Tokyo Disneyland Resort Expansion

CraftyFox

Well-Known Member
83144249_3205518612795103_6354329652583989248_o.jpg

Is this concept art new?
The hotel designs I have seen so far are very... worrying. It’s clear that they are going for a kind of over-the-top Art Nouveau look but the massing and the scale really ruin it for me. The Mocktorian hotel at TDL also suffers this issue. It’s overall just too big and clunky to look elegant. It seems like they’re just sticking turrets and balconies wherever it fits to try and add extra detail. Adding detail does not necessarily equal a more architecturally interesting building.
 

ThemeParkTraveller

Well-Known Member
The hotel designs I have seen so far are very... worrying. It’s clear that they are going for a kind of over-the-top Art Nouveau look but the massing and the scale really ruin it for me. The Mocktorian hotel at TDL also suffers this issue. It’s overall just too big and clunky to look elegant. It seems like they’re just sticking turrets and balconies wherever it fits to try and add extra detail. Adding detail does not necessarily equal a more architecturally interesting building.

Yeah, that's an issue with all new Disney hotels unfortunately. It's been a long time since they've designed a truly cohesive and period appropriate hotel building (the MiraCosta was probably the last and greatest). I do hope they've reworked the exterior since that concept art. For an in-park hotel, the building design is even more important.
 

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
The hotel designs I have seen so far are very... worrying. It’s clear that they are going for a kind of over-the-top Art Nouveau look but the massing and the scale really ruin it for me. The Mocktorian hotel at TDL also suffers this issue. It’s overall just too big and clunky to look elegant. It seems like they’re just sticking turrets and balconies wherever it fits to try and add extra detail. Adding detail does not necessarily equal a more architecturally interesting building.
This is why ornament should not be considered synonymous with detail. Glomming on a bunch stuff is not necessarily adding detail.
 

RandySavage

Well-Known Member
All of "New" Fantasyland at WDW is embarrassing at this point. It's amazing how fast it has poorly aged.
Since I usually agree with you, I'm curious about what you mean by "aging poorly". MK's ought to be aging well, as the landscape matures and trees grow. Do you mean maintenance-wise? Small additions or subtractions (e.g. adding TV screens to the SDMT queue)? Attractions getting stale?

From what I'm seeing (we don't know how well the attractions are executed in Tokyo yet) , each has its strengths, and I'd put Tokyo & MK New Fantasylands in the same league, environmentally. (That's a pretty good league, IMO, as I've been pleased with MK's.)
 
Last edited:

MisterPenguin

President of Animal Kingdom
Premium Member
I'm curious about what you mean by "aging poorly".

Almost all of Under the Seas' queue is leaking from many places in the ceiling. That queue takes up a huge amount of space and is almost always mostly empty.

BoG sill has horrible force perspective (plantings haven't helped). And the prettiest part... the river, is almost un-viewable because of the giant cement fencing of the bridge.

The free-standing-parapets to nowhere are sill cement eyesores on a cement plain doing nothing.

Only 7DMT looks nice and is a nice family coaster (I'm not going to grade it on a curve of what it could have been based on a one-time design plan).

And the evening lighting package is non-existent, as in, almost no lighting at all. TSL, Pandora, and SWL are all beautiful at night. NFL is invisible.
 

RandySavage

Well-Known Member
The free-standing-parapets to nowhere are sill cement eyesores on a cement plain doing nothing.
Those are major assets, not eyesores, in my opinion. They visually extend Cinderella Castle to the rear of the land. They separate/transition the rural forest of New from the urban townscape of Old. And they are miles more coherent than Tokyo's Old Fantasyland -> Toontown -> New Fantasyland transition.

I also was fine with the restrained night lighting (except the storage room lights below the SDMT drop that were for some reason visible and bright), the darkness was a welcome change from some now-overlit-for-safety areas of MK. And the castle perspective wasn't nearly as bad as I had heard about.
 

Animaniac93-98

Well-Known Member
Since I usually agree with you, I'm curious about what you mean by "aging poorly". MK's ought to be aging well, as the landscape matures and trees grow. Do you mean maintenance-wise? Small additions or subtractions (e.g. adding TV screens to the SDMT queue)? Attractions getting stale?

From what I'm seeing (we don't know how well the attractions are executed in Tokyo yet) , each has its strengths, and I'd put Tokyo & MK New Fantasylands in the same league, environmentally. (That's a pretty good league, IMO, as I've been pleased with MK's.)

The whole thing, aside from maybe the Main Train, would never be built if they decided to make it today, or even 5 years later than they did. I say that in terms of both IP content and attraction line up.

Keeping the 1988 Birthdayland tents? Building a Beauty and the Beast cafeteria with a mini golf course castle? A Belle meet and greet "show" with terrible capacity? A Little Mermaid D-ticket that had to be reworked to make it passable? A whole Tangled area with only toilets? A tiny gift shop and tavern wedged next to the Mermaid ride? Casey Jr's only a play area for toddlers?

It's was a huge project (in terms of money and acreage) that in comparison to Fantasy Springs now looks like a giant wasted opportunity. The "forest" will never grow in properly because of how wide the pathways were designed. Frozen got dumped into Epcot instead of being here where it truly belongs. There's no true E-ticket replacement for 20,000 Leagues. The transition between areas (Beast, Mermaid, Forest, old Fantasyland) is lacking, and they never did replace the teacups roof. Then there was the side project of replacing a dark ride with a meet n greet after the Aurora and Cinderella ones were scrapped part-way through construction.

Only Mine Train is decent, and even it is shorter than it should have been. A common complaint even among its fans.

Capacity, ambition, scale, scope, NFL is far less than it could have been. More recent projects only emphasize this.
 

ThemeParkTraveller

Well-Known Member
Off topic, what ever came of the talk of a Mermaid Dark Ride in TDS? I remember hearing TDL brass were shown the ride at DCA and basically said "try again". Does the Fantasy Springs expansion preclude that from actually happening? I have to assume a good Mermaid Dark Ride would be high on the list for TDS, it makes only too much sense for that park.

Thought this discussion would be a better fit here. There is speculation that there could be a Mermaid Lagoon expansion after Fantasy Springs. Ariel's Greeting Grotto is closing this year after almost 20 years of operation, which some are saying is an indicator that they plan to use the expansion pad directly behind it for a new attraction (it would either be for the Little Mermaid or Aladdin based on its location).
 

fradz

Well-Known Member
They'd have to relocate the power plant. It's not impossible, and probably has been discussed in blue sky (I guess), but it is quite an obstacle
 

Robbiem

Well-Known Member
Thought this discussion would be a better fit here. There is speculation that there could be a Mermaid Lagoon expansion after Fantasy Springs. Ariel's Greeting Grotto is closing this year after almost 20 years of operation, which some are saying is an indicator that they plan to use the expansion pad directly behind it for a new attraction (it would either be for the Little Mermaid or Aladdin based on its location).

If they did do this I’d like to see an Aladdin magic carpet dark ride. as well as being a unique ride it would also balance out fantasy springs with its more princess heavy line up
 

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

Back
Top Bottom