Star Wars themed land announced for Disneyland

lazyboy97o

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
TP2000 said:
I always admire folks who know their history, and WED did some truly ground breaking work.

But let's also remember that WED (and Walt) plopped a 160 foot tall Swiss Matterhorn down in the middle of the park, where it looms over multiple lands and thematic stories that are anything but Swiss. Not to mention the eternal conundrum of how a Swiss mountain could be sitting next to a tropical lagoon with mermaids and atomic submarines going to the North Pole. I bet they had great office parties at WED in the 1950's and 60's, that's the only way to explain it!
259d77eb9757655646a847ce5c945ade.jpg


Adding rocky cliffs beyond the berm on Disneyland's northern flanks will not be an issue. It'll make more sense than many other odd thematic twists installed in the park from 1955 to 1970.
Click to expand...
The Matterhorn makes perfect sense in its original context. Travel and leisure time are a big part of mid-20th century futurism. As a bridge, the Alpine peak was placed next to the Alpine castle.
 
Phroobar

Phroobar

Well-Known Member
If it is only BTR that gets replaced that is only about 10 acres. The other four should come from TT. I wonder how the train gets integrated into this new land.
 
GiveMeTheMusic

GiveMeTheMusic

Well-Known Member
I don't understand why anyone would want Star Wars in DCA. Everything in DCA has a connection, tenuous as it may be, to the California theme, there is no way on earth to justify a galactic spaceport in the context of DCA. Maybe as an extension of Hollywood Land, but even then, that would really suck.

Star Wars is a perfect fit for Disneyland, just like it was in 1987 when Star Tours opened. Star Wars is a richly detailed and beloved fantasy world with larger than life characters, exotic environments and layers and layers of detail. Disneyland is primarily a world of fantasy - fairy tale fantasy, historical fantasies, etc. A space fantasy fits right in. The concept art is so stunningly gorgeous, I can't imagine this being anything less than an absolute home run.

Mickey's Toontown was the first IP based land. It was based almost entirely on the Roger Rabbit film, just with a bigger emphasis on the fab five and some Disney Afternoon thrown in. No one complained about Toontown being an IP based land in the 90's. Toontown itself is an environment lifted directly from a movie. Now it's an issue?

Especially since the alternative (and original plan) was for Star Wars to just take over Tomorrowland. This is infinitely preferable - now Tomorrowland needs help and it won't be in the form of Star Wars.

I realize it's a departure from the original group of lands, but honestly, when the IP is as strong as Star Wars, I just don't think it's a big deal. It's certainly a way better IP than Cars or a bug's life and offers infinitely more possibilities. I would prefer a third gate for it, but that's obviously not on the cards and Disney isn't willing to wait that long for Star Wars.

There are conflicting reports as to whether Toontown will survive. My sources maintain it is going away and Disney is still being cagey about the Star Wars location (and yes, I saw the LA Times article). If Toontown is indeed closing, they will wait as long as possible to admit that to avoid backlash. There have been some calculations of space and it appears that 14 acres can't be reached without overtaking Toontown - so it will be interesting to see how that evolves in the next year or so as they prep for construction.

Those are my $.02 on the issue.
 
lazyboy97o

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
raven24 said:
Yes really, yes. That highway system didn't exist at the time Autopia opened. And Tomorrowland was thematically coherent at one time.
Click to expand...
The highways system did exist. Disneyland was intentionally located off of the future route of the Santa Ana Freeway. Autopia is definitely the bizarre wild child of Disneyland history. It's connection to Tomorrowland may sort of be there, but what about the three versions that existed in Fantasyland? Even stranger, but by the mid-1960s Walt had clearly started to sour on highway dominated urban organization, but the Autopias remained when New Tomorrowland (1967) came about.
 
P

planodisney

Well-Known Member
We'll, theyve kicked that tenuous at best thematic tie to California to the curb by changing out Soarin over California for Soarin over the World, so what difference would Star Wars make with some kind of ridiculously loose tie-in with the rest of the park?
 
Sage of Time

Sage of Time

Well-Known Member
GiveMeTheMusic said:
Mickey's Toontown was the first IP based land. It was based almost entirely on the Roger Rabbit film, just with a bigger emphasis on the fab five and some Disney Afternoon thrown in. No one complained about Toontown being an IP based land in the 90's. Toontown itself is an environment lifted directly from a movie. Now it's an issue?
Click to expand...
Which makes it an amalgam and an experience in the genre of cartoons. It's not perfect, but it's not just dropping ALL of Star Wars into ONE land... which seems lazy. At least Star Tours and Indy interact with TL and AdvL, respectively.
So, yeah, I find an issue with that.
 
V

veritas55

Member
Long-time lurker, first-time poster. I am actually very excited about these Star Wars lands in both parks. The size of it seems like a genuine immersive environment like Carsland, and I think it will look spectacular (if the artist concept is even close to what they build). I wonder why they didn't end up putting it in the autopia/ subs/ carousel of progress area (as was rumored some time ago). Can that area approximate 14 acres? I know it would be a real loss of history and the monorail messes up the scheme, but I still think that a Star Wars land expansion next to Tomorrowland makes the most sense, to me at least.
 

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

Back
Top Bottom