Something's off at Walt Disney Imagineering

January 18, 2025, 2:12 PM · The Haunted Mansion at Disneyland reopened today after what amounts to a year-long refurbishment. It will be the first time guests have been able to experience the original Mansion since 2023, when it was transformed to the Nightmare Before Christmas for an increasingly lengthy stay.

A brand-new queue and gift shop are part of the major changes. And it is the latter that has drawn the ire of theme park fans and, frankly, people with eyeballs, since it was first erected.

There's the unappealing, perhaps prefabricated design. There's how awkward it looks whether you're coming from Bayou Country or up from New Orleans Square. And then there's the interior, where art created by artificial intelligence was found wrecking these halls. It is, by no means, Imagineering's best work.

And given the extreme lack of transparency, we don't know who to blame. That's become increasingly clear over the past decade of Imagineering. Rumors suggest projects are wildly over budget, with the see-saw between Business Interests and Creative Desires more lopsided than ever.

But we do know what we can see: There's something off at Walt Disney Imagineering. The recently opened Tiana's Bayou Adventure was always going to receive somewhat mixed reviews because it replaced a classic, albeit one with, ah, skeletons in its closet. And foyer. You get the idea. But recent hotel projects have also fallen short of what Disney fans expect from the luxury entertainment company. The same can be said of long-gestating projects such as the Communicore Hall and Moana's Journey of Water.

If Imagineering is aware of these criticisms, I suspect they are, it's less clear if they're taking them seriously. The Los Angeles Times was given a tour of the Haunted Mansion by Kim Irvine, the executive creative director of the Disneyland arm of Walt Disney Imagineering. Her history with the resort is well known to fans; she is a second-generation Imagineer — her mother, Leota Toombs, provided the face for Madame Leota.

When the subject of the knockoff art in the gift shop came up, this was Irvine's response:

"How they can find one thing out of all this cool stuff," Irvine says of the fan outcry, trailing off as she stood in the shop full of artfully created oddities and references to tarot and mysticism. She stresses that the AI art was a temporary placeholder, noting there are many objects coming to the shop — more paintings and tapestries among them — that are in the process of being fireproofed before final install.

"They felt like it would be appropriate for a short time until they could put something else in," Irvine says of the ill-fated art. "They never intended to do anything bad, and it is gone now. We're going to bring something back in that is hand-painted, like all of these other pieces are."

It's telling that Irvine's first reaction is a defensive one. Yes, how did some of the most passionate, dedicated fans on god's green earth notice a piece of art clearly created by artificial intelligence. That first reaction suggests dismay that Imagineering was caught, not that it happened in the first place.

And then there's the distancing. Who is the they that Irvine speaks of? If someone other than Imagineering was to blame for the design of the store, fair enough. I'm not here to adjudicate the power politics of a company as large as Disney. But if it was Imagineering, there is no "they" to speak of. Irvine is responsible for the output of the outfit she is, presumably, paid handsomely to manage. That's part of the gig.

The interview goes on to cover the update to the Bride in the Haunted Mansion, no longer a ghostly murderer as has been the case for the past 20 years. No, the Bride will now strike a more somber tone; she is now a victim of heartbreak, not a greedy axe murderer. The new bride, and new tone, better fit the aesthetic the attic long captured. The melancholy of the "Bridal Chorus" has always clashed thematically with the Bride's sinister grin.

But here too, Irvine's messaging is odd:

"The bride that used to be in there was an axe murderer, and in this day and age we have to be really careful about the sensitivities of people," Irvine says. "We were celebrating someone chopping off her husband's heads, and it was a weird story. I know the fans — some will like it and some will say, 'Oh, you changed something again.' That's our job. That's what we're here for."

This is probably worthy of its own piece, but were you celebrating someone chopping off her husband's heads? Or was it merely a piece of the loose narrative that has been told in the Haunted Mansion since the 1960s? You didn't build a statue to this would-be axe murderer in downtown Anaheim, you included her in a macabre ghost house. What are we doing here?

The interview culminates in the infamous stretching room, where the Hanging Man, implied to be our disembodied Ghost Host, has been the subject of speculation for years. It appears he has survived this latest cut, though Irvine indicates this has more to do with the challenges associated with modifying the structure than anything else.

