News Tiana's Bayou Adventure - latest details and construction progress

[basas]

No, I believe that after watching GENERATIONS of kids fall in love with it.. and actually communicating with them why. None of them ever said they went on it for heat relief. The splashes and drop fun? Of course... was a splash down unique that drew them in? Absolutely not. Never did they say "man, I wish they would just cut out all that other stuff and just have those fun drops!"

No one ever walked around repeating the screams of the drop... but they seemed to learn a song from a movie they never got to see or understood and would repeat those chorus lines...

I never got very wet on Splash…cooling off is certainly not the reason I would choose to ride.

Now Dudley Do Right or Popeyes? Completely different argument…

 

[MrPromey]

So I’m still working on this general public idea.

What about this ride is appealing to the general public that the hard core fans are missing?

Why not build everything to the quality level of Nemo, if the only thing about a ride that matters is that it’s located in a Disney park.

The ride has no story.

The ride has no buildup to the drop.

Most people won’t even understand they have been shrunk and just confused as to what the heck is going on.

The music is not memorable like its predecessor.

Yea they will all scream on the drop and laugh when they get wet. But if that all that’s needed to make this ride a success why not just rip out all the theming to save on the maintenance costs.

I think the general public, especially those who never rode or don't really remember the original, is less likely to pass judgement by way of comparisons to what it replaced. Most will just look at it as a "new" ride and therefore, the general sentiment will be more positive.

 

[yensidtlaw1969]

Do you really think this story board was put in front of someone and they said... Wow yes, sign me up!!

I mean, on the most literal level they did sign off on it, so.

 

[MagicHappens1971]

So you believe they just didn't care at all, and just went with it based on liking the character selection and that's it?

Or do you believe they actually thought the concept was good?

I feel like you're not getting what I'm saying. Do I think that Disney thought this story was good? Clearly. It's what they approved and spent 150M+ on. Do I agree that the story is good? No.

Do I think the (inevitable) Splash retheme was always going to be Tiana? Most likely. As I said, the only other contender would've been Moana and I think Disney was iffy about Moana at the time.

 

[TalkToEthan]

, but most guests rode Splash to cool down.

They did??
maybe those over 50% ers should have walked under the tikis in Adventureland instead of waiting in line at Splash …..pretty dumb use of their time, no?

 

[Casper Gutman]

Everyone's complaining about the lack of Facilier, and that's fine since he's probably the best Disney baddy since Ursula and would have added much needed tension. But Ray was the beating heart of the film, one of the most unique Disney animated characters ever, and his absence here is glaring.

 

[MagicHappens1971]

They did??
maybe those over 50% ers should have walked under the tikis in Adventureland instead of waiting in line at Splash …..pretty dumb use of their time, no?

Definitely not the same thing. My point was that I'm sure they enjoyed the thrills and the benefit of being cooled down. I planned a trip specifically to see Splash one last time before it closed, I did enjoy the attraction. But at it's core, I didn't really connect with the characters or the story. Yes the music was fun, but that was about it, outside of the thrill and cool down.

 

[basas]

Definitely not the same thing. My point was that I'm sure they enjoyed the thrills and the benefit of being cooled down. I planned a trip specifically to see Splash one last time before it closed, I did enjoy the attraction. But at it's core, I didn't really connect with the characters or the story. Yes the music was fun, but that was about it, outside of the thrill and cool down.

Nothing wrong with that, but appreciate that others did.

 

[MerlinTheGoat]

Everyone's complaining about the lack of Facilier, and that's fine since he's probably the best Disney baddy since Ursula and would have added much needed tension. But Ray was the beating heart of the film, one of the most unique Disney animated characters ever, and his absence here is glaring.

If they had included Facilier in the manner that I suggested a while back (as a spirit who we meet after stumbling upon his grave and falling into the Other Side), it would doubled as a convenient way to include Ray as well, since he would also be a spirit. Ray helping to save and guide us up the final lift out of danger. Big missed opportunity not to include an impressive fiber optic curtain effect for him there too. Could have hit two birds with one stone, but instead they missed both birds.

Ray is still more a part of this retheme than Facilier though, his voice is used in some of the music. Makes no sense that his voice is present though within the context of the story they went with, I have to wonder if whoever edited that track didn't recognize it (or perhaps wasn't familiar with the movie's events) and left it there by accident...

 

[yensidtlaw1969]

Yes, captain O... but that's not the question.

Kinda seemed like it was:

Do you really think this story board was put in front of someone and they said... Wow yes, sign me up!!

 

[basas]

I feel like you're not getting what I'm saying. Do I think that Disney thought this story was good? Clearly. It's what they approved and spent 150M+ on. Do I agree that the story is good? No.

Do I think the (inevitable) Splash retheme was always going to be Tiana? Most likely. As I said, the only other contender would've been Moana and I think Disney was iffy about Moana at the time.

So why can’t you understand why I’m not happy as a stockholder? You just said management screwed up. You seem to be admitting that what they did was a poor use of money.

 

[MerlinTheGoat]

Kinda seemed like it was:

At the time this retheme was first announced, I do not believe that THIS version of the story was what people agreed to. I believe that there was an approval for a generalized PATF retheme with maybe a couple of different story pitch ideas. But this current version of the ride was not what everyone signed up for when they greenlit it. The old concept art of Mama Odie's boat and tree atop the mountain is good evidence that this was not the plan back then. Also the fact that Tony Baxter was willing to consult on the project early on and endorse it, but departed after they settled on something that he didn't like.

 

[Casper Gutman]

If they had included Facilier in the manner that I suggested a while back (as a spirit who we bump into after stumbling upon his grave and being accidentally transported to the Other Side), it would also have also come with a convenient way to include Ray as well if they wanted. As he is also now a spirit, Ray could have helped guide us up the final lift and out of danger. Big missed opportunity not to include an impressive fiber optic curtain effect for him there too. Could have hit two birds with one stone, but instead they missed both birds.

Ray is still more a part of this retheme than Facilier though, his voice is used in some of the music. Makes no sense that his voice is present though within the context of the story they went with, I have to wonder if whoever edited that track didn't recognize it (or perhaps wasn't familiar with the movie's events) and left it there by accident...

I suspect whoever edited the music just didn't care.

The rest of your ideas are great, of course

 

[yensidtlaw1969]

Are you getting hung up on whether someone said "WOW"?? We can't know, man. But they don't tend to throw many, many millions of dollars at things they think are gonna tank, so like . . . yeah, it's somewhat implied that somewhere in the chain there was enthusiastic support for what was pitched.

 

[basas]

Are you getting hung up on whether someone said "WOW"?? We can't know, man. But they don't tend to throw many, many millions of dollars at things they think are gonna tank, so like . . . yeah, it's somewhat implied that somewhere in the chain there was enthusiastic support for what was pitched.

I actually agree with you. I think this was approved…which makes me think Disney’s upper management is more incompetent than ever before.

 

[yensidtlaw1969]

I actually agree with you. I think this was approved…which makes me think Disney’s upper management is more incompetent than ever before.

I mean, yes, it was built, it clearly was approved. This is a major corportation with many layers of oversight. Are people thinking there was some sort of conceptual bait and switch here? That would not be a realistic assessment of how these things work.

 

[Mr. Sullivan]

Are you arguing that $150-$200 million dollars is not a lot of money?

In terms of WDI's current average spending on attractions? No, it isn't really.

Several of their most recent attractions cost a good deal more than that, and I'd imagine several of the upcoming ones will as well. Part of that is the ride structure itself already existed, but a great deal of this budget I've no doubt went into things that are not guest facing such as updates to the ride's technical systems and operational components. Splash was notoriously unreliable, even before the final years of it's operation and their aim I'm sure beyond just getting a new IP in was to also have a reliable attraction that didn't require the constant work Splash did.

RotR cost around $450 million and Cosmic Rewind cost about $500 million. Disney has been spending a heavy amount on attractions for years now. TBA is a general splash in the bucket compared to other projects they've been working on lately.

 

[eddie104]

In terms of WDI's current average spending on attractions? No, it isn't really.

Several of their most recent attractions cost a good deal more than that, and I'd imagine several of the upcoming ones will as well. Part of that is the ride structure itself already existed, but a great deal of this budget I've no doubt went into things that are not guest facing such as updates to the ride's technical systems and operational components. Splash was notoriously unreliable, even before the final years of it's operation and their aim I'm sure beyond just getting a new IP in was to also have a reliable attraction that didn't require the constant work Splash did.

RotR cost around $450 million and Cosmic Rewind cost about $500 million. Disney has been spending a heavy amount on attractions for years now. TBA is a general splash in the bucket compared to other projects they've been working on lately.

Exactly Splash was “cheap” compared to other projects they’ve worked on.

For a ride of this magnitude the budget should’ve been bigger actually.

 

[basas]

In terms of WDI's current average spending on attractions? No, it isn't really.

Several of their most recent attractions cost a good deal more than that, and I'd imagine several of the upcoming ones will as well. Part of that is the ride structure itself already existed, but a great deal of this budget I've no doubt went into things that are not guest facing such as updates to the ride's technical systems and operational components. Splash was notoriously unreliable, even before the final years of it's operation and their aim I'm sure beyond just getting a new IP in was to also have a reliable attraction that didn't require the constant work Splash did.

RotR cost around $450 million and Cosmic Rewind cost about $500 million. Disney has been spending a heavy amount on attractions for years now. TBA is a general splash in the bucket compared to other projects they've been working on lately.

The fact that other recent additions cost more really doesn’t make it any better.

Besides, $150-$200 million was just thrown out there by a poster. Has this been confirmed? Does this include WDW and DL?

Regardless, hundreds of millions was spent…and it is MY opinion that it was not well spent given the financial position of the company. If you disagree, fine.

 

[MerlinTheGoat]

I mean, yes, it was built, it clearly was approved. This is a major corportation with many layers of oversight. Are people thinking there was some sort of conceptual bait and switch here? That would not be a realistic assessment of how these things work.

Well, it depends on who did the baiting and switching and who was on the receiving end, but it might not be out of the realm of possibility that someone was kept out of the loop. Carter and Smith probably knew the most. There have been claims that Bob Iger had some negative things to say about the retheme following an assessment of the nearly finished product, implying that he may not have been keeping up with the details over the past couple years. I initially disbelieved this rumor and was told it was false. But it's clear that not everything I heard ended up being accurate, whereas the people who reported this Iger story were right about a number of things. If true, perhaps Iger was actually the one who was kept out of the loop about some of this project's development. I dunno.