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

[Parker in NYC]

Reminder that Disney initially brushed off The Princess and the Frog as a flop for not making as much money as they'd hoped it would. Somehow, I doubt they were really planning this for a few years, especially if some of the things I've heard on this site are true.

Wasn't that just another nifty excuse for them to kill hand-drawn animation? I'd say that in a computer-animated world, PATF did pretty damn good for a dying medium.

 

[Homemade Imagineering]

The reason Jim gave does nothing to improve the diversity. The fact that they chose a cartoon animal over African children only takes away from that.

Update on that... it appears that the Marc Davis vignette in question was actually altered in the early 70s, evidenced by this video here:


Skip to 0:39

Maybe this was another Jim Hill misconception after all...

 

[celluloid]

So you're saying that Disney is spending tons of money to retheme Splash Mountain because they think it will sell tons more of PatF merch (which is already available)?

Frozen merch was available before Maelstrom. Little Mermaid had multiple venue and attention as well as merch for 25 years. Whinnie The Pooh, even longer than that before it had an attraction, even Splash itself had minor representation in attractions and an iconic sellable song for decades in the parks before it it got own attraction inspired by it but it became a big marketing push.
It is the bottom line.

And relatively, "tons" of money is an emotional hyperbole. It is not dirt cheap but it is in fact a retheme that uses the same infastructure, which is not a ground up build again with Return on Investment. They can market it as a new attraction and synergize.

 

[mickEblu]

I don’t fully understand that line of thought people have. Maybe I’m more optimistic, but Disney’s track record has far more successes to me then misses.

My list that gives me hope, and maybe it’s because I look at a company wide lense:

- Buena Vista Street
- Cars Land
- Radiator Springs Racers
- Pandora
- Flight of Passage
- Galaxy’s Edge
- Rise of the Resistance
- Toy Story Land
- Frozen Ride
- Runaway Railway
- Mystic Manor
- Grizzly Coaster
- Shanghai Pirates
- Alice in Wonderland attraction plussing
- Peter Pan attraction plussing
- ROA redo

I just don’t see them messing up one of their icon rides.

I think your list goes too far back, as in pre Chapek. If you start that list from 2016 on it gets a lot less attractive.

 

[Brer Oswald]

You’re claiming two contradictory things here: 1) that the ride has no meaningful connection to the film and is just an assortment of cartoon characters; and 2) that the folktales “enshrined in the film will be lost from public consciousness” because of the retheme.

The ride has no connection to the problem parts of the film, the live action segments. If you’ve seen the film, you’d know that the animated sequences aren’t remotely dependent on the live action story, but the morals taught in the animated segments have an impact on the live action segments. This is why people who’ve watched the film (back in the 40s up to today), hate it, and think it’s racist STILL say they liked the animated sections.

It is very easy to separate the Brer Rabbit stories from the awkward live action missteps because they are very clearly separated in the film.

For his second point, he isn’t being contradictory. The live action parts of the film were completely made up by Disney in the 40s. The animated segments were not. They’re adaptations of the African American folktales. And as I’ve said MANY times, when Disney adapts stories, they involuntarily bear the burden of representing these stories for the modern audience. Disney says Brer Rabbit is racist (because they don’t see an easy path to market it with the mess they’ve made), then EVERYONE thinks the character is racist.

You may think I’m wrong, but the immediate dismissal by so many people proves my point. Nobody has easy access to these stories. There’s no Disney film they can watch. So it just becomes a giant game of telephone. All it takes is a bit of research, but most people barely care enough about the topic to take that time.

 

[LittleBuford]

Nobody has easy access to these stories. There’s no Disney film they can watch. So it just becomes a giant game of telephone. All it takes is a bit of research, but most people barely care enough about the topic to take that time.

This is what I find contradictory. If people have to do research to understand Splash Mountain's relationship to African American folklore, then clearly the ride itself is doing nothing to preserve that tradition or keep it in the public consciousness.

I can't recall any discussion of Splash Mountain's claimed educational merits before the retheme was announced.

 

[larryz]

But what does that get them? In your mind, is Disney thinking "Pandering to complainers on Twitter will help us make money?"

It's more what it doesn't get them -- a storm of negative publicity.

 

[Donaldfan1934]

The ride has no connection to the problem parts of the film, the live action segments. If you’ve seen the film, you’d know that the animated sequences aren’t remotely dependent on the live action story, but the morals taught in the animated segments have an impact on the live action segments. This is why people who’ve watched the film (back in the 40s up to today), hate it, and think it’s racist STILL say they liked the animated sections.

It is very easy to separate the Brer Rabbit stories from the awkward live action missteps because they are very clearly separated in the film.

For his second point, he isn’t being contradictory. The live action parts of the film were completely made up by Disney in the 40s. The animated segments were not. They’re adaptations of the African American folktales. And as I’ve said MANY times, when Disney adapts stories, they involuntarily bear the burden of representing these stories for the modern audience. Disney says Brer Rabbit is racist (because they don’t see an easy path to market it with the mess they’ve made), then EVERYONE thinks the character is racist.

You may think I’m wrong, but the immediate dismissal by so many people proves my point. Nobody has easy access to these stories. There’s no Disney film they can watch. So it just becomes a giant game of telephone. All it takes is a bit of research, but most people barely care enough about the topic to take that time.

You really hit the nail on the head in summing up the situation at hand. This all just goes to show that some people really need to step back and take more time to understand whatever or whomever they’re currently outraged about before they grab their torches and pitchforks.

 

[LittleBuford]

You really hit the nail on the head in summing up the situation at hand. This all just goes to show that some people really need to step back and take more time to understand whatever or whomever they’re currently outraged about before they grab their torches and pitchforks.

Those who disagree with his perspective aren’t necessarily outraged or even opposed to the ride in its present form. I’m certainly not.

 

[Donaldfan1934]

Those who disagree with his perspective aren’t necessarily outraged or even opposed to the ride in its present form. I’m certainly not.

Sorry, I probably should’ve clarified that I wasn’t talking about someone like you who disagrees with the folklore argument while not necessarily being opposed to the current ride. I was specifically talking about the people who he said make immediate dismissals of the Brer Rabbit character without caring enough about the topic to do a bit of research on it.

 

[LittleBuford]

Sorry, I probably should’ve clarified that I wasn’t talking about someone like you who disagrees with the folklore argument while not necessarily being opposed to the current ride. I was specifically talking about the people who he said make immediate dismissals of the Brer Rabbit character without caring enough about the topic to do a bit of research on it.

Thanks for clarifying, and no worries.

 

[EPICOT]

The macro-level problem with this type of thinking is that it makes every social/cultural institution into a political matter. I can’t go to a major sporting event without making a political decision on the flag. I can’t listen to many mainstream artists, such as Taylor Swift who has broad appeal, without a political message being presented. Now, I can’t go to a Disney Park without a political decision on Splash Mountain. You can brush all these things off as minor inconveniences, but the sum total is that it is dividing people at places that should be unifying across political ideologies.

I have no doubt that the decision is being made in good faith by those in Disney who truly support this modern definition of “diversity and inclusion,” but that’s a problem when this ideology is intentionally divisive. The implied message is that if you support Splash Mountain, then you are racist or, at best, passively allowing racism to exist. Those on both sides of this issue on these forums have admitted that very few to no guests were offended by Splash Mountain—then why change it?

 

[SamusAranX]

This is what I find contradictory. If people have to do research to understand Splash Mountain's relationship to African American folklore, then clearly the ride itself is doing nothing to preserve that tradition or keep it in the public consciousness.

I can't recall any discussion of Splash Mountain's claimed educational merits before the retheme was announced.

Ok, then I raise you with this: if people have to do research to understand Splash Mountain's relationship to Song of the South and the prejudiced elements of the live action segments, then clearly the ride itself is doing nothing to preserve that prejudice or keep it in the public consciousness.

I think this goes back to @Brer Oswald 's earlier point; Disney created this mess by turning SotS into the "forbidden fruit" of it's vault. Even Whoopi Golberg has advocated it be rereleased with contextual footage.

 

[_caleb]

The macro-level problem with this type of thinking is that it makes every social/cultural institution into a political matter. I can’t go to a major sporting event without making a political decision on the flag. I can’t listen to many mainstream artists, such as Taylor Swift who has broad appeal, without a political message being presented. Now, I can’t go to a Disney Park without a political decision on Splash Mountain. You can brush all these things off as minor inconveniences, but the sum total is that it is dividing people at places that should be unifying across political ideologies.

I have no doubt that the decision is being made in good faith by those in Disney who truly support this modern definition of “diversity and inclusion,” but that’s a problem when this ideology is intentionally divisive. The implied message is that if you support Splash Mountain, then you are racist or, at best, passively allowing racism to exist. Those on both sides of this issue on these forums have admitted that very few to no guests were offended by Splash Mountain—then why change it?

The decision to retheme Splash Mountain wasn’t made political by Disney, but by all those who don’t take Disney at their word that they see the change as part of their ongoing effort to make all guests feel welcome and included. It doesn’t matter if ten guests were offended or ten thousand, Disney deemed the Brer theme to have enough potential to offend (obviously due to its association with Song of the South) that it was worth the time, money, and backlash to change it.

Haven’t any of you ever had someone from a different culture visit your home? You really want them to feel welcome, so before they arrive, you clean house and consider how anything in your home might offend them. Then you have to decide if you’re going to change anything—even things you love–in order to make them more comfortable and welcome.

If you want to make your Muslim friends comfortable, you don’t serve pork for dinner. If you want to make your East Asian friends comfortable, you don’t wear shoes in the house. As the host, you make these changes if you care about making everyone feel welcome and included.

The Disney parks are like a restaurant in a changing neighborhood. They’re changing the menu in order to make sure all the neighbors feel welcome. I know some of you are upset that your favorite dish on the menu is changing, and as I’ve said, it’s ok to be sad about that. But can’t you (at least in theory) appreciate the desire to change for the sake of an environment that includes everyone?

 

[SSE_King]

If this were the Disney of a different era, instead of shoehorning PATF into a ride/area where I don't feel like it really belongs, they should have created all new characters and a new storyline for Splash. Keep the bluegrass/Southern feel to it (but with a new soundtrack/songs), keep the queue and theming mostly the same, even keep most of the animal animatronics, but swap out Brer Rabbit/Fox/Bear with a cast of new animal characters created specifically for the ride. That way you can keep the classic feel of Splash while then building a brand new PATF somewhere else, with a unique track and layout that wasn't just overlaid on top of an existing beloved attraction.

I know that's not Disney's MO anymore, to create brand new characters and stories for Disney attractions, because sadly it seems like they've lost a lot of their creativity when it comes to things like that. But that would have been the best solution, I feel.

 

[erasure fan1]

The decision to retheme Splash Mountain wasn’t made political by Disney, but by all those who don’t take Disney at their word that they see the change as part of their ongoing effort to make all guests feel welcome and included

I'd push back a bit and say that the decision was made political by them when they selected splash to replace. The decision to retheme splash is very much a political statement from Disney. If it was just about giving equal representation, PatF would be getting a new major attraction and splash would stay. As the old saying goes, actions speak louder than words. And Disneys actions in my opinion are political.

It doesn’t matter if ten guests were offended or ten thousand, Disney deemed the Brer theme to have enough potential to offend (obviously due to its association with Song of the South) that it was worth the time, money, and backlash to change

We all know this is why it is changing. So just because it's not their public statement, that doesn't make it any less of a political statement on Disneys part in my opinion. So I get why the person you were responding to said it was a political matter.

while then building a brand new PATF somewhere else, with a unique track and layout that wasn't just overlaid on top of an existing beloved attraction.

I'm not sure Disney has the ability to pull off this retheme and not have it come off as mediocre. If getting rid of splash is what they are going to do, do it right and bulldoze the building and start fresh. That is what PatF deserves. There are so many cool things you can take from the movie for a great ride. But having to shoehorn them into a preexisting space, really will limit the creativity in my eyes.

 

[Bocabear]

I'm not sure Disney has the ability to pull off this retheme and not have it come off as mediocre. If getting rid of splash is what they are going to do, do it right and bulldoze the building and start fresh. That is what PatF deserves. There are so many cool things you can take from the movie for a great ride. But having to shoehorn them into a preexisting space, really will limit the creativity in my eyes.

I disagree... It is not like the FEA overlay where they were taking a very short attraction and expanding from there, Splash is a long ride with tons of scenery and show scenes... There are ample opportunities to tell a great story and create an engaging attraction within that framework...Question is more like will they spend the money to really do a great job with it...
While I am opposed to the change, I am hopeful they will make old school Disney magic with it and create a beautiful detailed attraction worthy of the franchise.

 

[erasure fan1]

I disagree... It is not like the FEA overlay where they were taking a very short attraction and expanding from there, Splash is a long ride with tons of scenery and show scenes... There are ample opportunities to tell a great story and create an engaging attraction within that framework...Question is more like will they spend the money to really do a great job with it...
While I am opposed to the change, I am hopeful they will make old school Disney magic with it and create a beautiful detailed attraction worthy of the franchise.

When I say I'm not sure Disney can pull this off, it's not because it couldn't be done. Its because I don't believe current Disney can do it. Even you wonder if they "will spend the money to really do a great job". I hope they make me eat my words and this comes out fantastic. PatF is at the top of my favorite modern Disney movies so I hope they do it justice. Disney has been more about cutting things and doing the minimum. And it's not like they have a stellar track record of replacing things and having the replacement be better than what was there before.

 

[Donaldfan1934]

It doesn’t matter if ten guests were offended or ten thousand

The number of offended guests should matter if you’re considering spending millions of dollars that may have otherwise been cut given the increasingly uncertain financial future of the parks division.

 

[Brer Oswald]

This is what I find contradictory. If people have to do research to understand Splash Mountain's relationship to African American folklore, then clearly the ride itself is doing nothing to preserve that tradition or keep it in the public consciousness.

I can't recall any discussion of Splash Mountain's claimed educational merits before the retheme was announced.

It’s not contradictory if you’ve been following my posts. Splash Mountain CLEARLY isn’t enough to teach these stories proper. Movies are wildly more available to the general audience than theme park attractions. So the only positive preservation of the stories for the general audience is available in a theme park, one that is increasingly becoming difficult for the middle class to even experience. In a log flume that appeals to adults no less.

Disney has needed to do more regarding this issue for a long time. That’s why some of us say the decision to retheme is “one step forward, two steps backward”. One step forward because a black human character is “allegedly” getting an attraction for the first time (allegedly because if she’s not the star, I’d consider it another step backwards). More representation is always a good thing.

Two steps backwards. One step backwards because of the mess they created in 1946. Another step back because rather than fixing the actual problem and making things right, they are just painting over it. Of course people think Brer Rabbit is offensive now because all they know is that he’s from the offensive banned Disney film, and now they don’t even want to keep the ride.

Why do you think the film was protested so hard back in the 40s? It wasn’t the only film with objectionable content about Black Americans, but it was the only one that was adapting their stories.

So no, this is not the most just decision. It may present the best financial opportunity for the company. But there are problems with this decision, and it isn’t that it’s “too woke” or “too PC” or whatever tired crap the further right leaning may say.

This will be the last you see of the Brer Rabbit character in the public consciousness. The problem will never be addressed, but forgotten about. The damage already done.

And with that, I’ve said everything that can be said.