Monday, January 21, 2019

Characters Count

As my readers may already be aware, there was a kerfuffle in the Disney theme park fandom recently, concerning comments made by Grand Poobah Bob Iger to the effect that IP-based attractions are inherently superior to original ones. Big Bad Bob's description of Expedition Everest as “nondescript” and “themed like India or whatever” evoked such a backlash that it was later edited out of the transcript of the interview where he said it, in addition to which he assured us all over Twitter that he loves Expedition Everest. But I don't think anyone takes him at his word, because the insensitive wording was part of a larger assertion that what guests really want out of their Disney theme park visit is to encounter Disney characters (and that's why IP rides are so, so great).
Except...Bob? Disney characters are all over the original attraction concepts. Expedition Everest itself has a particular infamous one: the giant Yeti. He (?) may not be a particularly detailed character, but he's still a character, a recognizable one, and he was created for a Disney production, ergo he is a Disney character.
And if anything, Everest's Yeti is one of the least interesting of the park-original characters, insofar as it's just a huge ferocious animal. (Even that other famous Disney theme park Yeti, Harold of the Matterhorn Bobsleds, has a little more going on—he's a collector!*) There are quite a few attraction personalities with a lot more...well, personality. Turns out, the Imagineers are kind of awesome at drawing characters in broad strokes so that you can get what they're about even in the compressed timeframe of a typical theme park attraction.
Here are just a few examples, past and present.



The Citizens of Main Street, USA

I did an entire post about these folks a while back. They're a really unusual case because you never see them, only hear them. Yet the audio alone is enough to tell you quite a bit about their individual personalities and struggles. Quentin Spoon is dedicated to his job(s), but easily sidetracked. Annie's mother is thrifty, pragmatic, and exasperated, but a loving mother. The piano teacher is strict with her students and does not tolerate the newfangled “ragtime” music. There are at least half a dozen mini-dramas taking place in town, and most guests will never be the least bit aware of them.


The Tiki Birds

For a short show that mostly consists of songs, the Enchanted Tiki Room gives a remarkably good picture of its four hosts' character dynamics. All four of them are charming and comical—it's their job to be. But they have their individual quirks, like Michael's tinge of superstition and Fritz's distinctive elbow-nudge wisecracking. Jose, of course, is the charismatic leader who wrangles the others into line when they get too far out of it.
And now we have Rosita the cockatoo, entertaining guests outside in the Tropical Hideaway. Her perch overlooks the Jungle Cruise river and it really shows in her style of humor. She seems to be younger than the Tiki Room emcees and Jose apparently knows her personally—younger relative? No, probably not that, since they're different species. Apprentice, then? We know just enough about these birds to make us speculate wildly about what more there might be.
Or maybe that's just me.


The 999 Happy Haunts

This is the big one, the one where even people who don't consider themselves theme park fans and aren't looking for any unique entertainment value from rides, will sit up and notice that there are some darned intriguing characters here. The Haunted Mansion probably boasts the most unique characters of any attraction that is not entirely about those characters. There's no point to the Country Bear Jamboree apart from watching the Country Bears perform; conversely on the Haunted Mansion, if anything you are the main character. And your supporting cast is phenomenal.
There's the Ghost Host, impish and sly, oscillating between reassurance and veiled threats, very much in control of the situation despite having no body to speak of. There's Madam Leota, straightforward and aloof, playing out her role with understated competence. There's the gleefully insane Constance—you can even tell something about her husbands/victims from their portraits and stashed belongings—the suspiciously polite Hitchhikers, the terrified and flabbergasted Caretaker...even some of the background players in the Ballroom and Graveyard have something you could hang a more developed characterization on, if you wanted to. Which apparently many people do, since the Haunted Mansion is one of the few Disney attractions to inspire fanfiction.
This instantly perceived detail is mostly attributable to Marc Davis, who created much of the concept art for the individual ghosts. There has probably never been a Disney artist who was so adept at presenting an entire character in a single sketch. On which note...


The Country Bears

I doubt there is any group of characters from the theme parks as endearing or easy to understand as the Country Bears: pure Marc Davis creations who changed not at all from official portrait (and accompanying blurb) to full-fledged animatronic. Between said blurbs, the performances themselves, and things like news clippings and awards displayed in the waiting area, we know a lot about these characters. I can see why they thought making a movie about them** was a good idea. I mean...it manifestly wasn't, the way it was done, but I can see why they thought so.
Hey, you know what would be a better idea than a movie? A TV series! An animated TV show about the Country Bears traveling around the U.S. and Canada to perform their show and just getting into hijinks and interpersonal squabbles. New musical numbers, running gags...who do we talk to in order to get Disney on this?


The PNN Crew

For the benefit of those who never witnessed SMTV, please enjoy this video:


Okay, maybe “enjoy” was too strong a word. The Nineties were a weird decade. But you have to give credit to whoever scripted and directed the “PNN” (Planetary News Network) segments, for playing the concept so deadpan. Except for the future-y surnames and weird costumes, these people—anchors Dirk Tachyon and Pam Pulsar, quirky weather gal Wendy Beryllium, and catty fashion reporter Ray Cathode (played by Glenn Shadix, wow!)—are indistinguishable from an actual contemporary news crew. Between them and Crazy Larry the used spaceship salesman, I would have liked to see SMTV developed further as a feature of Tomorrowland at large.


Dreamfinder and Figment

I'd like to close with an example that's not from Disneyland at all, simply because I am convinced Dreamfinder and Figment are the most beloved characters ever to originate in a Disney theme park. Probably by no coincidence, they are also probably the best developed—the entire first scene of the original Journey Into Imagination was devoted to Dreamfinder introducing himself, explaining his mission, and then creating Figment right before the audience's eyes as a tangible demonstration of the power of imagination. EPCOT Center (v 1.0) was a high-water mark in the art of theme park and ride design in general, and this elegant, organic character introduction was certainly a facet of that.
Unfortunately, just a few years later, IP-fever settled in. From then on, original characters in the parks would be increasingly rare.

Bob Iger is not alone. Many people whose primary familiarity with Disney revolves around their film and/or television library seem confused by the idea that memorable characters could originate in the theme parks rather than on a screen. Several months ago, a prominent YouTuber significantly raised my blood pressure with a video*** denouncing the high visibility of Figment in Epcot because, in his words, “he's not from anything.” In Paris, the same Pirates of the Caribbean renovation that saw the auction scene revamped, also saw the skeletal helmsman replaced with Captain Barbossa, presumably out of a conviction that the film character would be more interesting to guests. I've lost track of the number of online conversations I've had with people who think any given ride would be “better” if only it had some movie characters in it. It's intensely frustrating for those of us who have been around since before the shift, who know that the parks are capable of more than just rehashing familiar movies...and don't get why so many people are not only content with the rehashing, but actively resist anything else.
Come to think of it, it's really weird. Why do the same people who get excited about the prospect of Disney introducing new characters and stories via movies, then turn around and scoff at the notion of them doing so via theme parks?


* We don't have to talk about what he collects...
** Or in-name-only facsimiles of them, which is part of the problem.
*** Not gonna link to it; it's too infuriating. You can easily find it if you're curious.

5 comments:

  1. I hadn't heard of the bruhaha yet, so I had to look it up... I had a spike of "Mother$%#@&!" but that settled quickly into "Well of course that's what he'd say: he's an accountant whose idea of business growth is acquiring and leveraging IP rather than actually being a creative producer." Really, this is just the natural expression of the direction the parks have already gone in for years now. And I think I know the video you're talking about... Is that the one where I left a link in the comment section to the Wikipedia article for the Dunning-Kruger Effect?

    I suspect the ambivalence towards original theme park characters is partially symptomatic of an ambivalence towards the art of themed attractions in general. The Venn diagram between people who don't get original characters and people who think rides are lame if they're not fast probably overlaps a fair bit. "Dude, you just, like, sit there and watch these robots that aren't even from anything. It's so dumb." For us nerds, there's actually relatively few IP-based attractions that are even in the top tier, no matter how good the technology is or how fast it goes.

    Some more great characters I would add to the list include the Jungle Cruise animals (though it may fuzz the line between a character and a gag) and the Chief Name version of Trader Sam, the Atlanteans from Tokyo's 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea (which aren't from the movie), the cast of Sindbad's Storybook Voyage (which is a pre-existing story but not a pre-existing Disney IP), the cast of Splash Mountain (which totally isn't based on any movie that actually exists *wink wink*), Harrison Hightower III, Lord Henry Mystic and Albert, and the goat chewing dynamite.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It was a bit of a "That's just what I thought you'd say, you dumb horse" moment. And yes, it's the same video.

      I guess the next big question is: What caused general audiences to stop caring about themed experiences, including new characters that might be introduced thereby?

      Delete
    2. If I knew the answer to that question... Could be a lot of chicken-and-egg stuff going on there. Somewhere along the line, audiences got it into their heads that the raison d'etre of theme parks is to make rides about movies (and the faster those rides are, the better). How exactly that happened I do not know. There might have been a corporate incentive towards that, e.g.: leveraging copyrighted IP, branding. A lot of it might be a lack of literacy amongst the audience concerning themed design, because any kind of art requires a certain degree of artistic literacy to understand what makes something good. A lot of very bad movies are getting free passes lately because audiences just don't know what makes a movie good. Some of it could be a response to increased availability of travel, such that if you wanted to go to a tropical destination or New Orleans or the Sierras, you could just go see the real thing. That said, I doubt someone who phrases it as "like, India or wherever" is actually THAT interested in going to India. I'm sure a lot of it also has to do with the spectre of fast rides, an obsession with the mechanisms of an attraction rather than the use they're put to.

      Delete
    3. For a while now Disney has promoted its newest attractions as state-of-the-art, generally referring to the ride vehicles or system, but at some point I think that definitely spilled over into the animatronics. Like when they released a Pandora teaser with the Na'vi animatronic, no one thought "that's an intriguing character" - they thought it was an amazing piece of technology. I think that's what you're getting at right? It's hard to care about a character if all they promote about the characters are that they are "just pretend" and merely sophisticated technology.

      Delete
    4. Your observation is certainly related, if not part of a direct cause-effect relationship. You know which AA's they *don't* promote as tech marvels? The ones that represent film characters. There is a push to make you believe, or at least pretend to believe, that the film characters you see/meet in the parks, whether robotic or played by actors in costumes, are real. Not so the unique characters.

      Delete