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

[MrPromey]

I still support the idea that replacing SotS was absolutely justified.

But I haven't felt like this since they destroyed EPCOT in the late 90s.

PS: It needs to be restated that SotS has been a problem since it opened in '46. Go back and read the debate in the media from the time. Look at the comments from the NAACP (again that's the 1946 NAACP). This is an issue with long, deep historical roots.

All that said, you don't need SotS to give the ride edge, tension, humor. All of those could have been present in the new version. The lack of them can be attributed to a lot of factors, but a major one is a corporation terrified of offending guests of ANY political persuasion, not just from one side or the other. It's the same cowardice that prevents the development of a new vision for EPCOT, that makes everything bland and safe.

To me, the problem here is for them to pull a change like this off, this needed to be better than Splash Mountain.

Instead, they replaced it with something that clearly seems to be not as good.

They gave us better animatronics, sure, but not a better attraction.

 

[yensidtlaw1969]

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.

Bob Iger is not someone you can keep out of the loop - if he wants to know, he knows. In this particular case he felt the project was of particular significance and was more looped in than usual. As I've said before, he'd "ridden" the CG renderings of the attraction more than once in the DISH.

He is not the only executive who would have done so, merely the highest, and there are many points of oversight in addition to that which would have to receive executive approval before progressing to next stages. Skipping that is a thing - you don't get money without telling the people what you're building, and not without being prepared for some of them to leaf through it with a fine-tooth comb. You don't just change what you're building after getting that approval without losing your job and getting hit with a lawsuit so severe your grandchildren feel it.

The bait and switch idea is not a thing.

 

[Mr. Sullivan]

That's not quite correct - for a redesign of an existing attraction, the budget for Tiana's was more than healthy. Looking at rides like Rise, a scratch-build, and Cosmic Rewind, a new attraction partially making use of an existing facility but largely new construction, is not a fair point of reference. Not to mention that those are two of the most bloated-budget attractions ever to exist (And just to say, my understanding is that Rise was closer to $350 Mil than $450. I have no idea where the money went for Cosmic Rewind or how it cost so much more than Rise, whose money was much more visibly spent).

Tiana's had the entire Splash Mountain complex to work with and build off of - that's an incredible financial savings against having to build a new facility. Adding $150-200 Mil on top of that (still trying to get a straight answer on the numbers) should have resulted in a spectacularly lavish attraction. And while I will say that I think not enough credit is being given for the expense of the production value that Tiana's Bayou Adventure does offer - and it does offer a significant amount - it should have been more. They should have been able to clear the bar of blowing Splash out of the water. Even with a less ambitious storyline. So for as handsome as many of the show elements are, it's strange that there aren't more of them or more to them.

I'm not sure I can think of a more expensive attraction redo than this one.

I'm sure they're never actually going to get into the details of what the money was spent on, but I do agree with you.

Even as someone who really likes what they see of the ride and the POV, it is hard for me to say that if they did spend $150-$200 million on this that what we see is the result of that as lovely as it is. That's why I think they did a pretty significant overhauling of things that guests have nothing to do with.

It's been mentioned before Splash was due for a pretty extensive refurbishment, even well beyond it's normally couple month closure at the top of every year. I really think part of what they were doing with this was of course converting the attraction, but also completely modernizing the ride system and working out the kinks that Splash had from the very day it opened from an operational standpoint.

I would also not be surprised if Splash was out of code and while it was grandfathered in, their decision to do this retheme meant that that grandfathering in was no longer valid and they had to do a lot of work structurally and around the attraction itself to get it up to modern building codes whether that be adding new emergency exits or making it more accessible.

I'd not be surprised to discover that a big chunk of the budget was earmarked for those things.

 

[yensidtlaw1969]

Did you ignore the other poster mentioning a lot of budget most likely being spent getting the “bones” of this attraction up to par before even installing interior scenes.

Also can’t ignore what other issues that may have occurred during the development of this project.

We can’t say what’s a healthy budget for a project like this considering we don’t know the scope they were planning.

Just because you may not know the scope doesn't mean that other people don't.

The budget was more than healthy. Which is part of why the results are so perplexing. Handsome though some elements are.

Didn't ignore anything, just hard to catch all the incoming messages while actively posting. But the money spent on the "bones" did not cut into the budget for show elements. That's not how things are budgeted.

 

[MagicHappens1971]

I don’t want to single anyone out, but….. This narrative that “no one approved” this attraction is absolutely bonkers.

Disney as a company has SOOOOOOOO much red tape and meetings about literal nonsense. Every single stage of this attraction was approved by someone, larger aspects like actual story and content, caliber of show scenes, etc were probably approved by at the bare minimum, Josh. Iger probably had to approve “milestones” in the attractions development, like after the story was complete, how was it being executed, how are they fitting those scenes into a pre-existing space, etc. Than comes CG renderings, which are pretty darn close to the final product. This attraction in its final stage (as we see it now) was approved by Iger.

 

[basas]

Bob Iger is not someone you can keep out of the loop - if he wants to know, he knows. In this particular case he felt the project was of particular significance and was more looped in than usual. As I've said before, he'd "ridden" the CG renderings of the attraction more than once in the DISH.

He is not the only executive who would have done so, merely the highest, and there are many points of oversight in addition to that which would have to receive executive approval before progressing to next stages. Skipping that is a thing - you don't get money without telling the people what you're building, and not without being prepared for some of them to leaf through it with a fine-tooth comb. You don't just change what you're building after getting that approval without losing your job and getting hit with a lawsuit so severe your grandchildren feel it.

The bait and switch idea is not a thing.

Regardless how much Bob was involved, as head of the company he is responsible, as are the senior people below him. To quote Truman, the buck stops with him.

 

[Vclguy90]

Can anyone tell me what's the last good thing Bob actually did?

 

[yensidtlaw1969]

I'm sure they're never actually going to get into the details of what the money was spent on, but I do agree with you.

Even as someone who really likes what they see of the ride and the POV, it is hard for me to say that if they did spend $150-$200 million on this that what we see is the result of that as lovely as it is. That's why I think they did a pretty significant overhauling of things that guests have nothing to do with.

It's been mentioned before Splash was due for a pretty extensive refurbishment, even well beyond it's normally couple month closure at the top of every year. I really think part of what they were doing with this was of course converting the attraction, but also completely modernizing the ride system and working out the kinks that Splash had from the very day it opened from an operational standpoint.

I would also not be surprised if Splash was out of code and while it was grandfathered in, their decision to do this retheme meant that that grandfathering in was no longer valid and they had to do a lot of work structurally and around the attraction itself to get it up to modern building codes whether that be adding new emergency exits or making it more accessible.

I'd not be surprised to discover that a big chunk of the budget was earmarked for those things.

These are understandable guesses, but not quite in line with the reality of the project.

There was infrastructural work done, which included ride system and control updates, but these were accounted for with their own budget. There would have had to be some pretty massive issues with those elements to have had significant money unexpectedly diverted from the show budget, and given the accelerated timeline on which the ride opened (remember, 6 months earlier than originally planned) that was not the case.

 

[yensidtlaw1969]

Can anyone tell me what's the last good thing Bob actually did?

Leave?

But then he came back, so.

 

[basas]

Bob Iger is not someone you can keep out of the loop - if he wants to know, he knows. In this particular case he felt the project was of particular significance and was more looped in than usual. As I've said before, he'd "ridden" the CG renderings of the attraction more than once in the DISH.

He is not the only executive who would have done so, merely the highest, and there are many points of oversight in addition to that which would have to receive executive approval before progressing to next stages. Skipping that is a thing - you don't get money without telling the people what you're building, and not without being prepared for some of them to leaf through it with a fine-tooth comb. You don't just change what you're building after getting that approval without losing your job and getting hit with a lawsuit so severe your grandchildren feel it.

The bait and switch idea is not a thing.

Iger seems to have his nose in everything. Wasn’t this Chapek’s complaint? I may be wrong, but he seems to be a bit of an ego-maniac.

 

[Vclguy90]

Leave?

But then he came back, so.

And he botched that by putting Chepek in there. I kinda feel bad for that dude, now.

 

[yensidtlaw1969]

Iger seems to have his nose in everything. Wasn’t this Chapek’s complaint? I may be wrong, but he seems to be a bit of an ego-maniac.

He is. Purportedly. By many.

Doesn't have his nose in everything, but he has it where he wants to. Tiana's was one such place.

We shouldn't pretend he drafted the scenery or painted the Animatronics, but he approved the spending and not blindly. Which is why the "Bob called it Boring!" story is so nonsensical. Plus I'm pretty sure he wasn't even in Florida the week that was supposed to have happened.

 

[basas]

He is. Purportedly. By many.

Doesn't have his nose in everything, but he has it where he wants to. Tiana's was one such place.

We shouldn't pretend he drafted the scenery or painted the Animatronics, but he approved the spending and not blindly. Which is why the "Bob called it Boring!" story is so nonsensical. Plus I'm pretty sure he wasn't even in Florida the week that was supposed to have happened.

Right, and as I said, as head of the company the buck stops with him.

 

[basas]

And he botched that by putting Chepek in there. I kinda feel bad for that dude, now.

Was Chapek given a chance? Was he constrained by Iger? I don’t know the answers.

 

[yensidtlaw1969]

Right, and as I said, as head of the company the buck stops with him.

I don't disagree with that. My point is more that he doesn't personally approve every expenditure within the parks, but this was a case where he was more involved than normal.

But yes, ultimately responsibility for keeping the ship right falls to him.

 

[Vclguy90]

Was Chapek given a chance? Was he constrained by Iger? I don’t know the answers.

I'm kinda under the impression that Chepek was given Igers and had to make lemonade. But got blamed for it not tasting good. It's hard to turn around a plan of destruction that's already set in place within his tenure. Iger got out because Disney was going under, it didn't, so he wanted to come back in like a knight. I don't really think Chepek actually initiated anything but more went along with a plan that was already in motion before he became CEO. It's almost like a conspiracy.

A sidenote and off topic: I talk to a lot of people at Pixar and stuff is going on there. I'm very open about my opinion with Iger and all they ever do is stare me in my face and say "Iger is great." Dead inside.

 

[Mr. Sullivan]

Was Chapek given a chance? Was he constrained by Iger? I don’t know the answers.

Chapek has never particularly been a popular figure among Disney fans for a multitude of reasons, but primarily because he just isn't very good at fulfilling either Disney CEO type.

CEOs for the company have usually come as one of two types: the ones who're very creative and love the story aspect of the company (your Walts and your Michael Eisners) and the ones who're more focused on the business and what revenue could be derived from their products (your Walker's and Iger's). Both types had different motivations, but what they did have in common was an ability to properly communicate to the public and to the company as a whole what it was they wanted to do and what their goal and vision was.

Chapek was neither type and hilariously bad at the communication part.

Chapek showed little interest in the artistry of Disney and he showed very little skill as a businessman at the same time. Sure, he was dumped with a lot of Iger's decisions, but he made several decisions of his own that proved to be quite bad ones. Not to mention he had a nasty, nasty habit of putting his foot in his mouth and saying things that reflected very poorly on the company and himself.

Iger has many, many, many faults. And unfortunately since he's come back for a second round, those faults have been more prominent. But it also cannot be ignored that he ushered in the most financially prosperous era of Disney's entire history all while also maintaining a generally well made product (even if it didn't quite match the company's previous peaks in the creative department). He showed that someone could be business oriented without also making themselves and the company look foolish, and Chapek spent his entire brief tenure as CEO demonstrating that that is kinda all he was able to do.

He was given a chance. People didn't like him going in, but most people were cautiously optimistic about a shakeup and new set of eyes on everything. He just kept proving over and over and over again why he wasn't cut out for it and people kept losing their patience with him more and more.

Frankly, for all the problems I have with Bob Iger (and there are tons), I'd rather have him than I would Chapek because Bob at the very, very least knows when it's time to shut up and just make a pivot and try something else. Chapek has no clue when it's time to shut up and reassess something.

 

[Vclguy90]

Chapek has never particularly been a popular figure among Disney fans for a multitude of reasons, but primarily because he just isn't very good at fulfilling either Disney CEO type.

CEOs for the company have usually come as one of two types: the ones who're very creative and love the story aspect of the company (your Walts and your Michael Eisners) and the ones who're more focused on the business and what revenue could be derived from their products (your Walker's and Iger's). Both types had different motivations, but what they did have in common was an ability to properly communicate to the public and to the company as a whole what it was they wanted to do and what their goal and vision was.

Chapek was neither type and hilariously bad at the communication part.

