Come on, Disney! Step it up already.

[Cinderumbrella]

No way is my 4 year old going to get as excited for Transformers as she will for princesses.

Maybe not today, but in 6-8 years she sure might!

Thanks to the OP and supporting posters for the information about the coming attractions at US. We may seriously need to take a vacation there instead...

 

[OThopeful35]

DS has been begging to go to US/IOA.

 

[tofubeast]

The way I look at it it's a win win for all of us theme park goers,even Sea World is creating their biggest expansion ever with the new Antractica attraction.

I so agree. As a Florida resident, it is AWESOME that so many new experiences are being built for my family and I to enjoy. The only reason I have not been to US for HP is because I am waiting for my daughter to be a bit older (taller etc). I love a little competition.

 

[Jennasis]

***headdesk***

I'd been holding out hope that Disney would wisen up and court LoTR. But nooooo...we get Avatar. The unproven (in terms of following. Box office receipts mean squat. I paid to see it, and promptly forgot all about it. Won't waste my money on the sequels and I can't name a single character in the movie) brainchild of an egomaniac. but hey, Disney seems to dig working with egomaniacs since they teamed up with Lucas for so long.

Dang. Well, at the very least, if ME goes to Universal I might actually shell out some bucks to stay onsite there.

 

[maxiesmom]

Am I the only person on the Earth who couldn't care less about Lord of the Rings? Or Transformers? Or Avatar? Ick.

I know I still wouldn't fly across country to see anything Universal has. If I want cool rides, Cedar Point is a short car drive away. Disney is way more than just fun rides.

 

[minnie mum]

Hmm, the sets in New Zealand are now actually tourist attractions (even with a working hobbit bar). I really want to go see that, and am not sure any theme park could persuade me to accept a substitute.

I really, really wanted to visit Paris and the villages in Bavaria, and I really, really enjoyed myself when I actually got to do it. That doesn't mean I don't still enjoy visiting the France and Germany pavilions at Epcot. KWIM?

In NZ you get to see the shoot locations and the exteriors of Hobbiton. Who knows? Maybe IF LOTR comes to UA you'll get a chance to visit the depths of Moria or dine in Rivendell.

 

[TJDisneymama]

wow, ive not seen (or read) LOTR, but went with DS the other day to see the hobbit and all i kept thinking was what a fabulouse movie to incorporate into a theme park. that would be unbelievable!

 

[Melodious]

I really, really wanted to visit Paris and the villages in Bavaria, and I really, really enjoyed myself when I actually got to do it. That doesn't mean I don't still enjoy visiting the France and Germany pavilions at Epcot. KWIM?

In NZ you get to see the shoot locations and the exteriors of Hobbiton. Who knows? Maybe IF LOTR comes to UA you'll get a chance to visit the depths of Moria or dine in Rivendell.

I get what you're saying, the Norway pavilion really encouraged me to visit Norway when I was going to Germany and England. But for me, the question is if there is enough at Uni to get me to go there instead of somewhere else, such as WDW or NZ where there are many great things. When I went to Paris, it was a lot bigger than the France pavilion at Epcot, KWIM?

I liked the HP books but I'm not going over there for one ride and some shops. And if I've seen it at NZ, having LOTR stuff isn't going to then persuade me to make the trip either.

 

[mbrou24]

I get what you're saying, the Norway pavilion really encouraged me to visit Norway when I was going to Germany and England. But for me, the question is if there is enough at Uni to get me to go there instead of somewhere else, such as WDW or NZ where there are many great things. When I went to Paris, it was a lot bigger than the France pavilion at Epcot, KWIM?

I liked the HP books but I'm not going over there for one ride and some shops. And if I've seen it at NZ, having LOTR stuff isn't going to then persuade me to make the trip either.

Are we really comparing actual places to theme park representations? Cuz if I go see the set pieces in NZ it's going to be a rollercoaster or a dark ride? There's no comparison there IMO

 

[bcrook]

Am I the only person on the Earth who couldn't care less about Lord of the Rings? Or Transformers? Or Avatar? Ick.

I know I still wouldn't fly across country to see anything Universal has. If I want cool rides, Cedar Point is a short car drive away. Disney is way more than just fun rides.

