Tomorrowland, er um Pixarland

[Captain Schnemo]

They must have market research...

A serious problem with all that research (although you'll never convince a bean counter of it) is that it's limited by what the subjects are familiar with. People will say they like things that sound comfortable and are wary of things that sound too out there. Hell, if Walt'd listened to market research they'd never have made Snow White (getting adults to sit still for 90 minutes to watch a cartoon full of creepy dwarves?!?) or even Disneyland (adults paying big money to see robot birds and pirates?!?). People didn't know they wanted Disneyland.

Many people will say "want heap big ride go real fast", but no one will say "ugh want intelligent exploration of complex topic". If you do it right, though, people will love it even though they didn't know they wanted to see it. Disney would rather just play it safe. Probably has a lot to do with money men refusing to release funds for something risky. That's when you need a leader with real vision, and it's been decades since Disney has had one of those.

Those pictures are amazing! They just store them like that? Is it smart to leave them out in the open, exposing them to the elements?

If you've ever been to Mouse Surplus, you'll know that Disney does not treat its artifacts with respect. They rely on amateurs to document their attractions for them and really have no understanding of the value of that kind of thing.

Mr. Toad should have been packed up and put on display at the Smithsonian, not stacked up in the corner of warehouse (or worse, a dumpster!).

By the way, fantastic detective work on those subs.

Here's a really nice desktop for fans of the lagoon. The sadness I feel when looking at this picture is just like the sadness I would feel if I returned to Epcot today:


As a side note, oh...my....god am I jealous of Japanese theme park fans:

[rdeacon]

Oh this is not going to make most of you happy, and especially Schnemo!

We have been talking about the Pixar take over of the parks..check out Jim Hill's take on it, after a reader sent him and email that sums up what we have been talking about in here.

http://jimhillmedia.com/blogs/jim_hill/ ... y-for.aspx

Looks like there is no end to the Pixar parade....

*sigh

I can accept some Pixar rides if they are done well, but I would like to see more original ideas for attractions. Or if they have to Pixar everything, at least put it in the right land.


Rich

[JWG]

The Pixar problem becomes an issue when the Studios goes Pixar heavy. However, I'm wondering how big Pixar can be in MGM if the other parks are already heavy on Pixar rides...

Either the Pixar takeover will slow in the theme parks so Disney Studios' Pixar land/area won't be a disaster of disinterest or this Pixar area won't happen because Pixar is already everywhere else in mass quantity.

[tmptnr]

Yeah there are way to many pixar movies represented in Tomorrowland.

[Lostboy]

I understand Epcot needed more thrill rides for the general public, but I've always thought the the Mission to Mars ride should have been in Tomorrow Land.

[snugglyevil]

" Do you feel that tomorrowland has lost its way? "

Most definitely. Disney was about the attraction first and the characters second. The past 10yrs easy has seen such an explosion of movie character themed rides. Removing "Alien Encounter" because it wasnt kid oriented and too scary was a crime. Dumbing it down to a Stitch themed attraction made it stupid. Little kids still cry. I went on the Stitch version once....I would have walked out on it if I could have. Granted....I like the Buzz Lightyear attraction. I have yet to see the Laughroom Floor. My 2 cents here is that that particular building seemed to have bad luck with attractions. Eastern Airlines then Delta pulled out on where Buzz is now. The America in 360 was a good place to go to cool down. Time Keeper was fun but I could see it being dated quickly. I hope for good things for the newest attraction. The atmosphere of Tomorrowland has really changed. It's not about the future. It's about the money in the right now.

[boilerbabe]

"Do you feel that tomorrowland has lost its way? "

Here's my two cents....I feel that the way Tomorrow Land was first desgined was in a way that Walt and Imagineers really pictured the future! Now, Tomorrow Land seems cartoonish to me. I still love it, but I wish they would have either left it alone or made it more to picture what we make think the future will be like. I don't really think the look of it fits the MK park.

[yodiwan1]

OK, now here's my take on everything....MK is a park more geared to children. Children relate to their favorite characters. There is still plenty in TL that is not PIXAR. Space Mountain, TTA, The Indy Raceway, AstroOrbitor, in fact doesnt that outnumber the pixat rides? 4-3?? And I havent been to the Monster's Inc attraction yet, but BUzz's ride si great...i do miss dreamflight, but it was replaced by a winner.stitch I can live w/o, but he's too popular, and him being an alien from space fits in perfect with tomorrowland.

[subsonic]

Yeah, but what happened to the originality and wow factor. I think about attractions like Circle-Vision 360. I remember as a child that being fantastic. Why not step it up a notch with Sphere-Vision? With LED screens theres no need for projectors. A seamless sphere could be built. Heck, make the floor Plexiglass and totally envelope the viewer (though, people might fall). It's the attention to details that make classics like HM and POTC winners. Attractions don't have to be based off of "what's hot now" characters.
</rant>

[Dr. Ravenscroft]

Why not step it up a notch with Sphere-Vision? With LED screens theres no need for projectors. A seamless sphere could be built. Heck, make the floor Plexiglass and totally envelope the viewer (though, people might fall).

This Idea of yours Intrigues me. I must ponder this, because if the Toronto's CN tower can have a plexiglass floor why couldn't Disney in a spherical ride. The dimensions and weight on the glass would determine what thickness they would need but they could definitely do it. The question that is more important is where to put it?

[yodiwan1]

disney still does make non-character rides that are great, saorin, EE, Space...i feel that disney is trying to make MK the kiddie park. Even though Tomorrow land has a few newer attractions with characters, when you look at the rest of the park there are stil plenty of non character rides to make everyone happy. ALien encounter was a bust from the beginging. At least Stitch has some humor to it, even though it's still not on my must see list.

[DisBeamer]

Why not step it up a notch with Sphere-Vision? With LED screens theres no need for projectors. A seamless sphere could be built. Heck, make the floor Plexiglass and totally envelope the viewer (though, people might fall).

This Idea of yours Intrigues me. I must ponder this, because if the Toronto's CN tower can have a plexiglass floor why couldn't Disney in a spherical ride. The dimensions and weight on the glass would determine what thickness they would need but they could definitely do it. The question that is more important is where to put it?

Or what to put in it. It'd a cool idea, though. Something that would fit in with an underwater ride, maybe, where the audience is in an 'air bubble' going somewhere. In which case it might fit better in around the living seas or something.

I actually don't mind them adding contemporary characters to TL but (as I think I've said before in this thread) Monsters Inc characters make no sense to me to have there. What do monsters have to do with the future? Buzz makes perfect sense and Stitch I'll give a pass to since he fits better in there than anywhere else in the MK (and I love the fuzzy lil guy even if his attraction stinks), but monsters? I don't get it.

What I -do- wish they'd do, though, is to keep to the Buck Rogers 'future that never was' idea they were going with after they redesigned TL the last time. I don't feel that TL needs to be a 'realistic future' at WDW because they have Future World in Epcot for that. I really loved the 'future from the 50s' kind of theme they were going with before they started chucking cartoon characters in there. Those metal palm trees and kitchy signs are some of my favorite theming in all of WDW.

[yodiwan1]

i think Monsters Inc. is there because its a very futuristic attraction, with the interaction aspect..thast the only thing i can think of

[DisBeamer]

i think Monsters Inc. is there because its a very futuristic attraction, with the interaction aspect..thast the only thing i can think of

Could be. If that is it, though, it's kind of a weak reason. I mean Soarin' is pretty futuristic tech but that wouldn't get it a pass into Tomorrowland. Or DL's Indiana Jones ride.

My personal theory is they couldn't figure out what else to put in that circle theater, which is a shame. It seems like it would have made more sense to edit the Timekeeper movie to be playable still (without upsetting people) and put the Monsters Inc stuff over in MGM. I think the concept of a time machine fits TL much better than monsters who talk to you. I can appreciate the push to make TL more kid friendly but this one will probably never stop bothering me.

[yodiwan1]

mission space would have fit in really well there, that way they could ahve kept horizons!!!