News Splash Mountain retheme to Princess and the Frog - Tiana's Bayou Adventure

[UNCgolf]

It was no doubt compared to the other Princess Films. Snow White, Cinderella, Beauty and the Beast, Little Mermaid. Does it have the same reputation as those? No. Did it live up to those films? Regardless of what you or I think of the film, it didn’t. It’s a Flop. I like it better than Cinderella and LM, but it didn’t reach those levels of acclaim.

What Princess films have? Frozen exceeded expectations. Tangled, I don’t think it met them, but it did better than PatF. Moana also came close.

As sad as it is, if not for the current climate, they probably wouldn’t be pushing for Tiana as hard as they are. It would be the first four I mentioned, Anna & Elsa, Moana, And Mulan (if only because of the new movie).

All of that is true.

In context, though, it came out at a pretty difficult time. I don't think many people were looking at Disney as an animated film leader at that point (outside of Pixar, of course) or clamoring to go to the newest Disney film. There had been a long stretch of disappointing movies -- the movies preceding it from Disney Animation were Bolt, Meet the Robinsons, Chicken Little, Brother Bear, Home on the Range, and Treasure Planet. PatF made more money than all of those films.

If anything, Winnie the Pooh is what killed traditional animation for Disney (although again, I don't think anything really killed it -- I think they'd already decided they were no longer interested in traditional animation regardless of results). It came out two years after PatF and really did flop; I'm not sure it broke even. It received excellent reviews and Winnie the Pooh is one of the largest merchandise franchises in the world, and yet basically no one saw it. That's really Disney's fault, though -- they released it on the same weekend as the final Harry Potter movie. It's almost like they were intentionally burying it, although it's more likely it was just hubris.

 

[Brer Oswald]

All of that is true.

In context, though, it came out at a pretty difficult time. I don't think many people were looking at Disney as an animated film leader at that point (outside of Pixar, of course) or clamoring to go to the newest Disney film. There had been a long stretch of disappointing movies -- the movies preceding it from Disney Animation were Bolt, Meet the Robinsons, Chicken Little, Brother Bear, Home on the Range, and Treasure Planet. PatF made more money than all of those films.

If anything, Winnie the Pooh is what killed traditional animation for Disney (although again, I don't think anything really killed it -- I think they'd already decided they were no longer interested in traditional animation regardless of results). It came out two years after PatF and really did flop; I'm not sure it broke even. It received excellent reviews and Winnie the Pooh is one of the largest merchandise franchises in the world, and yet basically no one saw it. That's really Disney's fault, though -- they released it on the same weekend as the final Harry Potter movie. It's almost like they were intentionally burying it, although it's more likely it was just hubris.

Winnie the Pooh was a disaster. A lot of people argue that it was set out to fail, and I’d agree. The cheap DisneyToon Pooh films made more money. Pooh is a proven money maker.

 

[tanc]

wonder how much this redo will cost, must be expensive enough that Tokyo said hell no. Kinda crazy they actually might be going full throttle now, just leaves Tokyo with exclusivity.

All of that is true.

In context, though, it came out at a pretty difficult time. I don't think many people were looking at Disney as an animated film leader at that point (outside of Pixar, of course) or clamoring to go to the newest Disney film. There had been a long stretch of disappointing movies -- the movies preceding it from Disney Animation were Bolt, Meet the Robinsons, Chicken Little, Brother Bear, Home on the Range, and Treasure Planet. PatF made more money than all of those films.

If anything, Winnie the Pooh is what killed traditional animation for Disney (although again, I don't think anything really killed it -- I think they'd already decided they were no longer interested in traditional animation regardless of results). It came out two years after PatF and really did flop; I'm not sure it broke even. It received excellent reviews and Winnie the Pooh is one of the largest merchandise franchises in the world, and yet basically no one saw it. That's really Disney's fault, though -- they released it on the same weekend as the final Harry Potter movie. It's almost like they were intentionally burying it, although it's more likely it was just hubris.

Didn't Winnie the Pooh release around the same time as the last Harry Potter film though?

 

[_caleb]

Those are imagineers? Looks like a bunch of High School Math Teachers.

I can’t tell if this post is racist, sexist, or just ignorant.

 

[UNCgolf]

Didn't Winnie the Pooh release around the same time as the last Harry Potter film though?

