Avengers Campus: E-Watch! (Waiting on the new ride)

[DCBaker]

Walt Disney Imagineering has shared these photos from the construction site:

Attention Recruits: Exciting progress in the expansion of Avengers Campus at Disney California Adventure Park – the canopy connecting the two new attractions, Avengers Infinity Defense and Stark Flight Lab, is being assembled!

 

[NobodyElse]

Canopy: ASSEMBLE!

 

[ToEarthandback]

Walt Disney Imagineering has shared these photos from the construction site:

Attention Recruits: Exciting progress in the expansion of Avengers Campus at Disney California Adventure Park – the canopy connecting the two new attractions, Avengers Infinity Defense and Stark Flight Lab, is being assembled!

View attachment 893436View attachment 893437View attachment 893438

The word “recruit” should be permanently and fully banned from all future Disney attractions

 

[DrStarlander]

I'm really happy with how quickly they seem to be working on the Avenger's Campus expansion. But given how much criticism the land has received -- since opening -- for being boring, with its Irvine office park aesthetic, I'm surprised they continued that "efficient" office/warehouse building approach to the new buildings. The new facades have flat horizontal lines (apparently no visual interrupters like antenna, towers, vehicles, or other thematic features...based on the concept image). And then inside, the truss is very no-frills...which is why you see truss like that inside a Costco. Probably, literally, the cheapest way to span a large space.

I really hope they have some big surprises up their sleeves once you step into the queue of these attractions. But from what they've shown so far, it seems possible they may have missed a crucial opportunity to add some fantasy and theming to the land.

And even if they were stuck working within a "modern corporate architecture" vibe, why not something more fantastical and flavorful to elect a "Wow!" response...given people are paying money for this.

 

[truecoat]

The new design appears to be an improvement over the old one on the outside.

This design from the original HKDL ride is better than both of them.

 

[DrStarlander]

The new design appears to be an improvement over the old one on the outside.

View attachment 893454

This design from the original HKDL ride is better than both of them.

View attachment 893455

That HDKL building is the kind of "Wow!"-generator I'm talking about, neat! Really, whether back in the 1970s, to 50 years later in the 2020s, it's not rocket science (excuse the pun) to put a modern-fantasy spin on a show building.

 

[britain]

I'm really happy with how quickly they seem to be working on the Avenger's Campus expansion. But given how much criticism the land has received -- since opening -- for being boring, with its Irvine office park aesthetic, I'm surprised they continued that "efficient" office/warehouse building approach to the new buildings. The new facades have flat horizontal lines (apparently no visual interrupters like antenna, towers, vehicles, or other thematic features...based on the concept image). And then inside, the truss is very no-frills...which is why you see truss like that inside a Costco. Probably, literally, the cheapest way to span a large space.

I really hope they have some big surprises up their sleeves once you step into the queue of these attractions. But from what they've shown so far, it seems possible they may have missed a crucial opportunity to add some fantasy and theming to the land.
View attachment 893440
View attachment 893441

And even if they were stuck working within a "modern corporate architecture" vibe, why not something more fantastical and flavorful to elect a "Wow!" response...given people are paying money for this.
View attachment 893443View attachment 893444View attachment 893445View attachment 893446

I think there may be some internal decision that WHENEVER they do get to rebuilding Tomorrowland, it will have fanciful physics-bending structures like we’ve seen some of in the Asian parks. But Marvel tech should not look like that (the theory goes). Those should look like high-tech functional structures, not like timeless sculptures.

I expect more details like antennas and electric paneling will be added before it’s over.

 

[mickEblu]

I think there may be some internal decision that WHENEVER they do get to rebuilding Tomorrowland, it will have fanciful physics-bending structures like we’ve seen some of in the Asian parks. But Marvel tech should not look like that (the theory goes). Those should look like high-tech functional structures, not like timeless sculptures.

I expect more details like antennas and electric paneling will be added before it’s over.

This makes a lot of sense. I wonder if we can give them that much credit though. I’d wager it has more to do with making the new structures look as cohesive as possible with the rest of the land. Maybe it’s just the artistic liberty in the concept art and the “lighting” but there is definitely something more appealing about the new structures than the rest of the land. We’ll see how it actually turns out.

 

[DrStarlander]

I think there may be some internal decision that WHENEVER they do get to rebuilding Tomorrowland, it will have fanciful physics-bending structures like we’ve seen some of in the Asian parks. But Marvel tech should not look like that (the theory goes). Those should look like high-tech functional structures, not like timeless sculptures.

I expect more details like antennas and electric paneling will be added before it’s over.

I agree the most organic-inspired forms in modern architecture may not be the most relevant to Marvel, but I think there's more curve, more panache, more physics-defying than what we got. Stark Tower's main trick is a cantilever (which creates drama by being physics-defying) and Stark's clifftop house also has some swoop and style and cliff-breaching drama. So, my point is that what we got can be found in So. Cal. office parks and on big box stores (the red tower of the Web Slingers building will always look like a Circuit City to me).

To deliver on the "high-tech," more was necessary than the stuff we see every day running errands. And if the answer to that is "absolutely not" because they want us to believe we really are in a relatively unremarkable place, architecturally-speaking, then that's where the need for more thematic props comes in. That is, sure, for whatever reason the buildings need to be mundane, then the land definitely needs more flashy vehicles, and props, and other place-making story-filled details (rockets, Stark's old flying cars, a quarantined still-glowing-and-steaming asteroid, a crashed wall where some Avenger test-drove a new vehicle...comic book stuff.)

Maybe it’s just the artistic liberty in the concept art and the “lighting” but there is definitely something more appealing about the new structures than the rest of the land. We’ll see how it actually turns out.

I think the new building will be marginally more interesting than the old buildings. I'm guessing that glowing blue band behind the Infinity Defense sign will be similar to the screens inside the Epic Universe portals, with constant animated plasma-motion. But that concept image has a lot of typical Disney concept art effects which make it look cooler than it will be.

 

[Disney Irish]

I agree the most organic-inspired forms in modern architecture may not be the most relevant to Marvel, but I think there's more curve, more panache, more physics-defying than what we got. Stark Tower's main trick is a cantilever (which creates drama by being physics-defying) and Stark's clifftop house also has some swoop and style and cliff-breaching drama. So, my point is that what we got can be found in So. Cal. office parks and on big box stores (the red tower of the Web Slingers building will always look like a Circuit City to me).
View attachment 893474View attachment 893475

To deliver on the "high-tech," more was necessary than the stuff we see every day running errands. And if the answer to that is "absolutely not" because they want us to believe we really are in a relatively unremarkable place, architecturally-speaking, then that's where the need for more thematic props comes in. That is, sure, for whatever reason the buildings need to be mundane, then the land definitely needs more flashy vehicles, and props, and other place-making story-filled details (rockets, Stark's old flying cars, a quarantined still-glowing-and-steaming asteroid, a crashed wall where some Avenger test-drove a new vehicle...comic book stuff.)


I think the new building will be marginally more interesting than the old buildings. I'm guessing that glowing blue band behind the Infinity Defense sign will be similar to the screens inside the Epic Universe portals, with constant animated plasma-motion. But that concept image has a lot of typical Disney concept art effects which make it look cooler than it will be.

If you take the MCU as the basis for the overall look, then you have to get away from Stark Tower and Tony's Mansion (both of which were destroyed). And look more at Avengers Compound which is fairly inconspicuous and plain looking other than the huge "A" -

One thing you will also notice is that same truss look in the buildings -

So they really are trying to make this look similar to the MCU in my opinion.

 

[DrStarlander]

If you take the MCU as the basis for the overall look, then you have to get away from Stark Tower and Tony's Mansion (both of which were destroyed). And look more at Avengers Compound which is fairly inconspicuous and plain looking other than the huge "A" -

One thing you will also notice is that same truss look in the buildings -

View attachment 893477

So they really are trying to make this look similar to the MCU in my opinion.

On one hand, I do think this is a very fair point. But on the other, the fact that they used the Porsche Experience Center in Atlanta and a university building in England to film that location also underscores the comparisons about Irvine office park architecture. Why did the filmmakers stay so grounded? I suspect there's an element of "foil" in this where they ground enough in reality that the most fantastical aspects and climax scenes seem all the more amazing.

Do theme parks work that way? I admit, sometimes. The exterior of Pirates of the Caribbean is not fantastical (not nearly as much as what happens inside) and doesn't "say pirate." It acts as a foil, keeping expectations low, then surprises guests inside. To me, that would be the argument for Avenger's Campus.

Most ride buildings though, I'd argue, have more vibey, thematic enticement on the outside. Haunted Mansion, all "the mountains," Fantasyland (the '83 version), it's a small world...even Jungle Cruise, especially since the 90s.

