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

Professortango1

Professortango1

Well-Known Member
Disney may have fooled me for awhile with the AA footage, but at least I know my concerns and predictions were pretty much on point throughout.

I was worried the mountain would look less iconic. It does.

I was worried modern imagineers wouldn't understand how to utilize music to score a musical attraction. They didn't.

I was worried that the removal of Splash AA's would leave big empty moments and the new figures would lack character. Yup.

I was worried about the dialogue and plot. MMMHMMM.

I was worried that the lift hill and drop would be recontextualized. It was.

I was worried that the recontextualization of the lift hill and drops would work against the storytelling in place in the ride design. It did.

The only thing I didn't know about was the idea to end the attraction on an unknown original song and having it fade out so quickly to final nothing scene of Odie.

I know it is much easier to armchair imagineer than actually doing it, but I wonder how much fault lies with modern Imagineering and how much lies with management not giving them the resources or freedom to design rides like they used to. I'm sure its a mix, but this feels like management told them to craft an original story, save money, and avoid all scary/problematic themes. And this was the best the modern imagineers could come up with those restrictions. Which is kind of baffling.

I understand the "wait and see" crowd, but it also is annoying that folks have been laying out evidence for years and they refuse to look at it or understand how many of us came to these conclusions. Let's all remember that thinking critically about what we have been presented is not jumping to conclusions.
 
Last edited:
M

Midwest Elitist

Well-Known Member
As expected:

The glazers glaze
Those of us against it are against it
The people in the middle are seeing this for the trash that this is

Personally, my memories of the ride were when I was 15, then 21, then 24 in 2021. Despite the ride being in utter disrepair, it was still better then what Disney is proudly showing off, and even the magic of the old ride was conveyed over video. This is a dud. This is a shame. They destroyed art.
It makes me even more sad, because PatF would make an insanely good dark ride addition to the parks. But no, can't say why they did it obviously, but now we can confirm that Imagineering is dead, and replaced by what are essentially advertisements for their IP. Splash WAS an ad for a soft banned film, and it was one of the best attractions ever created in theme park history.. That fact there proves the scale of what has been lost.
We were right.
 
AdventureHasAName

AdventureHasAName

Well-Known Member
Professortango1 said:
I know it is much easier to armchair imagineer than actually doing it, but I wonder how much fault lies with modern Imagineering and how much lies with management not giving them the resources or freedom to design rides like they used to. I'm sure its a mix, but this feels like management told them to craft an original story, save money, and avoid all scary/problematic themes. And this was the best the modern imagineers could come up with those restrictions. Which is kind of baffling.
Click to expand...
Management absolutely sucks. But modern Imagineering also absolutely sucks ... and it had plenty of money and resources to complete this attraction. I know where I'm placing the blame.
 
FettFan

FettFan

Well-Known Member
aladdin2007 said:
and what is on the right side after the musical critters before you go down the first drop inside?
Click to expand...

I think that’s Louis’ derrière.

I suppose it was to be an homage to Brer Bear’s rear end as Fox was pushing him through the hole to the Laughin Place.

But alas…gator derrière.
 
M

Midwest Elitist

Well-Known Member
LittleBuford said:
Not really. Most of the scenery is physical and dense. That’s what makes the screens that are included all the more jarring.
Click to expand...
The trees and scenery on the side did a fantastic job of limiting what you can see, and the painted walls had an affect where the distance looked believable from the logs. Because that was the design of the attraction. With the 2D screens, the animations suspend all disbelief, and ruins the immersion completely.
 
LittleBuford

LittleBuford

Well-Known Member
Midwest Elitist said:
The trees and scenery on the side did a fantastic job of limiting what you can see, and the painted walls had an affect where the distance looked believable from the logs. Because that was the design of the attraction. With the 2D screens, the animations suspend all disbelief, and ruins the immersion completely.
Click to expand...
I’m not defending the screens; I thought I was pretty clear about that. I was just disputing your “warehouse of screens” characterisation, which still doesn’t really make sense to me.
 
FettFan

FettFan

Well-Known Member
Midwest Elitist said:
The trees and scenery on the side did a fantastic job of limiting what you can see, and the painted walls had an affect where the distance looked believable from the logs. Because that was the design of the attraction. With the 2D screens, the animations suspend all disbelief, and ruins the immersion completely.
Click to expand...

Same with the primeval diorama at Universe of Energy…the painted backdrop and lighting effects made the space look like it went FAR into the distance, when in reality it was maybe 10 feet behind the brontosaur family.
 
Sirwalterraleigh

Sirwalterraleigh

Premium Member
Professortango1 said:
Disney may have fooled me for awhile with the AA footage, but at least I know my concerns and predictions were pretty much on point throughout.

I was worried the mountain would look less iconic. It does.

I was worried modern imagineers wouldn't understand how to utilize music to score a musical attraction. They didn't.

I was worried that the removal of Splash AA's would leave big empty moments and the new figures would lack character. Yup.

I was worried about the dialogue and plot. MMMHMMM.

I was worried that the lift hill and drop would be recontextualized. It was.

I was worried that the recontextualization of the lift hill and drops would work against the storytelling in place in the ride design. It did.

The only thing I didn't know about was the idea to end the attraction on an unknown original song and having it fade out so quickly to final nothing scene of Odie.

I know it is much easier to armchair imagineer than actually doing it, but I wonder how much fault lies with modern Imagineering and how much lies with management not giving them the resources or freedom to design rides like they used to. I'm sure its a mix, but this feels like management told them to craft an original story, save money, and avoid all scary/problematic themes. And this was the best the modern imagineers could come up with those restrictions. Which is kind of baffling.

I understand the "wait and see" crowd, but it also is annoying that folks have been laying out evidence for years and they refuse to look at it or understand how many of us came to these conclusions. Let's all remember that thinking critically about what we have been presented is not jumping to conclusions.
Click to expand...

Is it possible that WDI can only function one way?

As in they need to come up with the concepts/ride systems and then pitch them?

What I’m getting at is if they are given something existing and told “we need to change this to X…”. They’re done. It doesn’t work well
 

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

Back
Top Bottom