Removing Peter Pans Flight Scenes

[CmdrThor]

That's definitely true. It was created by a bunch of white guys as was the original story. I don't know how problematic the Native Americans are in the book - maybe they should do a total remake of the film? The question though is that is it still okay to enjoy the ride? The movie?

I haven't read the book, but from what I understand it was just as problematic as other works from the early 1900's. I don't think a new animated remake will happen for any classic Disney animated film. They like the live action remakes which allows them to update the story as they see fit while still relying on the core story. Personally I'm still going to take my kids on the ride and let them watch the movie, but I will use it as an opportunity to have a conversation about other cultures and how inaccurate the portrayal in those mediums was.

 

[Jennasis]

I always thought Tiger Lilly looked stoned sitting around the fire in Peter Pans Flight. I just assumed it was a racist "pass the peace pipe" scene and cringed my way by.

 

[Krandor]

I agree. Changing the ride isn't "erasing the past" - the rides are supposed to change and evolve. The thing is, to me, Peter Pan is a betteer ride than it is a movie anyway. Back to my original question, would redesigning the Native Americans in the scene be considered okay to do, or must they excise them completely. Personally, I really like Native American culture, so I hate to see them have to go. I mean, they don't use "that song" in the ride, just a traditional style of music. What are the parameters?

if the decision is go try to keep native americans but depict them better then the only real way to do it would be to involve some native american groups in the discussions and decisions. There are several in florida so would be very easy to do.

 

[Krandor]

I always thought Tiger Lilly looked stoned sitting around the fire in Peter Pans Flight. I just assumed it was a racist "pass the peace pipe" scene and cringed my way by.

Given that the movie has such a scene that is probably an accurate assumption.

 

[SaintsManiac]

You jest, but that is where we are headed. I understand that the somethings are offensive today that weren't scrutinized in the past. I get it and we need to be more sensitive. But in doing so, we shouldn't censor art and free speech from the past. We went down this path once before. Remember book burning?
Let's use the past to educate why it is offensive. Educate why it was generally accepted back then. We do this so we do not repeat past mistakes. “Those that fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.” - Winston Churchill

Now amusement rides are not the same as literature or art. We can change the depiction on a ride. Let's not censor, educate.

We don't censor swear words or sexual situations. We give warnings that this exists in the art. Why can't we do the same with stereo-typical depictions?

And as my last vent...
...the only race/culture/gender that can be made fun of, without being canceled yourself, is white males. As one, I find this offensive.

Whew, lad.

 

[MickeyWaffles]

Acknowledging that a depiction from the past is insensitive or offensive isn’t erasing history. It’s a ride at Walt Disney World. One of my favorite rides, at that! And I am 100% okay with them changing this scene. In fact, I will feel even better about my love for it - I’ve hoped they would change that part for a long time.

This world would be so much better if people would be more empathetic and put themselves in others shoes. Seems like a lot of white people on here tantruming about cancel culture and censorship. Think about how BIPOC families feel about an outdated and offensive depiction. It’s not about you.

There is nothing wrong with growth and realizing that outdated depictions are offensive. As time goes on, things change. Perspectives change.

All the pushback on inclusivity is pretty disappointing. And with that I’ll get back to this

 

[SheHulk]

Today DLP digitally removed scenes from Peter Pans Flight from the on-ride video.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1364688764283592705

Does that mean other attractions are at risk of being removed? I can't understand the difference between this and the entire 'it's a small world' ride.

What are your thoughts.

So a scene was removed from a promotional video and not even the ride itself? Just so I understand: the concern here is that a scene was cut from a video, talking about an attraction. A video that presumably could be taken down at any moment and hardly anyone would notice or care. This seems, at best, not worth talking about, and, at worst, somebody looking for something to complain about. Who even notices this stuff.

 

[GoingSince1990]

Love it or hate it (and I’m not up for the argument right now) we all know that PP scene is living on borrowed time, and that an “exciting new refresh” to the ride will be coming in the next few years.

 

[SuperMuscleMan]

As the adoptive mother of 4 Indigenous children, I can tell you right away the difference. It's a small world treats other cultures respectively, accurately depicting their cultures. Peter Pan does not. It treats Indigenous culture in a very caricature-y, stereoptypical way. Think of the song from the Peter Pan movie itself: "What Makes the Red Man Red?" If you don't understand why that's offensive, I can't help you...

And Disney isn't talking about removing the entire attraction. They only removed part of the ride in an advertisement. If they do anything, I'd imagine they will just be tweaking it as they are planning with Jungle Cruise.

Hi Thanks for getting back to me, I totally get your point. I was thinking in a different way about cultural appropriation. I.e. all Dutch wear clogs, all Welsh sing. I totally get your point and thanks for making me understand it. In terms of the song that's not included on the ride anyway... not on the DLP video anyway.

I can understand that the depiction in the movie is problematic, but in the ride they aren't really - they are just sitting around a fire. This is a legitimate question, can they ever depict Native Americans in traditional garb anymore? I am just wondering where the bar is set. I don't really have a big problem with changing it, just curious is all.

That's what I mean with my point above.

So lets change them to look traditional. I would rather do that then pretend they don't exist.

But then should the soldiers in IASM in the England section be in bear hats? Most of our Army don't ever see one of them, then we could say why does Disney in the same ride depict the Irish as a leprechaun. The Scottish are all in kilts - my best mates Scottish and wears his kilt once every 3 years!

But then the no longer look like the movie the whole ride is based on. It's kind of a mess and I don't know the best solution.

Totally agree

Well, it's not that people weren't offended, they just didn't have the ability to band together on the Internet to have a louder voice. That said, I'm sure a lot of people weren't and still aren't offended, but I can completely understand why a company like Disney wouldn't want to be offensive to anybody if they can help it, so you know, it is what it is.

For the record, I am not upset or anything about the changes, but I do like to ask the questions and have the conversation that some would rather skip. The "why" is an important part of understanding.

Yes the why is important but how can Disney do that without removing the experience?

You jest, but that is where we are headed. I understand that the somethings are offensive today that weren't scrutinized in the past. I get it and we need to be more sensitive. But in doing so, we shouldn't censor art and free speech from the past. We went down this path once before. Remember book burning?
Let's use the past to educate why it is offensive. Educate why it was generally accepted back then. We do this so we do not repeat past mistakes. “Those that fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.” - Winston Churchill

Now amusement rides are not the same as literature or art. We can change the depiction on a ride. Let's not censor, educate.

We don't censor swear words or sexual situations. We give warnings that this exists in the art. Why can't we do the same with stereo-typical depictions?

And as my last vent...
...the only race/culture/gender that can be made fun of, without being canceled yourself, is white males. As one, I find this offensive.

Really think you hit the nail on the head with this one in terms of learning.

For the most part I feel like Disney is trying its best to leave the original art intact, but with added disclaimers at the beginning that it contains "negative depictions and/or mistreatment of people or cultures." I agree you shouldn't just go editing old animated movies, but you can update attractions, and they have been also creating new live action remakes with more accurate cultural depictions.

But as i mentioned earlier does that mean we remove It's a Small World?

I haven't read the book, but from what I understand it was just as problematic as other works from the early 1900's. I don't think a new animated remake will happen for any classic Disney animated film. They like the live action remakes which allows them to update the story as they see fit while still relying on the core story. Personally I'm still going to take my kids on the ride and let them watch the movie, but I will use it as an opportunity to have a conversation about other cultures and how inaccurate the portrayal in those mediums was.

Great reply and it goes with what I think this forum is about... conversation! I see the Spike Milligan episode of the muppet show was removed (not put on D+) as he did a version of its a small world. That's what made me think... why is it ok for the ride but not the tv?

This forum really needs a moderator.

Why is that... I like the conversation, don't hide away form the conversation, learn and discuss. Other opinions help!

 

[GoingSince1990]

(I decided to delete this post)

 

[SuperMuscleMan]

As soon as I saw the "story" yesterday I knew this thread was coming. The only reason it's here is because OP wanted to stir the pot. Nothing more, nothing less.

I don't want to cause any argument (OP?) I just want to learn why it's ok to brand the Irish as a leprechaun on IASW but not ok for a Native Americian on PP when historically the book is a lot older and it's based upon the book. Never Land is a fictitious place and so are the characters? Are the native Americans actually native Americans? (if you get my gist) Tinkerbell and Captain Hook are not real etc.

 

[LoganBrown1990]

The problem is no wants to draw a line in the sand and educate. Everyone would rather blame others and try to erase the past as if it never happened. I would think that erasing would be more offensive

Like everyone else today who bothers to vote, differing viewpoints are not tolerated any more. Everyone one in my party has the same vote whether they are black white or purple. Show me where this is an issue today, 20 years ago, 40 years ago?

No where on the credit application does it ask for race.

Ahh yes, the purple people. I don't know why more politicians don't focus on getting their votes.

 

[Fido Chuckwagon]

I did not say put warnings on the rides.


I have no Security.


Except for today when being white is less than. So less than, that society wants you wiped from the earth. I am villified (Yes, I know, not a word) daily and I have had nothing to do with any of what you mentioned. I have never supported and have condemned each of what you listed.
And your assumptions are wrong. In my state, my vote doesn't count. I went years being denied a credit card because I had no credit history or went to college. I had to pay a bank the total cost of the loan to get the loan to get a credit history. I was then granted the opportunity to get a prepaid credit card at the highest interest rate. I was physically attacked all my youth because I was perceived to be smarter then them. I used to walk to school pausing at each corner to see who was on the street to see if I had to take a different path.
I am not minimizing what other ethnicity or genders have had to gone through with. But we all had had to deal with hatred and bias in one form or another. BUT DON"T TELL ME THAT I HAVE NEVER BEEN VIEWED AS LESS THAN BECAUSE I AM A WHITE MALE. WHO THE HELL DO YOU THINK YOU ARE!!!!!!!

I am going to get myself banned today. I can feel it.

This thread really needs to be nuked.

 

[jeffmw]

For the people who think that others will find everything offensive, why do you think it is that nobody is complaining about Coco or Mulan? When these films and franchises are created with actual respect towards the cultures they depict no one has a problem with them. This isn't cancel culture going wild. This is people looking back on some really bad stuff created in the past that they were forced to accept and finally standing up for their pride.

 

[BrianL]

Was a representative of every country involved. I think it's quite offensive in many ways to say all Scots wear kilts. If you have ridden the DLP version and seen what we depict as Americans do you feel it represents you in a respective and non cultural appropriation way?

I think it's because the message of It's a Small World is inherently about respect for other cultures and coming together - not creating charicatures to gawk at. Yes, they used a lot of the traditional garb for the charactets, but those things do exist - I believe they are showing them as a source of pride for all the various peoples. The tone makes all the difference.

"There is just one moon, and one golden sun, and a smile means friendship to everyone."

 

[Fido Chuckwagon]

Thats an interesting question. I think Disney has been changing its characterization of “princess-ness” for a while and celebrating those characters. I was even thinking of how in a movie like Moana the “princess” does not need saving nor is any part of it about how Moana needs to find a man. Really the only other male character in the movie is never even thought of as a mate.

Its one thing to change the characterization on a ride. It’s another to try to change centuries of characterization especially where people already own copies of that original version (DVDs, Blu-Rays, etc.) and cannot be updated. I have noticed that Disney appears to be updating these characterizations in more contemporary renditions. When our daughters were younger (5-7 years ago) when we would read “princess” stories written more recently, they focused on Cinderella doing charity work or Belle helping animals, etc., not on relationships with the “princes.” And this is not even talking about the close to 30 years of Disney “princess” stories such as Pocahantas, Mulan, Tangled, and Frozen.

It doesn’t erase this sexist/misogynist history but I’ve felt it’s turning the boat around. I think that our daughters have had more exposure to these more “modern” versions of “princess-ness” than to the prior versions.

I think Moana is such an underrated movie in Disney’s modern offerings.

 

[BrianL]

Yeah, but this is way different then the discussion about, for example, splash mountain, and even that one went off the rails. At least splash mountain involved actual changes to a ride... You know, something that actually might have an impact on people who go to a. Disney park. (I think he changes are fine btw, but not the point). This is literally pearl clutching about an update to an advertisement for a ride. And it’s already spawned a 100 post thread. It’s just dumb pearl clutching.

Well, the article I read did say that changes to the ride were likely incoming - I'd consider that a rumor, but this is the Rumors & News board. I do agree at this point it has devolved, but I don't hink that should preclude us from talking about it.

 

[davper]

It doesn’t erase this sexist/misogynist history but I’ve felt it’s turning the boat around.

That's the problem. Everyone wants to erase history. No one wants to learn from it. It is either altered to put it in a more favorable view or removed all together. Teach kids why this is not an acceptable action and why. Don't hide it from them. How are they to learn if they are sheltered?

 

[CastAStone]

I think Moana is such an underrated movie in Disney’s modern offerings.

Moana will be remembered as a Disney Classic. Today’s teens speak of Tangled, Moana and Frozen the way we speak of Lion King, BATB, and Aladdin.

 

[Irish_Mike]

That's the problem. Everyone wants to erase history. No one wants to learn from it. It is either altered to put it in a more favorable view or removed all together. Teach kids why this is not an acceptable action and why. Don't hide it from them. How are they to learn if they are sheltered?

There is a time and place for teaching and learning from history.
Removing a bigoted stereotype from a theme park does not change that.