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

[animagusurreal]

^

Excellent post

[Mr Wiggins]

Originally Posted by Matterhorn Boy

...The changes to the park over the last two decades have hardly been a rule-breaking liberation of the mind in the spirit of creativity. If anything, they move toward a structured and calculated oppression of it. ...

...This change isn't brilliant. It's unneccesary, and it cuts the original message of the attraction to ribbons. Accepting any change, regardless of it's quality or integration in its attraction, is sheer ignorance of the qualities and standards Disney's empire is built on.

Great post!

[ZeekSlider]

Originally Posted by woxel1

I appreciate a dialogue, I just feel like some people in this thread could channel their verbosity in more positive ways

This is the internet. Where else can people channel their negativity? On other people in the good ol' fashion style of a physical beat down?

Personally, I'm just taking this thing in small bite-size chunks instead of trying to eat and digest the entire pie. Which makes me wonder if I've killed the Recap thread when someone said real artists don't change other people's artwork by posting Duchamp's Mona Lisa.

[fo'c's'le swab]

Originally Posted by ZeekSlider

Which makes me wonder if I've killed the Recap thread when someone said real artists don't change other people's artwork by posting Duchamp's Mona Lisa.

While I haven't seen the posting you mention, I don't really have to in order to point out your 'thread-killing' argument is useless--worse than useless, really, as it demonstrates you don't seem yet to fully grasp the argument you wish to discredit.

[MrLiver]

Originally Posted by Matterhorn Boy

The changes to the park over the last two decades have hardly been a rule-breaking liberation of the mind in the spirit of creativity.

The point I was trying to make, and was obviously lost on you, is that whether a change is good or bad is usually determined by history.

Ragtime music when it came out had every criticism levied against it - even some of the same criticisms being used here against this new Small World. Breaking of tradition. Abandonment of believes and standards. Commercialization and marketing. Right down to the work of the devil.

The benefits of ragtime eventually became widely accepted and those criticisms of it vanished. Now most people see it as a novelty of a long gone era, a quaint little diversion but at the time it was social upheaval at its best.

You can say right now that the changes in the park violate the social standards and traditions all you want, but mostly those are just your opinions [I know it's been said a million times or more by now]. The real test will come when the attraction opens.

If people come in and see the characters and like them, your criticisms will be absolutely meaningless. They will be able to appreciate the changes in the same intellectual and artistic sense that you claim ragtime represented. They will see the change as good, as breaking down tradition and social conservatism. Mostly they will see it for what it is: freshening up an old stale ride that they didn't really care for before.


The Disney empire was built on entertaining the masses. Small World was built to entertain the masses. If it continues to do that with disney characters and christmas overlays for years and years to come, then its original intent will be preserved.

[Matterhorn Boy]

Originally Posted by MrLiver

The point I was trying to make, and was obviously lost on you, is that whether a change is good or bad is usually determined by history.

I'm sure that if Disney decided to level Sleeping Beauty's Castle with flamethrowers and bulldozers and replace it with a bigger shinier "better" castle, you'd tell us that only History could judge whether this change was good or not and that changes like these are necessary. All change is not created equal.

If people come in and see the characters and like them, your criticisms will be absolutely meaningless. They will be able to appreciate the changes in the same intellectual and artistic sense that you claim ragtime represented. They will see the change as good, as breaking down tradition and social conservatism. Mostly they will see it for what it is: freshening up an old stale ride that they didn't really care for before.

Going on a theme park attraction is hardly the democratic approval process you think it is. When I'm at the park with my family or friends, I often have to tolerate riding the very attractions I despise, like Pooh or Buzz. I've already paid Disney for the "privilege" of riding said attraction. It doesn't really matter if I go on it or not. You can argue all you want that number of riders per hour = automatic public approval of said attraction, but even Disney must disagree with you on that if attractions like Pooh and HISTA continue to remain.

The Disney empire was built on entertaining the masses. Small World was built to entertain the masses. If it continues to do that with disney characters and christmas overlays for years and years to come, then its original intent will be preserved.

Entertaining the masses! So that's what attractions like Small World were built for. I'm glad there are people like you to set me straight.

Seriously though, a goal of merely "entertaining the masses" is such a low bar to set for a company built on standards of excellence that are meant to set it apart from the competition. It's the total and complete embrace of Disney's transormation into an amusement park of no real distinction or quality. Many of the attractions Walt Disney oversaw the construction of were meant to inform or hinged upon the audience to entertain themselves. What is so inherently entertaining about riding a paddle wheel steamboat I may ask? Though from everything I've read from you, I'm sure you view the Twain as an attraction whose time is up as well.

While entertainment is certainly a facet of what imagineering sets out to do with their attractions, classic examples of imagineering were built on the foundation of strong art direction and the creative individualism of its designers. Walt Disney wasn't interested in some homogonized, all encompassing goal of entertainment when he hired a desinger like Mary Blair to design Small World. Her design sense could hardly be described as uninamously pleasing to the general public. Walt was involved in presenting different cultures through the eyes of children, with colorful design work and a light all-too-catchy song to go with it.

Instead of designing his attractions completely around the tastes of the general public would want, he directly influenced the tastes of the general public by showing them "impossible" ideas and attractions they couldn't dream of. He was a leader, not a follower, and that's what his company has become in his absense.

[animagusurreal]

^


Matterhorn Boy, I wouldn't typically applaud the same person twice in one thread, but damn, you're good .

[mrfantasmic]

Originally Posted by Matterhorn Boy

You can argue all you want that number of riders per hour = automatic public approval of said attraction, but even Disney must disagree with you on that if attractions like Pooh and HISTA continue to remain.

Once again, if you're going to say that Pooh and HISTA are failures due to their ridership, you're going to have to cite some numbers. Prove to me that Pooh does worse than the Fantasyland attractions in terms of ridership, then you can make that claim.

[animagusurreal]

Originally Posted by mrfantasmic

Once again, if you're going to say that Pooh and HISTA are failures due to their ridership, you're going to have to cite some numbers. Prove to me that Pooh does worse than the Fantasyland attractions in terms of ridership, then you can make that claim.

Mr. Fantasmic, is Pooh the most efficient ride in the entire history of the world ever? I think that would be the only way it's pulling in great numbers and (by most accounts and my personal experience) never has much of a line.

Anyhow, attendance sure isn't my sole criterion for "success." It's usually cited by people when justifying the destruction of Country Bears, the original Subs, etc. Why shouldn't it work the same way for Pooh and HISTA?

[Coheteboy]

Matterhornboy is indeed good!

Bringing up the Mark Twain is actually a pretty good example of why we love Disneyland. It's not thrilling. It's no E-ticket based on the latest movie franchise. It's just an honest steam ship that we don't see very often in our daily lives. It's a true transport to something else.

It seems as if Disneyland used to be based on showing us the world and how artistic and beautiful it is. Nowadays, it's shoving the art wherever they want just for kicks and then back it up by saying "Disneyland is never complete" or "Disneyland is not a museum."

I wonder if people realize that museums change their art out too. It's never the same exhibit. So why is Disneyland often compared to it? Just because Walt made a pretty clever remark? I really don't think Walt intended it to be used for messing up a ride.

The Louvre wouldn't get rid of the Mona Lisa, one of its major attractions. Nor would they add a mustache to it and say that the museum is never complete as long as they have sharpies! (edit: unless it was duchamp's)

Just because ONE attraction stays the same doesn't make Disneyland a museum.

[animagusurreal]

^

Now, here's a twist -

I actually think that should add more stuff to the shores of the RoA for the Mark Twain and Columbia to pass by, update some of the animal figures that are there, and put back what they've taken away - the burning cabin (see my sig) and Cascade Peak. I also think they should put back the Keel Boats (even as moving props, if not as a ride) to give the impression of more river traffic.

So in that way, I'm in favor of "change."

But I don't think any movie tie-in stuff should be done to it, and I don't think the attraction should be razed, in part because of its historical value in the park, and in part just because of the general immersive thematic awesomeness of seeing a steamboat and a sailing ship on that river.

[Matterhorn Boy]

Originally Posted by mrfantasmic

Once again, if you're going to say that Pooh and HISTA are failures due to their ridership, you're going to have to cite some numbers. Prove to me that Pooh does worse than the Fantasyland attractions in terms of ridership, then you can make that claim.

So my observations are deemed completely invalid until the almighty Disney comes in with attendance figures and proves me correct? How convenient.

I've never been in a line longer than a minute or two for Pooh. I've never seen a line of considerable length, even in the midst of summer crowds in the Aneheim heat. I can't say the same for even Snow White or Pinocchio, arguably the least popular of the FL attractions. I've never seen children rush over to Critter Country when the park opens to make sure they don't have to wait in line too long for Pooh. To most people, it seems like a store, providing a moments distraction.

HISTA has about the same attendance of its predecessor Captain EO did at the end of its lifespan, and needs to be thrown out and replaced with something new, just like EO did.

And thanks for the praise and whatnot everybody.

[bfdf55]

Originally Posted by flynnibus

No it's not - its simply a choice between making conditional claims vs. authoritative claims when you know you don't have the complete picture. The different between a hypothesis and a theorem. But on top its all opinion - and you have this mess.

The holiday overlay though is a great historical example of judging before implementation and prejudice. History has shown its been accepted and appreciated. While there may be some purists who don't agree with it - the park isn't built just for them and certainly they are not funding a foundation to run the park just operate in their vision.

Well, just as with Peter and the Wolf, eventually there WAS a wolf.

[bfdf55]

Originally Posted by MrLiver

I appreciate a good dialogue too.

There's just no point in discussing something with a group of people who are already convinced they are right and admit that nothing will change their mind.

Yes there is. While you may not change the mind of the person you are having an active “discussion” with, there are probably thousands of lurkers that are absorbing all the aspects of the issues being discussed. And, many of those people will be developing their own opinions based on the content of these posts.

So, just as with some of the judging systems, you throw out the extreme rants at both ends of the argument and total up the remaining points.

[animagusurreal]

[joke]
How about this: to balance out adding characters to Small World, we take the characters out of some of the other attractions in Fantasyland. Are you ready for “Mine Car Through Creepy Castle”, “Pirate Ships Over London” and “Out-of-Control Motorcar Ride”? [/joke]