The Trouble with Tomorrowland (New Paint Photo Update)
Tomorrowland has an identity crisis. This is becoming increasingly clear in Magic Kingdom, but it’s hardly a problem unique to Walt Disney World. With the exception of Shanghai Disneyland, every Tomorrowland has this same issue to varying degrees, and it only gets worse with the older parks.
It’s certainly true at Disneyland, which is still recovering from its New Tomorrowland project that brought Rocket Rods and brown paint to much of the land in an attempt at faux Steampunk. It’s also true at Tokyo Disneyland, which is currently contracting the footprint of its massive Tomorrowland with a medley of designs from several eras. And it’s true at Magic Kingdom in Walt Disney World.
In this post, we’ll take a look at some of the ongoing changes to Tomorrowland in Magic Kingdom, and what we might expect as the land expands and receives yet another aesthetic with TRON Lightcycle Power Run. We’ll also share some photos of the new paint scheme, signage, and other details that have recently changed in Tomorrowland.
Since some of you probably aren’t interested in my commentary about an ‘ideal’ Tomorrowland 2021, let’s start with the construction and project update photos and then shift gears to discuss the future of Tomorrowland…
First, the new color scheme. This starts with a creamy orange above Merchant of Venus and Auntie Gravity’s Galactic Goodies, which continues in a dark tangerine shade near the ground before switching to yellow near the restrooms.
Above the restrooms is a pastel purple, and below them to the right begins a turquoise pattern that juts up above Mickey’s Star Traders.
Here’s a ground-level look at the Auntie Gravity’s Galactic Goodies signage.
There are several pastel colors used here, and the combination of colors and patterns gives this area a decidedly 1980s vibe.
Here’s a look at the new paint scheme around Mickey’s Star Traders.
Plants here had been removed a few weeks prior, and now we know why.
I actually took a photo with the plants removed just before the repainting began, as I thought it was a rare chance to capture the signage in isolation. Little did I know what was about to happen!
Personally, I don’t think the result here is a good one. They’ve leaned a bit too much into the retro part of retro-futurism. Vibrantly colored walls are great for selfies, but arguably less so for futuristic themed design.
Worth noting is that this is far from the first repainting of Tomorrowland. The PeopleMover platform received a multi-colored scheme a couple of years ago.
However, my personal favorite is the paint above, from the backside of the PeopleMover track. I’m not sure to when this dates, but I’m guessing it predates Tomorrowland ’94.
While we’re on the Tomorrowland Transit Authority, we might as well check in on the progress of the projects visible from above.
Tomorrowland Speedway looks pretty much the same as it did in our last Magic Kingdom update.
Ditto the TRON Lightcycle Power Run.
This isn’t to say work isn’t progressing–the construction site is quite active–it’s just that visible progress is difficult to convey in photos or video.
Back on the ground, we have a look at the fleet of vehicles with Space Mountain in the distance.
New cars from Tokyo Disneyland (which closed its version of the attraction to make way for the Beauty and the Beast mini-land) give the attraction in its current state a new lease on life, postponing any plans to modernize. That’s unfortunate, to say the least.
For now, I’m less interested in the huge substantive changes and more interested in the aesthetic ones.
Another recent update to Tomorrowland was the refreshing of these restrooms. The interior is fine–generically modern, but it gets the job done–but what perplexes me is the use of the EPCOT Center ‘Prototype’ font. Tomorrowland isn’t Future World.
In a move that was praised last fall, the new Monsters, Inc. Laugh Floor signage offers an homage to the clean style of the original Tomorrowland.
However, it in no way fits with the rest of this corridor.
Same goes for the new-ish Joffrey’s Revive stand.
In isolation, I love this. It’s exactly the direction I think Tomorrowland should be heading aesthetically. However, it fits Tomorrowland of 30 years ago, not today.
At this point, it’s tough to see any cohesive plan for a reimagined Tomorrowland.
Rather, it feels like a lot of projects done in a vacuum, without regard for an overarching aesthetic. As if there aren’t plans for the whole land, so instead individual Imagineers are trying to make lemonade out of lemons with project assignments, which has resulted in some fan service for the original Tomorrowland (and Epcot, for some reason).
We applaud these changes, but are they any good if they’re not in service of a greater theme? Which brings an end to the ‘photo update’ portion of the post, and a start to the rambling ‘essay’ portion…
My Thoughts
I’ll preface this ‘essay’ by admitting that I’m a big fan of Tomorrowland ’94. It’s the version of the land from my childhood, and both the ExtraTERRORestrial Alien Encounter and Timekeeper still rank as two of my all-time favorite Walt Disney World attractions. However, as with both of those attractions, the cohesive design of Tomorrowland ’94 is also long gone.
