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

[Datameister]

You're talking about whether or not action should be taken, Dan--I'm talking about the manner in which it's taken. Call me crazy, but I believe in respect, even when "combat" becomes an unfortunate necessity.

[HBG2]

Originally Posted by Datameister

You're talking about whether or not action should be taken, Dan--I'm talking about the manner in which it's taken. Call me crazy, but I believe in respect, even when "combat" becomes an unfortunate necessity.

But the only combat possible at this point is verbal combat. If someone who is supposed to be a professional expert in Disney theming, after thinking "long and hard," is not able to see that this whole idea is conceptually flawed and damages a Disney classic, then pick some respectable but accurate term for such a person and call them that.

I'm speaking my mind here, and yes, I really am becoming more and more convinced that the people behind this are either dishonest (i.e., they're lying; it's all about $$$), or they're ignorant (i.e., they really haven't got a clue what IASW is, artistically). I've waited for a credible third option to appear, but so far I haven't seen it.

[PragmaticIdealist]

Originally Posted by HBG2

Notice that they admit that the world of IASW and the world of Disney characters are two different worlds. They "reconcile" the difference between these "two different worlds" by making one of them stylistically similar to the other. So the difference between the world of Disney characters and the world of the IASW dolls is superficial enough to harmonize them through surface stylization.

After thinking "long and hard," they have managed to cheapen and degrade both worlds with a single stroke.

I was waiting for someone to have the insight to realize that "it's a small world" isn't the only work that's being bastardized.

The stories supplying the characters that are being distorted into these grotesque childlike dolls are suffering, as well.

These characters are not like Pagliacci in the Disneyland Paris attraction because Disney has visualized them in a definitive way elsewhere and because the guests interpret Pagliacci as a role that is performed on stage by adults.

[HBG2]

Originally Posted by PragmaticIdealist

I was waiting for someone to have the insight to realize that "it's a small world" isn't the only work that's being bastardized.

The stories supplying the characters that are being distorted into these grotesque childlike dolls are suffering, as well.

The point deserves underscoring. A somewhat similar insight is already there in the middle of one of the first Re-Imagineering postings:

DIMINUTION OF CHARACTER
The Disney characters are, of course, one of the Company’s chief assets. But they are suffering homogenization, as the Grimm Brothers’ royals cavort with Minnie, Ariel and Jasmine in the Tween Spa Make-over Afternoons. Their insertion into A Small World is one more inappropriate and exploitive over-exposure.

http://imagineerebirth.blogspot.com/...-we-share.html

Elsewhere, I tried to make a similar point with regard to Pinocchio. It's an insult to the integrity of this character to plop him into a world completely opposite to the one in which he became the character he is, and then pretend that he's right at home.

http://micechat.com/forums/showpost....3&postcount=53

[Mr Wiggins]

Originally Posted by PragmaticIdealist

I was waiting for someone to have the insight to realize that "it's a small world" isn't the only work that's being bastardized.

The stories supplying the characters that are being distorted into these grotesque childlike dolls are suffering, as well.

Every time I think the shark-leaping can’t reach a higher orbit, Disney does something to prove me wrong. Those quotes from the imagineers are beyond dismaying.

[Coheteboy]

I'm with you, HBG2.

[PragmaticIdealist]

Disney management makes a serious miscalculation when it opens Hong Kong Disneyland without enough attractions (and, tangentially, Disney characters). And, many of the same people responsible for this failure decide to try to make the new "it's a small world" in China more cost-effective, synergistic, and proprietary by stuffing the attraction with as many characters as possible. Then, these same people decide that the new design work is not cost-effective enough, so they want to export the changes to Disneyland in California.

When does Disney realize that it fails commercially every time it makes creative decisions for business reasons?

The excuses these executives give are always either that the guests are too stupid to notice or that the work is not serious enough to warrant caring about its artistic integrity. The people that hold these views disgust me, and their effrontery is going to be met with even more commercial failure. When will these individuals be held accountable for their consistently-disastrous decisions?

If Iger won't do his job and make a cleaner break with the past and with Eisner's progeny, investors will. They've already done so once, and, if I'm not mistaken, Roy E. Disney and Stanley Gold are no longer contractually-obligated to remain silent.

[The International]

So who else is really excited to see the new characters??? I can't wait, Disney made the right choice!!!!

[HBG2]

Originally Posted by The International

So who else is really excited to see the new characters??? I can't wait, Disney made the right choice!!!!

There's a thread for that. If you think cotton candy makes a great meal, you'll love it.

[Datameister]

If someone who is supposed to be a professional expert in Disney theming, after thinking "long and hard," is not able to see that this whole idea is conceptually flawed and damages a Disney classic, then pick some respectable but accurate term for such a person and call them that.

I agree. And to that end, the term I'll pick is "severely misunderstanding the respective intents of the attraction and the films." Not "idiot." The former is descriptive, precise, and yet respectful. The latter is a useless insult. (And yes, I'm aware WDI has done its share of namecalling. "Foamers", I know. Doesn't justify retaliation.) Furthermore, it's not okay to insult other members for having differing opinions. Not something you're doing, HBG2, but others certainly are, in this thread and others. And it is starting to piss me off.

[ZeekSlider]

Originally Posted by HBG2

Wow, again the Oracle has deigned to speak. 90%, 80%....such precision. And elsewhere we discover that you know what the entire population of China knows or doesn't know, and why they would or would not visit an amusement park, based in part on their presumed similarity to the Japanese (which makes sense, since...well, you know, those people are all pretty much all alike). http://micechat.com/forums/showpost....&postcount=114

And now it's the "Just joking, just joking" defense.

Rule #1 for getting out of a hole: stop digging.

It's people and posts like this that make me wonder why I'm even a Disney fan still.

I like talking about Disney. The theme parks, the movies, everything I can find. But I can't so much state my opinion on that topic outside of these kind of sites because of "social normalities." And for the record, this isn't an attempt at gainning unwarrented pitty, so don't turn it into one.

Now, I'm learning that I can't even state my opinion without someone saying that I suck because I'm wrong or ignorant or just plain don't agree with their point of view. It's no wonder that I can't look at these attractions anymore and not say what is on my mind, no matter how critical it is! Nobody will let me!

So there, you've won. I hope you're happy.

Originally Posted by aashee

I'll help you out with words of wisdom from Linus. There are 3 things you probably shouldn't discuss without people getting angry. Politics, Religion and the Great Pumpkin.

I'll do just that, thank you. Consider this the last time I state any opinion of mine on MC. I'll just blindly thank people for posting threads I've been looking forward to seeing given the rumor mill or press releases.

[HBG2]

Originally Posted by Datameister

I agree. And to that end, the term I'll pick is "severely misunderstanding the respective intents of the attraction and the films." Not "idiot." The former is descriptive, precise, and yet respectful. The latter is a useless insult. (And yes, I'm aware WDI has done its share of namecalling. "Foamers", I know. Doesn't justify retaliation.) Furthermore, it's not okay to insult other members for having differing opinions. Not something you're doing, HBG2, but others certainly are, in this thread and others. And it is starting to piss me off.

All right, Data, all right. Yes, you are right. And besides, this being Micechat, there isn't any realistic danger that "idiot" will soon go the way of "mayhap" and "forsooth" without my help.

Crabby day in HBG-land.

[Datameister]

Crabby day in HBG-land.

Maybe if your head stopped switching from your shoulders to your hatbox every few seconds, you'd feel better! Seriously, hope you feel better, Dan, and thanks for replying sensibly, as you usually do.

[Mac Daddy]

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.

Originally Posted by mrfantasmic

Yes, well clearly I can't do that or I already would have. Suffice it to say that I know I'm right, but cannot give you details. Perhaps someone else could provide the exact numbers, but I won't.

Glad you enjoyed the pictures, though. That was fun.

Since you brought it up, maybe pictures would help. These two shots are from last Friday and just about 20 minutes apart from each other:

Exhibit A:



Exhibit B:



I waited until I saw at LEAST three consecutive empty ride vehicles at Pooh, and then sauntered over to Fantasyland when in the same time period I didn't see a SINGLE empty catipillar.

Hmmmm....


Pooh, extended or otherwise (that just sounds bad for some reason) is a complete and utter failure. It has to be running about HALF of what the bears used to bring in. It's a B ticket, half arsed waste of prime Critter Country real estate, IMO.

Just sayin.

[MasterGracey]

Originally Posted by Mac Daddy

Since you brought it up, maybe pictures would help. These two shots are from last Friday and just about 20 minutes apart from each other:

Exhibit A:



Exhibit B:



I waited until I saw at LEAST three consecutive empty ride vehicles at Pooh, and then sauntered over to Fantasyland when in the same time period I didn't see a SINGLE empty catipillar.

Hmmmm....


Pooh, extended or otherwise (that just sounds bad for some reason) is a complete and utter failure. It has to be running about HALF of what the bears used to bring in. It's a B ticket, half arsed waste of prime Critter Country real estate, IMO.

Just sayin.

Mac Daddy FTW!