lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
They obviously notice something because they pass by a lot of cheaper, more convenient places on the way. Appreciation of themed entertainment has nothing to do with being “old school original” visitors.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Is anyone actually excited about Guardians of the Galaxy Cosmic Rewind or is it just me?
- Thread starter RebelScum514
- Start date
eliza61nyc
Well-Known Member
That's sort of the point, they are falling in love with Epcot with all the Ip, with all the festivals and the lost of boring attractions so I guess I'm not seeing the problem with sticking guardians in place of Ellen
Parker in NYC
Well-Known Member
eliza61nyc
Well-Known Member
Oh I totally.claim it,. I love the world, I go as much as possible and have yet to be disappointed. I'm totally excited for GOTG.
TrainsOfDisney
Well-Known Member
It’s the right attraction, built the wrong way, with the wrong IP.
If WDW had to get a guardians themed something it should have been a mix-tape re-theme to rock n rollercoaster. Hey move your mix tape live into the space next door, (where Cars is now) and have a rockin-guardians area.
I think this type of coaster with unique technology could have been a really cool addition to Epcot as a stand-alone new attraction on energy, much like test track should have been built as an addition to world of motion not a replacement.
The inside of universe of energy should have been repurposed to be walk through space with exhibits on energy including a walk through of the Dino-dinorama. And then within that pavilion, you have the option of boarding the coaster.
But here we are. Epcot does need this type of attraction, I agree. The tech looks exciting. Maybe they will be able to retheme it in a few years when guardians is old fashioned and Chris Pratt looks as dated as Ellen when energy gave its last ride.
If WDW had to get a guardians themed something it should have been a mix-tape re-theme to rock n rollercoaster. Hey move your mix tape live into the space next door, (where Cars is now) and have a rockin-guardians area.
I think this type of coaster with unique technology could have been a really cool addition to Epcot as a stand-alone new attraction on energy, much like test track should have been built as an addition to world of motion not a replacement.
The inside of universe of energy should have been repurposed to be walk through space with exhibits on energy including a walk through of the Dino-dinorama. And then within that pavilion, you have the option of boarding the coaster.
But here we are. Epcot does need this type of attraction, I agree. The tech looks exciting. Maybe they will be able to retheme it in a few years when guardians is old fashioned and Chris Pratt looks as dated as Ellen when energy gave its last ride.
WDWFREAK53
Well-Known Member
Visited plenty of times.
Granted I was a child.
My favorite attractions were Imag and Horizons.
That being said, compared to the MK, it was a “boring park.” Not because those attractions didn’t stick with me but because I compared it to the MK. I’m also probably in the minority but preferred the original IllumiNations over RoE.
Was the original park better then compared to what we have in today’s day and age? Yes. Would the opening day park survive today? That’s up for debate but I can’t foresee those attractions drawing in the crowds even if they were just updated with new tech.
My optimism isn’t because I think the changes will bring it back to its former glory, but it’s because we are getting new attractions that will be fresh, some nostalgia that will look pretty, and a new direction. It’s in no way “perfect” but it’ll be leaps and bounds better than what we have now.
TrainsOfDisney
Well-Known Member
What do you think makes those attractions different from spaceship earth? (That’s not me being smart, that’s a genuine question).
WDWFREAK53
Well-Known Member
Do you think Spaceship Earth is bringing in the crowds? Spaceship Earth isn’t a great attraction anymore. The ending is a complete mess, the narration is awful, and it feels very dated.
Spaceship Earth has the show building working for it. I’m not saying these attractions weren’t amazing (because they really were back in the day!) but society and times have changed (ironic that I say that statement while talking about SSE).
Now, the Project Gemini “Timeracers” rumor would’ve been awful. Not everything needs to be thrilling. Rather than riding through a history textbook, I wish they could come up with a way to put you in the middle of the scenes rather than just riding past them.
BrianLo
Well-Known Member
I think there is too much weight ascribing that people have a disdain for theme parks. When I think they are just seeking a quality product more and are apathetic on its categorization by comparison.
DCA 1.0 was very cohesive in its theme. But very poorly executed. Islands of Adventure is very nebulous on a theme, but generally reasonably executed. People aren't going to Island's of Adventure to appreciate its thematic bookish coherence.
I think most of us would love a well executed theme park, naturally. It's why I personally think Animal Kingdom is Florida's best offering.
