Archives

Contribute to Our Research

Kickstart the Progress City Primer

Ten Wishes for the New Year: #5

And so we continue…

#5 – Rethink Tomorrowland

Monsters, Inc. Laugh FloorWelcome to… THE FUTURE!!!

I realize that most of my discussions so far have involved the Walt Disney World resort, as that is my main area of concern. This item, however, applies equally to all the Magic Kingdom parks worldwide and is an issue that should be addressed and coordinated at the top levels of Imagineering to ensure the best possible consistency of vision across all the parks. There’s trouble in Tomorrowland – all Tomorrowlands, actually – and something needs to be done to rectify the situation.

It seems to be some strange quirk of history that Tomorrowland is the area of each new park to receive short shrift. With both Disneyland and Walt Disney World, Tomorrowland was barely functional on opening day. In both cases, Tomorrowland was the last area of the park to be built and seemed to suffer from the rush to opening day and the scarcity of funds due to cost overruns elsewhere. Walt Disney World fans might be shocked to see pictures of Tomorrowland from 1971 – not only was there no Space Mountain or Carousel of Progress, but no Astro Jets tower or WEDway station either. The land essentially ended right past where Stitch’s Great Escape is today. Disneyland’s situation was equally dire – with the madcap rush to have things functional for opening day, Imagineers hustled to cram in sponsored exhibits and “attractions” such as the “Clock of the World” and the “Bathroom of the Future” just so guests would have something at which to look.

Tomorrowland in 1972, photo from AllEars.netSome of our theme park is missing: The Magic Kingdom’s Tomorrowland in 1972 (Photo from AllEars.Net)

So unsatisfactory was Disneyland’s Tomorrowland to Walt’s exacting standards, it received a massive expansion in 1959 and a complete overhaul in 1967. Sadly, as I mentioned recently, this 1967 “New” Tomorrowland remains the greatest realization of the concept to date. Walt Disney World’s Tomorrowland, while larger, was missing certain attractions and was never as thematically consistent (as wonderful as it was, If You Had Wings was no Adventures Thru Inner Space, thematically speaking). Tokyo Disneyland received a stripped-down clone of Walt Disney World’s Tomorrowland, missing the critical element of motion created by the PeopleMover track.

When Imagineers created Disneyland Paris, they attempted to avoid the pitfalls of having to update the area for the sake of modernity by re-thinking the land from the viewpoint of Victorian and Edwardian futurists such as Jules Verne and H.G. Wells. The result, dubbed “Discoveryland” and owing a great deal to Disneyland’s abandoned Discovery Bay concept, was well-realized but suffered from a lack of later expansion and, again, missed that “second level” effect provided by a PeopleMover track, monorail or skyway. Hong Kong Disneyland took a fantastical approach to Tomorrowland as well, with a neon-heavy retro-cartoony feel akin to Walt Disney World’s 1994 Tomorrowland remodel which transformed that land into a Buck Rogers-inspired, neon future-deco “future that never was”.

Space Mountain and the Orbitron, Space Mountain, Hong Kong DisneylandThe glowy science-fantasy future of Hong Kong Disneyland

Tomorrowland’s drift from science-fact to science-fantasy, and from attempting to provide a window into humanity’s future to relying on character-heavy franchise tie-ins, shows that no one can really get a handle on what this land should be. The fact that the concept of Tomorrowland has become increasingly jumbled since 1967 shows how much the company depended on Walt to drive innovation and push for consistent upgrades. Walt Disney died before 1967′s Tomorrowland officially opened, and without his unifying vision and willpower the same lack of purpose that led to the eventual abandonment of the EPCOT city project in Florida also led to the abandonment of Tomorrowland as a constantly-changing vision of the future. This is easily illustrated by the quantum leaps in design, technology and scope that occurred in the twelve-year span between Disneyland’s opening in 1955 and the New Tomorrowland of 1967. That decade saw numerous changes in Tomorrowland, and ended in a complete rebuilding of the area. Compare that to the current day, when it’s been a full fifteen years since the opening of Walt Disney World’s Tomorrowland of 1994; many of the original plans for that renovation were never even realized, and the only changes since have come in the form of new, low-budget cartoon-based attractions.

