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

[Trauma]

I don't think snarky posts on Twitter are Disney's brand anyway. I for one would lose respect for the company if it went that route.

After all they have done you haven’t lost respect for this company yet?

A twitter post is what it would take?

 

[LittleBuford]

Snark isn’t bad, nor is it in-Disney.

I'm not saying it's inherently bad, but it is (in my view at least) antithetical to Disney's public-facing brand, even if it features in some of the content the company produces.

 

[LittleBuford]

After all they have done you haven’t lost respect for this company yet?

A twitter post is what it would take?

There are plenty of things Disney has done that have made me lose respect for the company. Snarky tweets would be an addition to that list.

For me, it isn't an either/or situation. Some of Disney's decisions have earned my respect, others have diminished it. My overall feelings, however, are positive.

 

[MerlinTheGoat]

Paint the steamboat. Replace those expensive to maintain moving statues with some screens and projectors and we're good to go. The renderings could be preliminary sketches of what will be projected, not built.

Best chance of getting Tiana done on time and under budget.

Anyone have issues?

$35 million is not the budget, it is FAR higher than that now. And despite the fact that Splash only just closed, they already had a bunch of stuff made in preparation. That includes props and new animatronics.

If nothing else, at least the ride structure, track etc are already there. So the budget and effort is all being poured into the "show" elements. They won't need to squander large sums of money on building a new facility and worry about a new ride system like Cosmic Rewind.

 

[Midwest Elitist]

$35 million is not the budget, it is FAR higher than that now. And despite the fact that Splash only just closed, they already had a bunch of stuff made in preparation. That includes props and new animatronics.

If nothing else, at least the ride structure, track etc are already there. So the budget and effort is all being poured into the "show" elements.

Or much of the budget is going into destroying the concrete sets. Dismantling the Briar Patch looks like it's going to be a pain in the ***

 

[LittleBuford]

Let me tell you a story about media manipulation. It starts with TWDC .........

It is the brand of this and many other companies, the gentler, nicer Disney is a construct

I'm aware of that. But it's a construct that makes me (and others) happy and that depends on the cultivation and maintenance of a relentlessly upbeat image. Perhaps others would prefer Disney to drop the act, but I'm happy to suspend my disbelief and enjoy the fiction.

 

[MerlinTheGoat]

Or much of the budget is going into destroying the concrete sets. Dismantling the Briar Patch looks like it's going to be a pain in the ***

I doubt any of that stuff will be trouble to demolish. Lot harder and more expensive to build things than it is to destroy them.

 

[BrerFoxesBayouAdventure]

Subsequently raising that amount based on Twitter outcry is further evidence of very basic problems. It once again emphasizes exec’s utter cluelessness that they were taken by surprise by the reaction, but reacting to it shows an impulsiveness, poor judgement, and lack of self-confidence (the reason Splash actually needed a change were the historical realities surrounding the production and release of the original film, not the fact that a group of vociferous posters got mad on-line). Twitter is not real life. The fact that Disney’s leaders don’t know that…

Splash needed to change, but it needed to be changed by a company with a very clear vision of its past and future and the will to dedicate copious resources to the project.

It's like what happened with 20,000 Leagues; the company's been looking for an excuse to close the ride for years now and only now due to recent events do they finally have the opportunity to kill it off once and for all.

The original plan for the retheme, as we all know, was even worse than what they went with and only the level of backlash it got scared them into giving it a slightly higher budget.

 

[fgmnt]

And this is why the despair runs so deep. $35 million is an offensively small amount for a project of this deep significance to the park and fan community, especially given how little Disney gets for their money and how underwhelming (though fun) GotG is despite a budget nearly 17 times as large. It shows an absolutely fundamental ignorance on the part of management that no subsequent increases can actually correct. They don’t understand the parks or thier audience.

Subsequently raising that amount based on Twitter outcry is further evidence of very basic problems. It once again emphasizes exec’s utter cluelessness that they were taken by surprise by the reaction, but reacting to it shows an impulsiveness, poor judgement, and lack of self-confidence (the reason Splash actually needed a change were the historical realities surrounding the production and release of the original film, not the fact that a group of vociferous posters got mad on-line). Twitter is not real life. The fact that Disney’s leaders don’t know that…

Splash needed to change, but it needed to be changed by a company with a very clear vision of its past and future and the will to dedicate copious resources to the project.

Yeah, at the end of the day I think it is right and good to change this attraction but I don't know why I should have any faith in WDI or its overseers to "do it right." There is no reason for me to believe that anyone in a decisionmaking capacity understands why this attraction was so great, the value of keeping an attraction this great in the lineup, and how to best recapture that in the next chapter of the ride building. Consequently, there is no reason to believe those same people appreciate potential consequences of coming out the other side of this with a worse show.

Disney doesn’t do this stuff because they’re an ossified antique that is terrified of Twitter, doesn’t understand the significance of the closure, has an insultingly narrow definition of their desired audience, and is shockingly bad at promotion (witness the 50th and 100th).

And punching at Uni isn’t punching down anymore…

For what it's worth, I have a small amount of faith that MK will still get a better attraction out the other side of this than the water rides of its competitors. But (a) if that is the bar they are setting, that is incredibly (if not unsurprisingly) disappointing and (b) if it can't clear that bar, hoo boy... you could not discount the long term prospects of the parks division fast or steep enough.

 

[EagleScout610]

The final guest ride has been shared on YouTube.

 

[Casper Gutman]

I'm aware of that. But it's a construct that makes me (and others) happy and that depends on the cultivation and maintenance of a relentlessly upbeat image. Perhaps others would prefer Disney to drop the act, but I'm happy to suspend my disbelief and enjoy the fiction.

