Originally Posted By SuperDry <<< “Besides, Potter is going to get bigger, and Universal is going to build on this success.” >>> Well, Potter as a franchise I think is near its peak. There are no more books, and the final movie will come out in July 2011. Not that this will necessarily be bad for IOA, but I think it does put them in a different position than if they had done it, say 5 years ago.
Originally Posted By HokieSkipper By Potter will get bigger I meant the land itself, not necessarily the franchise. Although I do believe Rowling will write more books, as she has alluded to recently.
Originally Posted By vbdad55 She alluded too and then pulled that back almost immediately. I am not ready to put Potter in the Star Wars world yet for long term sustainability after the next two movies are done. For the period of time Potter has been out- yes it's easily on equal par-- but longevity is a funny thing and people are fickle. 5 years from now will young kids be reading Potter ? Remains to be seen. I hope so as it's done a lot just to get kids to read..but sh will have to keep the franchise 'alive'. One can damage a franchise by letting it be stagnant..or by doing things that are not original quality - ask Mr Lucas as well. Same holds true for Lotr-- my favorite book of all time and love the movies- awaiting the Hobbit. It was the #1 book of the century but before the movies how many kids had a clue about it ? When the Hobbit is done - how long before the buzz dies ?
Originally Posted By vbdad55 btw- Uni should expand Potter now ( is there contiguous room to do so? ) -while the iron is hot and ensure people who came mainly to see Potter come back soon..for new items. They can always re theme rides etc ( like they did for 2 of the current Potter rides)- in th future if they had to.
Originally Posted By Witches of Morva ORWEN: I don't know of any scene in the Snow White ride that is inappropriate or deviates from the story. Certainly not at the end. The scene at the end has Snow White and her prince riding off toward a castle just like in the movie. What's wrong with that?
Originally Posted By avimagine I wonder will these books be about Potter's kids, or maybe a side story about other characters (ie: Enders Shadow)? Besides even if Harry Potter name itself is dilluted later on, the general idea of "Wizards and Magical Places" is fairly generic and popular. How many kids these days know the full story behind Casey's Train for example?
Originally Posted By vbdad55 but no one comes for Casey's Train itself-- they're packing them in for Harry - and Hermoine and Ron etc.--- Wizards have been around for a long time ( like me) remember a wizard named Merlin ? But staying on top and popular much harder for any franchise. If she writes about 'similar' charcaters- and keeps in touch with Hogwarts - Harry and gang even remotely it'll likely be fine. However how many people read the Tales of Beedle & Bard ? Even my Potter crazy kids did not... just because it says J K Rowling on the cover doesn't mean it will continue to phenomenon which is Potter
Originally Posted By magic0214 To add one more conversation to the pot... <<<There's two things missing, outside of Fantasyland that I am still hoping for.>>> One has most likely mentioned this before, but what are the 2 that are waiting a reveal...
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>5 years from now will young kids be reading Potter ?<< I think so. It's one of those series that will be around pretty much forever, with generation after generation of kids reading it. It isn't some flash in the pan, it's a solid classic. It's been around nearly 20 years already. And the new land at Universal lends itself well to various holiday makeovers -- Halloween and Christmas for sure, as well as any number of invented "holidays" within the wizarding world. Very marketable and very easy to keep fresh and vibrant, so long as Universal sees fit to do what it takes.
Originally Posted By EPCOT Explorer >>>btw- Uni should expand Potter now ( is there contiguous room to do so? ) -while the iron is hot and ensure people who came mainly to see Potter come back soon..for new items. They can always re theme rides etc ( like they did for 2 of the current Potter rides)- in th future if they had to.<<< Yep, and they have plans, and they have to. It's happening. And yes, kids will still be reading Potter in 5 years. It's a classic, and it's earned it's place in literature.
Originally Posted By DlandDug It seems to me that "fanbois" come in all persuasions. It is also the case that an awful lot of anecdotal material is being thrown around as fact. Here's a bit of anecdotal material to chew over... Wizarding World of Harry Potter has, indeed, pulled a LOT of people over to Islands of Adventure. And that's all well and good. But, it hasn't really seemed to pull people into IOA-- just into WWoHP. We were there Sunday, December 26. As the day progressed, WWoHP filled up, and filled up. By 10:30(am) we were done. Saw everything, did everything, didn't need the crowds. So, we strolled through the rest of IOA. And I do mean, strolled, as the crowds just... weren't... there. And for the rest of the vacation (spent mostly over at that Resort with four theme parks, but also at other area attractions), when we spoke to anyone (and I do mean anyone) about the most amazing new thing in O-town, it was always the same (and I do mean always): "We went to see Harry Potter." Or, "The kids loved Potter." Or, "Potterland is great!" Not one person (and I was listening for this specifically) said "Islands of Adventure." I cannot even recall anyone saying the words "Universal" or "Universal Studios." Uni does not seem to be building up their brand (to use corporate-speak), and their parks are more tired and more stale than anything a few miles south on the I-4, with the vivid exception of the boy wizard's exceedingly tiny home. I do believe that WWoHP is amazing. It's so well done and deserves to be the major hit that it is. I also believe that the Harry Potter books will remain popular for the next fifty years and beyond. They are, I believe, this generation's Wizard of Oz. But to assume that Universal has somehow vaulted over Disney with a single attraction (a great, great attraction, don't get me wrong) and a redesign of less than half of an existing area (an incredibly detailed and richly themed redesign, yes) is more fanboi blather than just about anything else I have read here. Just my opinion, of course. And based purely on anecdotal observations. So... call it what you will. (And I am sure you will!)
