Originally Posted By Hans Reinhardt "Oh not at all. It's quite alive, you just don't hear about it. There are lots of things in this world that are being worked on." Yes, but as a movement it's pretty much dead. Walt Disney was truly a man of his time and the entire Tomorrowland concept was based on the post World War II mentality that technological advances were going to make our lives better in the future. In 2007, with technology all around us, the concept seems rather dated. Still, the optimistic view does fit into Disneyland's positive spin on everything. It's unfortunate that Disney seems to have given up on trying to tackle this subject at its Magic Kingdom parks.
Originally Posted By Moderation Three quarters of the problem could be solved quite simply, by moving the rocket pods back to the elevated station, putting something back on the people mover tracks and throwing a new movie into the HISTA space. Getting rid of the huge blast crater all by itself would open up the entry and provide a view into TL. I would rather see something more ambitious going into the HISTA space, but a quick fix new movie is doable, fairly cheap and could be done fast. In the long run, innoventions could be downsized a bit and moved into the two story starcade area (honestly, who needs to go to DL any more to play video games?) and the circlevision building could be clearedout for a new e-ticket and something more ambitious could go into the HISTA space, but still, a quick fix for 2010 could do alot.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>In 2007, with technology all around us, the concept seems rather dated.<< It's dated because not a lot was added after 1967 that even attempted to glimpse into the future, save perhaps Space Mountain. But if it is a dated, impossible concept, then I say junk it. Come up with a namme for the land that makes some sense, and stop trying to shoehorn in Fantasyland-in-Space stuff. There's nothing that says "Tomorrowland" must stay Tomorrowland forever, especially if nothing new is added to support that theme. It's the same with DCA. They come up with these themes and then get bored with them, make little attempt to flesh them out. Crimony, just rename these places to fit whatever you DO want to invest the effort in.
Originally Posted By fkurucz <<Still, as long as there is a Tomorrowland at Disneyland, the company ought to at least try to create something remotely in line with the land's objectives.>> I agree. But it will really take something to bring back the wide eyed crowds of the past. Can one imagine if ASIMO had been on display in the 50's and 60's? As an engineer I can appreciate all the work it has taken to get ASIMO to where it is today, and the fact that it is a real marvel. Perhaps the advent of special effects laden movies has jaded today's younger generation. Why should they be entralled with ASIMO, after all, ASIMO can't do half the things that C3PO or R2D2 can.
Originally Posted By fkurucz <<Holographic cell phones are boring. The future is not. We should be interested in the future, because that's where we are going to spend the rest of our lives.>> I think that most people now realize that the future isn't going to be all that different from today, except that we will have cooler gadgets. Here is some food for thought. Let us begin in 1960 and look back 50 years. Air travel did not exist. There was no TV. No automobiles. A 1910 house was very different from a 1960's house: carpeting, modern appliances, central heating, etc. Now fast forward to the present. Things haven't changed all that much since 1960. We pretty much have the same stuff as back then, perhaps more advanced and reliable. Outside of microelectronics which has given us mobile phones, computers, the internet and cars that don't need tune ups, on the surface life is pretty much the same. <nanotechnology, genetic engineering.> I don't think that this captivates the public because we see it in SciFi all the time. Heck, we see stuff all the time that is way beyond our abilities today: teleportation, faster than light travel, holographic people, energy weapons, time travel, etc.
Originally Posted By fkurucz What is also interesting is that some ideas that might appear to be original are actually quite old. For instance, many thought that The Matrix was an original concept. You live in a world that is merely an illusion, but with the "knowlegde" you can break out of the illusion. Its called gnosticism.
Originally Posted By Moon Waffle Personally I liked the approach of the "future as seen from the past". By doing this at least they can stick with a theme and not have to deal with rides that are dated in 5 years (which then take at least 10 years to replace). But they seem to have abandoned this concept. I stand by my position that putting something - ANYTHING - back on the elevated tracks would solve more than 50% of the problem. Again I ask, how can it possibly be taking so long? The next incarnation of TL is in no way going to make it by 2010.
Originally Posted By jonvn "Yes, but as a movement it's pretty much dead." I disagree. It's also an style of furniture. "technological advances were going to make our lives better in the future." That is still true. "ASIMO had been on display in the 50's and 60's? " Then people would have gotten bored with it too. You have to remember, it's not about gadgets. The original House of the Future, it was all about gadgets. People tired of it rapidly, even in 1966. "the future isn't going to be all that different from today" Short sighted, really. Things right now are rather different than they were 20 years ago. "Things haven't changed all that much since 1960" While I see somewhat what you are saying, and partially agree, things have changed quite a bit. "I don't think that this captivates the public because we see it in SciFi all the time." That's science fiction. That's not what the area was about. It was about actual science, and cool technical things used to make entertainment. This is not showing people a tv you can get in a week at best buy. When they did this, it was not popular in the 60s, either. You wouldn't think that a snowflake would captivate the public, either, but it did. "teleportation, faster than light travel, holographic people, energy weapons, time travel, etc."
