Guardians of the Galaxy Mission Breakout announced for Disney California Adventure

No Name

No Name

Well-Known Member
raven24 said:
Everyone in this thread has gone into detail as to why they're for or against this project.
Click to expand...

For or against the project in general, sure. "Everyone" is an exaggeration, but you are right that most have. But for or against the look of the exterior, not as many. I've read through this whole thing and I honestly don't know what certain people would rather.

For starters, what would you rather the exterior look like?
 
Californian Elitist

Californian Elitist

Well-Known Member
egg said:
For or against the project in general, sure. "Everyone" is an exaggeration, but you are right that most have. But for or against the look of the exterior, not as many. I've read through this whole thing and I honestly don't know what certain people would rather.

For starters, what would you rather the exterior look like?
Click to expand...

I thought you were talking about the project in general.

The facade is loud, and the colors make it look tacky. I would have gone for something for suttle without the extra "props" like the pipes. I would have chosen darker colors, like black, purple, and blue.
 
ReadySetDisney

ReadySetDisney

Member
From @DLThings on Twitter.
Seems to be a pitcure of the new Elevators. C8k7uAlUAAMdhhk.jpg
 
No Name

No Name

Well-Known Member
raven24 said:
I thought you were talking about the project in general.

The facade is loud, and the colors make it look tacky. I would have gone for something for suttle without the extra "props" like the pipes. I would have chosen darker colors, like black, purple, and blue.
Click to expand...

Ah, okay. I like it. I can envision that. Thank you.

Now I'll go. While I do find it more obtrusive than other ideas would've, I generally like the direction they went regarding the look. But I'll skip the positives and head to where I think it falls short.

My biggest issue is that the theming dies beyond the front of the building. The front is cluttered with pipes and other stuff, as though the collector is short on space, yet the sides have none.... what's with that? I get that the front is the most visible and photographed part, but that's no excuse to almost neglect the sides. The tower should look good from any angle.
I also don't understand the black stripe on the front. Maybe it'll make sense, maybe there's some effect we don't know about. But I'm willing to bet that's not the case.
And finally, I don't like that some of it, especially the pipes, looks brand spanking new, yet the bottom looks worn, faded, and blackened and dirty in some parts. Is the tower old or new? Or does the Collector have a very uneven and unorganized maintainance department like my local Six Flags's.

That's all I've got, at least at this stage. Anyone else who wants to go, please do.
 
Californian Elitist

Californian Elitist

Well-Known Member
egg said:
Ah, okay. I like it. I can envision that. Thank you.

Now I'll go. While I do find it more obtrusive than other ideas would've, I generally like the direction they went regarding the look. But I'll skip the positives and head to where I think it falls short.

My biggest issue is that the theming dies beyond the front of the building. The front is cluttered with pipes and other stuff, as though the collector is short on space, yet the sides have none.... what's with that? I get that the front is the most visible and photographed part, but that's no excuse to almost neglect the sides. The tower should look good from any angle.
I also don't understand the black stripe on the front. Maybe it'll make sense, maybe there's some effect we don't know about. But I'm willing to bet that's not the case.
And finally, I don't like that some of it, especially the pipes, looks brand spanking new, yet the bottom looks worn, faded, and blackened and dirty in some parts. Is the tower old or new? Or does the Collector have a very uneven and unorganized maintainance department like my local Six Flags's.

That's all I've got, at least at this stage. Anyone else who wants to go, please do.
Click to expand...

I agree, why does the bottom part look aged? And yeah, it should look nice from any angle. I really hate the backside, mainly because I hate the color palettes that were chosen.

I think the biggest issue, in terms of the facade/building, is the fact that Disney was too lazy to take down the original bones and come up with and construct something brand new. If I were an Imagineer, I would have been frustrated if I had been told to come up with a structure themed to GotG, but had to re-design the ToT building and not come up with my own design.
 
lazyboy97o

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
DDLand said:
What makes this different?

I know a lot of people don't adore Guardians of the Galaxy, myself included, but Joe Rohde and his team absolutely can knock this out of the park. They absolutely are putting the same level of care and thought into this project as any other project.
Click to expand...
Fast, Good, Cheap. That is what makes Guardians of the Galaxy — Mission: Breakout! different. It was specifically chosen to be fast and cheap. Yes, it can still be good but the odds are playing against it. It is an accidental bonus outside of its originating purpose.

It seems more than anything you are trying to find the meaning to protect your image of Rhode. If the intent is as you describe, that too is not really a positive. The meaning you describe is not just nonconformity, but a deconstruction. Themed entertainment is simply not compatible with deconstruction.
 
Suspirian

Suspirian

Well-Known Member
raven24 said:
I thought you were talking about the project in general.

The facade is loud, and the colors make it look tacky. I would have gone for something for suttle without the extra "props" like the pipes. I would have chosen darker colors, like black, purple, and blue.
Click to expand...

