Howdy Ed, Mr. Lutz says hi
We will let the pics do the talking and give you some of Fishbulb’s thoughts at the end.
I come to this ride with a rather neutral stance. It is a part of the park’s, in fact Disney’s, history but really I am not a huge fan of it. So when word broke that Disney was going to revamp the ride by adding Disney characters and music to it I was only mildly irritated. Not by the fact that it seems to be a total sell out but because it would make this classic attraction even more cloying than it already is.
Furthermore there would be the addition of an AMERICA scene before the big finale room. Some argue that the rest of the world should be in this ride as it is a tribute to all children on the planet. Frankly the addition of anything american seems to fit with me since, well, America is part of this small world. My biggest concern was if the new scene would actually fit the aesthetic.
Here we go
Nothing new here
Alice and the white rabbit in England
Cinderella in Europe
Spot Pinnochio in Italy
Alladin, Jasmine and Apu in the Asia area
Mulan in China
Simba, Pumba and Timon in the little tower
Simba and Pumba
Mexico
The three Caballeros to the left
The Three Caballeros
Flounder and Ariel where the mermaids were
Lilo and Stitch occupy the surfboard now
Dory and Marlin float in the water
The rainforest is still kicking
The brash America room
Woody and Jessie
the Finale room
Take Stitch WITH you!
Overall, the new Small World attraction is just fine. Concerns about this redo may have been overblown. Many were concerned about the purity of the ride being compromised - and to a degree it is. But frankly the ride was previously annoying at times. Adding Disney characters and musical arrangements really didn’t detract from the experience. I still walked away from the ride with that ear worm of a song stuck in my head and a rosey outlook on world affairs. The children I rode with in the boat all enjoyed trying to find the disney characters amongst the class dolls - almost like an “eye spy” game. The ride still does what it was always intended to do . . . entertain.
There’s so much that we share, that it’s time were aware . . . it’s STILL a Small World after all.
We’d like to extend a huge thankyou to Fishbulb for taking the time to share these photos and thoughts with us. Numerous other MiceChatters have also added their photos and reviews to the Small World Review thread in the MiceChat Disneyland section located HERE. Please stop by to see what the rest of the chatters think about the newly updated attraction.
http://micechat.com/forums/disneyland-resort/111442-reviews-new-small-world-disneyland-post-here.html
View: First photos and reviews of Disneyland's newly updated It's A Small World attraction
41 Comments, Comment or Ping
Burnt Toast
What? You mean the Disney world that we know it isn’t coming to a crashing end?
Feb 5th, 2009
RiversOfAmerica
I suspected, and FIshbulb confirms, that the IASW-redux is much ado about nothing. Jesus said “the Sabbath was made for man, not nam for the Sabbath”. I’d extend that to this issue, noting that IASW, as well as all other park attractions, was made for the entertainment and enjoyment of its guests, not the guests for the attractions.
Feb 5th, 2009
PeoplemoverMatt
If the kids are simply now trying to find all the Disney characters while ignoring everything else, they’re missing the point.
Feb 5th, 2009
Hazelrah
Great pictures! I’m more familiar with the WDW version, and I really don’t recall what the America section looked like before it became, well, America. But I guess it doesn’t bother me that it’s in there. If we can have sections for other countries, why not America? It’s not like it dominates half the ride or anything. It seems to have about as much screentime as any other country.
The characters are a little more intrusive, and I think they send the ride off message. Small World was always a celebration of harmony in real culture, not harmony in fictional culture.
But in the main, I just don’t understand the point of these changes. It seems like changing things just to change things. Will ridership increase just because Disney characters were added? And even if it does, is Small World a ride that needed a bump? I just think the dollars spent on designing new characters/scenes, building the props, recording new audio, etc. could have been spent on freshening up some other area of the park that actually needed it.
========
Shane
http://lindsaybrothers.blogspot.com/
Feb 5th, 2009
kjorgensen43
I don’t like the changes. I have reserved my opinion until now.
It is the subtleness of the changes that I find disturbing. I agree with the other comments that the changes are subtle. However, they closed the area for approximately one month, seemingly to add a few charachters around. Why make these changes? IASM is about visiting various cultures around the world. To put Disney Charachters distracts from this goal.
Feb 5th, 2009
JiminyCricketFan
I am not sure that kids are going to get that those are Disney characters. Most of the time it looks like kids doing dress up as Disney characters. Ariel and Cinderella really don’t look like their originals. After all, the stories had them as adults not kids, so I think it is a little confusing, story wise.
Feb 5th, 2009
umbrelladrink
Okay, here’s the thing. I know many who subscribe to Miceage and these forums consider themselves “die hard” Disney fans, myself included. But it seems that the hype and gripe after Mr. Lutz’s announcement of the Small World Update and the ensuing storm of complaints after the video and pictures were posted, seem to be all for not…or at least not much. Yes, it’s true that the Disney characters added into the framework of the ride may tarnish the ride’s nostalgia. Some may seem out of place or over indulgent. It seems to me, though, that these additions are harmless. Some have asked what purpose it serves to add these characters. In my opinion, it serves to bridge a growing generation gap. While those of us who grew up with the ride, have a soft spot of sorts for it. The younger generation tends to poke fun and joke about the silliness of the ride, and this will get younger kids a little more interested in the ride, if nothing more, than to serve as another “hidden Mickey” quest. The new additions, while slightly out of place, doesn’t really take away from the overall message. Those of you claiming that the “story” loses continuity, may be over analyzing the ride a tad bit. It’s not a hard story to follow and the addition of the Disney characters doesn’t seem to take away from that. Just as the addition of Jack Sparrow didn’t take away from the nostalia of Pirates. Finally, I have to disagree that Disney did this soley for marketing purposes. Are we all so disheartened that we think Disney really needs to market Aladdin or Alice in Wonderland to us through another ride. I think more likely, Disney is trying to connect these popular stories, all of which had an origin outside of Disney, to where they are from…showing the world that we in America may love our stories, but they’re not always our stories. In a year or two, this conversation will be a distant memory.
Feb 5th, 2009
Dustysage
I’m also in the camp that feels that the changes are not harmful and help keep the ride relevant to younger generations. Better for Small World to have small changes which help keep if from being closed down all together. These changes do indeed seem harmless. And individual dolls are easily removed and replaced if Disney has a change of heart or decides to remove a few of the additions which don’t really fit well (or are too in-you-face).
Feb 5th, 2009
Goover
I honestly have nothing wrong with this besides the fact that the other mermaids were removed.
I mean they did NOT just toss disney characters in there, they adapted them to fit the style and art of the ride. In fact, i had to LOOK for them in a lot of these photos, so there really is no need for exagerating remarks such as they ruin the ride’s image. Many children will ride maybe only noticing a few if any.
It’s a journey through the world while accompanied by your favorite disney characters. I think it’s nice to see settings behind the characters other than the obvious wonderland or supposed “magic kingdom” for cinderella.
No major complaints here.
Feb 5th, 2009
Bear-y Tales fan
The changes were Very Fine
Things are very fineeeeeeee! Riding on the changed small world Ride!!!!!!!
(A nod To the Bear-y tales theme song. I still miss my home alot even as a worker).
Feb 5th, 2009
cakvalasc
I think IASW looks clean and fresh again, the disney characters do not distract as much as I thought, the America room isnt as large as some said it would be and I like the finale room changes.
A+ things change, things will always change.
Feb 5th, 2009
SpenceMan01
So which line was longer today: the line of guests waiting to ride IASW, or the line of pissed off AP-ers at City Hall, waiting to complain about IASW?
Feb 5th, 2009
Marko50
“Small World was always a celebration of harmony in real culture, not harmony in fictional culture.”
Um, yeah, like flying carpets, Candy Stripe Gum animals doing the can-can and mermaids. While these may be real culture, they’re not real. Just like the Disney charactors. And the pre-Disneyfied versions are in the real cultures of many of these countries.
Sorry, Hazelrah, I know I took these comments out of context and we really are saying same things, but I think it really is much ado about nothing. Like adding the Three Caballeros into the Mexico pavillion at WDW.
Feb 5th, 2009
Baloo
i think it looks great and the main purpose of the closure was not to just add characters it was too fix the infrustructure of the attraction. The new LED lighting, new sound and a complete paint job as well as the addition of many new things to try and somewhat hide the celing were all done. The addition of the characters seems minor in my opinion and does not distract the overall attractions original theme
Feb 5th, 2009
Flyguy90815
So how many AP’s will jump ship and demand a refund? That’s what I thought. See you in line for small world!
Feb 5th, 2009
Disneykin Kid
Haven’t seen it in person yet, but the design elements in the America room look a little amateurish, not equal to the mastery of Mary Blair. Are those orange mountains of the Southwest? They look like volcanoes. The red house with the half gray roof looks like a shanty. And the neon, is that the Hollywood Bowl? I can’t make it out completely, but there seems to be neon and searchlights. If so, I think it’s a bad choice to portray a modern glitzy Hollywood, the other countries have always been classic, traditional portrayals. The monuments of Washington DC, Golden Gate Bridge, St. Louis Arch, Mt. Rushmore, almost anything might have been better.
Feb 5th, 2009
DLFreak71
Oh, look! The Disney characters you saw in the ride are in the small world shop after you get off (and yes, we can thank Pressler for many of the shops at the end of the rides). Big Shock. The ride was fine (besides some extra touch up love that it needed). The ride didn’t have the “mommy can I have that” factor, so Disney made it have it.
Feb 5th, 2009
Legacy
For the most part, the changes here don’t bother me. I was pleasantly surprised by the presence of Alice and the White Rabbit and how well they fit, as with other characters. Some are very much apart of the culture they help represent, and so they work rather well. Granted, I don’t agree with all these characters (Lilo and Stitch as well as Marlin and Dory seem a bit misplaced), and I don’t think we needed the America section, but for the most part I’m not terribly bothered by what’s happened here.
Feb 6th, 2009
KENfromOC
Great pictures - Thank you! From what I see I have to agree with most of the comments. There are always “those” who hate change of any kind (sort of reminds me where I work - at a large retirement communtiy in Orange County!). True, at times some changes don’t work, but the reworking of small world, weaving in the Disney characters within the doll-like design seems to blend perfectly. Keep in mind that many of the Disney characters came from classic European stories, so all this works. I’m sure over the years small children “saw” these Disney cgaracters in their own minds every time they road the ride. The same way my 2-year old sees Santa Claus every time she sees and older man with a white beard. It all works…It’s all good. For you naysayers (Mr. Lutz).. Get over it!
Feb 6th, 2009
KENfromOC
PS: By the way, the new look of this site is terrific! Love the clean uncluttered look! Nice job.
Feb 6th, 2009
CaseyJr
I don’t see a problem, frankly. I would have stuck with the ‘people’ characters (Mary Poppins, the princesses, Woody, Little Mermaid, etc) and not done the animal characters. I think Alice and the White Rabbit fit right in and are cute as can be, where as Stitch looks odd and out of place. As for riders ‘looking’ for the characters instead of taking in the ‘children of the world’ theme, these people have probably been on the attraction dozens of times and are looking for the new figures. I will be doing the same. Don’t get all bent out of shape over that!! One thing I DON’T agree with Disney doing is selling $75 pin sets at the exit. Now THAT is tacky and defeats how Disney is defending the character additions to be purely asthetic.
Feb 6th, 2009
vfire
Peoplemover Matt gets it right. Adding the Disney characters changes the theme of the ride of children joining together for world peace to an “I spy” game to promote Disney characters for purchase at the exit’s toy store. This is a failed Disney “upgrade” like Pirates. They attempted to plus a classic ride’s story/theme and made it worse and contradictory to theme.
Feb 6th, 2009
Micoofy Duck
“Won’t somebody PLEASE think of the children!” Simpson’s quote.
I just so tired of the “the kids are looking for the characters” point.
So what. Are not to expect the kids are not taking everything including the new additions!?!?
And the finale doesn’t have these new characters so are we to expect the kids don’t get the message of It’s A Small World in the grand finale of the ride.
Are we not to expect the kids are pointing out other aspects of the ride after they’ve found the diney character?!!
ENOUGH with how kids will not fully enjoy the ride.
Feb 6th, 2009
Micoofy Duck
I forgot to add “enjoy the ride’s message”.
Feb 6th, 2009
Micoofy Duck
Damn my own typos!
let me repost it all over again.
“Won’t somebody PLEASE think of the children!” Simpson’s quote.
I just so tired of the ol’ “the kids are looking for the characters” point.
So what. Are we not to expect the kids are not taking everything in that the ride offers and ONLY obsessed with the new additions!?!?
And i think it has been known that the finale doesn’t have these new characters so are we to expect the kids don’t get the message of It’s A Small World in the grand finale of the ride. Or are they just not looking at anything after the “I spy” game is over and just talking about what they saw.
Are we not to expect the kids are pointing out other aspects of the ride after they’ve found the disney character?!?!
ENOUGH with how kids will not fully enjoy the ride’s message. I feel it is just an easy reason to hate the changes and use it as an agrument for how the ride was changed for commerical reasons.
PEOPLE, you can buy It’s A Small World merchandise all over the park, Disney wanted you to buy stuff after you rode the ride when it was just the original ride! I don’t understand the new additions for new merchandise when you’ve always been seduced into buying IASW MERCHANDISE forever and a day!
Feb 6th, 2009
alices_momma
I’ve resigned to a state of apathy on this. Some of the characters I’d most likely not even notice if I hadn’t seen the pictures showing me where they are. Others stick out like a sore thumb. But more likely than not the changes are here to stay for awhile, not much we can do but sit back and see how it pans out over time.
Feb 7th, 2009
Swellpixiegirl
I was concerned, but the changes for the most part are subtle. I agree that some of the characters blend better than others, and some (Woody and Jessie) do not. I am sad that the mermaids are gone; I think they could have added Ariel to the existing mermaids.
