• 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.

News Splash Mountain retheme to Princess and the Frog - attraction discussion only

_caleb

Well-Known Member
Correct, the film doesn't do an explicit job hitting you over the head about the year /era it takes place. I think one of their errors is that it assumes too much from its viewers. Especially as we get farther and farther away from this era, people have no touchstones, as they would have been when the film came out (on top of education generally being terrible and Reconstruction being its own set of nightmares).

There are a lot of things about Disney in the 1940's I am surprised passed any Hays Office employee (Pinocchio, for example). Yes, I agree, there has always been some confusion, even contemporary confusion, and criticism, but to say there was "no indication" is a falsehood. The fashionable women's costumes indicate the 1870s immediately. There was an instant change in the silhouette of dresses post-Civil War, especially in the American South, for obvious "economic" reasons. Every single dress the mother wears in the film immediately invokes (late) 1870's, because of the closeness/tightness of the bodice on the dress, the clear boning from the corset, the elongated torso and the emphasis on the long lines and the bustle in the back (even though she is clearing donning 1940's hair).(I know this is probably going to be deleted and most people won't care either way --because what are facts and reality, anyway?--but, just in case, someone might find this useful).
You’re saying that the shape and design of the women’s dresses in Song of the South should have instantly made it clear that the film—made in 1946–was set before, and not after, emancipation? So you’re under the impression that the filmmakers were committed to that level of realism and authenticity?

If the fashion made it immediately obvious to the 1946 audience that the film was meant to be set after the war, why weren’t early critics of the film (back in 1946) able to discern the film’s setting?

Walter White, the executive secretary of the NAACP in 1946, criticized Disney at the time the film was released:
"The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People recognizes in Song of the South remarkable artistic merit in the music and in the combination of living actors and the cartoon technique. It regrets, however, that in an effort neither to offend audiences in the North or South, the production helps to perpetuate a dangerously glorified picture of slavery. Making use of the beautiful Uncle Remus folklore, Song of the South unfortunately gives the impression of an idyllic master-slave relationship which is a distortion of the facts."
 

Dear Prudence

Well-Known Member
You’re saying that the shape and design of the women’s dresses in Song of the South should have instantly made it clear that the film—made in 1946–was set before, and not after, emancipation? So you’re under the impression that the filmmakers were committed to that level of realism and authenticity?

If the fashion made it immediately obvious to the 1946 audience that the film was meant to be set after the war, why weren’t early critics of the film (back in 1946) able to discern the film’s setting?

Walter White, the executive secretary of the NAACP in 1946, criticized Disney at the time the film was released:

Friend, I just said the dresses indicated a post Civil War period, not that I agreed with Sugar Coated Reconstruction in any way, shape or form. Edit: like, if you're trying to pin me as some kind of SOTS apologist, ...bruh 😂
 
Last edited:

_caleb

Well-Known Member
Friend, I just said the dresses indicated a post Civil War period, not that I agreed with Sugar Coated Reconstruction in any way, shape or form. Edit: like, if you're trying to pin me as some kind of SOTS apologist, ...bruh 😂
I’m not trying to pin you as anything.

You said the silhouette of the dresses indicated that the film was post-Civil War, and that the audience of the day would have recognized this, where modern audiences might not. I asked why, if this were true, people have always been confused about the time setting of the film.

I know nothing about the history of dresses. But I do know that the film was deliberately vague about the time in which the story was set.
 

Dear Prudence

Well-Known Member
I’m not trying to pin you as anything.

You said the silhouette of the dresses indicated that the film was post-Civil War, and that the audience of the day would have recognized this, where modern audiences might not. I asked why, if this were true, people have always been confused about the time setting of the film.

I know nothing about the history of dresses. But I do know that the film was deliberately vague about the time in which the story was set.
All of what you said here is valid. As I had stated above, they didn't do enough to take the time to really make sure the time was set. This also could be due to the fact that a lot of Reconstruction and share cropping systems were freedom in name only. I've honestly always believed that depictions of Post Civil War like SOTS, Gone with the Wind, or My Forbidden past are WORSE that those set in Antebellum times because they suggest that enslaved people were so happy they stayed and that emancipation was a mistake. Personally, I don't necessarily believe that Disney intended the same kind of malice that GWTW and MFP were, but the egregious mistake was made, and instead of clarification, they just continued to flounder. They removed Sunflower from Fantasia almost immediately, I don't know why they didn't issue any kind of clarification or redaction. Considering how abysmally they've handled this entire time, it's just par for the course, unfortunately. (I hope that made sense!)
 

MerlinTheGoat

Well-Known Member
If they go to all screens we can't get videos like this anymore.
We'll get stuff like this though-
7hu5ct421jr31.jpg

frozen-ever-after-reopens-technical-glitches-glitch-anna-4-3591012-scaled.jpg

Ejl52FKWkAYubPR.png

WDeF7IC.png
 

dman1373

Active Member
so there is 0 things offensive in the ride.....its relation to the controversial movie has been almost wiped away other than from the people that are just looking to be offended or the clickbait sites that those people are addicted to and live off of. Now you can get rid of the ride, retheme the best ride in the magic kingdom to a b level disney movie with a subpar soundtrack. Hopefully it turns out alright, but when it turns into a sea of screens everywhere with subpar music and the reviews are in, im just gonna say i told you so. To me it just looks like the disney parks might be going the same way as the television and movie divisions. Down the drain. And i see the same thing happening here that happens when the ratings are down on these new abc shows or the public reviews of the show are bad. People will just blame racism or misogyny for the reviews or why people dont like it. Instead of realizing that maybe all of this crybaby nonsense has beatin the life out of the entertainment because these companys are more worried about appearing "woke" then making interesting or entertaining stuff.
 

eddie104

Well-Known Member
so there is 0 things offensive in the ride.....its relation to the controversial movie has been almost wiped away other than from the people that are just looking to be offended or the clickbait sites that those people are addicted to and live off of. Now you can get rid of the ride, retheme the best ride in the magic kingdom to a b level disney movie with a subpar soundtrack. Hopefully it turns out alright, but when it turns into a sea of screens everywhere with subpar music and the reviews are in, im just gonna say i told you so. To me it just looks like the disney parks might be going the same way as the television and movie divisions. Down the drain. And i see the same thing happening here that happens when the ratings are down on these new abc shows or the public reviews of the show are bad. People will just blame racism or misogyny for the reviews or why people dont like it. Instead of realizing that maybe all of this crybaby nonsense has beatin the life out of the entertainment because these companys are more worried about appearing "woke" then making interesting or entertaining stuff.
Now as much I would rather PATF have it’s own separate attraction I think Disney recognized it might have to make some changes to stay with the times. Nothing is wrong with them wanting to be more inclusive so I’m lost on your grievances because it seems like you want things to stay the same and not progress beyond where we are now.
 

dig311dug

Well-Known Member
What does a ride featuring animatronic animals have to do with inclusiveness? (One of the most overused words of the year next to “optics”).
 

celluloid

Well-Known Member
What does a ride featuring animatronic animals have to do with inclusiveness? (One of the most overused words of the year next to “optics”).

Your second overused word example, is the the answer to your first over word used example.

It would equal plush sales and immediate gratification of something "new" with a hearty pat on the back
 

MisterPenguin

🐧🐧🐧🐧🐧🐧🐧🐧Fully Pfizered!🐧🐧🐧🐧🐧🐧🐧🐧
Premium Member
What does a ride featuring animatronic animals have to do with inclusiveness? (One of the most overused words of the year next to “optics”).

I know your question is rhetorical, but the answer has been discussed repeatedly and at length throughout this thread.

That ship has sailed. Let's just hope that the retheme is as good as Splash Mountain with good music, AAs everywhere, etc.

@dig311dug has been an active participant of this thread for over a year. So...
 

Dear Prudence

Well-Known Member
Your second overused word example, is the the answer to your first over word used example.

It would equal plush sales and immediate gratification of something "new" with a hearty pat on the back
I know many of the BIPOC on this thread have expressed great discomfort with how this is being marketed as "inclusion " when Black cast members and guests have expressed that they still experience discrimination, or multiple accounts of racism experienced by Black cast members of the DCA production of Frozen. I don't think it's in bad faith to ask who this is actually for. WHY do they keep congratulating themselves over this imaginary princess who spends almost her ENTIRE movie as a Frog when they should be prioritizing the wellness and safety of actual Black people who work at and visit their parks?!
 

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

Top Bottom