Discussion in 'Disneyland Resort' started by jt04, May 14, 2016.
That would have been one long coaster ride.
And my old Souvenir Map of Disneyland showed a version with outside tracks as "Coming Soon".
The development of SM is a great story. Originally, during the planning for New Tomorrowland '67, it was to have six tracks and the somewhat stretched hexagonal footprint was that shape in order to take up all the available space from Main St. to Grand Canyon Diorama, and Inner Space and Flight to the Moon to Primeval World. Early concept art and models for WDW used this shape as a placeholder. Text descriptions for WDW pre-opening described going outside before "plunging" into the darkness of space. Renderings of the completed WDW Tomorrowland '75 (including SM) show fake outside tracks on the otherwise accurate depiction (minus the Peoplemover track leaving If You Had Wings in the wrong position). The fake tracks were ommitted along with some of the vertical spires.
My understanding was that outside track was definitely part of the original concept before Walt died.
I'm a huge Space Mountain fan, yet I know very little about its development. Do you know how the concept originated? Adventures in Science was originally slated for that space and evolved into Adventure Thru Inner Space. What was the impetus for building Space Mountain instead?
By the way, this concept piece by Herb Ryman showing Space Mountain's planned exterior trackways and a multi-leveled TL is one of my favorites.
Would have been interesting...but incredibly ugly.
I LIVED for these renderings. The two years that TL was closed was an eternity for me. I'm in the babyboomer/space generation. My mother worked in aerospace and I had lapel pins of X-15 and XB-70 (my favorite--it looked like Johnny Quest's plane) and mission patches for space missions. I wanted to live in the Monsanto house and was sad when it was demolished (and I love the B&W episode of That '70s Show where Red demands his Hover Car).
I grew up two miles due South of the DL Hotel. I was a true believer in the "Great Big Beautiful Tomorrow". Those Herb Ryman renderings of Tomorrowland were Nirvana to me. And while the result was different in many ways, it still had the kinetic energy and, with the 1977 addition of SM and the multi-level environment, some of the expansive feel. Enclosing the theater for Captain EO and moving Rocket Jets was a hard blow. Reportedly, one of the suggestions that George Lucas made at WED while they were planning Star Tours was to give more of TL an upper level.
I think it's a shame that Eisner never applied his love for world-class architects to EPCOT. The 1964 World's Fair had a much more diverse design base (some good, some not) including some name architects.
I admit that I am a creature of the 20th century, but that type of image still looks so futuristic and cool to me. If they could recreate that today, it would still look unique and impressive and obviously Tomorrowland. Even though that's an image from 1965-ish, it still looks future cool.
Why TDA and Burbank can't fix Tomorrowland is beyond me. The Parks division makes a Billion (with a B) dollars per quarter in pure after-tax profit, and Disneyland's Tomorrowland still looks like crud and still creates a drag on overall park capacity. Pure TDA management incompetence on display in Tomorrowland in 2017.
@TP2000 As fabulous as TL 67 was it still didn't match some of the ambitious inspiration whipped by Herb Raman in his concept sketches. Not even close. In fact TL was already outdated within a few years after the reopening.
Considering how much capital that's been wasted.... err... invested in TL in Anaheim I'm betting that Burbank and/or the board is very hesitant to task WDI to reinterpret a future cool TL for this generation based on Walt's "living blueprint of the future" philosophy. So I fully expect them to completely ditch any pretense of trying to represent the future in the next reincarnation and base everything on sci-fi related IP instead.
Walls go up around Tomorrowland: "We are imagineering a new world. Welcome to the planet Arrakis. Also known as Dune!".
I know this was probably discussed many times already but the search feature hasn't yielded much results. How exactly is Disney planning to reconcile having Star Tours completely separated from Star Wars Land? I know Disney has attractions with the same IP at different parks within the same resort (with Toy Story being the biggest offender) but having a dedicated land for a property and then a major attraction themed to the same property across the park in a different land would be a first . From what I can gather, there are no plans to remove (or relocate) Star Tours in the near future but leaving it as-is would be too incongruous even by modern "anything goes" Disney standards. This doesn't even get into the inevitable guest confusion and marketing complications that an unintuitive ride placement like this will cause. I haven't been following Disney parks lately because most of the news is so depressing so someone enlighten me on the plans (if there are any).
The current rumor is that Star Tours will close when SW Land opens.
Not according to THIS article which states plans for a Tomorrowland rehab is over a decade away and that, "There are no plans to move Star Tours."
There is no reason for Star Tours to disappear. It's an extremely popular ride. It will just make fan boys with OCD mad. Now I'm going to have to listen to "this doesn't belong here" comments for the next decade.
Of course anything is possible, but I find it hard to believe that LucasFilm wouldn't insist on having all SW related IP inside SW Land at DL and DHS. More to the point "no plans to move" isn't the same as "close".
I don't think Lucasfilm is going to care. TDA will just tell them to pay for the move. Disney doesn't have to cater to Uncle George anymore.
Except that LucasFilm is a business unit, much like Pixar, that undoubtedly weilds large control over the IP under its belt.
Remember how much influence John Lassiter and Pixar had over Cars Land? Considering the value of the franchise I expect a similar level of input from the devopment teams inside LucasFilm responsible for assisting WDI with the delivery of the SW Land project. Again, who knows what will happen, but the probability of Star Tours going away when SW Land opens seems pretty high to me.
Unpopular opinion: I don't like Star Tours, and wouldn't care if it was removed. It's a dated simulator, and the space would be better suited for some form of dark ride (as it was before).
Isn't LucasFilm technically Disney now?
It is, but Dr. Hans meant that WDI and Disney Parks would allow LucasFilm (I'm guessing Kathleen Kennedy had a bit of say on Star Wars in the parks) to voice their opinion and make sure that any Star Wars use would be quality.
In all seriousness, I'm sure the new attractions in Star Wars Land are going to put Star Tours to shame, so keeping it open would just seem sad.
Separate names with a comma.