EPCOTCenterLover
Well-Known Member
Maybe so, but it's a bad practice in general, as far as I'm concerned.
-
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
RSoxNo1
Well-Known Member
How so? Her celebrity status dropped around the opening of the ride because public perception of her coming out was mixed. Societal changes have justifiably normalized her coming out and she has a syndicated talk show that I assume is more popular than her sitcom.
Sure, you can argue that the science of the show had plenty of specific and quickly dated "facts and figures", but I felt it satisfied the edutainment model very well. It wasn't my favorite attraction in the world and needed to be replaced, but questioning the choice of Ellen then or in hindsight is flat out wrong.
That's a far more valid point. Having a celebrity play themselves as opposed to a character locks the relevance to a point in time. Sometimes it works out (as I maintain it did with Ellen), but in general, celebrity is fleeting. It's the same concept of using movie based IP where the theme of the movie isn't a good fit for the area. The relevance further dates the attraction.
EPCOTCenterLover
Well-Known Member
I think you misunderstood my point. I should have worded it better, but I wasn't questioning the choice of Ellen, although I would certainly be in my right to do so when discussing Disney's creative decisions. I may question their choices whenever I want, right? 
Isn't that what we do on these boards?
I should have said' "Ellen (the attraction)" was dated from the moment she appeared in the attraction. I hate it when Disney uses stars de jour as part of an attraction.'
Isn't that what we do on these boards?I should have said' "Ellen (the attraction)" was dated from the moment she appeared in the attraction. I hate it when Disney uses stars de jour as part of an attraction.'
Bender123
Well-Known Member
I don't think its Disney tried to kill it, so much as the business model that made it was not sustainable. The sponsorship structure that existed just isn't of much value to many companies to throw money into.
Many of the companies that had beloved attractions (Raytheon, Waste Management, etc...) have very little interaction with a day to day park guest and they wanted their marketing budget in a different area. Cant really blame them...when is the last time you had to go out and buy a fire and forget air to air missile or sign a contract for waste disposal? If you aren't a business owner or a government contractor, these companies don't matter very much.
The reason Disney was trying to "kill" Innoventions, is because it was already dying. They just had to wait out the contracts that had been paid.
No Name
Well-Known Member
There were dated elements of the attraction, such as the pacing, animatronics, video, hairstyles, etc. But let’s not get confused. Ellen, as a celebrity, is one of the best long-term choices they could have made in terms of relevancy. She is almost undoubtedly more relevant today than she was in the 90s.
Will the Guardians of the Galaxy be more relevant in 20 years than they are today? Who’s more relevant today, Ellen or GotG?
Will the Guardians of the Galaxy be more relevant in 20 years than they are today? Who’s more relevant today, Ellen or GotG?
UNCgolf
Well-Known Member
This is the problem with basing rides entirely on IP in the first place. If the ride itself is great, the IP doesn't really matter. Splash Mountain is incredibly popular but I'm sure the vast majority of riders have never seen Song of the South; it's just a great ride. The same is true for Flight of Passage -- people just love the ride; the fact that it's related to Avatar is completely irrelevant for many riders. If the ride isn't spectacular but has a beloved IP attached, that can be a huge boost (Frozen), but it's not enough on its own to prop up a mediocre ride (Little Mermaid). If it's an IP that fades out of the public consciousness, then you're really in trouble.
I doubt anyone will care about the Guardians movies in 15 years (and I say that as a big fan -- the first may be the best movie in the whole MCU, and the second is top ten as well). If the ride itself is good enough (and it better be with the amount of money they're spending on it), that won't matter. If it's not, well... uh oh.
