Tiana's Bayou Adventure: Disneyland Watch & Discussion

mickEblu

Well-Known Member
I think the narration might be triggered depending on how fast the boat is traveling - so that line can be skipped.

A similar thought had crossed my mind but then I thought how much variation in the speed could there possibly be to necessitate that alteration in the narration?
 

BrerFoxesBayouAdventure

Well-Known Member

Vegas Disney Fan

Well-Known Member
I suppose it's too much to hope that it is really a primer for some shade of gold paint.

It’s a similar color in the concept art… hard to tell if that’ll be the final color or if it’ll get a gold shade on top of it though.

IMG_0290.jpeg
 

Model3 McQueen

Well-Known Member
In the Parks
No
I don't know what it is (well I do actually but that's neither here nor there) but everything Disney does with "IP" in their parks these days is just SO tacky and cheap and corporate looking. Like it's an advertisement/commercial above anything else. It all just looks so gaudy and tasteless.

Perfectly said. Not about the experience, it's about advertising the IP. "Synergy".
 

BlakeW39

Well-Known Member
Perfectly said. Not about the experience, it's about advertising the IP. "Synergy".

because the IP mandate necessarily means that leadership isn't trying to do what is in the best interests of the parks or whatever works best creatively, IP or not.... they're interested in whatever [IP] has the most cross marketing appeal and the potential to generate brand syngery for the corporation

they feel like tacky corporate ads....because they ARE tacky corporate ads. literally
 

Rich T

Well-Known Member
because the IP mandate necessarily means that leadership isn't trying to do what is in the best interests of the parks or whatever works best creatively, IP or not.... they're interested in whatever [IP] has the most cross marketing appeal and the potential to generate brand syngery for the corporation

they feel like tacky corporate ads....because they ARE tacky corporate ads. literally.
Disneyland has always had cross-promotion, sponsorships, etc., and has always used its animated characters to sell anything from Chicken of the Sea Tuna sandwiches on Capt. Hook’s Pirate ship to the trinkets of Tinkerbell’s Toyshop.

The difference is that, today, the animated characters are used EVERYWHERE, in nearly every land, to the point where all the Disney parks are becoming more and more bland, dumbed-down and uninspiring. Tiana didn’t start this; when Splash Mtn. was first announced, many fans hated the idea of a cartoon-based attraction outside of Fantasyland. And I gotta say, that did seem to be the first crack in the dam. I don’t like the way DL’s Fantasyland later expanded past the front of the castle. Epcot and both coasts’ Tomorrowlands get more childish and cartoonified with each passing year.

One of the reasons Islands of Adventure has become my favorite Florida park is because its lands remain so refreshingly focused and unique. You won’t see a “We’re Back” or a “Land Before Time” attraction in Jurassic Park just because “hey, it’s dinosaurs—it fits, right?”
 

BlakeW39

Well-Known Member
Disneyland has always had cross-promotion, sponsorships, etc., and has always used its animated characters to sell anything from Chicken of the Sea Tuna sandwiches on Capt. Hook’s Pirate ship to the trinkets of Tinkerbell’s Toyshop.

yes Disneyland always had cross-promotion, IP, etc. Disney IP was always one of the primary reasons people showed up to the park and IP was always used as a way to market the parks and drive profits within them. The difference is that IP marketing pop wasn't the only or main priority for WDI in the past. It was creativity first, commercialism second. Now it's the opposite. Marketing/commercial appeal is the first priority. Second is what is in the best interest of the parks from a creative standpoint.

The difference is that, today, the animated characters are used EVERYWHERE, in nearly every land, to the point where all the Disney parks are becoming more and more bland, dumbed-down and uninspiring. Tiana didn’t start this; when Splash Mtn. was first announced, many fans hated the idea of a cartoon-based attraction outside of Fantasyland. And I gotta say, that did seem to be the first crack in the dam. I don’t like the way DL’s Fantasyland later expanded past the front of the castle. Epcot and both coasts’ Tomorrowlands get more childish and cartoonified with each passing year.

One of the reasons Islands of Adventure has become my favorite Florida park is because its lands remain so refreshingly focused and unique. You won’t see a “We’re Back” or a “Land Before Time” attraction in Jurassic Park just because “hey, it’s dinosaurs—it fits, right?”

Splash was great in Critter Country. In MK's Frontierland, not so much. Removing Splash was a chance to replace it with something that fit the western theme of the surrounding area. Instead they chose Princess and the Frog, because their first priority is commercial potential and marketing pop. Gotta have that character IP. How we fit that into the park's themes, IF we fit that into the park's themes, comes second.
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom