Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt "I believe that Imagineers COULD come up with some outstanding future concept if they were actually given the opportunity. It's just that they AREN'T given it." I want to follow you down that path, but unfortunately I have no faith that WDI possesses the skill to tell a cohesive story around "future" with Disney flair. In 60 years you can count on two hands the things that they've produced that have successfully translated Walt's big and bold concepts that were intended to shape Tomorrowland. Even when the Imagineers got it right, their best future themed work has experienced relatively short life cycles. There's no question that they tell stories of the idealized past better than the do the future. Which brings me to.... The only solution for WDI to present a mind-blowing and meaningful showcase of genuine future technology is to partner with real scientists, architects, and engineers. TL could use a non-Disney viewpoint, one that doesn't keep referencing monorails, peoplemovers, submarines and the Mighty Microscope. As far as "the future" goes Disney simply doesn't know how to do anything beyond those types of things very well. That, or just bulldoze the place already and turn it into Star Wars Land.
Originally Posted By FerretAfros >>TL could use a non-Disney viewpoint, one that doesn't keep referencing monorails, peoplemovers, submarines and the Mighty Microscope.<< I agree. All the lands (excluding Fantasyland, obviously) could use that. Although the in-jokes and references to previous attractions were fun when they started, it's just spiraled out of control, IMO. Everything has to reference something else, or have roots in an old concept, or a name that's related to a former park fixture. Seemingly every post on the Disney Parks Blog pays lip service to Walt and how he wanted the parks to continually change. What the parks need is a truly fresh outlook on things. On the one hand, it would allow them to create something truly new and visionary without being tied down to what's been done before. On the other hand, it would actually live up to Walt's legacy of pushing the boundaries and reinventing things, rather than simply having a tongue in cheek reference thrown in. I'm all for it! >>That, or just bulldoze the place already and turn it into Star Wars Land. << ...eh, you lost me again! : )
Originally Posted By oc_dean >>I don't know of the customer base demanding a new Tomorrowland, just us radical fringe types. Action comes when people don't spend because something isn't done and when Disney sees higher profits from something they can do. A land that has to be redone every 15-20 years is a mistake, throwing money down an eastside hole. They need to shoot for a few more decades than that.<< What happen to you Berol? Getting crankier as you get older? What?? Lets dissect this out: >>I don't know of the customer base demanding a new Tomorrowland,<< So, it's not about obvious issues that the co. most likely know what they eventually need to do .. it's just about whether Joe Tourist makes a bee line to City Hall to complain. For all you/I/everyone knows .. there are plenty people who have noticed. But haven't taken a minute to tell the co. themselves. And for all we know ... there probably have been some who've taken note, and have said something. But we here in LP aren't going to hear about it.. unless you work for TDA ... but even then .. sworn an oath .. not to say a word to social media outlets! It use to be .. management didn't wait for the public to come knocking them on the head about something ... Walt, and his first generation of imagineers just knew what they needed to do without hearing from the customer base. And that continued beyond his death. They didn't depend on Customer Surveys telling them what they needed to do. A totally unheard-of concept. Now, society feels they need it .. like a baby and their fib in their mouth! But you know all this already don't you? You know your Disneyland history. And I don't take pleasure insulting your intelligence. >>A land that has to be redone every 15-20 years is a mistake, throwing money down an eastside hole. They need to shoot for a few more decades than that.<< Hey, I'd love it, if they shot for a new look that would be relevant for the next 50 years. Long time, though! Can WDI pull it off? Or will they end up changing it ... just 15 years later. (Look at WDW's - Stitch replacing Alien Encounter 15 years later, Monsters Inc, shortly thereafter. replacing Circle-vision. Not that those changes are worthy "classics" that will be there beyond the next 15 years.) The look outside may not change .. but the attractions inside do tend to change. TL:2055 was suppose to conquer the "timeless" issue ... making the land look like a alien spaceport, with an architecture so unlike anything on Earth. You couldn't Earth-date it. >>15-20 years is a mistake, throwing money down an eastside hole. They need to shoot for a few more decades than that.<< Since you are talking 50 years there ... I'd love to see if they could create a Tomorrowland that will remain exciting for that long. But at their going rate ... they are back in some 15 years later on average, changing something. Spending money. I'm curious what happens next. All the buildings from the 1967 Tomorrowland are all still there. Here's your example of a land that has hung on for your time frame - nearly 50 years. I don't know if WDI can do something that can hold on for that long a time, .. and history not repeat itself. Here's hoping. Seems the only answer is a retro 50/60s 'fantasy' .. that comes right out of Walt's era. Uplifting, upbeat, positive. But then I look at modern day architects like Zaha Hadid ... among others .. and wonder what the possibilities can be.
Originally Posted By 2001DLFan <<The only solution for WDI to present a mind-blowing and meaningful showcase of genuine future technology is to partner with real scientists, architects, and engineers. TL could use a non-Disney viewpoint, one that doesn't keep referencing monorails, peoplemovers, submarines and the Mighty Microscope. As far as "the future" goes Disney simply doesn't know how to do anything beyond those types of things very well.>> Actually, Disney DOES have scientists, architects and engineers available, even outside of Disney. I understand that they have had some futurists brought in who are very enthusiastic about Tomorrowland's potential. But they do have their own research division (www.disneyresearch.com). It seems that they would have enough technology firepower to support some cool attraction concepts if they were given the opportunity.
Originally Posted By berol "So, it's not about obvious issues that the co. most likely know what they eventually need to do .. it's just about whether Joe Tourist makes a bee line to City Hall to complain." Nope, gotta take the post as a whole to get what I was saying which you largely did. And, Joe Tourist isn't on trial here!
Originally Posted By FerretAfros I agree that it's somewhat foolish on paper to have an area that needs to be updated every ~15 years. However, considering that the park as a whole looks very much like it did nearly 35 years ago (with single-attraction exceptions here and there), perhaps it would be okay to have an area that's constantly being reinvented. It allows them to keep the parkwide experience fresh, while only having to really invest in one corner of the park. As much as we mock it today, I remember TL98 being quite busy when it was running on all cylinders; consider what that sort of excitement could add to the park each time TL got revitalized. And since we constantly need annual promotions/marketing gimmicks, it seems like a reimagined land would be pretty easy to wrap up into one of those As for people not complaining about the current TL, I disagree. There are popular attractions within the land, but the land itself is a mess and guests realize it. It's rare that people just hang out and linger in TL; it's not a pleasant or inviting space right now. If you want to relax and watch the world go buy, there are countless other places in the park where you might want to sit on a bench and do that; it's very rare that anybody does that in TL (unless they're waiting with small children next to a height-restricted ride). They may not be marching down to City Hall or posting online that they don't like TL, but they're voting with their feet
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt But they do have their own research division (www.disneyresearch.com). It seems that they would have enough technology firepower to support some cool attraction concepts if they were given the opportunity." It isn't evident. How much influence do they have? Where were they when Tony Baxter was sucking the last bit of soul from Tomorrowland in the late 90s?
Originally Posted By phruby If they are voting with their feet, then they must really like the place. No one is leaving because they don't like the way things look. Disneyland is expensive and packed as it every has been in 60 years. They really need to start building that third gate just to spread the people and make even more money. The problem is management is gun shy after spending over a billion fixing their last mistake. Making tomorrowland pretty isn't going to draw more crowds or make them more money.
Originally Posted By FerretAfros >> Where were they when Tony Baxter was sucking the last bit of soul from Tomorrowland in the late 90s?<< I believe at that time they were laying the groundwork for what would later be known as the Living Character Initiative, which gave us Lucky the Dinosaur, Muppet Mobile Labs, Turtle Talk with Crush, Stitch Encounter, and a couple other things. From my understanding, a lot of the stuff that Disney's research arm creates never end up in the parks, but occasionally get licensed for other uses since Disney owns the patents on them >>They really need to start building that third gate just to spread the people and make even more money.<< Or they could improve the part of their park that people don't currently linger in, so that they can spread the people around within their existing infrastructure just like they did with DCA. That would be a whole heck of a lot cheaper than building a 3rd amusement park from scratch
Originally Posted By phruby Unfortunately, Disney management is too busy building "temporary" stages over penguins and overlaying flying tires with mindless bumper cars that don't actually bump into each other to care about tomorrow (land).
Originally Posted By phruby Were exactly in Disneyland do people linger? I've never seen that. I guess they linger in hour long lines for Space Mountain.
Originally Posted By FerretAfros >>Were exactly in Disneyland do people linger?<< <a target="blank" rel="nofollow" href="http://pixiepranks-panstinkerbell.blogspot.com/2012/08/benchesat-disneyland-resort-walt-disney.html">http://pixiepranks-panstinkerb...ney.html</a>
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt Were exactly in Disneyland do people linger?" I don't know about Disneyland, but at California Adventure you can usually find me lingering here: <a target="blank" rel="nofollow" href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/22541015@N00/7903799348/">http://www.flickr.com/photos/2...3799348/</a> The happiest bar on Earth!
Originally Posted By LP Watcher <It isn't evident. How much influence do they have? Where were they when Tony Baxter was sucking the last bit of soul from Tomorrowland in the late 90s?> Kinda of backs up my whole contention that it's not necessarily that Disney doesn't have the capabilities to do some great futurist attractions, but rather that corporate management decisions won't allow for that area of creativity to flourish.
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt "Kinda of backs up my whole contention that it's not necessarily that Disney doesn't have the capabilities to do some great futurist attractions, but rather that corporate management decisions won't allow for that area of creativity to flourish." How so? With a handful of exceptions Disney has never done "the future" very well, even when Walt was around.
Originally Posted By oc_dean >>Disney has never done "the future" very well, even when Walt was around.<< Okay ... so the first 11 years of TL wasn't so hot, with it's "state fair" exhibits ... But you have to remember there was not a whole lot of material to work with - Pre 1955 America. America was just getting started with "futurism" and the space race. And given the 10 years span Walt was alive ... they were doing far more than moguls and entrepreneurs are doing these days. They got FAR more accomplished in comparison. Just look at the work at the NY Worlds Fair. Walt's original intention for EPCOT. And of course TL67 that he didn't get to see complete. All that in just a 3-4 year time span. They were just getting started in 1955 .. and in just 3 years ... here came the Monorail, and the subs. They did accomplish more in less than 10 years .. than what most entertainment businesses can do in the last 30 years. Go ahead and fault those tacky exhibits like Bathroom of Tomorrow, Hall of Aluminum Fame, Color Gallery, and more .... but considering Walt did pair up with Werner Von Braun ... he was off to a good start. Where Disney of today just doesn't give a shit. Who's Disney teaming up with these days? Their cartoon characters are running the shots. Fabulous!
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt "Okay ... so the first 11 years of TL wasn't so hot, with it's "state fair" exhibits ... But you have to remember there was not a whole lot of material to work with - Pre 1955 America. America was just getting started with "futurism" and the space race." Really? What about this? <a target="blank" rel="nofollow" href="http://www.theatlantic.com/infocus/2013/11/the-1939-new-york-worlds-fair/100620/">http://www.theatlantic.com/inf.../100620/</a> By the way, that place covered 1200 acres, and in the year and a half span it was open attendance exceeded over 44 million people. Amazing. "Go ahead and fault those tacky exhibits like Bathroom of Tomorrow, Hall of Aluminum Fame, Color Gallery, and more .... but considering Walt did pair up with Werner Von Braun ... he was off to a good start." That's debatable. More to the point though, aside from TL '67 and EPCOT Center, Disney's designers haven't exactly hit any home runs with their representations of the future. And as ambitious as EPCOT Center may have been in spirit, it was a complete departure from the truly progressive city of tomorrow that Walt had envisioned it to be.
Originally Posted By oc_dean The 1939 Worlds Fair is but one of a smaller handful of "futuristic" representations that can be found in the first half of the 20th Century. Where's the second half, had far more. Seems with Walt's new park debut in 1955, with a permanent "future" land to explore year after year, Russia's Sputnick in 1957, JFK's 1961 announcement to put a man on the moon, futurism was really off and running by that point.
Originally Posted By FerretAfros Those are some great photos! I especially like #8 which shows the fairgrounds from the Empire State Building; I had no idea that it was that visible! It's also interesting to note the cloverleaf interchange in the upper left of #2; according to Disney lore, those were still considered cutting-edge when Autopia opened nearly 2 decades later And as much as the 1939 World's Fair had a great visual style and a lot of gee-wiz fun exhibits, I don't think it stood the test of time especially well. Many of the items on display were commonplace after the war, and others have proven to have no practical applications. Although the visuals of the fair are now considered to be timeless, they would have looked incredibly dated a few years later as modern tastes evolved. It's fun to look back to look forward, but much like anything that predicts the future its inaccuracies were seen pretty quickly
Originally Posted By oc_dean >>Disney's designers haven't exactly hit any home runs with their representations of the future. << 1. Well, we don't get to see any of them .. as they are locked up in WDI shelves (if you are talking about DL's TL.) 2. Well, we'll give Disney's 60 years of attempts more cudos ... as not even Universal's attempts with their "Sci Fi cities" aren't exactly ambitious and awe and inspiring! No one to this day can come close to the execution of what imagineers did in the past. Germany's Bremen Space Center and France's Futuroscope are only as half as ambitious as Disney in the past. 3. I agree with you ... HKDL, WDW TL:94, TDL, and OLC's plan to shrink it, and what EPCOT's Futureworld has become today .. are go good examples of your point - Not hitting a home run. I know we'll continue to argue about this subject .. fact being we have no crystal balls. We are never going to know .. no matter how clever the human race wants to be, no matter how hard we want to be about it .. to know what's coming 30 years from now, or 100, or 300. What we can do though is use the IMAGINATION without having it curtailed by restraints. And that's really the bulk of the problem. Iger pushing IPs on the parks so hard .. and not letting true creativity brew in WDI. All I can do, is hope talks happen among various key people in the industry, who have direct ties to current management in Burbank ... and hope for the best.
