DznyRktekt
Well-Known Member
Amazing. And to think they just demolished some of the more nicely detailed facades at WDW.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Closing of Tower of Terror (WDW)
- Thread starter Dunston
- Start date
Daveeeeed
Well-Known Member
It had to come though with the state of the Backlot Tour. Though nothing tops Tokyo Disney Sea.
Love this.
Disney Sea's ToT is indeed very well themed, but as a whole, WDW's is still the best
Daveeeeed
Well-Known Member
Problem is... people are comparing the world's best theme park and using that against the best Tower of Terror. Not the actual towers themselves.
RSoxNo1
Well-Known Member
American Waterfront is a pretty spectacular land. While all of DisneySea is great, American Waterfront and Mysterious Island are next level.
FigmentForver96
Well-Known Member
I like how since you no longer can argue the DCA vs DHS angle you decide to bring in the Tokyo version which is a whole other world then the Orlando one. Different story, different area
brb1006
Well-Known Member
Photos do no justice and it's even better to see the park in person.
brb1006
Well-Known Member
Now I want to visit Tokyo all of a sudden.
Professortango1
Well-Known Member
I didn't bring in Tokyo. Another poster did and I agreed they had the best themeing. The fact people think DHS has better themeing than Tokyo Seas shows a clear bias. While I personally feel the fully realized Buena Vista Street facades and impressive scale create a greater authentic atmosphere to lead up to Tower, I can also understand it isn't perfect. DCA's Hollywoodland has some major flaws and while I find the land more immersive and interesting than the one sides Sunset Blvd, many others prefer the picture perfect set up to Tower and the open feeling and themed shops.
It's like argueing which Tower is best. Many prefer the stylized and kitschy original and others prefer the darker more modern versions. Neither one is right or wrong. I'd personally love to see Sunset Blvd get a Buena Vista style retheme with full sized Carthay and streetcars. I also think a Super Hero inspired retheme would fit the new identity perfectly. But that's just me. Others are going to feel differently of course.
Magenta Panther
Well-Known Member
WOW....just...thank you for these pictures. Incredible!!!!
EVERYONE has biases--even you.
It comes across as incredibly disrespectful and belittling when you, on the one hand, say there's no right opinion, but then write the other off with descriptions like "kitschy" and "having clear bias." I can assure you that's not why I prefer WDW's Tower.
I'm also baffled by how anyone could consider the DCA or Paris versions of Tower to be "darker," but that's your right. I personally find the other boilerooms to be cartoonish and the mirror scene and the 'window into an elevator' scenes to be especially cheesy (and not in a good way).
Last edited:
Professortango1
Well-Known Member
I never said I'm not bias. And kitschy wasn't meant in a derogatory manner. The original tower was clearly trying to capture the feeling of the original TV show with direct projections of Rod Serling, the animated spiral, and the eye and window appearing throughout. The original creation didn't try and update or modernize these iconic things, instead they embraced the feel of the show. Fun, well written, and full of 1950's low budget charm and creativity. I believe this was a conscious choice Disney made and it is effective.
For the newer Towers the re-recorded narration is darker and more menacing as is the music. They've replaced the callbacks to the show with more fright-based imagery and selling the ghost story aspect more.
The original has an ethereal feel with scenes quietly fading away as we feel like we're drifting through another realm. The new towers are focused more on Haunted house imagery. We don't see a window float away, instead we see a ghostly elevator drop, dooming the souls within. Then we drop. We don't pass through a nebulous realm between worlds, we see our reflection disappear as we become trapped in this hotel of spirits.
I prefer the menacing version with more modern effects as the 5th Dimension Room doesn't work for me and the hallway ending feels unfinished, but that's me.
I think the original is ambitious with making a thrill ride based around ghosts less of a horror attraction and more of cooky experience tied to the source material.
I agree with most of that, and that is is a much more nuanced opinion than your use of "Kitschy" earlier, which has a much different definition than what it seems you meant to convey.
This is actually a pretty apt description--though for me, it's that exact "haunted house" imagery that actively works against the tonal and well-paced brilliance of the original.
Professortango1
Well-Known Member
Kitsch: considered to be in poor taste but appreciated in an ironic or knowing way.
Disney providing subpar effects and design purposefully to reflect the time and feel of the show. It's like shabby-chic. Sure, it looks run down and falling apart, but it's a desired effect meant to simulate that feel.
As for original vs remake, it's like movies. The older versions are usually more ambitious in design but dated in other elements. The make is more entertaining to a modern consumer, but generally plays up one angle of the original.
It's like the original Bedazzled vs the newer Brendan Frasier version. The original had incredible writing and fantastic dry comedians like Dudley Moore and Peter Cook. But the film was very 60's and not accessible to modern audiences. The newer version has more simplistic writing but focuses more on comedic sketches using modern technology and effects. I prefer the original for what it says, but I understand people who just can't get past the dated style.
With the Towers, I see them as two different takes on the same ride. One is trying to pay homage and the other is trying to stand on its own more. I loved the original when it opened but was floored by the changes in the newer one. It felt so much creepier and less ironic and campy and I personally thought it was great. The newer version spoke to me. Obviously it doesn't speak to you.
It's like the ending of Haunted Mansion. Some prefer the physical effects of the original with an unseen ghost attaching itself to you. Others prefer the animated silly interactions now in place. Both get audience reaction, but it's that playful nature vs the creepier tone. One version ends in a "boo" and the other in a chuckle.
Yep, that's where we disagree again. Guess your stance wasn't as nuanced or understanding as I had hoped. I don't find the original ToT to be ironic, nor do I suspect it was designed that way either, despite you seeming to think that's why people prefer it.
It's less "paying homage" as it well-themed and understanding of the subject matter--it's actually working on a couple of different layers, capturing the feel of an old, abandoned hotel while infusing it with the essence of the Twilight Zone. And it's that essence that is the cherry on top for me. I actually agree with you that DCA's Tower feels more like its own thing, as in divorced from the subject matter--I just don't find that to be a good thing. WDW's Tower is magnificent because of how it brought all of these elements together cohesively.
Yeah, our opinions literally couldn't be more different on this. I'm glad that the DCA one has such a big fan though! I rather like it too--I just think it got shafted compared to the original
always hate leaving here
TP2000
Well-Known Member
Just because I'm picky, The Twilight Zone TV show was not really 1950's, it was 1960's.
While there was a lone pilot episode aired in November, 1958, the show didn't get picked up by a network until late 1959. It then was televised on CBS through the summer of 1964. The vast bulk of the show was created, written, filmed and broadcast during the 1960-1964 timeframe. And as someone who remembers that time, it has that iconic early to mid 1960's look when it comes to hairdos and hemlines, lapel and necktie widths, and culture and technology.
With the exception of the pilot and the first few episodes, it really doesn't have the look or feel of the 1950's at all.
While there was a lone pilot episode aired in November, 1958, the show didn't get picked up by a network until late 1959. It then was televised on CBS through the summer of 1964. The vast bulk of the show was created, written, filmed and broadcast during the 1960-1964 timeframe. And as someone who remembers that time, it has that iconic early to mid 1960's look when it comes to hairdos and hemlines, lapel and necktie widths, and culture and technology.
With the exception of the pilot and the first few episodes, it really doesn't have the look or feel of the 1950's at all.
Matt_Black
Well-Known Member
Ah, but weren't many episodes adapted from existing short stories, which WERE written in the 50s?
Professortango1
Well-Known Member
You're absolutely correct. I knew it started in the 50's, didn't realize it was 1959. Thanks for providing some history. Loved that show and The Outer Limits.