Originally Posted By ecdc >>When you're talking about the unknown future, what is the difference between 30 years and 300?<< What Dabob2 said. But even the 300 years thing has its problems. What happens when some super futuristic, 300 years into the future thing turns out to be a reality in a decade? What happens when something that *seemed* like it would be really futuristic turns out to look old and shabby in twenty years? I read a study once that basically said humans are really, really horrible at predicting the future and what life will be like. I humbly submit that the entire Tomorrowland concept is inherently unsustainable. Remember, it did not develop in a vacuum. The idea of the super exciting, space-age future is firmly rooted in 1950s post-war American culture. Disneyland can be defined by one word: nostalgia. The entire park drips with it. Nostalgia for the past, mostly. Nostalgia for small town main street, for the cartoons people watched as children, for the adventurous spirit of youth, and for the old west. Even if it's not nostalgia we ourselves experienced, it's a collective cultural nostalgia for myths of adventure, like pirates and exploring a jungle river. You don't personally have to have rode a horse through a dusty old west town to feel nostalgic when you walk through Frontierland. But Tomorrowland struggles to fit this theme of nostalgia. It's not completely unsuccessful at it, but nostalgia is why the most successful attractions in TL are either based on existing properties or have just been around long enough for people to get excited about it (Space Mountain). People talk about turning TL into a 1950s style TL for the same reason (bring back the People Mover!). That's why the SW talk gains so much traction with people--they inherently understand that people might be nostalgic for SW. It sort of fits the DL bill. I personally hate the SW concept, but I also understand how next-to-impossible it is to come up with a long-term, viable solution for TL.
Originally Posted By berol For the record, nobody argued for dystopian. RoadTrip brought it up to make a point against it.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <What happens when some super futuristic, 300 years into the future thing turns out to be a reality in a decade?> You overlay it with Christmastime, which in the future will last from February through December. Seriously, though, I think there are enough things that seem pretty unlikely to happen; time travel, shrinking to the size of an atom (!), traveling to fully formed alien planets/civilizations, etc. that the 300 year-ahead concept could work. If we actually do manage to travel to an alien planet within TL's lifetime... or more to the point, if they're more advanced than us and travel HERE... we may have bigger problems to handle than TL becoming obsolete.
Originally Posted By ecdc >>Seriously, though, I think there are enough things that seem pretty unlikely to happen; time travel, shrinking to the size of an atom (!), traveling to fully formed alien planets/civilizations, etc. that the 300 year-ahead concept could work.<< Those are great concepts, I'm with you there. Is TL plagued by expectations that the future has to look a certain way? For example, let's say Disney develops a really incredible time travel ride. What do the cast members look like? What's the queue look like? The overall theming is what seems to get in the way. We have a collective sense of how the future is supposed to look, or at least, not look, so a cast member in jeans, sneakers, and a t-shirt probably won't look very futuristic. But the silver unisex one piece sure isn't going to cut it anymore, either. I guess that's what I mean by the dated look. The attractions themselves can work really well--look at Space Mountain. It's a simple roller coaster but it works great in TL. But it's all the other little things. Space Mountain doesn't look like a futuristic building with a futuristic queue...it looks like what people in the early '80s thought the future would look like. So I worry it's trickier than just developing a great ride.
Originally Posted By ecdc I guess a succinct way of expressing my point is to say that Tomorrowland can never look like the future. It will always look like what people think the future will look like at a certain point in time, and that vision is destined to become dated, even within a few years. No other attraction at DL has that problem. You don't have to be a fashion historian to know that the bellhops on ToT look "about right." Or the people in the Indy safety video. TL can't get away with that.
