...the attraction's action-adventure roots a la '51's The African Queen!
An important tidbit of for the money men courtesy of The Hollywood Reporter's original review of The African Queen.
A certain other series can learn some important lessons too.
Originally Posted by THR Staff
Filmed in Africa by S.P. Eagle, the production is a stunning pictorial display, wonderfully accurate in its atmospheric values and eye-arresting scenery. The backgrounds add considerably to the enormous credibility found in this narrative about the daring odyssey made through the jungle by a missionary's straight laced sister and a dissolute adventurer.
A sense of place is important.
Now that he's officially on board, The Rock is of course doing early promotion work hyping his participation. Normally that would be fine, but the idea that WDI would be seeking The Rock's advice in "improving" the ride. Said improvements would take place at all versions of the ride, and go into effect before the movie opened.
A temporary overlay? Tolerable. But lifelong changes featuring The Rock's likeness? Kill it with fire.
Apparently, this site reached to Disney about changes to the ride, and say:
Well, according to Disney, it turns out that is not case. Although Disney did confirm that The Rock did meet with Disney Imagineers recently, Disney said there are no plans to revamp the ride at this time. Good news for fans of the original attraction.
Secondly, a director for the film has reportedly been set:
It's said that he turned down the directing job for Suicide Squad 2 for this, because...
He decided that the opportunity to originate a new Indiana Jones-like action-adventure franchise in lockstep with one of the most globally bankable film stars ó like Gore Verbinski did with Johnny Depp in The Pirates of the Caribbean ó was a better opportunity than continuing a storyline originated by another director. Production will begin late next spring.
(Sorry for the F-word, Stoo. Their choice of phrase, not mine.)
Very glad that there will not be any changes to the ride. I honestly would not feel comfortable with them just changing things for that.
It took... three(?) movies before Jack was added to Pirates of the Caribbean.
Because they have no publicly available plans to put The Rock into the Jungle, it doesn't mean that there isn't a proposal on some executive's desk. Given the current direction of the parks, I can almost guarantee that The Rock will somehow be added in; it's one of the things to genuinely dislike this current incarnation of Disney for -- everything that gets added to the North American parks at least has to be a movie tie-in. Original attractions are for the overseas parks, and even those are hard to come by.
Originally Posted by curmudgeon
Secondly, a director for the film has reportedly been set:
Jaume Collet-Serra, director of Liam Neeson thrillers Non-Stop and Unknown.
Nothing about this director's filmography stands out as being particularly notable, but The Shallows did look interesting. I'm intrigued. Will a director of mid-tier action flicks be able to helm a big-budget action-adventure picture? At the very least they're going in the direction I want (and believe) it should be going in.
Conceptually speaking The World Famous Jungle Cruise is my favorite ride, but since they killed the narrations department it's been all down hill since. Good Skips who can deliver the canned spiel are few and far between.
re: Indiana Jones
The World Famous Jungle Cruise is permanently themed to 1936, so it's right in with Dr. Jones' wheelhouse. If production continues in the action-adventure vein, then comparisons are bound to happen and hopefully be apt.
Let's remember that Indiana Jones might be shorthand for a certain type of movie today, but it is not the originator.
Disney parks are known for their incredible spacial storytelling techniques. They weave together seemingly unrelated details and hidden nuggets within the architecture and decor to tell cohesive stories that the sharp-eyed visitor can see and enjoy. Itís what makes it possible to visit the parks again and again for a lifetime without the novelty wearing off.
One such storyline revolves, not around a famous Disney film property, but around a secret society of wealthy globetrotters and treasure seekers known as the Society of Explorers and Adventurers (The S.E.A.). Itís origins are mysterious even among Disney insiders. Thatís because details revealed about these fez-wearing, secret handshake-shaking millionaires are few and far between. Only in recent years has some of the folklore been added through hidden details and, in a few cases, overt placement in attractions, stores, and dining locations.
Bruh, you so woke you must be blind if that's the connection you made.
Pray sir, what, precisely, connection is that?
I made two: (1.) Linking the millionaire S.E.A. club with the 1%, and (2.) Linking (actually contrasting) the S.E.A. club with the Disney Shorts -- recently put out by Disney Television Animation that consciously adopted more of a blue collar, every-man's ethos for Mickey & Co's adventures.
Originally Posted by Le Saboteur
I know White Guilt is a popular thing these days, but you can take that Said trash out of here.
The irony here is too rich -- compare your cast of fictional S.E.A. explorers (and, for the Hell of it, throw in the lives of the imagineers who offer their likenesses for some of the S.E.A. related artwork) against Said's true life story and you're calling Said's oeuvre trash?
Said is no two-bit Mizzou assistant professor shouting for some muscle. Regardless of your views of his works, he transformed academic analysis (true, relying heavily on Michel Foucault -- which may be why you're calling his work 'trash' but that's a separate argument).
As for 'White Guilt' -- none here of that here at all.
First, the whole S.E.A. concept of a connected back stories for rides, venues and attractions in different Disney Lands and venues goes against the original vision for Disney Land/World of transporting park goers to dramatically different AND SEPARATE worlds that are mere steps apart. For example, having a S.E.A. related back story for both Big Thunder Mountain Railroad and the Jungle Cruise is retarded because it creates a linkage between the two worlds (Adventureland and Frontierland) that shouldn't be there. The S.E.A. linkages makes the world too small a place -- and that's not what Walt Disney's vision was about.
Second and what's worse, the actual linkage is a group of dead, crusty rich guys. How unimaginative is that? Given the way the Imagineers are falling over themselves with homages to African Queen, I think it would be fitting if a founding member of S.E.A. would be King Leopold or one of his bastard sons. That way, Disney diehard fans searching for 'Easter Eggs' could gain an appreciation for real history instead of the now (with this film) twice white-washed story of the Belgian Congo that bizarrely enough has its true roots in Joseph Conrad's masterpiece The Heart of Darkness.
What you call 'White Guilt', I simply call having a marginal interest in acknowledging the true historical record.