Unpopular Disney world opinions

[DisneyFanatic12]

I think I already said all of these in the other thread, but I guess I’ll post them again…

1. Toy Story Land is a great land
2. Journey of the Little Mermaid is a great ride, especially at Magic Kingdom
3. EPCOT is overhyped, although I can’t drink and that seems to be the cause for most of its love
4. MMRR is a great ride (although losing The Great Movie Ride is of course very unfortunate)
5. Mission: SPACE is a great ride and is themed well

 

[DisneyFanatic12]

As for a new one, if what is built is similar to the concept art, Cars Land could be better than RoA.

 

[Sir_Cliff]

Gran Fiesta starring The Three Caballeros is one of Disney's best rides.

I'm glad I'm not the only one who thinks that might be the most underrated ride at WDW!

 

[UNCgolf]

I do get all of that and also find it strange that they have chosen to clone a ride that was retrofitted into another attraction's space and use it to anchor an entire land in two different parks. That said, riding it again at HKDL it actually didn't feel as underwhelming as you might imagine in that context. Maybe a bit short, but I guess it's not exceptionally short for a modern Disney ride.

Then again, my unpopular opinion was a positive assessment of the Epcot version! I also kind of like the feeling of just drifting through various settings from the film with familiar music and characters without a clear narrative thread. I honestly think Disney should do more attractions like that. I know some people find it almost a book report ride, but that's really not my sensation as I don't see how it recreates any of the plot points from the film beyond the scene where the younger trolls are being told the story of the film at the beginning of the ride.

I'm definitely on board with rides not necessarily needing a linear narrative -- one of the complaints people have made here about Na'vi River Journey is that it doesn't tell a story, and I've never really understood that particular complaint. I don't think it needs a story (and there are other classic Disney attractions that don't really have a narrative, like Haunted Mansion and Jungle Cruise); you're just experiencing being on a river in a jungle on an alien planet (and, at least IMO, it absolutely nails that).

I've never really understood the complaint about book report rides either, though. If you're building a ride based off a specific movie, isn't that often what people want? People generally want to see the scenes and characters from the film they enjoyed. I think that's part of the reason FEA felt off to me (although certainly not my biggest issue); it's basically a collection of scenes similar to scenes from the film (Elsa singing Let It Go in the ice palace, etc.). If they ever built an Aladdin ride, e.g., I think people would want to see the Cave of Wonders, they'd want to see an A Whole New World flying carpet scene, they'd want to see a Friend Like Me scene, etc., which doesn't have to be done as a book report, but if you have all those scenes it seems like it's almost inherently one.

Not that I'm suggesting an IP ride should default to a book report ride -- some IPs have far more leeway for unique experiences from particular parts of a film, or even from something outside of the film itself (see the Avatar rides, e.g.), than others -- but Tiana, e.g., likely would be a much better ride if it was a book report (or close to one). The Disney animated films (and Pixar too) are often self-contained in a way that trying to develop something outside of the context of the movie doesn't really make a lot of sense.

I also think that it has to involve physical sets and AAs, because the point would be to inhabit the physical space of the film in a way that can't be done outside of the attraction. If it's mainly screens, then... may as well just watch the actual movie.

 

["El Gran Magnifico"]

From my perspective Disney is an entertainment company. I don’t care how many drops or inversions a coaster has, whether or not a ride is 100% faithful to the IP, how deep the backstory is,etc.

I care about - when I get off of the ride was I entertained? Do I have a smile on my face? Do I look forward to riding it again?

And that is regardless of whether it’s a “Thrill” or “Dark” ride.

I do though have a penchant for a well put together Dark ride.

 

[UNCgolf]

From my perspective Disney is an entertainment company. I don’t care how many drops or inversions a coaster has, whether or not a ride is 100% faithful to the IP, how deep the backstory is,etc.

I care about - when I get off of the ride was I entertained? Do I have a smile on my face? Do I look forward to riding it again?

And that is regardless of whether it’s a “Thrill” or “Dark” ride.

I do though have a penchant for a well put together Dark ride.

Absolutely. I often think "would I be willing to wait 30 minutes to ride it again?". Frozen Ever After, e.g., fails that test (and it's certainly not the only ride that does, but just because we were discussing above). I'd ride it if I could walk on, but that's about it.

That's also why I care very little about unthemed coasters -- as strange as it sounds to most people, I just don't find them especially entertaining. Simply going fast and big drops don't do that much for me unless there's well-themed context.

Of course now I probably couldn't ride many of those coasters anyways because I get motion sickness, but that's a relatively new thing. I didn't really care about riding them when I was a teenager (and had no motion sickness concerns) either.

 

[Jrb1979]

Absolutely. I often think "would I be willing to wait 30 minutes to ride it again?". Frozen Ever After, e.g., fails that test (and it's certainly not the only ride that does, but just because we were discussing above). I'd ride it if I could walk on, but that's about it.

That's also why I care very little about unthemed coasters -- as strange as it sounds to most people, I just don't find them especially entertaining. Simply going fast and big drops don't do that much for me unless there's well-themed context.

Of course now I probably couldn't ride many of those coasters anyways because I get motion sickness, but that's a relatively new thing. I didn't really care about riding them when I was a teenager (and had no motion sickness concerns) either.

I'm the opposite. I love coasters you., can beat going 120 mph and up 420 ft.

As far as themed rides go, I need some level of thrill for it to be worthwhile. I find Navi river ride boring. It's a boat ride with a bunch of scenery.

 

[LindseyDisney]

I'm not a fan of liquid cheese on Disney snacks.

 

[Agent H]

I'm not a fan of liquid cheese on Disney snacks.

Hard disagree. Give me all the cheese.

 

[ParadoxPortals]

-Country Bear Jamboree deserves the "it's creepy and annoying" allegations that it's a small world gets. I do not like those singing bears one bit, but I can vibe with the children of the world. CBJ gives me Gatlinburg tourist trap vibes but without the sincere Southern campy charm of Gatlinburg.
-In fact, the small world haters are weird for hating so hard on an attraction whose message is "we are all human and should respect each other's cultures."
-Cosmic Rewind makes no sense in Epcot, and I'm tired of people calling it one of the greatest Disney attractions. Yes, I will ride it, but it's meh to me and didn't do anything revolutionary. It just contributed to the IP overload in Epcot.
-Remy's isn't great. I wish it had animatronics or more physical sets or SOMETHING other than the 3D.
-I will never understand Spirit Jerseys or Loungeflys. $70 bucks AT LEAST for a long sleeve tshirt and a tiny backpack?????
-Splash Mountain was not a classic attraction and needed to close, problematic past or not. I never really understood why it opened in the first place, since the film it was based on hadn't been publicly available for 40 years (I know this one will really make some folks mad lol).

This list goes so hard and is so true, and I agree so strongly with it all, apart from number 1. I get where you're coming from, I think for me it's just the music that lifts this otherwise very strange show up. If it wasn't a musical, I think I'd agree that the characters are so strange and the whole thing was somewhat unsettling.

As a Disneyland Paris lover, I hate Remy's in EPCOT, not because it doesn't for or anything, but because it fits too well and deprives Paris of its signature E-ticket that justified visits to go see. Now Disney has to scramble to start building new unique attractions in Paris again (Lion King log flume, rumoured new Indy EMV ride, rumoured unique Pandora land, ETC) so that they can get back to where they were and keep growing the underdog resort's attendance. And yeah, Remy is a disappointing screen-based ride that hasn't aged well and lacks so much, with only 1 physical scene during the main ride through (the cold room / fridge).

Your Splash hot take is just cold hard truth I feel. The ride was weird! Well-made, entertaining, but a strange, very un-Disney-coded story, and utterly outdated. It needed to go.

