Discussion in 'Disney Rumors and News' started by Rumors Rocks, May 8, 2013.
Same here. No interest in it at all, no desire to read/watch them.
Log in or Sign up to hide this advert.
The first two people I've ever heard of who don't want to ride an utterly fantastic ride because of the theme! Do you suppose anyone out there has refused to do Tower of Terror because they hated The Twilight Zone TV show???
If I ever found myself at Universal for some reason, I would probably ride it. I have no interest in Song of the South and the related tales, but I like Splash Mountain. I have never seen Avatar and have no interest in seeing it, yet when it opens, I will go to the area when I'm at Animal Kingdom.
But it's not something that will draw me to Universal.
Like I said, I have no interest in reading or watching Harry Potter.
I'm wondering more about the people who've refused to ride Splash Mountain because of it's Song of the South (which today would be considered 'racially insensitive' at the least) theme.
But to be honest.... Saying someone refused to ride Tower of Terror because they "Hated" the Twilight Zone TV show isn't even really a fair comparison. Hating the Twilight Zone TV show at the very least shows someone who's aware of the source material and made a decision based upon their knowledge of the source material. What we are seeing here however are 2 people who don't want to ride a ride because of the theme, despite admitting to knowing nothing about the theme beyond the name on the marquee....and showing no interest to even put the slightest amount of effort into discovering the story behind the theme.
A better comparison might be someone who refuses to ride Radiator Springs Racers because they don't like the theme, yet all they know about the theme is that it's somehow related to automotive vehicles.
Or.... maybe if we REALLY want to get meta.... It's like all those people who complain about how Avatarland is going to completely suck because 'AVATAR' and they will never step foot into the section of the park, Despite admitting to knowing nothing about the theme source material other than "blue people" and knowing nothing about what the attractions and area is actually going to be like.
Who refused to ride the ride? I refused to go out and buy the books or rent the movies. If I am in IoA, I'll ride the ride, I guess.
Wrong. If I was at Universal, I would probably ride the ride. I have no interest in reading or watching Harry Potter though, and it's not something that would draw me to the park.
Like I said in my post above yours... I haven't watched Avatar and have no interest in watching it. When I'm in Animal Kingdom, I will visit the area, when it opens.
OP.. I appreciated the post and think it looks wonderful. Universal did an incredible job with the first HP land and this should bring some wonderful surprises. We love what both Universal and Disney have to offer and love even more that it offers us that much more to do and see when we are in Orlando.
... Edited to retract. No point in an argument.
Very long Post. Sorry
I'm looking forward to the HP expansion. I think Universal has done a very good job on this project. When reading this post, you should know that I really love Disney, and really enjoy Universal too. I can appreciate both. I also love Harry Potter, and am a fan of Avatar. Get the tomatos ready. This post may piss just about everyone off!
I think that Universal has gotten a lot smarter over the last 5 years. MHO: they use to identify themselves as the 'thrill seeker' niche, with some major kick *** coasters. And they had decent to very good theming. But, they have wised up, and its tell tale with the HP land. (lots of people would argue that the parks are very family friendly, and thats ok. I just dont think so.)
First, HP is INCREDIBLY marketable. Merchandising the brand is so simple, its more a case of selecting what they want, rather then coming up with ideas to 'market'. Hogsmeade is a testament to this. Universal made a highly successful land with just one new attraction, two 'overmakes' of attractions, and then lots of merchandise stores to sell various items for the brand, and a couple of eateries. So, like disney, (this new area) its mostly about 'extra cost' items, that bring more to the bottom line, and 1 marque attraction - that is VERY well done. Very Smart. Very 'generational family friendly' too.
Second- Universal did not make the the marque attraction a 'pee your pants thrill seeking teen' ride. Its more in line with a fantastic 'disney' thrill ride, i.e.- a good portion of the population can ride it and enjoy it, parents included. I always thought that Universal was doing it too much for thrill seekers, because although that can bring in a decent sized 'local' audience, it makes it a harder sell for 'families' vacationing for a period of time at these parks. This is just my personal experience: I consider myself someone who enjoys coasters, but some of them at Universal are now beyond my league. I did hulk once, and was finished for the day - I was so sick. But I would do RnR over and over again, and enjoy it so much. My point being, based on my own personal experience so take it for what its worth - that families might enjoy a single day at Universal, but it involves a lot of spliting up. Great for families with thrill seeking teens, but its less great, for families that have really young children, or a big spread between the ages. And it really does not lend itself to grandparents either. This harmed it as a 'resort' destination for a large population of families for extended periods of vacation days. But, I think Universal has wised up, and will make the Gringots ride to be at the same 'family friendly' thrill ride that the HP ride is, and the Mummy (another incredibly successful ride of Universal). The park may be trying to do more demographically 'inclusive' attractions.
The Que is the Que: Universal took a page from Disney when doing the Harry Potter Castle and Que. Its absolutely an amazing and immersive experience. (Its not however, interactive - and I think they missed the boat on this). For those of you who have read the books, or seen the movies, you realize that this Que is actually part of the attraction. Its a pleasure to be in line for the most part. (well, i never stood in it for an hour, or in the midtime day july heat, which would not be great, but you know what I mean). Its on par with Disney's best. Actually, I want to say its better, but only because I loved the books.
I think Disney is planning to take it a step higher though. I think that when the dreaded FP+ comes into play, the interactive elements they will employ in the ques will make them fun for ALL guests. And its so smart, because they can adapt their current Ques with interactive elements, elevating what they have already existing, and make them outstanding and entertaining for everyone. So, I think the future of both these theme parks are looking at making the que part of the 'ride'. Part of the reason for this- both Disney and Universal have a 'fininte' amount of space to grow, Universal certainly has much less. So, they need to work or rework with what they have.
Another issue with IoA is that some areas of the park are dedicated to 'wet' rides. I mean, get totally soaked. Thats fine 6 - 7 months of the year, but can be iffy for several months of the year. I dont know why I brought this up, other then its something that made me wonder 'what were they thinking?' And these rides dont really have the 'less wet' option like splash can employ during cold days (at least I dont think- please correct me if Im wrong)
Avatar vs Harry Potter:
I keep away from the avatar threads because, well, I really dont agree with what a lot of the naysayers say, and it always sorta aggrevates me when people forward opinions and 'facts' on either avatar or HP when they have 1)never visited Universal 2) read any of the books 3) seen the movies. Another aggrevating thing is when I read posts where people KNOW exactly how things will turn out, before the first shovel is place in the ground. Only hindsight is 100% in my opinion. I understand everyone has an opinion, and their feelings are their feelings right or wrong. BUT because so little is known about Pandora, ( I agree, this is a far better name then Avatarland), I really dont understand the vehnement disapproval that is very apparent.
There has only been one arguement against that I have read regarding Pandora that I think is completely valid. That is MARKETING. This is going to be a huge issue for Disney, I think.
Compare Pandora to the HP theme. In the first HP book alone, there was enough content to make every marketing exec and bean counter to dance a jig. Really not so with Pandora. Part of the problem will be that Pandora does not pander (haha) to toddlers, youths, and tweens. Its more specifically directed to young adults to perhaps mid aged people. Specifically, take clothing for example. HP is based on a british prep school, or what in Canada I would call a Private school. First, on the magical theme, there are Robes for the 'witches' and wizzards. Then, school clothing for Hogwarts, and specifically 'house' clothes for the 4 houses- there are scarves and ties, and hats and all sorts of things. Then there are dress robes, and accessories like witch hats and WANDS. Possibilites are endless, and appeal to the age group (small children, youth , teens and tweens) that are most likely to purchase, or get their parents to purchase.
Now, if you have never seen Avatar, you maybe dont know this. But the 'blue' people are mostly 90% naked. Yes, honestly they are. The first time I watched avatar I was thinking that Jake Scully had a really nice butt. Then I realized, I can see pretty much all of it. He wears a loin cloth when he is 'blue', with pretty much a g-string back side. If these beings were not 'blue' this maybe would almost be like some sort of soft porn. Nitiri has a top that I want to call nipple holders. So, other then t-shirts with favorite characters on them, I dont know what kind of brand or marketing Disney OR James Cameron plan to do regardng . And if they market those g-strings for men, well, Disney wont be such a family friendly place anymore!
I know what you are going to say! Thats why AVATAR is such a bad fit for Disney. Before you say it though, watch the movie. It wasent until one of the last scenes before I realized, hey, these guys are not wearing much. Its because of the way the movie is done. And I think that most people dont even realize the amount of 'skin' showing, because they are Alien people, and the color of them, you dont really think about it. So, before you forward an opinion on whether the nakedness is Disney appropriate, I submit to you to watch the movie first. And I am going to bet, If I didn't mention this, many people would watch this movie and not really NOTICE the nakedness.
