News Guardians of the Galaxy Cosmic Rewind attraction confirmed for Epcot

[Rteetz]

From up close, maybe. What looks iconic from across the lagoon in your view?

I don't think anything doesn't really.

Again it's all subjective.

 

[lazyboy97o]

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.

“Form ever follows function.” The buildings of Future World were not arbitrary shapes intended to just be “iconic”. The forms related to the story of each pavilion. Any addition should follow its role in Future World. Designing hypothetical boxes completely ignores the whole notion of designing for the context of a themed experience.

 

[MickeyMinnieMom]

If they could have created sort of a second Epcot icon I think that would have been well received by all.

Agree that SE is not apples to apples... that’s a clear icon.

Somehow I doubt this. I suspect some would have been appalled that a new Epcot icon would have been an attraction that should NEVER have been placed in Epcot to begin with... a big, giant IP sore thumb...

 

[Rteetz]

Agree that SE is not apples to apples... that’s a clear icon.

Somehow I doubt this. I suspect some would have been appalled that a new Epcot icon would have been an attraction that should NEVER have been placed in Epcot to begin with... a big, giant IP sore thumb...

Nothing ever pleases everyone nor will anything ever do that.

In terms of Disney and Epcot fans I think a more iconic or visually appealing building/structure would have been the most well received.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Nothing ever pleases everyone nor will anything ever do that.

In terms of Disney and Epcot fans I think a more iconic or visually appealing building/structure would have been the most well received.

I think that is doubtful in this particular instance. Something speaking to Future World would have been deceitful while something speaking to the Guardians of the Galaxy would have been contradictory.

 

[MickeyMinnieMom]

Nothing ever pleases everyone nor will anything ever do that.

In terms of Disney and Epcot fans I think a more iconic or visually appealing building/structure would have been the most well received.

I’d have a preference for that as well, if it could be done well with a GotG theme for a building that gigantic... not sure I can picture what would have been cohesive and still GotG...

I just can’t muster any upset over the camouflaged box when a) I didn’t personally think the sightlines from WS were so appealing before (I mean, Soarin??), and b) the camouflaging actually works quite well in practice so it isn’t so obtrusive.

 

[Rteetz]

I think that is doubtful in this particular instance. Something speaking to Future World would have been deceitful while something speaking to the Guardians of the Galaxy would have been contradictory.

Possibly. I think it would depend on the story of the coaster. Obviously nothing in the original Epcot was IP related. Lets say the Guardians coaster is/was still energy based they could stay true to that energy type design while working with the film narrative. Its not easy nothing really ever is with Disney or the Disney fanbase.

 

[Rteetz]

I just can’t muster any upset over the camouflaged box when a) I didn’t personally think the sightlines from WS were so appealing before (I mean, Soarin??), and b) the camouflaging actually works quite well in practice so it isn’t so obtrusive.

I understand. I don't get the obsession with the Soarin building from my perspective. Yes you can see it but it is not nearly as noticeable as something like the Guardians building.

 

[El_Tomato]

I don’t find the blue box to be that terrible, really. IMHO, the problem isn’t the box itself, but the fact that it is surrounded by buildings that thrived in being more than simple boxes. I mean, the original EPCOT Center seems so well thought of and carefully crafted design wise (mostly, as some don’t really like seeing a giant silver wheel from various countries around the world - understandable, IMO), that it couldn’t be THAT difficult to build something that would at least match (or follow the same design principles of) what is already seen around FW. I’m sure they have great people working for them, creativity doesn’t seem like a problem in a company known for creating things like Pandora and SWL.
But again, we don’t really know the thematic direction this park is taking (I’m not even sure those higher up in the company do, actually...). This is not the 80’s, this is not EPCOT Center. This is Epcot. Maybe something completely different in a few years. In the not-so-distant future, Future World (ha) might even be surrounded by blue boxes. Who knows?

 

[lazyboy97o]

Possibly. I think it would depend on the story of the coaster. Obviously nothing in the original Epcot was IP related. Lets say the Guardians coaster is/was still energy based they could stay true to that energy type design while working with the film narrative. Its not easy nothing really ever is with Disney or the Disney fanbase.

That really doesn’t solve the problem, it just shifts it elsewhere. You’re contriving a fit based on something that does not exist, what used to be in the location. Any character can explain any subject to make such a fit.

 

[Rteetz]

That really doesn’t solve the problem, it just shifts it elsewhere. You’re contriving a fit based on something that does not exist, what used to be in the location. Any character can explain any subject to make such a fit.

I get that. It was just an idea of what they could have done. I am not an Imagineer nor did I grow up with Epcot like some of you.

 

[larryz]

Unrelated to Future World, in the past, when a coaster was built, typically it was designed to tell a story. Space Mountain, Everest, Big Thunder Mountain, and Matterhorn in Disneyland each do not have a giant showbuilding, instead they built the coaster in an iconic structure. I believe this could have been done with GotG as well, but sadly they took the cheaper and faster route, and built a generic box. Regardless of opinion about the sightlines, I'm pretty sure all of us would agree that if they built a structure that had a more iconic design, it would have been better for the park in the long term.

Why waste money on exterior decoration (beyond an entrance facade) when the riders aren't going to see it anyway? Yes, everybody sees the gravity building now... give it a few years and you'll hardly notice it.

Meanwhile, look at the efforts they're putting into the former UoE building. Hardly trivial, I'd say.

 

[rle4lunch]

Why waste money on exterior decoration (beyond an entrance facade) when the riders aren't going to see it anyway? Yes, everybody sees the gravity building now... give it a few years and you'll hardly notice it.

Meanwhile, look at the efforts they're putting into the former UoE building. Hardly trivial, I'd say.

Hey bud, no ones looking for logical reasoning in here.. You take that crap to the micechat forums... in here we go full tilt, or nothing at all.

 

[LSLS]

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.

I think this is completely it for me. Making it a giant blue box just screams lazy to me. MickeyMinnieMom is right in one sense, unless they do some epic story telling to make this fit into Epcot, I wasn't going to like it anyways. But I think some great design on the outside would go a long way towards me getting over it. Maybe I'm not paying attention (or it's because it's not up yet), but I haven't heard the same complaints about Tron. Heck I'm kind of excited to see that one (whether it should be going there or not).

 

[lazyboy97o]

I think this is completely it for me. Making it a giant blue box just screams lazy to me. MickeyMinnieMom is right in one sense, unless they do some epic story telling to make this fit into Epcot, I wasn't going to like it anyways. But I think some great design on the outside would go a long way towards me getting over it. Maybe I'm not paying attention (or it's because it's not up yet), but I haven't heard the same complaints about Tron. Heck I'm kind of excited to see that one (whether it should be going there or not).

TRON is also a large box (by the same creative lead). It’s not as big (less than 100’ all) and its siting should help obscure it more.

 

[MickeyMinnieMom]

TRON is also a large box (by the same creative lead). It’s not as big (less than 100’ all) and its siting should help obscure it more.

Agreed. Epcot seems like it presents a fairly unique problem to me wrt sight lines due to the lagoon and viewing from WS.

Funny... the fact that GotG really doesn’t actually fit in FW is the thing that makes theming the exterior something that I don’t think would work.

It would either fit the theme of the ride OR the “theme of Epcot” — I cant see how it could satisfy both.

Therefore, “let’s just make the building disappear” seems like the best bet in a lot of ways.

 

[Missing20K]

“Form ever follows function.” The buildings of Future World were not arbitrary shapes intended to just be “iconic”. The forms related to the story of each pavilion. Any addition should follow its role in Future World. Designing hypothetical boxes completely ignores the whole notion of designing for the context of a themed experience.

Perhaps the box as form does relate to the story of the new pavilion. Uninspired, banal, off-the-shelf, with a slight Disney (and/or Marvel) flair.

Until they create a survey which quantifies how guests feel about what they see while on property (or if any significant portion even notice such things), I fear they will never allocate the necessary funding for proper design of anything except show sets and ride infrastructure.

P.S. "Form and Function are One" -FLW

 

[mikejs78]

Agreed. Epcot seems like it presents a fairly unique problem to me wrt sight lines due to the lagoon and viewing from WS.

Funny... the fact that GotG really doesn’t actually fit in FW is the thing that makes theming the exterior something that I don’t think would work.

It would either fit the theme of the ride OR the “theme of Epcot” — I cant see how it could satisfy both.

Therefore, “let’s just make the building disappear” seems like the best bet in a lot of ways.

I generally agree. I'd prefer this option to Mission Breakout style theming. However if the attraction does have some kind of Epcot-ish theme, the ideal would have been to fit it into the asthetic of FW, maybe as a themed extension to the UoE building, which they are keeping.

BTW, there were questions about the attractive skylines of FW from WS? I took this in April on my last trip.

 

[mikejs78]

Until they create a survey which quantifies how guests feel about what they see while on property (or if any significant portion even notice such things), I fear they will never allocate the necessary funding for proper design of anything except show sets and ride infrastructure.

P.S. "Form and Function are One" -FLW

Pandora and SW:GE would beg to differ.

 

[Missing20K]

Pandora and SW:GE would beg to differ.

I concede that. But they were sorta forced to do something big by the folks down the road. And I'm not sure why having some really well done themed areas gives them a pass at having some really poorly themed ones too. Shoudn't they all be up to the same level of quality?

And when I said "on-property" I'm one of the minority who thinks seeing the FoP show building from the parking lot is poor show.