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

[Brer Oswald]

That's a real twisting of words and intent in order to make a dig a Josh and Disney.

If Josh said "We're adding attractions to make sure our parks remain relevant and enjoyable to all of our guests," would you then assume that he's saying that the parks were never enjoyable previously?

And to others in this thread: Would you then make the leap that Josh is insulting CMs for being complicit in running a parks that isn't enjoyable and they are being shamed for it?

Really, so much nonsense in this thread to justify lashing out indiscriminately in anger.

I don't like a decision Disney made so I'm gonna burn it all to the ground!!

You’re really leaning on the “enjoyable” element as opposed to the r word, “relevant”. When Disney replaces an attraction with one they claim is more relevant, they are definitely of the belief that the preceding attraction is less relevant. Which really means it’s less likely to sell toys to kids because they probably haven’t watched the film.

Nobody has said “I don’t like the decision Disney is making, burn it all to the ground!” Quite the opposite. We’ve criticized Disney’s decisions, and more importantly, the way they’ve gone about presenting them. We’ve called on them to improve and suggested solutions. Disney isn’t above criticism. They certainly aren’t above their guests. It is not our job to just be grateful for whatever they’re doing, however they do it.

 

[lightningtap347]

Would you then make the leap that Josh is insulting CMs for being complicit in running a parks that isn't enjoyable and they are being shamed for it?

I don't think that's much of a leap based on what my friends who work at Splash have been saying/feeling.

I also understand that anecdotal evidence is not evidence at all, and I'm not going to go ahead and dox my friends for proof that they actually exist lol.

I can assure you though that the general feeling and tone at that area is weird right now. A lot of my friends do feel slighted by these comments and I even have one who got switched from one are of the resort (post-NBA) to Splash. He doesn't even want to work there anymore because he feels responsible for something that he really has no involvement in.

Edit: I can say with certainty that these comments are effecting how people perceive their worth in their current area in the company. That they feel like they are unwelcoming and hurting the people around them. This is a big morale sink for some people, at no fault of themselves.

 

[_caleb]

You’re not making much sense. By saying that they are making the change to make people feel “more welcome”, it’s inversely implying that the current ride isn’t welcoming enough (or unwelcoming).

It’s to further put fuel on the fire of the Pro-Changers to go after and namecall people like me who are attempting to make credible criticisms against the decision.

If this isn’t their intention, then they are doing a really bad job in trying to make their fans feel “more welcome” and “part of the family”.

I’m not trying to make any point at all. I’m asking whether your opinion is “nobody is actually offended” or “people might be offended, but they shouldn’t be.”

 

[MisterPenguin]

I don't think that's much of a leap based on what my friends who work at Splash have been saying/feeling.

Really? Who's going up to them and shaming them for working the ride?

 

[_caleb]

Who are these people who felt that way? Were is the proof before 2020?

It's a thrill ride that gets people wet, it is inherently an experience not for everyone, but where is there documentation that people who chose to go on the ride were repulsed because of its subject matter (of the ride, not the movie its based on)?

This is part of the gaslighting. The collective enjoyment of the attraction over the last 30 years by people from all over the world (of different backgrounds, races, religions etc) is dismissed as the ignorant unknowingly supporting racism.

You‘re asking for proof that people were offended? How much proof do you think it would take for you to be convinced that it’s worth considering making changes? Is there a certain number of people, or type of people that could influence your opinion on this?

Come on, you know Disney well enough to know that they wouldn’t spend millions to retheme a popular attraction for no reason. You might think the reason doesn’t warrant Disney’s response, but that’s different than saying there’s no reason whatsoever.

 

[Model3 McQueen]

That’s a pretty strong opinion you have there.

No it's not it was common sense until over dramatic people suddenly became OfFeNdEd.

 

[lightningtap347]

Really? Who's going up to them and shaming them for working the ride?

I feel like you didn't even read either of my posts, even though you responded to both of them?

