Guardians of the Galaxy coming to Energy Pavilion at Epcot

[Cesar R M]

As a Mexican, what kind of ride do you think would be good there? Did you think the old ride was offensive or badly dated? Would the new ride be better if it was more about Panchito and José, do you think?

As Roy said... I agree with him.
I would also have also used other movies and images. Not just the caballeros.
My issue is the overflow of Donald in a pavilion supposed to show Mexico.
The overusage of him feels like using Hello Kitty to showcase China (but apologist would say it could be ok, if it featured "pandapppie" or a reference Chinese character... in Mexico's case, Panchito for this example).

They have the opportunity to put more details into Mexico with Coco by featuring actual Mexican characters. (lets not forget that Jose Carioca is a Brazilian character).. If they had built Brazil right next to Mexico, it could make a lot of sense to have him there as friendship stuff..

Hell, Donald would be ok if he was asking for information about Mexico and inserting himself into the culture. But the current ride He just floats around being "lost" in the movie sections with no much information other than stereotypical stuff.

 

[Rodan75]

"MK 2.0" is more a way of saying too much IP based themes that would be better suited to a castle park, as opposed to original content that would better be suited in another park.

I still think that MK2.0 shorthand as well as 'IP based' is too generic. When folks say IP they generally really mean Character based Movie IP and when they say MK2.0 they are almost always referring to princesses, but then sometimes they aren't and that causes all sorts of random tiffs that go on for pages and pages when folks are really saying the same thing.

I would wager everything in Epcot 3.0 will be some sort of Disney specific Intellectual Property because leaving it generic allows for copy cats and comparisons to other venues and doesn't warrant the Disney price. The question really is how much of the IP utilized with be based on animated and movie characters and how much of it will be on other Disney created specific IP and how much any given IP application matches the Theme of Epcot 3.0.

If we have Sleeping Beauty presents Living with the Land sponsored by Chiquita with Aurora wearing the fruit salad hat...then it will be MK 2.0 (or -0.1).

 

[Mike S]

Magic Kingdom is really no more IP heavy than any of the other parks.

Magic Kingdom is a series of loosely connected themes lands meant to represent some of the major archetypes of storytelling and imagination. Adventure, cowboys, the future, fantasy, the past, etc.

Epcot is half a celebration of the world and half a celebration of discovery and innovation.

Hollywood Studios has pretty much always been mostly IP as it is themed to the movies. Thus, it has a lot of lee way as far as what does and does not "fit"

Lastly, Animal Kingdom is nature, the environment, and animals. The icon of the parks has a 3d bugs life show in it. Literally built around IP.

Making a park "MK 2.0" in no way means making it more filled with IP. "MK 2.0" would just be making it themed to General ideas and archetypes. MK 2.0, if anything, would be Tokyo Disney Sea.

Areas themed to IP and IP only would be IOA 2.0. Especially if the new areas begin to feel devoid of personality and character of their own and just start to feel like touring movie sets.

Dang, you must really hate absolutely everything that's IP based at both companies parks that recreate what we see in movies. GMR is probably at the tippy top of that list.

 

[brb1006]

Meanwhile at Disneyland

 

[roj2323]

I could be predictable and say some audience participation shows.... maybe one about visuals and one about audio... each with comic results....

But seriously I don't think the company knows.

At this point I could see them bulldozing the theaters and ABC Commissary to just start fresh. Once SWL opens that area of the park is going to seem like a relic of the 90's.

 

[marni1971]

At this point I could see them bulldozing the theaters and ABC Commissary to just start fresh. Once SWL opens that area of the park is going to seem like a relic of the 90's.

Crossed my mind too. But it does still offer a capacity overflow no matter the content of what's inside. And there's certainly nothing planned as things stand.

I do still wonder if they think both Commissary and Backlot are sustainable. Being me I hope so.

 

[roj2323]

Crossed my mind too. But it does still offer a capacity overflow no matter the content of what's inside. And there's certainly nothing planned as things stand.

I do still wonder if they think both Commissary and Backlot are sustainable. Being me I hope so.

BLX might get a remodel or replaced but it will remain a quick serve location in one form or another due to its perimeter road location and its indoor dining room. Remember it was the rumored location of the cantina before SWL got relocated to LMA

 

[Pi on my Cake]

Dang, you must really hate absolutely everything that's IP based at both companies parks that recreate what we see in movies. GMR is probably at the tippy top of that list.

I never said one style was worse than the other. Universal recreates world's from IPs. Disney creates world's IPs can live.

At Universal you visit Hogwarts. At Disney you'll visit a new planet in the Star Wars universe where these characters and stories can happen or live. Its different styles of theming. Different goals. Even Pandora has a while new plot and has (as far as I can tell) no direct recreations of places from the movies. It's a new take on the world, not just the world itself.

GMR is literally meant to be a tour through movies and none of the segments are meant to be taken as real. If you look at the ceilings in that ride it is all soundstage ceilings. You're never in OZ, you're taking tour through the movie itself. The difference is in the framing device.

Disney has no lands that are complete recreations of movies. Individual rides, but not whole lands. And those rides (with some exceptions *cough* Frozen *cough*) fit the themes of these lands. Universal has few lands that aren't direct recreations. I love both in different ways, but I personally don't think Uni's style has the same heart as Disney's. I love Potter land as I'm a huge Potter fan, but I never feel that immersed when Dragon challenge is fourth year, Gringotts is 7th year, and Forbidden journey is neither (Harry's hair is cut and Dumble is alive). But every vudual detail is correct in the land. They did a fantastic job recreating the castle, Hogsmede, (I haven't been able to go yet, but I assume) Diagon alley, Hagrids Hut, etc. But to me, the inconsistent timeline and prioritising more recognizable moments/objects over making it feel like a real breathing place makes it feel like it has less heart then most Disney lands. Why is there a wanted poster for Sirius Black? Are we in the third year? Or is the Sirius Black poster just a recognizable element from a film ao they included it even though it didnt make sense. The Very Potter musical was more consistent with the timeline. BUT I enjoy Uni for having exceptional rides and showing me all the sets and props I could ask for. It may hurt the immersion a bit how staged it feels and how many recreations of items from the movies they include even when they dont make sense, but I love getting to see everything. I love the golden egg, the flying car, the Sirius Black poster, the Maruaders map, all of it. I even waited over an hour in the hot sun to watch someone else choose their wand at Olivanders. Forbidden Journey is incredible (even if it makes no sense timeline wise). I love Dragon Challenge even though the ride itself is entirely unthemed. I even enjoyed Flight of the Hyppogriph and seeing a glimpse of Buckbeak.

Disney does have the same problems too sometimes. Star Tours is a mess timeline wise, but I enjoy that ride on its own the same way I enjoy Uni rides. While I wouldn't say they are as atrocious as some would, the Magic Carpets don't fit between Tiki Room and jungle Cruise. I'd argue that Adventureland is already a hodgepodge of locations mashed intro a general land where adventures live and thus Aladdins adventure can fit, but it isn't blended in well with the rest of the land.

BUT in General Disney creates places characters can live. Universal recreates where the characters already live. Both have merits.
Though, like I said, I do prefer Disney's style. That's why I'm on a Disney fan site. I'll take new worlds over highlight reels any day.

I've gathered you prefer Universals style in most regards and that's ok. Opinions come into play here. I just see immersion as different between the two parks. Immersion at Disney is creating new lands. Immersion at Uni is recreating lands.

 

[WDWTank]

Then it would have Future World problems of constantly needing updates to be relevant.

Disneyland is not a museum; it will never be completed

 

[britain]

I never said one style was worse than the other. Universal recreates world's from IPs. Disney creates world's IPs can live.

At Universal you visit Hogwarts. At Disney you'll visit a new planet in the Star Wars universe where these characters and stories can happen or live. Its different styles of theming. Different goals. Even Pandora has a while new plot and has (as far as I can tell) no direct recreations of places from the movies. It's a new take on the world, not just the world itself.

GMR is literally meant to be a tour through movies and none of the segments are meant to be taken as real. If you look at the ceilings in that ride it is all soundstage ceilings. You're never in OZ, you're taking tour through the movie itself. The difference is in the framing device.

Disney has no lands that are complete recreations of movies. Individual rides, but not whole lands. And those rides (with some exceptions *cough* Frozen *cough*) fit the themes of these lands. Universal has few lands that aren't direct recreations. I love both in different ways, but I personally don't think Uni's style has the same heart as Disney's. I love Potter land as I'm a huge Potter fan, but I never feel that immersed when Dragon challenge is fourth year, Gringotts is 7th year, and Forbidden journey is neither (Harry's hair is cut and Dumble is alive). But every vudual detail is correct in the land. They did a fantastic job recreating the castle, Hogsmede, (I haven't been able to go yet, but I assume) Diagon alley, Hagrids Hut, etc. But to me, the inconsistent timeline and prioritising more recognizable moments/objects over making it feel like a real breathing place makes it feel like it has less heart then most Disney lands. Why is there a wanted poster for Sirius Black? Are we in the third year? Or is the Sirius Black poster just a recognizable element from a film ao they included it even though it didnt make sense. The Very Potter musical was more consistent with the timeline. BUT I enjoy Uni for having exceptional rides and showing me all the sets and props I could ask for. It may hurt the immersion a bit how staged it feels and how many recreations of items from the movies they include even when they dont make sense, but I love getting to see everything. I love the golden egg, the flying car, the Sirius Black poster, the Maruaders map, all of it. I even waited over an hour in the hot sun to watch someone else choose their wand at Olivanders. Forbidden Journey is incredible (even if it makes no sense timeline wise). I love Dragon Challenge even though the ride itself is entirely unthemed. I even enjoyed Flight of the Hyppogriph and seeing a glimpse of Buckbeak.

Disney does have the same problems too sometimes. Star Tours is a mess timeline wise, but I enjoy that ride on its own the same way I enjoy Uni rides. While I wouldn't say they are as atrocious as some would, the Magic Carpets don't fit between Tiki Room and jungle Cruise. I'd argue that Adventureland is already a hodgepodge of locations mashed intro a general land where adventures live and thus Aladdins adventure can fit, but it isn't blended in well with the rest of the land.

BUT in General Disney creates places characters can live. Universal recreates where the characters already live. Both have merits.
Though, like I said, I do prefer Disney's style. That's why I'm on a Disney fan site. I'll take new worlds over highlight reels any day.

I've gathered you prefer Universals style in most regards and that's ok. Opinions come into play here. I just see immersion as different between the two parks. Immersion at Disney is creating new lands. Immersion at Uni is recreating lands.

Great analysis, Carsland being a notable exception.

 

[MisterPenguin]

And those rides (with some exceptions *cough* Frozen *cough*) fit the themes of these lands.

Or these which are in no way 'the future' in Future World (and some barely qualify for current cutting edge):

• Test Track
• Ellen's Energy Adventure
• Colortopia
• Figment
• An aquarium
• Finding Nemo ride
• Turtle Talk with Crush
• Soarin'
• Disney/Pixar Shorts (nor was Captain Eo the future... that was all Sci-Fi)
• Spaceship Earth (except the planning your future screens at the end which purists hate for some reason)
• Coca Cola taste shop
• M&Gs with anyone but BetaMax

Now if the theme of "Future World" wasn't "Future World" but "Let's Entertain You With Practical Applications of the Natural Sciences" World, then most of those attractions fit. Perhaps the problem was calling it "Future World."

But moving on to some other thematic sore thumbs..

• Speedway in Tomorrowland
• 75% of Carousel of Progress in Tomorrowland
• Laugh Factory in Tomorrowland
• Country Bears in Frontierland (confusing 'the South' with 'the Frontier')
• Splash Mountain in Frontierland (confusing 'the South' with 'the Frontier')

Funny thing: Animal Kingdom is too well themed to find anything out of place (besides how some don't think Pandora belongs there) and Hollywood Studios is too chaotically themed to declare anything out of place there as long as there's some sort of TV or Movie tie-in.

 

[marni1971]

BLX might get a remodel or replaced but it will remain a quick serve location in one form or another due to its perimeter road location and its indoor dining room. Remember it was the rumored location of the cantina before SWL got relocated to LMA

BLX is certainly in the right place to stay for the reasons you mention. Until they (possibly) decide to exploit the Indy pad which would of course bring all the offstage upheaval we would expect. Due to this I dare say it may never happen.

What's interesting is the backstage delivery access to Commissary is maintained - even enhanced - with TSL.

 

[Pi on my Cake]

Or these which are in no way 'the future' in Future World (and some barely qualify for current cutting edge):

• Test Track
• Ellen's Energy Adventure
• Colortopia
• Figment
• An aquarium
• Finding Nemo ride
• Turtle Talk with Crush
• Soarin'
• Disney/Pixar Shorts (nor was Captain Eo the future... that was all Sci-Fi)
• Spaceship Earth (except the planning your future screens at the end which purists hate for some reason)
• Coca Cola taste shop
• M&Gs with anyone but BetaMax

Now if the theme of "Future World" wasn't "Future World" but "Let's Entertain You With Practical Applications of the Natural Sciences" World, then most of those attractions fit. Perhaps the problem was calling it "Future World."

But moving on to some other thematic sore thumbs..

• Speedway in Tomorrowland
• 75% of Carousel of Progress in Tomorrowland
• Laugh Factory in Tomorrowland
• Country Bears in Frontierland (confusing 'the South' with 'the Frontier')
• Splash Mountain in Frontierland (confusing 'the South' with 'the Frontier')

Funny thing: Animal Kingdom is too well themed to find anything out of place (besides how some don't think Pandora belongs there) and Hollywood Studios is too chaotically themed to declare anything out of place there as long as there's some sort of TV or Movie tie-in.

Future World has always been more about the ideas that will shape the future rather than the future.
The Magic Kingdom ones I'll grant you more or less. Country Bears may be from the south, but i assumed they just built a new theater out on the fronteir, they do sing about the fronteir a bit with Davy Crockett. Splash Mountain I only recently learned was in Fronteirland and not Adventureland, so I'll agree there, but slide the boundary line a bit and it works. Carousel is all about the idea of Tomorrow, but I understand that could be a stretch. Speedway may be lightly themed, but it is meant as a raceway in the future. Laugh Floor has never fit there at all.

I'd still say all these, while some are stretches, it's better than a gray military headquarters in the middle of a Hollywood studio right by the entrance to the park. Most are less of a stretch than Kong being in Jurassic Park.

Both parks have their weak parts and strengths. I don't want to get into an argument about this.

 

[flyerjab]

I never said one style was worse than the other. Universal recreates world's from IPs. Disney creates world's IPs can live.

At Universal you visit Hogwarts. At Disney you'll visit a new planet in the Star Wars universe where these characters and stories can happen or live. Its different styles of theming. Different goals. Even Pandora has a while new plot and has (as far as I can tell) no direct recreations of places from the movies. It's a new take on the world, not just the world itself.

GMR is literally meant to be a tour through movies and none of the segments are meant to be taken as real. If you look at the ceilings in that ride it is all soundstage ceilings. You're never in OZ, you're taking tour through the movie itself. The difference is in the framing device.

Disney has no lands that are complete recreations of movies. Individual rides, but not whole lands. And those rides (with some exceptions *cough* Frozen *cough*) fit the themes of these lands. Universal has few lands that aren't direct recreations. I love both in different ways, but I personally don't think Uni's style has the same heart as Disney's. I love Potter land as I'm a huge Potter fan, but I never feel that immersed when Dragon challenge is fourth year, Gringotts is 7th year, and Forbidden journey is neither (Harry's hair is cut and Dumble is alive). But every vudual detail is correct in the land. They did a fantastic job recreating the castle, Hogsmede, (I haven't been able to go yet, but I assume) Diagon alley, Hagrids Hut, etc. But to me, the inconsistent timeline and prioritising more recognizable moments/objects over making it feel like a real breathing place makes it feel like it has less heart then most Disney lands. Why is there a wanted poster for Sirius Black? Are we in the third year? Or is the Sirius Black poster just a recognizable element from a film ao they included it even though it didnt make sense. The Very Potter musical was more consistent with the timeline. BUT I enjoy Uni for having exceptional rides and showing me all the sets and props I could ask for. It may hurt the immersion a bit how staged it feels and how many recreations of items from the movies they include even when they dont make sense, but I love getting to see everything. I love the golden egg, the flying car, the Sirius Black poster, the Maruaders map, all of it. I even waited over an hour in the hot sun to watch someone else choose their wand at Olivanders. Forbidden Journey is incredible (even if it makes no sense timeline wise). I love Dragon Challenge even though the ride itself is entirely unthemed. I even enjoyed Flight of the Hyppogriph and seeing a glimpse of Buckbeak.

