Tomorrowland Update: Would you prefer "gritty" or "clean"?

[ohmyjustin]

Clean, efficient, optimistic, but not "perfect" kind of feel. I definitely don't want the kind of tomorrow that Wall-E showed us nor do I want to enter a world that is completely automated. I guess I want to feel what people from the 50's-70's would think about the world today.

A gritty world would definitely be welcome as a part of an attraction, like others have said. Sort of like how Ghost Galaxy has this element that makes you feel just a little uneasy.

[DJS]

A Coruscant would fit better than Blade Runner, but a blend of the two could work.
I see the south side towering in spires and peaks, with giant LED displays along the facade, projection mapped shows after dark. The north side maybe a bit more aged, blending into a sort of Jules Verne, Futuristic Victorian timelessness. If you look ar blade runner, it's a lot of ugly downtown exteriors. That wouldn't feel right in Disneyland.
Throw a huge canopy of LED over the central area, similar to the one found in Downtown Las Vegas.
I wish I could describe it better.

[Pinrar]

I voted both. I want it to be clean, not because of what Walt wanted, but because everything at DL is and should be a bit idealized. I don't believe in doing everything by the book of Walt so to speak. I think the park needs to move on and evolve and create new eras of greatness.

I also think a lived in grit could work well with this. Im thinking neon, LED screen ads...Give it the same hustle and bustle of a real city but set in the future. The tomorowland of old lacked the culture you would find in a fast paced future. It was almost leisurely which I don't see the future being at all.

[film975]

I voted both. I want it to be clean, not because of what Walt wanted, but because everything at DL is and should be a bit idealized. I don't believe in doing everything by the book of Walt so to speak. I think the park needs to move on and evolve and create new eras of greatness.

I also think a lived in grit could work well with this. Im thinking neon, LED screen ads...Give it the same hustle and bustle of a real city but set in the future. The tomorowland of old lacked the culture you would find in a fast paced future. It was almost leisurely which I don't see the future being at all.

I don't think people here mean to follow every word and detail of what Walt wanted. Just stick to his original intent. Which is an optimistic future whic previous chatters have posted about. The biggest problem I see with Blade Runner is the Disney doesn't own that movie. I always find it funny when people mention that Wall-E needs to be in Tomorrowland when it clashes with Walt's original intent.

[calsig31]

I chose clean, but I want it in the sense Frontierland in clean.
mos Eisley and a blade runner aesthetic.. Giant LED's with fantastic TRON/Bladerunner/SW animations and entertainment on them. Partner adverts wouldn't bother me either (Futuristic coke commercials).
The lagoon, transformed into a steampunk world, gritty but clean, of Jules Verne...a return to the 20,000 leagues
an update to the gates, a new space punting facade... Remove the people mover tracks, neon and future fantasy.

You had me up until the bolded. I really don't want to see steampunk in Tomorrowland. It is supposed to represent the future from our perspective, not how someone in the 1800's would have predicted the future.

Everything else looks good, though.

[DJS]

It's about the only way to describe a Jules Verne style. 20,000 Leagues is a great theme and was a great film.

[junkin jay]

I say bring back the Peoplemovers, ReImagine the Innoventions building into a new attraction and retrofit the Autopia into electric vehicles.

[DJS]

The autopia thing really gets me. As a kid, I never thought it was fun. As an adult, even less. I guess the idea of removing autopia for a more thrilling ride is more attractive. It's big, clunky and going electric would not make it better.
a shorter track, no rails, higher output motors, racing, wold be fun...but never would happen. In my opinion, the autopia and Nemo do not fit the theme of Tomorrowland, at all.

[biggsworth]

I went with both. A clean looking area with maybe a section that looks sort of lived in. Sort of like a warning of what happens when you don't take care of things.

[Pinrar]

I don't think people here mean to follow every word and detail of what Walt wanted. Just stick to his original intent. Which is an optimistic future whic previous chatters have posted about. The biggest problem I see with Blade Runner is the Disney doesn't own that movie. I always find it funny when people mention that Wall-E needs to be in Tomorrowland when it clashes with Walt's original intent.

I understand and didn't mean every little detail, but why do we have to follow his original intent at all? I'm all for following Walt's theories on running and building a theme park(quality, immersive themeing, etc.) but what subject matter actually goes into the park....I think that should be up to our generation. If the public embraces a little grit, WDI designs it right, and the suits fund it well...I think we should do it!

[mycroft16]

I'm going to redefine the poll a bit here. I'm going to say that gritty doesn't mean lived in... because clean can be lived in. Gritty means dystopian.

Since Walt's vision for Tomorrowland, stated in his dedication speech, was one in which we had discovered how to live in harmony and conquered space and the atom and life was better for all, I'm going to say that Walt was not looking towards a dystopian sort of future. He looked forward with hope for humanity and the betterment of all through science and technology. Therefore it would have to be a clean future. That, however, does not mean it can not look lived in. It can be beautiful and hopeful and still have the wear and tear of real life on it. It does not have to be pristine. From a distance you get the broader hopeful look and as you approach things you see that real people actually do live here and work and use the environment and it has the age of history behind it. Remnants of the past showing through in places, wear from use maybe even, etc. Layers of reality.

[mickdaddy]

I think gritty as in a world destroyed by man that has been taken to this amazing post appocaliptic (sp?) Society that is dark but futuristic! For me no steampunk!

[clippers6]

Just throwing this out there: would you consider Disney's Animal Kingdom gritty? It definitely shows a lived in world where life is not necessarily easy and where one must be mindful of bad people such as poachers.

[drjeep]

I voted for gritty myself but it comes mainly from the desire to see an alternate universe Dystopian Disneyland (Epic Mickey was close but not quite for me). Not saying that I want that to happen to our Disneyland but it's fun to imagine. (Or maybe I am a bit odd)

[jcruise86]

The best: clean and trying to look clean. Disneyland's Tomorrowland of years ago & Tokyo Disneyland.

Second best: actually clean, yet looking gritty to fit the theme (Big Thunder & Phantom Manor)

Equally unacceptable (& found at some non-Disney parks):
Nasty dirty & rationalizing that it's part of the look
and actually dirty with a theme that's not.

So I vote clean, but then again I just got out of the shower.