News Guardians of the Galaxy Cosmic Rewind attraction confirmed for Epcot

[sedati]

it's a newer ride and yes it is more fluid but FJ is still superior in excitement and wow factor to me unless riding with your child is some kind of factor.

I like that they're different. FJ is more ambitious, but Gringotts has a clearer narrative. I was surprised at how the FJ screens seemed to be in need of an upgrade for what was a new-to-me ride. Gringotts needed more coaster bits inbetween the screen scenes. I also found it odd that the most thrilling physical element came right at the very beginning- could have used a bit of how the tour was intended to go before Belatrix showed up. Throughout, Gringotts always felt like it was just getting going before stopping again. My biggest criticism came about after several re-rides and that is how really is the exact same ride each time. I know FJ is as well (as are so many attractions,) but I almost always notice new things on the big rides and am always find myself looking in different directions. Gringotts suffers from being too linear.

 

[Lora Baines Bradley]

It'll probably be a bit of both. I'd expect Giaccino to score it, as it'd be his third (I think, maybe more) disney coaster soundtrack. On top of that, they'd probably mix in the 80s stuff a la Mission Breakout.

Giacchino scoring it is the only plus about this coaster to me, and I'm a teen audience. Although, most teenagers don't obsess over the thematic integrity of Epcot, so I suppose I'm a bit of an outlier.

 

[sedati]

Actually, I wouldn't consider BTM very lengthy... even for a Disney coaster (although the Paris version is longer, yes?). I suppose the lift hills pad out the time.

Three lift hills definitely makes a huge difference in Big Thunder. If the ride weren't so wonderfully scenic that would be a big negative. They are also slower than more modern lift hills. Having finally ridden Seven Dwarves I found that first lift hill to be way too fast. I'd like them to slow down the second (main) lift on Everest as well.

 

[ToTBellHop]

I like that they're different. FJ is more ambitious, but Gringotts has a clearer narrative. I was surprised at how the FJ screens seemed to be in need of an upgrade for what was a new-to-me ride. Gringotts needed more coaster bits inbetween the screen scenes. I also found it odd that the most thrilling physical element came right at the very beginning- could have used a bit of how the tour was intended to go before Belatrix showed up. Throughout, Gringotts always felt like it was just getting going before stopping again. My biggest criticism came about after several re-rides and that is how really is the exact same ride each time. I know FJ is as well (as are so many attractions,) but I almost always notice new things on the big rides and am always find myself looking in different directions. Gringotts suffers from being too linear.

They wanted a lower height requirement than FJ. They want the next coaster to have a lower requirement, too.

 

[Jones14]

They wanted a lower height requirement than FJ. They want the next coaster to have a lower requirement, too.

Gringotts’ problem isn’t that it isn’t thrilling enough. Gringotts’ problems are that it uses its best trick first, comes to a dead stop six times to watch a 4D movie (which implements the Spider-Man effects in a far less convincing way, such as the ten story drop), fails to use animatronics in places where they would be more than effective, and has an anticlimactic finale with a launch to nowhere.

 

[michmousefan]

Gringotts’ problem isn’t that it isn’t thrilling enough. Gringotts’ problems are that it uses its best trick first, comes to a dead stop six times to watch a 4D movie (which implements the Spider-Man effects in a far less convincing way, such as the ten story drop), fails to use animatronics in places where they would be more than effective, and has an anticlimactic finale with a launch to nowhere.

Plus that launch only is convincing when every intended ride element is performing as designed. That happens, what... one in five times on that ride?

 

[Dunston]

If no animatronics is true, it's just baffling. If I wanted to see the Guardians on a screen I'd pop in a blu ray at home. Don't have to wait in line for that!

 

[MisterPenguin]

If no animatronics is true, it's just baffling. If I wanted to see the Guardians on a screen I'd pop in a blu ray at home. Don't have to wait in line for that!

Does this mean you never go to the theater to see a movie? Just wait for the bluray and see it at home.

 

[marni1971]

Plus that launch only is convincing when every intended ride element is performing as designed. That happens, what... one in five times on that ride?

It’s gotten a lot better since opening.

I rode a few months ago and every element in the entire ride worked as designed. I was pleasantly surprised.

 

[sedati]

It’s gotten a lot better since opening.

I rode a few months ago and every element in the entire ride worked as designed. I was pleasantly surprised.

Same thing- rode five times in two days with no noticeable issues.

 

[Kman101]

Disappointed Groot and Rocket won't be animatronics.

 

[Horizons '83]

Gringotts is the worst of everything. Too short. Too scary for little ones. Not enough thrill for young people. Too many screens. I like the attraction but it's not the best IMO.

To each their own, but they nailed it on that one. The Perfect attraction in my mind. If you are over the age of 5.

 

[EricsBiscuit]

It’s gotten a lot better since opening.

I rode a few months ago and every element in the entire ride worked as designed. I was pleasantly surprised.

Back to Guardians, would you compare this roller coaster to From Earth to the Moon in Paris?

 

[marni1971]

Back to Guardians, would you compare this roller coaster to From Earth to the Moon in Paris?

Intensity wise hardly.

Show wise It depends on which direction is chosen. Things suggest some physical sets, some others suggest projection screens.

To me it’s too much like Space Mountain with lipstick. Same as Tron. Why try and build more Space Mountains in Orlando when you already have what could easily become the best of its kind in the world again.

 

[larryz]

Intensity wise hardly.

Show wise It depends on which direction is chosen. Things suggest some physical sets, some others suggest projection screens.

To me it’s too much like Space Mountain with lipstick. Same as Tron. Why try and build more Space Mountains in Orlando when you already have what could easily become the best of its kind in the world again.

Maybe it will be smoother than S:M ... and it's more than a coincidence that Space Mountain's initials are S and M.

 

[marni1971]

Maybe it will be smoother than S:M ... and it's more than a coincidence that Space Mountain's initials are S and M.

Mission One was a revelation. Mission Two got to the stage where it was a once a day ride it had gotten so bad.

The visuals and audio made up for the roughness. Just.

Or we talking about the ‘75 vintage?

 

[larryz]

Mission One was a revelation. Mission Two got to the stage where it was a once a day ride it had gotten so bad.

The visuals and audio made up for the roughness. Just.

Or we talking about the ‘75 vintage?

IIRC, the '75 ride (when I rode it in '78 or '79) was a lot smoother than the 90's-00's version.

It's possible I just didn't care back then, too...

 

[Winter]

Disappointed Groot and Rocket won't be animatronics.

Since when has it been confirmed that they won't have animatronics of them?

 

[britain]

Intensity wise hardly.

Show wise It depends on which direction is chosen. Things suggest some physical sets, some others suggest projection screens.

To me it’s too much like Space Mountain with lipstick. Same as Tron. Why try and build more Space Mountains in Orlando when you already have what could easily become the best of its kind in the world again.

It would be interesting if they build this guardians roller coaster more like an indoor Big Thunder, as far as plenty of sets around every square inch track goes.… If only.

 

[raymusiccity]

Have we definitively ruled out VR as being a possibility for this attraction? Some may argue that VR is the "cheap" way out of not doing a ton of physical sets, but I've been on enough rides/coasters with VR integrated to feel like I can say that it REALLY adds a lot to the experience and is WAY more than just a gimmick. If a coaster was already designed with VR in mind, it really wouldn't have to have anything else unique about it and if anyone can really show the industry how to do VR on an attraction right, Disney would/should be able to... it would seem like the perfect fit for an IP that is so heavily dependent on computer generated elements.

Of course VR is a gimmick. You can get the same result if you put on VR goggles and rode a bucking bull from Gilly's!