They aren't saying that people are coming up and shaming them. (And even so, I hear stories weekly about how guests come up to my friend trying to prod answers out of him about what SoTS is. They're "trained" not to respond to any inquiries. But I wouldn't consider that "shaming")

They're saying that the general tone of the press release makes them feel as if just by being involved in the ride currently, them themselves are perpetuating non-inclusive and unwelcoming values. People feel drained because they feel like there's a dark mark over their work taken by the tone of what is occurring.

 

[_caleb]

I don't think that's much of a leap based on what my friends who work at Splash have been saying/feeling.

I also understand that anecdotal evidence is not evidence at all, and I'm not going to go ahead and dox my friends for proof that they actually exist lol.

I can assure you though that the general feeling and tone at that area is weird right now. A lot of my friends do feel slighted by these comments and I even have one who got switched from one are of the resort (post-NBA) to Splash. He doesn't even want to work there anymore because he feels responsible for something that he really has no involvement in.

Edit: I can say with certainty that these comments are effecting how people perceive their worth in their current area in the company. That they feel like they are unwelcoming and hurting the people around them. This is a big morale sink for some people, at no fault of themselves.

The sentiment you describe is not limited to attraction CMs and is precisely why the company is laying out loads of money to retheme the attraction.

 

[_caleb]

No it's not it was common sense until over dramatic people suddenly became OfFeNdEd.

It’s not sudden just because you finally heard about it. And common sense isn’t very common these days—neither is common courtesy, which would entail listening to differing opinions without dismissing them outright.

 

[larryz]

That's a real twisting of words and intent in order to make a dig a Josh and Disney.

If Josh said "We're adding attractions to make sure our parks remain relevant and enjoyable to all of our guests," would you then assume that he's saying that the parks were never enjoyable previously?

And to others in this thread: Would you then make the leap that Josh is insulting CMs for being complicit in running a parks that isn't enjoyable and they are being shamed for it?

Really, so much nonsense in this thread to justify lashing out indiscriminately in anger.

I don't like a decision Disney made so I'm gonna burn it all to the ground!!

Well, this whole thing can be laid squarely at the feet of all of us who didn't know we weren't supposed to like it until the twitteratti enlightened us. We were blindly enjoying something that was making a segment of the population feel excluded, and that's bad. Now that we know it's bad to like it, and that we're bad people for liking it, we know we shouldn't spend our money supporting a place that has things that make people feel bad. Bring on the Frog! (and not just in the gumbo!)



Does this get me out of the first week at re-education camp?

 

[lightningtap347]

The sentiment you describe is not limited to attraction CMs and is precisely why the company is laying out loads of money to retheme the attraction.

I understand what you are saying. I just don't see how the messaging coming out is a little sporadic in what they are trying to say.

They're saying it's unwelcoming, and by extension those involved. But they're leaving it open and selling merch for it (I understand this is a completely different argument). This is extremely confusing, and spending a bunch of money doesn't instill confidence when the underlying messaging is still so wishy washy.

If the ride is bad, why is it still even open? Why put people through this any longer? Why can I buy merchandise with the characters, lines, and songs?

This feels like purgatory in a weird way.

Edit: I'm not arguing whether or not it should be changed. I just don't understand what exactly they are trying to get at with their current actions, because it doesn't make sense and is affecting their own workers.

 

[MisterPenguin]

They're saying that the general tone of the press release makes them feel as if just by being involved in the ride currently, them themselves are perpetuating non-inclusive and unwelcoming values. People feel drained because they feel like there's a dark mark over their work taken by the tone of what is occurring.

Well, this is the problem. They're reading into it something that's not there.

"remain...welcoming" is not the same as "we were horribly unwelcoming."

 

[MisterPenguin]

Well, this whole thing can be laid squarely at the feet of all of us who didn't know we weren't supposed to like it until the twitteratti enlightened us. We were blindly enjoying something that was making a segment of the population feel excluded, and that's bad. Now that we know it's bad to like it, and that we're bad people for liking it, we know we shouldn't spend our money supporting a place that has things that make people feel bad. Bring on the Frog! (and not just in the gumbo!)



Does this get me out of the first week at re-education camp?

Not until you're more respectful of Stooge-Americans.

 

[Brer Oswald]

I’m not trying to make any point at all. I’m asking whether your opinion is “nobody is actually offended” or “people might be offended, but they shouldn’t be.”

I’m not going to speak to the other person’s point. But to speak to my point, it is of my perception that most of the people dumping on Splash online are faking their outrage of it. My account’s name is “Brer Oswald”. There’s no way around it that I like Splash. I’ve had several conversations with these people discussing about our mutual enjoyment of the ride before June. People of several different backgrounds. All of which knew what movie it was loosely based on.

Now they do a 180? Come on, I’m not stupid enough not to notice. Unless they were just pretending to like it. But why would you initiate conversations and engage with me?

 

[lightningtap347]

Well, this is the problem. They're reading into it something that's not there.

"remain...welcoming" is not the same as "we were horribly unwelcoming."

That's true, and I think you're right actually.

Unfortunately, I can't really tell people how they should feel...

I will definitely bring this point up when my friend gets off work, because this is a way to look at it that I don't think people there may be.

 

[JohnD]

D’Amaro said that changes were coming in order to make everyone feel welcome. I’m asking if the anti-changers are saying, “No, nobody feels unwelcome because of Splash Mountain!” or if they’re saying, “No, nobody should feel unwelcome because of Splash Mountain is stup!”
Trying to understand.

I have no idea what you're getting at it. Let's go back to the original quote: "We want to make sure that we’re focusing on inclusivity for our guests as well, so we’ve chosen to speed up some of the work that we had been developing to make sure that our parks remain relevant and welcoming to all of our guests."

If parks are to "remain relevant and welcoming to our guests" that must mean the parks have fallen behind in that endeavor. Therefore, " speed up some of the work" and replace Splash with PATF so that "our parks remain relevant and welcoming to our guests." That's how I read it. Let's move on.

 

[JohnD]

That's a real twisting of words and intent in order to make a dig a Josh and Disney.

If Josh said "We're adding attractions to make sure our parks remain relevant and enjoyable to all of our guests," would you then assume that he's saying that the parks were never enjoyable previously?

And to others in this thread: Would you then make the leap that Josh is insulting CMs for being complicit in running a parks that isn't enjoyable and they are being shamed for it?

Really, so much nonsense in this thread to justify lashing out indiscriminately in anger.

I don't like a decision Disney made so I'm gonna burn it all to the ground!!

No, you're putting words and thoughts into my head. See my response to @_caleb. I have neither glee nor anger. I'm intepreting what was said. Others in this thread came to the same conclusion. You're the one lashing out.

 

[larryz]

Not until you're more respectful of Stooge-Americans.

Personally, I think it's a handsome portrait, and perfectly in keeping with the times... a brilliant tribute to a comedy genius.

 

[Homemade Imagineering]

There's not too much info other than what I believe I've shared before (maybe I didn't; I'm unsure). Expect some rides to get some mild to moderate modifications to remove inherently problematic elements or add slightly more inclusive elements. I doubt we will see any other major wholesale changes along the lines of Splash (potential HoP redo excepted, but even then I think it is less likely to happen).

Should we expect these changes to occur at both coasts (yes I am aware DLR doesn’t have HoP, CBJ, CoP etc... )? Of course, if the WDW changes were to come to DLR then we’d only see changes on IASW, JC and Pan. Maybe even Lincoln?

 

[bshah365]

I honestly feel like he used the wrong terminology... I want to believe what he meant by "fast track" wasn't that they were rushing but that this project is now at the top of their priority list. Also, I remember reading somewhere that Disney had 18 billion just sitting in the bank right now.. and that they weren't even close to going bankrupt any time soon.. so them not being able to afford giving this ride justice isn't a good excuse.. if they went HARD on this refurb, it would cost them a couple million at most.. which is nothing when you look at 18 billion...

I'm not trying to get slaughtered on here, but.... if I were Disney, I would start on Florida first.. Cali has no hope in reopening any time soon and Florida would bring in immediate revenue which is something they need right now...