Originally Posted By mstaft Yeah, Tomorrowland was great- will it be again? I started digging through more of my stuff and found something fun I'd forgotten about: the 1998 Tomorrowland poster. Check it out- it was full of the promise of the future but 10 years later????? <a href="http://insightsandsounds.blogspot.com" target="_blank">http://insightsandsounds.blogs pot.com</a>
Originally Posted By gadzuux So much of TLs usable space feels like a corridor. The linear design encourages people to keep moving. Regular visitors can easily skip most of the area's attractions, so they just walk on by headed for space mountain. Adding to this problem is the 'ball' smack in the middle of the area, as well as a much larger area so well marked off that it encourages everyone to swerve around it. And the south 'rim' is a near-continuous series of walkways and doorways into and out of various other locations. TL doesn't really encourage lingering. It's one saving grace is TLT - and not surprisingly, the most brightly lit at night. So people go where the lights and music and the tables and chairs are. The rest of the 'land' is just for walking through on the way to someplace else.
Originally Posted By aracuanbird Screw the future technology stuff. Disney should devote its Tomorrowland to OPTIMISM. IMO, this was one of Walt's greatest attributes (at least the public Walt...cannot speak beyond that). AB When in Cyberspace visit <a href="http://www.plausible-impossible.com" target="_blank">http://www.plausible-impossibl e.com</a>
Originally Posted By Moon Waffle ^Optimism!?!? How dare you suggest such a thing!?!? These boards are about complaining!!! Complaining about every character, every change, every misplaced flower in Disneyland!!! Take your optimism elsewhere, heathen!!!
Originally Posted By PetesDraggin My biggest gripe with TL is that it seems so dark at night. There are areas that you almost have to squint to see clearly. I never realized that the future was supposed to be so dimly lit.
Originally Posted By trekkeruss How do you build tomorrow's optimism in steel and concrete? I'm dense... give me an example of what you're thinking.
Originally Posted By fkurucz << I never realized that the future was supposed to be so dimly lit.>> Energy conservation baby! And before anyone rags on me, I buy 600 kWh of wind generated electricity every month.
Originally Posted By aracuanbird Trekkeruss, there was such a hopefulness in the attractions in TL 67, a real eagerness to usher in the great big beautiful tomorrow. From rocket flight to the discoveries of science to the GE dishwasher of the future. I'd suggest that the happy anticipation of TL67's attractions was mimicked in the structures of the land. There was movement. There was an ascension in many of the structures, from the Rocket to the Moon spire to the Rocket Jets. Guests could actually stand at a higher elevation than they could anywhere else in the park (with the exception of the treehouses). The colors selected were Mary Blair "celebration" colors (White and Blue, warm accents including gold) and tehy were vibrant, not aged down or muted. That's this bird's take, anyway. AB When in Cyberspace visit <a href="http://www.plausible-impossibl" target="_blank">http://www.plausible-impossibl</a> e.com
Originally Posted By trekkeruss <<there was such a hopefulness in the attractions in TL 67, a real eagerness to usher in the great big beautiful tomorrow. From rocket flight to the discoveries of science to the GE dishwasher of the future.>> But that was futurism and technology. <<There was movement. There was an ascension in many of the structures, from the Rocket to the Moon spire to the Rocket Jets. Guests could actually stand at a higher elevation than they could anywhere else in the park (with the exception of the treehouses). The colors selected were Mary Blair "celebration" colors (White and Blue, warm accents including gold) and tehy were vibrant, not aged down or muted.>> I agree with all of that, but some new facades and a coat of paint isn't going to fix the problem. IMO Tomorrowland has to be about optimism AND futurism, otherwise, why bother calling it Tomorrowland at all?
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <<nanotechnology, genetic engineering.>> <I don't think that this captivates the public because we see it in SciFi all the time. Heck, we see stuff all the time that is way beyond our abilities today: teleportation, faster than light travel, holographic people, energy weapons, time travel, etc.> All of which could form the basis for a good TL ride. And the fact that they're in today's sci-fi says to me that people ARE interested in them. Think of 50's/60's sci-fi and its emphasis on space travel. It didn't hurt DL's Rocket to the Moon that films like 2001 (or Disney's own now-forgotten "Moon Pilot") or shows like Star Trek were in release then. The public was interested in space travel, so of course they were. And if people are interested in genetics or any of the things that you mentioned (which is underscored, if anything, by their inclusion in current sci-fi), then by extension they could be interested in a TL that dealt with them. If well done, of course.