"We're still looking at that," Irvine says. "That one is complicated, structurally ... One thing at a time."

This sort of thing has been tricky for Disney in the past. The less savory aspects of Pirates of the Caribbean have long since been binned, though those changes are somewhat undercut by retaining Johnny Depp's likeness throughout the attraction. And it remains unclear to me whether those changes were responding to guest criticism or, well, something else. (The recent changes made to Jungle Cruise, on the other hand, were long overdue.)

Changes to the Bride also seem to be responding to criticism that does not exist. Constance Hatchaway (subtle, the Haunted Mansion is not) appeared in gobs of merch over the past several years, at least suggesting fans were, well, still fans. Changing the Bride makes sense thematically, but it's not clear that's why Imagineering made the swap.

And it's that lack of clear direction, limited ambition and fear of criticism that makes me increasingly skeptical Imagineering is capable of making the right call for the right reason. Is removing the Hanging Man the right way to go? I don't know. But I'm unconvinced Imagineering knows either; and I'm even less convinced they're up to the challenge of developing a worthy replacement.

* * *
To keep up to date with more theme park news, please sign up for Theme Park Insider's weekly newsletter.

Replies (26)

January 18, 2025 at 2:29 PM

There were no skeletons in Splash Mountain's closet or foyer. It was a ride based on a movie that was a product of its time. The ride however went out of its way to separate itself from the movie.

But c'mon, literally everything has something that can be deemed "problematic".

We have pirates looting and shooting -- that's fine.
We have Pinocchio having multiple depictions of abuse -- that's fine.
We have Toad sending us to hell -- that's fine.
We have stereotypical representations of cultures on Small World -- that's fine.
We have depictions of death and cultural stereotypes in Indiana Jones -- that's fine.

This can go on and on and on about everything. Right now all those things are considered fine. Well, now that they've "fixed" one problem, they'll move onto another.

It's clearly someone's job to find "problems" at Disney. The only way to keep their job is to find problems. When there are none, they'll create them. If you keep gutting "problematic content" then you will only have content that's really not all that interesting. That will (and is) majorly effect the long term.

January 18, 2025 at 5:14 PM

I think it can be simultaneously true that removing Splash Mountain to score points during a particularly fraught moment in our country's history was shortsighted and unnecessary and that there were legitimate complaints to be had with the ride's theme. It is interesting to look back on that moment now, though, as there's zero chance Disney would have greenlit the project in today's political and cultural environment and I bet there are a lot of folks inside the company who wish they'd not pulled the trigger.

As to the substance of Jacob's article, absolutely spot on, nothing to add. WDI is facing a huge half-decade ahead and needs to excise these sloppy mistakes.

January 18, 2025 at 7:39 PM

Sundstrom's effort reads like a collection of sentences searching for a story.

January 18, 2025 at 7:41 PM

Yeah, I think Splash Mountain closing is absolutely a product of the moment in which it happened and would not happen again today. However, I don't think you can credulously argue Disney went out of its way to distance itself from Song of the South when it opened the attraction, which you can learn by watching any 1980s promotional video about Splash Mountain.

Was the ride itself racist in content? I'd say no. But are all the characters and settings based on work that is, at the very least, steeped in racism? Absolutely. It was a mistake, in my opinion, to ever use those characters on such a marquee attraction, but it is what it is.

I think it's important to distinguish between things that Are Bad in Real Life vs. things that are meant to be understood as bad within a narrative. One detracts and distracts from the story you're telling, the other is part of the story. That is a key difference and something Imagineering seems to be missing.

Anyway! Thanks for reading.

January 19, 2025 at 10:12 AM

> 'Oh, you changed something again.' That's our job. That's what we're here for."

I disagree. Imsgineering is there to tell stories and develop the technologies to improve storytelling, not change for changes sake.

January 19, 2025 at 11:50 AM

"You didn't build a statue to this would-be axe murderer in downtown Anaheim, you included her in a macabre ghost house. What are we doing here?"

What are we doing here, indeed. I'm all for restoring the bride to her original conceit. Some of the additional enhancements appear to add more cohesion to the environment and story.

But to suggest that there can be no "bad guys" on theme park attractions, that portrayal of something must be an endorsement of that something misses the mark in my opinion.

January 19, 2025 at 7:31 PM

Personally, I always found the axe murder scene silly and not well executed. The somber heartbeat bride was always way more unsettling. Glad it's back.

"The bride that used to be in there was an axe murderer, and in this day and age we have to be really careful about the sensitivities of people..."

That has to be one of the dumbest quotes I have ever read from an "Imagineer". I don't see Disney running away from poison apples anytime soon. We really do live in the Panderverse.

January 19, 2025 at 11:32 PM

I'm with Court E on I never liked the axe murder bit, the heartbeat bride was always scarier for me.

January 20, 2025 at 8:58 AM

I've always viewed the Haunted Mansion as a campy romp and not a serious, scary spook house. The bride as a axe murderer kind of played into that campy, b-movie tone if you viewed it with the right eye, but it was easy to also see her vindictiveness as out of place with the rest of the mansion. For me, HM has always about the clever effects and presentation that always superceded any stories in my view. Much like PotC, HM is not about any story or even an overarching plot, it's about the individual scenes of mesmerizing effects and stagecraft. It's like watching a magic show, where each illusion stands on its own. Sure, some magicians may try to connect individual scenes with an overarching theme or story, but rarely do individual illusions connect to each other with a cohesive story. I feel the same is the case with HM, and while each scene may have its own story behind it, it's not like guests are progressing through a story as they slowly make themselves through the attraction. I don't necessarily mind WDI crafting or modifying deeper backstories to each of the scenes, but the goal should not be trying to develop a narrative for the attraction as a whole, because that is not what HM should be.

Now, I do think Jacob has hit on something here regarding WDI and their constant tinkering with things in response to various winds of change. IT does seem that WDI is doing things far more reactionary than ever before, and it could be taking a toll on their creativity because the group as a whole appears far more risk averse than ever before.

January 20, 2025 at 12:15 PM

Sums up my own feeling Russell.

January 20, 2025 at 2:09 PM

RM: "I've always viewed the Haunted Mansion as a campy romp and not a serious, scary spook house. The bride as a axe murderer kind of played into that campy, b-movie tone if you viewed it with the right eye, but it was easy to also see her vindictiveness as out of place with the rest of the mansion. For me, HM has always about the clever effects and presentation that always superceded any stories in my view."

Me: Brilliant take.

January 21, 2025 at 12:00 PM

I wouldn't say HM is "about" the effects – if that were true, it would not have aged nearly as gracefully as it has. Haunted Mansion is about the inevitability of death and choosing to laugh about it instead of fear it. We're all gonna die someday, so might as well crack a joke and sing a song! It's almost certainly the most profound theme ever applied to a theme park attraction, and the attic scene always felt a bit incongruous with it. I think the change is a positive one.

January 21, 2025 at 12:23 PM

I think the attraction is as much about the tension between two creative visions as it is anything else. The incongruity between those two visions (macabre vs. lighthearted) is part of what has led to the Mansion's staying power and led to so many interesting, albeit divergent, theories of What It All Means.

I'm not sure any of it means anything, at least not from a broader narrative perspective. But that's part of what I love about the attraction; it's interesting and that stands out all the more as the years go by.

January 22, 2025 at 4:32 AM

It always amuses me when fans start discussing the 'true meaning' of an attraction or 'the proper story' or whatever. 99.999% of visitors really don't get back stories. I've ridden HM a number of times and honestly it's just a (really well done) ghost train, full of faux-scary clever effects that amuse rather than chill. If there's any story behind it you'd have to be in the know to get it and I guarantee that a ten second glimpse of a woman in white isn't going to register with the average visitor one way or the other. She's just a spectral woman whether she's looking sad and holding a candle or looking a bit angry and holding an axe. Either way she's a fleeting moment in an overall great and entertaining attraction. You really can over-think these things!

January 22, 2025 at 7:22 AM

David Brown nails it!

January 22, 2025 at 10:12 AM

"Sundstrom's effort reads like a collection of sentences searching for a story." - god forbid you question anything the Mouse does. Pixie Dusters... oy vey.

January 22, 2025 at 10:50 AM

The removal of the axe murderer bride was nothing I'm aware people were clamoring for. It's a haunted house. There should be dark elements. That said, I went on the WDW version recently, and the placement of the Hatbox Ghost makes no sense. That bothers me more than anything that was going on in the Disneyland version.

Also, it was time for Splash Mountain to go. Sorry. Yes, it was tied to a problematic movie that Disney distanced itself from, but it was also not relevant in the year of our mouse, 2024. Tiana's is fun, and the music is so much better.

January 22, 2025 at 11:47 AM

i dunno, i'd argue over thinking these theme parks is kind of the point of being a fan. i hear you, it can come at the expense of actually enjoying the thing, but i'm not really all that fussed if dave from baldwin park doesn't notice any given change.

January 22, 2025 at 12:17 PM

I think the best attractions can be different things to different people, and that's what makes them so great. The reason HM is such an iconic attraction with amazing longevity is because a first time rider can appreciate all of the sights and sounds at first glance and appreciate what they just experienced, while a guest riding for the 999th time can see the infinite detail and backstories hidden within individual scenes, knowing that on their 1,000th ride they'll see something they missed or didn't consider on the 999 previous rides.

January 22, 2025 at 12:56 PM

Yeah, I think that's well said, Russell.

January 22, 2025 at 1:13 PM

Something has been off for a while, especially at the Anaheim team. Glad to see the team here at Theme Park Insider acknowledge this. In all honesty, I'm not a fan of the changes done at Jungle Cruise, and I know I'm in the minority on this one, but even if you are going to remove elements that are potentially offensive to some guests... you should replace them with things that are at least as entertaining as what was there before, and preferably so entertaining that they outshine what you replaced. The Jungle Cruise lost a lot of humor and excitement with the deletions (how many scenes of primates getting into trouble does one ride need?). I could go on about this but I know this is an article about Haunted Mansion. That said, I think they actually made a great change with the bride, even if it was for all the wrong reasons. Hopefully, if they do continue down this insane path of finding problems that don't exist, they can use this excuse to make more good changes and less of what we've seen with previous ones.

January 22, 2025 at 3:00 PM

If Disney is so concerned about objectionable content Villains Land, the answer to Dark Universe, seems rife with problematic scenarios. The classic Disney films Snow White and Pinochio were so resonant and successful because they DID address dark aspects of human nature. Disney's declared intention was to surpass animation's cartoon/juvenile status. There are ways to adapt to changing social conscience without neutralizing the power and meaning of these original subjects and stories.

January 22, 2025 at 8:01 PM

I have a theory about what is "off" at Imagineering. In the old days of Imagineering, while there were many talents brought to bear, the most influential were the former animators who were masters of visual storytelling, art direction, set design (architecture, environments, props...theming, you might say) humor, and mood. Key among them were bold creatives with distinct vision...This continued to be true all the way up through the 1980s with the successive wave of Imagineers.

But in modern days...who do we see represent the Imagineers? Who is on the videos, the breaking ground ceremonies, and seemingly in control? Project managers and writers. And I think they are getting so caught up in meaning, societal issues, narrative, not offending anyone, and they operate as a committee designed to eliminate risk. The result is "bureaucratic creativity" and the modern projects check a bunch of boxes and yet fail to inspire imagination or feel authentic and surprising and immersive like the Disney parks once did.

January 22, 2025 at 8:52 PM

Yeah, I think you could reasonably ask whether or not the modern Imagineer identifies themselves as an artist first. That was certainly true in the first generation, and the second generation was at least /inspired/ by those same artists. I think a great team, and great creative department, should contain a multitude of perspectives ... but having a strong creative vision at the head of the team is imperative for success.

January 23, 2025 at 10:00 AM

"The bride that used to be in there was an axe murderer, and in this day and age we have to be really careful about the sensitivities of people,"

That's really the statement that's most concerning, and while there was always the perception that WDI felt this way, this is the first time they ever said something like this out loud. To me, constantly evaluating attractions and making specific design choices based on the sensitivities of others quashes the creative process. As a few above have noted, this confirms to me that WDI is no longer a collection of talented artists and creative designers creating their own legacy, but instead of committee trying to arbitrate and refine the legacy of a global corporation.

January 25, 2025 at 12:58 PM

Something's off at Walt Disney Films (Marvel) as well...

This article has been archived and is no longer accepting comments.

Vacation deals

Park tickets

Subscribe by email

Subscribe by RSS

New attraction reviews

News archive