Originally Posted By oc_dean >>IASW has never appealed to adults<< Oh really?! And just how do YOU come to this conclusion? Oh, don't bother. I've been belittled with words like: "there might be an emptiness in your life." Walt was a master showman, who surrounded himself by the best talents of the time. >>And it's still only an entertainment company.<< Today it is. It USE TO be something a bit more. But you go on a ahead with your brand of wisdom and trivialization.
Originally Posted By Hans Reinhardt With all respect to those who are totally put off by these changes, I must say that the fuss being created because of the inclusion of a handful of bland characters only serves to show just how trite Small World really is. Yes, Disney is on a slippery slope to cartoon hell, but that doesn't necessarily mean that the recent changes to Small World are as truly devastating to the art of Disney's theme park design as some people are making them out to be. This is ISAW we're talking about not The American Adventure or Spaceship Earth.
Originally Posted By Hans Reinhardt It is to me. It's pretty, and a classic Disney attraction, but it's still schmaltz.
Originally Posted By oc_dean Okay, thanks. It's just .. not everyone (pardon my wording, please) share the same cynical view.
Originally Posted By oc_dean If there was no room for poignancy, and charm there would be no Enchanted Tiki Room, Snow White's Grotto, a reopened Sleeping Beauty Castle walk-through, or a handful of other attractions that come from a more "innocent" era.
Originally Posted By trekkeruss I guess I am cynical too, because I just don't believe that after riding IaSW very many people suddenly have this epiphany about how we should all live in harmony. As I've said before, the vast majority of guests merely think it is cute. It's in Fantasyland, after all... everything is pretty much merely cute and magical, not real and with substance.
Originally Posted By oc_dean >>I just don't believe that after riding IaSW very many people suddenly have this epiphany about how we should all live in harmony.<< It's more subtle than that. For me ... it's a little more a subconscious thing. It just depends person to person, on how well "attuned" they are to various things in the world. Besides ... how do you know what the attraction has meant exactly to everyone who has ever ridden it since it debuted at the '64 Worlds Fair.(?) Oh, I agree the world is more superficial now more than ever. But not everyone falls into the "I only see the superficial level of things" category.
Originally Posted By trekkeruss <<how do you know what the attraction has meant exactly to everyone who has ever ridden it since it debuted at the '64 Worlds Fair.(?)>> Because before this rehab, I had never read anything about IaSW assigning it these subtle, subconscious things you are attuned to. And I mean NEVER.
Originally Posted By Hans Reinhardt "If there was no room for poignancy, and charm there would be no Enchanted Tiki Room, Snow White's Grotto, a reopened Sleeping Beauty Castle walk-through, or a handful of other attractions that come from a more "innocent" era." No one has convincingly explained yet how the new additions have changed that. From what I can see, all of the attributes that you love (and some despise) about IASW are still there. I agree that the characters are pointless, but the attraction's underlying message of peace love and harmony does not appear overwhelmed by those handful of new dolls that vaguely resemble Disney characters.
Originally Posted By oc_dean >>No one has convincingly explained yet how the new additions have changed that.<< They are a distraction to it. Fortunately though .... the attraction is large enough where the viewer can tune out/ignore them. The American room though - ooh! Yikes. Of all the comments about the changes, many people agree the sets do not blend in with Mary Blair's style of the rest of the ride. Looks more like SuperStar Limo. I wonder how long this will remain, as is, till someone with a better artistic sense rips it out, and either improves it, or leave it out entirely.
Originally Posted By HMButler79 "I agree that the characters are pointless" The BEST line in a week and a half. It was POINTLESS. I was watching another video on YouTube and the person didnt know that was Cinderella!! HA! Lets face it, the "Save" movement worked whether you want to acknowledge it or not. They put Cindy in rags, Ali and Jas up HIGH, have Simabas eyes closed and Pumbaas and Timon is basically hiding in a hill thing as is Abu in a vase, squeezed the New Guinea and Rainforest into the South Pacific scene, restored the '64 FX and elements to the finale and toned down the Disney music. ALL THIS as opposed to what happened to HK. WDI heard us and knew that there best bet was to throw them into the least offensive staging possible and put them on regular Small World doll bodies as opposed to the creedy smiley dolls at HK. it IS Pointless, because the audio, costumes, and set reconstruction makes up for it.
Originally Posted By HMButler79 a compromise thanks to the media nightmare it caused TDA and WDI for a year. I also think if the HK version had not opened when it did we would have lost. We saw the freak show that was and we were right in protesting those changes if they had come as is. When you have to bring out Sklar AND Smith you know you have a P.R. time bomb. If only it had worked for TSI. What they did to THAT is UNFORGIVEABLE.
Originally Posted By oc_dean Lets remind the readers here .... We know we're just talking about an attraction. A ride. So .. before people say ... Why this huge fuss???? this goes beyond 'small world' and Tom Sawyer Island ...... it's about the big picture. And that is a our beloved Disneyland does not set the high standards that we've been use to for decades. It's hard to see .. something some of us grew up with ... evolve into something less imaginative.
Originally Posted By oc_dean And also, please spare us the - Get a life, get another hobby bulls**t. We've heard it. I'm managing to fit this into my daily busy life .. because I'm more than just that "casual Disney observer". I care about a world that I want to see to thrive and be great .. and hopefully beyond my years.
Originally Posted By oc_dean BUT MEHHMM ... they do not respect my authoritare! <a href="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3530/3257870604_f648b6dd0c.jpg?v=1233912453" target="_blank">http://farm4.static.flickr.com...33912453</a> to <a href="http://slog.thestranger.com/files/2007/08/eric_theodore_cartman_southpark.jpg" target="_blank">http://slog.thestranger.com/fi...park.jpg</a> Is there a difference? ;O)
Originally Posted By oc_dean This page from Micechat has all the Disney characters shots in one post: <a href="http://micechat.com/forums/disneyland-resort/111442-reviews-new-small-world-disneyland-post-here-3.html" target="_blank">http://micechat.com/forums/dis...e-3.html</a>
Originally Posted By 2001DLFan <<trekkeruss: I guess I am cynical too, because I just don't believe that after riding IaSW very many people suddenly have this epiphany about how we should all live in harmony. As I've said before, the vast majority of guests merely think it is cute. It's in Fantasyland, after all... everything is pretty much merely cute and magical, not real and with substance.>> That’s the big issue here. Those who don’t have any feelings one way or another about the attraction are writing off anyone who does. Just as with EVERY type of art, music, literature, poetry, politics, religion or any other type of opinion based experiences, some may be EXTREMELY moved while others have little or no feelings one way or another. But, just as with those issues, belittling those who have strong feelings does not strengthen the cynical point of view, just as it doesn’t weaken the view of the believer. So, my question is, why are those who are ambivalent or indifferent about IASW making such an effort to try and belittle the feelings that some people have for the original intent of the attraction? Those who are accepting of the attraction as it now stands can do so without causing distress to those who aren’t.
