Universal Releases Harry Potter Details

[movie77]

http://www.disunplugged.com/2009/09/15/universal-releases-wizarding-world-of-harry-potter-details/

I've only been too Universal once a couple years ago when I stayed at one of the Lowes onsite for a trade show. The hotel was quite nice. In fact I have to admit a bit nicer with better service than anything at WDW. The park I was not too impressed with at all. It seemed a bit of a hodgepodge with poor theming. What they have shown for Harry Potter looks pretty impressive and seems to really drop you in a different world. I think this is great. I'm still not that interested in going to Universal though probably on one trip in the few years we'll get over to see Harry Potter where we never would of gone before, but I think this could put a good pressure on Disney to up their game.

 

[Johnfish]

Based on the material presented it looks like more shops than attractions.

 

[Golf4food]

Based on the material presented it looks like more shops than attractions.

For now, but I believe their contract requires them to add new attractions in theming with the movies for a number of upcoming years so that there should be something new showing up in Potter world fairly regularly for some time to come.

.

 

[Condorman]

Any particular reason why this was posted on the "Disney Rumors and News" board?

It should be on the Universal board as it pertains to Universal not Disney.

 

[jlewisinsyr]

Any particular reason why this was posted on the "Disney Rumors and News" board?

It should be on the Universal board as it pertains to Universal not Disney.

Is it cluttering your beloved Disney loving threads? Seriously, this is also used for News and information, and there is most definately a correlation to Universal opening this new set of attractions and Disney as it could impact their operations.

OP:
As for rides, two of them are really existing rides (dueling dragons and the hippogriff ride).

 

[Condorman]

Why do I always have to educate the Universal pumpers out there?

This is the DISNEY Rumors and News board. Allow me to direct you to the Universal Studios/Islands of Adventure Forum, where this topic belongs:

http://disboards.com/forumdisplay.php?f=30

You're welcome.

 

[AlienBrain]

This seems very disappointing. So they are going to make 1 new attraction. Rename two existing attractions and add some shops. Huge disappointment in my opinion.

They could have done a "Forbidden Forrest" dark ride. But considering everything at Universal, it has to have a coaster or some sort of thrill tied into everything. I think Universal would have gained a ton of fans if they would have made a large amount of dark rides, simulators and other non-coaster attractions for the Harry Potter part. Just my 2 cents...

 

[skier_pete]

Condorman - the news is related to Disney, in that major changes at Universal can directly effect Disney.

But, I agree with you, and it was exactly as I predicted in other threads...1 new ride, 2 "re-themed" rides that will be exactly the same as they already were (though Dueling Dragons was a pretty awesome coaster), and a bunch of shopping and dining. Again, it will be very neat to visit for a few hours for all the HP fans out there (which includes DW and I). Hopefully this quashes the discussions about how "Universal will crush Disney with the new HP land."

I also hope anyone out there that was bashing Disney for the limitations of the Fantasyland refurb gets in line to bash Universal for this "missed oppurtunity"...since FL refurb comes to 1 new ride, 2 "re-themed" rides, and a bunch of shopping and dining. (I am joking sarcasticaly, so please don't flame me.)

Personally, I think BOTH are great. When my daughter is old enough to read the HP books and enjoy the other rides at Uni, I will certainly go over there. (I figure another 4 years.) Honestly, if they use a similar ride system to the Spiderman ride (car-on-track + 3D + effects), the single new ride *could* be the best theme park ride in all of Florida.

But, I still guarantee, the effect on Disney's bottom-line will be neglible as compared to other variable factors in their business model. (Namely, the economy.)

SkierPete

 

[DisneyInsider]

This is going to be a very interesting park.
Personally, I don't think it's going to make the difference Universal needs to compete with Disney.
It pretty low-style to take an existing coaster and just change the name to call it new....whatever...

 

[AlienBrain]

I think a really neat idea would be to make a ride where you are in the car that became possessed. Remember that book when Ron's father's car went crazy and it started flying and went into the forest and all. That would be an excellent ride.

Disney's imagineers would have thought of so many interesting tidbits if they had the rights to Harry Potter. J K Rowling made a huge mistake deciding to license their stuff to Universal. Could have made much more money with Disney support.

You honestly could have made an entire park based upon the Harry Potter books. There are so many facets it just amazing. To think what the Disney imagineers could have done with that great work. Oh well

 

[patsal]

Well I will be the first to admit that I am underwhelmed with this. What I thought would help me to justify a few days at Universal has now changed to a day trip. Back to the drawing board--I may add a 3 night cruise rather than add 4 nights at US/IOA! Who knows. I guess I will just leave it as a a wait and see then make last minute plans.