I think thats part of why I partially don't like the look of the building. I don't really mind post of the pipes, but the colors they chose make it so much worse. the stark orange and cobalt blue/ gold pipes are too much for me. The bottom of the building looks a lot better IMO because it's a bit more jewel toned. I probably would've actually liked it if they had darker tone. I think the colors from these buildings at Port Discovery in TDS would've been a bit more appealing.

upload_2017-4-4_19-38-35.png
 
Californian Elitist

Californian Elitist

Well-Known Member
Nothsa said:
I think thats part of why I partially don't like the look of the building. I don't really mind post of the pipes, but the colors they chose make it so much worse. the stark orange and cobalt blue/ gold pipes are too much for me. The bottom of the building looks a lot better IMO because it's a bit more jewel toned. I probably would've actually liked it if they had darker tone. I think the colors from these buildings at Port Discovery in TDS would've been a bit more appealing.

View attachment 198180
Click to expand...

Yep, exactly. The orange and the yellow, mixed with the brown and blue... I just can't with those colors combined like that.

When I think Guardians of the Galaxy, I think of space, and when I think of space, nebulas are always the first thing that come to mind, for whatever reason. Nebulas are usually dark in color, like blue and purple. I guess that's why I would have preferred dark colors.

IMG_3612.jpg


IMG_3613.jpg


IMG_3614.jpg
 
Ismael Flores

Ismael Flores

Well-Known Member
Rice people have issues with the color palette of blues orange reds and browns. Surprisingly it's a very common color palette they are used quite often because it create contrast and have been used for many many years . surprisingly that same color palette is using a small decorative elements at places like the Taj Mahal the only reason people don't notice it is because there is a bright white contrast of the white marble used behind it as the main color.
Once you are close to it you could see that the combination of blue orange brown red and blue marble is used to create patterns that flood your site to create intricate reflective and contrasting colors.
Similar color palettes that combine dark blues oranges yellows and reds are also used throughout the carribean, Latin America and parts of Europe.
I think people are just not used to the bold contrast look that it creates.

I do wonder why they chose to make the upper portion of the tower brighter than the bottom portion.
The only reasoning I think is because of the brighter colors would be to abrupt in such a small area at street level. Also by using more darker tones the changes that will be done to the surrounding area will blend in better with the darker color palettes.

Another reason can also be because yellows, reds and browns fade faster than other colors. The direct sun in the upper part of the tower will eventually age the top portion of the tower. If they had gone with more subdued colors within a few years the tower would have looked extremely faded. This had already happened with the original color scheme for TOT. The lightning blast as well as the areas that had direct sun already looked aged and faded.
Since the tower has much more ornamental pieces repainting would every few years would have costly.

I'm sure that in a few years those colors in the upper part of the tower will come closer to matching the bottom part. Add to that air pollution and dust and we all know how fast paint schemes can change.

All we have to do is look at space mountain and top town for example. Even buildings like Midway mania and the cove bar which use reds and shades of orange have faded drastically in just a few years and are in need of a complete repainting.
 
Last edited:
DDLand

DDLand

Well-Known Member
lazyboy97o said:
Fast, Good, Cheap. That is what makes Guardians of the Galaxy — Mission: Breakout! different. It was specifically chosen to be fast and cheap. Yes, it can still be good but the odds are playing against it. It is an accidental bonus outside of its originating purpose.

It seems more than anything you are trying to find the meaning to protect your image of Rhode. If the intent is as you describe, that too is not really a positive. The meaning you describe is not just nonconformity, but a deconstruction. Themed entertainment is simply not compatible with deconstruction.
Click to expand...
There's probably truth in what you're saying.

I am hoping this project is well done. It has to be. The next couple years are depressing. So far we know about no major project that omits a brand until at least 2023. A couple exceptions, like the new Soarin, are clones. The Rivers of America redo, and maybe a Living with the Land refurb, are hardly pushing creative boundaries.

Even projects I'm more excited about, like Star Wars or Avatar, carry maddening location issues.

Disney is on a march towards entropy; Tokyo Disney Sea, is degrading faster then I could have ever imagined. At Disney's Animal Kingdom, the cracks of disunity are forming. Disneyland is all but admitting defeat.

If these IP projects are just what they appear -boring and unharmonious - this will be a decade of unprecedented destruction. So I am trying to find some sign that something more is going on here. It could this project will fail to meet my lofty expectations due to the constraints you wrote out.

The state of things are worrying. Disney has shown a stubborn unwillingness at stopping with just adding IP. The company has to replace anything that does not fit the IP mandate. Whether they are replacing a simple boat ride or the E Ticket anchor in Tomorrowland, it makes no difference to them.

So I am holding onto hope. Maybe this is the wrong project to grasp onto.
 
Last edited:

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

Back
Top Bottom