Disney does have the same problems too sometimes. Star Tours is a mess timeline wise, but I enjoy that ride on its own the same way I enjoy Uni rides. While I wouldn't say they are as atrocious as some would, the Magic Carpets don't fit between Tiki Room and jungle Cruise. I'd argue that Adventureland is already a hodgepodge of locations mashed intro a general land where adventures live and thus Aladdins adventure can fit, but it isn't blended in well with the rest of the land.

BUT in General Disney creates places characters can live. Universal recreates where the characters already live. Both have merits.
Though, like I said, I do prefer Disney's style. That's why I'm on a Disney fan site. I'll take new worlds over highlight reels any day.

I've gathered you prefer Universals style in most regards and that's ok. Opinions come into play here. I just see immersion as different between the two parks. Immersion at Disney is creating new lands. Immersion at Uni is recreating lands.

Very interesting take, and one that I agree with.

Over the summer we went to the Universal parks in Orlando as part of our trip, mainly to see Diagon Alley. My wife is a huge Potter fan, as am I, and she came away with the impression that it is the best themed land in Orlando. And she has every right to think that as it is exceptionally detailed. It really was like stepping into the movie.

I, however, still hold that Disney creates more impressive environments. It isn't debatable for me, even after walking down DA itself and entering the shops (big thumbs up though to Nocturne Alley!). I still place NFL right with DA in terms of theming. And, as anyone that has read my posts on the boards knows, nothing in Orlando comes close to Harambe, Serka Zong or Anandapur. Those areas alone amaze me every time I see them.

The discussion that my wife and our two friends and I had was an interesting one. And it feeds into the main crux of your point. They were impressed with how UNI recreated DA, whereas I am more impressed with how WDI can create something new. Both can be equally challenging in different ways. UNI's approach is challenging as there are built in expectations for recreating a known place, whereas WDI is challenged by creating a new place based off of familiar constructs. Each is a challenge in its own right. As with most things, though, it comes down to individual preference.

Maybe that is what Chapek is challenging the Imagineers to do with Epcot. Create new experiences bolstered by familiar constructs from Disney IPs. Maybe he thinks he can keep the general fans and the zealots appeased by doing so. Then again maybe he really doesn't think as deeply about this stuff as we do.

 

[The_Jobu]

Meanwhile at Disneyland

Sigh...

 

[Mike S]

I never said one style was worse than the other. Universal recreates world's from IPs. Disney creates world's IPs can live.

At Universal you visit Hogwarts. At Disney you'll visit a new planet in the Star Wars universe where these characters and stories can happen or live. Its different styles of theming. Different goals. Even Pandora has a while new plot and has (as far as I can tell) no direct recreations of places from the movies. It's a new take on the world, not just the world itself.

GMR is literally meant to be a tour through movies and none of the segments are meant to be taken as real. If you look at the ceilings in that ride it is all soundstage ceilings. You're never in OZ, you're taking tour through the movie itself. The difference is in the framing device.

