Originally Posted By oc_dean He delivered Tomorrowland: "Imagination and Beyond" in 1998. He has a tall order to make up for that .. Not just to fans and rest of the public at large .. not just to Walt above looking down .. but to Tony's legacy. Don't screw it up, please! DL is where the "magic kingdom" parks began. The other 4 "magic kingdom" Tomorrowlands are a mess in one way or another ... But whatever DL's treatment is .. it's design, it's execution, could be an inspiration that could set the tone for the next few decades .. that could filter down into the other 4 "Tomorrowland" rhelms. Yes, it's wishful thinking. All I have to go on is Walt's own words - "Not to rest on our laurels." That's not exactly how he put it. It is essentially, but you get the point.
Originally Posted By Mr X ***Actually I forgot about the TDL idea. I only heard about it vaguely in the TDR section here but yeah that sounded reeeaaally cool and something TDL could use. It sounds like it never got far sadly.*** Actually, you could argue that they've already done it. All they need now is a few coats of paint and a name change. Think about it. In Tokyo Disneyland NOW there are just TWO attractions with a "Tomorrow" theme (and you could just as easily claim one of them is "now", if not both). Here's a rundown... Starjets - "Tomorrow" (though rockets can certainly apply to "Today" just as well). Space Mountain - "Tomorrow" (again, you could argue "Today", but it's pretty elaborate and "beyond" what we do with spaceships nowadays). Autopia - VERY "Today". Microadventure - "Today", movie themed. Tomorrowland Stage - "Yesterday", Disney character based show. Buzz - "Today", movie themed. Star Tours - "A long time ago", movie themed. Monsters Inc. - "Today", movie themed. Did I miss anything?
Originally Posted By Hans Reinhardt For better or for worse Disney parks are not run anywhere near the way they were in Walt's day. This is probably true for any given major corporation that exists now that was around in 1955. Though the spirit to create new experiences may still be there, but the pressure to produce products (attractions) that have broad appeal (brands) seems to be the overriding goal for Disney's larger theme park plans today. Given this, I think it is a real stretch to think that Tony Baxter can deliver the kind of Tomorrowland that the fans are wishing for while satisfying management’s thirst for huge returns on investment. Perhaps the one positive long-term change that could come out of the current economic fallout is resurgence in American ingenuity instead of running businesses solely for the purpose of inflated returns for corporate executives and shareholders.
Originally Posted By lesmisfan As much as I would hate a name change, it might be better to get a better theme for this area. As others have noted, futurism isn't as huge as it once was, and technology is changing almost daily in more sophicated ways that keeping a Tomorrowland up to date would be way to hard or nearly impossible. I think something along the lines of discovaryland, scifiland, or even sci fi city would be a better name for this land.
Originally Posted By spacejockey I like the SciFi City concept. I dislike the toonification of all the parks but, the problem with Tomorrowland name is that technology changes to fast and Disney won't pay for new attractions to keep up with pace. I may be in the minority but, I really don't like the Jules Vern stuff. And with Paradise Peir going Victorian I think the resort will have enough Victorian. the SciFi City concept is a broader theme that will hold it age well.
Originally Posted By trekkeruss I like the SciFi City concept too, but it's only window dressing if it doesn't follow the theme. I would expect, or at least want, some _original_ science fiction/fantasy stories told in the attractions, and not just an excuse to house Buzz, Sully, the Incredibles, etc. I don't expect that would happen though.
Originally Posted By Bellella Tomorrowland is one of the original lands in the park from 1955. They've changed its appearance several times, but the whole theme has remained fundamentally the same. If they put in some new attractions without taking out Autopia or Space Mountain, that would be fine. But it should always be about the future, and it should always be named Tomorrowland.
Originally Posted By trekkeruss <<the whole theme has remained fundamentally the same.>> If that were true, we wouldn't be having this discussion.
Originally Posted By Bellella Tomorrowland has always had futuristic exhibits (Innoventions) and space-age rides (Space Mountain, Star Tours). Though the only original ride from the fifties that's still there is Autopia, the original theme of future progress is still there. Look at Innoventions.
Originally Posted By trekkeruss What is in Innoventions is technologies of today, or the very near future. It is pretty much a waste of time, which is why there is usually not very many people visiting.
Originally Posted By pecos bill I just dont get why it is suddenly so hard to envision the future. Geez, think about a trip from one galaxy to another with a shortcut through a black hole. Or how about some time travel theming? Perhaps a visit to a culture billions of light years away. Remember the Mars And Beyond stuff they did in the fifties? Some of the animated characters in those series were mind blowing! Why couldnt they have an attraction based on critters from around the universe? There is no excuse for a lack of ideas or creativity, it is simply a matter of corporate stagnation, and bowing to the bottom line. The only relative name I can think of would be Pixarland!
Originally Posted By Yookeroo "The TL Walt envisioned in the 50's and 60's has been gone since the 80's when Star Tours replaced Thru Inner Space. That was the beginning of the end of futurism in TL and simply the start of sci fi fantasy." The end of futurism was started by Walt himself. Autopia and the subs never really fit into any "futurism" theme. Neither did the Matterhorn for that matter. "I have long believed that futurism is dead. It is certainly not relevant as a topic in the way that it was in the 50’s, 60’s and early 70’s. Space travel is now a regular occurrence and technology is literally in the palm of our hands." You're probably right. Which makes me kind of sad. Tomorrowland was always going to be a tough concept to keep relevant. The death of futurism makes it even harder. Pity. "If they put in some new attractions without taking out Autopia or Space Mountain, that would be fine. But it should always be about the future, and it should always be named Tomorrowland." How is Autopia about the future?
Originally Posted By davewasbaloo The subs were seen as futurism, they were the eighth largest fleet at the time they went into service, they took us under the North Pole (not yet happened when built) and we still know very little of the undersea world. If instead of Nemo we were viewing undersea colonies and kelp farms, it would be very futuristic.
Originally Posted By SoThisIsLove Dang, too bad Walt didn't do Star Trek. I'd like to have Scotty beam me up or something. Get materialized right there at the beginning of all the lines, like a fast pass.
Originally Posted By trekkeruss <<the subs never really fit into any "futurism" theme.>> They fit in the sense that in the future, atomic power would be a main source of power for America if not the world. The subs were modeled and named after atomic submarines of the United States Navy.
Originally Posted By trekkeruss <<they took us under the North Pole (not yet happened when built)>> Actually, the U.S.S. Nautilus made that journey the year before the Submarine Voyage opened at DL.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 And my uncle was on it (really). But in 1959 atomic subs were still very futuristic to most people.
Originally Posted By davewasbaloo so cool, I thought it happened post opening. But that is a really cool link Dabob2. Did he ever ride the attraction at DL, and if so, what were his thoughts? Again, if they had taken a Horizons approach instead of a nemo one, the Subs could still be very futuristic.