Walt said Disneyland would never be finished, so why are we (the general Disney-going population) so against any change? I like what DustySage said about the additions being individual dolls that can be easily removed later…nothing permanent has been compromised.
BTW, I HATE Stitch! That one bothers me!
Feb 7th, 2009
cellarhound
This is the equivalent of taking DaVinci’s The Last Supper and painting over it so it actually resembles the DaVinci Code version of the painting.
No matter how artfully and tasteful Imagineers have worked on all these overlays, someone out there in Glendale needs to realize - And YES, I am talking to you Mr. Lassiter… Imagineers are destroying a MASTERPIECE every time you change something thinking that the new change is better than the old… It doesn’t matter if it is an improvement like adding Johny Depp to POTC, or placing pictures in the Haunted Mansion… Replacing singing Bears with Pooh… Everytime, something is lost.
I would like to see Disney codify what was destroyed better than placing them on a commemorative pin. This stuff belongs in a museum and not on eBay.
OK, that’s all I gotta say on this…
Feb 8th, 2009
Digital Jedi
I’m still not seeing the tastefulness everyone keeps talking about. It’s actually tackier then I imagined.
No one thought it would be the end of the world if they did it, just like putting a little cut on your arm won’t kill you. But keep cutting yourself over and over again? Sure, you’ll get attention. But is it a smart thing to do?
Feb 8th, 2009
twobluestripes
Well, I’m not exactly thrilled. I’m not horrified either, so that’s a plus. I’m going to go as far as saying that these changes are not as bad and not as plot-destructive as the additions in POTC.
I didn’t really know which was worse, the addition of the U.S. or the characters. I’m going to agree with those who say that a couple of them look kind of out of place, and slightly tackier than expected, but for the most part they seem subtle. The adding of the U.S. just doesn’t make sense, however: A great Disneyland book I got recently mentions how the DLP doesn’t have a France section in their small world, TDL doesn’t have a Japan section, etc. On a cruise around the world, you leave the country you’re in (entering the ride), sail to other countries (the ride), and then return to the country you started from (exiting the ride). Insisting that the U.S. be included when it doesn’t make sense and no other small world had a scene for the host country just makes us look kind of conceited.
But overall, I’m not terribly upset. What’s done now is done, the rainforest was actually kind of saved, and it really could’ve been so much worse.
This problem with this argument about “Walt wanted the parks to always be changing, stop arguing against change” is that it’s not that the people who want great rides preserved and unaltered are against change in the whole parks. On the contrary, I think people like Al and the Blair family and the contingent of MiceChatters like myself agree that there’s a LOT of change that should be going on in the parks. THe problem is that TDA insists repeatedly on changing the wrong things, over and over. They take something that is beloved and considered a work of genius or art, and instead of taking care of it, improving technology but preserving original plot, they change it up in the name of progress. There are SO many other things at the park they could put that energy and money into instead of “updating” tried and true attractions that have already been gems of the park for years. Think about all the space in Tomorrowland that is boring, un-futuristic, etc, and all the semi-bad attractions that have come and gone there. I mean, HISTA’s just been sitting there getting stale and mouldy for years, why not change that? They could put a great stage show based on one of their movies back in the FL Theatre, or use that Aladdin space for a revival of a Tahitian Terrace type restaurant or show. The Big Thunder BBQ space sat empty for ages when it wasn’t a holiday. A good example of another is how they completely remove the Country Bears, but do not replace it with something better. DCA is a great example of them finally changing something that needs it. They ought to be improving things that are not yet popular to make them better loved, or filling in wasted space with new quality attractions, not changing (or even razing) the things that everyone already loves.
Feb 8th, 2009
Mike Wazowski
With all the die-hard Disney fans here, I’m surprised no one was upset about the inclusion of Apu! Disney characters are one thing, but Simpsons characters?! Disgraceful…
Feb 9th, 2009
gusghost
I don’t really mind the characters, some of them are cute like the white Rabbit and Pumbaa, but Nemo and Dory don’t fit in as well because they aren’t stylized enough. They kinda look like they were used from some other project, and they just threw glitter on them. The America room bugs me! It stands out from the rest of the show because it’s a little more detailed, not as geometric, and the colors aren’t as stylized and far out as the other rooms. You would think with all of the Mary Blair original art they have in their archives, that they would be able to pick up on her unique color sense. They made everything in that room too literal and not abstract enough!
Feb 9th, 2009
AidensDaddy
I don’t know if anyone else has noticed this, but I saw this the second time I went on it after it reopened. If you look above where Alice is, Peter pan and Tinkerbell fly around the moon. This is right above the bridge near the London scene.
Feb 13th, 2009
Reply to “Disneyland’s New Small World”
You must be logged in to post a comment.