LittleBuford
Well-Known Member
Goodness, where to start . . .
No, that isn't what inclusivity means. I'll leave it there, because I don't see this leading anywhere positive.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
News Splash Mountain retheme to Princess and the Frog - Tiana's Bayou Adventure
- Thread starter wdwmagic
- Start date
- Status
No, that isn't what inclusivity means. I'll leave it there, because I don't see this leading anywhere positive.
Yes I know, but I didn’t know how else to phrase it.
The point is they are turning traditionally white characters into other ethnicities and calling it inclusive.
Seems foolish to me.
Who not create amazing new characters of all ethnicities?
It seems so lazy. Sorry we don’t want to put in the effort to create new stories so we will just re-do the old ones.
I don’t think anyone has a problem with all ethnicities being represented but stop forcing it.
I could care less if they made a new animated film with a white lead for the next 20 years just stop race swapping all the old stories to show how “inclusive” you are.
It’s pandering and it’s disgusting.
LittleBuford
Well-Known Member
Most major characters in film and TV, including in remakes, remain white.
As I said, this exchange isn't a rabbit hole I want to go down with you, so I'm bowing out.
That makes sense, when you know your wrong leave.
“Most major characters in film and TV, including in remakes, remain white”
Great so let’s change that!
Let’s make the majority of new stuff non white.
No one will complain.
I’d be willing to bet the movies GIANT numbers.
Or continue with lazy race swap pandering and having your movies bomb.
Stop making excuses for laziness under the guise of something is better than nothing.
Also not trying to be combative this topic just really angers me because is so obviously creative laziness and still people rush to defend it.
Doing the right thing the wrong way is not the way to fix this problem.
Dear Prudence
Well-Known Member
I wish they had gotten the film(s) right the first time around. I wish that if they were going to have changed it over, they would have done it closer to the film coming out, and not zeitgeist exploiting BIPOC pain. I wish that it wasn't also tied to a Disney + series (which, to be fair, already looks better than the film on many accounts). I know I wish a lot of things, but I wish that things would actually be inclusive, and they wouldn't just drag out their tokens to stop what is often entirely legitimate criticism. It occurred to me that we're probably going to get an attraction based on a Disney Plus series, which, you know, has potential, and is fine by me (because the Tangled series is so good!!!), but I wish they could just do things they should have already been going without expectation of being rewarded.
Incomudro
Well-Known Member
Exactly.
And I believe that the quest for inclusivity is often persued over good characters and writing.
Matter of fact, it's demonstrable in many current works we see on tv, and movies.
And it's destroying the parks.
Last edited:
LittleBuford
Well-Known Member
Can you offer any examples to back up this very sweeping and extreme assertion?
You know we are in the Splash Mountain thread right?
One of the greatest themed attractions in the history of the world.
Did you just ask for an example?
LittleBuford
Well-Known Member
Given that the retheme hasn’t even happened yet, I don’t think it can be offered as a valid example.
Last edited:
LittleBuford
Well-Known Member
I dislike this mural intensely, as I made clear in the Jungle Cruise thread. The problem here isn’t inclusivity, however, but design. The aesthetic is all wrong, regardless of the characters depicted in the poster.
You are saying the same thing. Inclusiveness happened. Good design did not. It was uncalled to remove good design for bad design. So one got budget and attention. The other did not. Therefore, it was a mural that did not feature anything that lacked inclusiveness and made a bad design out of it. The two should not be mutually exclusive, but the old mural did not need to change, and it did in the name of inclusiveness with no care to design.
You asked for a example. You got one.
Last edited:
LittleBuford
Well-Known Member
No, I didn’t get one. There are plenty of recent examples of bad design at WDW that have nothing to do with inclusivity. The new crêperie in the France pavilion, the badly written Arabic in the Morocco pavilion, parts of the new entrance at the Polynesian, and the Harmonious barges are just some that spring to mind.
Correlation isn’t causation. That the new Jungle Cruise mural seeks to be more inclusive is not the reason it looks bad.
ImperfectPixie
Well-Known Member
I'd also argue that inclusive design doesn't cost more than design that isn't inclusive. (As was insinuated in another comment.)
That terrible mural replaced the well designed and non offensive mural in the queue. That is not just correlation. That is why that would be a reasonable "valid" example.
There are plenty of bad designs going on without the rushed inclusiveness ones, but the rush to be inclusive are some of the worst offenders.
I also find it funny that all of your examples, except for creperie, were creative moves that were pushed forward with the idea of(more marketable in the name of) culturing or not wanting to offend. So you gave your own additional examples where the powers that be thought they were going to incorporate more but failed. Of course it could be done right, but there are examples abundant where there is not a care to.
Also, a bonus one: Pirates don't steal from a town to organize an auction of the stolen items. They would just steal them. Another show quality downgrade.
Last edited:
It does when making something new for the sake of adding inclusivity costs additional money. Reimaginings. POTC, Jungle Cruise, Splash Mountain, Haunted Mansion (too soon?) etc.
LittleBuford
Well-Known Member
You're seriously going to maintain that the entrance to the Polynesian (to pick just one of my examples) was rebuilt in the name of inclusivity?
It seems to me that you're stretching the concept well beyond what it can reasonably accommodate simply because it offers a convenient scapegoat. The common denominator here is bad design, nothing else.
There was a list there that mentioned earlier in there with the idea in mind or as more marketable. Should the Polynesian culture not be a consideration in the design? The company pays a team at an executive level to oversee this aspect of design on major projects. I am not arguing against the idea of inclusiveness. If you hire an agenda team and pay them and promote them to the public...then your Polynesian themed hotel design should go over well and be...more Polynesian inspired than what was before it right? Or does inclusiveness only matter when they can squeeze it in as a selling point?
(such as the idea of Splash Mountain, which about a year and a half since announcement but no physical work on the operating attraction, they are still patting themselves on the back for)
You were asked for examples and do not like them, and then your counter arguments turn to passive insults/avoiding the evidence that those provided to you.
The new Jungle Cruise Mural is a bad design. It has no reason to exist other than the more inclusion even in the queue that never had a single race depicted on on the old one. That terrible mural replaced a well painted one there was no reason it could not have at least go elsewhere in the same queue. It would have still been a bad design, but it would not have been ruining a really good one that had no reason to be removed.
That is evidence to your request. The idea of inclusiveness will not ruin aspects of the parks. The way Disney is doing it so far can. This and other less than previous track record moves in the current climate portfolio are the reason people don't put any easy hopes or thoughts that the Splash Mountain removal will have a worthy replacement.
Last edited:
LittleBuford
Well-Known Member
But this is purely made up. The remodelled entrance at the Polynesian has nothing to do with an inclusivity agenda, nor has it resulted in the resort looking “more Polynesian than what was before it”; on the contrary, wood textures have been replaced by metal and concrete.
- Status