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

[LittleBuford]

They mean during the last few years of operation when Disney began rapidly pulling the merch from shelves.

They explained what they meant, and I “liked” their explanation to show I understood it.

 

[basas]

They explained what they meant, and I “liked” their explanation to show I understood it.

He was probably typing his reply at the same time. It’s all good!

 

[MerlinTheGoat]

You really have no way of knowing that. It certainly wasn’t why I rode it.

Nor me. In fact, I actively went out of my way to avoid getting soaked while riding it. Especially in cold seasons. I always ask for the back row for that reason (which gets the least wet out of all rows), and duck down when the boat reaches the bottom of the big drop. That prevents most threats of being drenched (even the waterfall at the stop right before the finale). Aside from the lottery of being hit by the the jets between the first two lifts. It's nice that there are/were ways to avoid getting too wet, unlike something like Kali River (i'm not a fan of those types of rapids rides).

I think quite a lot of people don't like getting drenched but still loved Splash. After getting off the ride, walking around in temperatures in the 90s in soaking wet clothes, underwear and squelching shoes is definitely not a pleasant experience whatsoever for many people. I get the same or better relief of being cooled off by just a proper air conditioned interior building, without any of the downsides.

He was probably typing his reply at the same time. It’s all good!

Yep, I was late.

 

[LittleBuford]

Disney Bot

What an absurd thing to accuse @Stripes of just because you disagree with him.

 

[cookiee_munster]

Jeez Louise, I come on here after a little bit away and this thread has been filled with Iger/Chapek stuff. As the ice queen herself would belt out: Let it Go...

On a more related note, i've seen the POV of the ride and I think it's fantastic. With what they have to work with already it's hard to work with the limitations of the ride structure, and to fit a whole new narrative around that is commendable.

I don't believe for a second that this was in development way, Way, WAY before the announcement. So what they've managed to do with the short time they've had is great.

The animatronics are all top-notch too. There are areas that look a little sparse, and may have little additions through the years, but what's there is great.

And that end song, I've been humming all day. I'd take that over Zip-a-Dee-Doo-Dah any time.

Overall I can't see why kids and adults who aren't hardcore Disney parks fans like the rabble here wouldn't like it. I think it ticks all the boxes to be a pretty good attraction and a fair replacement of a ride based on characters from a pretty controversial film.

And on that note, i'm now going to listen to "Special Spice" for the 100th time

 

[Heath]

Tiana’s Bayou “Adventure” is a big fat zippidy-doo-DUD

 

[mergatroid]

My main criticism would be it does feel a bit sparse in parts, compared to Splash anyway. I'm not too bothered about the 'storyline' really as I never really thought much of Splash's 'storyline' either. I rode Splash for the fun of the drops, the animatronics and the music. To me it feels a bit off in parts but what is good is very good.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

I used Mission Breakout as an example for instance. Had a ton of negative feedback for multiple reasons such as thematic inconsistency and losing a classic. Sound familiar?

Mission Breakout turned out to be a success in the long run. Proved many die hard Disney Parks audiences wrong. They turned a classic into something that could be just as beloved. At least we kept the original Tower of Terror in Florida.

The only difference now is that Tiana's Bayou Adventure appears to be potentially one of the biggest fails ever in WDI history. There is no upgrade.

Who could have foreseen this? Modern Imagineering messing up a certified classic. (and yes that was meant to be sarcasm)

Ok…but mission breakout doesn’t appear to be regarded in consensus as a huge success. It’s still pretty divisive.

 

[SuddenStorm]

Disney never confirms official amounts. I did not make up the number, it was posted on here but I don’t recall by whom. $150M seems like a good ballpark though. It would not include both coasts, but I’m sure there is some savings due to shared R&D costs. May bring the total cost per attraction down to a lower number but it’s definetly in the $125M-$200M range for each.

Man, imagine being in charge of Disney World- and having Burbank tell you you need to close Splash Mountain, the most popular ride in the most popular park in the most popular vacation spot on the planet.

And spend $100 million in the process. But no worries- WDI's got their best on it.

And then they deliver this.

 

[huwar18]

I think quite a lot of people don't like getting drenched but still loved Splash. After getting off the ride, walking around in temperatures in the 90s in soaking wet clothes, underwear and squelching shoes is definitely not a pleasant experience whatsoever for many people. I get the same or better relief of being cooled off by just a proper air conditioned interior building, without any of the downsides.

