Tomorrowland is perpetually troubled. So why is it so popular?

[mickEblu]

It won't happen...but they're probably kicking themselves now for moving ahead with MB.

Sorry, I feel like this is how MiceChat rumors get started...

It's also what happens when things get rushed with no solid long term plans and no creative with a vision in charge

 

[Deleted member 107043]

I think it was more ambitious and less naive.

Maybe, but it was overly optimistic for Walt to think that he could keep updating Tomorrowland every few years at great expense forever and ever without any strategy for how that was going to be accomplished. That's fairly big detail to gloss over and it's at the root of why every TL has come up short.

I see what your saying though and it's definitely harder to keep TL relevant (artistically/ thematically because it's obviously "popular" with guests today).

I wasn't there, but I can't imagine that The Bathroom of Tomorrow or some of the other worlds fair type science/tech related exhibits and attractions that have come and gone before my time were popular with people. Even the more recent flashy Innoventions failed to draw much of a regular crowd.

Disney's most successful strategy for keeping TL relevant has been to gradually rely on futuristic thematic set dressing with each update or new attraction. 60 years after opening TL is zero substance and 100% Show. Besides the edible landscaping there is literally no content in the land that points to an everyday future that guests might live in someday.

I think it's important to remember that Disney ran out of money for TL.

Don't forget that within a relatively short time the park had generated enough revenue to launch the first TL "expansion" in 1959.

I still think that TL can be a success with the proper design.

I think so too, however in the wake of EPCOT Center (itself a watered down theme park version of what was supposed to be a real city) and multiple iterations of Tomorrowland around the globe, I'm of the opinion that the WDCo is unwilling and unable to execute what Walt set out to accomplish back in 1955.

 

[mickEblu]

Maybe, but it was overly optimistic for Walt to think that he could keep updating Tomorrowland every few years at great expense forever and ever without any strategy for how that was going to be accomplished. That's fairly big detail to gloss over and it's at the root of why every TL has come up short.



I wasn't there, but I can't imagine that The Bathroom of Tomorrow or some of the other worlds fair type science/tech related exhibits and attractions that have come and gone before my time were popular with people. Even the more recent flashy Innoventions failed to draw much of a regular crowd.

Disney's most successful strategy for keeping TL relevant has been to gradually rely on futuristic thematic set dressing with each update or new attraction. 60 years after opening TL is zero substance and 100% Show. Besides the edible landscaping there is literally no content in the land that points to an everyday future that guests might live in someday.



Don't forget that within a relatively short time the park had generated enough revenue to launch the first TL "expansion" in 1959.



I think so too, however in the wake of EPCOT Center (itself a watered down theme park version of what was supposed to be a real city) and multiple iterations of Tomorrowland around the globe, I'm of the opinion that the WDCo is unwilling and unable to execute what Walt set out to accomplish back in 1955.

I agree that it is zero percent substance. If what you mean by TL is the whole edutainment thing than ya I don't think that is really sustainable or relevant to most people with the technology we have now. It Can be done but that sort of TL would need renovations at least once a decade. I'm just talking about getting the place to look futuristic ( not like a mall from the 70s) and infuse it with kinetic energy. They ought to be able to do that. And with the right design I don't see why it wouldn't be relevant for at least 3 decades.

Put one well thought out thesis attraction (that's actually fun) that really says TOMORROWLAND at Innoventions location and the rest of the attractions can be more commercial/ less risky with hopefully more connection to TL than Buzz, an outdated Autopia and Nemo.

 

[Hatbox Ghostbuster]

I agree that it is zero percent substance. If what you mean by TL is the whole edutainment thing than ya I don't think that is really sustainable or relevant to most people with the technology we have now. It Can be done but that sort of TL would need renovations at least once a decade. I'm just talking about getting the place to look futuristic ( not like a mall from the 70s) and infuse it with kinetic energy. They ought to be able to do that. And with the right design I don't see why it wouldn't be relevant for at least 3 decades.

Put one well thought out thesis attraction (that's actually fun) that really says TOMORROWLAND at Innoventions location and the rest of the attractions can be more commercial/ less risky.

What they REALLY could do to Tomorrowland...is create the future world of Horizons.

Turn the Nemo Subs and lagoon into Sea Castle
Turn Innovations into Mesa Verde
Turn Space Mountain into Brava Centauri

Everything Horizons predicted is still decades away from feasibility (minus, FaceTime). It would be great.

 

[mickEblu]

What they REALLY could do to Tomorrowland...is create the future world of Horizons.

Turn the Nemo Subs and lagoon into Sea Castle
Turn Innovations into Mesa Verde
Turn Space Mountain into Brava Centauri

Everything Horizons predicted is still decades away from feasibility (minus, FaceTime). It would be great.

I've never been to WDW but they got rid of Horizons right?

I'll put it on my YouTube list that I don't have but I'll create one now.

 

[Hatbox Ghostbuster]

I've never been to WDW but they got rid of Horizons right?

Back in 99. Replaced by Mission:Space.

 

[mickEblu]

Back in 99. Replaced by Mission:Space.

Oh wow didn't know that or that Mission Space was so "new."

 

[Hatbox Ghostbuster]

Oh wow didn't know that or that Mission Space was so "new."

Indeed. IMHO, that was the day of FW's (and Epcot's) decline.

 

[mickEblu]

Indeed. IMHO, that was the day of FW's (and Epcot's) decline.

A part of me is bummed that I never got to see classic EPCOT, MGM studios or all WDW for that matter. At this point I'm waiting for all the new stuff to open and praying they don't decide to overlay their TOT in the meantime.

 

[Hatbox Ghostbuster]

A part of me is bummed that I never got to see classic EPCOT, MGM studios or all WDW for that matter. At this point I'm waiting for all the new stuff to open and praying they don't decide to overlay their TOT in the meantime.

Rightly so. The 90's were (again, IMO) the hey-day for WDW. Epcot and MGM were functioning at full capacity, DAK was fresh and exciting and MK was MK. It was everything a person could want. But then, in typical Florida fashion, the dark storm clouds rolled in and well...you've seen the results.

I visited last in 2012 and spent a majority of my time thinking "hey, this used to be different (read: better)". Only later did I also realize that many of my rides were also to be my last for particular attractions (Studio Backlot Tour, Maelstrom, Universe of Energy, etc). It was a lot like visiting an old relative with amnesia. You try to recall the happier days, but realize a lot is simply gone and never coming back. So instead you soak up and cherish whatever you have left.

 

[Deleted member 107043]

And with the right design I don't see why it wouldn't be relevant for at least 3 decades.

I think it's a stretch to expect WDI to be able to do that. After 60 years of designing the future there's been little indication that Disney has strong competency in this area. I say let Disney stick to what it does best - distribute entertainment content through it's various channels. Leave designing the future to people like Elon Musk, Richard Branson and Tim Cook.

 

[Hatbox Ghostbuster]

I think it's a stretch to expect WDI to be able to do that. After 60 years of designing the future there's been little indication that Disney has strong competency in this area. I say let Disney stick to what it does best - distributing entertainment content. Leave designing the future to people like Elon Musk, Richard Branson and Tim Cook.

And yet...why can't Disney just make a few phone calls and arrange a few flights to Anaheim???

 

[mickEblu]

I think it's a stretch to expect WDI to be able to do that. After 60 years of designing the future there's been little indication that Disney has strong competency in this area. I say let Disney stick to what it does best - distributing entertainment content. Leave designing the future to people like Elon Musk, Richard Branson and Tim Cook.

Not sure you recall but I mentioned in another post that they should hire Musk to help WDI design TL.

Anyway, the original TL had no budget, the 67 TL seems to have rave reviews but it doesn't look like they focused on a future that was far enough into the future. TL 98 just sucked, color scheme, design. Those were just poor choices. Nothing to do with the subject matter.

