News Guardians of the Galaxy Cosmic Rewind attraction confirmed for Epcot

[yensidtlaw1969]

Yeah, the basic ingredients are too good to mess up.
Sure, some of those people who believe this IP doesn't belong in Epcot would likely hate it no matter how well it turns out.
But it's a big indoor coaster, who's coaster fun will be at least as much fun as any other indoor coaster.
On top of that will be a great queue, backward launch, effects, great music... The ride's going to be a win.

Imagine you go and order a Cheeseburger - it's pretty simple, bun, burger, cheese, some toppings; the ingredients are too good to mess up.

Imagine your burger arrives, and it's good - the chef put some fun twist on it, a topping you didn't expect, but it's still basically a cheeseburger, and you like it. Which is what you hoped for. Would have been cool if it blew your mind, but you weren't expecting that - in your mind it did its job.

Imagine you get the check and your burger alone cost more than the entire meal of the rest of the table put together. Doesn't that change your perception of it? Do you just pay the bill? Or do you call the waiter over and say "there must be some mistake"?

 

[ToTBellHop]

Translation: If the rubes like it, Bob wins.

Then I walk into the park, see some class acts wearing matching “I gave her the D” and “He gave me the D” shirts and realize we get what we deserve.

I hope none of you have those shirts. They make me cringe every time.

 

[HauntedPirate]

Then I walk into the park, see some class acts wearing matching “I gave her the D” and “He gave me the D” shirts and realize we get what we deserve.

I hope none of you have those shirts. They make me cringe every time.

Oh dear god, those are among the worst shirts to see in the parks. Absolutely no class. "Look at us, we're so funny!" but it only highlights how utterly stupid and clueless they are. I'm also over the "Most Expensive Day Ever" shirts. Now, the shirt that I've seen some dads wear with a barcode on the front that says "Scan for Payment" is kind of funny. But in general, I'm well beyond having tolerance for the allegedly-funny shirts that adorn groups of consumers, like the "Drinking around the world!!!" shirts. You want to have the cringey "[insert family name] Vacation 2022!", fine, but to me they now signal "Look how much we're spending".

 

[ToTBellHop]

Oh dear god, those are among the worst shirts to see in the parks. Absolutely no class. "Look at us, we're so funny!" but it only highlights how utterly stupid and clueless they are. I'm also over the "Most Expensive Day Ever" shirts. Now, the shirt that I've seen some dads wear with a barcode on the front that says "Scan for Payment" is kind of funny. But in general, I'm well beyond having tolerance for the allegedly-funny shirts that adorn groups of consumers, like the "Drinking around the world!!!" shirts. You want to have the cringey "[insert family name] Vacation 2022!", fine, but to me they now signal "Look how much we're spending".

People need to be more clever. I’ve never met a “If you can read this shirt, thank the Phoenicians!” or “we’ve gotta get in there, grab the iguanodon, and get out before that asteroid hits!” shirt I haven’t liked.

I admittedly chuckled at the matching “chest” “nuts” shirts last month because they’re pretty harmless, but still—you get one year, folks! Don’t overdo it!

 

[lazyboy97o]

I totally support @lazyboy97o point on this, but the Devil's advocate in me would like to point out where costs were much, much cheaper 20 years ago, we were getting some of the worst projects imaginable out of Eisner's run.

Imagineering needs to be contained for sure. But I'd much rather they severely overspend rather than do it on the cheap.

Disney Parks has the money, the cost issues are definitely most concerning for HKDL and in many ways sunk Euro Disney.

That was a different paradigm. Projects would have their allocated funds reduced mid-project and the funds were low, but it also gets to a point @FerretAfros has made before about good bones. A lot of the design fundamentals were still there in those cheaper projects. Disney’s Animal Kingdom didn’t have to be completely reconfigured. Disney’s California Adventure wasn’t radically reconfigured with even Buena Vista Street reusing a lot of the original entrance facility. But fixing a ride placed all the way around back isn’t something that will be fixed with a reskinning. The weird proportions of the Chinese Castles can’t easily be fixed. Adding anything into Toy Story Land’s massive footprint is not easily done which is why it’s new restaurant is awkward expansion. They’re over spending and poorly designing which will cost more in the future.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Mission Breakout inherited an expensive ride system. One that was already fun on its own. It's nice that they changed the music and made things more fun in some people's opinion, but let's not pretend they turned a bad ride into a good ride with a couple bucks.

Remember, Tower wasn't rethemed because it was bad, it was rethemed because management wanted a quick way to capitalize on Marvel in the park, and it was realized that too few guests cited Tower of Terror as one of the main reasons they came to DCA, even if they ranked it well after riding. That meant it had good enough bones to satisfy guests and it had the potential to create more of a draw than there was, which is an unusual combo.

The fact that it WAS a good ride is a big part of why they reskinned it. They didn't have to spend a lot of money on Mission Breakout because $140 million was spent on Tower of Terror. Adding Guardians was a cheap way to put it over the top and renew its headliner status.

My understanding is that after the initial rush to see the new thing the goal was ultimately missed. It didn’t really bring any renewed interest to the park. So between Guardians of the Galaxy - Mission: Breakout! and Pixar Pier we’re looking at over $200 million spent on redoing parts of the park that didn’t really need to be redone, one of which was just redone relatively recently, that also didn’t really generate more interest in the park. That was more than enough to add one big new ride or a couple smaller ones (and smaller being The Little Mermaid sized) to really draw more interest. It should have been enough to have a new E-ticket open with Avengers Campus.

 

[yensidtlaw1969]

My understanding is that after the initial rush to see the new thing the goal was ultimately missed. It didn’t really bring any renewed interest to the park. So between Guardians of the Galaxy - Mission: Breakout! and Pixar Pier we’re looking at over $200 million spent on redoing parts of the park that didn’t really need to be redone, one of which was just redone relatively recently, that also didn’t really generate more interest in the park. That was more than enough to add one big new ride or a couple smaller ones (and smaller being The Little Mermaid sized) to really draw more interest. It should have been enough to have a new E-ticket open with Avengers Campus.

Whoops.

Who'd've thunk that reaching for the quick buck would prove shortsighted in the long run? I'm shocked

A real shame, too, since Guardians walked back a meaningful bit of thematic integrity of the park, and Pixar Pier walked back both thematic integrity AND goodwill that DCA had been working real hard to build after years of sloppiness.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Whoops.

Who'd've thunk that reaching for the quick buck would prove shortsighted in the long run? I'm shocked

A real shame, too, since Guardians walked back a meaningful bit of thematic integrity of the park, and Pixar Pier walked back both thematic integrity AND goodwill that DCA had been working real hard to build after years of sloppiness.

It shows how, despite all of the talk of “Disney is a business” huge sums are spent on vanity projects. Hong Kong needed a bigger castle because Shanghai’s is a big vanity project. Mission: Breakout! was a Chapek vanity project to do the thing that Iger had long said he wanted, a cheap ride opening in concert with a movie. Pixar Pier was a vanity project to smooth Lasseter’s ego as focus had shifted away from Pixar to Marvel and Star Wars. Evolving Epot is a vanity crater because Iger decided to become a patron of starchitecture like Eisner.

 

[Surferboy567]

Mission Breakout inherited an expensive ride system. One that was already fun on its own. It's nice that they changed the music and made things more fun in some people's opinion, but let's not pretend they turned a bad ride into a good ride with a couple bucks.

Remember, Tower wasn't rethemed because it was bad, it was rethemed because management wanted a quick way to capitalize on Marvel in the park, and it was realized that too few guests cited Tower of Terror as one of the main reasons they came to DCA, even if they ranked it well after riding. That meant it had good enough bones to satisfy guests and it had the potential to create more of a draw than there was, which is an unusual combo.

The fact that it WAS a good ride is a big part of why they reskinned it. They didn't have to spend a lot of money on Mission Breakout because $140 million was spent on Tower of Terror. Adding Guardians was a cheap way to put it over the top and renew its headliner status.

That is a fair assessment, but I think you can make the argument that a coaster (despite not riding it) is going to fall into that fun category as well.

I also really like Tower, the theming, the atmosphere it’s all great. I think their is a place for both Tower and Mission Breakout (how it is currently). They are both very different experiences (despite having similar ride systems) and that is why it’s cool to have them both. I can agree with you on Mission Breakout being a fast way to insert marvel into the parks, but don’t really mind.

 

[Brer Oswald]

ive never seen cars and have no attachment to it but carsland is fantastic and RSR is a masterpiece of a ride

It’s a great ride, but I also like Cars. I don’t think it was until Runaway Railway that I truly realized that IP doesn’t matter.

I’m the biggest Mickey Mouse fan around. The ride is by no means bad, but I still found it disappointing. It probably would have been better if it was an addition instead of a replacement, but I know I still would have been a bit disappointed.

 

[Brer Oswald]

My understanding is that after the initial rush to see the new thing the goal was ultimately missed. It didn’t really bring any renewed interest to the park. So between Guardians of the Galaxy - Mission: Breakout! and Pixar Pier we’re looking at over $200 million spent on redoing parts of the park that didn’t really need to be redone, one of which was just redone relatively recently, that also didn’t really generate more interest in the park. That was more than enough to add one big new ride or a couple smaller ones (and smaller being The Little Mermaid sized) to really draw more interest. It should have been enough to have a new E-ticket open with Avengers Campus.

I’d argue that the Pier absolutely should be redone. It’s the largest area of the park, yet all it amounts to are a bunch of carnival rides, a coaster, and a weak interactive dark ride. The only real draw is likely the coaster.

I think it’s a ripe place for expansion. But painting on characters won’t move the needle. Change the theme. Replace the carny rides with dark rides. No idea what to do about the coaster though.

 

[Incomudro]

That is a fair assessment, but I think you can make the argument that a coaster (despite not riding it) is going to fall into that fun category as well.

I also really like Tower, the theming, the atmosphere it’s all great. I think their is a place for both Tower and Mission Breakout (how it is currently). They are both very different experiences (despite having similar ride systems) and that is why it’s cool to have them both. I can agree with you on Mission Breakout being a fast way to insert marvel into the parks, but don’t really mind.

That was my point.
If Space Mountain, and RnR are fun, Guardians will also be fun simply because coasters are fun and dark coasters are fun.
Plus that with a great queue - I'm betting on that, great visuals, and great music.

 

[yensidtlaw1969]

That was my point.
If Space Mountain, and RnR are fun, Guardians will also be fun simply because coasters are fun and dark coasters are fun.
Plus that with a great queue - I'm betting on that, great visuals, and great music.

I don’t think anyone is suggesting that Guardians won’t be fun.

But $50 million can get you a fun coaster. $100 million should get you an exceptional one.

Why is THIS one costing 4 1/2 times that??

 

[ToTBellHop]

I don’t think anyone is suggesting that Guardians won’t be fun.

But $50 million can get you a fun coaster. $100 million should get you an exceptional one.

Why is THIS one costing 4 1/2 times that??

It’s not cheap building a time machine and using it to interview a young Peter Quill in the ‘80s. Universal just makes stuff up like “Harry actually confronted Voldemort while getting Hufflepuff’s cup, that just didn’t come up in the books or movies!” Disney goes right to the source and asks Peter directly what his favorite ride was and why was it World of Motion (Horizons a year later)?

 

[Master Yoda]

I don’t think anyone is suggesting that Guardians won’t be fun.

But $50 million can get you a fun coaster. $100 million should get you an exceptional one.

Why is THIS one costing 4 1/2 times that??

Three letters...WED.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Three letters...WED.

That explains a premium that has always been present. It doesn’t explain the out of control skyrocketing that has occurred over the past 15 years.

 

[Master Yoda]

That explains a premium that has always been present. It doesn’t explain the out of control skyrocketing that has occurred over the past 15 years.

I have little doubt that the price of that "premium" goes up just as much if not more than lumber, steel, labor, etc.

 

[fgmnt]

In a vacuum, the cost of the ride does not matter to me. Don't think I could care less. It becomes worthy of discussion in context of the capacity crisis in Walt Disney World being exacerbated by only and slowly building these high dollar, low capacity attractions.

 

[yensidtlaw1969]

In a vacuum, the cost of the ride does not matter to me. Don't think I could care less. It becomes worthy of discussion in context of the capacity crisis in Walt Disney World being exacerbated by only and slowly building these high dollar, low capacity attractions.

Not to mention short. Cosmic Rewind will give us, what, 4 minutes of ride time?

That’s not, like, inherently a problem - there’s room for short rides within the park experience. But is that really what EPCOT needs? Future World used to be full of attractions that were 15+ minutes long. Now the average is much shorter and the waits are much higher. The front half of the park is in desperate need of more ride time and, and they’re focusing the brunt of their money on an attraction that doesn’t address that issue.

 

[Skibum1970]

Not to mention short. Cosmic Rewind will give us, what, 4 minutes of ride time?

At most. Launched coasters typically have very short ride times with a launch hill to slow things down. I know that this has a "lift hill" but I did not know if it is more launched lift versus the standard slower chain lift.

I do think that cost factors into so much. They build one for $400M (or whatever it will cost) with capacity probably around 1,600 pph (guessing on standard coaster capacity). However, they could build three rides for $130M each with capacity around 2,000 (using omnimover or boat rides) and triple the capacity or more for the same cost. It's a difficult thing for me to really project as I'm not too informed and not a construction expert.

No matter what. Spending half a billion on one ride is not economically feasible unless Disney has no concerns about address capacity.