News Guardians of the Galaxy Cosmic Rewind attraction confirmed for Epcot

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
Their Philosophy is not the same! Six Flags believes that the excitement and entertainment comes from the ride itself. That's why they will sink 20 - 30 million into a coaster by B&M or a of the shelf model from Vekoma, sprinkle a few cardboard cutouts around the area and name it after a Superhero. Disney on the other hand builds their experiences with every minor detail in mind on how it effects the experience. You honestly can't tell me that the philosophy of this
d11b2684de15f9aaaebfe911283050c1.jpg


Is the same philosophy as this
expedition-everest-1180w-600h-1180x600.jpg


Its all about the extra mile... no, 15 miles that Disney goes to entertain.



And I don't understand how you don't understand my understanding of him not understanding of the difference of understanding the understatement...

giphy.gif
You’re still harping on execution and bowing ignoring the context of time. Some cheap lemon and a Ferrari are both cars, even if the execution is vastly different. Disney has shifted from storytelling to branding. That they want their’s to be the most expensive doesn’t matter.
 

Movielover

Well-Known Member
You’re still harping on execution and bowing ignoring the context of time. Some cheap lemon and a Ferrari are both cars, even if the execution is vastly different. Disney has shifted from storytelling to branding. That they want their’s to be the most expensive doesn’t matter.

But you are still missing my point, which is not execution. I truly am sorry if you can't grasp what I'm saying. As for storytelling there are plenty of new attractions full of story coming out, but I'm sorry you are too blinded by anger or sadness to see them. What a pity.
 

Coaster Lover

Well-Known Member
In the Parks
No
I don't think this will be about energy anymore.

In the D23 event, they mentioned that the reason (thematically) that the Guardians will be there in the first place was because Peter Quill (Star-Lord) had visited EPCOT as a kid and they were coming back... what I honestly think would be an AMAZING idea was if the whole ride went META and the original Universe of Energy pre-show room was restored to some regards and possibly some of the initial experience... make it one of those things where it seems like you are going to experience Classic EPCOT Universe of Energy and then something goes awry taking you on a whole new adventure. Possibly even somehow maintain the Dinosaur Segment and incorporate it into the experience. With, of course, the whole ride/experience poking fun at it's original self with jokes/puns/humorous observations of the original ride. And with Peter Quill being a child of the 80s, I don't see how you CAN'T include some of the original songs from the ride...

If done right, I think it could make an AMAZING experience!
 
Last edited:

jakeman

Well-Known Member
I don't get it.
One is an example of someone actively seeking out knowledge that can be tailor fit to their individual curiosities and intelligence levels. The other serves up a lesson in a one size fits all package (at about a second-grade level) and is absorbed passively.
Which one is the really the fast-food style of learning?
Welcome to the Spirited platitude. They don't need to make sense, only be catchy and convey that Disney guest are trash.
 

flynnibus

Premium Member
Y'all complaining about Disney putting an IP in like Ellen, Bill Nye the Science Guy, and Jeopardy weren't quick (and cost effective) IP fixes to an old and dated pavilion?

They were bad choices then too... and their inability to age is a good portion of why the pavilion has struggled. As for dated... I believe Ellen has been there longer than she has not now.

There is a reason people see ~1994 as the turning point for Epcot
 

disneyC97

Well-Known Member
Epcot Center was built during a different time..an entirely different era- before smart phones and technology rapidly exceeded. You can't keep up anymore, and the idea of the "one idea theme park", whether it be about movie making or the future/the past colliding or animal encounters alone...it just doesn't work anymore. I grew up with all of you- riding Figment, enjoying Universe of Energy and World of Motion. But back then we had an unbridled optimism about science, nature and everything. Now every statement or new idea creates controversy because too many people have voices and can type at a keyboard. Back then there was only 3 Disney parks, 1 Universal park, and SeaWorld. That's it. There wasn't a whole lot of competition. You could innovate, excite, and explore. Epcot stood out because it was different.

However, things we built on 80s and 90s philosophies have disappeared from mainstream culture. Remember the big movie studio park boom? Universal, Disney MGM, Paramount, and even MGM alone created parks based on how movies are made. It was fascinating! We could learn how things were created from the VHS stocks we had at home.

Well, that idea is now overhauled because you can learn everything about movie making from Buzzfeed and any blu-ray disc. Epcot is the same- there's an app that shows you the constellations from anywhere you stand and you can literally pull it out of your pocket,, for example. On top of that Uof E was originally created as a love letter to the fossil fuels industry and now that fossil fuels are passe and clean energy is the future, the idea of UoE is dead.

Disney is a business at the end of the day. It has to compete with other businesses. It's going to make business decisions whether we like it or not. Sure, they could've tossed some dimes and created a fantastic, educational and original concept for an attraction that would've harkened back to the glory days of Epcot....but when you have Harry Potter to compete with down the road, you don't do throwbacks..you pull out the big guns.

My only hope is that the base idea keeps going- these attractions will continue to create wonder and excitement, even if the basic idea of edutainment has changed. People will continue to be inspired whether its dinosaurs or Groot, to create new things. Kids will love the thrills of Epcot, but grow up to appreciate the culture, foods, wines and shows that it showcases as they become adults. That maybe these attractions will save Epcot and new ideas will come to fruition as attendance climbs again.
In 1982 no Universal, just Circus World.
 

