It's a Mickey world after all?

[innerSpaceman]

Originally Posted by Alex

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...

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.

[Alex]

Originally Posted by innerSpaceman

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.

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.