I think they should have just picked a more interesting place in the Marvel universe. I get the idea of a foil, a subtle entry, contrasting with a big wowser on the inside. But Avengers Campus hasn't offered that wowser inside yet. Maybe we'll get that six years after opening. But the reaction the land gets -- from many -- is because so far it's all been a foil...to nothing.

And I'm not just critical of Avenger's Campus. I also don't like the "soundstages" conceit -- cheap beige warehouses with attractions inside -- seen at movie studio parks. I get the explanation, I get the rationale, congrats to the designers on being "clever" and conveniently saving money. But I pay my money to go a theme park for the theming, and not just inside the rides.

 

[mickEblu]

On one hand, I do think this is a very fair point. But on the other, the fact that they used the Porshe Experience Center in Atlanta and a university building in England to film that location also underscores the comparisons about Irvine office park architecture. Why did the filmmakers stay so grounded? I suspect there's an element of "foil" in this where they ground enough in reality that the most fantastical aspects and climax scenes seem all the more amazing.

View attachment 893491
View attachment 893487

View attachment 893492
View attachment 893493
Do theme parks work that way? I admit, sometimes. The exterior of Pirates of the Caribbean is not fantastical (not nearly as much as what happens inside) and doesn't "say pirate." It acts as a foil, keeping expectations low, then surprises guests inside. To me, that would be the argument for Avenger's Campus.

Most ride buildings though, I'd argue, have more vibey, thematic enticement on the outside. Haunted Mansion, all "the mountains," Fantasyland (the '83 version), it's a small world...even Jungle Cruise, especially since the 90s.

I think they should have just picked a more interesting place in the Marvel universe. I get the idea of a foil, a subtle entry, contrasting with a big wowser on the inside. But Avengers Campus hasn't offered that wowser inside yet. Maybe we'll get that six years after opening. But the reaction the land gets -- from many -- is because so far it's all been a foil...to nothing.

And I'm not just critical of Avenger's Campus. I also don't like the "soundstages" conceit -- cheap beige warehouses with attractions inside -- seen at movie studio parks. I get the explanation, I get the rationale, congrats to the designers on being "clever" and conveniently saving money. But I pay my money to go a theme park for the theming, and not just inside the rides.

I think it’s a moot point. So what Tony Starks tower was destroyed? By that logic, most of the Disney villains shouldn’t be allowed at the parks because they’re dead. Besides, you weren’t saying you wanted Tony Starks tower or Mansion at AC. You were using the architecture as an example. Still though, I suspect they just had to work with that they got and make sure the structures are cohesive with the existing land. They can include all the fantasy stuff as content on the attraction.

Part of me suspects that if they were building AC today they would have picked something more fantastical. Seems like they still had one foot in the “California” theme when they green lit this land. Or perhaps more likely - it’s just cheaper to build a business park than Wakanda or Asgard. You also have to wonder if they had enough space to do either those themes justice as they were working within Bugs Lands constraints. A few different factors at play.

 

[Disney Irish]

On one hand, I do think this is a very fair point. But on the other, the fact that they used the Porshe Experience Center in Atlanta and a university building in England to film that location also underscores the comparisons about Irvine office park architecture. Why did the filmmakers stay so grounded? I suspect there's an element of "foil" in this where they ground enough in reality that the most fantastical aspects and climax scenes seem all the more amazing.

View attachment 893491
View attachment 893487

View attachment 893492
View attachment 893493
Do theme parks work that way? I admit, sometimes. The exterior of Pirates of the Caribbean is not fantastical (not nearly as much as what happens inside) and doesn't "say pirate." It acts as a foil, keeping expectations low, then surprises guests inside. To me, that would be the argument for Avenger's Campus.

Most ride buildings though, I'd argue, have more vibey, thematic enticement on the outside. Haunted Mansion, all "the mountains," Fantasyland (the '83 version), it's a small world...even Jungle Cruise, especially since the 90s.

I think they should have just picked a more interesting place in the Marvel universe. I get the idea of a foil, a subtle entry, contrasting with a big wowser on the inside. But Avengers Campus hasn't offered that wowser inside yet. Maybe we'll get that six years after opening. But the reaction the land gets -- from many -- is because so far it's all been a foil...to nothing.

And I'm not just critical of Avenger's Campus. I also don't like the "soundstages" conceit -- cheap beige warehouses with attractions inside -- seen at movie studio parks. I get the explanation, I get the rationale, congrats to the designers on being "clever" and conveniently saving money. But I pay my money to go a theme park for the theming, and not just inside the rides.

I'm not a fan of the "studio" park either, I hate the faux movie set designs of the 90s and have said so here many times.