 

[ChrisFL]

I think a really neat idea would be to make a ride where you are in the car that became possessed. Remember that book when Ron's father's car went crazy and it started flying and went into the forest and all. That would be an excellent ride.

Disney's imagineers would have thought of so many interesting tidbits if they had the rights to Harry Potter. J K Rowling made a huge mistake deciding to license their stuff to Universal. Could have made much more money with Disney support.

You honestly could have made an entire park based upon the Harry Potter books. There are so many facets it just amazing. To think what the Disney imagineers could have done with that great work. Oh well

I disagree, I think Disney has dropped the ball on so many projects in the past decade or so, that JK Rowling really decided that Universal would suit her work better. If Disney was so much better and willing to offer enough of money to fund the project, I'm sure she would have chosen Disney, but it didn't happen.

 

[Condorman]

I disagree, I think Disney has dropped the ball on so many projects in the past decade or so, that JK Rowling really decided that Universal would suit her work better.

And how wrong she was. Have you seen the latest PR on HP? It was a pathetic last-ditch effort by Universal to steal attention away from D23 and it failed. HP is a dying brand. The last film didn't do nearly the box office WB had hoped for and USO's plans for HP Land are woefully underwhelming. You have to have *cough* to drop them, and Universal never did.

If Disney was so much better and willing to offer enough of money to fund the project, I'm sure she would have chosen Disney, but it didn't happen.

So you're admitting Disney would have done a better job? That it was just a matter of money? I always knew you believed Disney was the better of the two. Besides, this wasn't like Apple offering the iPhone to Verizon first. Disney was never interested in HP. They don't have extra cash lying around. It's not like they can just throw $4 billion at a comic book franchise... Oh, wait, that's right, they did! I guess Disney had the money all along and knew which would be the better product. Face it, Disney owns a significant portion of IoA now. I sincerely hope HP is a slam-bang success. It only means more ka-ching for Disney.

Enjoy the one e-ticket, the re-themed yawners, the psuedo-Main Street, and the overpriced souvenirs shops. Or do they spell that "shoppe"? Who cares...

Disney FTW!!!

 

[Dznefreek]

Disney was never interested in HP.

You don't know that to be fact . . . . . .

Face it, Disney owns a significant portion of IoA now.

No they don't. They may have Marvel but if memory serves me correctly they cannot really do anything significant with the characters east of the Mississippi

 

[ChrisFL]

And how wrong she was. Have you seen the latest PR on HP? It was a pathetic last-ditch effort by Universal to steal attention away from D23 and it failed. HP is a dying brand. The last film didn't do nearly the box office WB had hoped for and USO's plans for HP Land are woefully underwhelming. You have to have *cough* to drop them, and Universal never did.



So you're admitting Disney would have done a better job? That it was just a matter of money? I always knew you believed Disney was the better of the two. Besides, this wasn't like Apple offering the iPhone to Verizon first. Disney was never interested in HP. They don't have extra cash lying around. It's not like they can just throw $4 billion at a comic book franchise... Oh, wait, that's right, they did! I guess Disney had the money all along and knew which would be the better product. Face it, Disney owns a significant portion of IoA now. I sincerely hope HP is a slam-bang success. It only means more ka-ching for Disney.

Enjoy the one e-ticket, the re-themed yawners, the psuedo-Main Street, and the overpriced souvenirs shops. Or do they spell that "shoppe"? Who cares...

Disney FTW!!!

I've heard of blind fanboyism before, but this is ridiculous.

Universal had their date set for unveiling HP plans MONTHS before Disney set up the dates for D23.

Fantasyland refurb: one slow-moving e-ticket, moved and rethemed yawners, pseudo forests and souvenir shops...yeah, sooo much better

Disney owns a significant portion of IOA???

 

[DC7800]

Disney was never interested in HP

Actually, Disney lost Harry Potter to Universal because all they were offering (as I heard it) was a revamped simulator ride. Universal was willing to grant Rowling greater creative control over the project for a mini-land with multiple attractions and the accompanying shops, restaurants, and "theming". I'm not saying Disney should have gave such a high level of control over to Rowling, which might have cost WDW the agreement regardless, and I seriously doubt we know the whole story or even that everything reported is correct, but the point remains Disney was interested in Potter - and lost.

Disney owns a significant portion of IoA now

Completely false. Disney is attempting to buy Marvel Entertainment, which is a separate company from Universal, who merely licensed the rights to use some Marvel characters in their theme parks ("east of the Mississippi River"). Disney did not buy Universal or any portion of its Florida parks. Assuming no problems with the Disney/Marvel deal, then Disney ultimately will own the Marvel characters - not the IOA attractions or any part of the park - and Universal will retain the rights to use the Marvel characters within its Florida park. If that seems confusing, consider another example: Disney includes Lucasfilm creations in both California and Florida, but if Lucasfilm were sold off to Universal, that wouldn't mean Universal would then own part of Disneyland or Hollywood Studios.

 

[LostBoy89]

Next to Disney, there is a huge part in my heart for Harry Potter. Looking at the plans made me very excited! I cant wait till it opens!

 

[shirley 38]

I WISH DISNEY WOULD HAVE GOTTEN THE HARRY POTTER DEAL AND NOT UNIVERSAL.

They passed up on the movie because they wanted to make it animated so they lost out.
What a shame

 

[AlienBrain]

I WISH DISNEY WOULD HAVE GOTTEN THE HARRY POTTER DEAL AND NOT UNIVERSAL.

They passed up on the movie because they wanted to make it animated so they lost out.
What a shame

Wow, I never knew that. Animated would have been much much better. You would have never had all that talk that people have about the kids being adults and still being in school (hahaha).

It would have also been so much more magical. The first few Harry Potter movies, in my opinion, we so much more like the books and looked so much more magical. They enveloped you in the world of Hogwarts.

But the last few movies have been horrible. They don't have that magical feel as the first few. Regardless, the books are where it's at. But, IMO, Disney would have done a much better job at giving that magical feel that was present in the books and absent from most of the movies.

Oh well.

 

[rutgers1]

I think a lot of us - including myself at times - let our love of all things Disney cloud out judgment. I recently went to Universal for the first time. We spent the last 2 days of our Florida trip, with the previous 14 being spent on Disney property. Here are my thoughts about my trip, as well as my overall thoughts about this Potter issue:
1) I thought the Hard Rock Hotel was very, very nice, but it didn't feel all that magical. Maybe I just buy into the Disney magic too much, but to me the Hard Rock was no different than any nice hotel in any city in the world.
2) I was actually pleasantly surprised by the Universal parks. There wasn't enough rides to keep me there for more than a few days, but there was definitely a lot to see and do, and the rides and theming were much better than I expected.
3) If you wipe out the nostalgia that many of us feel for some of the poorly themed areas of Disney, I think there are areas of Universal that a completely neutral person (if you can find one) would like better. For example, I thought the comic book themed area was very unique.
4) As far as rides go, I obviously like the full breadth of rides that Disney has to offer more (because there are more, and because I am nostalgic), but I think the two best rides in Florida are Spider Man and the Simpsons. When I heard that Spiderman was around for years (I previously thought it was new), I almost fell over because I figured that Disney would have answered back with an equal or better ride. It seems odd that Disney's answer to SpiderMan and Simpsons is Star Tours. Unless you are a MEGA Star Wars fan, you have to admit that the Universal rides immerse you in the ride much more.
5) I liked the night life area...can't remember the name. I met some friends there for a night out, and it lived up to our expectations.
6) Now to Harry Potter....I have zero confidence that Disney would have done a better job with the move franchise, nor the incorporation of it into the parks. Look what Disney did to the Lion Witch and the Wardrobe. The CS Lewis movies were horrible. It is a beloved children's book with a huge following, and they have done practically nothing to make it part of the parks, and from what I understand, they have dropped the rights to make future movies. They really could have done something special with it, but they didn't.
7) With that said, I am not overwhelmed with what I have heard about Harry Potter Land. I do think it is more than Disney would have done with it, but my original vision was much better.

I think Disney fans have to understand that not everything Disney touches turns to gold. Disney has cheaped out many times in the past, and they have been taught a lesson or two here and there by the theme park up the road. In the end, I think the competition is good. But I don't think it serves any of us well to assume that Disney would have done a better job with anything. Look at Star Tours. I am not sure what the deal with Lucas is on that, but Star Wars is every bit as big - if not bigger - than Harry Potter, and it could easily carry its own section of Hollywood Studios. If Disney didn't pursue that, and if they made a lame attempt at integrating the Chronicles of Narnia, what makes anyone think that they would have done a better job with Harry Potter? like Star Tours, my guess is that they would have done one ride, end of story.