As a NJ resident and Six Flags member I would love AT&T to buy Six Flags. If they did think of how great all their parks could be with fully themed DC rides and taking back the HP rights from Universal would be.
-
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
Mike S
Well-Known Member
HP as in Harry Potter? You think Universal would give that up?
britain
Well-Known Member
I think there is an expiration on the rights. It’s like a 20 year thing, but still.
Mike S
Well-Known Member
There’s no way they don’t renew. WB clearly likes the relationship as well.
Marc Davis Fan
Well-Known Member
@marni1971, if I may ask: Although we agree that it doesn’t belong in Epcot, independent of that issue (to the extent possible), how optimistic are you about the impressiveness of this attraction? Is it “just fun” (e.g., M:B at DCA) or will it amaze? How do you think it’s looking to rank against other original E-tickets that have opened in recent years?
Next Big Thing
Well-Known Member
Paid a price? Disney paid a price if anyone.
- Disney paid him $10M so they could get him off their movie
- Gunn gets hired for Suicide Squad 2
- Disney re-hires Gunn and allowed him to dictate terms by directing Suicide Squad 2 before GotG3
Last edited:
I think that’s something that’s subjective and down to each individual person.
Some will go “wow” and some will go “meh”
Next Big Thing
Well-Known Member
To the average park guest what would you think? I mean, is there anything about the ride that will have a "wow" moment or no?
Average guest will undoubtedly like it. It’s new and shiny and a coaster.
kurtk
Well-Known Member
I keep trying to imagine what this ride will be like. It can't be like Gringotts where you basically move quickly from one show scene to the next. At least not with that size of a gravity building. But then it doesn't make sense to fly by a scene at 40 mph either. Looking forward to seeing how it turns out.
FerretAfros
Well-Known Member
Disney of late has not been great at utilizing all of the space available for attractions. The buildings and facilities keep growing larger and larger, while the experiences themselves don't gain any appreciable length or quality.
Just consider how massive the Tron building will be, with relatively little track inside. There are wide sweeping turns with lots of open spaces surrounding it. From what I've seen, there aren't lots of huge set pieces in there, it's just laid out in a way that leaves a lot of empty space between the tracks.
Now compare that with the dense tangle of track that was used for Rockin Rollercoaster. While I think that attraction is somewhat underwhelming for other reasons, it does a much better job of getting the most out of its building. The building footprint is only about half of Tron's (approx. 74,000 SF vs 138,000 SF), yet both have similar ride lengths (around 60 seconds, ~60mph max speed)
Given that GOTG is already relegating one of the largest showbuildings that Disney has ever built to just queue and load space, I see no reason to expect that the attraction will use the gravity building itself any more efficiently. If they were concerned about space, the building likely wouldn't be a monolithic box, but something more form-fitted to the track itself (which even Tron does to a degree).
This approach pretty much sums up why this project is so frustrating to me, regardless of whether the ride itself fits the park: if you must use so much space, have such intrusive sightlines, and spend so much money, you need to make sure you're using all of those resources as effectively as possible. Everything we've seen thus far indicates that they're not. It's just such a waste of so many things.
Hawkeye_2018
Well-Known Member
To the people complaining about GotG....this ride alone will make me visit Epcot. I don't think I'm in the minority. Epcot badly needs an attraction like this to compete with the other parks.
Pretty new to these threads, and not an insider, but I have an idea for how they could go about the future of Epcot.
The theme could be an imaginative view of the future and world around us, with Figment returning as the icon character of the park.
The idea could be that you are exploring, rather than a realistic future, an imaginative/ creative and fantastical future.
This makes the Disney IPs fit more and even makes things like Frozen, and Ratatouille more connected, because it is now about imaginative looks on the worlds countries and the future, all as if you are in the world of Figment’s version of an optimistic fantastical future.
Missing20K
Well-Known Member
I can't even fathom how much waste there is in the mechanical systems. Cooling/Heating two buildings this large is a serious chunk of change, both in design and procurement as well as energy consumption. They almost had no choice but to use an insulated metal panel facade. Good bang for the buck.Disney of late has not been great at utilizing all of the space available for attractions. The buildings and facilities keep growing larger and larger, while the experiences themselves don't gain any appreciable length or quality.
Just consider how massive the Tron building will be, with relatively little track inside. There are wide sweeping turns with lots of open spaces surrounding it. From what I've seen, there aren't lots of huge set pieces in there, it's just laid out in a way that leaves a lot of empty space between the tracks.
Now compare that with the dense tangle of track that was used for Rockin Rollercoaster. While I think that attraction is somewhat underwhelming for other reasons, it does a much better job of getting the most out of its building. The building footprint is only about half of Tron's (approx. 74,000 SF vs 138,000 SF), yet both have similar ride lengths (around 60 seconds, ~60mph max speed)
Given that GOTG is already relegating one of the largest showbuildings that Disney has ever built to just queue and load space, I see no reason to expect that the attraction will use the gravity building itself any more efficiently. If they were concerned about space, the building likely wouldn't be a monolithic box, but something more form-fitted to the track itself (which even Tron does to a degree).
This approach pretty much sums up why this project is so frustrating to me, regardless of whether the ride itself fits the park: if you must use so much space, have such intrusive sightlines, and spend so much money, you need to make sure you're using all of those resources as effectively as possible. Everything we've seen thus far indicates that they're not. It's just such a waste of so many things.
I still wonder where all the money is going. The gravity building could not have been built any more inexpensively. Steel framing with metal panel cladding is about as cheap a building one can make. That's why warehouses, aircraft hangers, industrial buildings, etc., are built in this method, as those clients rarely, if ever, care about aesthetics. Just build as large a building as is needed, as cheaply as possible. This is no doubt what happened with GotG.
Perhaps the demolition, ride system, and show scenes are costing more than what might be typical? They might be spending more on the gravity building than necessary due to it's size, but they are spending as little as possible in regards to building typology and material selection, and of course, exterior theming.
The ride could have been themed to something more amenable to the theme of Future World rather than a Sci-Fi world. That's what has some people down.
Incomudro
Well-Known Member
Disney of late has not been great at utilizing all of the space available for attractions. The buildings and facilities keep growing larger and larger, while the experiences themselves don't gain any appreciable length or quality.
Just consider how massive the Tron building will be, with relatively little track inside. There are wide sweeping turns with lots of open spaces surrounding it. From what I've seen, there aren't lots of huge set pieces in there, it's just laid out in a way that leaves a lot of empty space between the tracks.
Now compare that with the dense tangle of track that was used for Rockin Rollercoaster. While I think that attraction is somewhat underwhelming for other reasons, it does a much better job of getting the most out of its building. The building footprint is only about half of Tron's (approx. 74,000 SF vs 138,000 SF), yet both have similar ride lengths (around 60 seconds, ~60mph max speed)
Given that GOTG is already relegating one of the largest showbuildings that Disney has ever built to just queue and load space, I see no reason to expect that the attraction will use the gravity building itself any more efficiently. If they were concerned about space, the building likely wouldn't be a monolithic box, but something more form-fitted to the track itself (which even Tron does to a degree).
This approach pretty much sums up why this project is so frustrating to me, regardless of whether the ride itself fits the park: if you must use so much space, have such intrusive sightlines, and spend so much money, you need to make sure you're using all of those resources as effectively as possible. Everything we've seen thus far indicates that they're not. It's just such a waste of so many things.
You need to realize that the average guest isn't supposed to know that the gravity building is where the ride itself takes place - any more than guests are supposed to know that the show building for Flights of Passage is hidden in a natural façade, as are the show buildings for the Star Wars rides.
Epcot guests are supposes to only consider the revamped Horizon building as where the ride takes place.
FigmentFan82
Well-Known Member
While I am on team "Pro GotG Attraction" I found your post extremely well written and informative!! Thank you!Disney of late has not been great at utilizing all of the space available for attractions. The buildings and facilities keep growing larger and larger, while the experiences themselves don't gain any appreciable length or quality.
Just consider how massive the Tron building will be, with relatively little track inside. There are wide sweeping turns with lots of open spaces surrounding it. From what I've seen, there aren't lots of huge set pieces in there, it's just laid out in a way that leaves a lot of empty space between the tracks.
Now compare that with the dense tangle of track that was used for Rockin Rollercoaster. While I think that attraction is somewhat underwhelming for other reasons, it does a much better job of getting the most out of its building. The building footprint is only about half of Tron's (approx. 74,000 SF vs 138,000 SF), yet both have similar ride lengths (around 60 seconds, ~60mph max speed)
Given that GOTG is already relegating one of the largest showbuildings that Disney has ever built to just queue and load space, I see no reason to expect that the attraction will use the gravity building itself any more efficiently. If they were concerned about space, the building likely wouldn't be a monolithic box, but something more form-fitted to the track itself (which even Tron does to a degree).
This approach pretty much sums up why this project is so frustrating to me, regardless of whether the ride itself fits the park: if you must use so much space, have such intrusive sightlines, and spend so much money, you need to make sure you're using all of those resources as effectively as possible. Everything we've seen thus far indicates that they're not. It's just such a waste of so many things.
Hawkeye_2018
Well-Known Member
MCU is even more popular than Star Wars right now. Disney found a loophole with getting GotG into WDW. They need to take advantage of it and they are.
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
None of which dictates the specific direction they have taken.
FerretAfros
Well-Known Member
There is an unfathomable amount of waste with this project. I'm just waiting for someone to connect the dots and realize that this one attraction is costing the amount as DCA's initial build. Both are right around $600 million.
Yes, there has been inflation in the last 20 years and DCA was built on the cheap, but it's absurd that a single ride using an existing facility could cost anywhere near as much as an entire new park, with all of it attractions, shops, restaurants, entertainment facilities, placemaking and support infrastructure.
Even the at-the-time mindboggling $100 million spent on Expedition Everest and it's Asia expansion at DAK seems like an absolute bargain compared to the budget for this single retrofit. Short of having multiple people walking around with hundreds of millions of dollars in their pockets, I have no idea where the money is going on this project.