I completely agree. I loved the ride. However, I stopped riding it the last couple of years.

 

[GenChi]

As a shareholder you should be happy that Disney is adding modern IP that people are actually interested in to the parks.

This mindset is 100% the reason Disney the company is in a overall decline. Not just the parks, but every product the release now.

Almost everyone who is going to their parks or watching their content is not a shareholder. I'm not, because I think there's better outlets to invest in. Focusing on "shareholders" means focusing on unlimited quarterly profit increase and market valuation, which is not sustainable on its own but its absolutely toxic for an entertainment company. The focus is now not on longevity and offering the best service to keep money coming in, but cutting all expenses and throwing in IP themes that don't fit for a worse experience you are then charging far more for.

Looking at all the flagship Magic Kingdom attractions, none besides Splash are tied to an IP. Splash wasn't tied to the IP because it's an IP, but because the storyline made sense for a long-form attraction. That it's the one to get a major ride and not any of the bigger IPs people know shows how they focused on longevity more then short quarterly gains. Now that the focus is only "shareholders", Bob Iger has IPs he wants to promote and he tells them to put it in the ride and make an idea around it. Doesn't matter if it doesn't fit, doesn't matter if it's half-baked, it's an "IP" so it has to sell. We could never get something like Pirates, Haunted Mansion, Space Mountain, etc, ever again under this mindset, rides that have no IPs but have such good longevity 50 years later every casual knows them. Instead, you get this and the Spiderman ride at DCA which hurt the IP, park and brand overall.

Sorry but this comment bothered me, revolving around "shareholders" like Wish mentioned is just terrible. Because you cut the quality and the brand name can only stand it so far, and then you lose the quality edge that made Disney successful in the first place. Focus on "shareholders" as the priority is in short time currently killing the stock and the company.

 

[monothingie]

Man, imagine being in charge of Disney World- and having Burbank tell you you need to close Splash Mountain, the most popular ride in the most popular park in the most popular vacation spot on the planet.

And spend $100 million in the process. But no worries- WDI's got their best on it.

And then they deliver this.

They'll all be promoted.

 

[bwr827]

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

On a few fronts it’s fairly easy to say it’s better, for average park goers. The exterior theming looks amazing. The animatronics are fancy new tech. It has recognizable IP. And, probably, it has a fun shrinking part in the ride.

But I totally understand the nostalgia and attachment for Splash and the laments of “what could have been”. It’s clear the ride could have been made better — either with more money, or different talent, etc.

To me, I think the new ride will work. On balance, it has enough going for it to be popular.

 

[monothingie]

So is the Tianna retheme of the "problematic" Pecos Bill on hold now until things shake out with TBA?

Do they make changes to DLR's version to address the negative reaction to the MK version?

 

[Tha Realest]

I don't love the way the story turned out, but obviously it was put in front of a WDI exec, and probably at least Josh D'Amaro, and clearly they said yes, since at least 150M has been spent and the attraction opens in 25 days.

If that is true, I think the “how did this get approved?” ignores various dynamics at play. For instance, given the subtext of the subject matter, the reasons for making the change, it could have been uncomfortable if Josh rejected those views.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

I’ll never forget it, it was the Mary Poppins attraction announcement at D23 to get me to sign up for an account.

…they’re “getting around to that”…any day now

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

So is the Tianna retheme of the "problematic" Pecos Bill on hold now until things shake out with TBA?

Do they make changes to DLR's version to address the negative reaction to the MK version?

…oh yeah…forgot pecos got cancelled too…

The war on the topping bar

 

[Tha Realest]

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

at the end of the day they took Splash Mountain and the best many can say about this end product is “ not as bad as JII?”

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

I don't love the way the story turned out, but obviously it was put in front of a WDI exec, and probably at least Josh D'Amaro, and clearly they said yes, since at least 150M has been spent and the attraction opens in 25 days.

If that is true, I think the “how did this get approved?” ignores various dynamics at play. For instance, given the subtext of the subject matter, the reasons for making the change, it could have been uncomfortable if Josh rejected those views.

The P&R head gets to spend $150,000,000 when pigs fly…

The buck always stops at the same desk.

God…did they really blow this much cash on that?

Of course…took too long and under delivers…the modern WDI hallmarks

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

at the end of the day they took Splash Mountain and the best many can say about this end product is “ not as bad as JII?”

“…it’s no worse than FEA”