 

[Hatbox Ghostbuster]

Not sure you recall but I mentioned in another post that they should hire Musk to help WDI design TL.

Anyway, the original TL had no budget, the 67 TL seems to have rave reviews but it doesn't look like they focused on a future that was far enough into the future. TL 98 just sucked, color scheme, design. Those were just poor choices. Nothing to do with the subject matter.

The only thing "futuristic" about the huge rock outcroppings at the entrance was all the bottleneck problems they'd eventually cause.

 

[mickEblu]

The only thing "futuristic" about this huge rock outcroppings was all the bottleneck problems they'd eventually cause.

Love me some Baxter but those rocks? And the Astro Orbiter in the hub? What was he thinking?

 

[mickEblu]

Almost forgot @Dr. Hans Reinhardt TL 98 was just a renovation with a couple bells and whistles added. It wasnt a real redo like most of us here are clamoring for. They put lipstick on a pig really.

 

[Deleted member 107043]

Not sure you recall but I mentioned in another post that they should hire Musk to help WDI design TL.

In my dreams, but there is literally no business case for doing this when they can simply pimp out whatever popular franchise they own. There are quite a few things Disneyland has always done well (romanticizing the past) but there are some it has always done poorly (showcasing a "living blueprint" of the future). From a business perspective I'm going to guess that Iger and the board have little interest in it.

Anyway, the original TL had no budget, the 67 TL seems to have rave reviews but it doesn't look like they focused on a future that was far enough into the future. TL 98 just sucked, color scheme, design. Those were just poor choices. Not because of the subject matter.

The subject matter wasn't anything to crow about. A hokey ride into the world of the atom? An elevated tram propelled by hundreds of embedded Goodyear tires? An animatronic stage show about the history of General Electric appliances?

A theme park is too limiting to showcase "tomorrow", especially when it's all driven by corporate sponsors with marketing aspirations.

 

[mickEblu]

In my dreams, but there is literally no business case for doing this when they can simply pimp out whatever popular franchise they own. There a some things Disneyland has always done well (romanticizing the past) and some things it has always done poorly (showcasing a "living blueprint" of the future).



The subject matter wasn't anything to crow about. A hokey ride into the world of the atom? An elevated tram propelled by hundreds of embedded Goodyear tires? An animatronic stage show about the history of General Electric appliances?

A theme park is too limiting to showcase "tomorrow", especially when it's all driven by corporate sponsors with marketing aspirations.

And there lies the problem. Everything needs a business case now to be built. Instead of letting the creative juices flow first and then see how a business case can make it a reality.

As far as the subject matter I wasn't talking about past versions of Tomorrowland. I was saying that the world of tomorrow is a blank slate. They can go fifty years, 100 years into the future if they want and in that way make it more a fantasy version of Tomorrow. The reason TL 98 sucked is because all they did was put lipstick on a pig and add the Rocket Rods to a preexisting track.

So are you saying that they should keep TL looking like a 70s mall, keep it the way it is or just scrap TL?

Also are you insenuating that WDI at the very least can't make the place look futuristic? How low have we set the bar for WDI?

 

[Hatbox Ghostbuster]

I think at the heart of all of this, is the fact that Disney is now a hugely different company than it used to be.
Modern Disney isn't concerned with much of anything but "pimping out whatever popular franchise they own."

That, to me, is a sad and backwards ambition for a company whose founder stood for so much more. Disney's true biggest battle is with itself. Maintaining legacy vs modern franchise bombardment. The only problem is, they handle legacy by making "Walt" into an IP and not the visionary of the company that bears his name.

 

[Deleted member 107043]

As far as the subject matter I wasn't talking about past versions of Tomorrowland. I was saying that the world of tomorrow is a blank slate. They can go fifty years, 100 years into the future if they want.

But wouldn't that would be science fiction / fantasy? The original idea for TL was that it would be an accurate representation of the year 1985.