'Tomorrowland' is the Past; 'Todayland' is the Present and Future

[fo'c's'le swab]

Its hard to do a land on the future because one generations' future is anothers past. The only way to keep Tomorrowland fresh is to either make it into a giant money sink or every 20 years or so tear it down and rebuild it for the next generation.

(BOLD mine) "MAKE" it into a giant money sink??!

[Steve DeGaetano]

That idea does not have merit, that idea is one of the huge reasons that TL98 failed.

The reason for the failure was not the concept, it was the execution. That's why the DLP version is, in fact, successful.

A look at the future from the eyes of a man who lived over a hundered years ago, thats not futuristic, thats a step in the wrong direction.

The fact is, it may be impossible for "Tomorrowland" as a "theme" to remain viable. If that is indeed the case, then a step in a different--but related--direction may be necessary. I'm not necessarily saying it is; there are still "futurists" such as those who created the wonderful and futuristic Star Trek series, with it's wonderful toys like holodecks and transporters and "stun" settings on their phasers. But as it seems a difficult theme to maintain, then a step in a different direction may in fact be the only solution.

Most of his ideas are already reality or defunct. The Nautilus, thats not futuristic

Not to sound impolite, but, um...duh. I was in no way suggesting that Verne's ideas were "futuristic." How you arrived at that conclusion is beyond me.

at least Nemo has a futuristic twist. How about a helicopter and a drill to the center of the earth.

Nemo--the fish ride--has no futuristic twist, other than telling you a hydrophone is futuristic. Well, I'm telling you the emperor has no clothes.

They need to stop reusing old ideas and actually create something new and imaginative.

In case you haven't noticed, virtually EVERYTHING in Disneyland is based on "old ideas." Many folks call those old ideas "Archetypes." It's not Disney's "Peter Pan" that allows the story to be compelling; it's the archetype of lost innocence. It's not Disney's Pirates of the Caribbean that necessarily drives the ride's popularity--it's being able to participate in the archetype of sailing the high seas, pure independence, surviving on one's wits--pure adventure that has been told and retold in stories probably even before Robinson Caruso.

Tom Sawyer Island (before being evicted), the American Frontier, Adventureland, Main Street--all rely on very powerful archetypes and on our collective unconscious and collective societal memories. Sure, the rides are fun. But their deeper meaning gives them true staying power. A "New" Tomorrowland could be built using those formulas as well. And it would no doubt be successful--I again say--just like DLP.

But yeah, thanks for completely misconstruing my entire post. This was fun!

[IndianaJenn]

Moderator Note:

Please remember that discussion of Reputation is not permitted on the boards.

Thanks!

From the Rules & FAQs:

What about discussing reputation points with other members?

This is strictly prohibited. Do NOT discuss reputation (including comments and points) anywhere on the boards or in private messages with other users. Also, do not discuss the giving or receiving of Reputation on the boards. If you have any problems with a specific reputation comment, then private message a moderator or administrator (or use the ‘Contact Us’ page).

[1disneynut2another]

The reason for the failure was not the concept, it was the execution. That's why the DLP version is, in fact, successful.

The fact is, it may be impossible for "Tomorrowland" as a "theme" to remain viable. If that is indeed the case, then a step in a different--but related--direction may be necessary. I'm not necessarily saying it is; there are still "futurists" such as those who created the wonderful and futuristic Star Trek series, with it's wonderful toys like holodecks and transporters and "stun" settings on their phasers. But as it seems a difficult theme to maintain, then a step in a different direction may in fact be the only solution.

Not to sound impolite, but, um...duh. I was in no way suggesting that Verne's ideas were "futuristic." How you arrived at that conclusion is beyond me.

Nemo--the fish ride--has no futuristic twist, other than telling you a hydrophone is futuristic. Well, I'm telling you the emperor has no clothes.

In case you haven't noticed, virtually EVERYTHING in Disneyland is based on "old ideas." Many folks call those old ideas "Archetypes." It's not Disney's "Peter Pan" that allows the story to be compelling; it's the archetype of lost innocence. It's not Disney's Pirates of the Caribbean that necessarily drives the ride's popularity--it's being able to participate in the archetype of sailing the high seas, pure independence, surviving on one's wits--pure adventure that has been told and retold in stories probably even before Robinson Caruso.

Tom Sawyer Island (before being evicted), the American Frontier, Adventureland, Main Street--all rely on very powerful archetypes and on our collective unconscious and collective societal memories. Sure, the rides are fun. But their deeper meaning gives them true staying power. A "New" Tomorrowland could be built using those formulas as well. And it would no doubt be successful--I again say--just like DLP.

But yeah, thanks for completely misconstruing my entire post. This was fun!

Im sorry that you cant handle being disagreed with but thats ok, Discoveryland might be successful in Paris but to pass it of as Tomorrowland is a travesty, saying that the future is not a viable theme is rediculous, there is and will always be a future to imagine and look forward to, and in saying that you think that Vernes ideas in anyway belong in Tomorrowland directly infers that they are futuristic, Nemos thematic points are always up for debate so there is no real contesting to that. As for archetypes and old ideas there is a difference, I said they need to stop reusing old ideas, I didnt say that they need to stop using archetypes, Disneyland is an archetype, I was refering to, and you might agree with me on this one Steve, old rides and attractions from other parks, like BLAB, Innoventions, HISTA, anything having to do with Discoveryland and so forth. Tomorrowland needs fresh ideas so it can look like an idea of the future and not just a WDW clone.

[Steve DeGaetano]

Not sure who can't handle being disagreed with, 1D2A. You're the one who seems a might defensive.

Again, I didn't say to wedge Vern's ideas into Tomorrowland. I don't know why you insist on rephrasing what I say to suit you.

I am suggesting that perhaps the Tomorrowland theme is too difficult to maintain in today's fast-changing society, when the "communicators" of Star Trek become the cell phones of today in a matter of only a few years. So, if in fact it may be too difficult or costly to revamp "Tomorrowland" every few years to keep up, then perhaps the theme should be abandoned. And, BTW, I'm not saying I wish this. As a staunch traditionalist, I love the idea of Tomorrowland. But perhaps its concept has reached the point of infeasibility.

Now, please don't suggest that I'm trying to squeeze Verne into Tomorrowland. Just read what I've written, and argue against the points I've laid out in print--not the ones I haven't.

[1disneynut2another]

Personally, I've always been intrigued with the DLP "Discoveryland," what the future looked like to folks like Verne. A full-size walk-through Nautilus? I'll take it!

Now, I know that TL 98 attempted to replicate this, with horrendous results. The idea wasn't bad; it was just poorly and relatively cheaply executed. Still, I think the idea has merit, if it was done right. And by "right," that might mean a total demoliton of the area; a re-building nearly from the ground up.

Am I missing something!(BOLD mine)

[fo'c's'le swab]

I am suggesting that perhaps the Tomorrowland theme is too difficult to maintain in today's fast-changing society, when the "communicators" of Star Trek become the cell phones of today in a matter of only a few years. So, if in fact it may be too difficult or costly to revamp "Tomorrowland" every few years to keep up, then perhaps the theme should be abandoned. And, BTW, I'm not saying I wish this. As a staunch traditionalist, I love the idea of Tomorrowland. But perhaps its concept has reached the point of infeasibility.

This raises an interesting question, which I would like to expand the topic of my thread to encompass:

Is it practical to do away with the pretense of an under-utilized "Tomorrow" theme, and replace it with something easier to maintain thematically, structurally, and cosmetically?

[1disneynut2another]

Anyways lets get back on topic, sorry Swab, I am tiered of people saying that the Autopia should have electric or hybrid cars, its already out dated. It seems like no one can think of an actual futuristic version on that ride, I think they should be little hovercrafts.

[1disneynut2another]

This raises an interesting question, which I would like to expand the topic of my thread to encompass:

Is it practical to do away with the pretense of an under-utilized "Tomorrow" theme, and replace it with something easier to maintain thematically, structurally, and cosmetically?

Heracy, there is always a future ahead of us it just needs actual forethought and imagination, not the replication of other parks attractions or reworked ideas.

[fo'c's'le swab]

Anyways lets get back on topic, sorry Swab, I am tiered of people saying that the Autopia should have electric or hybrid cars, its already out dated. It seems like no one can think of an actual futuristic version on that ride, I think they should be little hovercrafts.

This, too, is my argument against going to all the trouble and expense of refurbing Autopia to an electric/hybrid-based tech. There is nothing futuristic about this tech anymore, so why rush headlong (once again) into obsolesence?

[BoogaFrito]

Star Tours-- ... To others, the presence of space travel, advanced technologies, robots, and other alien races makes ST a viable TL-themed attraction.

I believe that line could reasonably apply to Buzz Lightyear as well (the fact they're toys in the Toy Story movie notwithstanding).

But I do think having Incredipods buzzing around overhead would definitely feel futuristic, in spite of how the ride itself is ultimately themed (though hopefully it'll honor the larger "Tomorrowland" idea and not simply echo scenes from the film...).

As to the "success" of Discoveryland in Paris, I believe the concept has largely been abandoned there. With Star Tours, Buzz Lightyear, HISTA, Space Mtn 2, and Legend of the Lion King (?!), only the Orbitron, Nautilus and external architectural flourishes remain.

[fo'c's'le swab]

I believe that line could reasonably apply to Buzz Lightyear as well (the fact they're toys in the Toy Story movie notwithstanding).

I have seen this argument employed as well--a noble effort, but seems relatively desperate (but what newer attraction's connection with its host Land isn't, nowadays )

[1disneynut2another]

I believe that line could reasonably apply to Buzz Lightyear as well (the fact they're toys in the Toy Story movie notwithstanding).

THis would be a viable argument if it werent for the fact that the Buzz ride is clearly full of toys, they are in boxes and even have batteries. What they should have done was theme it to the TV show which was awsome if not underappreciated. They could have included more characters from star command to separate it more from the toys, but they didnt.

[patattack]

Discoveryland would work, but not in a jules vernish way, its already nemo'd and buzz'd out.

Star tours IS futuristic with its technology and space craft and lightsabers and man-made death stars. The set time and place of Star Wars is not specifically answered, it could be a story told by someone in the far future about our near future, unless someones actually asked george lucas about it.

it will be interesting to see what happens to tomorrowland in its next refurb coming up.

[DarthDucky]

^Star Tours is supposed to be in the past, but in a galaxy far superior to ours.