Chapek showed little interest in the artistry of Disney and he showed very little skill as a businessman at the same time. Sure, he was dumped with a lot of Iger's decisions, but he made several decisions of his own that proved to be quite bad ones. Not to mention he had a nasty, nasty habit of putting his foot in his mouth and saying things that reflected very poorly on the company and himself.

Iger has many, many, many faults. And unfortunately since he's come back for a second round, those faults have been more prominent. But it also cannot be ignored that he ushered in the most financially prosperous era of Disney's entire history all while also maintaining a generally well made product (even if it didn't quite match the company's previous peaks in the creative department). He showed that someone could be business oriented without also making themselves and the company look foolish, and Chapek spent his entire brief tenure as CEO demonstrating that that is kinda all he was able to do.

He was given a chance. People didn't like him going in, but most people were cautiously optimistic about a shakeup and new set of eyes on everything. He just kept proving over and over and over again why he wasn't cut out for it and people kept losing their patience with him more and more.

Frankly, for all the problems I have with Bob Iger (and there are tons), I'd rather have him than I would Chapek because Bob at the very, very least knows when it's time to shut up and just make a pivot and try something else. Chapek has no clue when it's time to shut up and reassess something.

I agree with you but I think it's time for Bob and Bob to go into Vault Disney and never resurface. I rather an 82 year old Michael Eisner - probably even more bats*** crazy now - than either of them.

 

[Mr. Sullivan]

I agree with you but I think it's time for Bob and Bob to go into Vault Disney and never resurface. I rather an 82 year old Michael Eisner - probably even more bats*** crazy now - than either of them.

Honestly, I would generally prefer if they got someone in there who is a good bit younger and perhaps comes from somewhere within the company that gives them a good idea about to how handle both sides of the operation (creative and financial).

I don’t know that would be, thought.

I’ve heard several different rumors floated around about who has been chosen but nothing concrete. The name I hear most often in the rumor mill is Dana Walden which I would not be completely opposed to, her resume is impressive. But yeah even she doesn’t fit into exactly the kind of mold I’d like to see a CEO take.

Someone who could be a mix of Eisner’s willingness to try creatively and care about the art and Iger’s understanding of finances and how to quickly respond to sudden changes in them would be great.

 

[Homemade Imagineering]

Okay so I’ve calmed down a little bit since the initial POV release, and I took some time to watch the others. My opinion remains however, yes the set dressing is very pretty and in a vacuum those are no doubt some very impressive animatronics. I don’t think this is nearly as bad a situation as JII. That will always be the absolute worst decision this company has ever made in it’s 100 year history, and will remain a huge disservice to fans until it is properly rectified.

Anyways, I do have faith this is not a lost cause IF they decide on investing some more capital into this in order to flesh out a good number of those dead spaces. They must also need to include some sort of grander conflict in this, whether that’s Facilier or something else entirely. Also, where the heck is Bruno Campos?? They explicitly said his voice work would be featured and yet he remains absent? I really wished they’d gone with that initial concept art in the boat as they’d initially released, and there was also a standalone Timoléon figure in a different configuration within that scene which never appeared anywhere.

Speaking of which, what was the point of the animation diagram for him showcasing all of those complex facial movements and whatnot? He received a total of 2 identical limited motion figures of which his facial features are stagnant and even seem obscured by his fur. Allowing him to be a complex AA throughout the attraction would’ve made alot more sense, at the end of the day this whole thing just leaves me with so many more questions than answers. It genuinely seems like some of these elements were for some reason cut or simply forgotten about, and I too am baffled at how much they spent on this for it to turn out as this confusing fever dream of what should be.

Also again… no side critters, which they could have at least made into static figures for some attractive vignettes to fill in some of that dead-space, but no… at the end of the day I am not asking for them to bring back SM, I know that ship has long since sailed, but there is so much potential for this to be improved upon. It almost reminds me of the confusion behind the Jurassic World redo of Jurassic Park at USH. The retheme opened with an incomplete finale scene, and several elements missing in the predator cove section. If they indeed are missing some elements that were sacrificed in order to open this thing in time for the summer, then that would answer alot of my questions and qualm my concerns. I actually hope that is the case, but until then I will continue to feel unsatisfied with this project. I hope someone out there in the know can eventually provide some insight into why the final product is so confusing