Tomorrowland Makeover

[innerSpaceman]

Paris' attempt to avoid the march of Tomorrowland-devastating time by making it Discoveryland themed to Steampunk was not a success to my mind. Neither is ignoring the Futuristic and going with a Sci-Fi(ish) movieland consisting of Buzz Lightyear and Star Wars, Star Wars, Star Wars.

Sure, "Tomorrowland" is not the Americana kick it once was in the '50's and '60's. I got news for ya: neither is Frontierland. But we still make due with whatever Americanic nostaglia that area brings, though the height of that is long, long gone. By that measure, Main Street, U.S.A. has nothing like the effect it once had when it was an actual memory for many visitors, instead of just another bit of time-period history.

So the passage of time affects nearly all of Disneyland's original lands ... yes, Tomorrowland most acutely of all. But Walt Disney's genius was picking timeless iconic adventures for his Park. Pirates. Haunted House. Jungle Expedition. He did the same with Tomorrowland and, imo, Disney would be wise to play on those Walt instincts with amazing updates to Walt's ideas. Because no matter how far in the future we get, it will remain exceedingly rare for people to venture where life support is needed (or impossible). I believe an amazing outer space attraction, an amazing under-sea attraction, and an amazing inner space attraction can STILL be exciting to modern audiences, and remain so for practically ever. And with Walt Disney's penchant for change and update, Tomorrowland could have been kept relevant AS Tomorrowland.

Le Sigh, Le Sigh, Le Sigh.

[Moonliner]

Which makes "Star Wars" a good choice because it is now a fixed point in time. Twenty years from now, mos eisely will still look like mos eisely, Vader will still look like Vader.

What I would have trouble with is a Star Wars themed land containing an Iron Man attraction or some generic type of futuristic theme that includes both.

Star Wars is big enough to take over Tomorrowland all by itself, save Marvel for a new park.

[RStar]

I agree with all of the above. And there is a purist in me that would hate to see Tommorrowland go, and the subs not return from the rehab, and the lagoon paved over. But a part of me likes the idea of paving over the lagoon and tearing out Innoventions to make a fantastic new E ticket in it's place. I'm not a huge fan of the subs, and I think they could make better use of the soundstage in DCA's Hollywoodland for the Marvel meet and greets.

I feel the 1998 makeover of Tommorrowland was a dismal failure. And I hope they can do better than steampunk (though I did kind of like Paris Tomorrowland a little). But staying ahead of "Tomorrow" is increasingly difficult as technology marches on at an exponentially quick pace, making the large investment in a makeover less appealing to Disney. So what is the fix? Anyone? Class??

[Moonliner]

Originally Posted by RStar

But staying ahead of "Tomorrow" is increasingly difficult as technology marches on at an exponentially quick pace, making the large investment in a makeover less appealing to Disney. So what is the fix? Anyone? Class??

Like I said, theme it to original series Star Wars movies. Twenty Plus years from now it will still be Star Wars and still look cool just like Potterland over at Universal will also stand the test of time.

[RStar]

Originally Posted by Moonliner

Like I said, theme it to original series Star Wars movies. Twenty Plus years from now it will still be Star Wars and still look cool just like Potterland over at Universal will also stand the test of time.

That's what Disney already has planned. But if all of Tomorrowland becomes Star Wars, is it still Tomorrowland? Won't it be Starwarsland instead? And what's "futuristic/tomorrow" about a place from a long, long time ago? Granted, Tomorrowland always had something about space travel (which was futuristic in the 1950s and 1960s) and Star Wars and even Buzz Lightyear fit that bill. And your comparing it to "Potterland" brings it back to my point, should it then be renamed if it is 80% Star Wars? I'd be real surprised if Disney would ever go that far though.

I do think it will look cool, and I'm all for it if they remove the rock outcroppings and put the Rocket Jets back on top of a building, opening up the bottlenecked entrance!

[alphabassettgrrl]

Originally Posted by innerSpaceman

Because no matter how far in the future we get, it will remain exceedingly rare for people to venture where life support is needed (or impossible). I believe an amazing outer space attraction, an amazing under-sea attraction, and an amazing inner space attraction can STILL be exciting to modern audiences, and remain so for practically ever.

Yes! I agree, absolutely. Space travel, alien worlds, undersea creatures, giant octopi and squid, high seas adventures! Could be totally cool.

[BarTopDancer]

Originally Posted by Moonliner

Which makes "Star Wars" a good choice because it is now a fixed point in time.

Well now I want a Doctor Who land.

[RStar]

Hey, good idea!

But if we get one, it would be in England.

But that would be a good reason to go!

[RStar]

Originally Posted by innerSpaceman

Sure, "Tomorrowland" is not the Americana kick it once was in the '50's and '60's. I got news for ya: neither is Frontierland. But we still make due with whatever Americanic nostaglia that area brings, though the height of that is long, long gone. By that measure, Main Street, U.S.A. has nothing like the effect it once had when it was an actual memory for many visitors, instead of just another bit of time-period history.

Was that really the idea for Main Street? To have people relive their past? It was never my past, and I felt it worked because it took me to another time and another place. It still is sucsessful in that repsect. Same with Frontierland (though, as you pointed out the Old West is no longer as popular as it once was), but the "Old West" is still the Old West, therefore valid. The problem with the future (and I know this has been beat to death already) is that it never quite reaches what we invision or comes to pass, therfore becomming invalid or old news.

Originally Posted by innerSpaceman

I believe an amazing outer space attraction, an amazing under-sea attraction, and an amazing inner space attraction can STILL be exciting to modern audiences, and remain so for practically ever.

I do agree, but are you saying they should bring back classic attractions with modern makeovers? This sounds like a good idea to me, and I know some of that has been kicked around at Disney, and have been done (Flying Saucers). But should they redo the subs? Back to the original idea, only with a more modern take (Loosing Nemo, anyone?)? I remember hearing of an idea of taking the subs to Atlantis, getting off the sub and loading onto a second ride system in a show building built next to the exsisting one. But I don't know if a ride with two loading points is even possible.

[3894]

Originally Posted by innerSpaceman

Main Street, U.S.A. has nothing like the effect it once had when it was an actual memory for many visitors, instead of just another bit of time-period history.

For the guests from the Midwest, Main Street U.S.A. does still strike a chord. Here are photos from the Main Street (actual name) of my current (and soon to be former) town. This is not a remarkable town; there are thousands like it.