It's Bob Iger who usually laser focuses on a movie's initial popularity when determining whether it has any sort of substantial future and deserves a ride. People are simply pointing out that the decision to promote PATF in spite of its lack of massive success has been very uncharacteristic for the company these days.
A movie's popularity is not something I personally care about at all when it comes to what receives a ride. I'm a big fan of Atlantis The Lost Empire for instance and think it has great ride potential (they considered basing the old Fire Mountain concept around the IP before the entire thing was scrapped). Hell, i'd be game for a Black Cauldron ride (yes really), moreso than some of the other far better movies that have gotten disappointing rides. The vast majority of Disney's best rides aren't even based on movies at all.
A lot of the people who are skeptical of this attraction are in fact big fans of PATF, myself included. I think it has great ride potential with the right people and proper planning. But given that it's a replacement for a legitimate cream of the crop classic, even a hypothetical dream team of the best imagineers who ever existed would have a nearly impossible task matching, let alone surpassing what it's replacing. And I do not consider anyone at WDI to be remotely dream team material.
I also have a considerably less pessimistic outlook on the attraction than most others. Based off of the claims i've heard (assuming it's true), I don't think this will be nearly as egregious as Imagination v2/3 for instance. But regardless, I don't think WDI has the necessary talent to create a ride that can match Splash anymore. If this was its own thing built from scratch, it would probably be better able to stand on its own as a really good ride. Perhaps even the best they've created in decades. But as a replacement, don't underestimate WDI's ability to screw it up. It would take a miracle to come anywhere close.
or a small indoor flat ride could work.
