Avengers Campus - Reactions / Reviews

[Disney Irish]

Can someone explain to me how Dr Strange’s area is an ancient supernatural site that ALSO happens to be in the campus that the Avengers have set up at California Adventure?

As I recall the backstory is that Tony in working with Dr. Strange decided to build Avengers Campus next to this site.

 

[ToTBellHop]

Can someone explain to me how Dr Strange’s area is an ancient supernatural site that ALSO happens to be in the campus that the Avengers have set up at California Adventure?

Never seen a new facility built where something else exists?

I thought we enjoyed Disney parks for the storytelling. So I’m surprised to hear people don’t care about backstory.

 

[Californian Elitist]

One can tell a story with attractions without unnecessary backstory.

 

[mickEblu]

Never seen a new faculty built where something else exists.

I thought we enjoyed Disney parks for the storytelling. So I’m surprised to hear people don’t care about backstory.

My point is you re going to do the whole Avengers set up a campus at DCA thing then stick to it. But oh ya DCA the theme park also happens to host this ancient supernatural site.

And no I don’t care for Disney parks blogs back stories that try to make sense of non sense. Like Towers that fall from the sky and land at a theme park and why Oga can’t be found in the cantina. That’s not story telling. It’s an attempt at Quality Control.

 

[ToTBellHop]

My point is you re going to do the whole Avengers set up a campus at DCA thing then stick to it. But oh ya DCA the theme park also happens to host this ancient supernatural site.

And no I don’t care for Disney parks blogs back stories that try to make sense of non sense. Like Towers that fall from the sky and land at a theme park and why Oga can’t be found in the cantina. That’s not story telling. It’s Quality Control.

What exactly is Space Mountain? Why could we never see the Swiss Family Robison in their treehouse?

 

[Californian Elitist]

My point is you re going to do the whole Avengers set up a campus at DCA thing then stick to it. But oh ya DCA the theme park also happens to host this ancient supernatural site.

And no I don’t care for Disney parks blogs back stories that try to make sense of non sense. Like Towers that fall from the sky and land at a theme park and why Oga can’t be found in the cantina. That’s not story telling. It’s an attempt at Quality Control.

The amount of back story for this project just tells me that they’re jumping through hoops to try and make sense of everything.

A well-thought out, planned, and executed attraction or land shouldn’t need an excess amount of backstory, or any backstory at all. It should come together well on its own without people having to describe why everything is the way it is.

 

[waltography]

Despite the stupid "history" the Disney Parks Blog puts out about the land, I feel like the land isn't taking itself seriously and therefore I'm not taking it too seriously. It's not like Batuu where the gravity of the design and development of the land is felt in every nook and cranny (weighing it down).

It doesn't make a fantastic land, but I'm sure I'll still enjoy it; I don't think it was trying to achieve what something like Galaxy's Edge was, so I'm not judging it as such.

 

[lazyboy97o]

And we have a right to call out what you're calling out. All that backstory stuff is easy to ignore. I mean in a couple months it won't even be mentioned. This is all just part of the promotional stuff while the land is being opened. Shortly after opening it'll fade away like all the promotional stuff tends to do.

But it’s not just promotional stuff. These convoluted backstories represent huge sums of resources. Their purpose is to guide design decisions but Disney is more indecisive than ever, spending more than ever, and the backstory is still incredibly forced.

 

[ToTBellHop]

The amount of back story for this project just tells me that they’re jumping through hoops to try and make sense of everything.

A well-thought out, planned, and executed attraction or land shouldn’t need an excess amount of backstory, or any backstory at all. It should come together well on its own without people having to describe why everything is the way it is.

I think part of it is that they insist on hitting us over the head with the backstory now, like “look how amazing we are!” Big Thunder has a rather complex story if you want to learn it, but that’s not required to “get” the ride and they don’t feel a need to gloat about how creative they were in making the ride. The current generation of Imagineers want to hear how amazing we think they are. If Big Thunder were built today, there’d be an entire DPB post about the goat’s backstory.

 

[Markiewong]

One can tell a story with attractions without unnecessary backstory.

And that still applies to this attraction. Its not that you need any backstory to enjoy shooting some robots.. Fan favourites such as Thunder Mesa’s backstory and the S.E.A all receive praise and are considered as the ‘Disney difference’. But for some reason we consider this as ‘unnecessary and unbelievable storytelling’.
Backstories are still optional, you don’t need them to enjoy ROTR, FOP or MMRN. (Just named some random modern Etickets)

 

[Disney Irish]

But it’s not just promotional stuff. These convoluted backstories represent huge sums of resources. Their purpose is to guide design decisions but Disney is more indecisive than ever, spending more than ever, and the backstory is still incredibly forced.

Yes its a starting point for the design process. And I don't see that changing anytime soon, as all theme parks appear to be heading in this direction. More and more complex stories wanting to be told via a theme park attraction. I mean even regular amusement parks seem to be trying to doing it with their coasters. So its not just Disney, its industry wide.

But what is given to the guest is promotional backstory, and usually fades into the ether shortly after opening. We likely won't hear about this backstory ever again a few months after opening. That is until the Avenger's attraction is built, if it still is.

