Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 39
  1. #16

    • Member
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Riverside Ca
    Posts
    1,956

    Re: How are the Subs NOT futuristic?

    Quote Originally Posted by gamer_christopher View Post
    what broken effects Proffessortango?
    The angler fish robotic arms are still not working and the waterfalls are turned off routinely due to leaks.

  2. #17

    • Animatronic
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles County
    Posts
    1,860

    Re: How are the Subs NOT futuristic?

    The Matterhorn always seemed like future recreation to me, and the swiss aspect fit the World's Fair feel of Tomorrowland. The subs were less a gray area, despite being gray. They were a rather futuristic exploration of the deep seas. I know Walt originally wanted 20,000 leagues, and that has always confused me, other than it being past futurism. Heck, a 20,000 leagues ride only almost fits Fantasyland, Adventureland, or Tomorrowland.

    Nemo isn't much different as far as fit in an area that's always been a transition area. It's not as big an abomination as a talking Toy at the entrance to Tomorrowland.

    The more damning complaints I've heard are the lack of dramatic vistas, obviously 2D effects, and a passive story ripped from the film.

    For the record, the most recent research suggests fish don't communicate like higher animals. Schools of fish don't even have a leader. Each fish simply acts based on simple rules. It doesn't seem like there will be anything worth "translating", even when we can scan their brains.

  3. #18

    • Who's your DaddyB?
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Corona
    Posts
    921

    Re: How are the Subs NOT futuristic?

    Quote Originally Posted by Steve DeGaetano View Post
    I will go out on a limb here and state that we will NEVER be able to translate "fish language" into the King's English.

    Dogs, dolphins and other creatures are FAR more advanced than fish, and we do know that they, in fact, can communicate with each other. Even so, we will never be able to transcribe those communications into anything other than basic phrases, if that. Babies also communicate, and we can't even translate those sounds--and they're human!

    Animals--and fish especially--do not communicate in any way that would be "translatable" into proper sentence structures. In fact, I'm not even sure we know that fish communicate at all, other than through their colors.

    But, if you must fabricate a twisted argument to justify the story line in Tomorrowland, you certainly have the right.

    (Personally, I might suggest that the fish are in fact "time traveling aliens" from a distant but dying water-world who have been deployed to eventually take over Earth. How's that for a "futuristic" theme?)
    there ya' go.
    First response pretty much nailed it for me.
    ---------------------------------------------


    a walk around the park... Star Tours, Nemo, Fantasyland, Frontierland, DCA... and more!



  4. #19

    • Minion
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Las Vegas, NV
    Posts
    2,854
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: How are the Subs NOT futuristic?

    Quote Originally Posted by Steve DeGaetano View Post
    I will go out on a limb here and state that we will NEVER be able to translate "fish language" into the King's English.

    Dogs, dolphins and other creatures are FAR more advanced than fish, and we do know that they, in fact, can communicate with each other. Even so, we will never be able to transcribe those communications into anything other than basic phrases, if that. Babies also communicate, and we can't even translate those sounds--and they're human!

    Animals--and fish especially--do not communicate in any way that would be "translatable" into proper sentence structures. In fact, I'm not even sure we know that fish communicate at all, other than through their colors.

    But, if you must fabricate a twisted argument to justify the story line in Tomorrowland, you certainly have the right.

    (Personally, I might suggest that the fish are in fact "time traveling aliens" from a distant but dying water-world who have been deployed to eventually take over Earth. How's that for a "futuristic" theme?)
    There also aren't any flying cars... But that doesnt mean that it will never happen... The future is undecided along with the technology that it will bring... You never know what is going to happen.... And anything is possible within the realm of possibilities so I don't see why a Translator that can translate any language is not a possible in the future...


  5. #20

    • Unhelpful User
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    935

    Re: How are the Subs NOT futuristic?

    Let me remind all of you that the Star Tours universe is officially "a long long time ago" which makes it a horrible idea for Tomorrowland and it should be removed immediately.

  6. #21

    • Closed Account
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    5,897

    Re: How are the Subs NOT futuristic?

    Quote Originally Posted by The International View Post
    Let me remind all of you that the Star Tours universe is officially "a long long time ago" which makes it a horrible idea for Tomorrowland and it should be removed immediately.
    Exactly.

    Clearly holographic projections, advanced robotics, travel at the speed of light, photon torpedos, anti-gravity technology, and amplified-light weapons such as light sabres are completely primitive; the work of neanderthals. Nothing futuristic about those concepts at all.

  7. #22

    • Closed Account
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    5,897

    Re: How are the Subs NOT futuristic?

    Quote Originally Posted by Snow_White_Raven View Post
    There also aren't any flying cars... But that doesnt mean that it will never happen
    You know, it's OK to state that's something is impossible. You won't self-destruct, I promise you!

    For some reason, "anything is possible" has become a self-esteem building mantra for some. But, everything is not possible. There's no shame in this.

    For instance, I assure you that it's impossible that I will ever be able to fly just by flapping my arms. It ain't gonna happen. I'll never play for the NBA. Impossible. And I'll never be 18 again. As much as we want to believe that "anything is possible."

    Sad to say, but that's just not being realistic.

  8. #23

    • Minion
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Autobot Base
    Posts
    2,259

    Re: How are the Subs NOT futuristic?

    Quote Originally Posted by Steve DeGaetano View Post
    Exactly.

