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

[WondersOfLife]

I think Splash Mountain is a great attraction but I stand by my assessment that it probably is more coherent if you've seen Song of the South or were already familiar with the Brer Rabbit stories.

Here’s the thing. Nobody is saying that it isn’t “easier to follow” if you’ve seen the movie.

Everybody is saying that the movie tie-in is not necessary though. Given the opening date of this attraction and how irrelevant the movie already was by the time it opened, I’m pretty sure Disney knew that hardly anyone had even seen the movie... Hence the brilliant attraction storytelling.

It isn’t necessary to see the movie to fully understand the plot (if you have enough brain cells to put a plot together). It’s as simple as that. I’ve never seen the movie in my life. Neither has anyone in my family. We have done just fine understand the plot. Lol

 

[WondersOfLife]

No-one has claimed that their own personal perspective holds universally true. The most anyone can be accused of is assuming too quickly that they represent the majority, and in that I’m not alone.

You’re not alone but you don’t represent the majority, based on all the posts I have read here in this thread.

 

[GimpYancIent]

How is it absurd? It’s factually true that someone who’s seen the film (or knows the story) can better grasp the narrative of the ride. That goes for just about any attraction at Disney that is based on a movie.

Over the last multiple decades people ride SPLASH because it's a fun ride, period. Guests could care less about some story line. Zippity-do-da Zippity yay is a none-offensive tune that is good background music, deleting it from being played accomplishes nothing. As I have said all along SPLASH is a great ride, iconic and will continue to be a great ride regardless of PatF retheming.

 

[LittleBuford]

You’re not alone but you don’t represent the majority, based on all the posts I have read here in this thread.

"All the posts" = comments from (by my count) nine users, five of whom say the plot is easy to discern and four of whom say it's less so. Whether one can draw any sound conclusions from such a sample (made up of fewer than a dozen members of a WDW fansite) about the millions of people who experience the attraction each year is highly doubtful in my opinion.

I've already qualified some of my language in response to people's criticisms and offered to agree to disagree, since all of us are simply making assumptions that are impossible to prove in the absence of some sort of exit poll of riders. I'm really struggling to understand why this has become so contentious.

 

[LittleBuford]

Over the last multiple decades people ride SPLASH because it's a fun ride, period. Guests could care less about some story line. Zippity-do-da Zippity yay is a none-offensive tune that is good background music, deleting it from being played accomplishes nothing. As I have said all along SPLASH is a great ride, iconic and will continue to be a great ride regardless of PatF retheming.

I'm not sure why you're directing this at me. I never said that someone needs to understand the storyline well in order to enjoy the ride. On the contrary, I said just the opposite.

 

[Ghost93]

Here’s the thing. Nobody is saying that it isn’t “easier to follow” if you’ve seen the movie.

Everybody is saying that the movie tie-in is not necessary though. Given the opening date of this attraction and how irrelevant the movie already was by the time it opened, I’m pretty sure Disney knew that hardly anyone had even seen the movie... Hence the brilliant attraction storytelling.

It isn’t necessary to see the movie to fully understand the plot (if you have enough brain cells to put a plot together). It’s as simple as that. I’ve never seen the movie in my life. Neither has anyone in my family. We have done just fine understand the plot. Lol

How was the movie irrelevant by the time the ride opened? Song of the South was released twice in theaters in the 1980s, and twice in theaters in the 1970s. When the ride opened, promotional material clearly stated that the ride was based on the animated segments of "Song of the South." The Disney company simply had a different relationship with the movie in the 80s. In the 80s, when the ride was under construction, they viewed the film as a "Disney classic."

SOTS's final theatrical release (1986) and the opening of Splash Mountain (summer of 1989) also occurred before the Disney Renaissance, so Disney had less characters to choose from at the time. So as a result the Brer characters played a bigger role in Disney theme parks in the 80s — because there was no Ariel, Simba, Aladdin, Belle, Pocahontas, Hercules, etc. and all of their sidekicks to promote instead.

 

[WondersOfLife]

I'm really struggling to understand why this has become so contentious.

I struggle to realize why some people in this site get confused when people defend attractions.

It is a Walt Disney World fan site. People here are insanely attached to things and will debate about rides and theories to no end. It is no different than a Harry Potter fandom, or being overly obsessed with football players. It is contentious because this is literally what we do here. Lol. There is no other place for us to debate this kind of stuff with because nobody in the real world cares. So, here we are. A bunch of Disney nuts.

For the record, I disagree about agreeing to disagree. I still think it is ridiculous if someone cannot pick up the plot of Splash Mountain. It is insanely clear.

 

[Californian Elitist]

I'm not sure why you're directing this at me. I never said that someone needs to understand the storyline well in order to enjoy the ride. On the contrary, I said just the opposite.

I know exactly what you’re saying, and I agree with you.

No one is saying that one has to have seen SotS who enjoy Splash. Just that the ride would likely make more sense if one has actually seen SotS. I would say that this is true for any ride based on a movie. For example, I haven’t seen any of the recent Star Wars movies. Because of this, I don’t know what’s going on in Rise of the Resistance. That’s not to say that I will have a terrible time on the ride. It just means I don’t know what’s happening.

Same thing with Toad. I rode Toad many times for many years without having ever seen The Adventures of Ichabod and Mr. Toad. I finally watched it one day and I was able to make the connections to the ride.

 

[LittleBuford]

I struggle to realize why some people in this site get confused when people defend attractions.

No defence was necessary, because absolutely no criticism was levelled. That’s why the tone of this discussion is so baffling to me.

 

[LittleBuford]

I know exactly what you’re saying, and I agree with you.

No one is saying that one has to have seen SotS who enjoy Splash. Just that the ride would likely make more sense if one has actually seen SotS. I would say that this is true for any ride based on a movie. For example, I haven’t seen any of the recent Star Wars movies. Because of this, I don’t know what’s going on in Rise of the Resistance. That’s not to say that I will have a terrible time on the ride. It just means I don’t know what’s happening.

Same thing with Toad. I rode Toad many times for many years without having ever seen The Adventures of Ichabod and Mr. Toad. I finally watched it one day and I was able to make the connections to the ride.

Lovely to hear from you as always!

You guys are so lucky to still have Toad. I can’t think of a better example of a ride that’s insanely fun even when you have no idea what’s going on!

 

[Coaster Lover]

I mean ... There's also the fact that it's in a land based around the American frontier while Robin Hood takes place in 12th century England.

Or Cars... or Woody's Round Up (not that we don't already have enough Toy Story representation around WDW). The issue is that Imagineering designed an attraction that will fit quite well into New Orleans Square for Disneyland. Then, when they looked at WDW, they just sort of said "meh... we'll save some money by doing the same thing in FL and we'll justify the decision publicly by pushing the fact that we're doing a ride around one of our POC characters despite the fact that it doesn't fit the land at all."

 

[Californian Elitist]

Lovely to hear from you as always!

You guys are so lucky to still have Toad. I can’t think of a better example of a ride that’s insanely fun even when you have no idea what’s going on!

Thank you, my friend!

Yes, I love that ride! But I enjoyed it so much more after I watched the movie lol. Not planning on watching any of the new Star Wars movies, so Rise will just be something that I don’t understand.

 

[WondersOfLife]

How was the movie irrelevant by the time the ride opened?

The movie was released in 1946

Song of the South was released twice in theaters in the 1980s, and twice in theaters in the 1970s.

I think that is irrelevant. It was re-released in 1986 specifically to promote the ride. The re-releases in 1972 and 1973 were more than 15 years before the attraction opened... And the '73 re-released was just piggy backed off the back of Aristocats. They aren't more significant than any other re-release that nobody talks about.

When the ride opened, promotional material clearly stated that the ride was based on the animated segments of "Song of the South."

Mmmmm.... Yea? There's also a crap ton of videos on the internet that say the only reason they used Song of the South was to re-purpose AAs from America Sings that resembled the characters from the movie. That is really the only reason Splash Mountain exists today in any correlation to the movie.

The Disney company simply had a different relationship with the movie in the 80s.

Obviously.

In the 80s, when the ride was under construction, they viewed the film as a "Disney classic."

Fantasia is a "Disney classic" too, but most people haven't seen that either... Or many other "Disney classics" for that manner.

SOTS's final theatrical release (1986) and the opening of Splash Mountain (summer of 1989) also occurred before the Disney Renaissance, so Disney had less characters to choose from at the time.

That doesn't mean that the film was relevant to the modern day audience of the time. The film was 46 years old. That is equivalent to the year of 1976 today... Why are we not getting any Bedknobs & Broomsticks, Robin Hood, The Rescuers, and Herbie based rides today?

So as a result the Brer characters played a bigger role in Disney theme parks in the 80s

Obviously. That doesn't mean people really knew who they were, though.

— because there was no Ariel, Simba, Aladdin, Belle, Pocahontas, Hercules, etc. and all of their sidekicks to promote instead.

