Disney Analyst
Well-Known Member
I am fine with Incredicoaster, apart from the babies on a stick, those can go.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Tiana's Bayou Adventure: Disneyland Watch & Discussion
- Thread starter Californian Elitist
- Start date
Rich T
Well-Known Member
Incredicoaster is obnoxious. I loved California Screamin’, but the overlay turned it into an irritating pile of IP vomit that actually made me 100% lose interest in ever watching an Incredibles film ever again.
Then there’s the Contemporary Resort makeover.
The Incredibles ruin everything they touch.
Then there’s the Contemporary Resort makeover.
The Incredibles ruin everything they touch.
BlakeW39
Well-Known Member
Incredicoaster is obnoxious. I loved California Screamin’, but the overlay turned it into an irritating pile of IP vomit that actually made me 100% lose interest in ever watching an Incredibles film ever again.
Then there’s the Contemporary Resort makeover.
Ditto for Moana. This is actually how I feel about a lot of the IPs Disney forces into the parks.
CaptinEO
Well-Known Member
Well said and I really liked both movies. It turned a normal roller coaster over a pier into a ride with people screaming at you every second with added plastic figures.Incredicoaster is obnoxious. I loved California Screamin’, but the overlay turned it into an irritating pile of IP vomit that actually made me 100% lose interest in ever watching an Incredibles film ever again.
Then there’s the Contemporary Resort makeover.
Oh and they enclosed so much of the ride for the overlay that you don't even get the nice view of the park on the hills any more.
This is why when people say they want animatronics on Grizzly Rapids I say be careful what you wish for. You'll probably end up with a poorly done overly that hurts the source brand AND the ride.
LittleBuford
Well-Known Member
She twice saves Eric, who in turn saves her and Triton from Ursula. How much more do you want from a 16-year-old?!
I’m surprised you think it’s more about Triton. To me, it’s about Ariel getting to be who she wants to be and finding acceptance. But then I can’t help reading it through a gay lens as a kind of coming-out story.
Rich T
Well-Known Member
Just to be clear, I think The little Mermaid is a wonderful film, and deserves its place in history as the movie that proved to the world that quality Disney animation and storytelling was BACK (Great Mouse Detective was actually first, but pop culture wasn’t paying attention yet.)
It’s so good, in fact, that the Ariel-not-really-learning-a-dang-thing point is about the only major criticism one can find in a nearly perfect screenplay. I’m not the first person to observe that King Triton is actually the character who overcomes his biggest flaws (unwillingness to listen, harboring of deep-rooted prejudices and inability to communicate well with his daughters), nearly sacrifices his soul to repair the damage his mistakes have caused, and ends up as a wiser, kinder, more knowledgeable leader and father. His hero’s journey is more weighty and complete than Ariel’s even though Ariel is the main character.
It’s not that Ariel’s poorly written or anything like that, it’s just that Triton’s brief moments on screen are used very efficiently, story-wise. (Also, he doesn’t spend any of his scenes bursting into song).
Also, Sebastian’s ever-present fear of Triton’s temper keeps adding to our understanding of the King’s character even when Triton isn’t present.But, in the real world, it’s Ariel’s movie, Ariel’s story and Ariel’s Adventure. She bails on responsibility, nearly gets her best friend killed while trinket-hunting, disobeys her parent, disobeys her teacher, gets grounded, pouts, follows evil characters down a clearly-marked Evil Path, gives into temptation, drags her teacher into extreme danger, goes on a date, sets off to thwart evil (because that’s HER prince, dammit), gives the quickest apology to her father in the history of cinema, and then distracts Ursula long enough for Eric to save everyone. And then she gets what she wanted all along because Triton wants his daughter to be happy, and he’s decided Eric doesn’t make him want to vomit.
And I say all that with great affection for this film. When I first saw Little Mermaid on its initial release (several times) I thought it was a near-perfect movie. I still do. It just…works. It’s only *later* that one can have fun looking at its storytelling quirks through the lens of time. For me it only adds to my enjoyment of one of the finest fantasy films (live or animated) ever made.
Last edited:
I'm oddly relieved we finally have a date. The silence honestly made me think one day we'd wake up and it'd be gone.
Collecting my Mason jars now.
BlakeW39
Well-Known Member
Just to be clear, I think The little Mermaid is a wonderful film, and deserves its place in history as the movie that proved to world that quality Disney animation and storytelling was BACK (Great Mouse Detective was actually first, but pop culture wasn’t paying attention yet.)
It’s so good, in fact, that the Ariel-not-really-learning-a-dang-thing point is about the only major criticism one can find in a nearly perfect screenplay. I’m not the first person to observe that King Triton is actually the character who overcomes his biggest flaws (unwillingness to listen, harboring of deep-rooted prejudices and inability to communicate well with his daughters), nearly sacrifices his soul to repair the damage his mistakes have caused, and ends up as a wiser, kinder, more knowledgeable leader and father. His hero’s journey is more weighty and complete than Ariel’s even though Ariel is the main character.
It’s not that Ariel’s poorly written or anything like that, it’s just that Triton’s brief moments on screen are used very efficiently, story-wise. (Also, he doesn’t spend any of his scenes bursting into song).
