Sure, but how much more did GOTG cost them vs keeping TOT around? And how many additional people ride the attraction now compared to before? TOT almost always sent the vehicles out full-loaded; there really wasn't any meaningful excess capacity. The new version has the same capacity as before; it did nothing to add capacity to the park. The same number of people can ride it daily as did a year ago. So what's the point, exactly? If it's all about selling merchandise, why not just swap out the merchandise in the stores? I always saw lots of people lingering to peruse the merchandise in the TOT gift shop. Last weekend, I saw very few people stopping in the store at the ride's exit, despite the devastating heat outside. Yes, the new ride is a lot of fun (even if I have no idea what was going on during it), but it just doesn't seem to add anything that the park didn't have before. So I have to wonder: what was the point of redoing it?
It's a matter of keeping the parks relevant to people. Rides are lost leaders. They get people to come to the park. The real money is in merchandise. No one will buy stuff from a sixty year old tv show that isn't even owned by Disney. How many Ellen and Bill Nye the Science guy dolls are they selling at the Universe of Energy?
But that's part of my point: TOT actually did a great job of selling merchandise, probably better than any other non-character attraction and better than most character-based attractions. People were always perusing the gift shop, checking out the neat Hollywood Tower Hotel merchandise and ride-branded stuff. From what I saw during my 2 rides last weekend, that just doesn't happen with GOTG; there were a couple people who seemed to be milling around and enjoying the air conditioning, but most people were headed straight to the exit As for the Universe of Energy, when was the last time (prior to its farewell) that they even offered any merchandise? Did they ever have anything during the 21-year run of Ellen's Energy Adventure? I was in the park about a month after that version opened, and I can't recall ever seeing anything. The original Future World merchandise was all pretty unique and sold quite well, but had largely been eliminated by the mid-90's. To this day, Figment continues to be a big seller, despite having a lackluster attraction. Compelling merchandise sells itself; 100 shops that all sell Mickey T-shirts just aren't compelling
I really liked the original 'Eureka!' Parade at DCA. Super fun, great theme song and no Disney cartoon characters. But what do I know? I liked '3 Bags Full,' 'Golden Dreams' and 'Seasons of the Vine.'
You should have seen the original UOE. It was basically propaganda for Exxon, with some dinosaurs thrown in to get you to listen to it. I actually actively disliked the original. That said, the moving theatre concept was great. The Ellen version toned down the Exxon stuff (though didn't jettison it entirely) and was a nice improvement at the time. But it's been past its sell-by date for a while now and needed refreshing. Considering all the advances that have been made with renewables in recent years... well, talk about a perfect opportunity to refresh an attraction and bring it back to the original EPCOT mission of edutainment. They would have needed a new sponsor - although Exxon itself is investing in renewables, so maybe not - but is Exxon going to sponsor GOTG? If not... then you're losing a sponsor anyway, so why not bring UOE into the 21st Century? Or get creative and approach a consortium of renewable providers to sponsor collectively? Of course, we all know why not. No IP. And ya' gotta love Disney PR. From their blog: "First, a “Guardians of the Galaxy”-inspired attraction will be added to Future World, adhering to the original vision of Epcot’s Future World as the place to experience the excitement and adventure offered by space travel." Um, excuse me? I visited EPCOT not long after it opened, and... is my memory faulty? Am I not remembering an original attraction (let alone "vision") dealing with space travel? There was a little in Horizons, but even that was considerably more expansive than space travel. I mean, really? They're saying space travel was the "original vision" of Future World? SMH.
ExxonMobil dropped their sponsorship in 2004, so they've been without a sponsor for well over a decade now, which is part of the reason that the maintenance was so lackluster in recent years (notably the retractable soundproof wall between Theater 1 and the dinos, Ellen AA, and curtains for the super-widescreen reveal in Theater 2 had all been missing for years). Anything that was done to the attraction in semi-recent history and the immediate future is all on Disney's dime, which partly explains the unfortunate focus on character-driven experiences Nope, there really wasn't anything significant about space travel in Future World until Mission:Space opened in 2004. An enormous space pavilion had been in the park's original plans, designed in cooperation with NASA and Ray Bradbury, but it was dropped in the late 70's. There were notions of space in Horizons, Universe of Energy, Spaceship Earth, and even Listen to the Land, but it's a real stretch to claim that space travel was any sort of unifying theme for Future World At least that press release claims the attraction will fit within some sort of general notion of Future World. The placard next to the GOTG concept art in Epcot's 35th anniversary gallery/Food & Wine festival space seems to sidestep the concept of an overarching theme completely, while celebrating the dumbing down of the park. The Universe of Energy needed an overhaul, but there are just so many things wrong with this project
I didn't realize Exxon dropped out that long ago. Oh well. My friends and I called ATIS "Monsanto" for years after they dropped out.
I wasn't even aware they'd dropped out. But (in spite of my owning a few share of ExxonMobil) I say "Good Riddance": we could have had something much more futuristic without fossil fuel money involved. (As a museum geek, I can always tell when a science museum has been given a lot of fossil fuel money, and a theme park attraction doesn't have to pass nearly as strict muster with scientists as a science museum exhibit.) But as to Ellen, Bill Nye, and the whole Jeopardy schtick, they could have easily survived an update.
