installation is a little older than Alien Encounter, a ride which involves a lot of looking at nothing.


I wish people would stop talking past each other and misrepresenting other posters.

We have these kinds of people who like this ride. These can be ALL different people:
A People who are excited to see something new in the parks.
B People who felt Song of the South is troublesome and unnecessary part of Splash's identity.
C People who are excited to see PitF have some kind of attraction after years.

On the other side you have, again a variety of opinions that can include:
1 People who are worried the company will botch the job, whether through budget cuts or refusing to recycle beloved elements.
2 People who liked Disney's attempt to isolate the Brer characters from their source material (and it's framing device).
3 People who are disappointed that Disney is devoted to purging Song of the South enough that they would rather invest in a whole new presentation for Splash Mountain than put the film somewhere with appropriate warnings.
4 Maybe/possibly some racists who use the above points to cloak their true feelings.

I'm like an A+1/2. Around the release of Splash in the late 80s, it felt like Disney was trying to position Brer Rabbit as their sort of Bugs Bunny, which was a thing I could have easily accepted as a kid. He's one of my favorite lesser-known characters in the stable. But between the Disney Decade drenching the company in profitable new IP and their efforts to remove Rabbit/Fox/Bear from Uncle Remus seemingly dropped cold when a handful of the audience asked, "isn't that offensive?" I wish the audience had been willing to go along, as they have with a Little Mermaid whose story is a complete inversion of the fable and a Lion movie that is (even if accidentally) a clone of a Japanese cartoon from the 70s. But I'm both happy and a little scared to see the company at present try to build a quality dark ride around this flume.

There's finally Group X, which I think of as a branch of Group 4:
X. People babbling about socialism and Karl Marx as though any of this is somehow relevant

Folks, Democratic Socialism did not bring down Splash Mountain. Let's be real: Disney's desire to protect it's pocketbook did more. Disney sold 30th anniversary merchandise in Disneyland with the Brer trio on them just fifty weeks ago. The ride is probably a few years from going away, and Disney simply moved up the announcement on this thing because of the timing rather than wait until D23 or later. Epcot is sitting on the surgical table and Disney is already booking an appointment for Splash Mountain. Why? Money.

We all know Disney's still putting Tinkerbelle in stuff despite "What Makes the Red Man Red". I do expect the stereotypical natives to leave the ride but it's going to be hard to remove Tiger Lilly without abandoning the whole film, and that only happens when girls don't care who Tink is anymore. The money makes it happen.

I'm a big government, welfare state kind of guy and I enjoyed the heck out of this ride and it's been a big part of my fandom as the opening of it (and Studios to a lesser extent) built my interest in the parks. I'm interested in what they plan to do the ride, but I'm also happy I have the memories of the ride that's leaving. I'm glad it happened and got to run for approximately three decades.

 

[Brer Panther]

No. I can't see how losing a beloved attraction because Disney caved and gave in to the (small group of) complainers, makes everyone happy.

It hasn't made everyone happy. As this thread shows, it just made people who like Splash Mountain depressed and people who hate Splash Mountain annoyed at the people who are depressed. Nobody's happy.

How about retheming DL's and keeping WDW's the way it is?

If they did that, they could ship all the America Sings characters they won't be using in Disneyland's retheme to Florida so we can put 'em in Disney World's Splash Mountain as opposed to simply trashing them like the Universe of Energy and Great Movie Ride animatronics.