What's new
Inside Universal Forums

Welcome to the Inside Universal Forums! Register a free account today to become a member. Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members and unlock our forums features!

  • Signing up for a Premium Membership is a donation to help Inside Universal maintain costs and offers an ad-free experience on the forum. Learn more about it here.

The Future of Fast and Furious: Supercharged

Ken96

Newcomer
Jul 24, 2021
33
62
I see a F&F coaster(in Florida) being a very small, but thrilling, indoor coaster with a large Top hat or spike out of the building. While I WISH it would happen quickly, my money is on 2028, giving Supercharged a 10 year run and a new ride after Zelda in 2026-2027.
 

SeventyOne

V.I.P.
Jul 1, 2010
3,581
7,304
Orlando
OK then….counter….does F&F make a great IP for theme parks even though it has grossed a bazillion dollars?
In Orlando, where many of your guests are international? Yes. Fast cars and sexy people dancing don't require a strong command of the English language or an American sense of humor to understand. And everybody across the globe has seen these movies.
 

grlhowl

Rookie
Aug 1, 2021
109
186
PA
OK then….counter….does F&F make a great IP for theme parks even though it has grossed a bazillion dollars?
I think absolutely... just not with its current representation. It's a franchise packed with fast vehicles, action, explosions, and a tendency to be over the top. Even if the movies have dropped in quality, it deserves better than a slow moving ride.
 

Milla4Prez66

Contributing Member
Jul 3, 2013
927
311
I just hope they don’t straight up clone the Hollywood coaster being built.

But I love the idea of just gutting Supercharged for a F&F coaster while keeping the queue in tact for the coaster. Maybe the addition of a new coaster at the park can allow Universal to close HRRR and use that land for something else. Probably more minions based on the location.
 

Casper Gutman

Contributing Member
Apr 30, 2017
530
1,474
The last thing Uni needs at the moment is another coaster, especially not a partially-themed one. I really hope they get creative with the IP if they decide to replace Supercharged.
 

Milla4Prez66

Contributing Member
Jul 3, 2013
927
311
There’s not that much creativity you can take with F&F at this point. People just want something fast. USF has too many simulators and screenz, so gutting the park’s worst simulator for even a moderately thrilling coaster would be a big win for this park.

A potential Simpsons/MiB replacement (Pokemon?) is where I think the more creativity and bigger budget can show out. This park does need another land that can rival Diagon Alley, but that isn’t happening in the Supercharged plot.
 

DodgsonHere

Contributing Member
Dec 3, 2020
832
2,475
I just hope they don’t straight up clone the Hollywood coaster being built.
I don't think they can literally clone it. I'm definitely not familiar with USH or the construction going on there at all but from little I have heard it sounds like the coaster layout there will be very terrain dependent. Probably not something you can just pick up and drop in any empty space.
 

DodgsonHere

Contributing Member
Dec 3, 2020
832
2,475
Maybe move on from F&F. They can always do something with that franchise in a different park, in a space better suited for it.
As much as I also like this idea, I think it’s too big of a franchise to be leaving the parks anytime soon. Thematically it also fits best in USF, I really wouldn’t want to see anything F&F in Islands or Epic.
 

TheUniC6

Contributing Member
Oct 10, 2021
905
510
RVA
I just hope they don’t straight up clone the Hollywood coaster being built.

But I love the idea of just gutting Supercharged for a F&F coaster while keeping the queue in tact for the coaster. Maybe the addition of a new coaster at the park can allow Universal to close HRRR and use that land for something else. Probably more minions based on the location.
I personally think that considering the plot behind HRRR is about 10-11 acres in land, I would hope and think they would use a totally different IP for that plot of land.
There’s not that much creativity you can take with F&F at this point. People just want something fast. USF has too many simulators and screenz, so gutting the park’s worst simulator for even a moderately thrilling coaster would be a big win for this park.

A potential Simpsons/MiB replacement (Pokemon?) is where I think the more creativity and bigger budget can show out. This park does need another land that can rival Diagon Alley, but that isn’t happening in the Supercharged plot.
If I had to guess if Pokemon were to come to the US parks it would take over Simpsons only. I would think that Universal would not want to heavily theme the stretch of land MIB and the now vacant FFL stage occupy as that plot of land behind Simpsons is ripe space for a massive expansion to USF and Universal would not want to limit their options on what IP could go there when it comes time. Plus another benefit to Pokemon replacing Simpsons is they could do what Disney does to maximize the return on investment for the R&D costs and clone any hypothetical Pokemon attraction to USH as well.
 

GA-MBIT

V.I.P.
Jun 16, 2017
1,064
3,458
Haines City, FL
A coaster doesn't excite me given the approximately 27 coasters we'll have gotten in the Orlando Universal parks since 2019 (give or take), especially directly next to Mummy and Diagon it's a bad fit imo. But also, if they are deadset on using FnF in that plot I don't know of a ride system that would work any better outside of a Test Track-type ride.
 

MakoMania

Contributing Member
May 8, 2017
541
608
The problem is all of those are at IOA or EU, USF needs something thrilling, fast, and non-screen based to round out it's lineup - a coaster is one way to achieve this. I for one think VelociCoaster would have been better placed in USF with a different theme.
 

Mad Dog

Premium Member
Jan 30, 2013
21,553
36,492
Pittsburgh area
Universal has set up IOA as their thrill park. Since 80% of all tickets sold (announced by Universal Execs.) are parkhoppers, most guests can seamlessly move through both parks. So there's really no essential need to have more coasters at USF. For all intents and purposes, with both parks being side by side, USO is essentially one giant park.
 
Last edited:

TheUniC6

Contributing Member
Oct 10, 2021
905
510
RVA
Universal has set up IOA as their thrill park. Since 80% of all tickets sold (announced by Universal Execs.) are parkhoppers, most guests can seamlessly move through both parks. So there's really no essential need to have more coasters at USF. For all intents and purposes, with both marks being side by side, USO is essentially one giant park.
I still think if they worked hard enough Universal could cook up a F&F ride that uses the same ride system as Gringrotts but with a different enough flavor that enough people won't mind. Though I also think they could do another variant of the SCOOP as well. If they are still dead set on a successor to Supercharged being a large scale dark ride, this would be the best option considering the action of the F&F series.
 

MakoMania

Contributing Member
May 8, 2017
541
608
Universal has set up IOA as their thrill park. Since 80% of all tickets sold (announced by Universal Execs.) are parkhoppers, most guests can seamlessly move through both parks. So there's really no essential need to have more coasters at USF. For all intents and purposes, with both marks being side by side, USO is essentially one giant park.
I certainly see the logic, but one in five guests is still a number worth considering. I do think there is appetite for another physically thrilling attraction at USF, there's a reason that Revenge of the Mummy gets higher ridership than Transformers or Simpsons, for example. Fast & Furious lends itself easily to something like this, and I think trying to force something other than a coaster or physically thrilling attraction on the franchise as they did with supercharged would be repeating the same mistake.
 
Top