 

[Brer Oswald]

This list goes so hard and is so true, and I agree so strongly with it all, apart from number 1. I get where you're coming from, I think for me it's just the music that lifts this otherwise very strange show up. If it wasn't a musical, I think I'd agree that the characters are so strange and the whole thing was somewhat unsettling.

As a Disneyland Paris lover, I hate Remy's in EPCOT, not because it doesn't for or anything, but because it fits too well and deprives Paris of its signature E-ticket that justified visits to go see. Now Disney has to scramble to start building new unique attractions in Paris again (Lion King log flume, rumoured new Indy EMV ride, rumoured unique Pandora land, ETC) so that they can get back to where they were and keep growing the underdog resort's attendance. And yeah, Remy is a disappointing screen-based ride that hasn't aged well and lacks so much, with only 1 physical scene during the main ride through (the cold room / fridge).

Your Splash hot take is just cold hard truth I feel. The ride was weird! Well-made, entertaining, but a strange, very un-Disney-coded story, and utterly outdated. It needed to go.

Say what you will about Splash, but to call it “un-Disney-coded” is straight up false. It was probably the one attraction that epitomized what Disney was all about for the first 85 years of the company’s life. Whimsical music that told a story, colourful characters and environments, strong morals that were simple enough for anyone to relate with, stakes and danger followed by relief and celebration. It literally ended with the company’s anthem.

Iger’s Disney has made audiences incredibly soft. No villains, no fear, no meaningful rewards, and niche lessons that mostly appeal to the writers as opposed to the audience.

 

[Tjaden]

I'm mostly on the popular opinion side here (IP hatred, death of coherent theming) but I guess my opinion may be more radical in that direction which turns it to unpopular

Opinion: WDW is not getting a visit from me unless I'm taking a family member that hasn't been who is under the age of 13.

The prices they charge for what you get is ridiculous compared to what you can get for your tourist dollars elesewhere but that isn't the reason to skip visiting for me. The reason is that the new stories they're telling are so boring and uninspiring that I'd rather just not be there. The last time I was there (2021) after the first day at a park, I was wishing that I was in a museum or eating local food in some other place that I can't get at home.

I'm probably just in that gap where WDW does nothing for me as a 30 year old married dude without kids who are old enough to visit.

I do love keeping up with the parks and seeing the disagreements on here though, which is honestly a weird thing to do for a place I don't care for anymore.

 

[ParadoxPortals]

Say what you will about Splash, but to call it “un-Disney-coded” is straight up false. It was probably the one attraction that epitomized what Disney was all about for the first 85 years of the company’s life. Whimsical music that told a story, colourful characters and environments, strong morals that were simple enough for anyone to relate with, stakes and danger followed by relief and celebration. It literally ended with the company’s anthem.

Iger’s Disney has made audiences incredibly soft. No villains, no fear, no meaningful rewards, and niche lessons that mostly appeal to the writers as opposed to the audience.

(Apologies this is egregiously long. I evidently have a lot of thoughts about this all. Please also see the very bottom paragraph for my separate thoughts on Disney's contemporary "softness", in which I agree with your point).

Let me elaborate on my claim of Splash Mountain being un-Disney-coded. I was referring to the attraction's narrative structure, which differs from how Disney typically writes hero's journey adventures.

Think of Tangled or Frozen or Peter Pan. In the, the protagonist(s) yearn for more from life, and they eventually accept their call to adventure, showing virtuous qualities along the way until the defeat whatever menace threatens them, and are rewarded for their bravery and adventurous spirit with a new and better life / the solution to their problem(s). Disney has always been about "magic" (things working out happily in the end), and heroes (people wanting more from life and using their tenacity to do good along the way as they search for fulfilment).

