Here's what it looks like in person without the use of telescopic eyes...
-
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
MickeyMinnieMom
Well-Known Member
SHUT IT DOWN!!! ;-)
ChrisFL
Premium Member
It would have been like The Mummy
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
Nobody said you said it is an interesting exterior. You were lecturing @The Empress Lilly about a comment regarding the exterior being interesting.
The Empress Lilly
Well-Known Member
Personally I had the opposite reaction. I went in two weeks ago thinking it couldn't be that bad, expecting a Soarin'-like box, but was shocked. Pictures don't prepare you for the actual size of this monstrosity.
The careful skyline of FW is greatly diminished. As are the views of Motion, a building the avid reader might have learned I highly value.
Like the MK, WS is classic Disney façadism. Buildings dressed up too look like something else. But FW, as always, is the anti-MK. All showbuildings are in sight, they are architectural statements themselves. Not trying to hide but vying to be admired. With the exception of the complicated The Land. Followed later, to a little extent, perhaps by the Seas and Wonders, as these slowly started to loosen this stark scheme. Soarin completely broke with it, whereas M:S seemed oblivious to it. And now this big box of doom looms over what remains of the once boldest, prettiest architectural ensemble of any Disney park. Barbary.
MickeyMinnieMom
Well-Known Member
Not entirely sure what the “careful skyline of FW” is... it always struck me as fine at quick glance, with some buildings sticking out like sore thumbs if you actually pause and look closely.
I saw what MP’s last post above indicates — something that is no big deal at all in the distance.
To each his own!
Magic Feather
Well-Known Member
A couple of photos from a friend: one from the area by Japan, one by Italy. Both captured without zoom.
Quote from same friend:
“It is always there when you look for it, but near invisible at a passing glance. From World Showcase, it has the same level of intrusiveness of Soarin (if not slightly better). Near invisible in Future World, especially with the color scheme. Only time it’s really bad is in the parking lot and entry plaza. At night, near invisible off Epcot Center [Drive], unlike during the day.”
Quote from same friend:
“It is always there when you look for it, but near invisible at a passing glance. From World Showcase, it has the same level of intrusiveness of Soarin (if not slightly better). Near invisible in Future World, especially with the color scheme. Only time it’s really bad is in the parking lot and entry plaza. At night, near invisible off Epcot Center [Drive], unlike during the day.”
The Empress Lilly
Well-Known Member
MickeyMinnieMom
Well-Known Member
Agree 100% with your friend’s take. It is quite the monstrosity from the parking lot (!!), which I personally don’t care about.
MickeyMinnieMom
Well-Known Member
I’m confused. This is an angle that no one in the parks would have ever seen. Have something taken from WS that illustrates what you have in mind? I truly cannot picture it as ever having been so visually appealing.
And even if it was at some point (park opening?) how exactly would that have been preserved as attractions were added? Show buildings that would work well in their own land, and still fit into that “careful skyline of FW”?
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
Design...
MickeyMinnieMom
Well-Known Member
That would fit appropriately in each of The Land, The Seas, etc. and still work as a cohesive “careful skyline of FW”?
I guess this is why I’m not an imagineer!! I have a hard time picturing what would actually have worked in practice in each “land”, AND satisfied this criteria for those who are so unhappy with the current appearance.
Would love to hear the design ideas that would work from folks here...
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
Yes. It’s just an issue of designing for context.
Rteetz
Well-Known Member
I think people want more iconic building deigns. As someone who has taken architecture and engineering classes a giant blue box may blend in but isn't a good design and isn't unique which is something the Epcot at least was at one point. The Land, Horizons, Test Track(former World of Motion), Universe of Energy, and more all have or had iconic and more eye appealing designs. It is fairly simple and cheap to just put up a metal box.
MickeyMinnieMom
Well-Known Member
I absolutely get the difference between the camouflaged box vs the other show buildings and grant you that. I can see a preference for something iconic instead.
However, I just think many of the buildings you mention are not at all visually appealing, particularly from across the lagoon. I think “iconic” is a stretch for most of them.
As such, I don’t see GotG as being something that is ruining a great visual. At all.
Look how those parking lot lights destroy the sightline!
MickeyMinnieMom
Well-Known Member
I’d still love to hear examples/ideas of what WOULD have worked design-wise for all of these varied large attractions that would be visually appealing from across the lagoon. What they had pre-GotG was not.
Rteetz
Well-Known Member
They are iconic for Epcot and many Disney fans. The building designs have been imbedded in Epcot logos and what not since they were built.
What buildings are appealing and which are not is certainly subjective. There are plenty of world renowned architectural structures that aren't my cup of tea but are too many.
MickeyMinnieMom
Well-Known Member
From up close, maybe. What looks iconic from across the lagoon in your view?
(ETA: I’m really curious on this topic of what others really think worked about the FW sight lines from WS pre-GotG, but I’ll leave it alone after Rteetz’s next answer — don’t want to stretch out this tangent any further!)
Rteetz
Well-Known Member
I have to disagree with this. While its not completely intrusive as some may have thought it would be or as some still think I would much rather look at a well designed building across the lagoon than a box.
Take Spaceship Earth for example. It is the park icon so maybe not an apples to apples comparison but it is visually appealing across the lagoon and is a big photographic moment across the lagoon for many. Even the TT/WoM structure isn't bad in my opinion.
If they could have created sort of a second Epcot icon I think that would have been well received by all. Obviously that would have been the most expensive route.