Concerned about the future of Jungle Cruise

[ryborg]

After watching the trailer for the upcoming Jungle Cruise movie I couldn't help wonder--and worry--what it might mean for the future of our beloved Jungle Cruise.
If you haven't yet seen the trailer, it's appears to be a CGI heavy movie with plot line involving some mystical, supernatural something er'other...

It would be great if the movie is successful, but I for one would really not love any movie treatment done to the ride. (a la. PoTC).
If subtle nods are done, that might possibly work, but if there is a rethemeing in mind, especially incorporating supernatural, or over the top fantasy driven story lines, I just couldn't enjoy it the same. In fact, for me, it would further substantiate my growing belief that current Disney Mgmt doesn't grasp what makes their own parks so special.

[HiddenMickey87]

Me, too. Me, too.

[DisneyRicky]

There was a movie about the Haunted Mansion that didn't influence the ride in any way.

[Mr Wiggins]

There was a movie about the Haunted Mansion that didn't influence the ride in any way.

The Haunted Mansion movie didn't influence the ride because the movie bombed. The better the Jungle Cruise movie does at the box office, the more likely it will be added to the Jungle Cruise ride. The bigger the box office, the more extensive the ride presence. A Jungle Cruise movie has been in development for well over 10 years -- you can bet that WDI already has stacks of concept art ready for approval, if not approved already.

As Chapek said in his interview about Star Wars Land...

"You know, we have millions of people that see movies – our movies, our Star Wars movies, our Marvel movies, all the time. And that’s always been a catalyst for our activities outside the berm. But we’ve never really thought about a theme park as a catalyst for those things as well. But if you think about it, millions of people see those movies, we have millions of people who walk through these gates 365 days a year on both coasts. That in itself is a catalyst for further storytelling.

...So it’s already happening – much like Pirates of the Caribbean seeded the movie franchise, or in many cases like the great Avengers movies have really helped us create Marvel-based superhero attractions in our parks as well. It’s very symbiotic."

[Starcade]

I think all these "reverse IP" overlays greatly depend on the movies success, POTC massive success Enter Barbosa and Capt. Jack, Haunted Mansion & Tomorrowland not so much.

[pure supercool]

I think all these "reverse IP" overlays greatly depend on the movies success, POTC massive success Enter Barbosa and Capt. Jack, Haunted Mansion & Tomorrowland not so much.

Yup. I don't feel this movie will impact the cruise at all. 100% guaranteed people will absolutely hate it. Unlike PotC, the first movie was fantastic and therefore it made its impact. I have a hard time believing The Jungle Cruise movie will have the same effect.

[Cookie Boat]

*Warning: Spoilers from the trailer/movie*

The knowing look at the ride is that the "Jungle Cruise" is fake - the animals are props designed to fool the rubes on the boat and the "natives" are Skipper's friends dressed up in outlandish costumes (but then Mary Poppins helps the Rock realize that magic is real!).

They could keep the ride basically intact as-is but change the dialog to make it even more clear that the animals are fake but the skipper is trying their "best" for you not to notice - and it offers a "tantalizing" opportunity to retcon the "natives" to be skippers-in-disguise and eliminate an awkward cultural issue. It's the ride equivalent of the bartenders in Trader Sam's screaming about shipwrecks and volcanoes while flashing the lights and squirting you with a water bottle.

Not sure if that changes/ruins the whole thing. (I do think they are eventually getting rid of the "natives" even without a movie tie-in, it's just a question of how and when)

[Starcade]

*Warning: Spoilers from the trailer/movie*

The knowing look at the ride is that the "Jungle Cruise" is fake - the animals are props designed to fool the rubes on the boat and the "natives" are Skipper's friends dressed up in outlandish costumes (but then Mary Poppins helps the Rock realize that magic is real!).

They could keep the ride basically intact as-is but change the dialog to make it even more clear that the animals are fake but the skipper is trying their "best" for you not to notice - and it offers a "tantalizing" opportunity to retcon the "natives" to be skippers-in-disguise and eliminate an awkward cultural issue. It's the ride equivalent of the bartenders in Trader Sam's screaming about shipwrecks and volcanoes while flashing the lights and squirting you with a water bottle.