In Splash Mountain, the good-natured yet bored trickster Brer Rabbit determines that his life is too boring and he yearns for more. The ride starts by extolling the qualities of initiative and bravery, matching other Disney flicks in encouraging its young audience to be inquisitive and open to new ideas / opportunities. Along the way he does good by punishing the duplicitous Brer Fox and Brer Bear, but eventually his fatal flaw of overconfidence leads to him being captured. By utilising his smarts, he's able to escape from his fate and 'defeat' Fox and Bear. So far, we're following the Disney formula! But then the ride reaches its finale... Brer Rabbit returns home? He sings of how he was wrong to ever wish for more from life, how he was lucky to be a member of the Briar Patch community, and how - in his own words - he'd "learned" his "lesson". This suggests Brer Rabbit was being selfish and foolish for wanting to explore his world more and see what else there was from life, to seize the moment and do more, ideals the Disney brand would typically support. This is what I'm referring to when I say Splash Mountain was deviant from most of Disney's values and narratives. Splash Mountain is an innocence to experience plot, sure, but its one where the main character's goals are distinctly viewed as 'incorrect', and needing of a journey to learn to remove his curiosity and dreams of more from life.

Now, if you wanted to bring a political reading to this narrative analysis, you could argue that it follows some of Song of the South's DNA. I'm aware this viewpoint is debated, but it's commonly accepted by left-leaning sources, as well as as the majority of modern analyses of the film, that Uncle Remus served as a mouthpiece to lessen and understate the negative impacts of slavery. In the film, Remus seems to yearn for a - in his words - "simpler time", and vaguely alluded at points to how the days of ownership and plantation labour were less complicated, and an easy lifestyle. Some would argue Remus, a character written by white writers for this specific film rendition of the Briar Patch Stories, served to further a white narrative that aimed to undermine the effects of slavery, for obvious benefits to its writers. In Splash Mountain, Brer Rabbit 'learns' to love his 'home' of the Briar Patch (which some argue is an allegory for a plantation), and he decides trying to leave this place was a poor idea, as it's easier to stay in the regimented familiar. Just like how in the film Remus used the Briar Patch stories as metaphors for this possible pro-slavery narrative, Splash Mountain curiously maintains the plot point of having Brer Rabbit value the Briar Patch over carving out his own chosen life of freedom and independence. This is why some audiences argue Splash Mountain was racist, not just because of a loose connection tp a controversial source material, but because of its maintaining of the source's questionable viewpoints.

On a separate note, I do fully agree that contemporary Disney is very 'conservative' in a sense of wanting to strip danger, tension, and maturity from its attractions. See Splash becoming an unscary musical ride, Constance Hatchaway losing her murder plot line, and the lack of recent horror additions in the parks (time will tell whether Villains Land is Phantom Manor / Tower of Terror scary, or just kiddy Halloween spooky). I wish Disney would offer more teen and adult offerings, and be braver in testing the waters with more mature concepts these days.

 

[Agent H]

(Apologies this is egregiously long. I evidently have a lot of thoughts about this all. Please also see the very bottom paragraph for my separate thoughts on Disney's contemporary "softness", in which I agree with your point).

Let me elaborate on my claim of Splash Mountain being un-Disney-coded. I was referring to the attraction's narrative structure, which differs from how Disney typically writes hero's journey adventures.

Think of Tangled or Frozen or Peter Pan. In the, the protagonist(s) yearn for more from life, and they eventually accept their call to adventure, showing virtuous qualities along the way until the defeat whatever menace threatens them, and are rewarded for their bravery and adventurous spirit with a new and better life / the solution to their problem(s). Disney has always been about "magic" (things working out happily in the end), and heroes (people wanting more from life and using their tenacity to do good along the way as they search for fulfilment).