Read the second to last sentence in the post you quoted! (yep, it was released on the same weekend)

 

[Squishy]

I can’t tell if this post is racist, sexist, or just ignorant.

imagineerist

 

[Donald Duck 25]

It wasn't a flop.

It wasn't an overwhelming success, but it made money and performed better than the previous few traditionally animated films Disney had released

It wasn't a flop.

It wasn't an overwhelming success, but it made money and performed better than the previous few traditionally animated films Disney had released.

In truth I was always told by many people it was a flop and I just believed them. I should have done some research on the movie before posting. It cost 105 million dollars and made 207 million dollars. But when it came out and I saw the previews they looked awful to me . And everyone was saying the movie flopped so I just believed them but the movie still did not making a ton of money and that is still the reason Disney abandoned traditional animation and for that it does not deserve a ride.

 

[MisterPenguin]

It wasn't a flop.

It wasn't an overwhelming success, but it made money and performed better than the previous few traditionally animated films Disney had released.

In truth I was always told by many people it was a flop and I just believed them. I should have done some research on the movie before posting. It cost 105 million dollars and made 207 million dollars. But when it came out and I saw the previews they looked awful to me . And everyone was saying the movie flopped so I just believed them but the movie still did not making a ton of money and that is still the reason Disney abandoned traditional animation and for that it does not deserve a ride.

Sorry, @UNCgolf, PatF was a financial flop... in the theatrical window.

Movie accounting, as a general rule of thumb:

1. Film budget is usually 50% more than as is stated because the known budget doesn't include advertising and administrative costs of the studio.​

2. Box Office take is only 50% than what is advertised because the studio shares the BO with the theaters.​

So, PatF's budget was $105M, so, with advertising, was really $157M. The film's worldwide BO was $267, so, Disney got $134M. That's a loss of $23M.

But... not a total flop. The film has a life after the theatrical run: PPV, Premium Cable, DVD, Cable, Broadcast, Streaming. Each window brings in more money. Then there's merchandise. Then there's synergy with The Disney Princesses(tm) and Disney Parks. Tiana becomes much beloved by Disney fans, especially girls of color. She's a popular M&G. She gets her own dessert party on the river boat. She's featured in the castle stage show and HEA. Her restaurant starts showing up on Disney cruise lines and resorts. Facilier is a staple for whenever the Disney villains appear, even hosting Club Evil and the post-Halloween MK after hours stage show. And soon, a ride.

PatF more than made up for the theatrical deficit and was a financial win in the end.

 

[Riverrafter21]

I can’t tell if this post is racist, sexist, or just ignorant.

That's easy because it wasn't any of these. Calm down

 

[_caleb]

That's easy because it wasn't any of these. Calm down

Talented Imagineers (all either women, people of color, or both) are honored for their achievements and you want to comment about how they don't look the part?

And when you're called out on it, you say "calm down" instead of "Oops, I'm sorry?"

 

[Brer Panther]

Regardless as to whether or not The Princess and the Frog was really a flop, Disney brushed it off as one for not making as much money as they'd hoped. It makes their suddenly making a ride off it more suspicious.

 

[_caleb]

Tiana becomes much beloved by Disney fans, especially girls of color.

This. This is why PatF was/is a success.

It was no doubt compared to the other Princess Films. Snow White, Cinderella, Beauty and the Beast, Little Mermaid.

It was developed to contrast with those other Princess Films. Disney needed a movie that featured people of color, and produced a Black princess. The audience was culturally significant to Disney.

Before anyone jumps in and starts throwing around terms like "woke" or "critical race theory," I'd just like to point out that Princess and the Frog is an example of how Disney has been working toward diversity and inclusion way before the Splash retheme announcement or the addition of the 5th Key.

 

[_caleb]

Regardless as to whether or not The Princess and the Frog was really a flop, Disney brushed it off as one for not making as much money as they'd hoped. It makes their suddenly making a ride off it more suspicious.

Maybe you just don't know enough Black people with little kids?

 

[Basil of Baker Street]

Maybe you just don't know enough Black people with little kids?

wow.

 

[Riverrafter21]

Talented Imagineers (all either women, people of color, or both) are honored for their achievements and you want to comment about how they don't look the part?