I'm perfectly fine with the "they didn't have much to choose from" argument... But that literally counterpoints your argument. "They didn't have all of these popular characters, so they had to go with something from the 40s." lol

 

[WondersOfLife]

I am positive people would say the exact same thing if Haunted Mansion were built entirely the same as it exists today and had a movie attached with it in the 70s.

Like I originally said... A good ride doesn't need a movie attached to it to know what is going on... And that is what Splash Mountain is. I haven't seen any Star Wars movies either, but I understand what is happening in Rise of the Resistance and Star Tours. Mr. Toad makes absolutely no sense in comparison to Alice in Wonderland at Disneyland. I consider Mr. Toad a classic, but not nearly as good as other attractions as a result.

I'm a theatre person... The same applies for a broadway show. It is all about storytelling. If you have never watched Spongebob and went to see the broadway show, you'd probably expect to not get the show at all... But after watching, you'd be shocked to realize that it had a cohesive plot that you could follow without needing to know any Spongebob references. (Don't knock my example, it had 12 Tony nominations) Same for Lion King, Aladdin, Beauty and the Beast... Literally any movie-based broadway musical that has done good.

 

[Ghost93]

Fantasia is a "Disney classic" too, but most people haven't seen that either... Or many other "Disney classics" for that manner.

Where on earth is this data for "most people haven't seen Fantasia"? When the movie was released on VHS in 1991 — 51 years after its initial release — it sold 14.2 million VHS cassette tapes, which was the best-selling movie of all time at that point behind ET. Adjusted for inflation, it is the 24th highest-grossing film of all time. Yes, that is with numerous re-releases over the 20th century, but still, it counts for something!

No defence was necessary, because absolutely no criticism was levelled. That’s why the tone of this discussion is so baffling to me.

I also am puzzled by the combative/over the defensive tone of this conversation. All I said was that the story of Splash Mountain is easier to understand if you had already seen SotS or were already familiar with the Brer Rabbit stories. Somehow people took that as an attack on the ride!

 

[LittleBuford]

Spoiler: Pompous and off-topic analogy

This is one of my favourite paintings of all time:

It's Leonardo's Virgin and Child with Saint Anne. You don't have to know anything about its subject matter to appreciate its beauty or to understand that we are witnessing a tender and meaningful family interaction. But knowing more adds to one's ability to make full sense of the imagery. A person familiar with such iconography would recognise that Christ's embrace of the lamb is symbolic of the Passion (he is essentially foretelling his own death), and that the woman in whose lap Mary sits is her mother, St. Anne. None of this information is necessary for a person to lose themselves in the picture—the work is amazing enough to be enjoyed entirely on its own terms. But it surely stands to reason that prior knowledge of the subject matter better equips the viewer to comprehend what they are seeing.

 

[HauntedPirate]

Thank you, my friend!

Yes, I love that ride! But I enjoyed it so much more after I watched the movie lol. Not planning on watching any of the new Star Wars movies, so Rise will just be something that I don’t understand.

You'll get the gist of Rise. It's not exactly a complicated plot, and they basically tell you what's going on the entire time.

The beauty of Splash Mountain - You can understand what's going on without knowing a thing about the movie that the characters were plucked from. That's what used to set Disney apart from the rest. Rise sort of does it, although you're kind of beaten over the head with the plot throughout the ride.

 

[G00fyDad]

You'll get the gist of Rise. It's not exactly a complicated plot, and they basically tell you what's going on the entire time.

Wait, wait, wait.... who are the guys in white in the large room with the window?

 

[Californian Elitist]

You'll get the gist of Rise. It's not exactly a complicated plot, and they basically tell you what's going on the entire time.

The beauty of Splash Mountain - You can understand what's going on without knowing a thing about the movie that the characters were plucked from. That's what used to set Disney apart from the rest. Rise sort of does it, although you're kind of beaten over the head with the plot throughout the ride.

Maybe I wasn’t paying attention, but I didn’t get the gist at all. I was confused during the entire duration of the ride.

Regarding Splash, yes, I had a good understanding of what was going on, but I understood it a lot more after I saw SotS. I don’t think that’s a far-fetched concept.

 

[TikibirdLand]

That doesn't mean that the film was relevant to the modern day audience of the time. The film was 46 years old. That is equivalent to the year of 1976 today... Why are we not getting any Bedknobs & Broomsticks, Robin Hood, The Rescuers, and Herbie based rides today?

No, but an important movie from 1977 comes into view about now...

Wait, wait, wait.... who are the guys in white in the large room with the window?

And, there it is! ... That's no Moon!