PDA

View Full Version : Idea for Disney's Answer to IOA's Harry Potter Land



MichaelMouse2379
07-23-2007, 10:44 PM
I have an idea on how Disney can combat the increased competition that will be posed by IOA's Harry Potter Land. I think WDW should build an entire land dedicated to Star Wars at the DS. Star Wars has just a big of fan following as HP if not more. True its not a "Disney" movie but since Disney has the rights to produce Star Wars themed attractions they might as well take full advantage of Star Wars Brand. I just think the opportunities with this type of Attraction(s) is endless, and not being utilized currently with Star Tours. I know with the current park size Im not really sure if there would even be room for something like this. What do you guys think?

LaDracul
07-23-2007, 11:13 PM
I'm still wanting something based on "Kingdom Hearts", but a mention of an all-new Muppet project has me all atwitter....

Jakk
07-23-2007, 11:24 PM
I have an idea on how Disney can combat the increased competition that will be posed by IOA's Harry Potter Land. I think WDW should build an entire land dedicated to Star Wars at the DS. Star Wars has just a big of fan following as HP if not more. True its not a "Disney" movie but since Disney has the rights to produce Star Wars themed attractions they might as well take full advantage of Star Wars Brand. I just think the opportunities with this type of Attraction(s) is endless, and not being utilized currently with Star Tours. I know with the current park size Im not really sure if there would even be room for something like this. What do you guys think?

Disney is planning alot for the new HP land in IOA. Current I am hearing rumors of a E-ticket "Incredibles" attraction at Magic Kingdom, and another E-ticket attraction (I'm hearing rumors of a Indy attraction, or some sort of Pixar attraction) at the Disney Studios, and finnaly a World Showcase E-ticket in Epcot. Honestly though I don't know if this is to fight the new HP land or not. But disney won't let Universal give Disney a little bruise.

JPL
07-24-2007, 12:47 AM
Disney is planning alot for the new HP land in IOA. Current I am hearing rumors of a E-ticket "Incredibles" attraction at Magic Kingdom, and another E-ticket attraction (I'm hearing rumors of a Indy attraction, or some sort of Pixar attraction) at the Disney Studios, and finnaly a World Showcase E-ticket in Epcot. Honestly though I don't know if this is to fight the new HP land or not. But disney won't let Universal give Disney a little bruise.

Most of these rumours have been around long before HP land was announced by Universal. I don't think Disney will or needs to answer it until they see what happens. IOA was suppose to be a big threat to Disney attendance and it was a flop. Universal has become nothing more than a side trip for those visiting WDW. At most people spend a day or 2 there and it really doesn't effect WDW that much. The Disney was long overdue for some upgrades and it seems to be the next park that will get some attention this was in the plans already.

aprilshowers93
07-24-2007, 02:09 AM
I think disney should build a really cool themed new resort to combat the HP land. If you are wondering why, I'll explain.

First of all, people will need to get it out of their systems. People are going to want to see the Harry Potter land and nothing disney does will stop people from spending one day at IOA. If disney builds a new ride or land, sure people will go to that particular disney park, but they might just go to the park with the new ride instead of another park, not spend an extra day. I f disney builds a new hotel however, that would encourage more people to stay on disney property and people would be less likely to spend 2 days at universal. I think the way to go would be a pirate themed hotel, only because it is such a big franchise and would probably draw in many of the HP fans, because my thought is many HP fans overlap with PotC fans.

BrerSchultzy
07-24-2007, 09:01 AM
Most of these rumours have been around long before HP land was announced by Universal. I don't think Disney will or needs to answer it until they see what happens. IOA was suppose to be a big threat to Disney attendance and it was a flop. Universal has become nothing more than a side trip for those visiting WDW. At most people spend a day or 2 there and it really doesn't effect WDW that much. The Disney was long overdue for some upgrades and it seems to be the next park that will get some attention this was in the plans already.

Exactly... I have to agree that Disney is not exactly sweating over the Harry Potter Land at Universal. All it does is keep Universal as another side-attraction for Orlando. WDW is still the big draw.

I love the fact that everybody is saying how wonderful a "maneuver" this is for Universal...when all they are doing is what Disney has done for 50 years....keep building. Keep growing. Do more and do it well. Universal had been free-falling in popularity, and this will keep them back in the game. But it is no competition (except for a few local day trippers), and if anything, it may get more business for the Disney hotels and Downtown Disney.