And when you're called out on it, you say "calm down" instead of "Oops, I'm sorry?"

Yeah, calm down. Nothing in what I said was racist or sexist, I'm sorry you interpreted it that way, but that's on you. I have plenty respect for Disney imagineers, no matter their gender or color of skin. Anyone can have a stuffy looking corporate photo, even me.

 

[_caleb]

Yeah, calm down. Nothing in what I said was racist or sexist, I'm sorry you interpreted it that way, but that's on you. I have plenty respect for Disney imagineers, no matter their gender or color of skin. Anyone can have a stuffy looking corporate photo, even me.

If you have plenty of respect for the Imagineers honored in the post you responded to, you did not show it. Commenting on their appearance takes away from their achievements by putting the focus on the wrong thing.

Look, I'm not going after you. But I am committed to calling out racism (casual and overt) when I see it. Regardless of your intention (which I'm certain was good!), your post was an example of the kinds of comments that discourage, frustrate, and demean others.

Let's say you were honored for your professional achievements in a very public way. And then a bunch of people (who don't know you and likely don't realize that they've enjoyed the products you've created) chime in with comments about the way you look. How does that make you feel? What's the purpose of those comments? What are the effects?

 

[Donald Duck 25]

wow

Maybe you just don't know enough Black people with little kids?

That's funny I always thought the princess frog was only made so little black girls could run around in those lousy princess outfits that tear up so easy so there parents have to buy more and more of the stupid things.

 

[_caleb]

That's funny I always thought the princess frog was only made so little black girls could run around in those lousy princess outfits that tear up so easy so there parents have to more and more of the stupid things.

That would be the cynical way to put it, but yeah. Up to that point, a lot of little girls didn't have any princesses that looked like them.

The store-bought princess dresses are the worst! And expensive! But I've seen some home made versions that are awesome! The best trend against this is DisneyBounding. Way more accessible, appropriate, and creative, in my opinion!

 

[ᗩLᘿᑕ ✨ ᗩζᗩᗰ]

This. This is why PatF was/is a success.


It was developed to contrast with those other Princess Films. Disney needed a movie that featured people of color, and produced a Black princess. The audience was culturally significant to Disney.

Before anyone jumps in and starts throwing around terms like "woke" or "critical race theory," I'd just like to point out that Princess and the Frog is an example of how Disney has been working toward diversity and inclusion way before the Splash retheme announcement or the addition of the 5th Key.

Making a 5th key was, IMO just virtue-signaling.

We're currently living in a world of "overcorrectiveness". Too much of a good thing is a bad thing. I'm fine celebrating Princess and the Frog for what it is (a beautifully animated feature) and what it's done for people of color but not at the behest of what I would consider the destruction of a classic attraction. But that's for a different debate. Or is it?

Wokeness (using derogatory term for lack of a better word) works in moderation and where appropriate. Too much of what I'm seeing is over-correction. Splash Mountain to Tiana Mountain is an over-correction.

Princess and the Frog HAD IT BEEN MORE SUCCESSFUL would have likely been it's own attraction. Even Tangled, which had similar box office "success" at least spun off into a tv series, fancy restroom and cruise show. PatF for being so beloved by Disney is being treated more like a stop gap solution or band-aid to fix any perceived boo-boos in Splash Mountain.

Frankly, I feel like the trajectory of this discussion has no relevancy to this thread anyway. The success/failure of the movie has no bearing on this overlay. It's just not a factor.

 

[Brer Oswald]

This. This is why PatF was/is a success.


It was developed to contrast with those other Princess Films. Disney needed a movie that featured people of color, and produced a Black princess. The audience was culturally significant to Disney.

Before anyone jumps in and starts throwing around terms like "woke" or "critical race theory," I'd just like to point out that Princess and the Frog is an example of how Disney has been working toward diversity and inclusion way before the Splash retheme announcement or the addition of the 5th Key.

I’m speaking strictly financially. I know why the film was made. I know why they chose the character of Tiana. I know why people want a PatF Ride. I don’t agree with what Disney is doing because of the way they are doing it, and their actual intentions.

I don’t think Disney should have one token story. I’ll give them some time to catchup, but with Brer Rabbit eradicated, their one current token story is PatF, and even then, it has little historical significance to who it’s representing (unlike most of the other films with a more diverse background).