Disney has no lands that are complete recreations of movies. Individual rides, but not whole lands. And those rides (with some exceptions *cough* Frozen *cough*) fit the themes of these lands. Universal has few lands that aren't direct recreations. I love both in different ways, but I personally don't think Uni's style has the same heart as Disney's. I love Potter land as I'm a huge Potter fan, but I never feel that immersed when Dragon challenge is fourth year, Gringotts is 7th year, and Forbidden journey is neither (Harry's hair is cut and Dumble is alive). But every vudual detail is correct in the land. They did a fantastic job recreating the castle, Hogsmede, (I haven't been able to go yet, but I assume) Diagon alley, Hagrids Hut, etc. But to me, the inconsistent timeline and prioritising more recognizable moments/objects over making it feel like a real breathing place makes it feel like it has less heart then most Disney lands. Why is there a wanted poster for Sirius Black? Are we in the third year? Or is the Sirius Black poster just a recognizable element from a film ao they included it even though it didnt make sense. The Very Potter musical was more consistent with the timeline. BUT I enjoy Uni for having exceptional rides and showing me all the sets and props I could ask for. It may hurt the immersion a bit how staged it feels and how many recreations of items from the movies they include even when they dont make sense, but I love getting to see everything. I love the golden egg, the flying car, the Sirius Black poster, the Maruaders map, all of it. I even waited over an hour in the hot sun to watch someone else choose their wand at Olivanders. Forbidden Journey is incredible (even if it makes no sense timeline wise). I love Dragon Challenge even though the ride itself is entirely unthemed. I even enjoyed Flight of the Hyppogriph and seeing a glimpse of Buckbeak.

Disney does have the same problems too sometimes. Star Tours is a mess timeline wise, but I enjoy that ride on its own the same way I enjoy Uni rides. While I wouldn't say they are as atrocious as some would, the Magic Carpets don't fit between Tiki Room and jungle Cruise. I'd argue that Adventureland is already a hodgepodge of locations mashed intro a general land where adventures live and thus Aladdins adventure can fit, but it isn't blended in well with the rest of the land.

BUT in General Disney creates places characters can live. Universal recreates where the characters already live. Both have merits.
Though, like I said, I do prefer Disney's style. That's why I'm on a Disney fan site. I'll take new worlds over highlight reels any day.

I've gathered you prefer Universals style in most regards and that's ok. Opinions come into play here. I just see immersion as different between the two parks. Immersion at Disney is creating new lands. Immersion at Uni is recreating lands.

I actually don't prefer either style. I just want quality product. Harry Potter, and soon Avatar, Star Wars, and Nintendo look to have that in spades. What I prefer about Universal is how they're able to double down and just get things done.

Oh, and Sirius was wanted throughout pretty much the whole series. It wasn't until 6 or 7 that they finally realized he was innocent.

Great analysis, Carsland being a notable exception.

And Pandora. Although it's not a specific location (is there really any except for the home tree, army base, and tree of souls?) there's still a lot perfectly recreated like the mountains.

Anyway, back to Guardians in Epcot.

 

[HauntedMansionFLA]

I actually don't prefer either style. I just want quality product. Harry Potter, and soon Avatar, Star Wars, and Nintendo look to have that in spades. What I prefer about Universal is how they're able to double down and just get things done.

Oh, and Sirius was wanted throughout pretty much the whole series. It wasn't until 6 or 7 that they finally realized he was innocent.

And Pandora. Although it's not a specific location (is there really any except for the home tree, army base, and tree of souls?) there's still a lot perfectly recreated like the mountains.

Anyway, back to Guardians in Epcot.

Is there any news to report on GotG into EPCOT or is just the rumor mill?

 

[jt04]

BLX is certainly in the right place to stay for the reasons you mention. Until they (possibly) decide to exploit the Indy pad which would of course bring all the offstage upheaval we would expect. Due to this I dare say it may never happen.

What's interesting is the backstage delivery access to Commissary is maintained - even enhanced - with TSL.

Well there's some food for thought.

 

[Pi on my Cake]

Oh, and Sirius was wanted throughout pretty much the whole series. It wasn't until 6 or 7 that they finally realized he was innocent.

That's right, I was thinking his death was faked at the end of Azkaban. My bad lol.

 

[Princess Leia]

Oh, and Sirius was wanted throughout pretty much the whole series. It wasn't until 6 or 7 that they finally realized he was innocent.

It was Book 6