Originally Posted By oc_dean >>Because it is ENTIRELY APPROPRIATE << I call it creative laziness! Or .. some have some great imaginations - but corporate would rather push cartoon branding! >> that Disney did so. The problem with Tomorrowland's original concept is that the vision of tomorrow changes too rapidly. << Therefore .. go for fantastic visions that is beyond 20-30 years .. shoot for 100, 200,300 years into the future. >> The vision of our future now is FAR different than what it was in the 60's. << Well .. so far, all we are predicting is gloom and doom, more "Bladerunner" visions, or a retro approach. We can do better than that. And with a good enough google search .. there are some interesting futuristic visions of things out there. Just got to look for it. >> I remember at that point we thought the year 20000 would have us in flying cars and freeways running through the sky in Plexiglas tubes. Didn't quite turn out that way, did it? << Well how can it, if it's still several decades to several hundred years away? As they say - Rome was not built in a day. Give it a chance to get here. In the meantime .. we can still dream. How can we expect hovercrafts in every garage in 2011... when the military can only fly anything close it, with extremely skilled pilots? Not even sure it's possible by 2111. Could take more than a hundred years. >> Thank God the austere white concrete design of WDW's original Tomorrowland also ended up having no relationship to reality. << I'll agree there. But there are elements that are cool. Here in Australia, so many homes are going through modern interior overhauls that remind me of the 60s, and 70s visions of the future. It's incorporating some "green" elements that's a bit tricky to blend in. >> So Disney did the only thing that really made sense... they reshaped Tomorrowland as a Jules Verne inspired vision of a future that never was. << Yes. For DLP that is. WDW's is not based on Jules Verne. It's inspiration comes from sci-fi comics of the 1920s and 1930s - Buck Rogers, Metropolis, etc. As a "sci-fi " retro city, view, as visionaries depicted the future from a 1920s/30s time period. Where's Jules Verne is 1870s/1880s view. >>It has become a sci-fi fantasyland, and I don't mind that one bit. Visually it is FAR more interesting than the original. It is absolutely gorgeous at night... far prettier than any of the other MK lands.<< The entrance .. with Plaza Inn to the right - EXPANSIVE! The promenade leading to Astro Orbitor - fantastic! But the theming ends there. Shocked how little was done to CoP's exterior, Tomorrowland Terrace restaurant exterior .. and the ever-more Out-Of-Place theming of a modern day "Indy 500" raceway. At least the Peoplemover helps to keep it visually kinetic, and interesting.
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt >>I think you're over-thinking this a little.<< “And I thought you'd appreciate me stating specific points why the new effect should not be transferred, as is, from WDW.” Well sure. All I’m saying is check out the ride, have fun and enjoy it without thinking about it so much. The one thing that stood out to me from the youtube clip is how much fun people seemed to having. Isn’t that the whole point of a day at Disney? To have fun? Now, if the new changes have ruined the ride for you there’s plenty more to see and do at The Magic Kingdom. If the parks have changed so drastically from their original vision that you can no longer tolerate them find another interest. I’m not trying to condescend or stop the dialogue, I’m simply making points that I believe should be pretty obvious to most people. “Why don't some of you stand up just a little for HMButler's point of how Disney has gone astray with the Tomorrowland theme, and inappropriately placing anything from small effects (HHghosts).. to large scale rides (Monsters Inc, Stitch, etc)... that have a little too much "fantasyland" going on in them .... “ Because it’s been said and done Dean. There is very little left to defend. Disney systematically adjusted the themes of these futuristic areas ages ago to fit the company’s needs and life goes on. As someone else stated, Tomorrowland hasn’t been about the tangible future for decades. Disney parks are fluid - they’ve always shifted and changed along with public tastes and preferences and this new Mansion upgrade in Florida is the perfect example of that. I don’t always like the decisions made, especially the general dumbing down of the experiences, but I’m also aware that this 2011 and not 1965. There are probably more physical things in Disneyland today that have little or no real connection to Walt Disney than there are that he personally had a hand in creating. The Haunted Mansion, interestingly enough and the current incarnation of Tomorrowland, are two of those things. “Does anyone stand up for anything? Or are we just going to be a wishy-washy group .......... "Oh, it brings laughs, so why not?" to "I think Monsters Inc is okay in TOMORROWland."” I personally don’t like Monster’s Inc in Tomorrowland, however the expression of my dislike is not the same as saying that I refuse to accept the change, which is the vibe I often get from you. If by “stand up” you mean go to Burbank and picket Disney headquarters count me out. Short of doing that I don’t think complaining here is going to get you very far. “thank you” You’re welcome!
Originally Posted By DlandDug >>Boy .. some of us old time LPers have settled a little too early into our grumpy grandfather chairs .. haven't we?! Why don't some of you stand up just a little for HMButler's point...<< Mmmm. Now there's the way to persuade people-- patronize them. It is not being a grumpy grandfather to disagree with someone. And I, for one, can't agree with a "point" that seems largely based on emotion and is expressed in such a hysterical manner. Based on all available information, the newly refreshed scene looks like a good enhancement to me. That's my opinion, which is just as valid as any other here.
Originally Posted By aquamoptop >>""I see nothing wrong with Monsters Inc"" You see nothing wrong w/ CGI monster characters from the modern day set and placed in a land about the future and mankinds future achievement? WOW. Culture has failed you.<< HMButler79 - you dont have to personally insult people to get your point across you know. In fact it just makes you look bad and sound manic!! You dont know anything about me and my culture. Just because I like MI doesnt mean that I feel its appropriate in TL. I would rather it be in HS. However, its there and I enjoy it. As do many others. As for Timekeeper....I can quote that whole dang attraction. Queue and all...I never said I didnt like it, I would rather have it back. I worked at WDW til 2000 and unless it was xmas or july 4th, you never saw but 20 people or so in there on any given day.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip <<Boy .. some of us old time LPers have settled a little too early into our grumpy grandfather chairs .. haven't we?!>> Besides yelling at people to stay off their lawn, the MAIN thing grumpy grandfathers do is complain whenever something changes... LOL
Originally Posted By aquamoptop >><<Boy .. some of us old time LPers have settled a little too early into our grumpy grandfather chairs .. haven't we?!>> Besides yelling at people to stay off their lawn, the MAIN thing grumpy grandfathers do is complain whenever something changes... LOL<< Man...your tellin me!! My grandma is here visiting right now. I love her dearly, but she is reminding me of some of the people on this forum. We went to the movies, $6.75 she paid and then ranted, very loudly, because in ohio she paid $5.00...I asked her when was the last time she went to a movie in ohio and she said 4 years ago...doh!!!
Originally Posted By RoadTrip <<WDW's is not based on Jules Verne. It's inspiration comes from sci-fi comics of the 1920s and 1930s - Buck Rogers, Metropolis, etc. As a "sci-fi " retro city, view, as visionaries depicted the future from a 1920s/30s time period. Where's Jules Verne is 1870s/1880s view.>> I stand corrected. I remembered reading that one Tomorrowland was styled after Jules Verne and one was after Buck Rodgers. I thought that WDW might be the Jules Verne version since he played a major role in Timekeeper. I thought for a moment there that maybe Timekeeper fit well after all. Guess not. It was anachronism. Just out of curiosity, what is the style of DL's Tomorrowland? It's similar to WDW's, but a little different feel.
Originally Posted By phruby I don't think DL's Tomorrowland has a theme anymore beyond blue/white/gold 1960's buildings with fruit and veggies planted everywhere.
Originally Posted By FerretAfros The Disneyland Paris version of Tomorrowland (called Discoveryland) is themed to the Jules Verne idea of the future. That was the original location of the Timekeeper attraction (with a different name), before it was copied into WDW's TL during its 1994 redo. The DLP version was a large part of the inspiration for DL's TL:98. The color scheme and Astro Orbitor were copied over, though the minimal changes to the shapes of the buildings lead to mixed effects. Also factor in the leftover ideas from the "Montana agrifuture" concept, and the TL:67 googie infrastructure, and it just came out as a mixed bag. DL's was sort of inspired by Verne, though several generations of concepts later and with a limited budget.
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt LOL @ aquamoptop. I'm wondering where you live. Mmovies only cost $6.75? It's around 11 bucks to see a movie here in the Bay Area.
Originally Posted By danyoung >Come on, guys! The Haunted Mansion must be left alone to continue to thrill everyone as it is. So must the Jungle Cruise, the Tiki Room, the Matterhorn, and the Fantasyland dark rides.< Why, Bellella? This goes against everything Walt ever preached about Disneyland. Things will always change, attractions will be updated, even themes of entire lands will experience change. Why is it so important to you that some attractions are left in their 1960's state?
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan Dean, you know I am 100% in agreement with you in regards to Tomorrowland. It's become a mish-mash and the theme isn't about tomorrow really, it's more about "space fantasy". But I disagree about the new hitchhiking ghost effects. By the time you reach the end of the ride, you've just ridden through a huge pull-out-all-the-stops production number. Other than a few pop-up ghouls here and there, the scares have turned into a big, fun party. All by design. So to end on both a fun note, with a cool new "how did they do that??" effect seems right to me.
Originally Posted By Tony C <<Why don't some of you stand up just a little for HMButler's point of how Disney has gone astray with the Tomorrowland theme>> Again it's his/her tone in these topics.
Originally Posted By Manfried I think most folks would welcome the effect in California. It really is quite clever.
Originally Posted By doombuggy I lv the new HHG I hope they do come here after the holiday over lay. These are so much better then a head... on a stick.
Originally Posted By Dis-Philip TP2000, you, sir, are COMPLETELY wrong in your first post! HMButler79, you're just as bad and wrong as he is! Enough with the WDW-hate already! It's annoying and why I never really come here anymore!
