Sunset Boulevard is bright, colorful, and optimistic. Looming over it all stands the opposite of all that. It works. Why can’t a similar swing back into the light? The car is adjacent, not parked in front of the tower. A pop splash beckoning us back into the light.
Sunset Boulevard and Tower of Terror were designed as part of the same project, with complementary design language (including the complementary use of art deco, streamline moderne, mission revival, and neo-moorish architectural styles) and one specific "complementary contrast" (the hotel looking abandoned). It works because it was carefully designed to work.
Once again, nobody is saying that the updated color scheme of the car "can't" work (I have said I'm cautiously optimistic that it will), only that
we do not yet know whether it will negatively impact the Tower of Terror's carefully crafted approach experience - which is one of the most highly regarded experiences in theme park design, and which relies upon the influence of everything in the guests' visual field. That is why, in my initial post about this, I was asking for the opinions of people who've seen how it looks in person so far. And again, among the factors that may allow the updated car to still work are precisely the careful decisions that Imagineering made due to these issues: to set the entrance back, to use art deco inspired design for the archway, etc.
Because according to some on here the music recording industry is super serious and muted, and we can't have any color or shenanigans to brighten our enjoyment at a theme park. Rock'n MUST be a bland colorless building and no matter how far tucked away it is from Sunset Boulevard it must not show any form of upbeat emotion.
Obviously, this is not even remotely what I or anyone else where is saying. We are discussing basic theme park design principles about visual cohesion and their application. It's one thing if you're not familiar with or interested in that topic, but repeatedly misrepresenting the statements of people who are isn't contributing to the conversation.
I do not want to keep correcting misrepresentations, as it requires repeating myself, which is not fair to people who want to read informative discussions. For anyone who wants to know what the actual statements and questions were, you can find them over the previous few pages, and I trust that people can differentiate between them and how they're being mischaracterized.
Paris shows how aesthetically/emotionally compelling a park can be when all the design principles are applied right practically everywhere. It's pretty much the standard by which all other theme park design can be judged.
