Save Small World! (Why the Classic Shouldn't be changed!)

[2DieFR]

Originally Posted by The Mad Hatter

Do we know if the characters will be in the small world, Mary Blair style? If they are made to look like they've been there the whole time, it won't be so bad.

It's not so much the execution in which Disney characters will be added that I am worried about. Mary Blair style or not, they will be there, and my point is the attraction will be reduced to "let's see how many Disney characters we can find." I think this is even worse than when guests ride Pirates of the Caribbean to gawk over Jack Sparrow.

[penguinsoda]

*My comments from the other thread where this is being discussed*

As far as IASW.... I think if they are going to shut down the entire ride for at least 10 months for "rehab" then update the existing structure and show, clean it up, utilize current technology, maybe add better AA dolls.... but don't toss in random Disney Characters into the mix. Its yet another concept of the lack of theme or raping of theme in yet another section of the park in my opinion.

[Micoofy Duck]

I can say now that at least I was there to ride the original ride before it changes. Hopefully these new added characters are only for some promotion that ties in with the next promotion that starts after YOAMD and then goes away when that promotion ends.

[Datameister]

I wasn't aware that this change had been officially greenlit, but I'm not particularly opposed to it. IASW is historical, absolutely...but if I look at it with a totally honest eye, I can't bring myself to like it. I laugh at it, not with it. IMO, most of its value is historical, and you can gauge the validity of that statement by considering what you would think of it if it had just been built recently.

Anyway, provided that the new dolls are high-quality products, I don't think I'll mind at all. They're supposed to follow the same visual aesthetic exactly, so they should fit in fairly well.

Everything about it's a small world - the song, the attraction, the message - has become and is today quintessentially Disney.

I don't agree with that. Or at least, the attraction doesn't embody all the things I like about Disney. The things I like about Disney's theme parks are immersive environments, the perfectly restrained amount of physical thrill, and the Imagineers' ability to create charm without affected saccharinity. it's a small world embodies none of these for me. Well, okay, the physical thrill definitely isn't overwhelming. I'll give it one out of three.

Anyway, I totally understand where those of you who are disturbed by this are coming from. It's certainly a valid position to take. I just don't happen to feel the same way.

[2DieFR]

Originally Posted by Olympicnut

Meh.

They did changes to Pirates and Mansion, both classic attractions, and the world didn't cease to exist as we know it. Nothing wrong with sprucing up something that's a bit aged. I mean isn't that why god created Botox?

(bold mine)

Your philosophy would work if it's a small world was an unpopular attraction before it closed a few weeks ago. But as you can see in Darkbeer's photo from January 18th, that is clearly not the case.



There's no denying it. This attraction, in its current form, still manages to pack them in.

small world doesn't need Disney characters. It needs a new trough, new boats, and some TLC.

[2DieFR]

Originally Posted by Walt Jr.

I think it's ironic about the historical facts they are putting out on the walls to honor the attraction when inside they are planning to completely change it with the characters.

Indeed. Almost a mockery.

Originally Posted by Micoofy Duck

Hopefully these new added characters are only for some promotion that ties in with the next promotion that starts after YOAMD and then goes away when that promotion ends.

I think there is little hope that the characters will be removed after they are in place, just like the characters added to Pirates of the Caribbean are not leaving any time soon.

[fo'c's'le swab]

If one believes that IASW is kept around really as a tribute to Walt and that World's Fair, then the addition of Disney characters is inappropriate.
If it is viewed as an aging, stale attraction that has remained, essentially, unchanged for 50 years, then these characters (if they are indeed to actually become additions) are at the least inoffensive, and at best, a welcome change.

I see IASW as having more historic value than entertainment value. I see the additions as an intrusion. If it is to cease being a faithful reminder of that World's Fair Exhibition, Walt Disney's contributions and innovations, and a showcase for Mary Blair's unique design, I would rather just see the attraction pulled, and room made for a new project in its place.

[SCUBAbe]

it doesn't matter what it needs or doesn't need. change is good. Why such a closed mind to it? It's a theme park not a shrine, let it grow and change.

[The Mad Hatter]

Originally Posted by 2DieFR

It's not so much the execution in which Disney characters will be added that I am worried about. Mary Blair style or not, they will be there, and my point is the attraction will be reduced to "let's see how many Disney characters we can find." I think this is even worse than when guests ride Pirates of the Caribbean to gawk over Jack Sparrow.

I doubt it. I'd be surprised if they put more than one character in each country.

I can honestly say I don't understand when people get in an uproar over characters in Disneyland.

[mrfantasmic]

Originally Posted by aashee

a 1,500 guests an hour ride.

You do Small World wrong, sir. It's more than that, for sure.

[2DieFR]

Originally Posted by Datameister

I don't agree with that. Or at least, the attraction doesn't embody all the things I like about Disney.

Data, I didn't mean that small world has to float your boat (major pun right there ). There are plenty of people out there that abhor the attraction...mostly the song and the bad reputation surrounding it, and for those that genuinely find the song annoying.

What I mean is that the small world attraction can and is associated with Disneyland without characters being added in. Doesn't mean it is your favorite, but there's no mistaking that small world is Disney, and found in Disney parks. I am defending attractions that have every right to be in DL, even though no standard Disney characters live inside of them.

[Mojave]

If they're going to be modifying IASM that much, why not make it a shooting gallery like Buzz Lightyear? (old joke from when we were kids)

[aashee]

Originally Posted by mrfantasmic

You do Small World wrong, sir. It's more than that, for sure.

I figured. I was going light to show that SW DOES have interest. Funny that Small World needs to be changed based on waning interest yet Pooh is fine. I guess you can twist numbers to fit the arguement either way.

[fo'c's'le swab]

Originally Posted by SCUBAbe

it doesn't matter what it needs or doesn't need. change is good. Why such a closed mind to it? It's a theme park not a shrine, let it grow and change.

So you liked the 1998 TL refurb? While I certainly agree with your sentiment, and understand how many perceive reluctance to see Disney 'history' altered as 'close-mindedness', I disagree that change is universally 'good'.

[2DieFR]

Originally Posted by SCUBAbe

it doesn't matter what it needs or doesn't need. change is good.

If it didn't matter what it needs or doesn't need, Disney wouldn't do anything at all and just let the attraction run as-is with boats getting stuck at every turn.

Point is, Disney does think it needs change. Major change. And no, I do not think all change is good, because it just so happens that some things work just fine the way they are.

Originally Posted by SCUBAbe

Why such a closed mind to it? It's a theme park not a shrine, let it grow and change.

I'm all for "plussing" when I think it will plus the experience. In this instance, I think it won't make the experience better. Maybe not worse, but certainly not better.