Those are all huge moneymakers that are integral parts of their brand and marketing. Even if they were "as bad," (and I am not someone who quantifies that stuff) they'd find some way to justify it. Because, like, you and I have both said, this is 100000% their fault. Them acting like SOTS isn't their IP and their fault is just BONKERS. The way they act like Splash wasn't in their parks for 30+ years, like they weren't the ones who made it is WILD.
Why is it that every other theme park in the US has tubular steel track coasters and they NEVER have to replace the tracks and yet people keep emphatically stating that the track needs to be replaced? I honestly want to know…
Disney’s general approach to problematic material is to quietly edit or (when that isn’t possible) bury it. Examples include the Jewish peddler in The Three Little Pigs (changed shortly after WW2 because of its anti-Semitism), Sunflower in Fantasia, and the original lyrics to “Arabian Nights”. I can’t recall a time when they’ve shone a spotlight on the issue or their addressing of it; the discourse surrounding the Splash Mountain retheme is about as close as they’ve come to being direct. That isn’t to excuse their evasive approach; I’m just not surprised by it in the same way you seem to be.
General wear and tear. It dosen't matter if it is a wooden coaster or a steel coaster over time the track will get rough. I guarantee those coasters at Six Flags are rougher now then the day they opened.
Great point about marketing and being integral to the brand, Fantasia and Peter Pan especially. Where would we be without Sorcerer Mickey, Tinkerbell, and pixie dust? The same thing can’t be said about SotS. You know what else is marketable? PatF.
I do realize that…the parks aren’t open 365 and the attendance is no where the same. I was just genuinely curious as to why everyone says the track needs to be replaced…makes sense I feel educated!
Need to show your work on this one. The film did disastrously; it was the seventh-best performing animated film in 2009 (barely beating out Coraline). A year later Tangled made twice as much.
Space Mountain is "rough" for me due to its sharp turns creating big lateral whiplashing. Those turns should have been banked.
How? (Asked with sincerity and genuine interest in your opinion.)
I said nothing about how much money the movie made in theaters, so not sure what this has to do with what I wrote.
I agree…I know that because you’re in the dark and can’t “brace” yourself on a dip or turn has a lot to do with it…I still enjoy it although I feel like it’s taking more time to recover after riding it… lol
By not pretending SotS doesn’t exist and owning up to the mistakes that were made. As stated before, Disney had a big hand in creating stigma surrounding the film. They won’t officially release the movie and won’t give those who’ve never seen it a chance to watch it. And now when people Google SotS, they will not only see that it’s racist, but they will find that Disney is hiding it and therefore can’t watch it (not legally, at least). That creates more tension and strengthens the stigma, when Disney could have been doing things to lessen the stigma. But they refuse. They’ve had nearly 80 years to correct the issue, but they don’t want to.
Just guessing since no one here knows what their true reasons are, but maybe Disney thinks that since the ride itself isn't racist in the slightest, that they don't need to say anything. Just guessing.
Exactly... thats why i dont buy for 1 minute that Disney was planning to remove Splash and replace it w Tiana a movie that was far from successful....
Thanks for your response. If I may ask a follow-on question, what do you think stands to be gained by lessening the stigma, and for whom? My sense from your other posts is that you’re no huge fan of the film, so I don’t think you’re hoping for a recuperation of Song of the South itself.
You stated, without evidence, PATF was marketable. I countered by demonstrating it’s been a financial failure by an easily observable metric. You’re still refusing to offer evidence of your conclusion.
She’s a Disney princess. That automatically makes her (and her film) marketable.