(if you are wondering at what point I noticed it, that was at the end when Jake was standing on the fallen tree, with his 'headress' on, organizing the people of pandora going to war. I though wow, what a body, and then was totally shocked when I realized I could see almost all of it. In retrospect, perhaps this is why I liked the movie so much, being a middle aged gal! Not just the girls are scantily dressed!)
Clothing is just one element, but Avatar really is weak across the board on any type of marketable stuff. It compares as a 0 to the HP 10, in my opinion. Mr. Cameron may get some push from Disney to bring in marketable elements in his next couple of movies.
Pandora Potential: If you have not seen the movie you might not get this, But one of the things that I think Disney must take advantage of with Pandora is the potential of nighttime. AK hours are so short, and this is going to be a very real issue with FP+, along with the lack of E attractions.
So, some of the best elements of the land of Pandora are most effective at night, or in the dark. Consider the layout of AK, lands that are like spokes of a wheel. I can see later hours in Pandora (old camp mickey/minnie) Oasis, Discovery Island, and Dinoland without 'disturbing' the animals. (was this really the reason for the shorter hours, or was it due to lack of interest?)
Also, if you have not seen the movie, the nightime elements of Pandora are 'quiet', something that could play well at the AK.
Uhhhh... It's more dark ride than rollercoaster
I think dadddio is referring to the coaster that will be built inside Gringotts in the Diagon Alley expansion, not Forbidden Journey.
But it's not a coaster... People at UC have come out and said it will be a family ride. It has a track, but it's labeled more dark ride than coaster
Now I am very confused.
When I asked what was so special about a bank, I was nearly given a beat down because I didn't know that in the movie, there is a roller coaster in the bank.
So there is a roller coaster in the bank (for some unknown reason) in the movie, but there isn't going to be a roller coaster in the bank in the theme park?
Other than the roller coaster, which isn't going to be in there, what's so special about a bank in the books/movie?
In the movies it's not a rollercoaster per say... It's a transportation system from the bank to the vaults. It's got a drop. And the ride will have a drop but it's not as intense as a rollercoaster... Keep in mind it's rumored to be a 3d attraction, how intense and "coastery" can you make a ride where the 12 passenger in the carts all have 3d glasses on. The ride is going to be a family ride. It will have more thrilling elements and will have dark ride elements. A mix of both. This is what I have heard through various forums and the people with insider knowledge
I am not a big fan of HP but I have seen about half the moves with my son. If I ever get a chance to go to HP World at Universal I would defiantly ride all the attractions as they look like they are well done from the theming to the ride itself. Simply not to go on a ride just because you were not interested in the movie is a lame reason to me but to each his/her own and that is one less person in line in front of me.
I am also not a big fan of the princess stuff but I have seen all the Disney princes movies and still go on all the rides. The little Mermaid ride is a fantastically done ride but because I am not into princess it does not deter me from enjoying myself and having fun.
Daddio - definitely wasn't trying to give anyone a beat down or pass judgment so I really hope it didn't come off that way. Most people avoid hp because they feel its silly and unfortunately miss out on a fantastic story. However, that is your decision and just wanted you to know that I recommend them whole heartedly and think you would enjoy the theme park much more if you knew the story. It is immersive and a wonderful experience for a Harry Potter fan.
As for the upcoming ride: Gringotts bank is situated above an underground network of caves connected by a seemingly endless mine cart system (think seven dwarfs mine on steroids, with drops, twists, forks in the road, waterfalls, and high speed). If they do this ride right, it will be awesome (just like forbidden journey). If they do it like Despicable Me or Simpsons, well, I'll still ride it but know they missed out a great potential to do something awesome. They retrofitted two rides into flight of the hippogriff and dragon challenge and so glad they did. Gringotts bank deserves a roller coaster like dragon challenge, and as unlikely as I know that will be, I shall continue to dream lol.
I don't think anyone said this. In fact, I think all of us that said we aren't interested in the movie or books said we would go on the rides if we happened to go to Universal.
Your inferences were certainly there.
I've said multiple times that I'd go on the rides/attractions if I were in Universal. Just like I've said multiple times that I have never seen/read, nor have any interest in seeing/reading Harry Potter. I've also said that Harry Potter will not draw me in to Universal.
Separate names with a comma.