Oh, my mistake. I guess that's why Peasant Belle costumes are flying off the racks!!Except Belle appears as a peasant in the movie.
Oh, my mistake. I guess that's why Peasant Belle costumes are flying off the racks!!Except Belle appears as a peasant in the movie.
Is that relevant, though, to which version of the character should be featured in the bayou section of the ride? Why should commercial factors matter more than thematic ones?If Disney sold Tiana princess costumes and Tiana adventurer costumes, I know which ones would be left in the clearance bin the day after Halloween.
Is that relevant, though, to which version of the character should be featured in the bayou section of the ride? Why should commercial factors matter more than thematic ones?
I was talking about the theme of the ride itself. But yes, from the perspective of the land it’s in also, an adventurer seems rather more fitting than a princess.Thematic? 1930s Adventure garb in Frontierland? That care went out the window a long time ago.
I was talking about the theme of the ride itself. But yes, from the perspective of the lands it’s in also, an adventurer seems rather more fitting than a princess.
What about within the ride itself? Do you consider Adventurer Tiana less fitting in the context of the bayou than Princess Tiana?That's like MacDonalds and Burger King arguing which one is a steakhouse.
What about within the ride itself? Do you consider Adventurer Tiana less fitting in the context of the bayou than Princess Tiana?
To me at least, an adventurer seems much more in the spirit of the American frontier than a fancily dressed royal. But I’m a Brit, so what do I know?A ride has a relation of the land it is in, otherwise, it has no point being a theme park. Particularly the one that was once seen as establishing the highest standard. For your second part of the post, see above.
A 1930s lady marrying a prince is no further or closer to the Frontier than a 1930s-40s pith helmet wearing adventurer.
One has a dress. One is wearing adventurer gear. Both form New Orleans in the 1930s.
Again, that is like BK and Mcy D's arguing which is a steakhouse.
But it's not in New Orleans Square, it's in Critter Country.Also this is the dl thread and not mk thread. TBA is in new Orleans and fits the thematic area of dl
It’s adjacent to rather than in Disneyland’s New Orleans Square, but your point still stands.Also this is the dl thread and not mk thread. TBA is in new Orleans and fits the thematic area of dl
This is Disney. Of course the ability to move merchandise matters.Is that relevant, though, to which version of the character should be featured in the bayou section of the ride? Why should commercial factors matter more than thematic ones?
I’m talking to you as a fan. To us as fans. Usually in this forum, Disney is taken to task when it appears to be putting profit over theme. Why, then, are so many here annoyed that Tiana is dressed as she ought to be in the bayou? Since when has any of us wanted Disney to be led by “the ability to move merchandise” when designing and theming its attractions?This is Disney. Of course the ability to move merchandise matters.
To me at least, an adventurer seems much more in the spirit of the American frontier than a fancily dressed royal. But I’m a Brit, so what do I know?
Actually, the majority of the ride is set in a bayou well outside the city. It is in that context that I think an adventurer’s outfit makes more thematic sense than a royal ball gown. I’m surprised so many here seem to feel otherwise.You will notice that either way, it is based on characters depicting the 1930s city of New Orleans
I’m talking to you as a fan. To us as fans. Usually in this forum, Disney is taken to task when it appears to be putting profit over theme. Why, then, are so many here annoyed that Tiana is dressed as she ought to be in the bayou? Since when has any of us wanted Disney to be led by “the ability to move merchandise” when designing and theming its attractions?
What’s silly about it? Do you disagree with my contention that we fans typically don’t want Disney to be led by profit when designing its attractions? Perhaps you misunderstood me.This is just silly considering they are replacing a mega successful attraction TV series about to release.
Silly question considering Tiana being a push from the company with Disney Plus series and marketable as a character replacing what was there but not present plans to push. So Disney totally is designing towards profit over form with this one.What’s silly about it? Do you disagree with my contention that we fans typically don’t want Disney to be led by profit when designing its attractions? Perhaps you misunderstood me.
As I suspected, you have misunderstood me. I’m asking how we as fans feel about Disney prioritising profit over theme, not whether the company itself wants to make money (which of course it does). I really can’t be any clearer than I’ve been, but since you’re unable or unwilling to get past viewing my question as “silly” (which, frankly, is the word I’d use to describe your Burger King vs. McDonald’s analogy), I’m going to move on from our exchange.Silly question considering Tiana being a push from the company with Disney Plus series and marketable as a character replacing what was there but not present plans to push. So Disney totally is designing towards profit over form with this one.
It falls far before you get to animatronic attire. Which artistically is off either way. See BK vs Mac argument analogy.
Because I like her princess gown? Sometimes the answer is pretty simple.I’m talking to you as a fan. To us as fans. Usually in this forum, Disney is taken to task when it appears to be putting profit over theme. Why, then, are so many here annoyed that Tiana is dressed as she ought to be in the bayou? Since when has any of us wanted Disney to be led by “the ability to move merchandise” when designing and theming its attractions?
Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.