MisterPenguin

President of Animal Kingdom
Premium Member
But there is a difference between adding more Marvel to a park vs adding more Disney. They're not completely interchangeable.

What is "more Disney"? More Alice in Wonderland? Peter Pan? Pooh? Cinderella, Belle, Snow White, Ariel? Bambi? Davy Crockett? Woody and Buzz?

These are all properties that Disney appropriated from other sources... just like Marvel properties. Disney has comparatively few original properties that are as popular as the ones they appropriated, such as Mickey and friends and they're rather recent (PotC, Moana).

There will be a time in your advanced years when you'll be talking to twenty- and thirty-somethings and they'll have zero clues that Marvel has been anything but 100% Disney.
 

odmichael

Well-Known Member
Y'all complaining about Disney putting an IP in like Ellen, Bill Nye the Science Guy, and Jeopardy weren't quick (and cost effective) IP fixes to an old and dated pavilion?
The concerns are more about the diminishing of established morals and ideologies of Epcot. The concern is that a Guardians ride will lack themes such as technology and innovation. Just because "new technology" is present does not mean it is a theme of the attraction.

What Universe of Energy had was those themes and they were what propelled the story forward.
 

wdisney9000

Truindenashendubapreser
Premium Member
It seems illogical for people to claim they "love", Epcot, but also encourage the IP onslaught that we are witnessing. Which aspects of Epcot do they love? Its concept? World Showcase? Future World? All are being dismantled in favor of creating an additional Fantasyland. What will be left of Epcot to "love" after WS is nothing more than IP based attractions and FW has no concept beyond Peter Quill visited as a child?

Will the attractions be amazing? Most likely. Will Epcot be recognizably different in nature from MK? Nope. I "love" Yacht Club. It is my favorite resort. Animal Kingdom Lodge is a very close second. Would I want Disney to add some Yacht Club style theme into AKL? Would that make it better? Absolutely not. I enjoy the distinction each resort offers. I also enjoy(ed) the parks having their own distinct identity. I suppose that enjoying wondrous variety is lost on some people.
 

rle4lunch

Well-Known Member
What is "more Disney"? More Alice in Wonderland? Peter Pan? Pooh? Cinderella, Belle, Snow White, Ariel? Bambi? Davy Crockett? Woody and Buzz?

These are all properties that Disney appropriated from other sources... just like Marvel properties. Disney has comparatively few original properties that are as popular as the ones they appropriated, such as Mickey and friends and they're rather recent (PotC, Moana).

There will be a time in your advanced years when you'll be talking to twenty- and thirty-somethings and they'll have zero clues that Marvel has been anything but 100% Disney.

Exactly. The whole IP thing is a stupid argument. EVERYTHING, I mean, EVERYTHING, that is created, used, merchandized, etc, is an IP. To include, Haunted Mansion, IASW, Country Bears, etc.. All of it! Just because it's acquired by another company doesn't make it lazy, or dumbed down, or whatever other negative connotation people can attach to it. Now, however, what is DONE with the IP after acquisition is the important factor.
 

Maeryk

Well-Known Member
It seems illogical for people to claim they "love", Epcot, but also encourage the IP onslaught that we are witnessing. Which aspects of Epcot do they love? Its concept? World Showcase? Future World? All are being dismantled in favor of creating an additional Fantasyland. What will be left of Epcot to "love" after WS is nothing more than IP based attractions and FW has no concept beyond Peter Quill visited as a child?

Will the attractions be amazing? Most likely. Will Epcot be recognizably different in nature from MK? Nope. I "love" Yacht Club. It is my favorite resort. Animal Kingdom Lodge is a very close second. Would I want Disney to add some Yacht Club style theme into AKL? Would that make it better? Absolutely not. I enjoy the distinction each resort offers. I also enjoy(ed) the parks having their own distinct identity. I suppose that enjoying wondrous variety is lost on some people.


The wailing and gnashing of teeth, and clutching of pearls is impressive. We don't even know anything about the ride yet. We know where it's going (roughly) and have a piece of concept art. Nothing more. The cadre of "EPCOT CAN NEVER CHANGE" (some of whom are too young to even remember original epcot, btw), exist on every board. They continually wail and howl about the 'purity" of their park, the "mission" and "education", etc. Any chance we can wait and find out what the attraction will actually be _about_ before we decide it has completely abandoned any purpose the park had, and is merely shoe horning whiz bang super thrill ride into a space that held a mouldering, outdated, finger wagging lecture? Nah.. of course not. That wouldn't be any fun for the gloom and doomers.

Maybe they can have a pepper's ghost leprechaun leaping around a room full of tape reels and extolling the virtues of a "Supercomputer".
 

The_Jobu

Well-Known Member
What is "more Disney"? More Alice in Wonderland? Peter Pan? Pooh? Cinderella, Belle, Snow White, Ariel? Bambi? Davy Crockett? Woody and Buzz?

These are all properties that Disney appropriated from other sources... just like Marvel properties. Disney has comparatively few original properties that are as popular as the ones they appropriated, such as Mickey and friends and they're rather recent (PotC, Moana).

There will be a time in your advanced years when you'll be talking to twenty- and thirty-somethings and they'll have zero clues that Marvel has been anything but 100% Disney.
That may be, but I live in the now and I'm not going to say things like Spiderman is my favourite Disney character unless I'm being a smartass.

Nor will I say I can't wait for Universal to open a new Disney ride.

There's still a difference when using the terms in discussion.
 

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

Back
Top Bottom