Save the Rainforest - Keep "it's a small world" a classic.

[lazyboy97O]

Originally Posted by TsWade2

Everybody calm down! Didn't you hear Marty Sklar's respond? He said replacing the rainforest into the Americana scene Mickey and Minnie is not true! Now, even though we're going to have Disney characters in IASW, but we still have rainforest scene. If you don't believe, then look at this:http://micechat.com/forums/showthrea...ors-93863.html

And they still going to keep the art of Mary Blair and it'll always be a Disneyland classic. Always!

So?

"That process begins with what we call our "Blue Sky" phase, so called because 'the sky's the limit' when Imagineers are brainstorming new ideas. Disney's California Adventure, the last theme-park concept we have developed to date, may suggest that the process has reached a new standard."
-Marty Sklar as quoted in Designing Disney's Theme Parks: The Architecture of Reassurance

[techskip]

wow... I didn't know this thread was still going... ok keep it moving people nothing to see here.

[ZeekSlider]

Originally Posted by techskip

wow... I didn't know this thread was still going... ok keep it moving people nothing to see here.

Some people beg to differ on that. I find the argument fasinating. I mean, this is a beloved ride, and for them to change scenes is something that doesn't go unnoticed. It's one thing to replace a ride that is obviously dated, but it's another to screw around with a classic a la Pirates.

That said, I'm just going to wait for Hong Kong's version to hit YouTube before I figure out if this is a bad thing or not.

[1FoolishMortal]

Just an FYI, too, you may want to change the title of the campaign as, according to Marty, the Rainforest scene is NOT being removed.

[merlinjones]

>>Just an FYI, too, you may want to change the title of the campaign as, according to Marty, the Rainforest scene is NOT being removed.<<

Yay! Partial, but crucial success! Keep it going...

[lazyboy97O]

Actually, the indications are that the Rainforest is being moved and cut down. Not 100% removal, but hardly saved.

Here's an idea for all those that must add and change. Why not paint the blank walls and ceiling? Make the whole thing surround more than it currently does. Large murals that blend into the surrounding scenes that could be lifted from numerous pieces of work done for the attraction.

[merlinjones]

Do you think the Imagineering compulsion to change the classics is sort of like trying to climb into mother's womb or something? Do they need to pee on their obsessions, to become part of it...?

I mean - - why do they do it?

Why not fix the broken things instead? There are plenty.

Or do something original (that doesn't replace a classic).

[lazyboy97O]

Originally Posted by merlinjones

Do you think the Imagineering compulsion to change the classics is sort of like trying to climb into mother's womb or something? Do they need to pee on their obsessions, to become part of it...?

I mean - - why do they do it?

Why not fix the broken things instead? There are plenty.

Or do something original (that doesn't replace a classic).

Maybe it is like the ancient Egyptians. Pharaohs would remove mention of previous rulers from monuments, etc. In their place they would add their name and image as a means of propagating their own greatness.

[Lore]

Originally Posted by merlinjones

Do you think the Imagineering compulsion to change the classics is sort of like trying to climb into mother's womb or something? Do they need to pee on their obsessions, to become part of it...?

I mean - - why do they do it?

Why not fix the broken things instead? There are plenty.

Or do something original (that doesn't replace a classic).

Your statement is really worthy of it's own thread. I have my own dark theory. I believe Disney has internal budgets set by higher ups. I believe marketing to get a huge budget with maintence and the parks getting much less then they need. In order to get things done, the parks must negotiate with marketing. I believe part of the small world refurb budget to be coming from marketing, in exchange for inserting the plush advertising message.

I can think of no other plausible explaination, other than perhaps wide spread dementia.

Ironically, good products can sell themselves. If my theory is even partially true. I wish Disney would cut marketing budgets and increase imagineering and park maintence budgets.

[JiminyCricketFan]

Originally Posted by merlinjones

Or do something original (that doesn't replace a classic).

That is what really needs to be done. Let's make a totally original ride. What is Disney management so timid that they only approve money to screw up older attractions or create a new 'franchize' by ripping off the latest Disney movie and making an attraction whether or not the story really inspires one.