That's why current thinking at Disney is so incredibly short-sighted. If your main focus is on the IP rather than the quality of the ride itself, there's a good chance it will end up a failure over the long term and end up needing replacement because there's nothing to attract anyone to the ride. It's a mindset that focuses on short-term growth rather than long-term success.
rioriz
Well-Known Member
SCgolf, post: 8965901, member: 131624"]
This is the problem with basing rides entirely on IP in the first place. If the ride itself is great, the IP doesn't really matter. Splash Mountain is incredibly popular but I'm sure the vast majority of riders have never seen Song of the South; it's just a great ride. The same is true for Flight of Passage -- people just love the ride; the fact that it's related to Avatar is completely irrelevant for many riders. If the ride isn't spectacular but has a beloved IP attached, that can be a huge boost (Frozen), but it's not enough on its own to prop up a mediocre ride (Little Mermaid). If it's an IP that fades out of the public consciousness, then you're really in trouble.
I doubt anyone will care about the Guardians movies in 15 years (and I say that as a big fan -- the first may be the best movie in the whole MCU, and the second is top ten as well). If the ride itself is good enough (and it better be with the amount of money they're spending on it), that won't matter. If it's not, well... uh oh.
That's why current thinking at Disney is so incredibly short-sighted. If your main focus is on the IP rather than the quality of the ride itself, there's a good chance it will end up a failure over the long term and end up needing replacement because there's nothing to attract anyone to the ride. It's a mindset that focuses on short-term growth rather than long-term success.
[/QUOTE]
Doubting Fiegie, smart, that is not
This is the problem with basing rides entirely on IP in the first place. If the ride itself is great, the IP doesn't really matter. Splash Mountain is incredibly popular but I'm sure the vast majority of riders have never seen Song of the South; it's just a great ride. The same is true for Flight of Passage -- people just love the ride; the fact that it's related to Avatar is completely irrelevant for many riders. If the ride isn't spectacular but has a beloved IP attached, that can be a huge boost (Frozen), but it's not enough on its own to prop up a mediocre ride (Little Mermaid). If it's an IP that fades out of the public consciousness, then you're really in trouble.
I doubt anyone will care about the Guardians movies in 15 years (and I say that as a big fan -- the first may be the best movie in the whole MCU, and the second is top ten as well). If the ride itself is good enough (and it better be with the amount of money they're spending on it), that won't matter. If it's not, well... uh oh.
That's why current thinking at Disney is so incredibly short-sighted. If your main focus is on the IP rather than the quality of the ride itself, there's a good chance it will end up a failure over the long term and end up needing replacement because there's nothing to attract anyone to the ride. It's a mindset that focuses on short-term growth rather than long-term success.
[/QUOTE]
Doubting Fiegie, smart, that is not
OSX
Active Member
It was dated the moment they had her use that huge brick she talks into during the pre-show
Bocabear
Well-Known Member
TBH, i don't think it will date that quickly... All thrill rides have a MUCH longer shelf life than any slow moving omnimover attraction, so IP or not, any sort of thrill ride with some special effects is going to be highly repeatable (unless you are Mission Space) especially in a park that has almost none... I am sure this will be done very well, hopefully will be a really great attraction. My biggest problem with it comes in it's placement... DHS would have been a much better spot..
Bender123
Well-Known Member
That cell phone never came back, though...
UNCgolf
Well-Known Member
15 years is a long time. I'd honestly be surprised if the current MCU was still going 15 years from now, but if it is, it certainly won't involve the current Guardians (or likely any of the current characters; it'll essentially be a whole new thing). Either there will be a bunch of new MCU heroes that people care about, or there will be some totally different thing that has replaced the MCU in the public consciousness.
Like I said, though, if the ride is good enough that won't matter. The ride could actually drive people to go watch an older movie instead of the movie driving people to the ride.
No Name
Well-Known Member
A concept they understood until the latter half of the 2000s.
trainplane3
Well-Known Member
Not a rumor:
One (or few) of the beetle/cockroach things were saved. Everything else was probably tossed out. The rubber skin would've probably deteriorated if they tried moving the big dinos.
Movielover
Well-Known Member
Clothes and skin tossed into a storage bin. The AA's themselves were most likely stripped of any parts that could be recycled then the rest trashed.
DreamfinderGuy
Well-Known Member
Ellen’s skin and clothes are still in a private collection. Confirmed as of like a week ago lol. As far as the Elas, I heard it was just tossed completely