News Guardians of the Galaxy Cosmic Rewind attraction confirmed for Epcot

sedati

Well-Known Member
Martin I stated in the video that the information about the building's supposed theming was derived from here.

Also the video was posted at the beginning of July, so yes I agree it's older info. But that's the reason why I put Dates on all videos, hoping that people will look at the date of the video's information.

And lastly I did state it was speculative at the time. "And if I were to guess, Disney would be looking to recreate something that draws from this Nova building"... Notice I said guessing, not confirmed, and "something that draws" not directly representing, but inspired by.

Anyways, just wanted that to be cleared up :)
I think what you're doing is a fine service to those who want their info in a quick and convenient package...

That said, here's where you lost me:



In this video you lay out details that had been sussed out by many users on this forum (a forum you were known to visit at the time.) In particular, I believe BrianLo, britain, and myself (among others) were the originators (complete with graphics) of most everything this video "revealed" and already had our conclusions vetted by Martin well before this video aired.
You claim in the video that this info wasn't being discussed in detail anywhere else, and that these revelations came through your own investigations and study. You do credit Martin with corroborating your findings, but say nothing that this was more or less reiterating what was already understood, or that elements of this originated from hints he himself had been dropping since the project was announced.
You weren't the only one, Yensid55 was tipped off on these theories through someone on micechat who heard it here. Not thrilled that it was explained as if they'd come to it themselves, but since they are such a source of genuine insight and unique footage, I couldn't care less.
I haven't really followed you since, but do get the sense from postings here that Martin is better credited, but I hope this forum and all the work that the sleuths, commentators, and photographers gets its due as well.
 
Last edited:

monothingie

❤️Bob4Eva❤️
Premium Member
Not sure if it has been brought up or confirmed, even though assumed, but the connector is now under construction and is elevated, allowing backstage traffic to flow underneath.

It’s in one of the pictures you can see the connector. It’s almost 3 stories tall.

EF7C4CBC-7A4B-4DA4-A2A8-338F500C3A86.jpeg
EF7C4CBC-7A4B-4DA4-A2A8-338F500C3A86.jpeg
D082BB69-6CB3-4674-AE24-DB46294B1256.jpeg
 

Attachments

  • 889F9DF2-1237-4F59-807A-59411D498E5C.jpeg
    889F9DF2-1237-4F59-807A-59411D498E5C.jpeg
    235.1 KB · Views: 46
  • 6539FD18-F4CA-4D5B-B0FF-C3E797C3134B.jpeg
    6539FD18-F4CA-4D5B-B0FF-C3E797C3134B.jpeg
    239.7 KB · Views: 57

marni1971

Park History nut
Premium Member

IveBeenJack

Well-Known Member
I think what you're doing is a fine service to those who want their info in a quick and convenient package...

That said, here's where you lost me:



In this video you lay out details that had been sussed out by many users on this forum (a forum you were known to visit at the time.) In particular, I believe BrianLo, britain, and myself were the originators (complete with graphics) of everything this video "revealed" and already had our conclusions vetted by Martin well before this video aired.
You claim in the video that this info wasn't being discussed in detail anywhere else, and that these revelations came through your own investigations and study. You do credit Martin with corroborating your findings, but say nothing that this was more or less reiterating what was already understood, or that elements of this originated from hints he himself had been dropping since the project was announced.
You weren't the only one, Yensid55 was tipped off on these theories through someone on micechat who heard it here. Not thrilled that it was explained as if they'd come to it themselves, but since they are such a source of genuine insight and unique footage, I couldn't care less.
I haven't really followed you since, but do get the sense from postings here that Martin is better credited, but I hope this forum and all the work that the sleuths, commentators, and photographers gets its due as well.


I understand the issue, and the frustration that you feel with this. However, honestly I came to the conclusion about the Troop Transports thing after curiously staring at various angels of the model. Then I reached out to Martin privately to confirm as such. I try and stay up to date with the forums, but no where near as much as is humanly possible, and if I knew other users had originated this theory then I would have credited them.

