The Future of Tomorrowland --- is the past

[dragonflymanor]

I decided to start a new thread based on JeffJewel’s comment about how futuristic has a limited shelf life.

I don’t think anyone would argue, although I might get a whack on the head from DVC, that the statement is effectively a true one. Sci-Fi of the 50’s is a campy joke today. So the question then, in my mind, goes to the question of how often to update the vision of the future.

Or not at all….

Disneyland Paris pretty much went backward and in a really cool way. Rather than try and present Tomorrowland as something that will exist, it puts us back in time only to look forward at what was, at that time, thought to exist.

So what’s the difference between a 1950’s tomorrowland and an 1890’s tomorrowland? Why is the 1950’s lame, but the 1890’s cool?

Because we all have images of the 1950’s either in real life, or through old television, movies, pictures. It’s hard to glamorize the 1950’s sci-fi version of the future. Ed Wood was lame, Jules Verne was a visionary.

So, does that mean that the future of good themed entertainment lies in the past. That only when sufficient time has passed where the general population can again glamorize the time is it possible to use the theme effectively without it coming across as lame, weak, or campy? I’m sure that folks living in the 1890’s really thought that the 1860’s were all that romantic (Civil War and all), or that the 1890’s were just a hoot. Life was life, you get through it. Now we romanticize the era and it works for us. 1950’s Sci-Fi doesn’t work because we are in living it. Sitting at tables that look like our Parents/Grandparents had doesn’t give us an esacpe. Sitting in a next to a giant 19th century cannon that shoots a shell all the way to the moon provides that escape.

The future of tomorrowland – is the 19th century (for now, then it becomes ancient history).

 

[DVC-Landbaron]

I don't think anyone would argue, although I might get a whack on the head from DVC, that the statement is effectively a true one.

No whack from me. I'm with you on this one. I was rather disappointed at their last attempt!

 

[Safari Steve]

As someone who was born less than 25 years ago, I find the 20s and 30s view of the future (which is the view used for WDW's "New Tomorrowland") pretty romantic. Don't get me wrong, I think that Discoveryland is more effective than our version, but part of that is thoroughness of the overhaul. If I remember correctly, overhauling the whole of Tomorrowland would have required the closure of the two largest-capacity attractions in the land, so to keep the closure from affecting guest experience too much (can you imagine the complaints if Space Mountain and Speedway were closed for over a year?) They walled off everything except Space and Speedway. Space mountain was given a quick and simple makeover (as opposed to the one CA got), and Speedway has changed in minimal ways as well. I think these were done this way primarily to get the whole land "reopened" at the same time... although I'm not sure that this was the best approach. I think that if the two major attractions had been given the makeovers needed for them to match the rest of their environments, the whole project would have been better-recieved (even if Speedway just got new fiberglass bodies for the cars... how hard would that be?)... Oh well, maybe next time around.

 

[YoHo]

I agree the new tomorrowland has a much longer shelf life then the original. the real question is what is to be done with futureworld.

 

[Another Voice]

The plan for Disneyland was called ‘Tomorrowland 2055’ (Disneyland’s 100th anniversary) and was designed in exacting 1950’s futurama style. The centerpiece of the area was to have been (once again) the TWA Moonliner from the original Disneyland, and that’s about as classic ‘50s future as you can get. A second level would have been added to the area, classic skywalks, and new facades on all the buildings. Several new attractions were planned but ‘Star Tours’ and ‘Space Mountain’ were to remain.

Of course, we had Paul Pressler long before any of you back east heard the name. The project was barely into the design stage when budget cut backs started. To save money, original attractions were canned to be replaced by WDW clones (Innocommericals and ‘Honey, The Show’s Audience is Leaving!’). The facades were reduced to nothing but new paint on Space Mountain and some plants.

The only new attraction left was RocketRods which had been sold to General Motors. That attraction too received several rounds of budget cuts and began to run into trouble. GM, fresh from the ‘Test Track’ mess, bailed rather than deal with Disney again. Yet another round of budget cuts slashed through the ride. A rumor claims that several WDI and construction managers spent their own money to buy some safety railing for the attraction after it had been cut out to save money. Everyone knows the rest of the story.

Of course, there is a “happy ending” to the story. Disneyland has a brand new themed Tomorrowland. Only instead of the 1950’s future, we have the 1970’s version of a post nuclear wasteland filled with empty and decaying buildings, broken technology from better days, hordes of pitiful people wandering aimlessly through the ruins – and the whole place is ruled by a distant power mad corporate master. Mad Max is here at last.

 

[raidermatt]

Disneyland has a brand new themed Tomorrowland. Only instead of the 1950’s future, we have the 1970’s version of a post nuclear wasteland filled with empty and decaying buildings, broken technology from better days, hordes of pitiful people wandering aimlessly through the ruins

I must agree with this, AV, though I could never express it with such, uhh, descriptiveness...

Innoventions at DL is the type of place I can spend hours in, then feel extrememly stupid for doing it. We managed to lose about an hour in that place on our last trip, and I can honestly say it was the biggest dud of the trip. (though Superstar Limo was close. If I ever hear Joan Rivers' voice again, I may have a Vietnam-type flashback...). It would take major changes to get me to walk through that door again.

DL Tomorrowland most definitely needs 2-3 attractions. Star Tours is a great ride, but in bad need of an update. SM is still great. Autopia is good for what its intended to be. The spinning space ships are fine. But that's hardly enough for a land with the potential of a Tomorrowland.