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

[celluloid]

I don't think anyone is truly confused, at least not in this forum. As @MisterPenguin observed, people are just making up "gotcha" points because they oppose the retheme.

That makes sense. No one should outside the brand or within the company should say the company is condemning the Song of The South or its inspired attraction then, as that would not be factually correct.

 

[MickeyLuv'r]

Chapek outright condemned it more or less.

Disney CEO Bob Chapek Incorrectly Claims Splash Mountain is 60 Years Old, Acknowledges Backlash from "Superfans"

Walt Disney World news, photos, and reviews! We provide you with daily news from the Walt Disney World theme parks and beyond

blogmickey.com

Wait...Chapek has been at Disney for nearly 30 years, but said in the linked interview that Splash Mountain is 60 years old? That is somewhat surprising.

It is also somewhat surprising - also per the link- that his college undergraduate degree is in microbiology.

 

[LittleBuford]

that makes sense. No one should say the company is condemning the Song of The South or its inspired attraction then, as that would not be factually correct.

The company has long since disavowed the film—no-one would deny that. There’s nothing new about the situation that some here are gloating over: Disney has for decades suppressed the film while happily running an attraction based on it.

 

[celluloid]

The company has long since disavowed the film—no-one would deny that. There’s nothing new about the situation that some here are gloating over: Disney has for decades suppressed the film while happily running an attraction based on it.

It depends on the country in terms of the film sales. The movie was still for sale overseas. We just know how strict the US was on it first. The USA was one of the few places they did not make money off of the film sales after the last theatrical release. to Disavow is not an appropriate word to use and neither is condemn. Disavow would be to no longer take responsibility or the support of something. Condemn would be not to accept anything related to it. It may seem semantic, but condemning is literally one of the strongest words in language to have the opposite of any support or allowance of it. The company is far from that.

As they readily took money from sales of other countries and cloned the attraction again in japan and were fine with selling merchandise with those characters, even to this day without a direct connection to the ride, it would be silly not to delusional not to deny that.

Again, they are selling the 70s artwork of Ber Bear on merch right now, so you can't say it is based on his existence in Splash Mountain. That is far from Disavow or condemnation. Balancing the optics, yes, but not condemnation.

 

[LittleBuford]

It depends on the country in terms of the film sales. The movie was still for sale overseas. We just know how strict the US was on it first. The USA was one of the few places they did not make money off of the film sales after the last theatrical release. to Disavow is not an appropriate word to use and neither is condemn. Disavow would be to no longer take responsibility or the support of something. Condemn would be not to accept anything related to it. It may seem semantic, but condemning is literally one of the strongest words in language to have the opposite of any support or allowance of it. The company is far from that.

As they readily took money from sales of other countries and cloned the attraction again in japan and were fine with selling merchandise with those characters, even to this day without a direct connection to the ride, it would be silly not to delusional not to deny that.

Again, they are selling the 70s artwork of Ber Bear on merch right now, so you can't say it is based on his existence in Splash Mountain. That is far from Disavow or condemnation. Balancing the optics, yes, but not condemnation.

I should have made clear that I was referring to the US market. As a Brit who owned an official copy of the film on video as a child, I know the situation was different elsewhere. I suppose the point I'm trying to make is that Disney's approach to the IP in question has long been inconsistent in the American context: the ride opened just as the film was locked away forever.

 

[Roger_the_pianist]

Maybe a thought process at the time of development and construction was *maybe if we have a Br'er Rabbit ride it will make people forget the film*

But really I think it was just: *we have all of these folksy animal animactronics! What to do? Well we have that one movie with folksy animals*

 

[celluloid]

I should have made clear that I was referring to the US market. As a Brit who owned an official copy of the film on video as a child, I know the situation was different elsewhere. I suppose the point I'm trying to make is that Disney's approach to the IP in question has long been inconsistent in the American context: the ride opened just as the film was locked away forever.

I agree with that.

That is the point where it seems no one should be using the term disavowed or condemned for the film or attraction. Suppressed accessibility in the United States for the film would be a phrase if one had to give it one. A worldwide company who is satisfied with making money off of the film in every other part of the world(while keeping finding ways to profit off of it peripherally within the US) are disavowing it. That is just finding other markets. And if they continue to do that, are the problems really being addressed with any relevance or sincerity?

Again, we have the character directly from the film on merchandise and painted on the Market Co-Op at Disney Springs this year. To commemorate the 50th no less. Do you think if you are fine making money and producing new merchandise off of the characters based in that property, you have disavowed it? That is the issue I have with that claim, and it is fine if you disagree. I am just genuinely curious.

 

[Dear Prudence]

It's been very clearly well documented that the designs for the America Sings animals come from the never-finished Catfish Bend movie which is based on the book series of the same name. Catfish Bend and America Sings were designed by many of the same artists and animators who worked on SOTS. There is even a reference to Catfish Bend in the Disneyland version of the attraction, which people who actually go to the parks and not just grandstand are familiar with. One of the Imagineers (I don't know which one, I don't have to book in front of me) clearly stated that Splash Mountain is supposed to be akin to the Joseph Campell Hero of a Thousand Faces (and hits beat for beat), and the Disneyland finale, in particular, is supposed to invoke The Wizard of Oz.

You also could buy SOTS fairly easily in the US. It was regularly in the "import" section of Tower Records, next to the live bootlegs cds of Jewel and Tori Amos labeled "imports." It has a huge overseas market and was shown on television in both Europe and the UK until fairly recently. The whole mythos behind it being *~locked awayyyyyyy*~ has always struck me as being very silly.

 

[LittleBuford]

Do you think if you are fine making money and producing new merchandise off of the characters based in that property, you have disavowed it? That is the issue I have with that claim, and it is fine if you disagree. I am just genuinely curious.

I think Disney’s approach before 2020 was to disassociate the animal characters from the film itself and treat them almost as their own IP. Many of us—myself include—thought this strategy sufficient and thus saw no great contradiction between the film’s suppression in the US and the continuing visibility and marketing of its characters. With the announcement of the retheme, Disney laid bare something that I think should have been obvious to all of us, namely that the characters really can’t be fully divorced from Song of the South. The contradiction has been exposed for what it is (I for one can’t unsee it), which is why the retheme will happen one way or the other.

Perhaps “disavowal” is too strong a term for this process, but I think it’s reasonable to say that Song of the South and its associated characters have become progressively less visible in the US, and that the retheme of Splash Mountain is a further move in this direction. In the meantime, aspects of the older approach will persist, which is why the ride remains open and the characters continue to populate Disney merchandise. I think that’ll change before long, however.

 

[LittleBuford]

The whole mythos behind it being *~locked awayyyyyyy*~ has always struck me as being very silly.

The film hasn’t been made officially available in the US for over 30 years. There’s nothing remotely “mythical” about it.

 

[Dear Prudence]

The film hasn’t been made officially available in the US for over 30 years. There’s nothing remotely “mythical” about it.

You could not "officially" obtain it, but it was easily available if you tried is what I am saying. If you weren't spending your time saying it couldn't be found, you could find it, is what I am saying. Video stores had European or Japanese copies. Tower Records which was a fairly large and reputable chain regularly had copies of both. It had been shown a couple of times on the Spanish language tv stations in Spanish dub form.

 

[Dear Prudence]

Also, it's worth noting that, while the film was "locked away," that didn't mean other films in the Disney canon weren't/aren't just as bad. Certainly not in a way that non-BIPOC can quantify, that's for sure--but we've clearly seen that Disney doesn't actually care, and it's about the performance and optics of caring. They can't even keep the narrative straight of who is getting 86'd and who is slapped on merch the next day/featured in fireworks/gets a stupid disaster kite made of them, sooo

 

[matt9112]

You don’t think they’ll build a Tiana ride elsewhere though?

That would be a better outcome....but its easier to retheme splash and hey they can say there not racist!

 

[LittleBuford]

You could not "officially" obtain it, but it was easily available if you tried is what I am saying. If you weren't spending your time saying it couldn't be found, you could find it, is what I am saying. Video stores had European or Japanese copies. Tower Records which was a fairly large and reputable chain regularly had copies of both. It had been shown a couple of times on the Spanish language tv stations in Spanish dub form.

I don't think anyone (least of all me) is denying that the film is easy to obtain and watch, especially now that it's freely available on the internet. The point is that Disney itself has stopped distributing the film in any form in the US since the late '80s.

 

[Dear Prudence]

I don't think anyone (least of all me) is denying that the film is easy to obtain and watch, especially now that it's freely available on the internet. The point is that Disney itself has stopped distributing the film in any form in the US since the late '80s.

I hope it doesn't come across as picking on you, because that's not my intent at all. It's just that the film being unavailable is sort of a half-truth, and that the fact that you could get it if you really wanted it with relatively little difficulty is important.

 

[LittleBuford]

I hope it doesn't come across as picking on you, because that's not my intent at all. It's just that the film being unavailable is sort of a half-truth, and that the fact that you could get it if you really wanted it with relatively little difficulty is important.

But no-one has said the film can't be obtained. I agree with you that it's rather easy to get one's hands on, but that's beside the point. I don't really understand why you consider it important to the present discussion.

 

[Animaniac93-98]

I hope it doesn't come across as picking on you, because that's not my intent at all. It's just that the film being unavailable is sort of a half-truth, and that the fact that you could get it if you really wanted it with relatively little difficulty is important.

That and video and audio clips from the movie finding their way to various products in the USA, including the DVD release of "One Hour in Wonderland" which has the first cartoon segment uncut.

 

[Dear Prudence]

That and video and audio clips from the movie finding their way to various products in the USA, including the DVD release of "One Hour in Wonderland" which has the first cartoon segment uncut.

You could buy the cartoon segments on reel to reel. They had them in the classrooms at my elementary school.

 

[Animaniac93-98]

There was also a time when you couldn't buy ANY Disney movie, but that didn't stop people from wanting to go on rides based on Peter Pan and Alice in Wonderland.

 

[LittleBuford]

That and video and audio clips from the movie finding their way to various products in the USA, including the DVD release of "One Hour in Wonderland" which has the first cartoon segment uncut.

You could buy the cartoon segments on reel to reel. They had them in the classrooms at my elementary school.

There was also a time when you couldn't buy ANY Disney movie, but that didn't stop people from wanting to go on rides based on Peter Pan and Alice in Wonderland.

I honestly don't understand the point either of you is trying to make. How does any of this relate to what we're discussing? Against whom or what are you arguing exactly?