
We were intrigued with The New York Times' thorough tour and explanation of Disneyland's new House of the Future, the Disney Dream Home. Author David Rakoff describes it as "out of touch" and casino-like and from the story and pictures we couldn't agree more...


David Rakoff:
To be fair, at 5,000 square feet, the Dream Home dwarfs all it contains. It is plush and commodious, with nary a space-saving innovation in sight. Nothing is dual-purpose; nothing folds down into anything else. And nowhere is there even a tip of the hat to notions of green or sustainability.
The feeling of the Dream Home is of a dwelling from 2004, before the subprime mortgage crisis and $140-a-barrel oil. It is an exurban mausoleum, representing the kind of house that can be reached only by a decreasingly affordable car.
We would have been thrilled to see something in the spirit of New York Magazine's recent stories on Vertical Urban Farms or Skyfarming. There are so many innovative ideas floating around on the web, that the Disney Dream Home of the future, IS out of touch.
See for yourself and tell us what you think in the comments: The Future Knocks Again and don't miss the accompanying audio slideshow.
Pics: J. Emilio Flores
Wow. I'm amazed that Disney could be so out of touch with the rest of the world. It's just a McMansion with gadgets.
view DarrenB's profile
Rakoff really hit the nail on the head. Depressingly bad.
I so fondly remember those cartoons from my childhood about the house of the future--and it was rad! Technological innovations to make our lives better--what happened to that concept? Oh yeah, it is here on AT!
view ValHalla's profile
House of the 'Future'? House of the 'Now'.
view swanygirl74's profile
I'm not surprised that Disney is enforcing glutton-ism over sustainability.
view revolution9's profile
I love his point about it being a home from before the housing crisis etc. Wow, so ridiculous. It kinda reminds me of how Charles Foster Kane's place ended up.
view ridge_van_winkle's profile
The original is better -- at least then attempted to use new materials and new styles. This new thing is all energy sucking contraptions and really yutzy backward-loking archtectural features.
On top of all this -- the hair-do gizmo was first done at the Clairol pavilion of the 64/65 NY World's Fair. ( I didn't see it first hand -- it was only for girls. I got to watch my dad smoke!) I imagine the graphics are better now though.
Ironically, the building this exhibit is house in was originally part of the 64/65 fair -- GE's "World of Tomorrow"!!! I was moved to "tomorrowland" at Disney after the fair.
view Mid-C Frank's profile
WOW! Who does their decorating?
Send them to Gulag.
view btoddster's profile
All glibness aside, this is the kind of show that if I were at, I would be curled up in fetal position while it seemed like everyone else would be enchanted by the notion of this Mcterialistic nightmare. This is beyond irresponsible in its outdatedness and mediocrity.
view btoddster's profile
This is rather depressing. I am saddened that they focused on "making our lives easier" (or people lazier?) rather than sustainable design, space saving and/or dual purpose features, furniture and spaces. And 5,000 square feet is ridiculous - never mind that the place is just hideously ugly. The original home was at the very least innovative and stylish.
view twenty twenty-one's profile
The audio slide show won't work on the computer I'm using. Can anyone tell me if Tom Morrow's song has anything in common with the song at the Carrousel of Progress at Disney World? Something tells me that "Thereâs a Great Big World of Innoventions" probably has more than just a passing resemblance to "There's a Great Big Beautiful Tomorrow".
What a shame that they missed such a great opportunity to highlight conservation and eco-friendly products. Even if they've been fiddling with this idea for more than a decade, they should have had the forethought to include these sorts of products.
I won't slam them for the 5000 square feet, though. Remember that this is a walk-through exhibit at Disney Land. They need to make room for the thousands of people who want to tour it each day. Here's a quote from the article: "With Americans With Disabilities Act accessibility requirements and fire code compliances, there would almost be no way to make an exhibition like this more compact." So I don't think they're honestly suggesting that everyone should live in a 5000 square foot house.
view Nougat's profile
The slide show commentary was devastating: it's not just that he's being witty and cutting, he's spot on in his criticisms. It's like a series of Home Show displays meant to furnish a McMansion and an ugly one at that. The massive, useless public spaces; the huge, tartily overdecorated furniture; the built-in technology which will be obsolete in 4 years and is pretty useless now: this is about things, not design. Design -- even if it's not to your taste -- is thought through, functional and coherent.
This is a shopping mall.
view jrochest's profile
I don't find that Art Nouveau and 1950's style furniture looks good together. Maybe in 2050 we'll think it matches...
view Daniel Poitiers's profile
I wouldn't live in a house that looks lilke this. I don't even want to visit!!!!
view williamsweyr's profile
that kitchen looks like it should be on a cruise ship. Hmm they do those too, don't they.
view somuchbetter's profile
It reminds me of the ski-resort time-share I stayed at in the mid-80's more than anything from the future...
view rymon[][]'s profile
Pop-up faucets??
I really like the art nouveau concept; it's close to my heart, and I think it looks great with danish modern. But as far as tech goes, my future house would start with solar panels and go from there. Digital tabletops aren't a priority.
Now, those farmscrapers y'all talk about -- those are creepy too.
view john m's profile
OMG! I just listened to the New York Times audio about this, and he loved the pop-up faucets! What a sucker
view john m's profile
This looks like some sort of Tim Burton-esque early 90's suburban house. It does not look like today or tomorrow but rather a very ugly, stylized version of yesterday.
Do over.
view RichardinLA's profile
gross.
view trygve's profile
Hideous! Mindblowingly hideous. Is it some kind of joke?
view sunspot42's profile