Guardians of the Galaxy Mission Breakout announced for Disney California Adventure

[mickEblu]

I definitely was among the many 'W.T.F.'ers when this thing was first a rumor. There still a huge element of W.T.F. in it for me. It's a crazy idea and it looks crazy. By all accounts, it's crazy. Maybe even stupid. Who knows... But at the end of the day, like so many other things, it's happening and I can't do a single thing about it. At nearly 40 years old, I've come to realize there is no point in putting negative energy towards things that are out of my control. What's the point? All I can do is hold out hope the thing is fun and becomes something I want to do when I visit the parks in between going on other rides, eating junk food, and having the occasional adult beverage.

Disney message forums have created too many armchair Imagineers and CEOs. I get people are passionate about Disney theme parks, but I mean c'mon, some people here think they have to write a freaking thesis every time they reply to a message on here full of big words as if they are going after a doctorate and are going to be published in some high profile theme park publication.

Not trying to downplay Disney's masterful work in the theme park industry over the past 60 years, but the world isn't going to stop if a sightline is ruined or we're forced to endure more IP-based attractions. I'm not going to lose sleep at night because a theme park ride is based on a popular movie instead of something that could have been a movie but instead was a ride, or maybe a ride that later became a movie.

I know you re not talking about me because I don't know any big words.

 

[Deleted member 107043]

Disney message forums have created too many armchair Imagineers and CEOs. I get people are passionate about Disney theme parks, but I mean c'mon, some people here think they have to write a freaking thesis every time they reply to a message on here full of big words as if they are going after a doctorate and are going to be published in some high profile theme park publication.

 

[Californian Elitist]

I definitely was among the many 'W.T.F.'ers when this thing was first a rumor. There still a huge element of W.T.F. in it for me. It's a crazy idea and it looks crazy. By all accounts, it's crazy. Maybe even stupid. Who knows... But at the end of the day, like so many other things, it's happening and I can't do a single thing about it. At nearly 40 years old, I've come to realize there is no point in putting negative energy towards things that are out of my control. What's the point? All I can do is hold out hope the thing is fun and becomes something I want to do when I visit the parks in between going on other rides, eating junk food, and having the occasional adult beverage.

Disney message forums have created too many armchair Imagineers and CEOs. I get people are passionate about Disney theme parks, but I mean c'mon, some people here think they have to write a freaking thesis every time they reply to a message on here full of big words as if they are going after a doctorate and are going to be published in some high profile theme park publication.

Not trying to downplay Disney's masterful work in the theme park industry over the past 60 years, but the world isn't going to stop if a sightline is ruined or we're forced to endure more IP-based attractions. I'm not going to lose sleep at night because a theme park ride is based on a popular movie instead of something that could have been a movie but instead was a ride, or maybe a ride that later became a movie.

Are you saying those of us who oppose this project should just stop expressing our opinions and just sit quietly altogether?

 

[Deleted member 107043]

Are you saying those of us who oppose this project should just stop expressing our opinions and just sit quietly altogether?

Must you always take everything personally? You demand space for open feedback and discussion yet you are so easily offended at the slightest remark you disagree with. Let's at least try to keep this conversation on TOT/MB and the general fan reaction to the changes and steer away from personal attacks. It's clear that no one here is telling you or anyone else to be quiet.

 

[britain]

I definitely was among the many 'W.T.F.'ers when this thing was first a rumor. There still a huge element of W.T.F. in it for me. It's a crazy idea and it looks crazy. By all accounts, it's crazy. Maybe even stupid. Who knows... But at the end of the day, like so many other things, it's happening and I can't do a single thing about it. At nearly 40 years old, I've come to realize there is no point in putting negative energy towards things that are out of my control. What's the point? All I can do is hold out hope the thing is fun and becomes something I want to do when I visit the parks in between going on other rides, eating junk food, and having the occasional adult beverage.

Disney message forums have created too many armchair Imagineers and CEOs. I get people are passionate about Disney theme parks, but I mean c'mon, some people here think they have to write a freaking thesis every time they reply to a message on here full of big words as if they are going after a doctorate and are going to be published in some high profile theme park publication.

Not trying to downplay Disney's masterful work in the theme park industry over the past 60 years, but the world isn't going to stop if a sightline is ruined or we're forced to endure more IP-based attractions. I'm not going to lose sleep at night because a theme park ride is based on a popular movie instead of something that could have been a movie but instead was a ride, or maybe a ride that later became a movie.

Put this in some high profile theme park publication!

 

[October82]

Disney message forums have created too many armchair Imagineers and CEOs. I get people are passionate about Disney theme parks, but I mean c'mon, some people here think they have to write a freaking thesis every time they reply to a message on here full of big words as if they are going after a doctorate and are going to be published in some high profile theme park publication.

