Significantly, Disneyland's most world-famous and iconic attractions in the pre-Eisner era were all non-movie brands: Jungle Cruise, Pirates of the Caribbean, Haunted Mansion, Tiki Room, Mr. Lincoln, Small World, Submarines, Space Mountain, PeopleMover, Mark Twain, the Monorail, Autopia, Disneyland & Santa Fe Railroad. Hardly the model that Burbank and Glendale have followed since Eisner.
Walt Disney created the Disneyland TV show to create an emotional connection to his new park.
If the Tommorowland movie creates an emotional connection to a new revamped section of the park then it seems very much in the Walt Disney tradition.
Other than the name, there is essentially nothing today's Disney Corporation does that is "in the Walt Disney tradition."
Rather than change the quality of the rides, they tried to fix things the easy way by slapping Disney characters on everything and making every new ride character based. If they were to provide some really quality non-branded attractions I bet the public would take to them just as well as the branded ones.
While I agree DCA's biggest problem was quality, the lack of disney characters was still enough of a fault to be mentioned by guests. More proof can be seen by the popularity of Cars land and the wizarding world of harry potter. People demand the characters they know and love and the great quality to go with it.
After veiwing the larger twitpic I was able to find the blue book.
Twitter / BradBirdA113: The Box... opened. ...
MODEL RESEARCH: THE NATIONAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR AERONAUTICS 1915-1958: Alex Roland: Amazon.com: Books
Published by NASA.
This is a simple picture of a rocket engine.
Also the modern Disney company does not seem incredibly risk averse to me. The recent DCA update was a huge expensive risk. It could easily have been throwing good money after bad. Shanghai and Hong Kong Disney were risks. The new
fastpass plus stuff is a huge risk. Misguided perhaps but risk adverse it isn't.
The fact is that for decades in Disneyland, the Disney Corporation has refused to do anything that doesn't have a tie-in to a successful brand. If the Walt Disney Company had followed the same business model in Disneyland's creation and first two decades as the Disney Corporation has done for the last two decades, Disneyland wouldn't have been a world-famous success, and we wouldn't be having this conversation.
No matter if one compares Disneyland's management vision, theme park business model, creative innovation or risk taking, there is, quite simply, zero similarity between Walt's Disney Company and Eisger's Disney Corporation. The WDC was a founder-driven company that was world famous for creative innovation; Disney Corp is a Wall Street style corporation that is world famous for making money. Claims that Disney Corp is in any manner following the standards, models, methods or philosophy of Walt's Disney Company are simply not supported by the reality of what the former is -- and what the latter was.
I wonder how many rumors will come about due to the title of the movie... might not even have anything to do with Tomorrowland...
Since Disney is famous for creating alternate realities via their animation and even some of their live action movies [ie TRON],,, maybe this is a movie about that reality becoming a little too real???
Truthfully, Disney's new motto should just be... IF WE BUILD IT, THEY WILL COME, because good or bad Disney attracts millions of people no matter what they do.... films, attractions, vacation opportunities, events, collectibles. You name it, people go to it and spend lots of money doing so.
Odd choice to rename a film called '1952' to 'Tomorrowland', but that must mean Disney has canceled the other 'Tomorrowland'-related film. I had this idea tucked in the back of my mind that I planned for the peoplemover that involved time-machines, a touring company and X-S Tech (downsized); but going back to the photograph of the open box, is that a photo of a young Walt Disney with Werner Von Braun or some other equally famous Rocket scientist?