Originally Posted By Manfried Finally Disney adds something new to the Magic Kingdom and all anyone can do is complain? One note to all the fanbois, lest you forget Disney is a family park, not a fanbois park.
Originally Posted By EPCOT Explorer ^ Complaining about the complainers. If you are sick of us, imagine how we feel about that?
Originally Posted By sjhym333 I disagree about Universal and the short shelf like of HP. I was at the supermarket last week and ran into a friend who is a creative director at Universal and he told me that they are a little shell shocked at how popular HP has been. They knew it was going to be a crowd pleaser but are surprised at how popular it has been. He also told me that the company is looking at plans on how to maintain the momentum that Universal has at the moment. He said that HP has energized the creative staff and the guys who control the money are vert open to ideas on new attractions at both parks. The last thing he said to me was...watch for the announcement of our summer concert series, it is amazing.
Originally Posted By HokieSkipper <<I disagree about Universal and the short shelf like of HP.>> As does any rational person. Unfortunately there are plenty of Disney fanbois out there who think that HP is nothing more than a passing fad that no one on Earth will remember in 10 years.
Originally Posted By Witches of Morva ORWEN: I have to disagree with the duckling who said Peter Pan's dark ride doesn't follow a chronological order that goes along with the movie. It starts out with Peter in the nursery meeting Wendy and her brothers before taking off to Neverland and then ending up on the pirate ship which returns to London. Some ducklings will say anything to make a point that isn't even valid and that's what one duckling did a few posts back. With the exception of Mr. Toad and Winnie the Pooh, it seems all the other dark rides have tried to remain chronological in telling their tales. (Roger Rabbit's dark ride might be another exception.) But for the most part the dark rides have remained faithful to the animated films they're all about and that's a good thing.
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt "I disagree about Universal and the short shelf like of HP." Every amusement park attraction has a shelf life. Harry Potter won't be as popular as it is today forever. "Unfortunately there are plenty of Disney fanbois out there who think that HP is nothing more than a passing fad that no one on Earth will remember in 10 years." Everything is a passing fad. Universal can't sustain its current success on a single expansion project.
Originally Posted By HokieSkipper <<Every amusement park attraction has a shelf life. Harry Potter won't be as popular as it is today forever.>> In layman's terms, "No ****." But the damage Potter has done is substantial. It's opened people's eyes that there are parks in Orlando that are not only on-par with Disney, but arguably better. And more and more people are seeing that everyday. Besides, Potter is going to get bigger, and Universal is going to build on this success. As Martin, a reliable source in the theme park world, said, "They now know that spending money and putting out a top flight product works. And they're going to continue to spend."
Originally Posted By HokieSkipper Also, Potter will be a classic franchise that will be timeless. Something that Disney's parks were built on.
Originally Posted By Christi22222 >>I've always found the Fantasyland dark rides work best when they attempt to recreate the atmosphere of the movie (Pan, Pooh, Mr. Toad) and not strictly retell the story (Pinnochio, Snow White, and Little Mermaid, I fear).<< Absolutely agree with this. In fact, I feel this way about back stories and queues as well. Give us a general idea of a story, and let our imaginations run with it. Don't bog us down with the specifics, which are irrelevant. It's the immersion in the experience that counts. Create a feel, plant the seed of an idea. Much more powerful.
Originally Posted By Christi22222 >>Also, Potter will be a classic franchise that will be timeless. Something that Disney's parks were built on.<< Absolutely! As long as they don't drop the ball, they have themselves a solid legacy here. Can they rest on their laurels? NO! But they are most decidedly in the game now. And from what sjhym333 is saying, Universal knows it and intend to stay in the game! Yay for all of us!
Originally Posted By Christi22222 Maybe I missed it, but did the surprising cool thing you insiders knew about get greenlit? Or was this all the known-for-sure type stuff?
Originally Posted By EPCOT Explorer >>>Maybe I missed it, but did the surprising cool thing you insiders knew about get greenlit? Or was this all the known-for-sure type stuff?<<< There's two things missing, outside of Fantasyland that I am still hoping for.
