Guardians of the Galaxy: Cosmic Rewind SPOILER Thread

[bhg469]

It needed starts and stops to really make the story work. I just didn’t understand the story AT ALL once on the coaster itself. The story is lost. This could’ve been something if they didn’t push into “pure coaster” realm and did coaster, show scene, coaster, show scene.

This is why I think I don't like it. Every time I have ridden it, I lose a little love for it. I just re-rode the mummy in universal and I love that one. It's a little more intense but the stops and show scenes are way more fun.

Hagrids is even better than the mummy too.

 

[Disstevefan1]

It looks like Disney attempted to create an attraction that everyone could ride but also had some thrills like a coaster.

It's clear it's not that.

I will say what I said when they closed Ellen; KEEP the ride system and do an overlay. That was a cool ride system, and they could use all their creative folks to put the work in to create something new AND save a lot of money.

And folks would flock to the new attraction simply because it is new, and Disney would make MONEY from each and every rider (thanks Genie+)

 

[SplashJacket]

I will say what I said when they closed Ellen; KEEP the ride system and do an overlay. That was a cool ride system, and they could use all their creative folks to put the work in to create something new AND save a lot of money.

As someone who had GMR in their top three, I fully supported a total gutting of Energy.

 

[Disstevefan1]

As someone who had GMR in their top three, I fully supported a total gutting of Energy.

There are a lot that agree with you, and I will enjoy Guardians if I ever get to try it as I do not get sick on attractions.
I am just saying, this attraction is not for everyone, and I liked the previous ride system.

 

[Incomudro]

I echo nearly everything you said (and I echoed you in another thread already). I’m in my early 40s, sat in the second to last car, and, like you, felt disoriented, but not nauseous on the ride. But it was uncomfortable enough that I don’t know that I ever need to go again.

It needed starts and stops to really make the story work. I just didn’t understand the story AT ALL once on the coaster itself. The story is lost. This could’ve been something if they didn’t push into “pure coaster” realm and did coaster, show scene, coaster, show scene.

Overall, I’m obviously disappointed that it’s a ride in EPCOT, like Mission:Space spinny side that I’ll never ride again.

(And I’m someone that can still do RNRC although I’m starting to sunset my time on that one, too, but I’m still good with it at the moment. Wish it was as smooth as this because the smoothness of this is impressive.)

I haven't ridden GotG but I like the idea precisely because it doesn't go coaster - show scene - coaster.
It's purpose isn't story, it's purpose is fun.

 

[lazyboy97o]

I haven't ridden GotG but I like the idea precisely because it doesn't go coaster - show scene - coaster.
It's purpose isn't story, it's purpose is fun.

So now the “storytelling coaster” isn’t about story?

 

[Incomudro]

So now the “storytelling coaster” isn’t about story?

Not to me it isn't, and never was.
I never really saw a story in Pirates - some say it's there.
Nor, Haunted Mansion, Jungle Cruise, certainly not Space Mountain.
Rock n Roller Coaster is probably its closest parallel.
Yeah, RnR sets up a story, but the story is extremely basic and doesn't matter to anyone I've ever heard from.
It's more of a premise.
This insistence that there must be story in every ride is something that I don't adhere to.
Sure, it's there in some slightly there in others, and not there at all in others still.
Some rides are just meant to be fun.
This is a fun coaster with a light story, using a combination of ride system, visuals and music.
It's not meant to be analyzed, just enjoyed.
It's a visually and musically augmented indoor coaster - enjoy it without thinking about it too much.

 

[Epcot82Guy]

I think you're highlighting my exact issue with this. It should have been a simple story that sets up a premise that fits within Epcot and Epcot's story. Instead they wanted a story coaster. So, we get a very convoluted story that is both overworked and misplaced. Storytelling, placemaking and premise setting is where Disney is having the greatest failures these days.


To your point, a simple, fun coaster that fits well into is setting would have still given most lovers of the ride what they wanted and likely brought a chunk of those who dislike it on board.

 

[Mickeynerd17]

Not to me it isn't, and never was.
I never really saw a story in Pirates - some say it's there.
Nor, Haunted Mansion, Jungle Cruise, certainly not Space Mountain.
Rock n Roller Coaster is probably its closest parallel.
Yeah, RnR sets up a story, but the story is extremely basic and doesn't matter to anyone I've ever heard from.
It's more of a premise.
This insistence that there must be story in every ride is something that I don't adhere to.
Sure, it's there in some slightly there in others, and not there at all in others still.
Some rides are just meant to be fun.
This is a fun coaster with a light story, using a combination of ride system, visuals and music.
It's not meant to be analyzed, just enjoyed.
It's a visually and musically augmented indoor coaster - enjoy it without thinking about it too much.