Not sure if that changes/ruins the whole thing. (I do think they are eventually getting rid of the "natives" even without a movie tie-in, it's just a question of how and when)

Oh yeah those natives are definitely getting removed for maintenance never to return as soon as they see a window in the budget. I am sure this has been on the agenda for awhile now regardless of the movie.

[GreatAndoski]

Yup. I don't feel this movie will impact the cruise at all. 100% guaranteed people will absolutely hate it. Unlike PotC, the first movie was fantastic and therefore it made its impact. I have a hard time believing The Jungle Cruise movie will have the same effect.

100% guaranteed that poeple will absolutely hate it? 100%? It's The Rock and Emily Blunt, two high-profile and generally beloved-by-the-zeitgeist actors.

Based on the trailer, I like the direction that the movie appears to be going. The "Cruise" itself is a hokey fake tourist trap, which opens the door to the real action that follows. It will have very little connection to the ride in general, just evoking key lines and images.

Hmm, a movie with top hollywood stars, vaguely inspired by a famous Disneyland boat ride, that takes some of the ride's key imagery and dialogue and wraps it up in a largely unrelated-to-the-ride story that's heavy on magical curses and such? The last time they made one of those, it was successful enough that it got four sequels...

100%?

[HiddenMickey87]

100% guaranteed that poeple will absolutely hate it? 100%? It's The Rock and Emily Blunt, two high-profile and generally beloved-by-the-zeitgeist actors.

Based on the trailer, I like the direction that the movie appears to be going. The "Cruise" itself is a hokey fake tourist trap, which opens the door to the real action that follows. It will have very little connection to the ride in general, just evoking key lines and images.

Hmm, a movie with top hollywood stars, vaguely inspired by a famous Disneyland boat ride, that takes some of the ride's key imagery and dialogue and wraps it up in a largely unrelated-to-the-ride story that's heavy on magical curses and such? The last time they made one of those, it was successful enough that it got four sequels...

100%?

The ride itself is already inspired by something. You mean the creative geniuses at Disney can't come up with an original idea?

What's the point of all this? I don't get this, "oh it's going to only loosely be inspired by the ride," but "we're using its name and imagery and dialogue" reasoning.

[Mr Wiggins]

The ride itself is already inspired by something. You mean the creative geniuses at Disney can't come up with an original idea?

They could, but the un-creative business geniuses who call the shots wouldn't greenlight it. This is Disney -- a corporation running on the philosophy that it's more profitable to exploit existing brands than to invent new ones.

What's the point of all this?

The point is to maximize profits while minimizing risk by making a movie (and if successful, a franchise) from a popular Disneyland ride (in this case, Jungle Cruise), in the same manner and with the same formula that they made a movie franchise from the Pirates of the Caribbean ride.

As Chapek said...

"A lot of times people say “well why don’t you, y’know, do something, why does everything have to be franchise-oriented?” Because that’s our barrier to entry. Because if any of our competitors had our intellectual property, guess what they would be doing? The exact same thing we’re doing. But they don’t have it and we do. So we’re going to build it, we’re going to sustain it, we’re going to create this world where everybody works together to create storytelling across time, across territories and geographies, and across lines of business, to create something that’s bigger than any one of those individual pieces. And that’s why we have a franchise orientation – and frankly that’s why the Walt Disney Company far and away outperforms all of our peers."

[tarheelalum]

Speaking of Disney making movies about attractions, what ever happen to the remake of Haunted Mansion by Guillermo del Toro? I really was looking forward to that.

[Eagleman]

If the movie is successful...........I think there is a concern........

We know how Chapek,likes making Attraction into Billboard
imo

[JerrodDRagon]

They would never touch a classic just because a movie made a lot of...ohh wait....Pirates...ohh god....no...dear god NOOOOOOO

[Eagleman]

They would never touch a classic just because a movie made a lot of...ohh wait....Pirates...ohh god....no...dear god NOOOOOOO

BINGO- I hope not

[tarheelalum]

They will change it the next day if that movie hits big at the box office.