Originally Posted By FerretAfros >>It will always look like what people think the future will look like at a certain point in time, and that vision is destined to become dated, even within a few years.<< To an extent, I think that each area of the parks reflects this. Main Street doesn't look like an actual Victorian town street, but rather what one looked like when seen through the lens of the 1950's; WDW's has style from the late 60's/early 70's in its. The shops inside have been revised through the years, and reflect the eras that they were done in. I think the old Market House is an excellent example of what 90's-style design looked like. Although it was supposed to look like the turn of the century, there was something about its design aesthetics that looked really dated by the end of its life <a target="blank" rel="nofollow" href="http://dapsmagic.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/MarketHouse.jpg">http://dapsmagic.com/wp-conten...ouse.jpg</a> Or consider the Plaza Inn. The dining rooms were designed by Harriet Burns in the late 50's, and they look like it. The service area was redone in the late 80's/early 90's, and captures some of that design aesthetic, still while maintaining the Victorian theme and original color scheme <a target="blank" rel="nofollow" href="http://davelandweb.com/centralplaza/images/plazainn/2000/DSC_1708.jpg">http://davelandweb.com/central...1708.jpg</a> <a target="blank" rel="nofollow" href="http://davelandweb.com/centralplaza/images/plazainn/2000/DSC_3458.jpg">http://davelandweb.com/central...3458.jpg</a> Everything in the park reflects the era that it was designed in, and what people thought the theme meant at that time. There are certain new elements in the parks that look out of place to me, since they reflect the contemporary aesthetic so much (like the railings surrounding the planters on Buena Vista Street, with the painted spindles and antique-finish bronze top rail). Just like watching old movies, it's neat to see what people in a different era thought was important and how to best represent it. The entire park reflects when it was designed. It may be more obvious to the general public when it's futuristic architecture, but once you start looking it's easy to find places that were clearly designed in a bygone era
Originally Posted By FerretAfros ***minor correction: the Plaza Inn interiors were done by Dorothea Redmond, not Harriet Burns
Originally Posted By RoadTrip I agree with the above. All areas in Disneyland are based on idealized and nostalgic ideas about what the originals looked like. While Main Street may be based on turn of the century small town architecture, I can guarantee you that no Main Street in America was as picturesque and beautifully maintained as the one in Disneyland. Likewise, there is a collective vision of what "the future" looks like, both in architecture and fashion. It would not be that hard to come up with something that worked for Tomorrowland. Makes little difference if it actually looks that way 300 years from now. We are looking for a vision, not a factual prediction.
Originally Posted By ecdc >>We are looking for a vision, not a factual prediction.<< Sure, I agree. But that's just it. Even though Main St. USA doesn't look like a turn-of-the-century Main St, people accept the vision because it fits our collective understanding. Those expectations don't really change, either. Visitors to DL in 1955 and visitors in 2014 see Main St the same way: as an idealized representation of the past. But TL doesn't have that luxury. It is destined to always seem stuck in a very specific time's perspective. And that's the key: TL doesn't have to predict the future, it has to predict what people *think* the future will look like. It's destined to fail.
Originally Posted By FerretAfros >>We are looking for a vision, not a factual prediction.<< Yes, this. This is what "Disney" is to me, and what built the strong brand that we have today. Sure it's great that there are so many beloved characters and franchises to exploit, but it takes vision to get those off the ground; that's something we haven't seen since Iger took control of the company nearly a decade ago. We need to let the creative people be creative and make something fresh, new, and inspiring. As much as Iger likes to rest on his laurels, it's starting to catch up; without new vision for any element of the company, it begins to stagnate and decay. Considering how much he's spent on stock buy-backs while he's been in control, it's silly to think that there's no money to devote to capital expenditures in Parks & Resorts
Originally Posted By EighthDwarf "Setting it 300 years in the future takes care of that problem, AND allows for a far more fanciful take on the future. No worries about it getting dated, or that you'll have to replace the attraction in 20 years or less as the 30-year window closes a little more every day, or worrying that you'll get the future "wrong."" Sorry I wasn't clear. What I was trying to point out is that any vision of the future, whether it is 30 years or 300 years ahead, will become outdated in short order. Why? Because we can't see the future, we don't know how things are going to change. Every vision of the future from the past represents the point in time that the vision was created, not the future itself -- no matter what the visionaries said when they created it. 30 years or 300 years.....absent a crystal ball I see no difference at all. It will merely be the vision of the future from the year 201X.