In Splash Mountain, the good-natured yet bored trickster Brer Rabbit determines that his life is too boring and he yearns for more. The ride starts by extolling the qualities of initiative and bravery, matching other Disney flicks in encouraging its young audience to be inquisitive and open to new ideas / opportunities. Along the way he does good by punishing the duplicitous Brer Fox and Brer Bear, but eventually his fatal flaw of overconfidence leads to him being captured. By utilising his smarts, he's able to escape from his fate and 'defeat' Fox and Bear. So far, we're following the Disney formula! But then the ride reaches its finale... Brer Rabbit returns home? He sings of how he was wrong to ever wish for more from life, how he was lucky to be a member of the Briar Patch community, and how - in his own words - he'd "learned" his "lesson". This suggests Brer Rabbit was being selfish and foolish for wanting to explore his world more and see what else there was from life, to seize the moment and do more, ideals the Disney brand would typically support. This is what I'm referring to when I say Splash Mountain was deviant from most of Disney's values and narratives. Splash Mountain is an innocence to experience plot, sure, but its one where the main character's goals are distinctly viewed as 'incorrect', and needing of a journey to learn to remove his curiosity and dreams of more from life.

Now, if you wanted to bring a political reading to this narrative analysis, you could argue that it follows some of Song of the South's DNA. I'm aware this viewpoint is debated, but it's commonly accepted by left-leaning sources, as well as as the majority of modern analyses of the film, that Uncle Remus served as a mouthpiece to lessen and understate the negative impacts of slavery. In the film, Remus seems to yearn for a - in his words - "simpler time", and vaguely alluded at points to how the days of ownership and plantation labour were less complicated, and an easy lifestyle. Some would argue Remus, a character written by white writers for this specific film rendition of the Briar Patch Stories, served to further a white narrative that aimed to undermine the effects of slavery, for obvious benefits to its writers. In Splash Mountain, Brer Rabbit 'learns' to love his 'home' of the Briar Patch (which some argue is an allegory for a plantation), and he decides trying to leave this place was a poor idea, as it's easier to stay in the regimented familiar. Just like how in the film Remus used the Briar Patch stories as metaphors for this possible pro-slavery narrative, Splash Mountain curiously maintains the plot point of having Brer Rabbit value the Briar Patch over carving out his own chosen life of freedom and independence. This is why some audiences argue Splash Mountain was racist, not just because of a loose connection tp a controversial source material, but because of its maintaining of the source's questionable viewpoints.

On a separate note, I do fully agree that contemporary Disney is very 'conservative' in a sense of wanting to strip danger, tension, and maturity from its attractions. See Splash becoming an unscary musical ride, Constance Hatchaway losing her murder plot line, and the lack of recent horror additions in the parks (time will tell whether Villains Land is Phantom Manor / Tower of Terror scary, or just kiddy Halloween spooky). I wish Disney would offer more teen and adult offerings, and be braver in testing the waters with more mature concepts these days.

Very well said @ParadoxPortals

 

[Brer Oswald]

(Apologies this is egregiously long. I evidently have a lot of thoughts about this all. Please also see the very bottom paragraph for my separate thoughts on Disney's contemporary "softness", in which I agree with your point).

Let me elaborate on my claim of Splash Mountain being un-Disney-coded. I was referring to the attraction's narrative structure, which differs from how Disney typically writes hero's journey adventures.

Think of Tangled or Frozen or Peter Pan. In the, the protagonist(s) yearn for more from life, and they eventually accept their call to adventure, showing virtuous qualities along the way until the defeat whatever menace threatens them, and are rewarded for their bravery and adventurous spirit with a new and better life / the solution to their problem(s). Disney has always been about "magic" (things working out happily in the end), and heroes (people wanting more from life and using their tenacity to do good along the way as they search for fulfilment).

In Splash Mountain, the good-natured yet bored trickster Brer Rabbit determines that his life is too boring and he yearns for more. The ride starts by extolling the qualities of initiative and bravery, matching other Disney flicks in encouraging its young audience to be inquisitive and open to new ideas / opportunities. Along the way he does good by punishing the duplicitous Brer Fox and Brer Bear, but eventually his fatal flaw of overconfidence leads to him being captured. By utilising his smarts, he's able to escape from his fate and 'defeat' Fox and Bear. So far, we're following the Disney formula! But then the ride reaches its finale... Brer Rabbit returns home? He sings of how he was wrong to ever wish for more from life, how he was lucky to be a member of the Briar Patch community, and how - in his own words - he'd "learned" his "lesson". This suggests Brer Rabbit was being selfish and foolish for wanting to explore his world more and see what else there was from life, to seize the moment and do more, ideals the Disney brand would typically support. This is what I'm referring to when I say Splash Mountain was deviant from most of Disney's values and narratives. Splash Mountain is an innocence to experience plot, sure, but its one where the main character's goals are distinctly viewed as 'incorrect', and needing of a journey to learn to remove his curiosity and dreams of more from life.

