Tiana's Bayou Adventure: Disneyland Watch & Discussion

[Brer Oswald]

Yes and no. Pooh is a waning franchise in terms of popularity and they probably need some form of a dedicated Tiana and Louis M&G and character shop to drive both merchandise and photopass for the current “Pooh Corner” section of the park. Perhaps even a second/store window for hugely successful beignets?

In terms of F&B and merch in NOS “proper“, I’d think WDI would be able to market this as a way push “synergies” and up sales a bit more at the already successful New Orleans Square shops and restaraunts too with a dedicated ride tie-in. Probably some more voodoo stuff also tied to Dr. Facilier (who I assume will still roam the “square” side/area).

People give the Pooh IP less credit than it deserves. The first shorts came out in the late 60s and were a Smash hit. The film came out in the late 70s. Pooh resurged in popularity in the late 80s. Then he resurged in popularity in the early 2000s with more films, shows, and theme park attractions.

He got a bad ride in Disneyland, no doubt. The 2011 film was mediocre and less interesting than the direct to video films. The IP may not get much attention right now, but it’s not a new IP or a property acquired by Iger. This is no shock.

There is a precedent for Pooh to return to prominence. It’s a timeless and always relatable property that PatF, or any other Disney property aside from Mickey Mouse, just isn’t.

 

[Brer Panther]

He got a bad ride in Disneyland, no doubt. The 2011 film was mediocre and less interesting than the direct to video films. The IP may not get much attention right now, but it’s not a new IP or a property acquired by Iger. This is no shock.

There is a precedent for Pooh to return to prominence. It’s a timeless and always relatable property that PatF, or any other Disney property aside from Mickey Mouse, just isn’t.

Hey, now, I'll defend the 2011 movie. I really liked that one. But yeah, Pooh really needs to return to prominence. I think I heard they were gonna do a Disney+ series for him, but take that with a grain of salt.

That said, I agree that Disneyland's Pooh would be a better candidate for a Princess and the Frog replacement, mainly because unlike the Magic Kingdom and Tokyo Disneyland's Pooh rides, it's pretty lousy. They can build a better Pooh ride in Fantasyland (even just a clone of the Magic Kingdom's a la Shanghai's would be an improvement over the one they've got now).

 

[el_super]

Why does everyone think this is a Chapek move and not Iger? Iger loves synergy. Iger loves his legacy. Iger loves the films that came out under his leadership, even if he didn’t at first. Iger hates SotS because everyone keeps asking for it at investor meetings (most likely because Splash is a thing).

Iger pushing the refurb for petty and selfish reasons is still far more believable than thinking they wanted a new food campaign for the Internet.

 

[el_super]

If Apple buys them I hope they completely wipe out all executives and high management for the entire division.

They could, but it wouldn't make any difference in how they run the company. And of course the apple execs will want to leave their own mark on the park, so they would have to go removing more old stuff to make way.

 

[brb1006]

I think "banned" is a bit too strong of a word, as it suggest an official government action, either at the local or federal level. "Banned in Boston" was a phrase we used decades ago to describe racy material, as Boston politicans in the mid 20th century were notoriously prudish, and a lot of films and books that were available in Los Angeles or Chicago were not available in uptight Boston.

I think the more appropriate wording would be "unavailable" or "removed", as in removed from distribution.

Just like Herbie Goes Bananas or The Ugly Dachshund are also not available on Blu-Ray or Disney+, either. They are not banned, the company that owns them just chooses to not make them available for purchase today.

Now in the case of The Ugly Dachshund, it's because there's not a big enough audience and it makes no sense financially, regardless of how great Suzanne Pleshette looked in 1965. But in the case of Song Of The South, it's just too politically sensitive to release and not worth the headaches, even though a bunch of folks would probably snap up the Blu-Ray and subscribe to Disney+ just to see what all the fuss is about.

Banned? Not quite. Too risky financially and politically to put it out for public sale? Most definitely.

EDIT: Oh for goshsakes!! I typed that and thought I should Google.... Yup, The Ugly Dachshund is available on Disney+. Can someone please find an obscure old Disney movie they've forgotten about??? The Computer Wore Tennis Shoes? Son Of Flubber? Or has Disney released everything they own on Disney+ except Song Of The South and my whole thesis is bunk?

I'm surprised the Disney's "So Dear To My Heart" isn't on Disney+ yet. (the movie featuring a black sheep/lamb).

 

[el_super]

You never know. I don't think Apple would have the same approach as Disney does currently with the parks. I'm sure they'd make their mark like you said, but would it turn out any worse than current Disney execs "leaving their mark"?

It really wouldn't be any worse, unless you fear any change occuring. Change has to happened regardless.

 

[brb1006]

We need some new variant of Rule 34 for our current age. If it exists, someone is offended by it.

Never thought I would expect Rule 34 to get mentioned on this site.

 

[waltography]

There's also the 2018 Christopher Robin movie that took the characters to an... interesting direction, but still performed relatively well in the box office and was a great movie. Pooh's Corner also still commands enough of a wait, even with a mediocre ride.

That being said, I'm excited to see the potential for a bayou transformation for the area.

 

[socalifornian]

Pooh Bayou Restaurant

 

[SplashGhost]

See and I don't believe Disney is really capable of that anymore. The biggest thing that has made me lose hope is (I know I'm beating a dead horse) Guardians. ToT was a staple of DCA and practically saved the park from abysmal attendance numbers and started an upswing in attendance. It had a lot of history and value to DCA and it was unceremoniously stripped down and filled with prop borders and flat screen TVs with an uninteresting "Help us, theme park guests! Put your hands in the air so we can get security clearance, all you visitors obviously have security elevator clearance! Woohoo! You did it! You sat in your seat and screamed and that helped us break out of here!" plot. It was also meant to be technically the first ride for the Marvel expansion into DCA and thus they should have made a really high quality ride to start things strong, yet they still botched the ride and made it have less charm, less atmosphere, and look so dang ugly. It's a genuine eyesore, when I'm walking from a hotel to the park and see the building towering in the sky it looks so gross and in the park in person it's terrible, my friend who has been working at Disney for a few years now literally calls it "Microchip Mountain" because the weird copper tubing and ornaments on the front look like components on a PCB board. But yeah, I have very little faith in Disney to do this properly, obviously I really hope they do it right, I just don't think they will.

I still enjoy Mission:Breakout as a ride since I love airtime, but it fails spectacular as a cohesive thematic experience. Tower of Terror was far and away the best thematic experience in DCA. One thing about Mission: Breakout that is sad, is that it is pretty much the high point of DLR additions in the last few years (aside from Rise of the Resistance). Incredicoaster and the new auction scene in Pirates are so flat out horrendous that they make Mission:Breakout look like the greatest thing that Disney ever did. I do not trust current Disney with changing anything in the parks.

True. Iger also likes replacing everything his immediate predecessor did - both good and bad - which is why he has had no problem (sometimes understandably) dumping on and totally “transforming” most of Eisner’s “legacy era” park additions.

Compared to other domestic parks, just look at how nearly unrecognizable both DCA and Disney’s Hollywood Studios are since 2005, as an example.

One thing that makes me think that Iger's ego is a big part of the recent changes is The Imagineering Story documentary series on Disney+. The first half was great, but it went downhill in the last 3 episodes since the narrative was changed to frame a story that Iger was the savior of Imagineering. I wouldn't doubt that we wants to get rid of everything good from the Eisner era to prop up his own ego and help support this narrative.

 

[Brer Panther]

One thing that makes me think that Iger's ego is a big part of the recent changes is The Imagineering Story documentary series on Disney+. The first half was great, but it went downhill in the last 3 episodes since the narrative was changed to frame a story that Iger was the savior of Imagineering. I wouldn't doubt that we wants to get rid of everything good from the Eisner era to prop up his own ego and help support this narrative.

Iger is basically post-Disneyland Paris Eisner 2.0. Except somehow even worse. At least post-Disneyland Paris Eisner gave us Test Track, Expedition Everest, and the Magic Kingdom's Pooh ride.

 

[SplashGhost]

Iger is basically post-Disneyland Paris Eisner 2.0. Except somehow even worse. At least post-Disneyland Paris Eisner gave us Test Track, Expedition Everest, and the Magic Kingdom's Pooh ride.

I feel like Iger had a promising start, but it all rapidly went downhill in the second half of his reign. What happened with Eisner felt more understandable given the circumstances that he was dealing with. Despite his flaws, I feel that Eisner understood the Disney brand and the parks, whereas I don't think Iger really cared at all about either, outside of milking them for as much money as possible.

 

[Brer Panther]

I feel like Iger had a promising start, but it all rapidly went downhill in the second half of his reign. What happened with Eisner felt more understandable given the circumstances that he was dealing with. Despite his flaws, I feel that Eisner understood the Disney brand and the parks, whereas I don't think Iger really cared at all about either, outside of milking them for as much money as possible.

Yeah, things went downhill with Iger after Frozen came out. I don't know what happened, but that seems to be when things took a turn for the crappy.

 

[CaptainAmerica]

One thing that makes me think that Iger's ego is a big part of the recent changes is The Imagineering Story documentary series on Disney+. The first half was great, but it went downhill in the last 3 episodes since the narrative was changed to frame a story that Iger was the savior of Imagineering. I wouldn't doubt that we wants to get rid of everything good from the Eisner era to prop up his own ego and help support this narrative.

I think the impact of John Lasseter getting himself #MeToo'ed has been significantly under-appreciated by most people in the fan community. Iger was never supposed to be the creative "Walt" guy, Lasseter was. I don't think getting deeply involved in the creative side was an ego play on Iger's part, I think it was something he felt obligated to do because there was a vacuum of leadership in that area.

 

[lazyboy97o]

I think the impact of John Lasseter getting himself #MeToo'ed has been significantly under-appreciated by most people in the fan community. Iger was never supposed to be the creative "Walt" guy, Lasseter was. I don't think getting deeply involved in the creative side was an ego play on Iger's part, I think it was something he felt obligated to do because there was a vacuum of leadership in that area.

It was Iger who forced the 11th hour change to World of Color. It's also one thing to present yourself as a needed leader and another to rewrite history to give yourself more credit.

 

[The Grand Inquisitor]

That's not a first look!

I know I was just sharing the video. It's what Jim Hill said the ride would be like. It could be legit or fake.

 

[SplashGhost]

I agree with this. Eisner was also more hands on with each project where as Iger seems to just take a step back. I remember seeing photos of one unit hotels built for each room on Disney World property that Michael Eisner would personally stay on to provide critique.

I also feel like Eisner was willing to listen to people around him. Eisner wanted characters from the movie Splash in Splash Mountain. Thankfully, he listened to the Imagineers and they convinced him that wasn't a good idea.

The Iger/Chapek reign seems to place synergy above all else, and that is what is causing the parks to lose what makes them special. Almost all the greatest attractions of all time were either not based on IPs, or else they were based on IPs that were past the height of their popularity. Current Disney would never have given us anything like The Twilight Zone Tower of Terror since it wouldn't have been based on an IP that they own.

 

[Kyle’s Dad Sent Me]

Current Disney would never have given us anything like The Twilight Zone Tower of Terror since it wouldn't have been based on an IP that they own.

I mean obviously this is no longer the case but at the time of conception/opening Avatar was not a Disney property.

This was common at Disney for a very short window in the late 80's to early 90's mostly but not exclusively for Disney M&M Studios, probably because Disney lacked teen or adult-friendly franchises (or any substantial live-action franchises for that matter). See: Star Tours, Indiana Jones, Twilight Zone, Great Movie Ride, random dated things like the Ninja Turtles and Ace Ventura.

This is unfortunately not the media landscape we are in anymore and I don't expect to see anything like it from either Universal or Disney anytime soon. Potter/Avatar was probably the very last time this will happen.

 

[George Lucas on a Bench]

In the early 90s, Universal Studios Florida opened and appealed to a more mature audience and kids with then-modern and relevant (but still iconic and beloved to this day) properties like Ghostbusters, Back to the Future and E.T. Many of the greatest movies of all time became attractions in that park with fiery PG-13 edginess.

Eisner realized that they would need to get with the times. Disney suddenly looked stale and old hat (but still preferable to modern Disney). Post-Universal Disney produced Tower of Terror, Alien Encounter and Indiana Jones. Their most 90s Universalian attractions!

 

[MisterPenguin]

I also feel like Eisner was willing to listen to people around him. Eisner wanted characters from the movie Splash in Splash Mountain. Thankfully, he listened to the Imagineers and they convinced him that wasn't a good idea.

The irony. Oh, the irony.