Guardians of the Galaxy Mission Breakout announced for Disney California Adventure

D

Deleted member 107043

Westcoaster has shared some good photos of MB in his latest blog post.

DLR-17_0328-D-Guardians-0006.jpg


He says that to him "the tower itself continues to look more and more like the Pompidou Center in Paris and 1998 Tomorrowland had a torrid one night stand and popped out a baby". :D
 

Kiwiduck

Well-Known Member
Westcoaster has shared some good photos of MB in his latest blog post.

DLR-17_0328-D-Guardians-0006.jpg


He says that to him "the tower itself continues to look more and more like the Pompidou Center in Paris and 1998 Tomorrowland had a torrid one night stand and popped out a baby". :D
I had never heard of the Pompidou Centre until the moment I read your post but now that I have seen it I cant help but fully agree with this analysis of the Tower!!
 

DDLand

Well-Known Member
Who can definitively say Walt wouldn't have built his park solely around IP that rich and deep?

Disneyland was not made in a day. Walt Disney and the team that he surrounded himself with were doing something different. They were building something that would eventually become Disneyland, but on July 17th (or 18th ;) ) the first modern theme park didn't know whether it was more living history park, amusement park, gardens, or museum.

Disneyland was the ultimate gamble. It was also a bold invention. Nonhuman storytelling had been limited to books, film, animation, puppetry, and painting/sketching.

By the mid 1960s Imagineering had found out what Disneyland was. It was a place where incredible stories were brought to life.

No area in Disneyland better represents Walt Disney and WED's design sensibilities like New Orleans Square. This land and its signature attractions were Walt Disney's final physical masterpieces. They were incredibly immersive. They told bold stories. They transported guests to far off places.

Sightlines were masterfully executed. They pushed technological boundaries. Attention to detail was unsurpassed. They also were original narratives.

New Orleans Square and arguably the two most important theme park attractions ever built were derived from a design process Walt Disney put into motion.

New Orleans Square is Walt Disney's take on theme parks.

Walt Disney was a futurist, but he was also a storyteller. His companies, up until recently, believed in putting narrative first. Creating new content was at the very center of being a storytelling organization.

Epcot, Disney MGM Studios, Westcot, PortDisney, Disney's America, Disney's Wild Animal Kingdom, Tokyo Disney Sea, and Disney's California Adventure all represented originality. The Bob I./John L. mindset of more characters all the time is a new phenomenon and a rejection of ideals that have been held sacred for 50 years.

Can I point out something ironic about Bob's new park? Its most popular attractions are a simulator that celebrates great landmarks of humanity and geography, and a next generation iteration of an original attraction that was created 49 years prior.

IPs. We didn't need them, and we don't need them now.

Originality will be back. It's only a matter of patience. Until then, we'll be bored out of our minds with a continual stream of IP attractions.

Though honestly I rather like the exterior of Mission Breakout. Rohde has done good work.
 
D

Deleted member 107043

Am I the only one that finds GotG movie overrated? Could be another reason I'm not so excited about the attraction.

I found it fun and entertaining, but not so great that it deserved the box office it recieved. If I could pick one Marvel franchise for Disney to build an E ticket around it would be Spiderman. Of course that's not possible.

Like everyone else I'm still patiently waiting for a Black Hole ride.
 

GiveMeTheMusic

Well-Known Member
I found it fun and entertaining, but not so great that it deserved the box office it recieved. If I could pick one Marvel franchise for Disney to build an E ticket around it would be Spiderman. Of course that's not possible.

Like everyone else I'm still patiently waiting for a Black Hole ride.

Well they can do a Spider-Man attraction at DLR, they're just choosing not to (for now). And inevitably whatever they build will be compared to the ride at IOA, so I think they will avoid the property for new attractions for the foreseeable future.

I loved GOTG and anticipation for the sequel is sky-high. The sequel is going to make crazy money really fast, which is good for Disney, as within six weeks or so of its release they're also shoving out Cars 3 and Pirates 5.
 