Now, if you wanted to bring a political reading to this narrative analysis, you could argue that it follows some of Song of the South's DNA. I'm aware this viewpoint is debated, but it's commonly accepted by left-leaning sources, as well as as the majority of modern analyses of the film, that Uncle Remus served as a mouthpiece to lessen and understate the negative impacts of slavery. In the film, Remus seems to yearn for a - in his words - "simpler time", and vaguely alluded at points to how the days of ownership and plantation labour were less complicated, and an easy lifestyle. Some would argue Remus, a character written by white writers for this specific film rendition of the Briar Patch Stories, served to further a white narrative that aimed to undermine the effects of slavery, for obvious benefits to its writers. In Splash Mountain, Brer Rabbit 'learns' to love his 'home' of the Briar Patch (which some argue is an allegory for a plantation), and he decides trying to leave this place was a poor idea, as it's easier to stay in the regimented familiar. Just like how in the film Remus used the Briar Patch stories as metaphors for this possible pro-slavery narrative, Splash Mountain curiously maintains the plot point of having Brer Rabbit value the Briar Patch over carving out his own chosen life of freedom and independence. This is why some audiences argue Splash Mountain was racist, not just because of a loose connection tp a controversial source material, but because of its maintaining of the source's questionable viewpoints.

On a separate note, I do fully agree that contemporary Disney is very 'conservative' in a sense of wanting to strip danger, tension, and maturity from its attractions. See Splash becoming an unscary musical ride, Constance Hatchaway losing her murder plot line, and the lack of recent horror additions in the parks (time will tell whether Villains Land is Phantom Manor / Tower of Terror scary, or just kiddy Halloween spooky). I wish Disney would offer more teen and adult offerings, and be braver in testing the waters with more mature concepts these days.

I’ll challenge your interpretation of the narrative. Brer Rabbit does indeed leave because he’s bored. But a big part of the reason he “leaves” is to trick Brer Fox and Brer Bear for fun. He isn’t “doing good”. He’s a trickster by nature and enjoys pulling pranks at the misfortune of others. There is no actual Laughing Place. All of the signs leading to the bee infested tree were painted by Brer Rabbit himself, evident by a bucket of paint left to the side of the tree. Ever wonder why Brer Rabbit is loudly exclaiming his plans to leave home right in front of Brer Fox and Brer Bear? It isn’t because he’s stupid. He wants them to chase him. He enjoys it. Until it catches up with him in the end. So the moral of the story isn’t “never leave home for a better life”. Rather it’s “that there are consequences to being a trickster and toying with others”.

There’s also the message of learning to appreciate what you have, and that sometimes the quiet things in life can be just as good as the “action”. A similar message to such literary classics as the Wizard of Oz, Alice in Wonderland, Pinocchio, and *gasp* Peter Pan! In all of these stories, the protagonist “leaves home” for a desire and then end up returning home realizing that the “desire” wasn’t what they wanted all along.

Not even going to dive deep into that political narrative, but besides what I’ve already said, it’s not applicable to the story. What some deviants believe Brer Fox and Brer Bear symbolize directly contradicts what they believe the Briar Patch symbolizes. If the analogy were true, the villains wouldn’t receive their comeuppance in the Briar Patch, nor would the Briar Patch be a location of rest and relaxation.

 

[Mireille]

(Apologies this is egregiously long. I evidently have a lot of thoughts about this all. Please also see the very bottom paragraph for my separate thoughts on Disney's contemporary "softness", in which I agree with your point).