In terms of architecture and design, there’s presently a lot going on in Tomorrowland. There are remnants of the Space Age flourishes and Googie architecture of the original Tomorrowland in the core structures. The majority of the land is still a melange of Art Deco, Factory Pomo, and industrial design, but this is already being peeled back. There’s also a hodgepodge of various other stuff thanks to additions and partial removals.
Soon, there will be TRON Lightcycle Power Run with its swooping organic design and biomimicry features. This style of architecture is unlike anything currently existing in Magic Kingdom’s Tomorrowland, but it does fit the style of Shanghai–both the Tomorrowland there and the sense of fluidity in the city.
How this very distinct design will be reconciled with the rest of Tomorrowland in Magic Kingdom is beyond me. My guess is that it won’t, at least not fully. The best case scenario is probably further stripping away of the Tomorrowland ’94 elements to reveal the Googie style underneath. While that’s certainly not the same as the organic design of TRON Lightcycle Power Run, it could be argued that both at least share some ultramodern bloodlines.
Personally, I wouldn’t mind this. I love Tomorrowland ’94, and think what Disney pulled off there is one of the great reimagining stories, as Imagineers used the same core forms but managed to transform them into something totally different, and totally novel. I also can recognize that there’s no longer any thematic integrity left in this–that version of Tomorrowland is long gone, and would look dated even if it weren’t.
That leaves Walt Disney World with two options, essentially. Further peel back Tomorrowland ’94 and remove the most visually jarring elements that will be at odds with the Tron coaster’s style and call it a day, or restore the original Googie design. (A third option would be going all-in on the organic design, but there’s no way that’s happening.)
My vote would be for the latter option, and not just because I’m a nostalgic yearning for the Walt Disney World of yore. (Tomorrowland ’94 is what I grew up with; I don’t remember the original.)
Rather, because I think futurist design has aged well, and it remains a novelty that’s rare outside of Southern California. There’s a renewed affection for retro Space Age designs, which are at once futuristic and classic. Ironically, that style is today exactly the type of retro-futurism Tomorrowland ’94 was trying to convey when it replaced the Space Age design.
Personally, I think clean design and sweeping lines leading to TRON Lightcycle Power Run, with that attraction’s architecture punctuating the style of Tomorrowland, is pretty much the best case scenario. It’s certainly not perfect, but with the disparate Space Mountain standing tall right next door, there is no perfect solution. At least in this (realistic) scenario, we end up with a Tomorrowland in Magic Kingdom that mostly works on an aesthetic level, and is not a visually jarring mishmash of ideas and eras.
Planning a Walt Disney World trip? Learn about hotels on our Walt Disney World Hotels Reviews page. For where to eat, read our Walt Disney World Restaurant Reviews. To save money on tickets or determine which type to buy, read our Tips for Saving Money on Walt Disney World Tickets post. Our What to Pack for Disney Trips post takes a unique look at clever items to take. For what to do and when to do it, our Walt Disney World Ride Guides will help. For comprehensive advice, the best place to start is our Walt Disney World Trip Planning Guide for everything you need to know!
Your Thoughts
What do you think about the new color scheme in (parts of) Tomorrowland at Magic Kingdom? Any hopes for an overarching reimagining of the land’s aesthetic, or are you fine with Tron Lightcycle Power Run being added to Tomorrowland, as-is? Do you agree or disagree with my thoughts? Any questions we can help you answer? Hearing your feedback–even when you disagree with us–is both interesting to us and helpful to other readers, so please share your thoughts below in the comments!
Disneyland should restore the Googie architecture for its Tomorrowland and keep it that way. Give up on trying to predict “the future”–anything you come up with will become outdated in a decade. Instead, the original DL should honor the “tomorrow” in Walt’s imagination which by coincidence was also a significant architectural and design period in Southern California. A clean, 60s Googie aesthetic would also nicely contrast with the “junkyard” aesthetic of Star Wars land.
Totally agreed. I never experienced the ‘classic’ Tomorrowland at Disneyland, but just in looking at photos, it’d still fit perfectly today. That entrance was beautiful!
Just as a point of information, the speedway ride is scheduled to reopen in mid May per the My Disney Experience App and web page.
Love this article. These are the reasons I save Tomorrowland for after the sun goes down
I agree with your criticisms completely. We walked into Tomorrowland mid-day with our 2-year-old, having not seen it in decades, and we felt like we’d literally wandered into some weird closed area – the food bays were closed, and nothing looked “open.” We honestly walked right through without stopping. It just didn’t look like a LAND. It looked like a walk-through place. Coming back at night last year, the lights helped a LOT. But it still is very jarring compared to the themed lands around it.
I was really hoping they might rehab the race cars while the track was shut down. There’s nothing futuristic about loud, smelly go karts. Replacing them with electric carts would solve that even if they didn’t make any other changes. Looks like it isn’t on the agenda but I’ll keep hoping.
Agreed, Alien Encounter was the best attraction I have experienced and will never forget. Thanks for bringing it up.
II think Tomorrowland/Discoveryland at DLP still works quite well, but I think that’s because they went for an alternate future vision which doesn’t age as badly.
Have you visited/seen the City of Arts & Sciences in Valencia? It looks a lot like Tomorrowland from the the recent mivie and was used as a future city in Doctor Who. I think that look could work with Tomorrowland, incorporating both the existing look of Space Mountain and also the bio style of Tron to come.
I guess I’m so use to Disneyland’s awful Tomorrowland that this looks good to me
I don’t think the Restrooms font is the original Epcot Center one. R and M look different.
I still miss the original 1970’s Tomorrowland. No metal decorations. No gaudy signs. No vibrant colors. It was just simple sleek white concrete that was designed to match the sleek Contemporary Hotel (which you could see from Tomorrowland). The entrance to the land – with its two powerful water jets (the water roared as it shot downward) – was exciting. At least I have my memories. (Yes, I’m old.)
“The entrance to the land — with its two powerful water jets (the water roared as it shot downward) — was exciting. At least I have my memories. (Yes, I’m old.)”
I don’t personally remember that at Walt Disney World, but Tomorrowland at Tokyo Disneyland still has a carbon copy of that entrance (with a new color scheme) and it’s still a simple yet impressive and relaxing sight. I love standing in the little alcoves off to the side of the walkways there and just listening and watching.
Thanks for your reply, Tom. I didn’t know the water jets existed in Tokyo. (I searched online for images of Tokyo’s water jets and discovered that, in many of the photos I found, the water is turned off.)
The problem with WDW’s water jets was the wind. The breezy Florida winds would blow the water onto the entrance walkway and, invariably, the guests. Eventually, Disney had to turn the jets off to keep the guests dry.
Ah, you’re talking about the upper jets. Those are also permanently off in Japan for the same reason.
However, there are water-level jets at Tokyo Disneyland that create a similar sound effect.
Well said. I concur.
I think it should have been remodeled to look like the future city from Meet the Robinsons
If I owned Tomorrow land, I would give it a 1960 Jetson’s vibe. The atomic age with boomerang signs, whimsical aliens and a fun play on “space.” Retro isn’t going to go out of style in 5 years and it is “future” without being specific to time and place. Kind of like the videos done at the end of the Epcot Spaceship Earth ride.
Love the idea.
I had the same thought that Crystal posted below– in real cities, a mishmash of different eras and styles is the norm; why shouldn’t the theme of a supposed city in the future be the same way? Not that I’m wanting to give Imagineering an excuse to abandon consistent theming and claim THAT’s the theme…
…but mainly I’m wondering, what’s the last photo in the article, with the blue striped facade, crystal-ish towers, and Space Mountain in the distance? Is that one of the Asia Tomorrowlands, or an artist’s conception for WDW’s? Is it the Shanghai one that shows the look of the Tron ride? I like it, whatever it is– if they redid Florida’s Tomorrowland with that look, I wouldn’t mind at all.
Tomorrowland isn’t a real city though and should stand as a cohesive representation of some kind of well-planned and conceptualized “Land.” That’s one reason we go there. The very nature of Disney World operates under a suspension of disbelief and it has an obligation to maintain that. If I wanted to pay for and experience or walk around the typical mish-mash and disorganized urban sprawl I’ll just drive to the nearest suburb.
Well… today’s New York is a mishmash of all eras but they’re all New York’s eras; and Tokyo is a mishmash of Tokyo’s eras but is still a distinctively Japanese city.
Our idea of what the future– especially the sci-fi future– will look like has changed over time but every era of it is recognizable as a sci-fi future. Douglas Adams (of the Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy) coined the term “zeerust” for the way an image of the future can seem dated to the past; but like Tokyo’s eras are all Tokyo, a zeerusted future still says “future” to anyone who sees it.
The art deco rockets of the 30’s Flash Gordon era, the clean white modernism of the 50s-60s Space Age, the “used future” of the 70s, the dark industrial of the 90s: every one of them, however dated it now looks, is still instantly recognizable as a sci-fi future.
If implemented properly (a very big IF, which I think the chances of are sadly very low) a Tomorrowland that pays tribute to all the different ways we’ve imagined tomorrow could work thematically, and have the benefit of being much easier to keep up to date, since the nature of it wouldn’t require an overhaul of the entire land every time the picture changes, only enough to make room for the new thing when the new thing comes along.
Meanwhile I’d still like to know which Tomorrowland that last photo in the article is. It has a bit of the “Crystal Spires and Togas” version of the future that’s been a constant through all eras when sci-fi wants to show a civilization even more advanced than the space opera protagonists…
“Meanwhile I’d still like to know which Tomorrowland that last photo in the article is.”
Tokyo Disneyland
I’m glad I’m not the only one who loved the ’94 Tomorrowland! I loved the vibrant colors at night, the retro-futurist kitsch, the underlying sense of darkness – particularly from the corner occupied by XS Tech! The TTA, the Space Mountain “newsreel”, the various props and posters all over the place – suddenly Tomorrowland was a fun world to explore. It also felt like they had solved the “Tomorrowland problem” – by appealing to a crazy alien-populated fantasy, it wouldn’t need to be constantly updated.
It’s sad that ’94 Tomorrowland fell apart so quickly – and not because “tomorrow became today,” but because Disney management clearly doesn’t think in terms of using a park’s theme as a springboard for creativity, but only as a loose (and unwelcome) set of restrictions as to which IP goes where. So when TimeKeeper becomes less popular, or Alien Encounter starts getting complaints – in comes the hopelessly bland and familiar, and the theme is eroded. Oh well.
The Monsters Inc and Joffery’s signs take their design cues directly from the space mountain architecture which does make that sign design more relevant. I like that those, along with the new paint scheme are throwing back to a 70’s era modern sci-fi aesthetic. I kind of like it. But then again I liked the opening day Epcot. So can’t wait for our trip down in November.
The inspiration for the Monsters Inc sign and Joffrey’s actually pre-dates Space Mountain’s architecture. This was the same style used for Tomorrowland signs like ‘America the Beautiful’ and ‘Mission to Mars’ back when Magic Kingdom opened in 1971.
I agree that the design is relevant…if Disney keeps this up and redoes the rest of Tomorrowland in a similar aesthetic.
I think Tomorrowland/Discoveryland at DLP still works quite well, but I think that’s because they went for an alternate future vision which doesn’t age as badly.
Have you visited/seen the City of Arts & Sciences in Valencia? It looks a lot like Tomorrowland from the the recent mivie and was used as a future city in Doctor Who. I think that look could work with Tomorrowland, incorporating both the existing look of Space Mountain and also the bio style of Tron to come.
A couple months ago, Marni1971 stated with regard to the Tomorrowland changes that “It won’t be a direct take on 1971 – even minus the monoliths – but will be more than a passing nod to it. If the budget holds with some plussing too.” He’s also said that most of the 94 stuff will be gone by the 50th anniversary and is fairly optimistic it will look good when done. That’s saying a lot considering how negative Marni usually is.
Thanks for that! Since the “rumors” about Tomorrowland have sort of gone off the rails (in my opinion), I had stopped following them, so I didn’t see that.
I personally find Martin to be pretty reasonable and fair, but to each their own! 🙂
I’m optimistic that the new “retro-style” signage is the early shape of things to come throughout the land and once completed there will be more harmony. I wouldn’t expect all of the new style to be in place overnight, so it makes sense that additions are rolling out in the new style before they go back and replace older pieces. The ’94-95 transformation was pretty slow and a lot more jarring than the current progress, so I’m willing to wait for now.
Great thoughts. I enjoyed the discussion on the recent “Walt Loved…” podcast about how Tron will be more detrimental than helpful to the aesthetic to Tomorrowland, while also drawing more people the world’s most popular theme park.
I hear that’s a great podcast!
They should scrap the name Tomorrowland and rebrand to what Paris does with Discoveryland. It’s too difficult to maintain a sense of “tomorrow” when the financial commitment to stay futuristic isn’t reasonable for a theme park.
Irrespective of the name, it still needs a cohesive identity. Discoveryland had that with the original Jules Verne-inspired steampunk meets gothic design, but that too has been slowly eroded as additions inconsistent with the theme have been added.
Changing the current Tomorrowland’s name doesn’t fix the problem, and I don’t see why it can’t retain the Tomorrowland name if going for a retro-future aesthetic.
You know it’s funny but the mish-mash of looks in Tomorrowland well not good for an overall theme, is actually really realistic because the future in buildings is always a combination of different eras, as a new building is constructed next to a old building.
I almost included a jab in the article that Tron would be consistent with other organic architecture in the United States, which looks cool by itself but is totally at odds with its surroundings.