Originally Posted By oc_dean Doesn't mean you stop trying. One needs to give more credit to what the human imagination can conjure up.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip Many of the ideas presented in the original Tomorrowland have been accomplished... Tomorrowland did end up looking like something from the future. We have landed on the moon and have plans for a manned flight to Mars. Many of the features of the House of the Future have been adopted with fully automated homes controlled by an app on your smart phone. Although the original People Mover at Disneyland did not use an advanced transportation system, the Linear Induction used at the Magic Kingdom is now widely used in transit system throughout the world. Freeways have become far more common than I think even Walt envisioned with his Autopia. They are now even experimenting with self-driving cars. Although there was the recent failure with SpaceShip Two, Passenger rocket travel to the edge of Space will be a reality in the near future. What more could you want from "Rocket Jets"? People are not sub-miniaturized like in Adventures through Inner Space, but much the same is accomplished with CT and MRI scans, as well as the use of microscopic and laparoscopic surgery. I think the visionaries behind Tomorrowland have not been given the credit they deserve. There is no reason that similar vision couldn't be shown today.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 "But the silver unisex one piece sure isn't going to cut it anymore, either. " Maybe if you added a Jetsons collar. It's all about the Jetsons collar. "30 years or 300 years.....absent a crystal ball I see no difference at all. It will merely be the vision of the future from the year 201X" On that level, maybe. But there's a big difference in the dateability of attractions based on things you think are going to happen in the short term and completely fanciful things like time travel. "
Originally Posted By ecdc >>Doesn't mean you stop trying.<< I just think Tomorrowland as almost like trying to predict fashion. No matter how cool I thought my clothes were in the '90s, and what they'd look like in 10 years, it's just not going to hold up. Like I said, the other lands don't have that problem. Why not convert TL into a retro TL? Here's what people thought the future would look like, kind of thing. Or just re theme the area completely into something else? I just don't think it's a coincidence that TL is always the land struggling. At some point the ideas have to reckon with the inherent limitations.
Originally Posted By oc_dean Traveling to alien planets is another. We can barely make circles around Earth's orbit .. let alone travel through our own solar system on a regular basis. So getting beyond our own solar system, is a concept that's not going to be dated anytime soon!
Originally Posted By oc_dean >>I just don't think it's a coincidence that TL is always the land struggling. << The only reason for it's supposed "struggle" is the fact the co. has time and time again neglected various WDI proposals to reinvent the land. Letting the land to become the decrepit place it's become. And when they finally did commission something .. it was that joke of a K-Mart Blue Light Special .. called "TL:98 Imagination & Beyond" where they took the existing '67 infrastructure and gave it a bronze/dirty look .. and added some fruit & Vegetable plants and trees .. and whoola ... there's your new Tomorrowland .. still holding on after 16 years. I don't understand why we are making the argument for a land that becomes dated no matter what. It's as if we are saying - Either create a Tomorrowland that will never date. Ever. If Disneyland exists for the next 300 years. But should it become dated after 280 years .. then it was a waste of time and effort. Whatever happen to the idea of simply going back in for another renovation? Walt had no problem 10 years after DL opened. If he lived beyond 1966 ... he probably would have done again, ever 10 years after. People can make all the anti-Walt comments they like. But he had the fortitude to get things done. Unlike the way the co. procrastinates now. And the rumors of past TL renovation plans of the last 30 years, and passing on every one of them, is pure proof! The difference between TL and the other lands ... the others never change. Never. Always the same. Always ... and always. But we could always count on TL to become something new again. That's what makes it exciting!! What's the big problem with that idea in the first place? Oh yeah ... the Disney Co. is balking at the idea of spending money once every 15 or so years to redesign the land again. It was bad enough the co. makes the argument. Now we are doing it for them. Not me though! I'd say .. get off your lazy butts ... and make TL the exciting land .. once every 15-20 years. It's the one land WDI can have fun with once every 2 decades, and give audiences something new to look at for the next 20 years. I really don't get - "Either create a land that can't possibly become dated, ever again. Or just throw in the towel." If it takes a redesign every 20 years, then do it. To make the argument to not have to reinvest in the land ever again, beyond the next renovation - takes the fun out of a place that's all about 'Fun'.