Kram Sacul

Well-Known Member
In the Parks
Yes
are people still crying about this? because so far the outside looks way better than I expected, can't wait until the ride is completed. i don't even watch marvel movies. sucks that people have their underwear stuck up their butt with this.

Yeah, I totally don't get the outcry over it either. Butchering an already popular attraction and slapping a fast and cheap overlay on it. Why the hate? Give it a chance!
 

Travel Junkie

Well-Known Member
You can see a great Spiderman attraction at IOA. In fact it's the best ride in Florida imo. I think it would be smart for Disney to stay away from Spiderman and focus on the other Marvel properties. They have plenty to choose from. I'm curious about the Avengers E-ticket supposedly coming to Hong Kong. I really hope they nail that one and whatever else comes to DCA and Shanghai.
 

nevol

Well-Known Member
If you have numbered and lettered points and sub points, I'm skipping the post. Even if it is the "clearest mist objective" response. We're discussing an amusement park ride. I don't quite care that much. Who needs a long lecture on a discussion board for an entertainment conglomerate?

Odd that you would care enough to be a member of this forum, but not enough to want to learn anything or think critically about the subject. What is your threshold for being interested? Do you similarly watch post-game interviews with coaches and athletes and then change the channel as soon as an answer becomes too rich with detail? Why block yourself out of a discussion or learning opportunity? When you're at a party, and the conversation starts to go over your head, do you walk away, listen, take interest/ask questions, or do you attempt to insult everybody for talking about something you can't keep up with, thereby offending nobody but making yourself out to be a complete jack?

However, point taken. I'll remember moving forward, as a designer, not to engage the audience; that you just eat stuff up and can't decipher what meticulous strategies are deployed in the creation of experiences that give you pleasure. Designers and critics will stop sharing and preserving our body of knowledge with you, if you agree to stop sharing your opinions with us; when you understand that ultimately there are standards that must be maintained and details at depths you don't care to explore; when you let us do our work and protect the body of knowledge associated with the craft. What happens when you and others like you on a macro scale demonstrate to park operators that you will be just as happy if they invest minimal money and effort into the standards and quality of the attractions they pay the imagineers to build, is they start to listen. What you and they will involuntarily find out together, is that you don't like things as much when they let standards slip in every which direction.

It's like there is a restaurant you really love, but you don't know why. So you say you don't mind if they swap out the chef, start cooking with low-quality sourced and nitrate-soaked cuts of meat, pesticide soaked vegetables, swap out the music, change the wallpaper, transition from a service restaurant to a buffet. You walk in one evening and think "I don't know what's changed, but I don't really like this place anymore." Let the chefs cook.

I could write you a comprehensive list with every design technique involved in themed entertainment and how GOTG:MB! fails or succeeds on every individual technique. It would surely save you a ton of time in the long run because you wouldn't need to keep coming back here day in and day out to argue with other low-information, high-passion strangers, a process you seem to be gaining nothing from. But you aren't interested in that, and frankly neither am I, so after a week with WDWMagic, I'll go back to letting you all be.

"Interestingly, for all its success, the Disney theme show is quite a fragile thing. It just takes one contradiction, one out of place stimulus to negate a particular moment's experience." John Hench
 
Last edited:

nevol

Well-Known Member
Or do you mean a franchise as in movies? To which I will say there have been, including a very large movie franchise created out of a little attraction called Pirates of the Caribbean. Book franchises have been created out of the parks, such as Kingdom Keepers. Disney Music, put out albums on music from the parks.

So I'm not sure what else you would like them to do?

Pirates turned 50 last week. I doubt we'll see a motion picture inspired by Grizzly River Run any time soon. If they cant create original content that catches people's attention and seeps its way into the zeitgeist, becoming multi-generational popular culture, then you won't see a movie based on it. Basically, no attraction built after 1980 has made that cut, except tower of terror, whose original story separate from the Twilight Zone IP tie-in, was strong enough to be made into a Disney Channel original movie.
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom