belloq87
Platinum Member
Let the past die. Kill it if you have to.
But yet here's our upcoming land based on movies nearly 9o years old!
Let the past die. Kill it if you have to.
I meant old rides coming back. At least Monsters hasn’t had a ride. (And no, Graveyard Revue or the Hollywood haunted house don’t count.) But Yea Lol.But yet here's our upcoming land based on movies nearly 9o years old!
9o years old
I, Frankenstein - 2014But yet here's our upcoming land based on movies nearly 9o years old!
If Twilight gets to be on the list I’m adding Hotel Transylvania.I, Frankenstein - 2014
The Wolfman - 2010
The Invisible Man - 2020
The Mummy - 2017
Phantom of the Opera - 2004
Twilight: Breaking Dawn Part 2 - 2012
Can we PLEASE stop pretending these monsters have been some ignored concept? Something reintroduces them every couple of years.
Do it.If Twilight gets to be on the list I’m adding Hotel Transylvania.
I, Frankenstein - 2014
The Wolfman - 2010
The Invisible Man - 2020
The Mummy - 2017
Phantom of the Opera - 2004
Twilight: Breaking Dawn Part 2 - 2012
Can we PLEASE stop pretending these monsters have been some ignored concept? Something reintroduces them every couple of years.
That's because ALL of the characters are public domain.Only three of these are based on the Universal versions of the characters, however.
That's because ALL of the characters are public domain.
To most people, a different take on a character is just a different take on a character. How many Spider-Mans have we had in 20 years?
My point is that they're characters that are continuously reintroduced into the zeitgeist. The "take" isn't important. It's the character itself. It's like Sherlock Holmes, King Arthur, or Robin Hood. Universal could just as easily drop a land for any of them, because they're properties that keep showing back up.I guess I'm not following the point you're trying to make with respect to these characters being used in a land.
My point is that they're characters that are continuously reintroduced into the zeitgeist. The "take" isn't important. It's the character itself. It's like Sherlock Holmes, King Arthur, or Robin Hood. Universal could just as easily drop a land for any of them, because they're properties that keep showing back up.
Without looking it up, do you know which Universal classic horror movie features Dr. Mirakle? It came out between Frankenstein and The Mummy. He was played by Bela Lugosi.
If you don't know, he's from Murders at the Rue Morgue (based on the Poe story). It's a character that isn't widely known because he's not constantly churned back into the public consciousness.
The Monsters have been.
Where did I say they would?As somebody who owns multiple versions of MURDERS... on multiple formats, I certainly am not going to disagree that the Universal Monsters are more widely-known. They're iconic elements of pop culture in a way that movies like MURDERS... or THE BLACK CAT or THE INVISIBLE RAY will never be, despite being part of the same horror arm of the studio.
It is because they're iconic that I think it would be a mistake for Universal to move too far away from the original Jack Pierce makeup designs.
I would say the Monsters are more than their respective filmsBut yet here's our upcoming land based on movies nearly 9o years old!
You're wrapped up in the take on these characters.
I would say the Monsters are more than their respective films
I don't know. I wrote my dream Classical Monsters village as non descriptive European village as there are many styles and villages that have a castle and look cute, even I live in a village with a castle although it's not very impressive:That does look like inspiration! Here is a link to google images of various views of the city.
Sighișoara - Google Search
Praised and popular are two different things. Gone With the Wind is considered one of the greatest movies of all time. How many 20-50 year olds have actually seen it?
I, Frankenstein - 2014
The Wolfman - 2010
The Invisible Man - 2020
The Mummy - 2017
Phantom of the Opera - 2004
Twilight: Breaking Dawn Part 2 - 2012
Can we PLEASE stop pretending these monsters have been some ignored concept? Something reintroduces them every couple of years.
Universal was never going to make UCM land aimed at adults. Families are where the money is at. That's not to say there won't be an attraction in the land aimed at an older crowd set, but they would be passing up too much potential profit by alienating families. That's why some of us have floated the idea of properties like Scooby Doo and even The Addams Family around. If you don't give families enough reason to venture into that area of the park (which would be a real risk for families with small children) then Universal is failing on properly capitalizing on guest spending in the area as well as overall crowd control for the park.
If people are expecting "scary" from UCM, you're going to be disappointed. It will be "mature," but still family friendly. Think more Van Helsing than Blumhouse.
Let the past die. Kill it if you have to.
It is because they're iconic that I think it would be a mistake for Universal to move too far away from the original Jack Pierce makeup designs.
Exactly my pointIf they do want to bring those brands to the Universal someday, I hope they are not mixed in with UCMs land. The whole point of these lands is for full immersion. Scooby doo is animation and does not fit in with live-action movies. The immersion of the land would be ruined if I see scooby doo characters in front of Dracula's castle.
Van Helsing does not include scooby doo or the Addams family.
Yes, it would be a big mistake.
I, Frankenstein - 2014
The Wolfman - 2010
The Invisible Man - 2020
The Mummy - 2017
Phantom of the Opera - 2004
Twilight: Breaking Dawn Part 2 - 2012
Can we PLEASE stop pretending these monsters have been some ignored concept? Something reintroduces them every couple of years.
I think they go for classic. The costumes of the 30's, the whole design of the "monsters" isn't threatening for anyone in the family.Not an ignored concept at all, but some of your list have been less than successful endeavors. So the question will be what style, what rendition of these monsters will they use in this land? This is where the argument of “old” comes in.
Should they feature the 1931 Frankenstein or the 2014 Frankenstein or should UC create a whole new Frankenstein?