Originally Posted By Daannzzz I do not morn the loss of the Snow White ride as there will be a new (and hopefully better) one across the walkway. I do morn the loss of a dark ride (or any ride for that matter)for a meet and greet. While I understand there are many, many children who love meet and greets it is really sad the they can not okay a new building for that purpose and retheme the dark ride. Of course they say the Princess Fairytale hall is temporary, but for how long. 3 years? 5 years or 12 years at which point I don't really consider it temporary.
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt “But the damage Potter has done is substantial.” Frankly I think the damage was done long before Harry Potter arrived on the scene, mostly because of WDW management and Disney’s corporate emphasis on branding just about everything. In my opinion, the success of HP is just another straw on the camel’s back so to speak. “It's opened people's eyes that there are parks in Orlando that are not only on-par with Disney, but arguably better. And more and more people are seeing that everyday.” This kind of rivalry between Disney and local parks has been going on for decades… all the way back to Disneyland and Knott’s Berry Farm in the 60s. Outside the theme park community I would wager that most people don’t care all that much. Beyond discussion boards like this one, nobody is sitting around debating this stuff. “Besides, Potter is going to get bigger, and Universal is going to build on this success.” It stands to reason that Universal wants to build on the momentum created by this amazing new attraction, however without another franchise as huge as HP it’s hard to imagine that it will invest in a new addition that’s comparable to WWOHP. There will be new attractions for sure, but on the scale and expense of HP? I’m skeptical. “Also, Potter will be a classic franchise that will be timeless. Something that Disney's parks were built on.” Agreed.
Originally Posted By HokieSkipper <<Outside the theme park community I would wager that most people don’t care all that much. Beyond discussion boards like this one, nobody is sitting around debating this stuff.>> I don't understand why that matters. It's a fact that more people are visiting IoA now then ever before. Many of whom probably thought that Universal was basically a worse version of Disney. Now they're leaving with a different attitude and point of view on the place, and word of mouth is a powerful weapon. <<It stands to reason that Universal wants to build on the momentum created by this amazing new attraction, however without another franchise as huge as HP it’s hard to imagine that it will invest in a new addition that’s comparable to WWOHP. There will be new attractions for sure, but on the scale and expense of HP? I’m skeptical.>> The talk of LOTR keeps getting louder and louder from the Universal people...
Originally Posted By hopemax > The talk of LOTR keeps getting louder and louder from the Universal people... < Don't tease me! I know it showed up on the surveys, but is there actually some there, there? It seemed like so much of a pipe dream, because I would imagine there are multiple organizations that would have to reach an agreement for its usage.
Originally Posted By HokieSkipper I know there have been talks, and actual strides taken. Whether anything materializes out of it remains to be seen. But even then, expanding Wizarding World is their next project. So anything with LOTR will be a while coming.
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt "I don't understand why that matters." It matters because the context in which people discuss this stuff is important. Most people simply don't care. It would be newsworthy if Universal outperformed Disney for the next decade. In other words one hit attraction that the fan community is salivating over may or may not have a lasting impact on the average person's perception of Disney vs. Universal in the theme park market in Orlando. "It's a fact that more people are visiting IoA now then ever before." True, and a lot of that is because of the appeal Harry Potter brand, which is why I question whether the pencil people at Universal will be willing to pony up that kind of money for a lesser franchise. "Now they're leaving with a different attitude and point of view on the place, and word of mouth is a powerful weapon." Weapon? Is this a war?
Originally Posted By leobloom >> ORWEN: I have to disagree with the duckling who said Peter Pan's dark ride doesn't follow a chronological order that goes along with the movie. It starts out with Peter in the nursery meeting Wendy and her brothers before taking off to Neverland and then ending up on the pirate ship which returns to London. Some ducklings will say anything to make a point that isn't even valid and that's what one duckling did a few posts back. With the exception of Mr. Toad and Winnie the Pooh, it seems all the other dark rides have tried to remain chronological in telling their tales. (Roger Rabbit's dark ride might be another exception.) But for the most part the dark rides have remained faithful to the animated films they're all about and that's a good thing. << The Pan ride isn't heavy on story. If you hadn't seen the movie you'd have no clue what the hell was going on. Chronologically it roughly follows the film, but make no mistake: it's not a close retelling of the movie. The less retelling, the better. Which is why I always thought the scene tacked onto the end of Snow White in 1994 is so out of place.
