Guardians of the Galaxy coming to Energy Pavilion at Epcot

Status
Not open for further replies.
marni1971

marni1971

Park History nut
Premium Member
jt04 said:
Except that they are quite unlikely to tackle such a major project while three lands are in development plus planning for the 50th. BTW, 2 of the new lands are the largest ever built at a Disney park. I'd say they have as much on their plate as they can handle at the moment.
Click to expand...
This is the company that built The Disney-MGM Studios, the Yacht Club, the Beach Club, the Swan, the Dolphin, the Caribbean Beach, the Epcot resort infrastructure, Typhoon Lagoon, Pleasure Island, Norway and Wonders of Life. All at the same time.

An BTW, they're not.

Keep apologising.
 
Last edited:
jt04

jt04

Well-Known Member
marni1971 said:
This is the company that built The Disney-MGM Studios, the Yacht Club, the Beach Club, the Swan, the Dolphin, the Caribbean Beach, the Epcot resort infrastructure, Typhoon Lagoon, Pleasure Island, Norway and Wonders of Life. All at the same time.

An BTW, they're not.

Keep apologising.
Click to expand...

Interesting list in that few of the attractions built then still exist. And few seem upset about it.
 
Earl Sweatpants

Earl Sweatpants

Well-Known Member
jt04 said:
Interesting list in that few of the attractions built then still exist. And few seem upset about it.
Click to expand...
...whatever "point" you were trying to make...you failed to make....
anigif_original-grid-image-25140-1377206305-20.gif
 
J

jpinkc

Well-Known Member
I've always felt that the World Showcase is the heart of Epcot. Always hear about a new country coming but it never does which is a big shame to me. I know Future World is nothing like it was back in the 80's when I was young. Now we just hit 2 or 3 things, then on to wander the World Showcase.
 
Earl Sweatpants

Earl Sweatpants

Well-Known Member
jt04 said:
Point is when Disney is reactionary when building attractions the product is not likely to stand the test of time. Which is why the "Disney Difference" is regaining its meaning after almost getting lost.
Click to expand...
Actually, I think the point you were originally trying to make was that Disney can't handle multiple projects at the same time...to which Martin clearly pointed out that they in fact CAN...and your response was to counter that by saying that a very small portion of those projects were eventually replaced with something else...thus NOT proving your original point at all.

Have a good day sir.
 
jt04

jt04

Well-Known Member
Earl Sweatpants said:
Actually, I think the point you were originally trying to make was that Disney can't handle multiple projects at the same time...to which Martin clearly pointed out that they in fact CAN...and your response was to counter that by saying that a very small portion of those projects were eventually replaced with something else...thus NOT proving your original point at all.

Have a good day sir.
Click to expand...

I have always emphasized that Disney prioritizes quality over speed under Iger. Comparing people's impatience with a fast food drive-thru mentality. You must be new here.
 
Earl Sweatpants

Earl Sweatpants

Well-Known Member
jt04 said:
I have always emphasized that Disney prioritizes quality over speed under Iger. Comparing people's impatience with a fast food drive-thru mentality. You must be new here.
Click to expand...
...once again...not even close to the point of what anyone's talking about.
You made a claim. Martin showed you were wrong. The end.

And yes, clearly I am new here...I'm glad you can read the date I joined.
 
CDavid

CDavid

Well-Known Member
jt04 said:
Point is when Disney is reactionary when building attractions the product is not likely to stand the test of time. Which is why the "Disney Difference" is regaining its meaning after almost getting lost.
Click to expand...

So, you're saying that Avatar likely will not stand the test of time, since it was reactionary.

You realize that, right?
 
I

iHeartDisneylandCats

Well-Known Member
jt04 said:
Interesting list in that few of the attractions built then still exist. And few seem upset about it.
Click to expand...
False. MGM was simply a name change, the infrastructure is still there. Yacht, Beach, Swolphin, CBR, EPCOT resort infrastructure, Typhoon Lagoon, and Norway (minus Maelstrom) are still there.

Pleasure Island and Wonders of Life are the only items on that list that no longer exist.

jt04 said:
I have always emphasized that Disney prioritizes quality over speed under Iger. Comparing people's impatience with a fast food drive-thru mentality. You must be new here.
Click to expand...
Disney used to prioritize both at the same time. Lets see......
20120610-125013.jpg

Three years to build.

http://www./wp-content/uploads/2016/07/1385231_1280x720.jpg
Five years to build.

Arguably, both parks on their opening days were of a similar quality. There is no reason that Shanghai Disneyland should have taken two years longer than EPCOT Center to build.
 
RoysCabin

RoysCabin

Well-Known Member
I'm not comfortable with the notion that people are somehow "dumber" now; there really isn't any evidence for that. Shorter attention spans? Maybe, but I'd argue that putting all the blame on the audience is a means of taking responsibility off the organizations, businesses, and other institutions that, as said earlier in this thread, "seek out" the lowest common denominator rather than using their creative advantages and financial strengths to do something constructive and positive for all.

As for the larger argument concerning EPCOT, part of what frustrates me about the move toward IPs and various toons is that I really enjoy a lot of those things, but end up kind of resenting them as they take over more and more of the WDW experience. I don't like feeling that way; I don't want to "resent" Mickey (or whatever the change might be now) for taking over Great Movie Ride, I don't want to "resent" various IPs for getting in the way of more creative visions for EPCOT, I don't want to "resent" meet and greets for eating away at space and funds that could go toward presenting more varied offerings to the public rather than falling back onto the same formulas aimed at the same audiences over and over again.

Everybody rightly acknowledge that some level of change in inevitable in the theme park experience, nobody argues that, but even as a child many of my favorite Disney World experiences were the ones that didn't feel 100% "Disney", know what I mean? EPCOT didn't have Mickey and pals for awhile; MGM had them as compliments to the overall experience, not dominating it; the resorts did some interesting conceptual things and, again, mostly used Disney characters as a compliment, not as the heart of the experience. Heck, early WDW largely marketed itself toward young, childless guests; kids were obviously welcomed and thrilled with the place, but they weren't the only market being catered to. Again, even as a child I really appreciated that.

We keep coming back to it, but yeah, "blessing of size", it'd be nice to see them use it more to vary up the themed experiences.
 
marni1971

marni1971

Park History nut
Premium Member
vgersix

vgersix

Member
wdisney9000 said:
Perhaps you should read more, or visit other threads in regards to Epcot before compartmentalizing people into incorrect camps.

Do you honestly feel that emulating Fantasyland and blurring the lines of distinction between parks is the best that WDI is capable of? Or is it simply pandering to the most basic desires of guests, most who dont understand proper and balanced theme beyond an empirical correlation of a cartoon character displayed in an attraction.
Click to expand...

Hey, I never said it was the best or only option for the future of the park. My point was, as others have said, if that's what they're going to do... they need to commit to the idea and DO IT. The disjointed nature of current day EPCOT that so many can't help but notice is the result of inconsistency when it comes to theme.

Lol, sorry I don't have time to read 200+ pages of one thread just to catch up on a conversation that had for the most part established itself by page 20. By the time I got to the end, the conversation would be over. Also I thought my 1, 2, 3 compartmentalization was pretty obviously tongue in cheek and not intended to be taken 100% seriously, but okay.

My take on what comes next for EPCOT is that while I might not love the idea of bringing in characters etc., the park clearly needs something new and fresh if it's going to endure. So I'm sorry if you disagree with my attempt to remain positive about the future of the park, but I find it a better option than just complaining about a proposed attraction before I even get to see it or know anything about what it's going to be like firsthand. Again, we don't all have to agree; just my two cents.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

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

Back
Top Bottom