Remzlightyear
07-24-2007, 09:37 AM
HP land, like Universal and IOA in general, will be something to "see" or "check-out," but probably nothing to do repeat visits for. I don't know about you guys, but every time I visit the WDWR and "plan" for a side trip to Universal, I never end up going.

battlefield2freak
07-24-2007, 09:48 AM
Most of these rumours have been around long before HP land was announced by Universal. I don't think Disney will or needs to answer it until they see what happens. IOA was suppose to be a big threat to Disney attendance and it was a flop.

thats exactly what they need to do and HP yes the series is coming to an end in a short few years. notice there will be only 7 books and 7 movies. 7 books are released and 5 of the 7 movies are out leaving 2. after all the movies are done HP will start to lose its popularity after a few years. i say disney shouldnt worry about HP ride since it wont stay as popular as WDW all togther. and a side note the new ride unless its been changed is going into the place where back to the future was. back to the future used to be in universal studios not IOA.

and the new resort to combat the HP ride will not even be very effective. most of the WDW resorts arent running at 90% capacity most months so why build a new one when htey havent filled up the old ones, and aside from that they jut finished saratoga and they have the option of finishing the other half of pop century, and on top f that the new DVC resort. also another point in making a resort would be it would cost a ton of money and take longer to build then it would a ride.

BMan62
07-24-2007, 10:04 AM
I believe what you are seeing right now is a buildup to expansion. The team currently in control of the parks (WDW, at least) is starting some much needed restoration/renovation/upgrading to existing rides/shows/buildings.

In that these major steps are being taken, seemingly at the same time (to the disdain of many,) it will allow for minimal maintenance beyond the day to day operations. This will afford the group opportunity to put major $$$ and time into new rides/shows/park(s)/etc.

As has been stated previously in this thread, the HP attraction at Universal will be popular no matter what WDW adds. The key is to bring those coming down to the Orlando area to the Disney parks. That has never, really, been a problem.

KevGuy
07-24-2007, 11:11 AM
Disney has the space theme with Star Wars, so I think the perfect thing to kick it up a notch would be to secure the rights to Transformers and integrate that into Disney!! I'd hate to see Universal latch onto that but I fear they will. Granted they have decided on the HP island, but if they are smart as that is already in the pipeline, they are looking for the next "big" thing and Transformers surely is one of the biggest things right now. In addition they have 2 more movies planned from what I heard so it will not be going away anytime soon. I think Disney would be able to do something at MGM and blow the competition away!! Star Wars, Power Rangers, now Transformers need to be added!!! :thumbsup:

aprilshowers93
07-24-2007, 01:49 PM
and the new resort to combat the HP ride will not even be very effective. most of the WDW resorts arent running at 90% capacity most months so why build a new one when htey havent filled up the old ones

I must agree. I have changed my mind. A resort wouldn't be worth the investment. As I said be before, people will check out Potterland, but after the first time, people will have seen it and the hype will slowly die down after the 7th movie is over. This is the reason I am glad Disney didn't get Harry. Disney is timeless, and HP is a fad.

Disney just needs to keep doing what they're doing, update the parks, and keep building new attractions to keep people interested and coming back for more.

battlefield2freak
07-24-2007, 04:58 PM
right now im praising disney for there projects at WDW because the MK has been in long need of extensive rehabs nad refurbs for years. but i will say that since they are doing all this i would rather wait till they get it all done at epcot and MK before i come back since they ahve closed all my favorite rides and if the rumors true that space mountain could be closed for a 6 month rehad next year it definately doesnt make me want to go until thats complete. epcot in my opinion needs a more exciting ride in the world showcase area because i can get through all of the epcot park in less time it takes at MK since i dont normally stop at the worlds. after toy story mania is finished and the DVC is done they probably wont be doing any more construction work until they have finished a mojority of these refurbs/rehabs. after they get alot of these done and they should be before HP opens then disney will definately keep the crowds pouring in.

Horizon93
07-24-2007, 06:08 PM
I agree that the HP attraction will not have a negative effect on WDW. Disney is not a reactive park operator. It started the theme park concept and is the best at it. They should continue to do what they do and continue to grow.

MichaelMouse2379
07-24-2007, 07:41 PM
Ok, I think I should have phrased this differently cause my main point is getting lost.

Yes I agree that HP probably wont have a negative effect on WDW and WDW doesnt need to be reactive to US/IOA HOWEVER, when I saw IOA adding this land it made me wish WDW did something like this with Star Wars. I had thought about this Idea for awhile and never thought Disney fully uses the Star Wars brand to its fullest potential. I just think WDW would be better served doing something similar with Star Wars that IOA is doing with HP.

battlefield2freak
07-24-2007, 09:35 PM
for disney to make a entire land based off starwars then why dont they just move the entire star tours to tomorrowland. which i dont want to see happen but an entire star wars land would be going to far with star tours whose popularity is very slowly declining each year which is why its in need of a major rehab soon. instead of a starwars land id rather see an new ride built at MGM for a disney/pixar movie. something inovative and unique. if you have been to dollywood in the past 2 years then you will know the ride im getting ready to talk about. you know that ride that u get in a seat and a harness comes over you and then slowly pulls u to the top before locking into place then tips over and stars to rotate you while the water is squirting at you? disney could do a incredibles movie ride using a ride like that. they could make it look like u have been frozen in that little ray and he starts swinging u back and forth like in the movie. that was just a quick post on what popped in my head after remembering that ride at dollywood if i had more time i would probably go into details about it.