Originally Posted By leobloom >> ORWEN: I don't know of any scene in the Snow White ride that is inappropriate or deviates from the story. Certainly not at the end. The scene at the end has Snow White and her prince riding off toward a castle just like in the movie. What's wrong with that? << It shouldn't be the job of the ride to tell the whole movie. No need to have the happy ending tacked on. The prince isn't even in the ride until the very last scene. Absolutely unnecessary to hit us over the head with the happy ending IMO. But all that could be forgiven if the rest of the ride had anything impressive to offer. Alas, it doesn't.
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt "But to assume that Universal has somehow vaulted over Disney with a single attraction (a great, great attraction, don't get me wrong) and a redesign of less than half of an existing area (an incredibly detailed and richly themed redesign, yes) is more fanboi blather than just about anything else I have read here." Well said Doug.
Originally Posted By HokieSkipper <<We were there Sunday, December 26. As the day progressed, WWoHP filled up, and filled up. By 10:30(am) we were done. Saw everything, did everything, didn't need the crowds. So, we strolled through the rest of IOA. And I do mean, strolled, as the crowds just... weren't... there.>> Funny. I was there January 8th and the crowds WERE there. Interesting.* *This is not a sarcastic comment. It's seriously interesting. <<"We went to see Harry Potter." Or, "The kids loved Potter." Or, "Potterland is great!" Not one person (and I was listening for this specifically) said "Islands of Adventure." I cannot even recall anyone saying the words "Universal" or "Universal Studios.">> So? I'm sure when Tower of Terror was new people did the same thing. <<Uni does not seem to be building up their brand (to use corporate-speak), and their parks are more tired and more stale than anything a few miles south on the I-4, with the vivid exception of the boy wizard's exceedingly tiny home.>> Wow...really? If there's one thing I would never call the Universal parks is stale. They change rides around all the time. The only opening day rides left at Uni in their original for are Jaws and E.T. IoA was stale, I'll give you that. But with all the refurbishments that have gone on the past year it looks brand new. And the addition it did get is better than anything Disney has done in 15 years. (Also, it still has this little ride called Spider-man which is also better than anything Disney has done in 15 years, but who's counting.) And another outside influence is how many times UOR changed hands so many times. I mean it flopped from company to company for a while there. And according to most sources, now that they see that spending the money works, they plan on continuing. And how are they not growing the brand, persay? <<But to assume that Universal has somehow vaulted over Disney with a single attraction (a great, great attraction, don't get me wrong) and a redesign of less than half of an existing area (an incredibly detailed and richly themed redesign, yes) is more fanboi blather than just about anything else I have read here.>> Where the hell did anyone say that? All I said were that Universals parks at least match Disney's in quality(which, I don't know any sane person who thinks otherwise) and in some cases surpass them. Overall great post. It's nice to talk civilly with people about this.
Originally Posted By sjhym333 ^^^I agree. My son and I were there last Thursday for a short afternoon visit. Both IOA and Universal Studios were packed. We assumed that IOA was busy because of Potter and decided to head over to the Studios only to find it even more busy then IOA. I have said it for years...the Universal parks are as good as the Disney parks. They do some things better than Disney, some things as good as and some things not as well as Disney, but I have always found the experiences comparitable.
Originally Posted By HokieSkipper <<I have said it for years...the Universal parks are as good as the Disney parks. They do some things better than Disney, some things as good as and some things not as well as Disney, but I have always found the experiences comparitable.>> I completely agree. Both have their highs and their lows. For instance, Disney, overall, kicks Universal's butts when it comes to characters and live entertainment.
Originally Posted By vbdad55 I think so. It's one of those series that will be around pretty much forever, with generation after generation of kids reading it. It isn't some flash in the pan, it's a solid classic. It's been around nearly 20 years already ----- I do hope you're right - what concerns me is that reading in general just doesn't happen much for pleaseure for kids- Potter broke that mold. The fact on how long it's been around though was fueled by the story line thru 7 books and the movies.. the books are over and the movies are almost there. 5 years from the end of the movies will be a better judge of if this holds up or not. I'm hoping it does...but remain unconvinced in this attention span of a gnat world today
Originally Posted By DlandDug >><<...I cannot even recall anyone saying the words "Universal" or "Universal Studios.">> So? I'm sure when Tower of Terror was new people did the same thing.<< Really? People usually say, "I'm going to Disney" when they are headed to Disney-MGM (Disney's Hollywood Studios, now) or the Magic Kingdom or Disney's Animal Kingdom or even Epcot. That's the elusive branding thing that (anecdotally) I don't think WWoHP is doing for Uni. People are going to see that fabulous new Harry Potter theme park. (And do you have any idea how many people go to Disney and ask to see the new Potter Park???) (P.S. It was really, really cold on 12/26.)
Originally Posted By leobloom >> Really? People usually say, "I'm going to Disney" when they are headed to Disney-MGM (Disney's Hollywood Studios, now) or the Magic Kingdom or Disney's Animal Kingdom or even Epcot. That's the elusive branding thing that (anecdotally) I don't think WWoHP is doing for Uni. People are going to see that fabulous new Harry Potter theme park. (And do you have any idea how many people go to Disney and ask to see the new Potter Park???) << But you also get the guests who mean MK when they say "Disney" and don't think the other parks are. Or you get guests who think every damn thing in Orlando is Disney (Sea World, Universal included). Face it, many (most?) Orlando tourists are stupid when it comes to this stuff. Harry Potter has probably done more to make Universal a distinctive entity in the tourists' minds than anything Universal has done before. (And I'm still looking forward to seeing Potter, hopefully, in Feb!)