[Yamamoto364]

The Haunted Mansion movie didn't influence the ride because the movie bombed. The better the Jungle Cruise movie does at the box office, the more likely it will be added to the Jungle Cruise ride. The bigger the box office, the more extensive the ride presence. A Jungle Cruise movie has been in development for well over 10 years -- you can bet that WDI already has stacks of concept art ready for approval, if not approved already.

As Chapek said in his interview about Star Wars Land...

"You know, we have millions of people that see movies – our movies, our Star Wars movies, our Marvel movies, all the time. And that’s always been a catalyst for our activities outside the berm. But we’ve never really thought about a theme park as a catalyst for those things as well. But if you think about it, millions of people see those movies, we have millions of people who walk through these gates 365 days a year on both coasts. That in itself is a catalyst for further storytelling.

...So it’s already happening – much like Pirates of the Caribbean seeded the movie franchise, or in many cases like the great Avengers movies have really helped us create Marvel-based superhero attractions in our parks as well. It’s very symbiotic."

Spot on! Bingo

[GwenRowan]

I had been worried noticing the amount of litter in the waters... they used to pick up floating water bottles...

at least they can't make the ride shake more... I know several who now can't ride TSM since the added "excitement" of throwing riders from side to side...
or the new bumps and grinds and slam at the end that made flying in peter pan seem not so much like flying...

seems the usual approach to update is LOUDER music and more shaking

or they could make the bar slam down like it does in Haunted mansion... they still haven't added "move your arms close to your body or we bruise you" to the audio

One of the great things about the Disneyland experience is the variety of lands and attractions

Jungle cruise is slow, relaxing and very amusing, esp with a great captain....
the animatronics and landscaping are fun and very attractive...

the jingle cruise was a fun variation but did not change the nature of the attraction

I hope they don't lose track of that

Pirates become too much POTC... more like a promo than an attraction on its own...
actually, more like the "jack sparrow" show...

no longer the hot item it was when the movies were great....

[Starcade]

I often think do younger guests ever think the HM is actually a ride built from the Eddie Murphy movie? My kids saw the image for the movie years back on a streaming service and asked me that once when they were around 7ish. If you've only grown up with Disney's current IP centric angle I could see why they would be confused.

That being said I always wondered is why doesn't Disney make a Splash Mountain Movie? It could go far in cleansing the bad taste left over from Song of the South. Take all the ride elements and turn them into a more positive narrative than one of slavery and southern separatism.

[Golden Zephyr]

They could, but the un-creative business geniuses who call the shots wouldn't greenlight it. This is Disney -- a corporation running on the philosophy that it's more profitable to exploit existing brands than to invent new ones.




The point is to maximize profits while minimizing risk by making a movie (and if successful, a franchise) from a popular Disneyland ride (in this case, Jungle Cruise), in the same manner and with the same formula that they made a movie franchise from the Pirates of the Caribbean ride.

As Chapek said...

"A lot of times people say “well why don’t you, y’know, do something, why does everything have to be franchise-oriented?” Because that’s our barrier to entry. Because if any of our competitors had our intellectual property, guess what they would be doing? The exact same thing we’re doing. But they don’t have it and we do. So we’re going to build it, we’re going to sustain it, we’re going to create this world where everybody works together to create storytelling across time, across territories and geographies, and across lines of business, to create something that’s bigger than any one of those individual pieces. And that’s why we have a franchise orientation – and frankly that’s why the Walt Disney Company far and away outperforms all of our peers."

Exactly Mr Wiggins that is the sole reason and Chapek is just the philistine to do it. There has hardly been one like him with an insatiable appetite to remake the parks into ride the movies with nary a passing care to the storied history and tradition of the parks.

Chapek cares not for theming, artistry, storytelling, or coherence. All he cares is meeting his "barrier to entry" from the "embarrassment of riches" that Disney has. IP, IP, synergy, synergy. All endless marketing spin from a guy devoid of imagination, wonderment and spirit.

A man that truly fits the definition of the word: uninspired.