    Clearly holographic projections, advanced robotics, travel at the speed of light, photon torpedos, anti-gravity technology, and amplified-light weapons such as light sabres are completely primitive; the work of neanderthals. Nothing futuristic about those concepts at all.
    Actually, "A Long Time Ago" is apparently the late 1700's judging from a (non-canon Star Wars Tales short story) comic where Han and Chewie get stuck on Earth and Han is killed by Native Americans. The comic ends 150 years later with Indiana Jones finding the Millennium Falcon in the Pacific Northwest(The depressed Chewie became Bigfoot) but after seeing the rotting remains of Han, deciding to keep it quiet.
    Not cavemen who made all that cool crap, but still.
    M-I-C-K-E-Y P-R-I-M-E

    Flickr

  9. #24

    • Minion
    • Offline

    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    corona
    Posts
    1,938

    Re: How are the Subs NOT futuristic?

    Quote Originally Posted by The International View Post
    Let me remind all of you that the Star Tours universe is officially "a long long time ago" which makes it a horrible idea for Tomorrowland and it should be removed immediately.
    they live in a different universe, their technology is still very futuristic to us... theres more of a problem with BLAB let me remind you

  10. #25

    • Inhospitable about happy
    • Online

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    5,946

    Re: How are the Subs NOT futuristic?

    In the future, people will be unable to tell the difference between a cartoon character and a real fish. So the new Subs fit.

  11. #26

    •   
    • Senior Minion
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Laguna Beach,CA
    Posts
    7,223
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: How are the Subs NOT futuristic?

    Quote Originally Posted by Steve DeGaetano View Post
    You know, it's OK to state that's something is impossible. You won't self-destruct, I promise you!

    For some reason, "anything is possible" has become a self-esteem building mantra for some. But, everything is not possible. There's no shame in this.

    For instance, I assure you that it's impossible that I will ever be able to fly just by flapping my arms. It ain't gonna happen. I'll never play for the NBA. Impossible. And I'll never be 18 again. As much as we want to believe that "anything is possible."

    Sad to say, but that's just not being realistic.
    Well is Disneyland a land of FANTASIES world.
    where hope and dream may come true.
    I think eveyone need to relax and daydream.
    AKfandisney Have a Magic Disney day șoș 2010
    Alan





    Toy Story Mania construction:
    Older photo
    New Photo

    Member of
    MiceChat WDW Trip
    Next trip
    2014 Dec, 31

  12. #27

    • Closed Account
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    5,897

    Re: How are the Subs NOT futuristic?

    Quote Originally Posted by akfandisney View Post
    Well is Disneyland a land of FANTASIES world.
    Oh really? You need to read Disney's dedication for Disneyland. You need to memorize it. Then tell me where the word "fantasy" appears.

  13. #28

    •   
    • Chicago Gal
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    56,019
    Blog Entries
    120

    Re: How are the Subs NOT futuristic?

    Disneyland Here I Come Again!
    October 1, to October 6, 2015

  14. #29

    • Beach Expert
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    A beach town that Harbor Blvd was named after
    Posts
    10,814

    Re: How are the Subs NOT futuristic?

    Quote Originally Posted by Barbaraann View Post
    Tomorrowland has failed because it has not followed Walt Disney's dictate as to what Tomorrowland should be.

    The key point that is missing is "...the hope for a peaceful and unified world." Without this key element Tomorrowland fails to convey what Walt wanted it to. We live in an age that finally contains all the points made in his dedication but these items and technologies have failed to produce the peaceful and unified world that Walt obviously wanted to demonstrate.

    Back in 1955 this was easy because the technology we now have wasn't around. Now we have these things and the world is far from peaceful and unified.

    What does this have to do with the subs? Hearing fish talk -- I know that sounds ridiculous, but I think we are still trying to find that one technology that will make our lives better. Or maybe finding technology that will let us travel to Nemo's world, or at least to a world better than our own.

    I know this sounds ridiculous. We think that everything has been invented that needs to be invented. But that one invention that promises a peaceful and unified world still hasn't been found. In many ways what Walt wanted for Tomorrowland in 1955 still is entirely valid for what we need for Tomorrowland in 2007.

  15. #30

    • Blind to His Own Faults
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Near
    Posts
    8,071

    Re: How are the Subs NOT futuristic?

    Quote Originally Posted by DisneyIPresume View Post
    What does this have to do with the subs? Hearing fish talk -- I know that sounds ridiculous, but I think we are still trying to find that one technology that will make our lives better. Or maybe finding technology that will let us travel to Nemo's world, or at least to a world better than our own.

    I know this sounds ridiculous. We think that everything has been invented that needs to be invented. But that one invention that promises a peaceful and unified world still hasn't been found. In many ways what Walt wanted for Tomorrowland in 1955 still is entirely valid for what we need for Tomorrowland in 2007.
    I'm a bit confused--are you justifying "Nemo"'s inclusion in the TL panoply with the "ridiculous" fish talk argument; or are you criticizing the use of this "ridiculous" fish talk argument by those who use it to justify the "Nemo" presence in TL?!

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 6
    Last Post: 12-12-2007, 02:37 PM
  2. Subs or 20k??
    By Walt Jr. in forum Disneyland Resort
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-24-2006, 07:29 PM
  3. So, how about those subs...
    By PianoManBluez in forum Disneyland Resort
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 06-27-2006, 09:56 PM
  4. More Subs
    By FormerDiz in forum Disneyland Resort
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 06-09-2006, 06:17 AM
  5. Subs ???
    By DisneyDan24 in forum Disneyland Resort
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 11-14-2005, 07:48 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •