Visualizing StarWarsland (and Frozen)

[biggsworth]

Re: Visualizing StarWarsland (and Frozen)

Looks awesome and if they go ahead with the plan i hope they take this approach rather than keep the current TL foot print.

[Tomorrowland_1967]

Re: Visualizing StarWarsland (and Frozen)

Well .. that map is one labor-of-love .. one can tell. I appreciate Randy's efforts. I use to do maps like this .. but as actual drawings. I wish I knew how to do it on computer.

What I like is that overpass to reach Main Street. With crowd flow these days ... that would be very useful. But parade storage would make it somewhat impractical. Surely .. there must be a way to deal with it.

And while I love Randy's imagination .. taking on what rumors he's heard .. seeing this in an actual graphic .. just makes me hope this doesn't happen.

Too much of Tomorrowland to the north is devoted to Forest. Sorry .. I don't want to pay 100 dollars or more to visit DL .. and pay to look at more trees. I want to see high-tech innovation.

This layout also casts large bodies of water .. as non essential - GONE. I disagree. I think one beauty added to futuristic landscaping is some large body of water. Just look at the City of Arts in Valencia, Spain .. and you get the idea.

The monorail? Okay .. so there's the outgoing track coming out the Star Trader. Where's the incoming line?

With less monorail sections ... No peoplemover replacement ... and a speeder bike ride .. that will mean few bikes on the track .. since each will have to be fairly spread apart from each other .. means one thing that I will dislike with a passion:

TOO LITTLE IN THE WAY OF KINETICS.

I see fewer attractions. And those fewer new ones .. will mean less capacity.

A Speeder Bike ride will be no different than Rocket Rods in terms of capacity. It will be lousy.

Take away the Innoventions space ... as a high capacity possibility. Take out the subs .. take out Autopia .. take out the idea of a new Peoplemover. And this is going to help the growing DL crowds how????

Maybe there's a real reason why we are not hearing much about these past "Star Wars" rumors from the co. ... because they all actually suck? And they realize it??

Tomorrowland needs the same diversity .. the same number of attractions as before ... with the same .. or BETTER capacity as older attractions.

Anything less is just a plain stupid idea!

[frollofan]

Re: Visualizing StarWarsland (and Frozen)

^ Especially with attendance numbers on the climb, it is nice to have those extra People Eaters or theater attractions that can help soak some people off of the walkways.

[Sambo]

Re: Visualizing StarWarsland (and Frozen)

In order to convey OUR future it has to be relatable and set in a not too distant future, but what exactly IS our future?

The way we look at the future now is very different from the space age optimism of the 1950's. Whenever I read about future predictions it's all about avoiding a global energy crisis and how in 20 years we'll all live vicariously through the internet.
Not exactly theme-park material.

We who? Certainly not this future optimist. That wonderful space age optimism of the 1950's you refer to also had its dark side that was not exactly theme-park material - racial tensions and paranoia, communism taking over the world, fear of mutually assured nuclear destruction... need I go on?

How we as individuals see the future is not entirely dependent on how the media portrays the future. The media makes money off bad news - not good news. To buy into the dystopian view of the future is how they profit and manipulate. You can choose to buy their view, or decide for yourself how our future will be.

I see a future that is much more free of want, a future that holds the probability of consumer space travel not just the possibility, a future of medical advances where more disease is curable even if the common cold isn't, a future where information is always at our fingertips but doesn't require us to be constantly logged on and oblivious to our surroundings, a future where science explores the boundaries of the physical world as well as our imaginations, a future where we can explore, discover, create, and live wonderful lives.

If that doesn't sound like it would make good theme park material, then how did Walt Disney do it in the 50's amidst all the darkness that was going on at that time? It is up to us to decide the future we want to see. Apparently some of us can't see themselves as a vehicle or participant in our collective future and would rather just live in a fantasy future that never did nor ever will exist.

This is why I do not think Star Wars or Marvel are appropriate for Tomorrowland - but are excellent candidates for a third gate where their world is not at conflict with our need to see a future we are personally part of and can actually make happen.

[Disney Adventure]

Re: Visualizing StarWarsland (and Frozen)

@Sambo

I agree that the near future is optimistic, but it's very boring at least as far as being theme park material. If you talked to most anyone in the 50's and 60's they would have told you that flying cars and a space station on the moon were a certainty by 2014. And those things are very futuristic and cool and evoke a feeling of a Jetsons like tomorrow. The problem is that we aren't going to have flying cars. Ever. At least not any were allowed to pilot ourselves. There isn't going to be a space station on the moon. Ever. At least not one humans inhabit.

The two things that will absolutely dominate our future are robotics and Artificial Intelligence. And they are very exciting in the near future, but they are terrifying in the far future.

The realism of our future isn't a fun and fantastical environment. It won't look much different than our present on the surface.

For Tomorrowland give me the fantasy future that looks like Star Wars, Star Trek, The Jetsons, Buzz Lightyear, The 5th Element etc.

[Sambo]

Re: Visualizing StarWarsland (and Frozen)

The problem is that we aren't going to have flying cars. Ever. At least not any were allowed to pilot ourselves.

You know - they said the same thing about airplanes...

Moller Skycar

If you have ever seen this in a tethered test you couldn't say "Ever" with such confidence. I firmly believe we will have "flying cars" like this available and in use in my lifetime - and I am not that young anymore. Of course this will happen - there are other companies nipping on Moller's heels and may actually beat him into mass production and sales. It is simply a matter of time...

There isn't going to be a space station on the moon. Ever. At least not one humans inhabit...

That is simply because a moon station is so 1960's. No one seriously thinks of a colony on the moon. Mars is where it is at today. And yes, I will likely see a station on Mars in my lifetime.

Mars One Even if they are optimistic - 2018 is not that far off. It will be the private sector, not NASA leading the manned space effort.

So live in your preferred fantasyland future if you wish. We all have different things we enjoy. Understand though that we cannot substitute fantasy for reality in regards to our very real human future. Dreaming of improbable fantasy worlds may be fun, but the real world is where our future is happening. And it is happening now - under or noses. I'll more likely be riding in a skycar while others are still fantasizing about Endor and Asgard. The future is yours - spend it how you like.

Boring as theme park material? I don't think so...

[Disney Adventure]

Re: Visualizing StarWarsland (and Frozen)

@Sambo

First of all that isn't a car, it's a plane. And the amount of people who will have that kind of small plane in the future is about the same amount of people who have it now. Very, very few. It's going to be our way of traveling in the future about as much as the Segway was supposed to be the way everyone would get around in the future.

A station on Mars for humans? I'll take that bet right here and now. Even if you're a 10 year old and you'll live to be 110 I'll take that bet. It's not happening because the cost outweighs the reward by about a trillion. Always follow the money, there isn't one financial reason to have a colony of people on Mars. And by the time we can actually get there it would make WAY more sense for us to send robots that can explore the planet better than we can and not need any life support.

I'm glad you don't work for TDA. Your ideas for Tomorrowland are based in an already here reality or they have already been done like Mission to Mars. You pictured a small plane as a cool future idea, and planes have been around for over a century.

Disneyland is a theme park and everything should be unique and different compared to the real world. The stuff you're talking about is typical Consumer Electronic and Trade Show stuff that is not even remotely new.

[Sambo]

Re: Visualizing StarWarsland (and Frozen)

@Sambo

First of all that isn't a car, it's a plane. And the amount of people who will have that kind of small plane in the future is about the same amount of people who have it now. Very, very few. It's going to be our way of traveling in the future about as much as the Segway was supposed to be the way everyone would get around in the future.

A station on Mars for humans? I'll take that bet right here and now. Even if you're a 10 year old and you'll live to be 110 I'll take that bet. It's not happening because the cost outweighs the reward by about a trillion. Always follow the money, there isn't one financial reason to have a colony of people on Mars. And by the time we can actually get there it would make WAY more sense for us to send robots that can explore the planet better than we can and not need any life support.

I'm glad you don't work for TDA. Your ideas for Tomorrowland are based in an already here reality or they have already been done like Mission to Mars. You pictured a small plane as a cool future idea, and planes have been around for over a century.

Disneyland is a theme park and everything should be unique and different compared to the real world. The stuff you're talking about is typical Consumer Electronic and Trade Show stuff that is not even remotely new.

Sigh...

You were the one who brought up the Jetson's flying car - saying it will never happen. I show you what is current that is similar and you quibble that it is a plane and not a car. Anything that flies can be called a plane of some sort as opposed to a "car."

Mars One is making news in that they are screening applicants, but I suppose you didn't hear. It is something that is happening now in preparation for the very near future. NASA is already using robots, yet people are still applying in droves just for the adventure. The moon landings brought us how much in commercial ROI?

We were talking about the future - our future as opposed to a fantasyland future and you made comments about future events that wouldn't happen. I showed what is happening today that are getting us there in the near future. What do I get? I get told that you are glad that I don't work for WDI because what I brought up was typical Consumer Electronic and Trade Show stuff.

I never brought those up as examples of our long term future, or what WDI should be doing - that was your connection to my post of what is happening now. Of course those are not examples of "attractions" for a Tommorrowland, just examples of a side discussion of what was possible in our future.

If that is how this works - there would be no need for WDI as we could just show Star Wars movies all day long. Problem solved. Actual future be damned.

[RandySavage]

Re: Visualizing StarWarsland (and Frozen)

^Visionaries don't follow the money. They follow their vision. Things like DL & Tomorrowland & EPCOT were created by those rare, empowered visionaries (who shape the public's zeitgeist versus reflect it). The money-man says there will never be X because the cost outweighs the reward. Visionaries just go ahead and create X because their vision, resources and abilities allow them to.

That said, Visionaries no longer hold power within the Company (and may never again, as it is public and the founder's people are all gone); the money-men do.

Turning Tomorrowland into Star Warsland would not be my choice over a bold, optimistic new vision of mankind's Tomorrow (as a opposed to a return to Walt's 1960s vision) - I drew the plan mostly as an interpretation of the MiceAge rumor, notsomuch proposing one path over the other.

But a coherent, contained, well-executed StarWarsLand (as drawn, with a mini-Tomorrowland) would, IMO, be a massive improvement over the discord of the present TL.

You've got 3 movies playing in a theater.
-One is grand, moving art that changes the way you perceive the world (Visionary TL Remake).
-The second is big, fun, not-too-deep escapism; a great summer popcorn flick (Star Wars Land).
-The third film is incoherent and mediocre as a whole, with 1 or 2 redeeming scenes(TL Today).

I'll pay to see screens one or two, just not screen three.

[Tomorrowland_1967]

Re: Visualizing StarWarsland (and Frozen)

@Sambo

The problem is that we aren't going to have flying cars. Ever.

There isn't going to be a space station on the moon. Ever.

I might believe all that .... IF the human race all of a sudden stopped producing scientists, inventors, futurists, etc .... but that is far from the truth, as you seem to be forgetting.


I bet there were people, say in 1870 - who said "we'll never be able to fly, ever. Only birds ever will." (We did invent flight). Or, "the horse will be the only way of getting around." (We did invent the car.) Or that "buildings could never go higher than 5 stories, ever." (I suppose the 163 story Burj Khalifa is a figment of our imaginations.) Or a thing called the Hadron Collider in Switzerland is too big to ever be invented, and built. They did! Or that Fusion power over "Nuclear" Fission was only a line Spock would say in a science-fiction movie back in 1986. Fusion power has been invented! We are some 25 years from building Fusion reactors. Or that a person in a war-torn world in the 1940s thought a person can sit down in the comfort of their own home, and type posts in a thing called discussion forums. They would have said - "Never!"

We are inventing stuff all the time. Making incremental moves all time, and someday ... to the stars. When? I don't think we'll have colonies outside Earth for a while. But in 1 or 2 centuries from now? One never knows. But to say "never" ... well ... we would have to proof to make such a claim, wouldn't we?

[Tomorrowland_1967]

Re: Visualizing StarWarsland (and Frozen)

Disneyland is a theme park and everything should be unique and different compared to the real world. The stuff you're talking about is typical Consumer Electronic and Trade Show stuff that is not even remotely new.

That's hilarious. Anyone who knows poster "Sambo's" posts ... He doesn't talk "typical consumer electronic and trade show stuff" - His posts are always about the innovation, originality, technical wonder of everything the Walt Disney Co. once stood for ... when TL67 was new. When EPCOT was new. And when Tomorrowlands in WDW, DL, TDL, etc .. didn't represent the latest in cartoons, and franchises that have nothing to do with futurism.

[Tomorrowland_1967]

Re: Visualizing StarWarsland (and Frozen)

This is meant just as a stand alone post, not directed to anyone in particular ...

This is a reflection, just me editorializing life of the last 30 years ... of Baby Boomer, X, Y, & Z generations. A reflection of our own era, right now. And how we press forward further in the 21st Century, and beyond.

It seems, some things that were thought up in the 1950s or 60s .. and haven't come yet .. we think they are not coming at all.

Society back then .. dared to dream these wondrous things. There was some attempt at some things (manned rockets to reach Earth's orbit, and the moon. And flying cars, that cartoons like the Jetsons wildly dreamed up.)

Somewhere .. some got the idea ... those things were suppose to be part of every day living before the 20th Century wrapped up, 14 years ago. These things most likely will come .. but instead of it coming in 15 years, may take 100 years or longer. Take space travel for one. I bet NASA were more naive about dangers of radiation and mini meteors outside Earth's atmosphere .. than they anticipated in the 1960s. That will take more time to figure out. With better materials that will shield astronauts and space craft more properly.

Are our latest generations a bit acting like spoiled children, who didn't get to fly through outerspace as the Robinson family did in Lost In Space, by the year 1996, as the year the tv show set itself in? Or, if the Jetsons flying cars didn't arrive by 1999 .. that means it's not coming at all? Don't we realize to get the real deal .. it's going to take time?

On another point - Are we so cynical, jaded, and deeply negative .. we can see no further into the future ... than the end of our nose? Are we so brainwashed by endless Hollywood films that endlessly depict dystopian futures ... that we have given up trying to envision anything better?

And do people think Disney Imagineers don't have better ideas for Tomorrowland, and the only idea left is "Star Wars"?

I'll keep repeating this every time since people tend to forget:

Tony Baxter presented a new Tomorrowland to the big bosses in 2009.

Don't you all want to know what that entailed?

Or do we keep brainwashing ourselves to think .. All futurism is dead .. because we never hear of anything from the WDI .. other than Star Wars and more franchises???

I'm not trying to get under anyone's skin here ....

I do ask that we open our eyes .. instead of looking through this narrow straw.

Please.

[Disney Adventure]

Re: Visualizing StarWarsland (and Frozen)

There seems to be some confusion about my posts, so I'll try to simplify my thoughts on this subject.
I believe the human race can accomplish any and all of these things that have been discussed here. It's not a matter of if we can, it's a matter of if we will or should.
Would flying cars like BACK TO THE FUTURE PART II be incredibly cool? Yes! Amazingly cool. What is the probable reality? Our cars in 50 years will probably still be the jelly bean shape that's dominated car design for the last 30 years, be driven on roads, and 90% of the time by a computer. Not very interesting.
Would human interstellar space travel to another planet with life be incredible? Yes! It would be. Will it happen? Probably not. We'll send androids that are smarter than us by a lot, physically better than us by a lot, that don't need oxygen, that don't need food, and don't need to get there during a human's lifespan. That makes MUCH more sense, but it's not nearly as interesting as the idea of humans doing it.

I just think the future has become much less interesting in the last 20 years because it's becoming increasingly clear that the human element won't be there. It seems as though we'll have done TOO good of a job in creating a networked planet, Artificial Intelligence, super advanced robotics, and nanotechnology. Our future has a whole lot less of our involvement and it's kind of boring.

Do I want attractions in Tomorrowland that are a preview of the realistic tomorrow and missing the human element? No, I really don't.

I really like that space ranger Buzz Lightyear. I like Iron Man. I love the characters of Star Wars. Tomorrowland needs these kind of characters and personalities that people really enjoy experiencing. Kids LOVE The Jedi Academy, and are shaking with excitement when Darth Vader appears! Science fiction should be the majority of Tomorrowland because it gives us interesting people/characters and fantastical settings that are far more exciting than the mundane reality will be.


There seems to be a few Mice Chatters here that want Tomorrowland to be EPCOT Center from 1982, and that's just not what it should be.

The signature attraction of Tomorrowland is Space Mountain and it has nothing to do with a realistic tomorrow, it's a thrill ride that gives people an emotional and visceral reaction. It's exciting, retro-futuristic, a little scary, and above all it's FUN.

Let's have less attractions like the Carousel of Progress and House of the Future, and more attractions like Space Mountain and Star Tours.

[mickeyfan42]

Re: Visualizing StarWarsland (and Frozen)

Personally, I LOVE this idea of having the future of the east side of the park include both an expanded Fantasyland AND a better tomorrowland. I love going on Autopia and the subs, BUT, Autopia is in no way futuristic. I'd rather see a new version of autopia get put in Cars Land where I think it will fit better. I don't know if there is a way to keep the subs but it would be nice. But I think the motor boat cruise area should be devoted to a fantasyland forest expansion, while autopia end gets a tomorrowland attraction.

[Tomorrowland_1967]

Re: Visualizing StarWarsland (and Frozen)

It's not a matter of if we can, it's a matter of if we will or should.

"if we will" vs. "If we can"?? You're getting confusing.

So, you'd rather live in a world that barely makes advances .. especially to be able to explore anything outside our own solar system?

Would human interstellar space travel to another planet with life be incredible? Yes! It would be. Will it happen? Probably not.

As long as the human race incrementally works toward it, it will. I don't understand why you insist on saying it won't. Like you know for fact, and have some crystal ball in your possession that allows you to make absolutes about the future.

I really like that space ranger Buzz Lightyear. I like Iron Man. I love the characters of Star Wars. Tomorrowland needs these kind of characters and personalities that people really enjoy experiencing. Kids LOVE The Jedi Academy, and are shaking with excitement when Darth Vader appears! Science fiction should be the majority of Tomorrowland because it gives us interesting people/characters and fantastical settings that are far more exciting than the mundane reality will be.

Yeah, I get it. The consummate Peter-Pan Complex Land. Where everyone, including adults, are a kid again, playing with their favorite heroes and villains.

Instead of a land that inspires young kids to grow up into adults who might want to become scientists, astrologists, inventors, architects, transportation planners, and what have you.

You don't understand what Tomorrowland embodied at one time. A place that did inspire, and spur the imagination. Not the part of the imagination to giggle with your favorite sith lord. But the part of your imagination that did so much more on a deeper level of the human psyche.

Goodnight!

[Disney Adventure]

Re: Visualizing StarWarsland (and Frozen)

The way you speak of a "Peter Pan syndrome" with such a negative tone is certainly strange from someone who loves Disneyland. I look at it completely different than you.
Your user name and posts make it pretty clear that you want Tomorrowland to be what it was in 1967, or some new version of it that would make you happy on a subjective level. Your own personal Tomorrowland that is everything you want it to be. Which is fine, you want what you want.

What I want Tomorrowland to be is a fun, futuristic, and fantastical place. Not a science fair, not OMSI (it's an Oregon thing), and not EPCOT center from 1982 which seems to be what you really want for Tomorrowland. There are literally countless places in the country for the young scientific mind to blossom. And Tomorrowland is one of those places, just not on the level you would prefer. I don't think anything in Disney parks should be something you can do anywhere else. Scientific edutainment is a great thing, but that kind of thing is everywhere. Being transported to an alien world via Star Wars or Avatar? That is something you can only do in a Disney Park, and they're going to spend over a billion dollars making those two Galaxies come alive. They wouldn't spend it if they weren't confident it will drive attendance up. And it will because they'll be spectacular and people, and most importantly children, will love it.

[TFN5459]

Re: Visualizing StarWarsland (and Frozen)

The way you speak of a "Peter Pan syndrome" with such a negative tone is certainly strange from someone who loves Disneyland. I look at it completely different than you.
Your user name and posts make it pretty clear that you want Tomorrowland to be what it was in 1967, or some new version of it that would make you happy on a subjective level. Your own personal Tomorrowland that is everything you want it to be. Which is fine, you want what you want.

What I want Tomorrowland to be is a fun, futuristic, and fantastical place. Not a science fair, not OMSI (it's an Oregon thing), and not EPCOT center from 1982 which seems to be what you really want for Tomorrowland. There are literally countless places in the country for the young scientific mind to blossom. And Tomorrowland is one of those places, just not on the level you would prefer. I don't think anything in Disney parks should be something you can do anywhere else. Scientific edutainment is a great thing, but that kind of thing is everywhere. Being transported to an alien world via Star Wars or Avatar? That is something you can only do in a Disney Park, and they're going to spend over a billion dollars making those two Galaxies come alive. They wouldn't spend it if they weren't confident it will drive attendance up. And it will because they'll be spectacular and people, and most importantly children, will love it.

I agree with the points you made here, I don't want to see a clone of EPCOT 1982 either. Likewise, the Tomorrowland 98 refurb was termed "The Future that Never Was", which if they had spent the money, would have saved them the conundrum of having to update an outdated Tomorrowland ever few decades. That being said, I am a big fan of the original Tomorrowland overhaul in 1967 and personally now, I think they should do a hybrid of both concepts, a little of the realistic future(Horizons, World of Motion etc.), a little of fantasy (Star Wars, Marvel, etc.) and little bit of the past (Space Mountain, Monorail).

[Tomorrowland_1967]

Re: Visualizing StarWarsland (and Frozen)

The way you speak of a "Peter Pan syndrome" with such a negative tone is certainly strange from someone who loves Disneyland.

What you call a "negative tone" .. is my sadness that the Disney co. of today .. differs from itself .... 30+ years ago. And how the co. of today ignores it - don't care, and TL continues to languish. And languish ... and languish. Not all change in life is for the better. And replacing Innovation, Originality for Franchises, and Character Obsession is not for the best.

Your user name and posts make it pretty clear that you want Tomorrowland to be what it was in 1967, or some new version of it that would make you happy on a subjective [Subjective?? What are you talking about?] level. Your own personal Tomorrowland that is everything you want it to be. Which is fine, you want what you want.

You know .. I'm not the only one who wants it. Like there's something peculiar about it, and I'm in the complete minority. There are a lot of people who I feel you are forgetting, and discounting.

What I want Tomorrowland to be is a fun, futuristic, and fantastical place.

TL67 was all those things. Did you get to experience it yourself? I get the feeling you didn't. Otherwise, it's quite possible you wouldn't be so down on it. I'm old enough to have experienced both eras. Today's .. and TL in 70s, at it's peek. I can compare both today, and yesteryear to see the problem with today. I don't have to look at books and old videos. I saw it all in person .... and there's a clear distinction between it in 70s, and the mindset of today, of what it should be today.

I actually feel you probably would have loved it.

Not a science fair, not OMSI (it's an Oregon thing), and not EPCOT center from 1982 which seems to be what you really want for Tomorrowland.

For the record: In the same vein .. but different execution all together.

But definitely not what you seem to be proposing - Posing for a photograph with a sith lord, like he's about to kill you. I would like something that stirs the imagination. Not a "favorite villain photo op" land.

I don't understand why it's so wrong to improve upon the 1967 Tomorrowland concept ... instead of a giggly place to dodge Storm Troopers and save present day New York for the umpteenth time with Iron Man.

There are literally countless places in the country for the young scientific mind to blossom. And Tomorrowland is one of those places, just not on the level you would prefer.

You seem to think I want Tomorrowland to become one large dull science museum. And it to be more edutainment than it was in 1967. I mainly want to see the company go for a plan that reaches at the same level. Doesn't have to be more. But I don't want to see less. And that's what I think you want to see. I see that as regression. Why would you want that?

Secondly............
Yeah ... that's right .. just me. Only me. I'm the only one in the world who wants a land that spurs imaginations, and kids to want to do great things in their life, and be land, that's still FUN. You word everything .. like it's only me who wants this. (??)

BUT ..... Best to just "duel it out with sith lords, storm troopers, favorite heroes" just like .. umm .. Peter Pan & the Lost Boys.

. Scientific edutainment is a great thing, but that kind of thing is everywhere.

It's not "everywhere" like a McDonalds or Starbucks. I can count all the places in SoCal with just one hand. And they don't make it as cool, as Disney (of another time) do. Disneyland is the one place though ... that brings the two elements together brilliantly .. and is still fun.

Being transported to an alien world via Star Wars or Avatar? That is something you can only do in a Disney Park, and they're going to spend over a billion dollars making those two Galaxies come alive.

Disney has yet to divulge any budget on any Star Wars theme park attraction. Anywhere.

Only Avatar is reported to be given some 560 million. And I'm not quite sure .. that is "official" Disney information.

[Disney Adventure]

Re: Visualizing StarWarsland (and Frozen)

@TFN5459

I like your ideas. A nice blend of the types of attractions you mentioned would be really great.

[Disney Adventure]

Re: Visualizing StarWarsland (and Frozen)

@Tomorrowland_1967

I was there in the 70's and I miss a few of the attractions that are gone, but I definitely don't miss all of them.

The thing about your posts that I can't quite reconcile is the out and out vitriol you have for Star Wars in the park. Kids love it, it's futuristic, and kids love it. Seems like an obvious thing to include. Where you just fit to be tied that Star Tours took over Adventure Thru Inner Space? Because you're definitely in the minority on that one.

And your reply to my estimate of Star Wars and Avatar costing over a billion seems a little shortsighted:
"Disney has yet to divulge any budget on any Star Wars theme park attraction. Anywhere."

Yeah, they've literally said nothing. They don't need to. If Avatar Land is going to cost $560 million, do you really believe that they'll spend less than $440 million on Star Wars? Cars Land itself cost over a billion. For an e-ticket, two kiddie rides, a restaurant, two food stands, and a few shops. Over a billion dollars.