Originally Posted By PeterPan1313 Actually, if you look at Disneyland on Google Maps, the area behind TT seems to be less than the esplanade area between the east and west security gates . . . give that this space of land can't even hold an RSR sized ride, and that you've got to have some backstage space . . . you talking about a Lilliputian sized Star Wars land. Maybe a Star Wars version of Storybook land Canal boat ride?
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt "doesn't seem big enough to use up the $800 million that Iger wants to use for a longterm 'big bet'" That's roughly what many have estimated that park cost in 2001. The park's overhaul was rumored to be 1.1 billion, so considering all this I'm straggling to see how Disney would be willing to invest that much into a single land. $800 million is a ridiculous amount of money even it is Star Wars.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 "Do you mean TT WDW or Disneyland? Because the amount of space theoretically available behind of TT in DL is about 1/2 the size of Carsland . . . doesn't seem big enough to use up the $800 million that Iger wants to use for a longterm 'big bet'." We've been through this before. Afraid they'd have to move the horses in circle D off-site (as at WDW). They'd have to move the administration buildings elsewhere, which is easy. Then there's the festival area, which could connect to it. Altogether, it's larger than cars land. It's still a stretch. But more likely than Simba.
Originally Posted By Captain Neo Wouldn't they also have to get rid of Big Thunder ranch and Big Thunder Ranch BBQ?
Originally Posted By Dabob2 Possibly. Someone when we were discussing this before had an acreage count on all the areas back there. It would depend on how much space they thought they needed for SWL, and how much they wanted to retain as FrL.
Originally Posted By Bellella 1967. The year Tomorrowland really hit its peak (minus Space Mountain). I'd love to see Tomorrowland focused more on the FUTURE instead of franchise rides. As for all this talk about a negative future ahead of us, Tomorrowland could offer exhibits or shows about how to make everything better, for something more optimistic ("There's a great big beautiful tomorrow".....). Space Mountain should stay. I guess the Nemo subs are a permanent addition. The Monorail must stay. Innoventions either needs some serious re-tooling or should be replaced with something new. The PeopleMover track- when are they going to make up their minds?! And how does General Motors feel about all-electric cars?
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt Dean, DLP's Discoveyland revamp may give us some clues on what the direction the company is headed for Tomorrowland stateside. No big surprise that it mostly appears to revolve mostly around Star Wars <a target="blank" rel="nofollow" href="http://mb.laughingplace.com/MsgBoard-T-130480-P-1.asp?C=1">http://mb.laughingplace.com/Ms....asp?C=1</a>
Originally Posted By FerretAfros >>I'd love to see Tomorrowland focused more on the FUTURE instead of franchise rides.<< I always find myself surprised when I agree with Bellella, but I certainly agree with this! A Guardians of the Galaxy simulator belongs in TL about as well as a mid-80's music video or a shoot-'em-up ride featuring a toy searching for batteries
Originally Posted By Bellella Yes. Thank you. I wish time travel was possible. I'd go back to the 1950's and 1960's and see Tomorrowland when it really had awesome stuff. I definitely feel we've gotten cheated out of the best Tomorrowland ideas since they've practically all disappeared. What does Buzz Lightyear have to do with the future? Why do we need Star Wars, or worse (shudder), Marvel? I'm not suggesting they return all the old Tomorrowland attractions (except the Carousel of Progress) but they should definitely try to go along the same vein they did at the start. Seriously, ever since they KILLED EO, the only Tomorrowland attractions worth going on are Space Mountain and the Monorail. Two attractions out of a land that once had a ton of awesome stuff? That's really sad.
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt "What does Buzz Lightyear have to do with the future?" Nothing, but very few things over the long history of TL have ever really been about the future. That's why I keep saying that the land has seldom met Walt's lofty goals that he set forth for the land. You probably would have loved Tomorrowland in the late 60s to late 70s Bellella. It was far from perfect, but there was a spirit hope and optimism - you could feel that TL was trying reach further than just entertain people in a theme park. The difference today is that the designers aren't even trying to do anything nearly as ambitious and it shows.
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt "You lost me at EO." Right! Now there's a show that has nothing to do with the future Walt envisioned if there ever was one.
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt You mean this wasn't awesome? <a target="blank" rel="nofollow" href="http://smg.photobucket.com/user/bananaphone5000/media/NEWGORILLA/S-spacecouple.jpg.html">http://smg.photobucket.com/use...jpg.html</a>
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt Nothing says "living blueprint of our future" more than a high fashion mini in silver lamé.
Originally Posted By FerretAfros Does anybody know what the panel behind the fashionable lady astronaut says? I assume it's some sort of quasi-factual information about the Moonliner rocket, but I don't think I've ever noticed it before
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <Nothing says "living blueprint of our future" more than a high fashion mini in silver lamé.> Hey, that high fashion mini in silver lame apparently gives her the ability to breathe without a helmet, unlike her male counterpart.
Originally Posted By Yookeroo "You mean this wasn't awesome?" Oh, that's kind of awesome. But probably not in the way Bellella means.