But, in the the real world, it’s Ariel’s movie, Ariel’s story and Ariel’s Adventure. She bails on responsibility, nearly gets her best friend killed while trinket-hunting, disobeys her parent, disobeys her teacher, gets grounded, pouts, follows evil characters down a clearly-marked Evil Path, gives into temptation, drags her teacher into extreme danger, goes on a date, sets off to thwart evil (because that’s HER prince, dammit), gives the quickest apology to her father in the history of cinema, and then distracts Ursula long enough for Eric to save everyone. And then she gets what she wanted all along because Triton wants his daughter to be happy, and he’s decided Eric doesn’t make him want to vomit.
And I say all that with great affection for this film. When I first saw Little Mermaid on its initial release (several times) I thought it was a near-perfect movie. I still do. It just…works. It’s only *later* that one can have fun looking at its storytelling quirks through the lens of time. For me it only adds to my enjoyment of one of the finest fantasy films (live or animated) ever made.
I'd actually wager that while you are correct that Ariel doesn't really grow over the course of the film, that isn't really a bad thing. Ariel is a well written and dynamic protagonist, she just doesn't change markedly over the course of the film. But characters don't have to change to be captivating, which is what's actually important for telling a good story imo. Just my take.
LittleBuford
Well-Known Member
Youth and love can make you do crazy things, especially in combination with each other, so it's impossible for me to assess her so harshly. Moreover, her less responsible actions are far outweighed by her many shows of courage and loyalty, at least by my estimation. I think she's awesome!Just to be clear, I think The little Mermaid is a wonderful film, and deserves its place in history as the movie that proved to the world that quality Disney animation and storytelling was BACK (Great Mouse Detective was actually first, but pop culture wasn’t paying attention yet.)
It’s so good, in fact, that the Ariel-not-really-learning-a-dang-thing point is about the only major criticism one can find in a nearly perfect screenplay. I’m not the first person to observe that King Triton is actually the character who overcomes his biggest flaws (unwillingness to listen, harboring of deep-rooted prejudices and inability to communicate well with his daughters), nearly sacrifices his soul to repair the damage his mistakes have caused, and ends up as a wiser, kinder, more knowledgeable leader and father. His hero’s journey is more weighty and complete than Ariel’s even though Ariel is the main character.
It’s not that Ariel’s poorly written or anything like that, it’s just that Triton’s brief moments on screen are used very efficiently, story-wise. (Also, he doesn’t spend any of his scenes bursting into song).
But, in the the real world, it’s Ariel’s movie, Ariel’s story and Ariel’s Adventure. She bails on responsibility, nearly gets her best friend killed while trinket-hunting, disobeys her parent, disobeys her teacher, gets grounded, pouts, follows evil characters down a clearly-marked Evil Path, gives into temptation, drags her teacher into extreme danger, goes on a date, sets off to thwart evil (because that’s HER prince, dammit), gives the quickest apology to her father in the history of cinema, and then distracts Ursula long enough for Eric to save everyone. And then she gets what she wanted all along because Triton wants his daughter to be happy, and he’s decided Eric doesn’t make him want to vomit.
And I say all that with great affection for this film. When I first saw Little Mermaid on its initial release (several times) I thought it was a near-perfect movie. I still do. It just…works. It’s only *later* that one can have fun looking at its storytelling quirks through the lens of time. For me it only adds to my enjoyment of one of the finest fantasy films (live or animated) ever made.
Rich T
Well-Known Member
Also, from a movie history perspective: When this film was first released, Ariel was widely hailed as a Disney princess who didn’t passively wait for a prince to find her, she went forth on her own to find and win the heart of her true love. It’s only now, after many, many additional princess films, that she’s sometimes compared unfavorably (a bit unfairly) to other female leads.
Rich T
Well-Known Member
Oh, I think she’s awesome too. My critical remarks are not meant to say she’s a bad character. All characters in any work can be seen in different lights.Youth and love can make you do crazy things, especially in combination with each other, so it's impossible for me to assess her so harshly. Moreover, her less responsible actions are far outweighed by her many shows of courage and loyalty, at least by my estimation. I think she's awesome!
I mean, look at Alice: She talks sass to her big sister, runs off after a stranger, trespasses with the intent of crashing a party, drinks from a suspicious bottle marked “Drink Me,” wrecks the White Rabbit’s House because of a cookie she stole, ingests questionable mushrooms, does indeed crash a party, gives up on her quest, fat-shames the Queen, wakes up and has learned absolutely nothing.
And Alice in Wonderland is my favorite Disney movie.
Disgruntled Walt
Well-Known Member
- In the Parks
- No
Can confirm there are two separate Imagineering teams working on each version of TBA. They are collaborating, but working independently on each coast.
CaptinEO
Well-Known Member
Im bringing a bucket.
Why would there be two different imagineering teams working on this? Two different construction teams, sure. Two different teams of imagineers? I find that hard to believe.
LittleBuford
Well-Known Member
Maybe because of the differences between the two ride systems. If there are separate teams for each, I imagine they’re working to the same overall brief.
Disgruntled Walt
Well-Known Member
- In the Parks
- No
I heard this from someone who met members of the Florida Imagineering team for this attraction. It's a similar format to what was followed for the planning of TDL's and MK's Splash Mountains. Two different teams collaborating, but working independently (this I was told by Don Carson, one of the designers of MK's SM).
Even just thinking about it logically, the attractions are not identical, with both exterior and interior differences. However similar the two TBAs end up being, the two SMs were actually quite different, so I can totally see why two separate design teams would be necessary.
Disney Analyst
Well-Known Member
I’d assume it’s the same team leads, Charita etc., and then they have imagineers on each coast doing specific things for the different attractions.
I wonder how soon until we get pictures of the Imagineers on Disneyland's Splash