Tomorrowland rendering, Disneyland, 1967The High Water Mark: Disneyland’s New Tomorrowland, 1967

These new attractions, built to capitalize on popular characters from Disney (and especially Pixar) films, have often been criticized for turning Tomorrowland into “Fantasyland East”. Bringing characters from Toy Story, Lilo and Stitch, and – most egregiously – Monsters Inc. into Tomorrowland destroys all pretense of attempting to create a coherent theme of futurism. Moreover, these attractions tend to be franchised and retro-fitted into other parks, leading to thematic non-sequiturs such as Buzz Lightyear inhabiting the Vernian steampunk future of the Parisian Tomorrowland.

Then there’s the original Tomorrowland – that wonderful Californian vision of the future from 1967. It was, in great part, destroyed a decade ago to make way for the now-infamous Tomorrowland ’98. Culled from a variety of stylistic sources, including the Parisian futurism of Jules Verne, the golden age sci-fi stylings of Florida’s park, Eisner’s obsession with “Montana future”, and precious little from the original Imagineering plan for re-design called “Tomorrowland 2055″, the Tomorrowland of 1998 was a disaster upon opening and remains widely loathed today. Several attractions closed to make way for the remodeling, and were replaced mostly with shops and restaurants. The centerpiece of the new land, the Rocket Rods, took the place of the PeopleMover but was soon forced to close because a lack of funding led to shortcuts in its construction which rendered it prone to breakdowns and eventually inoperable. Thus Disneyland’s once-vibrant Tomorrowland sits desolate, with an empty PeopleMover track and a net loss of attractions.

This is the situation we find ourselves in, and no matter how it happened it needs to be turned around. Disney needs to devote the effort and, most importantly, the funding to take care of this situation not only in one specific park but in all five of its resorts. There needs to be coordination at the highest levels to determine a specific theme and purpose for each individual Tomorrowland, and a concerted program to fully fund and construct each individual concept as quickly as possible. Tomorrowland is a mess, and Disney has pussy-footed around the issue for years. It’s time to fix it. My suggestions:

Disneyland

Tomorrowland rendering, Disneyland 1998The rusty, rocky future of 1998

The first and once-greatest Tomorrowland is, strangely, the most in need of immediate attention. Some elements of Tomorrowland ’98 have been removed or painted over, but many unpleasant vestiges remain. The 1998 remodeling was a half-hearted effort that attempted to cheaply put a Discoveryland veneer over the original 1967-era Populuxe infrastructure, and the result was a chimerical disaster.

The greatest amount of damage that was done to Tomorrowland’s infrastructure resulted from the Astro Jets being removed from their location atop the WEDway station and being relocated as a new spinner ride amongst Eisner’s “Montana future” rockwork at the land’s entrance. Not only did this ruin the thrill of the Astro Jets and remove the land’s traditional “weenie”, but it also provided a massive hindrance to traffic flow between Tomorrowland and the Hub. Job one for any Tomorrowland refurbishment should be returning the Astro Jets to their proper place atop the WEDway station and doing any necessary refurbishment work required to get both the Jets and the WEDway operating again.

The dominant rumor at the moment is that as soon as the economic crisis eases up and the corporate offices release the purse-strings, Tomorrowland will be the first area of Disneyland to receive attention. The Imagineers are well aware of the land’s current unfulfilled promise and now that John Lasseter has influence at the highest levels, the creative neglect of the Eisner years should come to an end. Imagineer Tony Baxter, it is said, has a plan. How soon that plan is revealed is anyone’s guess.

My opinion is that they should return Disneyland’s Tomorrowland to its roots – a real-life exploration of science and technology with an eye towards humanity’s future. While I’ll admit that a return to its kitschy Populuxe roots would be highly enjoyable – Saturn V and all – I think the concept of 1967’s Tomorrowland could easily be updated for the modern age. Space travel is no more of an everyday event for the average person than it was then; NASA’s planned Ares-series rockets – intended to return us to the moon and later take us to Mars – provide a nice analogue to the Apollo age of the 1960s. Issues with transportation are just as relevant as they were then, and science has learned a lot about what fills that “inner space” that we once were able to explore at Disneyland.

Disneyland’s Tomorrowland should be sleek, modern, and relevant. It should look forward, not backward or sideways. There’s room for the whimsical and fantastical – we know of many fantastic abandoned concepts from the past and who knows what WDI can come up with to revisit futuristic themes with modern technology.

Walt Disney World

Tomorrowland rendering, Magic Kingdom, Disney World, 1994

While I’m usually of the opinion that Tomorrowland should reflect and expand on its original intent, I’m willing to cut some slack in Florida. The Orlando resort is blessed by EPCOT Center, which gives Disney the opportunity to explore the ideas that Tomorrowland was created to espouse, but in a much larger scope. EPCOT has (or, rather, should have) the actual future covered, so that gives Tomorrowland a little room for zaniness.

That doesn’t mean it should be a free-for-all. Monsters, Inc. has got to go. Thankfully, its simple construction should mean that it’d be easily to pluck it out of Tomorrowland and remove it to Hollywood Studios’ Pixar Place, where it’s somewhat thematically relevant and hurts no one. Stitch’s Great Escape has to go – mostly because it’s awful – and as we already have one Toy Story-themed shooter at the Studios I think that gives us free reign to re-think Buzz Lightyear.

So, where to start? First, pick a theme. I really don’t mind the whole Buck Rogers 1930s future angle, but it needs to continue all the way through the land. Compare the area leading from the Tea Cups down past the Speedway to Rockettower Plaza – you can almost see the seam where the money ran out and they just gave up. It’s possible to be fantastical and classy at the same time – witness Metropolis – without being overtly cartoony.

Then they need to pick a roster of attractions that fits whatever theme they select. This fits my personal agenda of moving the Carousel of Progress to EPCOT. I love the Carousel, although it needs updating, but it doesn’t fit the rest of Tomorrowland anymore. It would make a lot more sense at EPCOT, perhaps at the end of Innoventions East where it could serve as a grand finale of sorts for the “Road to Tomorrow”. In its place in the fantastical Tomorrowland could be an animatronic spectacle akin to the once-proposed Plectu’s Intergalactic Revue.

Something needs to be done with the abandoned Skyway station, the expansion pad beside it, and the demolished Galaxy Theater. The Speedway needs to be completely re-imagined, with at the very least a conversion to electric cars. As I’ve mentioned before, I’d like to see its footprint reduced by having a multi-story ride building with indoor and outdoor segments, which could feature black-light vistas of the “City of Tomorrow” akin to the former finale of the World of Motion.

Imagineering could then come up with new concepts to replace Stitch, Buzz, and the Monsters. The Monsters theater could always be reverted to CircleVision – I enjoyed the concept of Timekeeper, although its execution was a bit over-the-top. Or, perhaps, a re-voiced Timekeeper and Nine-Eye could take over a redesigned Monsters theater for a new show. One final option would be to incorporate the Monsters show space with the adjoining Buzz ride, creating enough room for a truly special dark ride of some sort. The entrance and queue could be on the Monsters side facing the hub, making the land more open and inviting from the entrance. If they really wanted to go far out, why not a ride based on those insane Ward Kimball cartoons for the Tomorrowland-themed Wonderful World of Color shows in the 1950s?

Mars and Beyond artworkAdmit it – this would make a killer ride

Perhaps a Kimball-themed dark ride about zany alien invasion could be paired with Plectu’s Revue and a flying saucers attraction in the former Galaxy Theater location to create a sort of Tomorrowland Roswell – Area 71? I think anything’s game for Tomorrowland as long as we have the luxury of EPCOT to represent the “real” future.

Tokyo Disneyland

Space Mountain, Tomorrowland, Tokyo DisneylandIt looks awfully familiar, but doesn’t it seem like something’s missing? (Photo from Disney and More)

Tokyo has farther to go, as their Tomorrowland is sort of a stripped-down version of Walt Disney World’s original 1970s version. Here’s where things get dicey, as they’re just preparing to debut an incredibly expensive, E-ticket dark ride… themed to Monsters, Inc. I don’t know what to do with that. My feeble lizard brain cannot reconcile the issue.

Much like at Disneyland, there was a plan for a complete makeover of this Tomorrowland in the 1990s. Known as “Sci-Fi City”, the concept was a combination of Florida’s neon-retro Buck Rogers “future that never was” with the lived-in, rough-around-the-edges future of Blade Runner. Sci-Fi City would be a total conversion of the land, with several new attractions unique to the Tokyo park. Eventually, though, the land’s multi-billion dollar price tag led to its postponement when that money was instead routed to the construction of the DisneySea park. To date, the only concept from the plan that has seen the light of day was the planned retheming of Tokyo’s Star Jets; the flying saucer-shaped designs seem to have been used as the basis for Hong Kong Disneyland’s Orbitron.