I think you're highlighting my exact issue with this. It should have been a simple story that sets up a premise that fits within Epcot and Epcot's story. Instead they wanted a story coaster. So, we get a very convoluted story that is both overworked and misplaced. Storytelling, placemaking and premise setting is where Disney is having the greatest failures these days.


To your point, a simple, fun coaster that fits well into is setting would have still given most lovers of the ride what they wanted and likely brought a chunk of those who dislike it on board.

With the videos I've seen of Cosmic Rewind....

The multiple preshows seemingly set up an excellent, well-detailed story akin to how Energy set up its story, except once you get to the ride, it becomes just a fun coaster. It's almost like the preshows overhype the experience you actually receive, from what I've observed.

Much different from RnRC where although you see a preshow, the actual premise/story is much simpler and doesn't overhype the actual ride experience. You get exactly what you are expecting, which is a speedy drive to an Aerosmith concert.

 

[James Alucobond]

With the videos I've seen of Cosmic Rewind....

The multiple preshows seemingly set up an excellent, well-detailed story akin to how Energy set up its story, except once you get to the ride, it becomes just a fun coaster. It's almost like the preshows overhype the experience you actually receive, from what I've observed.

Much different from RnRC where although you see a preshow, the actual premise/story is much simpler and doesn't overhype the actual ride experience. You get exactly what you are expecting, which is a speedy drive to an Aerosmith concert.

I think it’s fine to have an elaborate pre-show, but the story should be effectively complete by the time the backward launch occurs. It’s obviously too chaotic to even hear what’s being said.

I really wish Eson weren’t part of it, and that you were simply tasked with either observing the big bang or retrieving something from the formative years of the universe, perhaps using research the Xandarians are doing on the Time Stone as a premise.

Honestly, if they were dead-set on using Marvel, a good idea for a more cohesive Future World East transformation might have been to have each of the pavilions showcasing new tech based on Infinity Stone research. Each could be presented by an in-universe group (Xandarians, sorcerers, agents of S.H.I.E.L.D., etc.), and each could explore some scientific concept through a science fiction lens. So, like:

Time Stone - Time travel
Mind Stone - Artificial intelligence
Space Stone - Faster-than-light travel
Power Stone - Self-sustaining power generation
Reality Stone - Multiverse

 

[Epcot82Guy]

I think Disney has painted itself in its own box. I would argue 90% of people riding the ride are there for the music and to see the main Guardians. They don't care about the stones. They don't care about Eson. Most don't even know about them. Let alone in a park where it makes no sense to blur in the fantasy MCU elements.

The attraction takes itself way, way too seriously from a story standpoint. I can come up with 5 stories off the top of my head that would have been just as effective and not felt so shoehorned. But, there is this desire to self aggrandize the MCU and backstories of these series now in a way that even Coco Chanel couldn't edit back successfully. Let alone at the expense of the actual backstory of the parks themselves.

 

[James Alucobond]

I think Disney has painted itself in its own box. I would argue 90% of people riding the ride are there for the music and to see the main Guardians. They don't care about the stones. They don't care about Eson. Most don't even know about them. Let alone in a park where it makes no sense to blur in the fantasy MCU elements.

The attraction takes itself way, way too seriously from a story standpoint. I can come up with 5 stories off the top of my head that would have been just as effective and not felt so shoehorned. But, there is this desire to self aggrandize the MCU and backstories of these series now in a way that even Coco Chanel couldn't edit back successfully. Let alone at the expense of the actual backstory of the parks themselves.

I don’t think it matters who the presenters are as long as they make an effort to have the story be self-contained. It’s not like you had to go into the parks with pre-existing knowledge of Buzzy or the Kitchen Kabaret or the Dreamfinder, and there was always an element of fiction or fantasy woven in. It wouldn’t have to be terribly different if that fantasy fiber happened to be MCU-related.

But like you said, I think part of the problem with Marvel attractions is the same problem I have with the MCU at large, which is that it feels like there’s an expectation you have some awareness of everything that’s happened across every film and television show. You can’t even watch a direct sequel in the MCU without needing context from something that happened chronologically between those two entries.