And they absolutely could have gone in a different direction and made it more aesthetically appealing by being "fantastical". All I'm saying here is they've at least kept it within theme, because this is something that is shown in the MCU for an Avengers base, right down to the trusses, so ripped right from the movies. Something that many have come to expect from a Marvel experience in a Disney Park.

And just so we're all on the same page, they consulted directly with Marvel on the land. So this wasn't WDI working alone, this was working hand-in-hand with Marvel on designing the entirety of the land. So this got Marvel's seal of approval. You'd have thought that if Marvel thought it needed to be more "fantastical", and not looked like it was an actual compound/business park, they would have said so during the design phase.

Anyways hopefully both of these will provide that "wowser" thing you're looking for once inside.

 

[MarvelCharacterNerd]

Yeah I mean it’s great my dude loves Avengers Campus but I’m not sure why it’s so hard for him to understand that he’s in an extremely small minority of people who enjoy/treat the land and the parks in that way.

I've got no issue with people experiencing the park far differently than I do. I've got an issue with people saying "I was there 5 minutes and this didn't happen so the place sucks."

 

[DrStarlander]

I've got no issue with people experiencing the park far differently than I do. I've got an issue with people saying "I was there 5 minutes and this didn't happen so the place sucks."

I think you misunderstood me. I think the place is unsatisfying because it looks like a business park and Web Slingers is not very good. (These are not controversial opinions, by the way.)

My comment that you reacted to was about role-play. Are there opportunities for kids to do that? I heard you, you're saying there are, and that guests need to hang around and wait for them to happen. David from Fresh Baked is reporting that those opportunities are not happening as much lately. And tourists like me don't have time to wait around hoping.

What Universal is showing at Epic Universe is that you can have characters and street performers and spend money on innovative available-any-time interactive role-play experiences. Heck, Disney did it in Toontown decades ago. And I think with super-heroes, that's a failure of ambition, creativity, investment, and exploiting the IP.

I'm truly happy you enjoy Avenger's Campus. Some day, I hope to enjoy it as well.

 

[EPCOTCenterLover]

Based on the concept art, looking at the structures inside or out, I could not be less exited than I am for these attractions.

 

[BrianLo]

The ship on Avengers campus has sailed. But given what is there the Costco Flight lab makes a lot more sense than the Epcot Pavilion Flight lab.

And perhaps that’s the problem, it could have been presented as a public facing fare with pavilions instead of a campus. Hong Kong is. But for Avengers Campus what they are doing is more in keeping with the lands theme.


Which gets me to my next controversial topic. If Avengers Campus is the Tomorrowland analogue for DCA, which it sort of is, may I suggest Disney stops trying to build Tomorrowlands? They all kind of suck at holding up, even if they were originally ok. Even Disney Sea’s is up for a redo.

Don’t build a Tomorrowland in Abu Dhabi!

 

[DrStarlander]

If Avengers Campus is the Tomorrowland analogue for DCA, which it sort of is

I think it's a Tomorrowland analogue in terms of walking through and feeling a sense of disappointment, a sense of "this is it?" Ugh.

But I think it's different from Tomorrowland in that Avenger's Campus does have an incredible, A-list, rich, decades-old fantasy IP to draw from, that is still quite popular, and perfect for a theme park land. The investment case for Avenger's Campus is crystal clear: one, they can't do the IP in Florida so get all the mileage out of it they can in California. Two, keep that fly-wheel going, baby! Turn park visitors into Marvel fans. Three, DCA needs help (still)! Four -- IP attractions, IP exit gift shops, IP merch!

None of these quite apply to Tomorrowland so unfortunately we may be stuck with it, as-is, for a while.

for Avengers Campus what they are doing is more in keeping with the lands theme.

I doubt normies ever understand the land's "theme." Old brick walls, stainless steel walls, palm trees? That whole Stark Industries backstory, conveyed almost entirely by some logos painted around, is not clear. The lack of props (rockets, flying cars, old Iron Man suits, weird experiments...) is a huge missed opportunity. These relatively inexpensive props could do so much storytelling, and I'm sure someone at WDI could even find a way to make them interactive and part of some back-story revealing puzzle quest game.

 

[wityblack]

The new design appears to be an improvement over the old one on the outside.

View attachment 893454

This design from the original HKDL ride is better than both of them.

View attachment 893455

I have a feeling the Hong Kong one was more so exploratory blue sky art. I think people will be surprised how good the Avengers expansion looks.

 

[Purduevian]

Guessing this was for Infinity Defense? @21:27