lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
That’s how they described it because they are both celebrations of human achievement. You’re reducing theme to referencial aesthetics.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
News Guardians of the Galaxy Cosmic Rewind attraction confirmed for Epcot
- Thread starter wdwmagic
- Start date
V_L_Raptor
Well-Known Member
Just to pull two examples, Living Seas was meant to evoke flowing water and ocean currents, as evidenced by how the entrance used to look. Seen from above, World of Motion was a wheel.
There was a lot more to Future World than World's Fair futurism, if you're looking at the pavilions for themselves. If you're busy critiquing Future World itself as a unit, you miss the individual pieces (unless you're hoping to do so to help your point).
Bender123
Well-Known Member
Thank you for agreeing with me, I guess...We haven't even seen the building. All we can see is a single pillar of girders. We don't know what tricks WDW has up its sleeve to blend with the UoE building and the discussion has been that it "destroys the sight lines and looks out of place". My question is how? Looking across the lagoon, I see glass pyramids, a giant ball, a mirrored wheel, a Mayan Pyramid and a French Canadian Chateau.
The pavilions were self contained themed units and the external cohesive theme was "future".
You cant claim the building will wreck the aesthetic and then claim each building was designed to be its own aesthetic and act independently. People on this board are openly saying the view will be wrecked when we are currently looking at girders being welded...
The Empress Lilly
Well-Known Member
Well yes, we shouldn't read EPCOT backwards. That is, see the park that was built, overanalyse it, ascribe intent to every aspect, and so mistake it for a single piece of work, as if designed like a symphony where every note has an intended harmonious place.
EPCOT Center changed constantly between 1977 and 1982. Different pavilions, architecture, organisation were all proposed. If EPCOT was not random, it was the product of constraints of time and budget, of compromises, conflicting ideas, unrealised dreams. (As any other work of art. Dirty deadlines, as Walt knew, are the cause of an art work´s final form just as much as the more sexy spark of genius inspiration. Practical insight that the individual genius obsessed narcissistic art world of the 20th century has not forgiven him for)
But we´re a long way from a superhero thrill ride. Any attempt to make that fit is convoluted.
Fit in EPCOT, that is. There seems to be a somewhat double effort to make Guardians fit into a nominal Epcot, and to have it help create a new thrill ride subland of FW East.
V_L_Raptor
Well-Known Member
It's interesting that you thank me for agreeing with you. That's... really not the purpose of my post.
You're speaking to two different purposes. Finished buildings and buildings in process are two different things, and discussing one doesn't preclude discussing the other... but it's still possible to look at something in process and say that it doesn't look like it's going to be good. As has been mentioned previously, Disney has an unfortunate track record in recent years with theming the exteriors of show buildings. (To repeat an example, Soarin' doesn't evoke Canadian mountains very well, unless your preferred area of Canada predominantly has mesas. If you consider a coat of light blue paint to be an example of theming, I feel terribly sorry for your imagination.) If a building doesn't appear to have any kind of aesthetic intention -- like, say, Soarin' or the Millenium Pavilion -- then yeah, it can wreck an aesthetic. A bunch of uniquely shaped buildings and then a box or an enhanced pole shed in plain view with some go-away coat of paint? Yeah, that's not going to come off as world class optics. Sorry.
While we're looking at girders being welded, we can get an idea of how the building will affect sight lines, because girders do tend to bespeak things like building height and dimensions. Please do not insult people's intelligence and ignore what they're actually looking at just so you can "rabble, rabble" about how they're just fuming to fume. Further, note that we do have people on these boards who have information above and beyond what the average forum member does. Their notes on the building have not been glowing, and whether they can divulge precise explanations or not, your insistence that it's just girders doesn't invalidate their assessments. (Acting like a jerk about it will also subsume your argument.)
We're not exactly swirling around in a haze of optimistic hope to wave our hands around and say, "But it's Disney, so it'll be magical when it's done, don't worry!" There's no real reason we should be. It's entirely possible to be a fan and look at something in development and say, "Yeah, this could be better." If it could be a *lot* better, that can be a much harsher fan review.
Exactly. It's not just "Disney" any more; it's Disney/ABC, and the current CEO ascended from the TV side.
But it is what it is.
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
Theme is not aesthetic uniformity.
V_L_Raptor
Well-Known Member
And if it weren't, this discussion would be very, very different indeed (and maybe we'd have a healthy and updated UoE instead).
Mike S
Well-Known Member
What is this sorcery? How did you say it?!?!?!?!?!
Each building represented its theme in style, shape and appearance.
Apparently now a square box says rollercoaster.
Does this mean there will be no attempt to theme or is there still hope on that one proposal?
In all honesty I hope they don’t try. Lest it look like a looming oil rig.
You can’t polish a turd.
trainplane3
Well-Known Member
This may be the only time I correct you, but...
I completely get what you're saying though. A big blue box would be acceptable.
FerretAfros
Well-Known Member
A big blue box may be the least offensive option, assuming that we must have a 130'+ tall box, but it's a long way from being acceptable.
Can someone remind me again why they couldn't fit more in the existing building? It's the second largest single-roofed structure on property (behind the Contemporary convention center) and one of the largest show buildings Disney has ever created, yet modern WDI seems to think it's only large enough for queue and load/unload. In addition to disrupting sightlines around the park, it's a colossal waste of a massive facility.
trainplane3
Well-Known Member
I guess I should've said "acceptable in this situation since it's being built and nothing will change that".
I don't think anyone will disagree with you on the waste of a great (looking) building.
ChewbaccaYourMum
Well-Known Member
Since this building is so big does this mean we might get some seriously big drops?! I feel like Disney roller coasters usually stay away from the drops. Everest is the only one I can think of with a drop where you actually feel the thrill of it.
Imagine a Sheikra type straight down drop while spinning.. the thrill on that would probably be too much hahaha.. I know this is supposed to be more a family friendly ride so probably no to the straight down drop lol.
Imagine a Sheikra type straight down drop while spinning.. the thrill on that would probably be too much hahaha.. I know this is supposed to be more a family friendly ride so probably no to the straight down drop lol.
It's big because it's long. "One of the longest indoor roller coasters in the world."
Clyde Birdbrain
Unknown Member
My prediction for the pre-show video:
Okay, so this is unlikely to happen, but I would really like it if the Guardians are actually aware that they are in Epcot and they incorporate the original Universe of Energy attraction and song (link) somehow. Like Rocket Raccoon in Mission: Breakout! commenting about Disneyland.
Okay, so this is unlikely to happen, but I would really like it if the Guardians are actually aware that they are in Epcot and they incorporate the original Universe of Energy attraction and song (link) somehow. Like Rocket Raccoon in Mission: Breakout! commenting about Disneyland.
smile
Well-Known Member
premise sound, format questionable, execution admirable... i lol'd
Haymarket2008
Well-Known Member
HAHA, this is amazing