The trouble I run into is that I don't have eyes on every part of the internet, and so it very well may be true that something that I "reveal" has been previously disclosed in some other forum, but I'm just not aware that it has. I have previously cited other users in this forum such as MisterPenguin and TheVisionarySoul, but in that circumstance relating to the Star Wars video talking about the Troop Transport vehicle and Battle Escape entrance, I didn't realise it was disclosed elsewhere. I was only made aware of Yensid55's video afterward when someone commented about it, and felt bad I hadn't cited him either.

Hopefully you understand the dilemma that I face when it comes to covering news in these videos.
 

Brad Bishop

Well-Known Member
I’d beg to differ but each to their own.

It could have been cool if it were a themed building like Space Mountain.. and maybe shifted just a bit more East. It's pretty foreboding right there in front. Look, it's the giant cube!!! - also, there's a huge golf ball there, too.

Go-away green will help but it could (should) have been so much more.
 

trainplane3

Well-Known Member
A bit early to ship I’d have thought.

Some interesting photos on that page.
Oh yeah, I agree. I visit the site every couple days to see if there's something new.

That guy's been keeping up with various projects over there. The F.L.Y. (Phantasialand I believe) photos were real neat. He got chased off a couple times and was asked to only take photos from one spot from now on. Obviously that spot has some good views still...
 

eddie104

Well-Known Member
Have you seen it in person? I find it rather beautiful.
Sorry in my opinion it sticks out like a sore thumb compared to rest of the park. At night when they do projections on it is when it looks the best but otherwise its a no from me. If they had constructed the Marvel Land and did the overlay along with it the then it would look so much better with the surroundings being more cohesive to the design.
 

LittleBuford

Well-Known Member
Sorry in my opinion it sticks out like a sore thumb compared to rest of the park. At night when they do projections on it is when it looks the best but otherwise its a no from me. If they had constructed the Marvel Land and did the overlay along with it the then it would look so much better with the surroundings being more cohesive to the design.

I can definitely see why many find it an eyesore. It does stand out relative to its surroundings, though I think the disjuncture is less extreme in the flesh, and will be resolved altogether once they build the rest of Marvel Land. I'm not sure if it's the result of a deliberate design choice or something I'm imagining, but there's a strangely vintage--even Art Deco--quality to the building's futuristic look, and that helps it to blend in with the neighbouring Hollywood Land. The colours, moreover, are really rich and striking.

I should add by way of full disclosure that I never liked the old ToT building, which I thought looked far inferior to its WDW counterpart.
 

LittleBuford

Well-Known Member
Does anyone happen to have a recent pic from across WS lagoon? I was there last month, and I remember thinking it would look worse from there than it did, after seeing it up close. Of course, I didn't end up taking a pic.

I think we sometimes underestimate the ability of the human eye to edit things out of view. The Soarin' building, for instance, barely registers for me, and I know that others, too, don't "see" it until it's pointed out to them. (That doesn't mean, of course, that some people aren't more sensitive to these things than others.)
 

GlacierGlacier

Well-Known Member
I can definitely see why many find it an eyesore. It does stand out relative to its surroundings, though I think the disjuncture is less extreme in the flesh, and will be resolved altogether once they build the rest of Marvel Land. I'm not sure if it's the result of a deliberate design choice or something I'm imagining, but there's a strangely vintage--even Art Deco--quality to the building's futuristic look, and that helps it to blend in with the neighbouring Hollywood Land. The colours, moreover, are really rich and striking.

I should add by way of full disclosure that I never liked the old ToT building, which I thought looked far inferior to its WDW counterpart.
The old building looked like a toe sticking up out of DCA. Stubby lil fellow next to no other tall structures. This new guy commands the sky that surrounds him. Once he's given more architectural context through marvel land it's going to be much more cohesive, but I feel it's an improvement.
 

GlacierGlacier

Well-Known Member
I think we sometimes underestimate the ability of the human eye to edit things out of view. The Soarin' building, for instance, barely registers for me, and I know that others, too, don't "see" it until it's pointed out to them. (That doesn't mean, of course, that some people aren't more sensitive to these things than others.)
Soarin for me has all but faded out of view. Tree growth, proper positioning, and paint have made it difficult for me to spot unless I really go looking for it.
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom