Discussion in 'Disneyland Resort' started by wdwmagic, Jul 23, 2016.
But this gives me hope that Tomorrowland's overlay will eventually turn to this style:
I think WDI can be forgiven for not embellishing the backside of the building since you can only get a glimpse of it from a few spots on Harbor. That said it's hard to justify the lightly adorned sides, which are a stark contrast to the over-the-top facade and clearly visible from inside DCA. Apparently The Collector ran out of money when he was building his tower.
Boy is that thing ugly.
What do you mean? Most of DL's paint scheme has returned to the pre-'98 blues and whites.
True but a lot of the negative side effects from TL98 are still unfixed.
I'm not sure that the legacy of TL '98 is its biggest problem at this point. More important has been ~20 years of no artistic direction along with underinvestment.
Peoplemover tracks still empty, and Asto Orbitor still there and the Rocket Jets corpse is still dressed up as the Observatron. . Those be part of the 98 legacy.
I don't disagree with you about the astro orbiter, but the lack of anything with respect to the Peoplemover is more about a legacy of failures that includes TL '98. The land lacks direction and investment today, not just in the late 90s.
The land never completely recovered from TL98.
I agree. That doesn't mean that every misstep on display in that land is a consequence of TL98. '98 gets the blame both because it was done without the budget it needed and because it was the last attempt at a cohesive theme. Much of that theme has been removed without providing a cohesive and quality replacement.
Yeah, to be fair at least TL98 was not a giant Star Wars billboard which is pretty much what the land is functioning as now.
Getting back to the Tower, I'm curious how you think Twilight Zone was more fitting of the Disney brand than GOTG?
Seems you think I jumped to conclusions, but as a great American philosopher Buffy Anne Summers once said, "I didn't jump. I took a tiny step, and there the conclusions were." As you are the original author and the only one who knows the true intent of your words, I will honor that, but say that they may be somewhat open to a poor interpretation. (Others, feel free to chime in if I am wrong, though if there are any who agree with me I'd prefer they stay quiet as I don't ever want to gang up on an individual poster.)
If your mind can't be changed then there's nothing to do BUT go in circles until everyone agrees with you. I've posted a lot this past week on how I think Mission Breakout could fit in DCA- sometimes in replies to your own posts. Dismissing them doesn't mean they didn't happen. As I said, I tried humor to keep things light, but that didn't mean I wasn't making points.
The Hollywood Tower Hotel had it's life cut short both in real life, and in it's own story. Certainly it wasn't going to sell due to it's history and being haunted. So whoever would take over such a place is bound to be eccentric. Can it not be imagined that this is the same building, now under new management? (Perhaps this will be part of the new ride's story, who knows- there's bound to be a few nods at least.)
Speaking of Hollywood, what's more California than that? Well, Marvel studios is the biggest Hollywood success story since Pixar. Sure it's not "classic" Hollywood, but then again, neither is the animation building. Marvel: "It's hip. It's now. It's wow. And how." (To quote some other great American thinkers.) Is the park only about what's historically relevant to the region? Because history is written every day- it's nostalgia that takes time. Is it about culture? Because superheroes are part of our culture even if you're not a fan. Some characters live in California, others have been a real-world tradition of hanging outside the Chinese Theater for photographs.
Maybe Avengers Infinity War takes place in California. Maybe the Guardians actually end up prisoners in a tower, in Hollywood, that was once struck by lightning. Would it be then be OK if there was movie canon to back the premise up? Would it be even better if they showed a first draft script where this idea was floated years before the overlay, making it less of a shoehorned in idea? Though saying so does diminish the legitimacy of theme park storytellers by putting cinema on a higher level.
And as we already went back an forth on this, I don't see how must remain in Hollywood Land. Even now it's just Hollywood adjacent. Why can't it be annexed into it's own thing even if it's just a small thing for now? Or they can revert to the backlot theme, in which case this is just a giant set.
Ever heard of California Crazy architecture? It's what got us giant donuts and hat-shaped buildings- so why not a building that looks like a giant circuit board? (homage to Silicone valley?) California has also had it's share of real eccentric millionaires who built some pretty odd stuff. California also has many industrial buildings. And prisons. Why can't the less attractive parts of the state get some theme park representation?
Many have said, good or bad, it draws the eye. Like a big wienie. Who liked using visual pulls to move the crowds? (or for some guests, visual deterrants)
Some will never believe that the TOT was anything less that a classic- nor that it didn't meet expectations from both a general audience perspective and a corporate one. Sure they could have done some tweaks, but how much would it cost and would it really make a difference past a season? Here we have a property that seems to be on the rise and looks to have some legs. Here we have an opportunity to look beyond an everyday elevator, and push the ride system to deliver more. Yes, merchandise. Yes, movie tie-ins, not only with Guardians, but all of Marvel in the form of the Collector's displays (always something new to look at.) Yes, multiple soundtracks, multiple ride profiles, multiple pipes on the exterior. Yes, synergy, synergy, synergy. Yes, cool new lighting package. Yes, to something less horror themed and thus, more family friendly. Yes to kids saying "I Am Groot" repeatedly in line. Yes, Joe Rhode. You've heard of killing two birds with one stone, well I think for the board that approved this, they saw a whole flock going down with a single green light.
I'm sure these aren't the best points, but 90% of this post is more for my own amusement and to hopefully pull some others out of the dreck that is Disney Parks discussion. I'm not trying to change your opinion and we've likely gone full circle again. Anyway, I don't wish to argue with you. We're clearly here for different things and I don't want to ruin your time here. I thought I loved the parks, but these forums make it frequently clear that my opinions will lead to its undoing (should probably sell that stock then.) I get the passion, but I don't get the rigidity. Flexible things last. Rigid things break. I had some fun going back and forth with others here, and I'm sorry you got caught up in it.
People express their passion for their own Disney experience in individual ways. I understand that strongly expressed rhetoric that disagrees with one's own views will inspire strongly opposing emotions. That's just human nature, and being human is something we all share. Your milage may vary, but when I see a poster delivering a strongly expressed viewpoint, I have an appreciation for their personal passion. If they indulge in a personal attack on another poster in the process, that's another matter, but I haven't seen that here.
With people posting comparisons to past Tomorrowland looks, I'm surprised no one has brought up this:
Plectu's Fantastic Galactic Review was an overlay of the Carousel of Progress building housing an "intergalactic collection" of alien creatures in a musical review. Part of the much hyped "Disney Decade," back when wallets were supposed to open wide and yet, as you can see here, taking some random tech to an existing building was acceptable.
^^^I LOVE that my photo of this project has made it all over the world! See: http://insightsandsounds.blogspot.com/2017/03/the-why-behind-nine-years-of-insights.html
I like how you said that "but musical talking bears, tikis, and even Disney characters in robotic form were no longer a big draw." It's sad that Plectu's never happened.
I wish it would have been built, but especially the Disneyland version of Alien Encounter.
Speaking of mechanical entertainers, I do hold out the small hope that the Rocket Raccoon slated to be a part of this overlay of the Attraction will be a AA figure.
It would be nice to have some actual dimensional figures involved instead of just screen graphic animation.
Perhaps in the queue / pre-show...?
Screens will likely be used elsewhere, which is expected considering the IP and Attraction probabilities.
I just realized that the Observatron is perched on top of Plectu's in the concept art. I'd never noticed it before.
Separate names with a comma.