Not trying to downplay Disney's masterful work in the theme park industry over the past 60 years, but the world isn't going to stop if a sightline is ruined or we're forced to endure more IP-based attractions. I'm not going to lose sleep at night because a theme park ride is based on a popular movie instead of something that could have been a movie but instead was a ride, or maybe a ride that later became a movie.

I'm not sure I understand what the point of this post is supposed to be.

We're Disney fans posting on a website about Disney. Some people put together high quality content that contributes insights to this community. A community of people that includes people who are both interested in and understand design, business, and the entertainment industry. If they choose to spend their time doing that, and if others appreciate and benefit from it, that seems worthwhile to me.

If you don't care for that kind of discussion, don't participate in it, but don't disparage those who do care about this kind of conversation.

I don't know if anything said on this forum matters in any real way, but I do know that going out of your way to argue that "none of this matters", doesn't matter.

 

[Curious Constance]

No one is saying someone can't or shouldn't express opinions on a Disney forum, at least I would never say that. But going back and forth for pages at a time trying to provide irrefutable proof that something looks cheap or doesn't belong in its location, when it's all a matter of opinion, can be exhausting.

In my opinion, IP is the future of theme parks. I would bet good money there will never be another major attraction at a Disney park that isn't based on some IP, ever. If that is something that someone finds they can't live with, why wouldn't they want to move on and find something more enjoyable to pass their time?
I find fault with the people who can't live with it, but still make it a large part of their existence and then come to forums and talk down to the fans who aren't so vehemently opposed to every single thing. All the negativity and the snarky comments about "kool aid drinkers " and "excuse makers", it gets real old. Sometimes you forget you're talking about new attractions at a theme park, it all feels so life and death and serious.

 

[Disney Irish]

No one is saying someone can't or shouldn't express opinions on a Disney forum, at least I would never say that. But going back and forth for pages at a time trying to provide irrefutable proof that something looks cheap or doesn't belong in its location, when it's all a matter of opinion, can be exhausting.

In my opinion, IP is the future of theme parks. I would bet good money there will never be another major attraction at a Disney park that isn't based on some IP, ever. If that is something that someone finds they can't live with, why wouldn't they want to move on and find something more enjoyable to pass their time?
I find fault with the people who can't live with it, but still make it a large part of their existence and then come to forums and talk down to the fans who aren't so vehemently opposed to every single thing. All the negativity and the snarky comments about "kool aid drinkers " and "excuse makers", it gets real old. Sometimes you forget you're talking about new attractions at a theme park, it all feels so life and death and serious.

Preach Sister!

 

[October82]

No one is saying someone can't or shouldn't express opinions on a Disney forum, at least I would never say that. [...]

Again, I'm not certain what this kind of post is intended to accomplish. I would hope everyone agrees we shouldn't insult or belittle one another, but this post goes further than that. Although you say that no one should suggest that opinions shouldn't be expressed, this post seems to indicate that the opinions you disagree with shouldn't be expressed.

If you enjoy posting in these threads - post. If you find it exhausting, then don't. This is the exact advice that you give to others. Complaining about conversations that others have or don't have on a board dedicated to a subject that - in objective terms - does not matter, seems particularly misguided.

 

[Practical Pig]

I've avoided chiming in here in any significant way on this subject for awhile. I haven't anything new to say about it. But it seems to me that the thread has been invigorated back to being a lively topic by a few articulate posters who are relative newcomers to this thread, and are just taking their own turn in talking through ... it all. I confess that I've stopped reading the longer posts, but that's because I've personally let go of the subject as it passes into history. Well, mostly at least.

 

[Practical Pig]

In my opinion, IP is the future of theme parks. I would bet good money there will never be another major attraction at a Disney park that isn't based on some IP, ever.

I'm afraid I agree with this completely, at least in the stateside parks, no matter how much I'd like to see unique new park experiences. Barring a complete sea-change in corporate, synergy is the name of the game. But synergy has, to a strong degree, always played a significant role in the original park and beyond. They just had fewer IPs adaptable to the park experience back then. I expect most people will have seen these early days diagrams, but I'll post them here anyway.

From 1957:

And from 1967:

 

[Disney Irish]

I'm afraid I agree with this completely, no matter how much I'd like to see unique new park experiences. Barring a complete sea-change in corporate, synergy is the name of the game. But synergy has, to a strong degree, always played a significant role in the original park and beyond. They had fewer IPs adaptable to the park experience back then. I expect most people will have seen these early days diagrams, but I'll post them here anyway:

View attachment 196512
View attachment 196513

Yep, and I think this is one things that a lot of the fandom forgets. The original corporate strategy was that the parks feed and were feed by all parts of the company. The company has grown but the strategy is still the same, just on a larger scale.

 

[Curious Constance]

Again, I'm not certain what this kind of post is intended to accomplish. I would hope everyone agrees we shouldn't insult or belittle one another, but this post goes further than that. Although you say that no one should suggest that opinions shouldn't be expressed, this post seems to indicate that the opinions you disagree with shouldn't be expressed.

If you enjoy posting in these threads - post. If you find it exhausting, then don't. This is the exact advice that you give to others. Complaining about conversations that others have or don't have on a board dedicated to a subject that - in objective terms - does not matter, seems particularly misguided.

Again, I'm not certain what this kind of post is intended to accomplish. I would hope everyone agrees we shouldn't insult or belittle one another, but this post goes further than that. Although you say that no one should suggest that opinions shouldn't be expressed, this post seems to indicate that the opinions you disagree with shouldn't be expressed.

If you enjoy posting in these threads - post. If you find it exhausting, then don't. This is the exact advice that you give to others. Complaining about conversations that others have or don't have on a board dedicated to a subject that - in objective terms - does not matter, seems particularly misguided.

I don't agree with your post but I have no personal issues with you and see no need to further argue the points with you. Not everyone is as polite as you are on these boards. We can leave it at that.

 

[Curious Constance]

I'm afraid I agree with this completely, at least in the stateside parks, no matter how much I'd like to see unique new park experiences. Barring a complete sea-change in corporate, synergy is the name of the game. But synergy has, to a strong degree, always played a significant role in the original park and beyond. They had fewer IPs adaptable to the park experience back then. I expect most people will have seen these early days diagrams, but I'll post them here anyway:

View attachment 196512
View attachment 196513

I hadn't seen those before. That's amazing! Thanks for posting those!

 

[October82]

Yep, and I think this is one things that a lot of the fandom forgets. The original corporate strategy was that the parks feed and were feed by all parts of the company. The company has grown but the strategy is still the same, just on a larger scale.

@nevol had a nice post a few pages back about how the strategy has changed. These images actually provide a nice contrast and counterpoint to the current model - where the parks are treated as vehicles for the marketing of studio IPs - by elaborating on how the parks can be an independent and complementary medium.

 

[October82]

In my opinion, IP is the future of theme parks. I would bet good money there will never be another major attraction at a Disney park that isn't based on some IP, ever. If that is something that someone finds they can't live with, why wouldn't they want to move on and find something more enjoyable to pass their time?

Although a minority of recent attractions lack IP, Disney has built several over the last decade and there are a few more that are very likely to be built in the near future - though not at DLR.

 

[Californian Elitist]

I'm not sure I understand what the point of this post is supposed to be.

We're Disney fans posting on a website about Disney. Some people put together high quality content that contributes insights to this community. A community of people that includes people who are both interested in and understand design, business, and the entertainment industry. If they choose to spend their time doing that, and if others appreciate and benefit from it, that seems worthwhile to me.

If you don't care for that kind of discussion, don't participate in it, but don't disparage those who do care about this kind of conversation.

I don't know if anything said on this forum matters in any real way, but I do know that going out of your way to argue that "none of this matters", doesn't matter.

It's always those who don't favor a decision by Disney that get told to basically shut up because "it doesn't matter anyway." Rarely, if never, is it the opposite. Those who oppose should just keep their opinions to themselves and let those who are in favor have their fun. What I really get a kick out of are those who seem to get mad at those of us with opposing views. I find it weird, since they're getting their way in the long run.

Those of you who are in favor of this project, please continue to voice your opinions. Those of you who aren't, please continue to voice your opinions. LET EACH OTHER BE AND STOP TRYING TO STOP DISCUSSION. And don't let the length of your posts discourage you either. And your opinions DO matter. What would be the point of a discussion forum?

Those of you who might want some of us to keep our mouths shut, since it doesn't matter anyway, here's the sign up link to DisBoards below. Nothing but positivity there, and those with opposing views usually aren't welcomed, making discussions one-sided and quite boring. I'm sure you'd love it there.

https://www.disboards.com/

 

[BrianLo]

Are you saying those of us who oppose this project should just stop expressing our opinions and just sit quietly altogether?

It's always those who don't favor a decision by Disney that get told to basically shut up because "it doesn't matter anyway." Rarely, if never, is it the opposite.

To be fair, you asked me like a week and a half ago to stop discussing it with you.

I think everyone's just getting cranky at going in circles with one another, we all need group therapy.

This is very reminiscent of the boiling point the Epcot Frozen thread was reaching (and I think quite similar in many ways). We've just replaced capacity issues with exterior issues.

 

[October82]

This is very reminiscent of the boiling point the Frozen thread was reaching (and I think quite similar in many ways). We've just replaced capacity issues with exterior issues.

Frozen... don't get me started...

 

[BrianLo]

Frozen... don't get me started...

It would be a brief respite at least!