Yes it is! But what surprised me most about my one day at Islands of Adventure was how cool the Port of Entry is at that Park. Some of the best theming I have ever seen. The restaurants were cool at all the islands, and The Wizarding World of HP tops the list for theme, rides, and experience. I didn't make it to Universal.

I don't think I can afford visiting both sites during my trips. Tough decisions coming up.

 

[cbs0006]

Am I the only person on the Earth who couldn't care less about Lord of the Rings? Or Transformers? Or Avatar? Ick.

I know I still wouldn't fly across country to see anything Universal has. If I want cool rides, Cedar Point is a short car drive away. Disney is way more than just fun rides.

You are not as I couldn't care less either.

And Cedar Point is the place for coasters also!!!

 

[angierae]

Am I the only person on the Earth who couldn't care less about Lord of the Rings? Or Transformers? Or Avatar? Ick.

I know I still wouldn't fly across country to see anything Universal has. If I want cool rides, Cedar Point is a short car drive away. Disney is way more than just fun rides.

This is kinda my feeling. If I wanted thrill rides, I'd drive two hours to Cedar Point and ride coasters that blow anything Disney has out of the water...twice.

Disney is...Disney. And I love it, even though I'm a thrill ride junkie. I'm not going to Disney for thrill rides.

 

[colfr]

I agree with what a lot of people have said. I'm a bit of an adrenaline-junkie and I go to universal just for the rides. I honestly don't pay attention to the theming or shops there except for in the Harry Potter section of IOA.

I go to Disney for the whole experience. I ride the rides, of course, but what I really love is meeting the characters that I've grown up watching in my favourite movies, and I REALLY love that overall, it doesn't change that much.
At the age of 18 I walked into the Magic Kingdom and it was the exact same place I'd been when I was 6. It felt the same, smelled the same, looked mostly the same. I'm glad they're not creating huge new sections of the park for the latest movies.

Also I am SO not into Lord of the Rings and I really don't understand how they're going to model part of a theme park after that... :/

 

[RMulieri]

I hope they get it.Universal has done a FANTASTIC job with Harry Potter and I think they could do an even better one with Middle Earth.Don't get me wrong...I love Disney( 28 trips in my lifetime), but I also love Universal and for years Disney trounced Universal for my vacation dollars..After having a fabulous time over at Universal last year, we are going again this year for a week..Now Disney needs to take Star Wars and DO SOMETHING WITH IT...

 

[WDSearcher]

People hold Universal to a different standard, and that's why Disney gets thumbs down in the "step it up" department.

I will agree that WWoHP is amazing. The theming, the ride, the butterbeer ... all of it. I love that part of the park. But it's the only part of the park I go to. I go in, go to WWoHP, spend a few hours, leave. And when you walk out of WWoHP into Seuss Landing, the first thing I think is, "Boy ... these buildings are faded!" The whole rest of the park looks like they've barely done any maintenance. But then ... no one expects them to. They have thrill rides! Harry Potter! Spiderman! No one gets upset if Seuss Landing looks faded or if they cut back entertainment to almost nothing or if the kids areas are still based on Feivel (who?) and Barney (eww). I'm not a "off the shelf thrill ride" person, so nothing else in either park really holds my interest. (Dr. Doom's Firefall? No thanks -- if I'm going to ride a drop ride, I'd MUCH rather have Tower of Terror. Men in Black? Nope. Give me Buzz or TSMM any day. Popeye vs. Splash? No contest.)

At Disney, people get mad when there's chipped paint, burned-out bulbs or dirty windows. They can't find the princess they want in the exact dress they want her to be in and letters and e-mails come pouring in. There are characters who have been on Disney Jr for a year and they're not in meet & greet form yet? How dare they!

No one remembers WWoHP's delays or the timeline or the problems it encountered during soft openings. No one talks about how outdated E.T., Twister or Beetlejuice are. No one talks about how lame the Disaster! attraction is or how you have to pay for FP or how annoying that walk from the parking garage to the parks is. How many people actually visit the rest of the park, other than to go from coaster to coaster? Who spends time exploring the theming of Superhero Island? When was the last time you were immersed in shops and entertainment in Amityville? When was the last time your kid begged you to let him wear his Woody Woodpecker costume to school?

Yes, they're both theme parks and, as such, are the "same" business. But the expectations of the guest are different. If they weren't, this thread wouldn't exist.