But Disney’s output is very largely snarky. Marvel (as discussed), but large sections of Star Wars, much of Pixar - heck, even Tiana wasn’t snarkless. And as those films show, snark and sentiment can coexist equally. Snark is absent from the PR rhetoric of the park because they are trying to appeal to an incredibly “exclusive” audience that doesn’t actually represent the company’s fan base or output. It’s a focus that’s been hugely detrimental to the resort, harkening back to a past that largely never existed (Mickey was a snarky little fellow before he was sanitized) and certainly hasn’t existed for years.

Disney’s PR personality doesn’t have to be snarky, but it should probably shoot for “fun” and even “clever.”

Or just “competent.”

 

[Kirby86]

I doubt any of that stuff will be trouble to demolish. Lot harder and more expensive to build things than it is to destroy them.

Its actually pretty expensive to demolish stuff because not only do you have to pay to actually demolish it you have to pay for the cleanup and transportation off site.

 

[Smiley/OCD]

No surprise here. People are insane. Some lunatic is selling a Choco Taco on eBay for $25,000. Sad part is that there is probably an equally insane person out there who will buy it.

1 Sealed Klondike Choco Taco Shipped With Dry Ice - Discontinued! | eBay

Find many great new & used options and get the best deals for 1 Sealed Klondike Choco Taco Shipped With Dry Ice - Discontinued! at the best online prices at eBay! Free shipping for many products!

www.ebay.com

Didn’t I just see those in the lagoon at Epcot?

 

[LittleBuford]

But Disney’s output is very largely snarky. Marvel (as discussed), but large sections of Star Wars, much of Pixar - heck, even Tiana wasn’t snarkless. And as those films show, snark and sentiment can coexist equally. Snark is absent from the PR rhetoric of the park because they are trying to appeal to an incredibly “exclusive” audience that doesn’t actually represent the company’s fan base or output. It’s a focus that’s been hugely detrimental to the resort, harkening back to a past that largely never existed (Mickey was a snarky little fellow before he was sanitized) and certainly hasn’t existed for years.

Disney’s PR personality doesn’t have to be snarky, but it should probably shoot for “fun” and even “clever.”

Or just “competent.”

Perhaps we’re defining snark differently, because I don’t see any in Tiana.

I don’t think Disney as a company has typically indulged in, or been associated with, sarcastic or cheeky put-downs of their rivals. I personally would not regard such an approach as appropriate or consistent with the company’s brand. Others may view things differently, though I doubt mine is a particularly rare position, nor do I believe it has anything to do with exclusivity. I’m not remotely snobby or prissy in my tastes, but I still prefer the Mouse to remain nice.

Fun and clever are a different matter. Those I have no issue with.

 

[Smiley/OCD]

Its actually pretty expensive to demolish stuff because not only do you have to pay to actually demolish it you have to pay for the cleanup and transportation off site.

Plus, you have to be extremely cautious not to damage what is remaining…

 

[Tha Realest]

And this is why the despair runs so deep. $35 million is an offensively small amount for a project of this deep significance to the park and fan community, especially given how little Disney gets for their money and how underwhelming (though fun) GotG is despite a budget nearly 17 times as large. It shows an absolutely fundamental ignorance on the part of management that no subsequent increases can actually correct. They don’t understand the parks or thier audience.

Subsequently raising that amount based on Twitter outcry is further evidence of very basic problems. It once again emphasizes exec’s utter cluelessness that they were taken by surprise by the reaction, but reacting to it shows an impulsiveness, poor judgement, and lack of self-confidence (the reason Splash actually needed a change were the historical realities surrounding the production and release of the original film, not the fact that a group of vociferous posters got mad on-line). Twitter is not real life. The fact that Disney’s leaders don’t know that…

Splash needed to change, but it needed to be changed by a company with a very clear vision of its past and future and the will to dedicate copious resources to the project.

Again, why? The need and necessity of this reskin hasn’t been demonstrated. Why shouldn’t it get the JII / Under New Management treatment?

Some on here have suggested it will be the same ride and it won’t be any less fun. Since theming is immaterial, why spend any more money than necessary?

 

[Drdcm]

I know this attraction was built in less than 2 years but I don't see the Disney of today re-theming it as fast as it was built.

View attachment 694606

That’s a really neat photo!

 

[Incomudro]

Its actually pretty expensive to demolish stuff because not only do you have to pay to actually demolish it you have to pay for the cleanup and transportation off site.

And they have to carefully demolish stuff.
Surgically extract things on this ride unlike the full scale demo they did in Epcot.

 

[Kirby86]

Plus, you have to be extremely cautious not to damage what is remaining…

Exactly they have to make sure they don't damage the flume. I'd say a good amount of this budget is going to demolition. This attraction wasn't built to be taken apart every set is built out of concrete so any change will cost them time and money.

 

[Tha Realest]

In

Exactly they have to make sure they don't damage the flume. I'd say a good amount of this budget is going to demolition. This attraction wasn't built to be taken apart every set is built out of concrete so any change will cost them time and money.

Interesting. Wonder if their demo work would create some stability/structural integrity issues.

I also know one of the concerns about doing anything new to the PeopleMover in DL is that it wouldn’t be grandfathered under the ADA/OSHA. Presumptively a remake of this ride would mean they couldn’t grandfather in to pre-ADA regs (Splash constructed in ‘89; ADA passed in ‘90). Anyone know if Splash would’ve passed ADA muster?