Y'all should ...

[yensidtlaw1969]

I'm thinking the exact same thing. It's exactly why I don't enderstand people saying it wouldn't fit the theme. I'm glad I'm not the only one thinking this.

It's not that it doesn't fit the theme. It's that it's not a perfect fit given the present company of the land -- Let's Play "One Of These Things Is Not Like The Other":

Astro Orbitor
Buzz Lightyear Astro Blasters
Finding Nemo Submarine Voyage
Space Mountain
Star Tours: The Adventures Continue
Autopia
Captain EO Tribute
Disneyland Monorail
Disneyland Railroad
Unnamed Iron Man Attraction

. . . You'll notice, part of the problem here is that there are a number of things that are not like the other. Iron Man seems to add itself to that list of confusion. That is my only point.

If Disney has plans to overhaul Tomorrowland and adjust the themes of the surrounding attractions to better suit a shared existence with Iron Man and a new direction for the land, great. It just seems that if we want a consistent theme in this land, something has to give. Bring Iron Man. I'm sure it will be brilliant. But it does nothing to justify the patchwork theme that their Tomorrowland has had for more than a decade, and in fact may exacerbate the issue, no matter HOW good the attraction is - and probably will be, from the bit's of info we've heard. If it's the image of how Tomorrowland should be, hooray! But then the rest of the land still needs help. It could be a step in the right direction, but then some more steps need to be taken or it will stick out like a beautiful, expensive, shiny new E-Tickety sore thumb. Nemo, Buzz and Tony Stark in a group doesn't project a shared vision for what a Tomorrowland should be.

Do you see what I mean?

 

[Californian Elitist]

It's not that it doesn't fit the theme. It's that it's not a perfect fit given the present company of the land -- Let's Play "One Of These Things Is Not Like The Other":

Astro Orbitor
Buzz Lightyear Astro Blasters
Finding Nemo Submarine Voyage
Space Mountain
Star Tours: The Adventures Continue
Autopia
Captain EO Tribute
Disneyland Monorail
Disneyland Railroad
Unnamed Iron Man Attraction

. . . You'll notice, part of the problem here is that there are a number of things that are not like the other. Iron Man seems to add itself to that list of confusion. That is my only point.

If Disney has plans to overhaul Tomorrowland and adjust the themes of the surrounding attractions to better suit a shared existence with Iron Man and a new direction for the land, great. It just seems that if we want a consistent theme in this land, something has to give. Bring Iron Man. I'm sure it will be brilliant. But it does nothing to justify the patchwork theme that their Tomorrowland has had for more than a decade, and in fact may exacerbate the issue, no matter HOW good the attraction is - and probably will be, from the bit's of info we've heard. If it's the image of how Tomorrowland should be, hooray! But then the rest of the land still needs help. It could be a step in the right direction, but then some more steps need to be taken or it will stick out like a beautiful, expensive, shiny new E-Tickety sore thumb. Nemo, Buzz and Tony Stark in a group doesn't project a shared vision for what a Tomorrowland should be.

Do you see what I mean?

So you're saying everything in a specific land should be similar to each other? Is that what you're saying?

If Iron Man comes, then Space, Buzz, Star Tours and Astro Orbitor need to go, according to what you're saying, correct?

 

[yensidtlaw1969]

At this point, I almost don't care what goes in Tomorrowland, though IMO Stark Expo fits with the theme. There are two themes in Disneyland's Tomorrowland it seems, a space theme and a futuristic theme. I'm fine with the two different themes. What I don't like is the way Tomorrowland looks. It should look a lot better, and it doesn't. I hate Innoventions and I'll take pretty much anything over it, including Iron Man.

That's the thing, there aren't even just two themes. Buzz, Nemo and Autopia (all to their fault) do not fit in with Space -- Buzz does if you're reaching -- or Futuristic. Iron Man may be a good fit, but he would not be amongst like-minded attractions. Yes, anything would be better than Innoventions, I'm glad to see it going. But I'm still not convinced Tomorrowland is the best place for Iron Man, even if it is a good one.

Isn't it weird that we have Pixar Place in DHS, yet there are seemingly dozens of other Pixar themed attractions sprinkled throughout the rest of the parks? I know Pixar Place was not planned when Space Ranger Spin and Finding Nemo the Musical and such were all added, but in hindsight wouldn't it improve the theme of the land if there weren't aberrations like that all over WDW? And if so, why consciously cause one now by rushing to build Iron Man in Tomorrowland when you know you're going to build a Marvel Park down the street in a matter of years? It's just funny planning.

If Tomorrowland were the absolute best place for an Iron Man attraction I'd be all for it. But with a Marvel Park on the horizon, it merely seems that Tomorrowland is the best existing place for it. If they had to put it somewhere now, that would be where. But that does not make it the best decision, I think.

 

[Californian Elitist]

That's the thing, there aren't even just two themes. Buzz, Nemo and Autopia (all to their fault) do not fit in with Space -- Buzz does if you're reaching -- or Futuristic. Iron Man may be a good fit, but he would not be amongst like-minded attractions. Yes, anything would be better than Innoventions, I'm glad to see it going. But I'm still not convinced Tomorrowland is the best place for Iron Man, even if it is a good one.

Isn't it weird that we have Pixar Place in DHS, yet there are seemingly dozens of other Pixar themed attractions sprinkled throughout the rest of the parks? I know Pixar Place was not planned when Space Ranger Spin and Finding Nemo the Musical and such were all added, but in hindsight wouldn't it improve the theme of the land if there weren't aberrations like that all over WDW? And if so, why consciously cause one now by rushing to build Iron Man in Tomorrowland when you know you're going to build a Marvel Park down the street in a matter of years? It's just funny planning.

If Tomorrowland were the absolute best place for an Iron Man attraction I'd be all for it. But with a Marvel Park on the horizon, it merely seems that Tomorrowland is the best existing place for it. If they had to put it somewhere now, that would be where. But that does not make it the best decision, I think.

If we leave Nemo out, I would say there are definitely two themes. Buzz falls into space, in my opinion. Zurg and Buzz come from space. The space category includes Space Mountain, Star Tours, Astro Oribitor and Buzz. Then there's the futuristic theme, which includes Autopia, Innoventions and the Monorail. Iron Man, or Stark Expo would clearly fall into the futuristic theme of Tomorrowland. Nemo doesn't fit into either categories. I'm fine with these two themes being in one land.

I'll admit I find the Marvel park/Iron Man attraction in Disneyland weird, but that theme park isn't guaranteed. We may not even get it, and if we do, oh well. There will be one Marvel attraction in another park. No big deal to me.

 

[yensidtlaw1969]

So you're saying everything in a specific land should be similar to each other? Is that what you're saying?

If Iron Man comes, then Space, Buzz, Star Tours and Astro Orbitor need to go, according to what you're saying, correct?

Everything in a specific land should work toward the overarching mission of the land.

I'm not saying they need outright to "go" - that would be ridiculous in too many senses. But if the intent is to shift the mission statement of Tomorrowland toward something different than it currently is (whatever it is, who knows at this point), perhaps the other attractions in the land could use some work to help them speak to the same point, if from different perspectives. All other functioning lands in Disney's parks work this way, and that's part of what makes them so special. You have a land with a theme, and the attractions within support that theme. If we're rediscovering Tomorrowland's theme, perhaps some of it's current attractions need tweaking so that they serve the theme and become part of a whole.

 

[Tigger1988]

I haven't been to Disneyland since 2001. A Stark Expo attraction would get me over there faster than Carsland ever would.

 

[Lee]

If Tomorrowland were the absolute best place for an Iron Man attraction I'd be all for it. But with a Marvel Park on the horizon, it merely seems that Tomorrowland is the best existing place for it.

At this point, a Marvel park down the street is far from a sure thing. And if it does move past Blue-Sky...it'll be years before it could open.
Iger wants to capitalize on Marvel now. ASAP. Hence Iron Man bumping Tron in TL at DL.

Tomorrowland is and will forever be a bit of a thematic mess.

 

[yensidtlaw1969]

At this point, a Marvel park down the street is far from a sure thing. And if it does move past Blue-Sky...it'll be years before it could open.
Iger wants to capitalize on Marvel now. ASAP. Hence Iron Man bumping Tron in TL at DL.

^Then that was my misunderstanding. I thought it had been pinned as a certainty. I apologize if I confused anyone.

I understand the desire to capitalize on Marvel right now. It made a metric butt-load of money and surely could make more for Disney. What was the plan for Tron at DL before Iron Man bumped it?

 

[yensidtlaw1969]

Tomorrowland is and will forever be a bit of a thematic mess.

That makes me so sad . . . it doesn't have to be this way! Someone just needs to let Imagineering be creative with the theme. I'm sure there's a brilliant solution in there somewhere . . .

 

[Mawg]

They need to get rid of tomorrowland altogether. The tomorrow theming works for expos and world fairs that have a short life but not for Disney. Tomorrow eventually comes and you have a yesterday land. Sometimes tomorrow comes faster than expected as in the case of Autotopia. This land needs a new name.

 

[Californian Elitist]

Everything in a specific land should work toward the overarching mission of the land.

I'm not saying they need outright to "go" - that would be ridiculous in too many senses. But if the intent is to shift the mission statement of Tomorrowland toward something different than it currently is (whatever it is, who knows at this point), perhaps the other attractions in the land could use some work to help them speak to the same point, if from different perspectives. All other functioning lands in Disney's parks work this way, and that's part of what makes them so special. You have a land with a theme, and the attractions within support that theme. If we're rediscovering Tomorrowland's theme, perhaps some of it's current attractions need tweaking so that they serve the theme and become part of a whole.

I agree. That ship has sailed for Tomorrowland, though. It seems that since Tomorrowland has existed at Disneyland, its had two themes. Autopia is an opening day attraction and Astro Orbitor came shortly afterwards. Tomorrowland was always meant to have these two themes, as Walt Disney states it himself in the Tomorrowland dedication on Disneyland's opening day.

Skip to 4:30



Tomorrowland will always have multiple themes.

 

[yensidtlaw1969]

Tomorrowland will always have multiple themes.

The theme is Tomorrow. The Future. Whatever falls under that umbrella is fine, I suppose. But when many of the attractions in the land either disregard or have to find roundabout ways of fitting in the theme, it's time to shake things up.

If we're talking themes as in messages, it's fine to have multiple themes as long as they're like-minded and are working to achieve a greater whole. Novels, movies, any kind of entertainment with only one theme can be tedious and boring. But ones with themes that disagree with themselves are equally unfortunate.

I just want Tomorrowland to be a well crafted vision of a land with attractions that work toward a mission shared with the others of that land. WDW's "Tomorrow that never was" theme did this almost as well as you could expect (if only they had finished the back half of the land, and then not thrown that mission out the window when adding new attractions). When Disney adds an attraction to Fantasyland, you expect it to fit the theme of Fantasyland. Same with any other land. There have been hits and misses of varying degrees to this point in every park, but Disneyland's Tomorrowland has had more misses of this kind than any other land I can think of, and I wish better for it.

 

[Californian Elitist]

The theme is Tomorrow. The Future. Whatever falls under that umbrella is fine, I suppose. But when many of the attractions in the land either disregard or have to find roundabout ways of fitting in the theme, it's time to shake things up.

If we're talking themes as in messages, it's fine to have multiple themes as long as they're like-minded and are working to achieve a greater whole. Novels, movies, any kind of entertainment with only one theme can be tedious and boring. But ones with themes that disagree with themselves are equally unfortunate.

I just want Tomorrowland to be a well crafted vision of a land with attractions that work toward a mission shared with the others of that land. WDW's "Tomorrow that never was" theme did this almost as well as you could expect (if only they had finished the back half of the land, and then not thrown that mission out the window when adding new attractions). When Disney adds an attraction to Fantasyland, you expect it to fit the theme of Fantasyland. Same with any other land. There have been hits and misses of varying degrees to this point in every park, but Disneyland's Tomorrowland has had more misses of this kind than any other land I can think of, and I wish better for it.

The ship has sailed, my friend. Far away. They'd basically have to tear everything down and start over to get the Tomorrowland you're looking for.

 

[yensidtlaw1969]

The ship has sailed, my friend. Far away. They'd basically have to tear everything down and start over to get the Tomorrowland you're looking for.

I don't think so. But if that's true, then maybe they should. It worked for their Fantasyland, and it could be argued that it was less in need of that kind of treatment than their Tomorrowland is now.

EDIT: Didn't they try something like that with their Tomorrowland in 1998? It was done with varying degrees of success, but it can be done. And maybe it should. Only this time, maybe give it the money it needs rather than saving a few bucks but being worse off than you were before?

 

[Disneyhead'71]

Simple question with a simple answer. What do Buzz Lightyear, Star Wars, and Ironman have in common? Merchandise! Action Figures! T-Shirts and key chains, galore!

Give up guys, the Tomorrowland concept is dead. Now it "Futuristic Fantasyland". Just be glad they aren't cloning MILF.

 

[Californian Elitist]

I don't think so. But if that's true, then maybe they should. It worked for their Fantasyland, and it could be argued that it was less in need of that kind of treatment than their Tomorrowland is now.

Our Fantasyland is significantly smaller than Tomorrowland. Fantasyland's footprint is smaller than Autopia's alone. Not to mention I doubt the Disney management today would tear down Tomorrowland like they did Fantasyland in the 80's.

 

[alphac2005]

EXACTLY. I'll take pretty much anything over Innoventions, and Iron Man is cool. Win win.

If it does right, the possibilities of pure awesomeness are endless for an Iron Man themed attraction. I can only imagine what Garner Holt and company can put together with the audio animatronics there.... and an innovative ride system. Disney is now two generations behind Universal in the next-gen ride system with Spiderman and Harry Potter*. *-Side note, my wife and I were down at IOA a few weeks ago and the ride system is just incredible. What a great attraction!

 

[yensidtlaw1969]

I feel like we're veering off course here. All I'm saying is that Disneyland deserves a better Tomorrowland than it has right now. We'll have to see what's what when Iron Man opens - if it improves the land as a whole, or if it is simply a better use of the space than Innoventions (which, I think we know is bound to be true).

I just wish it didn't feel like Disney's given up on DL's Tomorrowland. There's too much potential, in every sense, for that to be okay.

 

[Californian Elitist]

If it does right, the possibilities of pure awesomeness are endless for an Iron Man themed attraction. I can only imagine what Garner Holt and company can put together with the audio animatronics there.... and an innovative ride system. Disney is now two generations behind Universal in the next-gen ride system with Spiderman and Harry Potter*. *-Side note, my wife and I were down at IOA a few weeks ago and the ride system is just incredible. What a great attraction!

The more I think about, the more excited I get. And we're just THINKING about it. If we get the attraction, imagine what the concepts will look like! My goodness. I've yet to go to IOA. I live in California but Spider-Man's ride system is the same as the Transformers attraction here. Amazing, I agree.

 

[Californian Elitist]

I feel like we're veering off course here. All I'm saying is that Disneyland deserves a better Tomorrowland than it has right now. We'll have to see what's what when Iron Man opens - if it improves the land as a whole, or if it is simply a better use of the space than Innoventions (which, I think we know is bound to be true).

I just wish it didn't feel like Disney's given up on DL's Tomorrowland. There's too much potential, in every sense, for that to be okay.

It's a sad truth. It's unfortunate, but it is what it is. Maybe some time from now they'll decide to do something with the land. Until then, we have to work with what we've got. Tomorrowland may be in some sort of mess but I love experiencing its attractions, minus Innoventions.