Eh, the rain effect hasn't been working for decades.

Again, I wasn't responding to the complaints about the changes. My first post in this thread was saying that there didn't seem to be any good reason for making changes.

It was to the YAGE, which I admit may be unfair to CoasterMatt since he very well may let his AP lapse over this issue.

Complain all you want about the changes, I don't care. Though you can't deny that unless it has been a change to restore something to the way it was in the past (subs, IASW paint job) there hasn't been a significant change to the park in 15 years that wasn't met with teeth gnashing and hair pulling by some segment of the AP population (though of course not every person is in every group of tooth gnashers). I have no idea if there were teeth gnashers from an the earlier years but I do know that they didn't have easy access to places where they could gather and lick each others wounds.

I would be happy with the changes if they kept within the perameters of the ride. Keep the look and style and they could put a whole striper section for all I care. (hmmmm) What I don't like is when they take the liberty of puting in something that does not fit into the ride. I'll use "the Bride" as a blaring example.

IMHO - if they keep the Mary Blair theme and relocated the evicted animals, I would be very pleased.

I too am sick of the “museumification” response to complaints about the awful changes that have been made to Disneyland. It’ a trite and meaningless sound bite, used to try and silence those you disagree with without having to actually discuss the topic in a meaningful way.

I love the (IMO) positive changes they’ve made at Disneyland. But change is not always for the good, and I sure as hell will speak out when I see something that is stupid and ill advised.

I don’t want to see Disneyland kept as a museum. I also don’t want to see it turned into a cheap carnival.

And that's likely because there haven't been significatn changes to the Park in the past 15 years that have been positive.

Some exceptions: Buzz Lightyear. Generally greeted with postive response. Some bemoaned the loss of CircleVision. Buzz Lightyear did not replace Circlevision. I don't think I ever heard one complaint about the passing of Rocket Rods.

More to the point - - Pirate's Lair on Tom Sawyer Island. This is case in favor of the wait-and-see response. There were many complaints from so-called "purists" about this change, but I believe the end result was met with general approval.

Each change is on a case-by-case basis. But the fact there there have been no large-scale improvements or new E-Tickets in the Park for the past 15 years is probably the true cause of the lack of positive reaction on the part of Disneyland fans.

Well, it's a world of laughter a world of queers.... :P *groan* hahah if anyone with camera and photoshop knowledge wants to have some fun for some new avatars, I'm game :D

Here's what I wrote on MiceChat:

I hardly consider myself a "Disney Purist" or even a big fan of iasw but I think that the addition of Disney cartoon characters in that ride sucks eggs.

It is one thing to "plus" the attraction in the spirit of the attraction -- see, for instance, the plussing done to the Jungle Cruise (perfect) and the Haunted Mansion (yes, I know it is debatable with Constance, but for me it doesn't take me out of the attraction... it's still the same mood as the ride).

Plussing that has really screwed up the mood, feel and/or spirit of the attraction? Pirates is a perfect example. It puts you into a specific time, place and storyline which is less fun, less imaginative, less evocative of the mood, less stimulating to the imagination.

Disney characters in iasw were sort of fun when, for instance, there was a little Stitch plastic item as a present on the surfer's board during the holiday version... stuff like that (i.e. the dolls were getting disney presents for xmas). But actually adding them to the ride? Aren't there other specific places for all of those characters? How does screwing with an attraction for the sole sake of changing it "plus" the attraction? How does it have to do with children all over the world holding hands and getting along? If these changes are made, then iasw will be about children playing with Disney toons all over the world -- did they re-hire Paul Pressler when we weren't looking?

Stupid, stupid idea Disney. If they add Disney toons it will cheapen the ride. There are other ways to plus it -- adding show scenes, adding special effects, covering up the tiled ceiling, adding more dolls, making it brighter and happier -- THAT is plussing the ride.

I don't even like IASW as it is. I just find it silly to put Disney characters on a ride with no "Disney cartoon" tie in. I like Nemo, I like the PotC make-over. I like HMH and regular mansion.

Disneyland will never be complete as long as their is imagination left in the world. What they need is better imagination. IASW could be amazingly re-done with updated effects and dolls. It's cute and classic as it is. It would be amazing if they made the billygoat and mountain climbers move up and down the mountain, a rolling wave for the surfing dude, stuff like that. Whatever happened to flooding the flume and having the sets look like they are coming out of the water?

Or look on the bright side. They are removing the gay-tor, but so far their leaving the kid choking his chicken.

I try not to resist change, but there are some things that are classic and really do not need to be updated. After all, at Al Lutz pointed out, IASW ferries 2000 guests per hour. Since it was installed, it's still significant that the ride still maintains this kind of ridership.

Given the original premise of IASW to be just that and dedicated to children all over the world, I do not see there to be a need to turn this into a Fantasyland/Toontown attraction with the addition of Mickey, Minnie and others. Upgrading and repainting and taking care of the wider berths of the visitors (such as myself) that's a good thing.

I can't comment on the Pixarization of the subs since I do not remember them from my youth. I know I rode it, but I'll be damned if I remember it. So, I rode it, enjoyed the Nemo subs and don't feel pressed to ride it every visit to the park.

Change is good, but I do not always think adding Pixar/Pirates theming to all the attractions to moderize them or upgrade them for the youth of today and the future. I'm still on the fence about Pirates as I think the franchise is dead (it died for me after Pirates I) and as previously mentioned (Morrigoon?) I miss the original soundtrack. The attraction came first and I'd prefer to see it remain true to the original. That said, the changes are not offensive and I can live with them.

I may be in the minority, I realize it is OLD, but I'd love to see the Swiss Family return to the treehouse. Of course nobody has seen the film or read the book, so it's probably moot. I've already expressed my sentimental desire to see a return of the Peoplemovers, that would be nice for movement in Tomorrowland.

A new, original, e-ticket somewhere in the park would be great!

I can't wait until they add Mickey to the Peter Pan ride. That thing's getting old.

I agree with this. I think as we've moved farther and farther from an age when significant major change at the park was a near constant thing with major attractions coming and going that it makes what change does happen all the more of an issue.

I agree that the "Disneyland is not a museum" charge is not all that useful but I also think the response to it is very typically "I don't think Disneyland is a museum but this particular thing is sacred to the core mission." Of course, since just about everything has a group of people who think it is vital representation of the magic that is Disneyland, that if they all were respected then Disneyland does become a museum even if nobody actually thinks it should be.

If I were running things I'd just have a hard 20-year rule or something. No matter how popular something is, it comes out by its 20th year and something new is tried. That something new may be worse (as would be a given for pretty much anything that would follow Pirates) but at least it would be new and keeping an eye towards striving for better. For all intents and purposes, Disneyland is almost exactly the same park it was when I first visited there with Lani in 1998. I don't think that is a good thing.

The interior of small world has been untouched for 44 years. That's a long time and based on several of the responses in this thread (and elsewhere that I've seen) has, in itself, become a reason not to make these changes. Now, that may not mean thinking that Disneyland is a museum, but apparently for some IASW is one.