Originally Posted By ecdc >>If it takes a redesign every 20 years, then do it.<< But that's just it. No one walks into Fantasyland and says, "Oh man, can you believe these guys in 1983 thought *this* was a good idea?!? How corny!" No one walks down Main Street USA and says, "What! People in the '50s thought this was a good representation of a Main Street at the turn-of-the-century! Whoa, they need to update it!" But people think that about Tomorrowland all the time. They will keep thinking that about Tomorrowland. TL '98 doesn't look like the future anymore. Know what it looks like? It looks like what people in the mid-'90s *thought* could stylistically pass for the future. It doesn't work. And it isn't because they got the future wrong, it's because current ideas about what looks "futuristic" changes rapidly. It doesn't change every twenty years, it changes every five or ten years, at slowest. Conceptions about what the past looked like don't change much. I'm all for some updates, but the kind of updating Walt's vision of TL would require is untenable.
Originally Posted By oc_dean Welcome to oc_dean's "Tomorrowland History 101" Course ;-) ... okay class ..... settle ..... 1955 to 1961: Walt keeps TL going, by inserting at least 1 new attraction almost every year in this time period. 1962 to 1963: A lull time .. every imagineer is busy on the NY Worlds Fair .. Walt's intentions are to bring all 4 shows back to DL at some stage. 1964: Walt gets everyone busy on new TL concepts. 1967: What has to be the land's benchmark version ... entertains guests, and we today continue to look back at how good it was .. and in many ways .. still looks good by today's standards. <a target="blank" rel="nofollow" href="http://picasaweb.google.com/ocdean/BestOfTomorrowland1967">http://picasaweb.google.com/oc...land1967</a> 1977 ... the land hits it's peek with the addition to Space Mountain. TL has never been better (albeit the loss of CoP). 1979-1981 ... talk is brewing among imagineers who want CoP out of WDW, and back in DL. Imagineers are busy working away at concepts to renovate the land, for 1984. See ... Walt was long gone. But, pre Eisner era .. they were keen at this point to reinvent the land, after 13 years! Lazy, they weren't! 1984-1991 .... The '84 redo plans .. axed. TL:2055 redo plans, developed from 1988 to 1991 .. also axed. Meanwhile, didn't stop DL management from letting TL fall through the cracks, and more attractions and facilities shuttered. (In addition to America Sings closure from '88, Mission To Mars 1992, Space Place Restaurant by 1992/sh. Skyway 1994. Peoplemover abruptly ends late summer 1995. 1995 .... TL:98 is unveiled to NFFC Convention folks. (I was there.) Looked better 'on paper', budget cuts (later) made it the pathetic land, we would soon know. 1998 .. as soon as it opened, TL began to shutter already with the Submarine Voyage gone by September. 1999 ... 2004 ... Rocket Rods gone, Cosmic Waves gone, 2nd floor of Starcade gone. Empty Rocket Rods tracks, the entire Circle-Vision/RR Queue building, both big glaring "pot holes". So far class .. all these things happening .. at the hands of a company, that simply didn't give a rat's arse. You couldn't fault the land at all. 2003 to 2014 ... Numerous "total renovation" rumors a float .. between posters and a few insiders on Screamscape, Laughinglace, Miceage, Mouseinfo, Mouseplanet, WDWMagic, Disney&More, Etc. * Tron * Tony Baxter's mysterious '2009' plan * Marvel * Star Wars ... and here we are today. This journey of WDI trying to put forth a proper (all new) renovation plan .. beginning as early as 1979/80 .. still rages on to this day ... A grand whopping total of some 34-35 years! Oh, TL is "struggling" ecdc .. no doubt. But not due to it's core concept. But due to a bureaucracy between execs ... that continues on.
Originally Posted By oc_dean >>TL '98 doesn't look like the future anymore.<< You, I, and many other astute people realize the 'sorted' history behind the development of TL98. Sure it didn't look like the future anymore. I don't think that was really ever their intention. LOL It was imagineering's attempt at appeasing Eisner and Pressler's wishes to keep the budget as low as possible. Not bring forth the best TL the co. could deliver to 1990s guests.
