The most cogent comment in this thread. Especially in context of this next as the objection:
Of course there may be something poetic in CoffinMan preferring that the rides not be living things but they are. Disney does not embalm their rides. They change them to reflect what newer parents and their children want to see as casual family entertainment. Not what people found amusing for light family fun entertainment half a century ago.
And exactly right, cartoonish violence is so American that Itchy and Scratchy is hardly satire, but cultural norms have changed to the point that sex slavery, hell slavery in general, is not “part of our overall cultural background noise”, not something that is part of casual family fun. The current popular pirate tropes have played down the rape aspects even though being abducted by a pirate who would “have his way with you” was sold as a “romantic” fantasy to girls 50 years ago. It is not a PC issue, it is just that with it the ride is old and dated, appealing only to those who are wanting the old that they “recall with fond nostalgia” … Disney Corp OTOH does not make the bulk of their money off of the nostalgic and the nostalgic is not where their growth is likely to come from. Oh they need enough of it, such as preserving the redhead, to keep Gramps wanting to come along, but it is not the prime concern. Preserving the memory of a once popular but now mostly forgotten Swiss Family Robinson movie is not their mission statement. Tarzan OTOH appeals to new parents who saw that movie growing up. And Tarzan will be dated too, soon enough. The submarine ride was originally a reference to “20,000 Leagues Under the Sea”; what kid knows that movie now? “Finding Nemo”/“Dora” OTOH is a still active property. Parents buy their kids “Finding Nemo” backpacks still. The same parents will look at you blankly if you ask them who Captain Nemo was.
Disney does not exist to educate. It does not exist to preserve your nostalgic recollections. It exists to make money for its shareholders and executives and getting rid of dated elements is the same part of that as is making the rides tie in to parts of the franchise that still sell things.
Now what would be fun is if they took the retired wench characters and auctioned them off … donating the money to some appropriate Disney sponsored charity of course.
FWIW been on the ride, years ago, and it was boring then.
Of course Disney’s primary concern is making money and any concerns about it’s patrons are a figment of that prime directive. This much is abundantly clear and painfully obvious. This is in spite of Disney’s statement about the park as follows:
“To all who come to this happy place: Welcome. Disneyland is your land. Here age relives fond memories of the past, and here youth may savor the challenge and promise of the future. Disneyland is dedicated to the ideals, the dreams, and the hard facts that have created America, with the hope that it will be a source of joy and inspiration to all the world.”
No, Disneyland is not our land, but the land of it’s corporate interests. Age may relive fond memories of the past only if it suits the whims of the corporation.
No - I am not naïve enough to be surprised that Disney cares first about making profits in any way. That said, it is a matter of personal preference that they leave old attractions as they were originally (apart from safety updates) and create new attractions to appease the demands of the consumers for attractions based on new releases.
So no, my illusions have not been shattered and I understand why they have chosen to do this (whether it’s short sighted or a best business practice is something that can only be seen in hindsight) however I don’t have to like it and I don’t.