 

[Epcot82Guy]

I don’t think it matters who the presenters are as long as they make an effort to have the story be self-contained. It’s not like you had to go into the parks with pre-existing knowledge of Buzzy or the Kitchen Kabaret or the Dreamfinder, and there was always an element of fiction or fantasy woven in. It wouldn’t have to be terribly different if that fantasy fiber happened to be MCU-related.

But like you said, I think part of the problem with Marvel attractions is the same problem I have with the MCU at large, which is that it feels like there’s an expectation you have some awareness of everything that’s happened across every film and television show. You can’t even watch a direct sequel in the MCU without needing context from something that happened chronologically between those two entries.

Yes. And, a lot of other background. The story should be self contained AND fit in the overall context. Both story views should make sense in their own context. This one is shoehorned on both the Epcot and MCU sides.

 

[Incomudro]

I think you're highlighting my exact issue with this. It should have been a simple story that sets up a premise that fits within Epcot and Epcot's story. Instead they wanted a story coaster. So, we get a very convoluted story that is both overworked and misplaced. Storytelling, placemaking and premise setting is where Disney is having the greatest failures these days.


To your point, a simple, fun coaster that fits well into is setting would have still given most lovers of the ride what they wanted and likely brought a chunk of those who dislike it on board.

Then just ride it, and have fun with it.

 

[Epcot82Guy]

Then just ride it, and have fun with it.

This is where you and I disagree. At a Disney Park, the story and fit and immersion is why I go. If I'm just going to Disney for "fun" of the actual ride itself, there are many other places with attractions that are far more fun. The story issues greatly detract from the fun, and I personally don't and can't go to Disney to ignore the story. That 100% defeats the purpose for me.

(And, yes, I am one who has stopped going - even with moving to Orlando in recent years - before that argument comes up.)

 

[Incomudro]

This is where you and I disagree. At a Disney Park, the story and fit and immersion is why I go. If I'm just going to Disney for "fun" of the actual ride itself, there are many other places with attractions that are far more fun. The story issues greatly detract from the fun, and I personally don't and can't go to Disney to ignore the story. That 100% defeats the purpose for me.

(And, yes, I am one who has stopped going - even with moving to Orlando in recent years - before that argument comes up.)

Where's the story in Tron?
Aerosmith?
Big Thunder?
Jungle Cruise?
Space Mountain?
PotC?
Everything doesn't have to be deep.

 

[Phicinfan]

This is where you and I disagree. At a Disney Park, the story and fit and immersion is why I go. If I'm just going to Disney for "fun" of the actual ride itself, there are many other places with attractions that are far more fun. The story issues greatly detract from the fun, and I personally don't and can't go to Disney to ignore the story. That 100% defeats the purpose for me.

(And, yes, I am one who has stopped going - even with moving to Orlando in recent years - before that argument comes up.)

Okay so to be clear.....
A Roller coaster ride, in world of Discovery, that has a pre-show about meeting new cultures from outerspace that are close to us, and then have a great ride where you experience "space travel" to save the world isn't immersive enough for you? I get folks here that expect more of Disney, but sometimes I wonder if we don't keep moving the goal posts too much.

This is the new EPCOT, this is world of Discovery now, and they are discovering new worlds, races and peoples from space in a fun ride that highlights being part of a team that "saves the world" How is that not fun and immersive?

 

[Epcot82Guy]

Where's the story in Tron?
Aerosmith?
Big Thunder?
Jungle Cruise?
Space Mountain?
PotC?
Everything doesn't have to be deep.

I think we are talking past each other. I don't believe stories have to be deep at all. In fact, some of the best attractions have simple stories. My point is that they fit in context and have some level of believability in their own reality. It's the shoehorning that I don't like. I actually agree that people who want some long, drawn out story for a 5 minute ride are asking for something way more than is needed.

Most of the attractions you highlight work great because they focus on place setting. There are definitely backstories, but the focus is on the immediate moment. You are visiting a place/doing a thing to see it in that moment. Pirates is probably the best example, pre-Depp. The story is that you are going back to visit a village being ransacked by Pirates. You are visiting it real time. The story unfolds around you. You don't have to have this full story arc in a few minutes. And that's why it worked so well.

Disney Parks used to be able to tell stories without having to write a film short. Being a physical place, you have the luxury of just being there. It's the storytelling of a building vs. the story telling of a film. They are different media.

In short, the stories for great attractions are simple. They actually work (physically) and are believable accordingly. They make sense. You can find layers in them, and they still make sense when you do. They don't feel forced - which is the issue I have with these more recent stories. They are trying to do too much and too little at the same time - in a setting that doesn't naturally work.

Guardians, specifically, tries to tell too many stories at once in too short a time. They demanded a save the world story, had to deal with the Epcot shoehorn and it just doesn't work IMHO. It should have been simpler.

 

[Epcot82Guy]

Okay so to be clear.....
A Roller coaster ride, in world of Discovery, that has a pre-show about meeting new cultures from outerspace that are close to us, and then have a great ride where you experience "space travel" to save the world isn't immersive enough for you? I get folks here that expect more of Disney, but sometimes I wonder if we don't keep moving the goal posts too much.

This is the new EPCOT, this is world of Discovery now, and they are discovering new worlds, races and peoples from space in a fun ride that highlights being part of a team that "saves the world" How is that not fun and immersive?

In a word - No. Because I would argue that's not at all what you are doing. I get that people want to make this new version work, but it just doesn't. At least not at the levels the old stories did. The ride is absolutely detailed. There is no doubt. But, there are too many things that don't work together for it to make sense.

The goal posts aren't moving at all. This has been my criticism since the very first uses of IP in the park more recently. The focus is more on the story of the IP and not the park itself.

While I appreciate your creativity, your story of World Discovery doesn't hold up under scrutiny beyond the surface. And, if it did, I would be all for it. The 4 attractions in World Discovery aren't about discovering new worlds. What in Test Track is about discovering new worlds?

Similarly, maybe it's about creating new worlds - as Play and Test Track are about using technology to create new worlds? Then Mission:Space and Guardians fail, since there is no creation on our part there.

Maybe it's about how technology, real and imagined, allows us to explore other worlds (what could have been one idea, especially if Play had been outer space themed instead of Instagram themed) - but Test Track still fails.

The problem is they are trying to blur fantasy and reality in one land. It would be like putting Mission Space next to Smuggler's Run because they are both about space travel. I know they tried to tie in Epcot with the pre-show. But, it's still fantasy. Test Track and Mission:Space are fantasy based in reality. Guardians is fantasy based in MCU scifi fantasy. It's the story of Tomorrowland, not Epcot.

There is no common thread between those 4 pavilions beyond some vague idea of futuristic look. The story just doesn't work if you dig into it at any level. (Much like Tomorrowland has become.)

 

[Phicinfan]

In a word - No. Because I would argue that's not at all what you are doing. I get that people want to make this new version work, but it just doesn't. At least not at the levels the old stories did. The ride is absolutely detailed. There is no doubt. But, there are too many things that don't work together for it to make sense.

The goal posts aren't moving at all. This has been my criticism since the very first uses of IP in the park more recently. The focus is more on the story of the IP and not the park itself.

IP is only an issue if the IP does not meet the area it is placed. While I agree that GotG does not fit old EPCOT, it can fit in NEW EPCOT with the change in direction. Not everyone is old EPCOT like some, to each their own.

While I appreciate your creativity, your story of World Discovery doesn't hold up under scrutiny beyond the surface. And, if it did, I would be all for it. The 4 attractions in World Discovery aren't about discovering new worlds. What in Test Track is about discovering new worlds?

Well lets see what you define as Discovery. Discovery does NOT only mean finding new things... It means you discover what is different or what effects things or learning why things happen. So Space and GotG fits well. As far as Test track - I don't totally disagree with you, but then again the pre-show is designing a car to optimize what it can do, so if you are new to cars or what you need to design for, it does fit the category of Discovery.

Similarly, maybe it's about creating new worlds - as Play and Test Track are about using technology to create new worlds? Then Mission:Space and Guardians fail, since there is no creation on our part there.

Again, where do we state Discovery can ONLY mean one or the other?

Maybe it's about how technology, real and imagined, allows us to explore other worlds (what could have been one idea, especially if Play had been outer space themed instead of Instagram themed) - but Test Track still fails.

See above.

The problem is they are trying to blur fantasy and reality in one land. It would be like putting Mission Space next to Smuggler's Run because they are both about space travel. I know they tried to tie in Epcot with the pre-show. But, it's still fantasy. Test Track and Mission:Space are fantasy based in reality. Guardians is fantasy based in MCU scifi fantasy. It's the story of Tomorrowland, not Epcot.

?? You as a rider learning to guide a rocket or meet aliens or learning to design cars is blurring reality and fantasy? its all fantasy.

There is no common thread between those 4 pavilions beyond some vague idea of futuristic look. The story just doesn't work if you dig into it at any level. (Much like Tomorrowland has become.)

Only if you limit the definition of Discovery. IMO.