Let me elaborate on my claim of Splash Mountain being un-Disney-coded. I was referring to the attraction's narrative structure, which differs from how Disney typically writes hero's journey adventures.

Think of Tangled or Frozen or Peter Pan. In the, the protagonist(s) yearn for more from life, and they eventually accept their call to adventure, showing virtuous qualities along the way until the defeat whatever menace threatens them, and are rewarded for their bravery and adventurous spirit with a new and better life / the solution to their problem(s). Disney has always been about "magic" (things working out happily in the end), and heroes (people wanting more from life and using their tenacity to do good along the way as they search for fulfilment).

In Splash Mountain, the good-natured yet bored trickster Brer Rabbit determines that his life is too boring and he yearns for more. The ride starts by extolling the qualities of initiative and bravery, matching other Disney flicks in encouraging its young audience to be inquisitive and open to new ideas / opportunities. Along the way he does good by punishing the duplicitous Brer Fox and Brer Bear, but eventually his fatal flaw of overconfidence leads to him being captured. By utilising his smarts, he's able to escape from his fate and 'defeat' Fox and Bear. So far, we're following the Disney formula! But then the ride reaches its finale... Brer Rabbit returns home? He sings of how he was wrong to ever wish for more from life, how he was lucky to be a member of the Briar Patch community, and how - in his own words - he'd "learned" his "lesson". This suggests Brer Rabbit was being selfish and foolish for wanting to explore his world more and see what else there was from life, to seize the moment and do more, ideals the Disney brand would typically support. This is what I'm referring to when I say Splash Mountain was deviant from most of Disney's values and narratives. Splash Mountain is an innocence to experience plot, sure, but its one where the main character's goals are distinctly viewed as 'incorrect', and needing of a journey to learn to remove his curiosity and dreams of more from life.

Now, if you wanted to bring a political reading to this narrative analysis, you could argue that it follows some of Song of the South's DNA. I'm aware this viewpoint is debated, but it's commonly accepted by left-leaning sources, as well as as the majority of modern analyses of the film, that Uncle Remus served as a mouthpiece to lessen and understate the negative impacts of slavery. In the film, Remus seems to yearn for a - in his words - "simpler time", and vaguely alluded at points to how the days of ownership and plantation labour were less complicated, and an easy lifestyle. Some would argue Remus, a character written by white writers for this specific film rendition of the Briar Patch Stories, served to further a white narrative that aimed to undermine the effects of slavery, for obvious benefits to its writers. In Splash Mountain, Brer Rabbit 'learns' to love his 'home' of the Briar Patch (which some argue is an allegory for a plantation), and he decides trying to leave this place was a poor idea, as it's easier to stay in the regimented familiar. Just like how in the film Remus used the Briar Patch stories as metaphors for this possible pro-slavery narrative, Splash Mountain curiously maintains the plot point of having Brer Rabbit value the Briar Patch over carving out his own chosen life of freedom and independence. This is why some audiences argue Splash Mountain was racist, not just because of a loose connection tp a controversial source material, but because of its maintaining of the source's questionable viewpoints.

On a separate note, I do fully agree that contemporary Disney is very 'conservative' in a sense of wanting to strip danger, tension, and maturity from its attractions. See Splash becoming an unscary musical ride, Constance Hatchaway losing her murder plot line, and the lack of recent horror additions in the parks (time will tell whether Villains Land is Phantom Manor / Tower of Terror scary, or just kiddy Halloween spooky). I wish Disney would offer more teen and adult offerings, and be braver in testing the waters with more mature concepts these days.

All of that was really well said. About the narrative of SotS and Brer Rabbit in particular being un-Disney-coded, I've never thought much about it (because even having grown up in the 70s I never remember SotS being viewed as acceptable, but I grew up in Minnesota and have no southern-ness in me) and I never saw anything but brief clips from the film, but it seems to me that Brer Rabbit could fit more comfortably in the Warner Bros stable of characters. On the other hand, I suppose it's not wildly different from the Disney narrative of Pinocchio, but where Brer Rabbit is depicted as an instigator, Pinocchio was portrayed more as naive and easily fooled by bad actors (very different from the book!) And I suppose very early Mickey was more of a trickster as well, though he had lost that trait by the time SotS came out, I think.

 

[ParadoxPortals]

I’ll challenge your interpretation of the narrative. Brer Rabbit does indeed leave because he’s bored. But a big part of the reason he “leaves” is to trick Brer Fox and Brer Bear for fun. He isn’t “doing good”. He’s a trickster by nature and enjoys pulling pranks at the misfortune of others. There is no actual Laughing Place. All of the signs leading to the bee infested tree were painted by Brer Rabbit himself, evident by a bucket of paint left to the side of the tree. Ever wonder why Brer Rabbit is loudly exclaiming his plans to leave home right in front of Brer Fox and Brer Bear? It isn’t because he’s stupid. He wants them to chase him. He enjoys it. Until it catches up with him in the end. So the moral of the story isn’t “never leave home for a better life”. Rather it’s “that there are consequences to being a trickster and toying with others”.

There’s also the message of learning to appreciate what you have, and that sometimes the quiet things in life can be just as good as the “action”. A similar message to such literary classics as the Wizard of Oz, Alice in Wonderland, Pinocchio, and *gasp* Peter Pan! In all of these stories, the protagonist “leaves home” for a desire and then end up returning home realizing that the “desire” wasn’t what they wanted all along.

Not even going to dive deep into that political narrative, but besides what I’ve already said, it’s not applicable to the story. What some deviants believe Brer Fox and Brer Bear symbolize directly contradicts what they believe the Briar Patch symbolizes. If the analogy were true, the villains wouldn’t receive their comeuppance in the Briar Patch, nor would the Briar Patch be a location of rest and relaxation.

Good point and fair

 

[Chef Mickey]

I think I already said all of these in the other thread, but I guess I’ll post them again…

1. Toy Story Land is a great land
2. Journey of the Little Mermaid is a great ride, especially at Magic Kingdom
3. EPCOT is overhyped, although I can’t drink and that seems to be the cause for most of its love
4. MMRR is a great ride (although losing The Great Movie Ride is of course very unfortunate)
5. Mission: SPACE is a great ride and is themed well

Toy Story Land was so terrible, management admitted it.

 

[DisneyFanatic12]

Toy Story Land was so terrible, management admitted it.

I don’t deny that it’s considered a failure by many, but my unpopular opinion is that it’s one of my favorite lands at WDW.

I don’t want this to come across as me suggesting that you’re wrong, but could you explain how/when management deemed it terrible? I’m curious now!

 

[FiestaFunKid]

-Bay Lake behind The Contemporary is the best pool area on property. A beautiful lakeside escape from the hustle and bustle, while bringing all the retro Disney feels - just steps away from MK to boot.

-Related - I prefer lake view to theme park view at The Contemporary or BLT.

-Cant lie - Carousel of Progress (granted with the inferior song), Country Bears, and especially Hall of Presidents bored me to tears in the 80s/90s as a kid and I couldn't wait for them to end. I'm glad they are all still here - but Carousel is the only one I routinely visit as an adult.

-Recently re-explored the caves at Tom Sawyer Island and they are a top 5 attraction for me at MK.

-If you are from New England or the Pacific NW - Wilderness Lodge is a poor setting for your winter escape vacation. I'll visit for Geyser Point but I'm all set with feeling like I'm in a New Hampshire ski lodge while in Florida.

-Very unpopular or popular - All in, Splash Mountain is the greatest ride ever built at MK. The best mix of immersion, feels, classic music, thrills, animatronics, long ride time, story - and flat out fun. Even if you disagree with some of those, no other ride was strong in so many of the key aspects of what makes an attraction memorable.