News Tron coaster coming to the Magic Kingdom

[Professortango1]

How does sci-fi fantasy fit in more with Epcot than Tomorrowland? If anything, that makes it the absolute perfect transition from FL to TL.

Because Tron is set in a modern world where someone discovers a way to delve into the electronic world of a vintage arcade game. Exploring technology/science through a fantastical conceit seems more akin to Epcot where Tomorrowland is centered around man's future and sci-fi space worlds.

 

[WDWTank]

I withheld my judgement about Shanghai’s Tomorrowland until I visited. But, I’m sad to report, in person it did feel to me quite like what @insert name here, @Professortango1, and @Bocabear are describing - common and uninspired.

I think a major reason is that the architecture is too functionalist. With the exception of Tron’s canopy, most of the architecture looks like it was designed just to narrowly serve its functional purpose, without flourish.

Now, I realize that’s probably just what they were going for, but in that case it runs into the same problem as things like Dino-Rama: good execution of a poor premise. We visit theme parks to experience more/different than what’s in the everyday world, not less/same. So, functionalism in theme park design doesn’t have a strong emotional appeal and also doesn’t create a sense of place.

Yeah TRON shouldn’t have the canopy facade from Shanghai. Rather, a new custom facade designed to fit in better with the rest of Tomorrowland. That would be a lot cheaper than completely re doing the land, minus a paint job.

 

[mikejs78]

Because Tron is set in a modern world where someone discovers a way to delve into the electronic world of a vintage arcade game. Exploring technology/science through a fantastical conceit seems more akin to Epcot where Tomorrowland is centered around man's future and sci-fi space worlds.

Epcot is more about the *real* advancements, presented in a fantastic way. Tron is anything but real. Tomorrowland isn't purely about space - it's theme is more about fantastical views of the future, science, and technology, which Tron is somewhat.

So it sort of fits in Tomorrowland. Does not fit *at all* in Epcot.

 

[BrianLo]

I withheld my judgement about Shanghai’s Tomorrowland until I visited. But, I’m sad to report, in person it did feel to me quite like what @insert name here, @Professortango1, and @Bocabear are describing - common and uninspired.

I think a major reason is that the architecture is too functionalist. With the exception of Tron’s canopy, most of the architecture looks like it was designed just to narrowly serve its functional purpose, without flourish.

Now, I realize that’s probably just what they were going for, but in that case it runs into the same problem as things like Dino-Rama: good execution of a poor premise. We visit theme parks to experience more/different than what’s in the everyday world, not less/same. So, functionalism in theme park design doesn’t have a strong emotional appeal and also doesn’t create a sense of place.

This a systemic issue with the fundamentals of Tomorrowland (and futureworld). Both are functionalist by design.

There is a sheen to original futureworld and Tomorrowland in the fanboi’s heads... but corporate headquarters and airports have borrowed too heavily for the concept to ever work like you all want.

Tomorrowland really has a few options, lean into the retro 50’s idealized vision (and risk feeling like an out of date Airport), lean into Sci-Fi, lean into an IP like Marvel (which really is just not being Tomorrowland), or lean into Fantasy (Discoveryland).

 

[Marc Davis Fan]

This a systemic issue with the fundamentals of Tomorrowland (and futureworld). Both are functionalist by design.

There is a sheen to original futureworld and Tomorrowland in the fanboi’s heads... but corporate headquarters and airports have borrowed too heavily for the concept to ever work like you all want.

Tomorrowland really has a few options, lean into the retro 50’s idealized vision (and risk feeling like an out of date Airport), lean into Sci-Fi, lean into an IP like Marvel (which really is just not being Tomorrowland), or lean into Fantasy (Discoveryland).

I don’t find the other Tomorrowlands to come across the way Shanghai does. They seem to have design flourishes that differentiate them significantly from functionalist architecture in the outside world.

Take DL’s Tomorrowland, which is often considered the weakest: there are spires atop Space Mountain and similar ones on other buildings, there’s the bizarre sculpture made from the former rocket jets, there’s the beautiful (IMO) kinetic sculpture atop the Astro Orbiter, there’s the Moonliner rocket, etc. Even with the well-known problems of thematic/aesthetic incongruity in DL’s Tomorrowland due to the 98 overhaul and subsequent piecemeal changes, I think it still works better than Shanghai. Fundamentally: it feels like a place that you would not experience in the outside world.

 

[BrianLo]

I don’t find the other Tomorrowlands to come across the way Shanghai does. They seem to have design flourishes that differentiate them significantly from functionalist architecture in the outside world.

Take DL’s Tomorrowland, which is often considered the weakest: there are spires atop Space Mountain and similar ones on other buildings, there’s the bizarre sculpture made from the former rocket jets, there’s the beautiful (IMO) kinetic sculpture atop the Astro Orbiter, there’s the Moonliner rocket, etc. Even with the well-known problems of thematic/aesthetic incongruity in DL’s Tomorrowland due to the 98 overhaul and subsequent piecemeal changes, I think it still works better than Shanghai. Fundamentally: it feels like a place that you would not experience in the outside world.

I believe that's more ornamentation you are after. Shanghai's design is too clean.

Now, this is not in a global defence of Tomorrowland in Shanghai... it has absolutely tons of problems. From the multiple holes for expansion, the terrible sightlines, the nonsensically laid out pathway and the way too exposed blue show building. The Tron cover itself isn't the problem, it's kind of the one element that sort of works in an Epcot sort of way. It just literally and figuratively doesn't cover up the other issues in the land, nor can one approach it in a logical fashion.

I think the biggest thing they botched was the layout.

 

[JustInTime]

It's just very similar to Space Mountain, short/low capacity, and doesn't fit the land. I'd be more ok with it in EPCOT.

Does anything really fit the land at this point? And the only similarity to space mountain is that it’s also a coaster. I’m excited and glad it’s coming. I’d have also been happy with it in Epcot but if it doesn’t fit Tomorrowland, it doesn’t fit future world.

 

[smile]

To each their own. I'll see how it changes when it opens. I've never said I loved the canopy, and I haven't seen it in person. It looks nice at night, I suppose. I don't really like the look of Shanghai's Tomorrowland like some people seem to revere it. There's valid criticism and then there's what I see as whining and cynicism. That's not being a realist (not saying you Martin, you always bring up valid criticisms but I do think sometimes it's not beneficial to know so much ...).

Personally Guardians to Future World feels like more of a huge change than TRON to Tomorrowland but you know more than I do. I'm just not seeing how damaging and jarring this is.

Like some are clouded by pixie dust, some are clouded by jaded cynicisim (which I fully understand, being let down by the parks and the company; I get it. I'm just not someone who always dwells on what I don't like - I used to be; I still complain, we all do, lol, some complaining is quite healthy. I don't find cynicisim productive, it's easy to be negative. Valid criticism is productive. It's not good to be negative about everything all the time; JMO -- and again, not you Martin).

"The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it."

that's not a shot, k...
but it's something to consider.

 

[Marc Davis Fan]

I believe that's more ornamentation you are after. Shanghai's design is too clean.

That’s correct. I suppose that’s more accurate than saying “too functionalist.”

I think there’s also a noticeable lack of intimacy/warmth in Shanghai’s Tomorrowland. It lacks the “architecture of reassurance” feel. Maybe the lack of ornamentation is a factor in that as well, and maybe it’s also the level of of openness and empty space, as well as the overall scale of the structures.

 

[Bocabear]

It looks like a deserted plaza...too much open space. Not enough engaging detail...it looks joyless

 

[Horizons '83]

Can't wait for this.... did I mention that already?

 

[ToTBellHop]

It looks like a deserted plaza...too much open space. Not enough engaging detail...it looks joyless

So it’s a good representation of the future of America.

 

[Jack Wolfe]

Oh I agree. And I agree life is a gift. After all, I should be dead. Yet here I am.

Live it whilst you can.

Having had my own "tap on the shoulder" recently, I couldn't agree more. Don't waste a moment.

 

[EricsBiscuit]

I'm super pumped for Tron. Anyone who isn't hasn't ridden it yet. It's an awesome attraction

 

[DznyRktekt]

Having had my own "tap on the shoulder" recently, I couldn't agree more. Don't waste a moment.

Great advice. Needed it today. Your post is a great contrast to the one prior.

 

[marni1971]

I'm super pumped for Tron. Anyone who isn't hasn't ridden it yet. It's an awesome attraction

It’s too short, costing too much and is in the wrong place. But apart from that, yep.

And I like the IP.

 

[EricsBiscuit]

It’s too short, costing too much and is in the wrong place. But apart from that, yep.

And I like the IP.

I disagree. It's just right in length. Cost is WDI's fault. And if it revamps TL then it's in the perfect place.

 

[marni1971]

I disagree. It's just right in length. Cost is WDI's fault. And if it revamps TL then it's in the perfect place.

We’ll agree to disagree then.

 

[montyz81]

And if it revamps TL then it's in the perfect place.

Hardly the justification for putting an attraction in a specific land. That rates right up there with "Peter Quill visited Epcot in the 1980s" I am starting to think all of Walt Disney Wold should be called Fantasyland or Adventureland.

 

[Prince Thomas]

It’s too short, costing too much and is in the wrong place. But apart from that, yep.

And I like the IP.

You've ridden it?