Mermaid it comes down to a question of scale. The entire area is viewed as an attraction, each ride and show is just a part of story. The childrens rides combined create the Under the Sea section. Just as there are different gags within that scene from the movie (the carp play da harp, the lute play the flute
), each of the rides provide just a single note in creating the picture. Each individual attraction does not have to tell the complete story; they are just one of the scenes.
Now the same thing could have happened in Fliks, but with out a reference to a broader story, each attraction much work harder to communicate a story. Thats the same situation as with Fantasyland the theme is merely the background. Think about movie genres Frontierland is for westerns, Tomorrowland for science fiction, Fantasyland for Disney fairy tales. The background doesnt tell the story; it simply provides a setting so that flying elephants, talking stuffed bears, evil witches with apples, and so forth are believable. So Dumbo, against this background, was left to tell its complete story.
Back to Fliks the place is stuck in the middle. It has a background (a bugs carnival) but no overall story like the Mermaids Kingdom. The individual rides are too small to tell their own stories like all the individual attractions in Fantasyland. So what we end up with are four well decorated carnival rides but what were missing is the Disney magic of using story to combine and enhance the experience.
And thats in general whats wrong with California Adventure.
Disneyland was created by filmmakers who knew how to structure and organize and present scenes so that the whole becomes greater than its parts. They turned an amusement park from just a collection of rides and souvenir stands into something more.
California Adventure, however, really does come off as nothing more than a collection of rides and merchandise opportunities. Most people wont be able to explain whats missing; they simple pass it off as feeling different than Disneyland. Its not the number of rides that people feel is wrong, its the impact of thats off.
Thats why additions like Fliks and the Kmart Tower of Terror arent going to improve DCAs financial performance no matter how much patience we give Mr. Hill. The park isnt missing a critical mass of rides - the park is missing the spark of showmanship people have come to expect from Disney (and what separates Disney from Six Flags). Its quality not quantity.
As for Aladdin, yes it follows the Dumbo model exactly. As an individual attraction I dont have a problem with it. My only concern is a nagging question of this is the best they could come up with? You would think that after fifty years and umpteen billion dollars later they might have done something more than copy a ride that was Walts back-up plan half a century ago. Its not the ride that I question, its the people behind it that worry me.