deleted

FigmentFan82

Well-Known Member
So I think I had a post removed for including a link to another site. Didn’t know there were taboo sites to link to and totally wasn’t trying to ruffle any feathers. Just new here and hoping to contribute to the conversation. I look forward to more WDW discussion! Cheers!
 

MisterPenguin

President of Animal Kingdom
Premium Member
So I think I had a post removed for including a link to another site. Didn’t know there were taboo sites to link to and totally wasn’t trying to ruffle any feathers. Just new here and hoping to contribute to the conversation. I look forward to more WDW discussion! Cheers!

The WDW sites that have "news today" and "easy" in their names are the ones to avoid.
 

Kman101

Well-Known Member
Tomorrowland while not perfect is severely underrated.

Not trying to be snarky or argue (since sometimes things get taken the wrong way), but what makes it underrated? I'd love to be sold on why this movie is better than I thought it was (I admit I could have had the wrong expectations towards it, maybe it's worth a re-watch; I remain unsurprised it tanked - Disney standard tanking, not regular tanking).
 

geekza

Well-Known Member
Not trying to be snarky or argue (since sometimes things get taken the wrong way), but what makes it underrated? I'd love to be sold on why this movie is better than I thought it was (I admit I could have had the wrong expectations towards it, maybe it's worth a re-watch; I remain unsurprised it tanked - Disney standard tanking, not regular tanking).
I'll bite. Firstly, we all have different tastes and there's nothing wrong with that. The film just might not have been one that connected with you. It certainly didn't connect to a wide audience.

I can only speak to my own opinions on the film. To me, there was far more to like about it than dislike and, in some cases, there were aspects of it that I found to be extraordinary.

The production design of the Tomorrowland city was top-notch. You could tell that a lot of thought went into it.

There was a good balance of action and ideas. Too many times, "family films" aim low and are simplified in order to reach a wide audience. Like the best Science Fiction, Tomorrowland dealt heavily with an idea and showed a possible outcome of moving that central idea forward. In this case, it was the Ayn Rand-ian notion of Objectivism. What would happen if that philosophy was taken to an extreme? What are the benefits? What are the undesirable results? In the end, is it worth it? That's pretty heady stuff for a family film and tricky to balance with lighter, more traditionally entertaining elements.

I thought the acting was good. I always like George Clooney and Hugh Laurie, but I thought the young actors did a fine job as well.

It had interesting action beats, though I do think that the last section of the film seemed to sacrifice some of the previous thoughtfulness in service of ramping up the excitement.

It was shot well. Camera usage was creative and aesthetically pleasing.

I guess, overall, I just thought it was a notch above most summer movie fodder. While it had some story faults and felt like perhaps it had been "tinkered" with by a studio that didn't trust the material, the bulk of the film was thoughtful, heartfelt, and exciting. I think it could have spent more time in the titular Tomorrowland, but I don't know how much of that is the fault of the original script or post-production editing.

In short, I found it to be a fine film with a lot of creativity and that, even with its faults, it deserves far more credit for being a flawed, but still really good film than it has received.
 

FigmentFan82

Well-Known Member
I'm usually very forgiving of movies that are just "ok" but I felt really let down by Tomorrowland, especially from Brad Bird as well, who is usually aces when it comes to filmmaking. I feel like Tomorrowland is half a good movie. There was so much promise and cool places they could have gone, but it just kind of ended up falling flat. I have high hopes for Jungle Cruise though, and who knows, maybe they could make a Space Mountain movie!! (could be fun, pls don't kill me)
 

Kman101

Well-Known Member
I'll bite. Firstly, we all have different tastes and there's nothing wrong with that. The film just might not have been one that connected with you. It certainly didn't connect to a wide audience.

I can only speak to my own opinions on the film. To me, there was far more to like about it than dislike and, in some cases, there were aspects of it that I found to be extraordinary.

The production design of the Tomorrowland city was top-notch. You could tell that a lot of thought went into it.

There was a good balance of action and ideas. Too many times, "family films" aim low and are simplified in order to reach a wide audience. Like the best Science Fiction, Tomorrowland dealt heavily with an idea and showed a possible outcome of moving that central idea forward. In this case, it was the Ayn Rand-ian notion of Objectivism. What would happen if that philosophy was taken to an extreme? What are the benefits? What are the undesirable results? In the end, is it worth it? That's pretty heady stuff for a family film and tricky to balance with lighter, more traditionally entertaining elements.

I thought the acting was good. I always like George Clooney and Hugh Laurie, but I thought the young actors did a fine job as well.

It had interesting action beats, though I do think that the last section of the film seemed to sacrifice some of the previous thoughtfulness in service of ramping up the excitement.

It was shot well. Camera usage was creative and aesthetically pleasing.

I guess, overall, I just thought it was a notch above most summer movie fodder. While it had some story faults and felt like perhaps it had been "tinkered" with by a studio that didn't trust the material, the bulk of the film was thoughtful, heartfelt, and exciting. I think it could have spent more time in the titular Tomorrowland, but I don't know how much of that is the fault of the original script or post-production editing.

In short, I found it to be a fine film with a lot of creativity and that, even with its faults, it deserves far more credit for being a flawed, but still really good film than it has received.

You pointed out most of what was right with the movie. And agreed it's subjective. I was just wondering why some felt it was "underrated". Not a word I'd use for the movie. I never thought it was horrible or even "bad". I appreciate films for a lot of things and it was a beautiful film, and in that regard maybe it is underrated, but story matters. My problem was it just didn't feel like it knew what it wanted to be. Not that the bones of a potentially great movie weren't there. I guess I'm more mixed on it than I realized.

I'm usually very forgiving of movies that are just "ok" but I felt really let down by Tomorrowland, especially from Brad Bird as well, who is usually aces when it comes to filmmaking. I feel like Tomorrowland is half a good movie. There was so much promise and cool places they could have gone, but it just kind of ended up falling flat. I have high hopes for Jungle Cruise though, and who knows, maybe they could make a Space Mountain movie!! (could be fun, pls don't kill me)

I agree on this. I felt let down and it fell flat for me. It doesn't mean the movie wasn't shot beautifully and the acting wasn't good. That's not even in question for me. lol.

EDIT: And I do sometimes find I change my mind re-watching something. It's just tough to re-watch a movie I was disappointed by again, but maybe I'll try to watch it with a different perspective on it. Sometimes we let our feelings in the moment towards something cloud our judgement, so to speak. I've been meh on some things before and re-watched years later and had a totally different opinion.
 
Last edited:

JayWaters

Member
Not trying to be snarky or argue (since sometimes things get taken the wrong way), but what makes it underrated? I'd love to be sold on why this movie is better than I thought it was (I admit I could have had the wrong expectations towards it, maybe it's worth a re-watch; I remain unsurprised it tanked - Disney standard tanking, not regular tanking).

You know this is a movie that I think about all the time. Particularly the notion that the future used to be a bright beautiful place but became a scary apocalyptic place. In an odd way, I feel that despite the very polarized views of modern day American we’re beginning to see the future as an exciting place again. A place with self driving electric vehicles and drones delivering Amazon packages and numatic tubes connecting the country.
 

articos

Well-Known Member
It’d be a alucabond panel removal and a big crane.
It’d be the same crew/vendor which periodically redoes Life, but they’d have to dig up people who are still familiar with the techniques involved in the panel removals. I believe it’s still the original membrane with some patches here and there. If I recall correctly, there’s structure that sits directly over the ride track as you come out into the dome. If the leak is there, it could be running down the support steel. If it’s in the dome, it’s likely from the roof.
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom