News Guardians of the Galaxy Cosmic Rewind attraction confirmed for Epcot

[flyerjab]

I see no reason why fiction, fantasy, or science fiction, cannot be used to convey facts about the actual, physical, moral reality in which we live. Why was Star Trek always as popular as it was? It took science fiction as a backdrop and applied the everyday challenges, emotions, struggles and triumphs of our shared humanity to them. That’s why it has held for as long as it has. The iconic episode - Measure of a Man - where Data’s very sentience is questioned- we studied that in philosophy class in college. Does the fact that it is science fiction make it less of a story or less impactful because it isn’t non-fiction? Hardly.

I admire Disney for a different approach. There is still edutainment throughout the bones of this queue. You will learn things if you want to: things that are actual - not everything is about Xandar in this Pavilion. Also, this is no attempt at changing other people’s minds. This is me offering an opinion, an interpretation of how this park is changing, but still offering great things.

 

[Epcot82Guy]

I see no reason why fiction, fantasy, or science fiction, cannot be used to convey facts about the actual, physical, moral reality in which we live. Why was Star Trek always as popular as it was? It took science fiction as a backdrop and applied the everyday challenges, emotions, struggles and triumphs of our shared humanity to them. That’s why it has held for as long as it has. The iconic episode - Measure of a Man - where Data’s very sentience is questioned- we studied that in philosophy class in college. Does the fact that it is science fiction make it less of a story or less impactful because it isn’t non-fiction? Hardly.

I admire Disney for a different approach. There is still edutainment throughout the bones of this queue. You will learn things if you want to: things that are actual - not everything is about Xandar in this Pavilion. Also, this is no attempt at changing other people’s minds. This is me offering an opinion, an interpretation of how this park is changing, but still offering great things.

I can go along with this. What is the great shared human struggle being told through this experience and the main story of the attraction itself? (noting I agree with you on the general idea of the queue.) This feels more like a Saturday morning cartoon episode vs. the depth of a Star Trek episode.

 

[Disstevefan1]

That was only one part of it. EPCOT Center respected the intellectual ability of its guests, to deliver a message that went beyond the individual pavilions.

This ride does not. It is fiction. It is fantasy. It is not EPCOT. The fact that late great attractions are referenced just makes this all the more a slap-in-the-face to those of us whom the original EPCOT appealed to. Now you get MK 2.0… but what do we get?

Horizons was my favorite attraction in EPCOT. I also like mission space and I wish we had both. Living with the land is also one of my favorites. I preferred the old Test Track to the new one, but I still enjoy riding the new one.

I prefer the old return to earth on SSE to the current one. I hear all the sets are merely behind black scrim and are in tact. It would be cool to bring that back. That said, I still enjoy the current version. I love the points of light on SSE! This is the way to plus an old attraction with today’s technology!

Yes, Guardians it total fiction. It’s too bad, I heard it was initially written to focus on the Big Bang and not at all tied to an IP.

WE get what WE get. What is said on these boards will NEVER change what TWDC will do, or not do.

We all must make our choice; never set foot in EPCOT because we dislike the choices TWDC makes, of try to focus on what’s still great about it.

Everyone’s personal choice is valid for them.

 

[Incomudro]

"I totally wouldn't want to go on that exciting high tech new rollercoaster, because I might learn something about blood platlets in the queue preshow! EPCOT is for pop cultural references!"

Sorry, but are you going to compare the appeal of Guardians to riding through the bloodstream?
Maybe if WDW existed without the competition of Uni just down the road, this idea would fly.
Those days are over.

 

[Patcheslee]

Every single ride causes some number of people to become motion sick. The lack of a pattern is meaningless because it doesn’t exist strongly for other rides. Different people react differently. This ride does something that is specifically known to cause issues with a wide variety of people.

Would installing more AC into the area and strategic ventilation/ducts help with motion sickness.

 

[Casper Gutman]

Sorry, but are you going to compare the appeal of Guardians to riding through the bloodstream?
Maybe if WDW existed without the competition of Uni just down the road, this idea would fly.
Those days are over.

I guarantee I am one of the biggest Marvel and MCU fans on this forum and have spent an inordinate amount of time reading the comics and watching the films and TV series. The GotG IP slapped on the new EPCOT ride holds no appeal to me for several reasons. Unlike the California reskin, CR is a bad Guardians attraction. The main characters only appear on TV screens (and a TV screen size hologram in an empty room), the aesthetic is not recognizably Guardians, and the storyline breaks the MCU in comical fashion.

But even were CR a strong use of the Guardians IP (like, yes, Mission: Breakout), the allure of the IP is minimal. Because films (and comics) are a completely different type of media then theme parks and work in completely different ways. IPs don't translate directly. I adore Cars Land. I don't like the Cars films. I love the Harry Potter lands. I think the Potter films and books are fine. I prefer Universal to WDW now. I have almost no emotional attachment to any Universal IP outside of the classic monsters (which aren't really represented in the parks yet) but I LOVE Disney animation, Pixar, Marvel, and Star Wars. In a theme park land I want a distinct, appealing visual aesthetic. In a film, book, or comic I want excellent plotting, characterization, scripting, etc.

The IP I want in EPCOT is EPCOT, however strange that may seem to some. So yes, riding through a bloodstream CAN be more appealing then slapping a GotG label on a ride, since one represents an IP intended for a theme park attraction and the other an IP intended for film and comics.

Also, I find it endlessly ironic that embracing modern EPCOT requires a deep, almost nihilistic cynicism about humanity and our future. Sure, at one point, humanity was hopeful about the future and a theme park could be popular by offering edutainment and optimism, but around the late 90s all mankind became aggressively hopeless and anti-intellectual and the future died so now we all just want to ride roller coasters featuring bored Hollywood stars on TV monitors while the world circles the drain. I don't really buy that.

 

[ElvisMickey]

Just my two cents…went on earlier today and really enjoyed it. And that’s coming from an 80s EPCOT Center purist. Because of all of the motion sickness comments I’ve been reading, I took two Bonine about an hour before I went on and was completely fine. The ride was fun, smooth and I got to rock out to Blondie

 

[Incomudro]

I guarantee I am one of the biggest Marvel and MCU fans on this forum and have spent an inordinate amount of time reading the comics and watching the films and TV series. The GotG IP slapped on the new EPCOT ride holds no appeal to me for several reasons. Unlike the California reskin, CR is a bad Guardians attraction. The main characters only appear on TV screens (and a TV screen size hologram in an empty room), the aesthetic is not recognizably Guardians, and the storyline breaks the MCU in comical fashion.

But even were CR a strong use of the Guardians IP (like, yes, Mission: Breakout), the allure of the IP is minimal. Because films (and comics) are a completely different type of media then theme parks and work in completely different ways. IPs don't translate directly. I adore Cars Land. I don't like the Cars films. I love the Harry Potter lands. I think the Potter films and books are fine. I prefer Universal to WDW now. I have almost no emotional attachment to any Universal IP outside of the classic monsters (which aren't really represented in the parks yet) but I LOVE Disney animation, Pixar, Marvel, and Star Wars. In a theme park land I want a distinct, appealing visual aesthetic. In a film, book, or comic I want excellent plotting, characterization, scripting, etc.

The IP I want in EPCOT is EPCOT, however strange that may seem to some. So yes, riding through a bloodstream CAN be more appealing then slapping a GotG label on a ride, since one represents an IP intended for a theme park attraction and the other an IP intended for film and comics.

Also, I find it endlessly ironic that embracing modern EPCOT requires a deep, almost nihilistic cynicism about humanity and our future. Sure, at one point, humanity was hopeful about the future and a theme park could be popular by offering edutainment and optimism, but around the late 90s all mankind became aggressively hopeless and anti-intellectual and the future died so now we all just want to ride roller coasters featuring bored Hollywood stars on TV monitors while the world circles the drain. I don't really buy that.

I'm not a huge MCU fan, though I have had my share of fun watching some of the films - Guardians in particular.
I'm actually a big nature and science.
Nature, science, exercise and eating right (sort of natural and biological things) fishing (more nature) etc...
Despite all of that, I don't want a body wars in Epcot - and I'm 100% confident that virtually no one else would want it either.

 

[Casper Gutman]

I'm not a huge MCU fan, though I have had my share of fun watching some of the films - Guardians in particular.
I'm actually a big nature and science.
Nature, science, exercise and eating right (sort of natural and biological things) fishing (more nature) etc...
Despite all of that, I don't want a body wars in Epcot - and I'm 100% confident that virtually no one else would want it either.

How are you 100% sure that people don’t want classic EPCOT style rides? Because, from the amount of nostalgic merchandise on sale, Disney isn’t nearly that sure. In fact, between GotG’s backstory and the merch, Disney has apparently decided EPCOTs current theme is “The park that used to be good.”

 

[lazyboy97o]

How are you 100% sure that people don’t want classic EPCOT style rides? Because, from the amount of nostalgic merchandise on sale, Disney isn’t nearly that sure. In fact, between GotG’s backstory and the merch, Disney has apparently decided EPCOTs current theme is “The park that used to be good.”

More specifically, the theme of Evolved EPCOT seems to be “The park that used to be EPCOT Center.” Disney is going to great lengths to create parallels. They absolutely want people to think of EPCOT Center when they think of the “new” EPCOT. Ford isn’t reviving the Edsel brand.

 

[vikescaper]

The videos of this ride do it no justice…it is amazing!

 

[flyerjab]

I can go along with this. What is the great shared human struggle being told through this experience and the main story of the attraction itself? (noting I agree with you on the general idea of the queue.) This feels more like a Saturday morning cartoon episode vs. the depth of a Star Trek episode.

Ha! Excellent point! Sometimes I need my hyperbole to be more subtle I suppose. I gather that another purpose for this ride is to intertwine some edutainment with some of the Guardians irreverent humor. I would never argue that the educational aspects of this ride compete with the heavy-handedness of the original EPCOT Center rides. My notion is to offer a counterpoint that a different approach can still yield similar, if not equivalent goals. Will this be a linear progression about the concept of energy and fossil fuels, delivered via a long drawn out omnimover? Not really. However, if you are willing to learn about the formation of the universe, or when Voyager 1 entered interstellar space, and so on, you can definitely do that here.

 

[Casper Gutman]

Ha! Excellent point! Sometimes I need my hyperbole to be more subtle I suppose. I gather that another purpose for this ride is to intertwine some edutainment with some of the Guardians irreverent humor. I would never argue that the educational aspects of this ride compete with the heavy-handedness of the original EPCOT Center rides. My notion is to offer a counterpoint that a different approach can still yield similar, if not equivalent goals. Will this be a linear progression about the concept of energy and fossil fuels, delivered via a long drawn out omnimover? Not really. However, if you are willing to learn about the formation of the universe, or when Voyager 1 entered interstellar space, and so on, you can definitely do that here.

“Heavy-handedness,” “long drawn out”

Taste is subjective, but I’m genuinely curious, did you ever visit the original EPCOT?

 

[celluloid]

Wonders of Life, Robot and Bird(and the entire pavilion it was in) as well as Imagination were anything thing but Heavy Handedness.

 

[Casper Gutman]

Wonders of Life, Robot and Bird(and the entire pavilion it was in) as well as Imagination were anything thing but Heavy Handedness.

WoM wasn’t at all heavy-handed either. Nor was Horizons. Honestly, the most heavy-handed EPCOT rides are the ones that survived the longest, the Land, UoE, and even SSE (which is nonetheless one of the greatest rides ever built).

 

[celluloid]

WoM wasn’t at all heavy-handed either. Nor was Horizons. Honestly, the most heavy-handed EPCOT rides are the ones that survived the longest, the Land, UoE, and even SSE (which is nonetheless one of the greatest rides ever built).

Ironically Land's attractions became dryer.and straight forward in presentation without as much fancifulness.

 

[TalkingHead]

WoM wasn’t at all heavy-handed either. Nor was Horizons. Honestly, the most heavy-handed EPCOT rides are the ones that survived the longest, the Land, UoE, and even SSE (which is nonetheless one of the greatest rides ever built).

You have to wonder whether part of the difference between then and now is related to the declining craftsmanship of popular entertainment. Back then filmmakers and show business types knew how to carefully modulate tone for effect, how to shape entertainment within/against genre conventions, and when appropriate how to be subtle with their craftsmanship. Could easily be argued none of those things are readily apparent in the vast majority of popular entertainment in 2022, including newer theme park attractions.

 

[Casper Gutman]

You have to wonder whether part of the difference between then and now is related to the declining craftsmanship of popular entertainment. Back then filmmakers and show business types knew how to carefully modulate tone for effect, how to shape entertainment within/against genre conventions, and when appropriate how to be subtle with their craftsmanship. Could easily be argued none of those things are readily apparent in the vast majority of popular entertainment in 2022, including newer theme park attractions.

I agree to a considerable extent about the decline in theme park craftsmanship but I disagree about film. Blockbuster filmmaking is just as (if not more) skillful as it’s ever been - for instance, we have seen a producer as skilled and accomplished as Feige MAYBE twice before in the history of American studio film. Other genres, from animation to art films, are also just as well crafted, even if the venues in which they debut may have shifted from cinema to streaming. In fact, the shift to streaming has opened up new opportunities for established filmmakers to experiment and for up-and-comers to establish themselves.

I actually think a big chunk of the problem with theme parks is the decline in cross-pollination with filmmaking. A huge chunk of the greatness of Pirates or Motion came from the involvement of Walt’s animators. The visual language of theme parks shares a great deal with cinema, and it often seems like modern park designers don’t grasp that. I have a very hard time believing that CR would have turned out as it did if Feige and Gunn had been intimately involved in the development and design process.

 

[gustaftp]

Sorry, but are you going to compare the appeal of Guardians to riding through the bloodstream?
Maybe if WDW existed without the competition of Uni just down the road, this idea would fly.
Those days are over.

It is this type of transactional thinking that has put EPCOT in the state that it is today.

And if your argument were valid, you are essentially saying Disney was mistaken about attractions like Expedition Everest. Yet EE remains an incredibly popular attraction.

Not everyone wants Disney to take the easy way out. Competing with Universal doesn’t have to mean compromising the very theme of the park. EPCOT was meant to challenge us.

 

[Epcot82Guy]

And the two don't have to be mutually exclusive. I bet a bloodstream race attraction (with all the content you would expect there) being hosted by Baymax would be equally popular to Baymax fans as "Baymax takes you on a haphazard tour of Sanfransokyo".

I HIGHLY, HIGHLY doubt anyone loves FEA, Rat, CR, MFSR or MMRR because of the incredibly compelling storyline. They enjoy the fun aspect of the attraction plus characters they love. So, Disney's choice to do these oddly place, ill-fitting stories is 100% on Disney management. They are choosing stories that don't fit well - and that is not required to drive popularity (assuming you understand and respect your setting and source material, of course).