Placement of Wizarding World Of Harry Potter?

[Chris]

I agree.  As long as you try to be Disney, you are going to fail.  Its best to stay unique.  "But Orlando is making money...let's be like them!" is the attitude we are seeing.

 

[Chris]

I believe our Potter will be much smaller than Orlando.  Yes there are 6 acres of land devoted to the WWoHP in Orlando.  Remember, this is land that already existed and encompassed 2 rides which were rethemed!  We will not get those 2 rides here in USH.  There is talk to get the Hippogriff rollercoaster, but that still remains to be seen.  I think we will only get The Forbidden Journey and streetmosphere.  We will get an Olivander's Wand Shop and hopefully a Three Broomsticks Restaurant or Sweet Shop.  We must think smaller here in Hollywood and we already know this area will be downsized compared to Orlando.   

 

[Jonathan]

My personal issue with this is that i don't care about families with small children. Those families can go to Disneyland. Universal has a vibe for an older crowd that is being changed, that's what i don't like. Older kids can appreciate universal more, and older kids won't be as interested in a despicable me simulator. I think universal is trying to get families with younger kids to go there instead of Disney, and it's stupid of them to try to edge that market, they just won't win.

The only problem with that philiosphy is that you will end up alienating most of your audience.  Families is where the money is at.  Universal is a business, in which they need to make money to spend money (at the same time spending money to make money).  Families really stopped coming to Universal in the mid 90's cause after the 80's which was USH hayday they stopped with the family entertainment.  In the 80's and early 90's they foucused on shows and rides the everybody would like(ie. A-team, Miami Vice, Star Trek, ET, Show Biz Quiz, World of Cinemagic, Conan, Screen Test Show, Aiprot 77', Emergency and Castle Dracula. To name a few).

Universal is not trying to win the war, but trying to tap into a market that makes them competitive and not think of them after the fact.

When I was going to USH in the 80's and early 90's, that place was spectacular, with something for everyone.

 

[Miss Betty Juice]

I didn't say families. I said families with small children. Families with kids all under the age of about seven just have no reason to be at universal. If they have at least one older child or all older children, then there's much more to be done and older kids can better enjoy what's happening, and appreciate the movie magic. Universal needs to focus a little higher on that target audience age, not lower. Older kids have better attention and better memory and are more likely to build those ties to the park that will keep them coming back. A small child is just going to remember loud noises and whatever toy they got that day.

 

[Jonathan]

I didn't say families. I said families with small children. Families with kids all under the age of about seven just have no reason to be at universal. If they have at least one older child or all older children, then there's much more to be done and older kids can better enjoy what's happening, and appreciate the movie magic. Universal needs to focus a little higher on that target audience age, not lower. Older kids have better attention and better memory and are more likely to build those ties to the park that will keep them coming back. A small child is just going to remember loud noises and whatever toy they got that day.

I would hate to tell someone if you have kids under the age of seven, your kids have no reason to be at Universal.  I remember the incredible expeirences of going to Universal back when I was four to six years old.  Parents want something for all ages.  Universal realizes that.  Despciable Me: MM is something for everyone, the queue and ride is a lot of fun( and yes I have been on it).  USH can't be short sighted.  They finally realize they have to cater to a larger audience or else it will just flounder. 

USH can have stuff for the older crowd (in your terms 7 or older) but they need to properly balance that.

 

[Miss Betty Juice]

Having something for all ages is one thing, but the trend seems to be leaning towards younger focus, that's my fear. I worry that they will push to cater to a younger crowd at the expense of the bigger audience. I don't mean to be argumentative, I'm just quite passionate about this, so i hope I'm not coming off as rude! I'm glad to have someone to discuss this with.

 

[Jonathan]

Having something for all ages is one thing, but the trend seems to be leaning towards younger focus, that's my fear. I worry that they will push to cater to a younger crowd at the expense of the bigger audience. I don't mean to be argumentative, I'm just quite passionate about this, so i hope I'm not coming off as rude! I'm glad to have someone to discuss this with.

I don't take this to be arguementative or rudel!!! I love this type of stuff.  I agree they need to balance it.  I hope that after Despicable Me, they add something for the older crowd.  It's a fine line they have to walk. You don't want to be Legoland but you don't want to be Six Flags Magic Mountain. 

Thanks for putting up  with me!

 

[Jon Fu]

I disagree with you about Transforms. It may use some of the same basic ride system, but Transformers was a big enough deal that Tony Baxter (one of Disneylands head imagineers) made a special visit to USH to ride the ride during the soft openings. I realize that theme parks always send their people to check out their competition, but normally not someone of his stature.  Why go check out a rehash of something from 1999 with just a different name. Transformers is probably the best and most impressive rides on the west coast. Including a very well designed queue(on par with something Disney would do).

Don't get me wrong, the ride experience is great. There's no denying that, but it didn't bring a new guest experience to the theme park industry. Sure, it's a great ride, but where did all the innovation lie from 1999 till now? Like Chris mentioned, most of the innovation was done behind-the-scenes - probably to limit costs.


While the theme park industry may appreciate the use and development of the technology behind-the-scenes, the average guest probably won't notice the difference between this and Spiderman.


...and I disagree with your assessment about the queue. True, it's probably the best queue Universal Studios Hollywood has ever seen, but I don't think it's the best of what Universal (let alone Disney) is capable of. To be frank, the queue doesn't make sense from many perspectives.


Again, that's not to say it's bad by any means. It's just that the current queue isn't the best representation of what Universal is capable of.

Since the mid 90's to the early 2000's USH did little to nothing to the park.  But to say that Kong, Transformers, plus the coming WWOHP is not a change in direction????

King Kong and Transformers were big leaps - there's no denying that. But both (with a much larger emphasis on Transformers) were the product of severe budget restraints that could have perhaps hurt the guest experience. Transformer's facade is perhaps the greatest testament to that belief that compromises had to be made.


I'm not saying every attraction needs to have an unlimited budget, but I am stressing the point that it's obvious where the funds ran out. You're also missing the fact that Terminator was introduced in 1999 - another big attraction with severe compromises.

Even if Despicable Me is a BTTF redo...To be honest...who cares!!!!  They are spending money.  Most theme parks will do this type of turn-a-round. I don't blame them for taking an attraction that was seriously showing its age and adding something that they have never had before, which is a ride for the entire family. Something that kids, teens, and adults can all relate to.

There's a difference between spending money for the sake of getting a higher turnstile count for a few months, and spending money for the long term future of a park. Simpsons may have increased the guest count for a year, but it's readily apparent that it didn't do much in the long term.


Transformers and King Kong appear to break that trend, but again, it's something to keep in mind.

I hope this doesn't come across as me being angry or overly defensive, thats not my intention.   

Slowly but surely they are re-doing the park.  Over the next decade the whole upper lot is going to look quite different.  I have complete faith in Mark Woodbury and Thierry Coupe. 

No, it's fine. Healthy debate is good. Shows that we're both passionate about the park.


But the point I'm trying to stress is this: wait until Harry Potter comes along. Wait until Despicable Me opens. By then, you'll see some traces of Comcast. I really think it's too early to make declarative statements proclaiming Comcast as the save-all for the park when none of their influence has been shown.


Sure, we're in construction phase, but I want to see an actual product. It's easy to make announcements, and announcements change, but it's difficult to produce. Let's wait till we can see the product of NBCUniversal/Comcast before we jump to any conclusions.

 

[Jonathan]

I hear ya! I guess what I was trying to say and maybe not all that well, is that it's encouraging to see them finally invest.

 

[Jon Fu]

Definitely! And that's a great sign! But we need to simmer down a bit before we see the end product.


I have faith that Comcast is taking the park seriously, but I've been wrong about this before.

 

[Jon Fu]

I didn't say families. I said families with small children. Families with kids all under the age of about seven just have no reason to be at universal. If they have at least one older child or all older children, then there's much more to be done and older kids can better enjoy what's happening, and appreciate the movie magic. Universal needs to focus a little higher on that target audience age, not lower. Older kids have better attention and better memory and are more likely to build those ties to the park that will keep them coming back. A small child is just going to remember loud noises and whatever toy they got that day.

I agree. Regardless of what we did as children (and I admit, I was terrified of everything at the age of 5), Universal is not known as a kid-friendly park. As we've seen with Six Flags, it's almost impossible to turn that perception around with teh general public.


Universal tried with the introduction of Shrek, but the park still maintains an adult feel.


I guess what Adriana is trying to say is that Universal shouldn't devote any money into a segment of the population that's now considered a "lost cause" - demographic wise. I agree, but I'm hoping Despicable Me transcends that.

 

[UniversalFan]

Interesting. On Monday I'll be at the park, I'll post my trip report, will try to get as much T2 as possible, and a few surprises may be thrown in.....  (Evil Laugh)

 

[Jon Fu]

Despicable Me is very popular with all age groups in Florida from what I hear, which certainly tanscends the old Hannah Barbera and Jimmy Neutron versions. Also for those worried about the queue: USF has a much smaller footprint than the T2 one. The only thing that may hamper things is the want to cheap out for the area usually used for HHN. However the ride will be open during the event, so I'm sure that will factor into things.

Definitely. Out of all of Universal's recent releases, I think Despicable Me really hit the mark. I'm glad that it's become its own attraction, but I'm disappointed that Universal continues to subtract instead of add.

About Transformers, the VTU system is certainly a remarkable innovation, albeit one that could easily go unnoticed unless you thought about it. Still I don't think that this should disprove that Universal doesn't care about the Hollywood park. They had Oceaneering invent this brand new technology just for us, and this is a huge leap for space issues in amusement parks. I think no matter what, that should not go unnoticed.

There's no denying that there's massive innovation behind the scenes. I guess I'm just disappointed in the front-facing portion of the ride. Again, the technology is impressive and the ride experience is top-notch, but the ride - in its essence - is a rebrand of Spiderman.

True, there's nothing inherently wrong with that, but Universal is certainly capable of much more.

I think we'll need to see what happens with Harry Potter. I think that will be the true testament of Comcast's investment in this park.

 

[Allen The Actor]

Transformers was a super smart move, one that I'm still so excited about! I never experienced Spiderman, so this was an amazing addition. Kinda similar with Test Track and Radiator Springs Racers, although that's slightly different.

Despicable Me seems fun, but to me, it sincerely feels like a step BACK from T23D. That, and it's a basic simulator in my eyes.

What Universal should've focused on was finding a market segment that Disney has been losing. The "fun for the whole family" market. Look at something like ET? The whole family can enjoy it. Some of their other choices have been more "kid" centric.

 

[Miss Betty Juice]

I will argue till my dying day that removing ET for Mummy was the biggest mistake Universal has made in the past 20 years, possibly longer. That ride still has an enormous popularity in Florida, and ET is a classic, strong Universal film. Mummy should have gone somewhere else, anywhere else. That ride was simply too good to go.

 

[Allen The Actor]

^ I completely agree. As much as I loved BTTF, ET's removal was the biggest mistake. Still very popular classic movie, fabulous dark ride for the WHOLE family, etc. With updated effects and animatronics, it would've been a show stopper. I know that with theme park goers, suspended ride systems like Peter Pan and ET are super popular. You got to FLY over so much! It was a huge mistake, and i have an unbelievably sickening feeling that we'll never see a dark ride on that scale ever again (that doesn't rely on projections).

Although, you say The Mummy could've gone somewhere else. Where do you think it could've gone instead? I remember when I was little a lot ofboys complained USH didn't have a roller coaster before Mummy opened, so maybe that was a strong target audience....

 

[Jeremy12Lopez]

I have luckily had the absolute pleasure of seeing waterworld in person and would hate to see it go, but if they do decide to go that route following the end of their contract I would want to see another live action stunt show to follow in its legacy. I think a Harry potter live action show would make an excelent accent to the wizzarding world and as waterworld does now, help with crowd control. Though I don't see this happening as land is more valuable, universal Hollywood from what I see will mimic the exact layout as Universal Orlando, with the exception of the hippogriff which was a existing rollercoaster that was rethemed. The only thing I would not like about Hollywood's version would be that it would be compressed into a tighter place so all the facades may not be practical and I don't see it matching the scale. I hope I'm wrong and I will certainly be there to experience USH version first hand.

 

[Jon Fu]

If a Harry Potter show did pan out, I wonder what type of show would it be. I hate saying this, but most theme park shows are terrible - unless Potter can do something clever with its plot in less than 20 minutes.

I think the era of big shows is over at Universal for the time being. We saw the loss of Terminator, and it wouldn't surprise me if WaterWorld marks the end of big-budget shows altogether.

 

[Jeremy12Lopez]

I will agree that era has come and gone but I think that is what set universal aside from other parks is its ability to sell you on the show not just the attraction as well as incorperate the two together.Here in Fl were limited to the 7 voyages of Sinbad as well as some seasonal shows but the culture completely died following the close of Nickelodeon studios. Even if USH were to invest (I know that's a hard word for them to swallow) in a live potter show I feel it would absolutely benifit the park traffic and the returns would be profitable. In this situation even making the show an extra expense like blue man group in USF would help... It would sell without a doubt.

 

[Allen The Actor]

The only Harry Potter show that could've been practical was the rumored show that was supposed to open with the original Wizarding World. Would've been a Wizard Duel and use similar tech from the old Ghostbusters show and use Pepper's ghost for the wand effects. I kinda don't see what else they could do with a Potter Show.

The only big budget show i can see USH doing is a theme park version of Wicked to tie into the future Wicked movie release.