Hi everyone! Little plug here, but I found some concept art I hadn't seen and posted it here.
I'm calling @Figments Friend to this thread. If anyone has seen this obscure art before, it would be her. But it's new to me.
It also shows how quickly the Imagineering artform was advancing in the 1970's. This type of development really wouldn't be seen until Disneyland Paris opened in 1992, or Tokyo Disneysea in 2001. It was a style of Imagineering showing that Tony Baxter was ahead of his time in the 1970's.
These pieces really show off how well DB would have fit into Disneyland vs standing so out of place like SW:GE.Makes the presence of SW:GE sting more.
These pieces really show off how well DB would have fit into Disneyland vs standing so out of place like SW:GE.
I think the ire is taken more with *Single IP-based* lands - No one complains about the amount of IP in Fantasyland, largely because the IPs fit together under the concept of the land and the land's concept extends beyond a singular property. The same could have been said of Discovery Bay.It's so weird. Did I just imagine all the lengthy discussions on why IP based lands and convoluted backstories where everything is connected through some weird meta-verse was BAD?
Oh, you mean like Discoveryland in Paris!They should really just replace Tomorrowland with Discovery Bay. A land devoted to invention, exploration, and ingenuity.
I think the ire is taken more with *Single IP-based* lands
*Technically* Mysterious Island is a 2 IP land - 20,000 Leagues and Journey to the Center of the Earth are different properties. But they are both Verne, so I see what you mean. Not to mention that the relative obscurity of 20K and Journey as IP leaves their attractions feeling to most guests like wholly new experiences. In Mysterious Island's case I think it would come down to how exceptionally well executed it is, and how well it complements the rest of the park.But Mysterious Island at Tokyo Disney Sea is ok?
I don't want to give the impression that liking either is wrong, as I really do think it just comes down to personal preference. It's just weird see the same faults excused in one concept and derided in another in an attempt to validate one attraction as more "artistic" than another.
Discovery Bay though, and especially, benefits from the projections and lofty goals of the design team, since it only exists on paper.
Yep! Maybe an emphasis on 1900's America meets innovation. Discoveryland still feels like an Expo with metal structures rather than a port city which is building upon its foundations. I think that's the biggest drawback of ALL Tomorrowlands, its the one land where I can't imagine living there. With every other land, even Critter Country, I get a sense of a community and life outside of the attractions. I'm in a fictional world. With every Tomorrowland, even Discoveryland, it just feels like attractions plopped down with futuristic theming and landscaping. It feels like a theme park rather than another world.Oh, you mean like Discoveryland in Paris!
It probably also helps that at the time of Mysterious Island's inception such narrowly-focused lands were an exception rather than a rule, and present Disney has made clear their intentions to continue rather pretty exclusively down that path. But even if it were built today its unique and well-realized enough to inspire awe rather than ire.
I think people are more bothered by the trend than by most of the examples of it, you know? I don't care for Avatar but Pandora is great, I don't care for Cars but Cars Land is great, I'm not a Star Wars junkie but Galaxy's Edge is . . . well, ambitious . . . but thinking the days of Disney building a Fantasyland-style fusion land are behind us bothers me. Part of the magic is seeing them weave things together in a new way like that and finding new creations to fit within that structure, instead of just "dragging and dropping" a whole environment out of a movie (obviously it's not *that* simple, but I think you know what I mean).
Interesting thought! I can't imagine really living in any of DLP's lands aside from Frontierland and Main Street, but I've never thought of theme park design from that angle.Yep! Maybe an emphasis on 1900's America meets innovation. Discoveryland still feels like an Expo with metal structures rather than a port city which is building upon its foundations. I think that's the biggest drawback of ALL Tomorrowlands, its the one land where I can't imagine living there. With every other land, even Critter Country, I get a sense of a community and life outside of the attractions. I'm in a fictional world. With every Tomorrowland, even Discoveryland, it just feels like attractions plopped down with futuristic theming and landscaping. It feels like a theme park rather than another world.
Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.