Figured I would repost this, since I shared it two years ago in the old (now defunct) thread (I know it discusses Splash, but there's relevant bits about the construction that are pertinent to our discussion):
When this was announced back in June of 2020, I reached out to Don Carson, one of the Imagineers of the WDW version of the attraction and asked him some questions about Splash Mountain, the retheme, and Imagineering. Here's what he had to say (his words are in the quote boxes):
I would be happy to answer your questions. Although I am sad to see the old Splash going away I am sure the designers at WDI will create a wonderful new attraction in its place. The "mountain" has "good bones" and I think it will support the changes they make, and the original did get a 28 year run so it isn't all sad news.
How did you join the team designing WDW's Splash Mountain, and what were the guiding principles (or directives) for starting your design? Given that it was a "duplicate" attraction, was the budget for WDW's version of Splash Mountain the same as the original?
I was assigned to Splash the very first day I joined WDI. It was meant to be a two-week assignment that included taking the Disneyland design and "cookie-cutter" it to the Florida site. The ride vehicle doubled in width which made the flume wider and the scenes smaller so everything needed to be re-designed to fit... and I ended up working on the project for two and a half years, right up to the opening. The budget was about the same, Tokyo's Splash was over twice as much since it included a lot more and encompassed an entire land.
It's clear that the design of the mountain's exterior is meant to fit more in the Frontierland theme, but what has always fascinated me about the three Splash Mountains is the log on top being different for each version of the attraction. Is there any particular reason for this? And who came up with the fantastic Hidden Mickey (side profile made of rocks) at the top of the lift hill?
Each attraction has a different rockwork designer. Ours was John Gauld and the look of the mountain and the tree atop it took on his style... hence the different designs. WDI designers seldom do out of their way to hide Mickeys, the on Splash is pure serendipity rather than by design.
The storyline in WDW's version is much easier to follow than the Disneyland version, due in part to the presence of Brer Frog in the queue and ride itself, as well as additional animatronics of Brer Fox and Brer Bear scheming to catch Brer Rabbit. There are other scenes omitted or added in WDW as well as much brighter lighting. How did you decide what to change, add or subtract from the story and the ride layout/set-up? How did this affect what could be re-used (dialogue, music, and animatronic molds)?
The advantage to doing the "second" version of an attraction is that you get to step back and learn from the first. We decided that the story needed help to make it clearer to an audience that might not be familiar with the Brair Rabbit stories, and we felt it was important to really create a contrast between the real world of Frontierland and the cartoon world of the film characters.
I had always been under the impression that the Tokyo and WDW versions were developed simultaneously, with the logs being so similar in their seating arrangement. But after viewing the Tokyo version on YouTube, it is more different than I would have expected. To what extent did you work with the Tokyo design team in crafting the sequence and look of the attraction?
Tokyo Splash's design was headed up by my friend Joe Lanzisero, in fact it was his storyboard designs for the scenes that Florida based our character placement on. The rest took on the style of the artists that worked on it. The two attraction models were built right across the hall from each other so they influenced each other's designs a little but Tokyo's is much more Fantasyland influence while Florida pulls more from the animation sequences in the film.
Was there anything in the plan for WDW's Splash Mountain that couldn't be or wasn't realized, and if you could change something about the way it turned out, what would it be?
I realized in hindsight that I could have changed Florida's design even more than I did. If I could do it again I would have made the Laughing Place an outside scene rather than a cave (which never appears in the film). At this point, this is mute as the Princes Frog will soon be residing in Chickapin Hill.
Looking at WDW and Disneyland now, what current project are you most interested in seeing completed? If you were working for Disney now and could propose and oversee a new attraction (either a replacement for something or an altogether new project), what would it be?
I'd bring the Peoplemover back ;)
Regarding the new Princess and the Frog attraction, I am looking forward to seeing what the Imagineers come up with (though I really wonder if Tony Baxter will actually have any input or if this is merely symbolic), but I do worry about whether they will be given a large enough budget to come anywhere close to Splash Mountain's level of detail and quality. Honestly, since the two versions of Splash Mountain are so different, it might be challenging for them to carbon-copy the designs.
I too look forward to seeing what the WDI designers come up with. I think they will do a splendid job. Tony is purely a consultant and I am sure he will be able to give his input. It will be interesting to see how they deal with the existing scenery since in both attractions this is all carved concrete. Time will tell.
Of course, now we know Tony Baxter had very little to do with this.