Guardians of the Galaxy coming to Energy Pavilion at Epcot

Status
Not open for further replies.

Kamikaze

Well-Known Member
Nah. Just lazy. The whole "backstory" is probably the worst WDI has ever come up with. A really, really bad attempt at justification on their part.

There is a comic associated with the ride/story. It is 'canon' as far as comics can be canon. It isn't inherently broken. If you want to make the argument that Disney shouldn't have put it where they did, thats different, but the actual story is a perfectly Marvel story.
 

FigmentForver96

Well-Known Member
Nah. Just lazy. The whole "backstory" is probably the worst WDI has ever come up with. A really, really bad attempt at justification on their part.
I hate the self referencing crap. Especially from different parks. It be like putting Harold in Everest since he's a snow monster. Then come up with some pitiful story about how the yeti and Harold are cousins.
 

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
Ah, but someone who is known as 'The Collector' would most definitely want to collect the 'unique' Figment when he visited earth.
So Journey Into Imagination is based on a true story?

There is a comic associated with the ride/story. It is 'canon' as far as comics can be canon. It isn't inherently broken. If you want to make the argument that Disney shouldn't have put it where they did, thats different, but the actual story is a perfectly Marvel story.
It is perfectly Marvel to think your parent company supports slavery?
 

MisterPenguin

President of Animal Kingdom
Premium Member
There is a comic associated with the ride/story. It is 'canon' as far as comics can be canon. It isn't inherently broken. If you want to make the argument that Disney shouldn't have put it where they did, thats different, but the actual story is a perfectly Marvel story.

Indeed the superhero comics are the epitome of self-referentialness. And this is a superhero ride. And the backstory of the Collector exists in the comics and was brought into the movies (and will most likely reappear in Infinity War). Collector stories are themselves an epitome of crossovers because he brings together so many disparate elements of the comic book universe. An alien tower appearing overnight in the city? In the comics, they call that "Tuesday."
 

Kamikaze

Well-Known Member
Indeed the superhero comics are the epitome of self-referentialness. And this is a superhero ride. And the backstory of the Collector exists in the comics and was brought into the movies (and will most likely reappear in Infinity War). Collector stories are themselves an epitome of crossovers because he brings together so many disparate elements of the comic book universe. An alien tower appearing overnight in the city? In the comics, they call that "Tuesday."

The comic actually makes it canon that the Collector's fortress can move between planets.
 

Haymarket2008

Well-Known Member
There is a comic associated with the ride/story. It is 'canon' as far as comics can be canon. It isn't inherently broken. If you want to make the argument that Disney shouldn't have put it where they did, thats different, but the actual story is a perfectly Marvel story.

Then what about Harold the Abominable Snowman from Matterhorn? The logic is broken there.
 

MisterPenguin

President of Animal Kingdom
Premium Member
I don't see how. The Collector collects unique things.

But if they are cousins, then they're not really unique. If Harold and Yeti are identical... identical cousins all the way; a pair of matching bookends, as different as night and day. While Harold adores the minuet, Ballet Russes, and crepe suzette, our Yeti loves to rock and roll, a hot dog makes him lose control — what a wild duet!

Still, they're cousins, identical cousins and you'll find: They laugh alike, they walk alike, at times they even talk alike — you can lose your mind, when cousins are two of a kind.
 

KikoKea

Well-Known Member
Attractions don't have to be thrill rides to be good.
I know- but I do expect a roller coaster to have some thrill to it. I mean, otherwise you're simply riding a train or TTA...both of which are in my top 10 of favorites for the whole of WDW, by the way, along with CoP. :)

I did hear about scaling back... the value engineering. We can see what that did to Pandora. It's good but not great! But then again not all rides need to be mega super thrills.

Star Wars land is the more intriguing land and has a larger fanbase so I'm still hopeful this one will be a big hit with quality rides. It looks like it will be. The jab about a lack of benches: Boy oh boy do I agree with you there. What's up with that? Seems the only place to sit down anymore is in a restaurant.
No, not all rides have to be mega super thrills. I'm sure Pandora is beautiful, and I hope its 2 rides will be amazing. Should be, after all the wait and hype. Guess I'm getting a tad disillusioned with WDW- felt it last time we were there, but I'm hoping this revival and the new lands will change things there for the better. As for benches...we like to enjoy our $3 bottle of water sitting down, resting, listening to the music. If I'm rested and happy, I'm much more likely to spend money. If tired and cranky, DH and I are heading back to the room and Disney isn't getting any more of my money that day.

With the current WDC administration's cautious approach, I suspect that a review of these two land's success will determine future expansion. They start small and if it is successful, they could add to it. I think if you look at Epcot as a whole, you will see that adding an IP to Norway has been deemed successful. That success, at least in part, is contributing to the inclusion of more IP into the park. My point in saying this is that there is always a chance that each of these could just be a phase 1. I will go on record as saying SWL will increase in size over the coming use as I expect it will be very successful. (Theoretically, you could consider TSL a phase 2 of TSMWM because of the success of that first ride)
I thought about that, too- that they might add on more later. They probably will, or at least let's hope so.

But, I thought Star Wars was already successful worldwide so why start small? To me, going small for what is probably their best known IP (OK Frozen fans- don't hate on me!!:D) is like aiming for just the target, not the bullseye- good enough, but not the best.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

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

Back
Top Bottom