 

[ToTBellHop]

Despite the stupid "history" the Disney Parks Blog puts out about the land, I feel like the land isn't taking itself seriously and therefore I'm not taking it too seriously. It's not like Batuu where the gravity of the design and development of the land is felt in every nook and cranny (weighing it down).

It doesn't make a fantastic land, but I'm sure I'll still enjoy it; I don't think it was trying to achieve what something like Galaxy's Edge was, so I'm not judging it as such.

Exactly, and honestly, that’s appropriate for the MCU. The stories, in general, are pretty ridiculous. The movies are popular because we like the actors (and we like looking at the actors...), the visual effects, and the interconnected stories. Having a convoluted connection between these structures to allow us to see the Guardians next to Spider-Man is not much different than the number of films and backstory required to bring those characters together in the MCU. That set up required Guardians 1, Guardians 2, Captain America Civil War, Spider-Man Homecoming, and Infinity War.

 

[mickEblu]

What exactly is Space Mountain? Why could we never see the Swiss Family Robison in their treehouse?

The better question would be did you ever really care or enjoy it any less because you didn’t have those details? The answer is no. No well designed land or attraction needs this degree of back story.

 

[ToTBellHop]

The better question would be did you ever really care or enjoy it any less because you didn’t have those details? The answer is no. No well designed land or attraction needs this degree of back story.

And I don’t think you need to read it to enjoy this land, either. But, I’d certainly read an Imagineering book about the backstory of buildings like Space Mountain because I’m a fan. The Big Thunder backstory is awesome, even if it is unnecessary. It is just cool for fans. I doubt the typical visitor would enjoy Avengers Campus any less if they didn’t know Tony Stark brought kids to WEB and they made the graffiti outside. Doesn’t make the place making wasteful, however. There are little details like that throughout the parks and they all have a backstory. Used to be called The Disney Difference.

 

[1HAPPYGHOSTHOST]

My point is you re going to do the whole Avengers set up a campus at DCA thing then stick to it. But oh ya DCA the theme park also happens to host this ancient supernatural site.

And no I don’t care for Disney parks blogs back stories that try to make sense of non sense. Like Towers that fall from the sky and land at a theme park and why Oga can’t be found in the cantina. That’s not story telling. It’s an attempt at Quality Control.

Thank you!!! That is what I was pointing out with my previous remarks! You get it

 

[mickEblu]

And I don’t think you need to read it to enjoy this land, either. But, I’d certainly read an Imagineering book about the backstory of buildings like Space Mountain because I’m a fan. The Big Thunder backstory is awesome, even if it is unnecessary. It is just cool for fans. I doubt the typical visitor would enjoy Avengers Campus any less if they didn’t know Tony Stark brought kids to WEB and they made the graffiti outside. Doesn’t make the place making wasteful, however. There are little details like that throughout the parks and they all have a backstory. Used to be called The Disney Difference.

The blue crap all over the ground = the Disney difference? It’s over y’all.

 

[Californian Elitist]

And that still applies to this attraction. Its not that you need any backstory to enjoy shooting some robots.. Fan favourites such as Thunder Mesa’s backstory and the S.E.A all receive praise and are considered as the ‘Disney difference’. But for some reason we consider this as ‘unnecessary and unbelievable storytelling’.
Backstories are still optional, you don’t need them to enjoy ROTR, FOP or MMRN. (Just named some random modern Etickets)

I was indicating that Disney seems to creates backstories for things that don’t quite make sense. I agree that one doesn’t need to read backstory to enjoy. However, Disney has a habit for creating backstory when weird and bad choices are made, i.e. Jungle Cruise and the tacky-looking goop that’s spread across the area of MB.

 

[ToTBellHop]

The blue crap all over the ground = the Disney difference? It’s over y’all.

It is consistent with the campy absurdity of the Guardians films. Now, does it fit into a park themed to California? Probably not. But they largely stopped caring about that years ago. They’d honestly have an easier time if everything Avengers was an expansion of Hollywoodland—you are just entering movie worlds. I assume Chapek insisted on it being its own space, themed as a literal MCU space in the park, however.

 

[No Name]

3. Pym Foods makes no sense. Hank Pym is interested more in the quantum round than being a chef. You wanted a restaurant so make a restaurant that makes sense character wise. Its odd.

The backstory suggests the restaurant is more of Scott’s idea, which would make sense, and Hank probably begrudgingly let him do it. After playing an instrumental role in bringing back Hank’s wife and then bringing back half of the universe, I can imagine Scott getting Hank to at least let him open a restaurant.

Regardless, it’s a relatively creative idea. Galaxy’s Edge strives to make perfect sense and people complain about that.

 

[CaptinEO]

The backstory suggests the restaurant is more of Scott’s idea, which would make sense, and Hank probably begrudgingly let him do it. After playing an instrumental role in bringing back Hank’s wife and then bringing back half of the universe, I can imagine Scott getting Hank to at least let him open a restaurant.

Regardless, it’s a relatively creative idea. Galaxy’s Edge strives to make perfect sense and people complain about that.

I agree. I never had issues with Doc Brown Chicken or Pinocchio Pizza. Things should be fun, not strictly story based.

If Galaxy's Edge had "Yoda's Boba" thatd be fine by me.