Can it Jay. You are seriously delusional..

The first is about audio-animatronics… I think they’re truly remarkable, awe-inspiring technology. There is a timeless quality about them that really does make them special, even magical. It’s a rare technology for which newer versions don’t simply make older iterations outdated. New AAs are more advanced, but earlier generations continue to charm. They are also special in uniqueness, their mechanical ingenuity, and broader technical innovation. I hope they are always a defining part of Disney parks and attractions.

The second is about the approach to the project itself… The care and attention to detail, the earnestness, the sincere desire to maintain a sense of integrity, despite other competing factors is also remarkable. From the insistence on “not putting words into Walt’s mouth”, regardless of how that might have simplified and arguably improved the end result, opening up any number of possibilities, to technical innovations “on which they would not compromise”. It’s an inspiring approach, and I believe really should be the standard by which all meaningful, constructive work is measured.

The passion of Walt and his Imagineers for the park. The passion of the present day Imagineers working on the project. The passionate approach of the Walt Disney Archives and Walt Disney Family Museum. Passion is the common thread. Everything else, all of the financial and technical elements, the skill and knowledge, etc. are of course necessary components of any advanced project, but not sufficient without the kind of passion that sets the tone, the direction, priorities, and ultimately defines success. I see how the project and attraction is a full circle moment, but it also feels like an answer for many of modern Disney’s ills. Intentionally or not, it strikes me as an assertion of what works, and why, when priorities can often feel scattered or conflicted. Lead with passion, and clarity follows.

As for the face… I believe what’s lacking is a little honesty that comes from a willingness to be transparent about challenges, and in so doing invite the public to engage with and understand the project more meaningfully, to champion it as much as judge. It takes a kind of trust that I’m not sure exists.

What exactly is the “slander” out there? I’ve seen stuff that’s critical of Walt but nothing that was inaccurate. Walt might have been a great American visionary, and he certainly deserves kudos for how he revolutionized animation, theme parks and entertainment in general, but he was not perfect. Pointing out his flaws is not “slander”. I’d rather have an accurate representation of his whole character and history than a sanitized version of it – but of course I don’t expect that at the park that bears his own name. You can argue that Walt was a product of his time, except he had contemporaries who did not share some of his views and would have cringed at many of the racial stereotypes he included in his work – going so far as to ignore contemporaries who made their misgivings clear to Walt. Disney as a company has quickly walked back its acknowledgments of racism when the former president retook office. That, IMO, is way more harmful than any “slander” about Walt.

The face of the Disney animatronic is reminiscent of the face of Donald Trump in the Hall of Presidents.

Technical innovations aside, Disney’s face, and his voice, for that matter, are not on the same level. Hopefully the imagineers will take care of matters soon.