I'm also sure there are probably too many people who actually prefer Islands over original Epcot. I don't think that means they hate theme parks though... But I can't fault some people for buying into the IP quilt over the memory of a good theme park, which is really what is happening here.
TrainsOfDisney
Well-Known Member
It seems to be. But I agree the show building and its placement help that.
I think it’s still a great attraction yes.
WDWFREAK53
Well-Known Member
Sorry, i didn’t mean being a “people-eater” but more of a draw to that park. Granted, not all attractions need to be a reason to go to a park but the original park was filled with rides of that nature with just different themes.
To me, Spaceship Earth, being the icon, should be an attraction that people go to the park for. Keeping the same layout and revamping the scenes, adding some screens (to accentuate the scenes, not replace the physical sets), and pair it with Augmented Reality and you could really pull the riders into the scenes.
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
How can someone like something they consider unimportant? Having a preference for something over another is not the same as saying none of it matters and should not be bothered with.
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
Epcot was less popular than EPCOT Center despite huge surges in visitation to Walt Disney World. Why not place Guardians in Frontierland?
BrianLo
Well-Known Member
The later is exactly what I am saying. I have a preference that attractions fit the theme. But just because it doesn't, doesn't mean Epcot won't be better off than it currently is.
Epcot82Guy
Well-Known Member
I think that's the distinction. For the prices being charged, I personally won't give Disney that pass. There is no reason for it just to be better off. It should be good and well done. And it totally could have been. They are choosing to pick one part of the audience vs the other. And that is alienating more fans than it has to.
If they are going to claim premium quality, I plan to hold them to it.
If they are going to claim premium quality, I plan to hold them to it.
Oh we are getting new things. An unprecedented amount of money is being spent on the park. It’ll have more recent attractions than the park of last year or today.
But it should not be the MK2.0. We have an MK already.
More guests who visit have lower attention spans and less brain cells than they used to. Beer and IP is the current band aid quick fix without actually fixing the problem.
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
Those who claim not to care about theme and design lose nothing if there is stronger theme and design, but for some there seems to be this perverse joy that those who do care are losing something.
WDWFREAK53
Well-Known Member
I agree that it should not be MK2.0.
As far as IP integration goes, I feel that they are doing a fairly decent job of using them.
Nemo in the Seas (although I'm not a fan of the implementation, the IP fits)
Caballeros in Mexico (Coco would/will be better and a perfect fit)
Frozen in Norway (A bit of a stretch, bad implementation although the attraction seems to be more popular than Maelstrom) but they have said since the beginning of Frozen that it was inspired by Norway.
Ratatouille in France...perfect.
Beauty & the Beast in France...no issues
Mary Poppins in the UK...perfect
Guardians of the Galaxy...ummm....we'll see I guess
Moana as an entrance to the Seas...works for me as far as what we know of it.
I'd say that all of those (with maybe the exception of Guardians, but time will tell) are better fits in their respective locations than Monsters Inc. Laugh Floor.
The original vision and execution of the park was pretty bold and risky. It paid off and worked beautifully. I don't feel that the problem is what they are doing to the park now...but what they let happen to the park in the past that required this. With the exception of a few (namely Seas, UoE, Norway), the pavilions are still the pavilions even if they have some sort of IP integrated into them. Rataouille will still be, first and foremost, the "France Pavilion" but now with a Ratatouille attraction.
To also use Hollywood Studios as the place where everything goes that doesn't fit into the theme of the other three parks isn't the right mentality either. Why does Guardians fit better in Hollywood Studios? Because it's a movie? That's a pretty lame tie-in to that park as well. Personally from a purely "wearing blinders" aspect of this sole IP/theme, Guardians fits better in Tomorrowland (way more than M.I.L.F.), and then "World Discovery." Using that same mentality, Galaxy's Edge doesn't really fit into the theme of Hollywood Studios either but again, that park needed a major boost, and they had an IP that could deliver.
We all know that EPCOT will not be the same as "Center" but why can't we love the memories of the original but still enjoy the new direction? The negativity over each and every little announcement baffles me. (I'm not meaning you with that statement Martin, just the forums as a whole). Rather than dwell on the negative, why can't people just go in with cautious optimism? If the attractions and new areas open up and they stink...be negative all you want. Haha.