 

[mbrou24]

People hold Universal to a different standard, and that's why Disney gets thumbs down in the "step it up" department.

I will agree that WWoHP is amazing. The theming, the ride, the butterbeer ... all of it. I love that part of the park. But it's the only part of the park I go to. I go in, go to WWoHP, spend a few hours, leave. And when you walk out of WWoHP into Seuss Landing, the first thing I think is, "Boy ... these buildings are faded!" The whole rest of the park looks like they've barely done any maintenance. But then ... no one expects them to. They have thrill rides! Harry Potter! Spiderman! No one gets upset if Seuss Landing looks faded or if they cut back entertainment to almost nothing or if the kids areas are still based on Feivel (who?) and Barney (eww). I'm not a "off the shelf thrill ride" person, so nothing else in either park really holds my interest. (Dr. Doom's Firefall? No thanks -- if I'm going to ride a drop ride, I'd MUCH rather have Tower of Terror. Men in Black? Nope. Give me Buzz or TSMM any day. Popeye vs. Splash? No contest.)

At Disney, people get mad when there's chipped paint, burned-out bulbs or dirty windows. They can't find the princess they want in the exact dress they want her to be in and letters and e-mails come pouring in. There are characters who have been on Disney Jr for a year and they're not in meet & greet form yet? How dare they!

No one remembers WWoHP's delays or the timeline or the problems it encountered during soft openings. No one talks about how outdated E.T., Twister or Beetlejuice are. No one talks about how lame the Disaster! attraction is or how you have to pay for FP or how annoying that walk from the parking garage to the parks is. How many people actually visit the rest of the park, other than to go from coaster to coaster? Who spends time exploring the theming of Superhero Island? When was the last time you were immersed in shops and entertainment in Amityville? When was the last time your kid begged you to let him wear his Woody Woodpecker costume to school?

Yes, they're both theme parks and, as such, are the "same" business. But the expectations of the guest are different. If they weren't, this thread wouldn't exist.

Your post is very dated. Amity is being redone into a new Harry potter land, suesslanding got fresh paint and is vastly popular around the holidays with the grinchmas stuff, marvel island is awesome in terms of comic book theming. Splash is not a legit comparison to popeye... Kali river rapids would be. Rip saw falls would be the equivalent of splash. Splash is in a dire state at this point and in need of major refurbishment which it is currently getting btw. The Jurassic park area has a lot of non ride attractions for kids, then there is Harry potter and that is just one park. US has a lot to offer and is getting extremely more entertaining with the new stuff set to open. I personally like disaster. And men in black is just as good as buzz and not comparable to tsmm.

 

[debbie1996]

I'm finding this discussion interesting as I was scouting the pages for some last minute tips. My kids have been to Disneyland (@1 and 2 years old), Disney cruise (3,4) and Disney World (4,5) - we're making or first trip in several years and at 9 and 10 they have next to no interest in going to the Magic Kingdom. I'm insisting on one day, for me - they really don't care at all about but said they'd be happy to go as long as I didn't drag them to any character meals. The only park that really held appeal to them was HS and it was for Star Wars - I'll be curious how long one ride will hold their interest. It's ALL ABOUT HARRY POTTER. We're staying two days at Disney, mostly because I want to and figure maybe they'll enjoy it more than they think they will and three days at Universal - all on property.

It's amazing how quickly those tweens turn up their noses at Disney Magic - I was pretty shocked frankly - they're really not the most cynical, or pseudo sophisticated kids out there.

 

[andyman8]

People hold Universal to a different standard, and that's why Disney gets thumbs down in the "step it up" department.

I will agree that WWoHP is amazing. The theming, the ride, the butterbeer ... all of it. I love that part of the park. But it's the only part of the park I go to. I go in, go to WWoHP, spend a few hours, leave. And when you walk out of WWoHP into Seuss Landing, the first thing I think is, "Boy ... these buildings are faded!" The whole rest of the park looks like they've barely done any maintenance. But then ... no one expects them to. They have thrill rides! Harry Potter! Spiderman! No one gets upset if Seuss Landing looks faded or if they cut back entertainment to almost nothing or if the kids areas are still based on Feivel (who?) and Barney (eww). I'm not a "off the shelf thrill ride" person, so nothing else in either park really holds my interest. (Dr. Doom's Firefall? No thanks -- if I'm going to ride a drop ride, I'd MUCH rather have Tower of Terror. Men in Black? Nope. Give me Buzz or TSMM any day. Popeye vs. Splash? No contest.)

At Disney, people get mad when there's chipped paint, burned-out bulbs or dirty windows. They can't find the princess they want in the exact dress they want her to be in and letters and e-mails come pouring in. There are characters who have been on Disney Jr for a year and they're not in meet & greet form yet? How dare they!

No one remembers WWoHP's delays or the timeline or the problems it encountered during soft openings. No one talks about how outdated E.T., Twister or Beetlejuice are. No one talks about how lame the Disaster! attraction is or how you have to pay for FP or how annoying that walk from the parking garage to the parks is. How many people actually visit the rest of the park, other than to go from coaster to coaster? Who spends time exploring the theming of Superhero Island? When was the last time you were immersed in shops and entertainment in Amityville? When was the last time your kid begged you to let him wear his Woody Woodpecker costume to school?

Yes, they're both theme parks and, as such, are the "same" business. But the expectations of the guest are different. If they weren't, this thread wouldn't exist.

Well, I'm one of those who loves Disney and Universal and basically hold them to the same standard (like many do) as theme parks.

I would argue that IoA is a better, more solid theme park than DAK, DHS, or Epcot. It has over 20 "solid" attractions (many of which are major attractions). None of them, in my eyes, are outdated. I'd also argue that the park itself is awesome regarding theming. Look at Jurassic Park or The Lost Continent. That is some of the best theming I've seen at any theme park.

The Studios, next door, is a slightly different situation. Many of the attractions are older, though, only two (I believe) attractions are open that were in the park on opening day, yet the park has only been open half the time MK has. While I'll admit the Studios lacks "Disney" theming, the technology at the park is beyond anything available at WDW. In addition, UOR recognizes this and suddenly, we see construction left and right at USF. In 2012, we saw the Cinematic Spectacular, Superstar Parade (both decent offerings I should add but not as good as Disney), and Despicable Me. In the coming years, we'll see a WWoHP expansion and a Transformers attraction.

And regarding the soft opening difficulties with HP&tFJ, they did work them out, while Disney puts out "the revamped TT" using nowhere near as complicated technology and after the official opening, they're still having tremendous problems.

My real concern is that, in recent years, it has become evident that Disney does not have a monopoly in Orlando, yet their response to what many call the most groundbreaking attraction ever is a "return of the classic dark ride (News flash: theme parks are moving past the "basic dark ride"), some character greetings, and some bathrooms. While I feel the theming of WWoHP is great, I do find New Fantasyland's atmosphere extraordinary and immaculately detailed.

Overall, I love both WDW and UOR (and DLR for that matter) and I wouldn't give one up for the other, but I do hold them to the same standard: the both theme parks with their goal being providing the best experience possible. I am excited to see how the SDMT turns out. I love the idea of a "classic ride" combined with a mild coaster.

 

[Melodious]

Are we really comparing actual places to theme park representations? Cuz if I go see the set pieces in NZ it's going to be a rollercoaster or a dark ride? There's no comparison there IMO

I'm not quite sure what you're saying in that second sentence. I compared it to a real place because mostly theme parks allow us to visit places that do not exist in real life (Cinderella's Castle, Be Our Guest, etc). But in the instance of LOTR, it does already exist and you can visit it. So if I were obsessed with LOTR, I would go to NZ.

I'm just saying that (almost) all of us are limited in our vacation, by money, time off, traveling partners, etc. If I wanted to visit LOTR, I would choose NZ not Uni. And if I wanted to visit a theme park, I would visit WDW not Uni and the existence of LOTR at Uni wouldn't change that.

 

[starjazz]

Harry Potter, Transformers, Spiderman - these all have little interest to me, and I don't think they have the staying power. 50 years from now, anyone gonna still be watching these movies? Showing them time after time to their kids as they grow up? Doubt it.

I'm totally biased because I grew up going to Disney, and me and my kids love it, so US won't compete just because I have no interest in their themes.

If they get LOTR, that'll change, I'll be interested. But not enough to bail on the Disney movies/themes. Not even close.

Are the on-site resorts at US anything comparable to Disney's? Just curious.