In Defense of Florida's "It's a Small World"

[Architectural Guinea Pig]

I’m a bit confused, is this sarcasm?

View attachment 881113View attachment 881114

I've never understood why such a large part of Disney fandom insists the bottom picture is more attractive. Plain nostalgia? DL snobbery? Jealousy of the newborn, handsomer sibling?

I wish they had left the MK version well alone, or updated it according to its strengths rather than its weaknesses. It didn't need to adopt DL influences, it is its own thing.

You chose the best photo of MK’s IASW and compared to the worst photo of DL’s.

vs

 

[The Empress Lilly]

One part I love about TDL’s IASW is the train running in the queue:View attachment 882404
It also has a monster capacity with a double load and two boats loading on each side!

Everything in Tokyo is just better operated and presented. It's a good picture with nice saturated colours, but just look at the beautiful state of everything. Popping colours, train and balloon overhead, superb lighting, everything fresh and looking like the place opened two weeks ago.

 

[The Empress Lilly]

I’m a bit confused, is this sarcasm?

You chose the best photo of MK’s IASW and compared to the worst photo of DL’s.
View attachment 882406

vs

View attachment 882407
View attachment 882408

No sarcasm. My sincere opinion.

I did deliberately use two older photos. The MK was the vastly improved version of DL. But time hasn't been kind on it. I struggle to name even a handful of aspects that have not been greatly reduced over time. Meanwhile, much of DL, despite also being ravaged in parts, is in a better state than ever before. IaSW is case in point.

 

[Brer Panther]

I wish Florida's "it's a small world" had a sea serpent like the Disneyland and Tokyo Disneyland versions do.

 

[jah4955]

No sarcasm. My sincere opinion.

I did deliberately use two older photos. The MK was the vastly improved version of DL. But time hasn't been kind on it. I struggle to name even a handful of aspects that have not been greatly reduced over time. Meanwhile, much of DL, despite also being ravaged in parts, is in a better state than ever before. IaSW is case in point.

I like Rolly Crump's story of why trees are (or at least were?) on the DL building. They were rushing to complete the model for Walt's review, and the model trees were on top of the model of the building, about to be placed to the sides, when Walt came in early, saw it as it was, and said, "hey I like that!"

 

[Architectural Guinea Pig]

No sarcasm. My sincere opinion.

I did deliberately use two older photos. The MK was the vastly improved version of DL. But time hasn't been kind on it. I struggle to name even a handful of aspects that have not been greatly reduced over time. Meanwhile, much of DL, despite also being ravaged in parts, is in a better state than ever before. IaSW is case in point.

That makes sense. MK’s facade really does seem very beautiful back in the day. Hope to see some of that semblance restored soon!

 

[jah4955]

That makes sense. MK’s facade really does seem very beautiful back in the day. Hope to see some of that semblance restored soon!

The Skyway helped

 

[BrianLo]

Small World is the one attraction that I struggle to identify the differences. I know there are major differences. I would need to ride them all back to back in a day as otherwise my memory blends them together.

So it just leaves me with the facades. It’s inherently far more charming having the boats outside. Pinocchio’s portion is grand, the tents far less so.

Magic Kingdom’s actual ride seems solid though. I’m going to be a controversial contrarian and say the Disney characters would make the ride better.

 

[StarWarsGirl]

Small World is the one attraction that I struggle to identify the differences. I know there are major differences. I would need to ride them all back to back in a day as otherwise my memory blends them together.

The boats are wider in the MK version. You'll notice that because it originated at the World's Fair, it has a track for the boats with no surrounding water whereas MK has pools of water with a track like every other boat ride. The scenes are different and in a different order.

I overall like Fantasyland better at DL for multiple reasons (heck, DL is my favorite US park), but Small World is not one of those reasons. DL purists will claim everything is superior at DL. Which in the case of Small World isn't fair because the WDW version has a fair amount of history that is worth acknowledging as well.

 

[lazyboy97o]

The boats are wider in the MK version. You'll notice that because it originated at the World's Fair, it has a track for the boats with no surrounding water whereas MK has pools of water with a track like every other boat ride. The scenes are different and in a different order.

There’s not really an appreciable different in the width of the boats.

Nor is the lack of flooded scenes directly a result of the attraction being at the World’s Fair. While Disney has always described the attractions as being moved from the fair to Disneyland, none were really moved exactly as they were at the fair. “It’s a small world” at Disneyland has a different track layout, scene order and additional scenes than what was presented at the fair. WED chose to keep the distinct trough look for Disneyland as they were also developed the flooded scenes of Pirates of the Caribbean around the same time.

 

[StarWarsGirl]

There’s not really an appreciable different in the width of the boats.

Nor is the lack of flooded scenes directly a result of the attraction being at the World’s Fair. While Disney has always described the attractions as being moved from the fair to Disneyland, none were really moved exactly as they were at the fair. “It’s a small world” at Disneyland has a different track layout, scene order and additional scenes than what was presented at the fair. WED chose to keep the distinct trough look for Disneyland as they were also developed the flooded scenes of Pirates of the Caribbean around the same time.

The other poster asked for differences. Both are differences, aren't they?

 

[EricsBiscuit]

Everything in Tokyo is just better operated and presented. It's a good picture with nice saturated colours, but just look at the beautiful state of everything. Popping colours, train and balloon overhead, superb lighting, everything fresh and looking like the place opened two weeks ago.

Yes Tokyo is amazing. That being said, IASW at MK looked really good a month or so ago last time I rode it. Even all the effects from the ceiling were moving and operating. They’re doing a much better job maintaining it.

 

[StarWarsGirl]

Yes Tokyo is amazing. That being said, IASW at MK looked really good a month or so ago last time I rode it. Even all the effects from the ceiling were moving and operating. They’re doing a much better job maintaining it.

When I was a kid (2000s) we didn't ride it very much because it wasn't well maintained and were very disappointed when we went to DL for the first time in 2009 and saw theirs.

Recently, though, MK's has been on par with DL's as far as upkeep. Which is nice because many times, WDW falls behind DL in terms of general upkeep and maintenance, and IASW is a classic and should be pristine.

 

[Disstevefan1]

WDW's Small World is fine. MK needs as many attractions open and operating as possible at all times.

 

[HMF]

- No characters! The MK respects the history of the ride and its message. It's singing dolls, but the ride is also trying to say something. If naïve, at least earnest. I love my Disney characters, but there's a time and place for everything. Kilimanjaro Safari doesn't need Simba and Black Panther AA's, the Haunted Mansion doesn't need Woody and Jess, and IASW doesn't need Ariel and Groot.

I don't think I need to add anything to this to say it reflects my opinion perfectly.

 

[mickEblu]

Wait, which IASW exterior is more attractive between MK and DL is actually up for debate? Wild. I mean the interior/ show? Sure, have at it. Debate away.

 

[Brer Panther]

Hot take: I honestly wouldn't be opposed to them adding Disney characters to the Magic Kingdom's Small World. However, I do have some conditions...

1) Make them subtle. Don't have them stand in front of the other dolls with a giant backdrop (so, less like the Frozen characters in Tokyo's version and more like Simba, Timon and Pumbaa being among the jungle animals).

2) Remember that not every Disney character would fit in the attraction. No Marvel guys, no Star Wars characters - they'd be out of place.

I recall Disney Dan talked about this sort of thing on Twitter, if anyone can find his posts...

 

[mickEblu]

Hot take: I honestly wouldn't be opposed to them adding Disney characters to the Magic Kingdom's Small World. However, I do have some conditions...

1) Make them subtle. Don't have them stand in front of the other dolls with a giant backdrop (so, less like the Frozen characters in Tokyo's version and more like Simba, Timon and Pumbaa being among the jungle animals).

2) Remember that not every Disney character would fit in the attraction. No Marvel guys, no Star Wars characters - they'd be out of place.

I recall Disney Dan talked about this sort of thing on Twitter, if anyone can find his posts...

My semi hot take (as I'm usually more of a traditionalist) when it comes to DL is that the Disney characters don't bother me. I think they all work and are integrated nicely except for Woody, Jesse and Bullseye.

 

[Fox&Hound]

I just wish WDW would ditch the tent facades entirely in FL and do something better. Shoot compare the exterior of Peter Pan in DL to MK’s and you will see it too.

 

[WondersOfLife]

The thing I like about this one over DL's is the water goes to all sides, like Pirates... Otherwise... It's a Small World is... It's a Small World.

I cannot speak for the overseas parks.