Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 31 to 39 of 39
  1. #31

    • Beach Expert
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    A beach town that Harbor Blvd was named after
    Posts
    10,594

    Re: How are the Subs NOT futuristic?

    Quote Originally Posted by fo'c's'le swab View Post
    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?!
    Being able to hear fish talk is a ridiculous concept and one that is unlikely to happen. But many of the technologies we have today would have seemed just as crazy if presented back in 1955.

    I am not legitimizing the whole fish-talking idea. I am just saying let's put things and ideas in Tomorrowland that haven't been discovered yet that may just help achieve Walt's goal of living in peace and unity. To that extent, the subs present to us technologies that do seem silly and maybe a bit childish, but if they present some type of utopian future, then I say go for it.

  2. #32

    • Closed Account
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    5,897

    Re: How are the Subs NOT futuristic?

    People who can envision the future based on hard science, projected technology, facts and imagination are called "Futurists." DaVinci was an early one. Gene Rodenberry was another. They are still out there. Disney should hire a few.

    People who give us ideas based on fantasy concepts with no basis whatsoever in reality are called charlatans.

  3. #33

    • Look Right, Pick Up Phone
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    1,699

    Re: How are the Subs NOT futuristic?

    Lest we forget the vast amount of unexplored ocean. I would say with the fact that there is so much we don't know about it, there's plenty of room for "science, adventure, and ideas." Let's not even DRAG the hydrophones into this. Even if the ride quickly abandons the pretext in order to go following a dad after his adventuresome little son (both of whom are fish), the entire reason we board the subs is to travel to an active underwater volcano (which we do). Just because of the involvement of cartoon characters does not render the ride unfit for Tomorrowland. That'd be like saying that a ride based off a live-action film wouldn't fit in Fantasyland because it's not a cartoon. Thematically, live action and cartoon can co-exist, as is clearly seen by Adventureland.

    Although this hardly justifies ANYTHING, at the absolute worst case, the submarines are just another offender (although a very small scale offender if you ask me) on a STAGGERING list of things that shouldn't be in Tomorrowland.

  4. #34

    • 88 mph
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Irvine, CA 10 miles from DL
    Posts
    808

    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... 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...
    There are flying cars.


    What about the Moller M400?


    "Impossible is just a big word thrown around by small men who find it easier to live in the world they've been given than to explore the power they have to change it. Impossible is not a fact. It's an opinion. Impossible is not a declaration. It's a dare. Impossible is potential. Impossible is temporary... Impossible is nothing."
    -Adidas
    Quote Originally Posted by KISSman View Post
    In the grand scope of life, there's nothing actually cool about being knowledgeable about an amusement park.

  5. #35

    • Long Distance Imagineer
    • Offline

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Mesa, Arizona
    Posts
    418

    Re: How are the Subs NOT futuristic?

    Quote Originally Posted by DisneyIPresume 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.
    Tomorrowland is also missing the part about predictions of constructive things to come. While it's nice to use "future technology" to hear the conversations of fish, that's it. That's the limits of the innovative ideas to be inspired from the new sub attraction. There could have been so much more done, but the creativity to be found in the story line seems to have stopped at that point.

    My question, if such "future technology" were to become available, is what could we learn from them? If humans were to begin colonizing underwater, what could we learn about them in order to survive?

  6. #36

    • Minion
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Las Vegas, NV
    Posts
    2,852
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: How are the Subs NOT futuristic?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeronius View Post
    There are flying cars.


    What about the Moller M400?
    Good find.. So why isn't a universal translater possible... One that will translate all languages even the ones you don't realize are forms of communication... I just don't understand why everyone has to justify the whole thing and why everyone has to tear eachother apart... I am not saying that it is possible to be 18 again however you never know if one day they can will be able to come up with a time machine where you would be able to releave those moments... Like I said before and I think people should actually pay attention to the whole sentence...

    Anything is possible within the realm of possibilities...

    Just where that realm lies no one knows until the boundaries have been pushed...
    Please help me raise money for children's hospitals by clicking the extra life image.






  7. #37

    • Minion
    • Offline

    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    corona
    Posts
    1,938

    Re: How are the Subs NOT futuristic?

    Quote Originally Posted by Snow_White_Raven View Post
    Good find.. So why isn't a universal translater possible... One that will translate all languages even the ones you don't realize are forms of communication... I just don't understand why everyone has to justify the whole thing and why everyone has to tear eachother apart... I am not saying that it is possible to be 18 again however you never know if one day they can will be able to come up with a time machine where you would be able to releave those moments... Like I said before and I think people should actually pay attention to the whole sentence...

    Anything is possible within the realm of possibilities...

    Just where that realm lies no one knows until the boundaries have been pushed...
    like phil diffy's wizard!

  8. #38

    • Member
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Sierra Madre, CA
    Posts
    481

    Re: How are the Subs NOT futuristic?

    Quote Originally Posted by wave789 View Post
    I'm referring to the "technology" that allows guests to understand the speech of fish. Since this and the idea of discovery are the center thematic concepts of the ride, it fully fits in Tomorrowland.

    The Submarine Voyage takes us on a futuristic journey through liquid space where we will one day be able to understand the languages of fish and be captivated by the stories they will tell.

    Are the Subs not futuristic because fish won't exist in the future? Is it because understanding fish speech is too futuristic? Is it because animated fish are less futuristic than fish that look realistic today?

    Or is it because the timeless tale of Finding Nemo perhaps takes place in the present, despite the obvious employment of futuristic technology on the ride?
    You have to understand. In MiceChat, unless an attraction has a spaceship, then it won't be considered a "futuristic" attraction. If there is no spaceship, then we get "Tomorrowland is a failure," or "What does this have to do tomorrow." Since MiceChat seems to take things so literally, Disney should've put in a sunken spaceship, then we wouldn't be having this discussion.

  9. #39

    • Look Right, Pick Up Phone
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    1,699

    Re: How are the Subs NOT futuristic?

    I think a lot of people seem to be focusing TOO much on the fact that it's Nemo. If you take a step back, at least three things make this fit:

    1) In the beginning, the point of the ride is NOT Nemo. It's not "Hey, let's go look for that loveable, troublesome little clownfish." In the beginning, it's about traveling to an active undersea volcano for scientific research.

    2) Sure, it may be weak, but the hydrophones bring up another interesting aspect. If it weren't for the hydrophones, the adventure wouldn't be happening in the first place because we couldn't hear the fish. For those saying that we could "hear" them in the movie without the hydrophone, stop and consider this: is there ever a SINGLE instance in the film where a human character actually hears one of the fish talking? Ever? Of course the film didn't pull some "we're using a hydrophone" because it was never supposed to be like that. But the submarine ride involves the fish interacting with each other, as well as the submarine goers.

    3) If the submarines fit into Tomorrowland in the first place (and I'm pretty sure Walt himself will always win the "What fits into Tomorrowland debate," seeing as how he made that dedication that people keep tossing around on these boards. There is still a sense of discovery and scientific research in the ride, even if it has cartoon characters that were featured in a contemporary time perspective.

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

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
  •