Tokyo Disneyland's Sci-Fi CityI ain’t gonna play Sci-Fi City

No doubt, the plans for Sci-Fi City were impressive. The combination of unique attractions, kinetic atmosphere and visuals, and the addition of the necessary “second story” to Tomorrowland with a Rocket Rod-spinoff ride served to create a unified and immersive themed area that did not skimp on detail. While the plan was not as based in hard science as the original Tomorrowland, it wasn’t an overtly cartoon-driven vision and many elements – such as the area themed as an asteroid mining colony – gave a real otherworldly feel missing the from other parks.

So what should Tokyo’s Tomorrowland be? Should it merely elaborate on more traditional themes, or should they go whole-hog and do something totally new like Sci-Fi City? I’d like to see a new, unique Tomorrowland with the full backing of the Oriental Land Company, but there’s still the unfortunate fact of their own recent Buzz Lightyear attraction and the brand-new Monsters, Inc. E-ticket. And, sadly, despite Michael Eisner’s attempt to the contrary, the Tokyo resort doesn’t have a Disney-MGM derived park in which to dump this sort of attraction. Maybe Tokyo’s Toontown needs a Pixar-centric cul-de-sac?

Disneyland Paris

Space Mountain, Discoveryland, Disneyland Paris

Discoveryland is a fantastic concept that has never been fully exploited. Euro Disney’s financial woes precluded a great deal of park expansion after its opening, although the 1995 addition of Space Mountain is often cited as a key element in rehabilitating the park’s image and financial stability. Discoveryland was, for years, left in neglect and never really expanded on; many rides originally conceived for the park have never been built. In recent years, the park-exclusive Le Visionarium was replaced by another Buzz Lightyear clone.

Still, the fact that not much expansion has taken place in the area means that little has been done to destroy the overarching theme of the area. The foundation is still there to create a fantastic Verne-derived land, and Imagineering’s archives are full of unrealized concepts that could be easily adapted to the theme. The Toon Studio at the neighboring Walt Disney Studios park would be an excellent place to relocate Buzz Lightyear, as that park has not yet been saddled with Toy Story Midway Mania and there would thus be no duplication of theme. Then all WDI would have to do is add those critical elements of motion that make Tomorrowland “a world on the move” (steam-powered WEDway?) and bingo – a unique Tomorrowland with a cohesive and interesting theme.

Hong Kong Disneyland

Tomorrowland rendering, Hong Kong DisneylandHong Kong Disneyland’s Tomorrowland – like Kristen Chenowith, quite pretty but very small

As mentioned earlier, Imagineering went with a neon-retro design for Hong Kong; in effect it’s most similar to Walt Disney World’s 1994 redesign and the chrome-and-primary-color exterior of Florida’s Mission: Space. But there’s not a lot there; the area has four ride attractions, none of them unique to the park. Hong Kong’s Autopia does have one nice feature, though – its cars run off of electricity.

Hong Kong’s Tomorrowland is essentially a blank slate – some nice atmosphere but it could go in many directions. Yet Hong Kong Disneyland’s need for expansion is so desperate that it might be a while before Tomorrowland receives attention – current rumors point to Adventureland as the site for the next expansion, if it indeed comes, and after that it’s expected that the park will add a Frontierland or Toontown.

In summary…

Disneyland Tomorrowland rendering, 1955There’s A Great Big Beautiful Tomorrow: Disneyland, 1955

It’s possible for each of the five Tomorrowlands to have a unique and special identity that doesn’t betray Walt Disney’s original intent for Disneyland’s “world of tomorrow.” I think that they should run the gamut from science-fact to science-fiction, but even when they delve into the realm of science-fantasy the focus should remain on humanity’s promise for the future – not on toys, monsters, superheros, or any other franchised product.

Related Posts...

9 comments to Ten Wishes for the New Year: #5

  • wow – this post was a ton of work!

    First, let me just say that the Tomorrowland concept (and EPCOT) are two of my favorite things in this world. I love Disney’s vision of the future, however skewed and unfinished it may be, because it’s one of the few tactile representations of futurism outside of the brain (and theaters, etc.) – and I really dig vintage futurism, so it works out well.

    In regards to the post, several things came to mind…
    - You, me, and many others have voiced their opinions about commercialization inside the parks (whether it be toys or rides), and how it can destroy an overall theme that’s trying to be conveyed, but I think we know that removing these distractions will ever happen – in fact, even Walt was into creating rides around his films/characters, etc. (though I do think that he wanted a cleaner, more mature vision for EPCOT). That being said…
    - Even though Alien Encounter almost gave even me a heart attack, replacing it with Stitch was really stupid, imo. Additionally, putting Buzz there too just deflated the whole mid-century futurism concept (as you’ve discussed) – especially when riding TTA. Speaking of the Peoplemover…
    - This ride should be in every park – no discussion about it. With massive populations, overcrowed highways and environmental concerns, it makes it even more relevant and interesting. In fact, this is what Walt had invisioned for EPCOT – to create systems like this for realistic trial and marketing in the parks, then to be hopefully sold to other segments of the world. It was a futuristic enterprise for the progression of society in general, not just the almight buck. It still pisses me off thinking about why these concepts were created by Disney, and where the world (and the Disney brand) is today. On that note…
    - You’re right about converting the Speedway into electric cars. It just makes too much sense not to do it. A clean vision of the future…
    - Thus, looking over the various proposals for each of the Tomorrowlands, I do like the idea that each park has it’s own retro-theme for the future, though I really like the clean, mid-century modern aesthetic at WDW. There’s a reason that style is so popular again.
    - Finally, have you heard anything about bringing back the Skyway? They could update that if they wanted too (closed pods, handicap accessible). One of the most depressing things about WDW’s tomorrowland is that dead Skyway-landing area. It added so much life to the park back in the day.

    Again, thanks for taking the time to write such a great post.

  • Forgot to add that your idea of “having a multi-story ride building with indoor and outdoor segments, which could feature black-light vistas of the ‘City of Tomorrow’ akin to the former finale of the World of Motion” is brilliant. Indoor/outdoor rides (like the TTA) are completely enjoyable.

    One of the great things about Disney rides is the to-scale environment – the ability to be transformed completely by being carried through a large, masterfully-detailed diorama display (i.e World of Motion, Horizons, SE, etc.). Extending this somehow to envision Walt’s futuristic (and underutilized) city on a larger scale makes so much sense. The brief glimpse you get on the TTA is never enough for me.

  • Haha thanks – I hope it wasn’t a ton of work to read. I’ll admit it kept me up way too late last night. I’ve had this the back of my brain for a while, though.

    First, I should say that I am absolutely, definitely 100% aware that very, very little of what I think “should” happen ever will happen. A few of these ideas coming to pass is an iffy proposition – it’s unthinkable that all of them would. I’m always tempted to put this disclaimer in every post that includes “Backseat Imagineering,” but I figure it’d get redundant after a while. Anyway, it’s not as much fun to brainstorm “what kinda might could happen if current market conditions continue” so I prefer to be wildly speculative and fantastic. But readers should rest assured that for all my big talk of pulling Buzz Lightyear out and making new unique attractions, I know we’ll probably get IncrediPods or Little Green Men saucers instead.

    I also know that Walt didn’t shy away from cross-promotion, but not in Tomorrowland! That’s what Fantasyland was for :)

    Your other points:

    - Alien Encounter was flawed, but it was a good idea. I actually enjoyed it more as time went on, especially after I started taking friends to WDW when I could observe and enjoy their reactions. And although the frantic exposition in the main show made it kind of a mess, I still think the preshow is classic. I really miss S.I.R. I don’t even mind the concept of Stitch, but the execution was wayyy off. I even can appreciate the idea behind Buzz – and I actually enjoy the ride! – but it just doesn’t fit.

    - The PeopleMovers should be everywhere. In Tomorrowlands, in EPCOT, at Downtown Disney – everywhere. It’s such an amazingly efficient and reliable system, and you’re right that it’s irritating that they perfected a technology so well-suited to their needs and then totally abandoned it. In fact, I’d argue that the PeopleMover is MORE relevant now than it was in 1967!

    - I haven’t heard anything ever about bringing back the Skyway. I’ve never even heard it mentioned aside from people on message boards asking when they’re going to bring back the Skyway! It’s funny, because it’s kind of under the radar, but I think there’s a huge pent-up demand for the Skyway from casual parkgoers. I miss it, of course, and I tend to more often pine for other lost wonders, but it amazes me how often I hear people ask about Skyway. I’d *love* to see it come back but doubt it ever will, despite the fact that current ride design could overcome many of the old problems. Basically, you can’t put a gift shop at the exit to sell plush so I doubt anyone’s interested. But yeah, I miss that.

    - And THANK YOU for backing me up on the Speedway idea. This has been a weird personal obsession of mine for a few years now, which I guess puts me in ranting messageboard fanboy territory. Switching to electric engines would prevent that whole “suffocating to death” issue, as well as preventing guests from going deaf from those awful lawnmower engines.

    I just think it would be cool to drive around a new, well-landscaped track and then drive into the showbuilding where you’d be on a freeway in Progress City. You could have the tracks split and enter the building on different sides, so you’d have oncoming traffic. They could put lots of nifty, multi-level show scenes to look at and then you’d go back outside. Anyway, I think it’d be neat and would add a little something to make the ride more interesting. It’d also free up that land between Space Mountain and Birthdayland for something more interesting…

    Thanks for the comments!

  • RandySavage

    I can see we’re on the same wavelength about a great many things.

    There is hope in Tokyo for a couple reasons… Oriental Land is more willing to put money into their park. Monsters Ride n Go Seek is completely irreconcilable with Tomorrowland, BUT it lies outside the Skybridge in a no-man’s land between World Bizarre & TL, so an overhaul of Tomorrowland could easily use the Skybridge as the entry point and maintain a more coherent and style and story to the land, leaving Monsters Inc alone.

  • Well that’s good news – I wasn’t taking into account Tokyo’s strange layout. I hadn’t know until a few years ago that its “Center Street” actually connected to the lands on both side. When I was looking around trying to pull pictures for this article I was baffled trying to figure out the layout of the land. No matter how many times I remind myself, I always think of it as being really similar to the MK when it’s not at all.

    Looking at Google Earth just now, it’s an even stranger Tomorrowland layout than I remembered – the main entrance seems to be the one off of World Bazaar, and the “main” entrance we’re used to in Florida seems secondary. The rocket jets are also out of place compared to all the other parks.

    You’re right though, in that the most hope lies in Tokyo for a really different Tomorrowland overlay. They seem to want unique things, and hopefully when they get around to re-investing in the area they’ll do it right.

    I feel somewhat better that Monsters isn’t “officially” inside the land, although it’s no-man’s land location is a little weird. I wonder why they chose to do that, and if there’s a larger plan we don’t know about. Not that there’s much room for expansion for any sort of Pixar mini-land; I can’t imagine where the park would expand if they wanted to add something new. No wonder they’re just re-purposing old buildings. In fact the whole resort seems rather landlocked – I wonder if they have a solution for the future…

  • Chason

    Michael,

    Wonderful work. I have read all these many times over (and I think commented on at least one), and while my experience in the parks is minimal, I share many of your thoughts and musings.

    A recent tweet of yours compelled me to ask this question: what do you make of the “border” between Fantasyland and Tomorrowland in WDW? As you said, it is odd that the new Dumbo section will be so close to the Speedway, and other lands seem to fade into each other better than Fantasyland and Tomorrowland do. Is it just me? What, if anything, would you do about this?

  • What bothers me about the redesign of the Orlando Tomorrowland is that it was conceived of as an artistic unit, it had a very distinct, very deliberate style that screamed ‘future’ even though it was *never* realistic. And I don’t think it was meant to be, I think it was just supposed to be optomistic and give a little sense of wonder, in a World’s Fair sense.

    Updating it completely trashed that sensibility. It’s like painting all over the Mona Lisa because clothing styles have changed.

    That said, I don’t think I’d mind the whole “Let’s make it look like a 1930s vision of the future” if I believed, for even one instant, that anyone involved in the makeover had ever seen a 1930s/40s SF movie, or even been in the same room with a DVD of one. It’s just embarrassing, ugly, and lacks all style. It what some dude thinks Science Fiction fans will like, without any knowledge of SF or Fans or anyone.

  • It also didn’t help that the remodel was never carried out fully, so we were left with half-measures that left a lot of the land in weird visual conflict. You’re right, though – there needs to be a distinct and complete style that carries over to the ENTIRE land and makes it a cohesive, futuristic whole. It doesn’t have to be predictive, it just has to “feel” futuristic.

Leave a Reply