Was Splash Mountian the last original ride? Even that one was just reusing AA's from America Sings and thus finding a Disney movie, "Song of the South" that could use all those animal AA's, even though the story really had nothing about waterfalls and log rides.

[lazyboy97O]

Originally Posted by Lore

Your statement is really worthy of it's own thread. I have my own dark theory. I believe Disney has internal budgets set by higher ups. I believe marketing to get a huge budget with maintence and the parks getting much less then they need. In order to get things done, the parks must negotiate with marketing. I believe part of the small world refurb budget to be coming from marketing, in exchange for inserting the plush advertising message.

I can think of no other plausible explaination, other than perhaps wide spread dementia.

Ironically, good products can sell themselves. If my theory is even partially true. I wish Disney would cut marketing budgets and increase imagineering and park maintence budgets.

Apparently Mendenhall was successful in establishing a marketing review that all projects at Imagineering had to go through. He may be gone, but his legacy certainly is not.

[Lore]

Originally Posted by lazyboy97O

Apparently Mendenhall was successful in establishing a marketing review that all projects at Imagineering had to go through. He may be gone, but his legacy certainly is not.

Egads! They need to drop that right away! Nothing kills a company faster than marketing involvement BEFORE a product is finished.

[animagusurreal]

Originally Posted by lazyboy97O

Here's an idea for all those that must add and change. Why not paint the blank walls and ceiling? Make the whole thing surround more than it currently does. Large murals that blend into the surrounding scenes that could be lifted from numerous pieces of work done for the attraction.

There's an idea I could get behind .


Unfortunately, it wouldn't advertise plush and DVD's.


Acutally, though, I believe that a guest that has a really WOW experience on an attraction is more likely to want to commemorate their visit and is more likely to buy more souvenirs. So quality is good business, at least by my theory!

[lazyboy97O]

Originally Posted by animagusurreal

Acutally, though, I believe that a guest that has a really WOW experience on an attraction is more likely to want to commemorate their visit and is more likely to buy more souvenirs. So quality is good business, at least by my theory!

The distinctive style of "it's a small world" lends the attraction to a vast array of products to be sold. The obvious one being pursued is the character. Items already exist of characters portrayed enjoying several attraction, I see no reason why "it's a small world" merchandise would be different. I doubt anybody is complaining that Mickey Mouse or Stitch are on some Twilight Zone Tower of Terror merchandise, but never appear during the course of the attraction.

[animagusurreal]

Originally Posted by JiminyCricketFan

Was Splash Mountian the last original ride? Even that one was just reusing AA's from America Sings and thus finding a Disney movie, "Song of the South" that could use all those animal AA's, even though the story really had nothing about waterfalls and log rides.

I think the last non-pre-existing-franchise-based attraction in Disneyland was Captain EO (1986) (unless you count Michael Jackson as a franchise), while the last non-pre-existing-franchise-based ride was Thunder Mountain (1979). (Unless you count Rocket Rods (1998). I don't. And no, Thunder Mountain is not The Apple Dumpling Gang: The Ride. There are no Tim Conway and Don Knotts AA's .)

The excuse is that the "general public" just can't handle originality anymore, but some of the most popular rides in the park remain non-franchise-based (the ones that they haven't eliminated yet ):

Space Mountain
Thunder Mountain
Pirates (now has its own franchise)
HM
Small World (still well-attended prior to refurb)
Etc.

While others are based on older franchises that are, in some cases, less popular than the rides based upon them:

Splash Mountain
Indy (only just getting a new movie)
Mr. Toad
Roger Rabbit's Car Toon Spin
Etc.


While Pooh, which is based on one of the most popular franchises of all, is sparsely attended.

Originally Posted by lazyboy97O

The distinctive style of "it's a small world" lends the attraction to a vast array of products to be sold. The obvious one being pursued is the character. Items already exist of characters portrayed enjoying several attraction, I see no reason why "it's a small world" merchandise would be different. I doubt anybody is complaining that Mickey Mouse or Stitch are on some Twilight Zone Tower of Terror merchandise, but never appear during the course of the attraction.

I agree. I'd buy Small World-style character merchandise, without it specifically being advertised by the ride.