CaptainJessicaSparrow
07-25-2007, 02:51 AM
I think a lot of people don't realize that most Guests who visit Orlando tend to stay for a week at minium. During which, they typically go to both Universal and Orlando which I know by talking to them, while staying at Disney resort. Universal's Harry Potter addition will be a great benefit to Orlando as a whole, for both Disney and Universal because most Guests do come for both, visit both and spend money at both. After all, if you're going to go on vacation, why not go all out and hit all of the parks in Orlando? I know the concept might be hard to believe, but not everyone comes to Orlando just for Disney, especially a lot of those Guests from abroad.

And Harry Potter is not really a fad, because the same thing has been said for Star Wars. The movies ended, the books aren't written by George Lucas anymore and yet Star Wars Weekends is still an extremely popular event at MGM.

I don't think Disney will have to do anything major for the Harry Potter area. They'll be fine without it.

wedway fan
07-25-2007, 10:59 AM
Ok, I think I should have phrased this differently cause my main point is getting lost.

Yes I agree that HP probably wont have a negative effect on WDW and WDW doesnt need to be reactive to US/IOA HOWEVER, when I saw IOA adding this land it made me wish WDW did something like this with Star Wars. I had thought about this Idea for awhile and never thought Disney fully uses the Star Wars brand to its fullest potential. I just think WDW would be better served doing something similar with Star Wars that IOA is doing with HP.

have to say- i hadn't read your posts at all before posting this exact idea on another thread ("star wars character meals" in the dining section). i think it's exactly the kind of thing disney studios needs, whether you want to call it a response to harry potter or not.

the star wars franchise appeals to the kids at WDW and the parents who bring them there. the story line has all the elements of a great disney story, and the characters are so well known they could easily be adapted for so many uses- meals, dining, attractions, merchandising, etc.

don't think it will ever happen, but i think it's a terrific idea.

lockedoutlogic
07-25-2007, 09:46 PM
Here's a few fundamental truths about the vacation Mecca known as "orlando"....

1. All the tourist sites benefit from each other far more than they ever suffer....the thought that Disney tries to beat Sea World or Universal is wrong and will never be true.
The fact is...every new opening floods the entire town with more business...
Kinda like Target is always within a mile of Walmart...and Home Depot and Lowes are across the street from each other...
Consumers are basically lemmings without as much fur...

2. Disney is the king of the roost and in no way threatened by Universal. Think of it in practical terms: many people go to orlando an skip Sea World and/or Universal...but practically no one skips WDW. They were the first...they are the busiest...they have the biggest reputation...and it would take an act of congress to ever significantly affect that...

3. Disney would never realistically be able to respond to any development across town. The only cases where they may have even attempted to were in 1989 with the opening of MGM (the park opened with almost nothing and is still far short of the 2 older established parks at WDW...a work in progress 20 years old) and maybe rushing the schedule to open AK in 1998...undoubtedly to trump IOA's 1999 opening (again...the hurried schedule resulted in an unfinished park that is still a major location for needed upgrades almost 10 years later)
The point is...Disney's development process for it's attractions is extremely long....even simple rides take over 5 years from concept to opening day...and if they go with cheaper or faster ideas...you get Magic Carpets of Aladdin...and Chester and Hester's Dinorama...
I don't think we need to go into further detail.

Disney will continue to implement new rides and attractions on its own schedule...and we will see about one ever year...as always.
Harry Potter is all the rage...but if Rowlings is telling the truth and she's done with it....by the time universal tries to exploit it...it will already be in the twilight of the harry potter generation.

The suggestion of a star wars land would be a thrill to alot of people 40 and younger....
...but Star Wars isn't what it used to be....the new movies damaged an almost mythical pop culture phenomenon and showed that it could be bested in many ways by films such as the Matrix, Spiderman, and Lord of the Rings....
Besides...Lucas and Disney have repeatedly butted heads and failed to use the star wars franchise properly over the years...star tours is an embarassment...and they put it in four parks!
I don't think an outside owned creative franchise such as anything from Lucasfilm would ever get the royal treatment behind a disney owned ticket reader...
IF they didn't do anything in the 90's to capitalize on perhaps the 3 most anticipated new films in the history of movies....
...what would they use the theme for now?

:twocents:

larworth
07-26-2007, 03:59 PM
The issue isn't who will still be king of the hill, but rather will Disney's attendance growth be impacted because more people decide to spend a day at Universal. A few percentage points difference in growth can have a big profit impact on the parks. We don't need a reduction, just flat or low growth to get Wall Street's attention.

I thought most of WDW's evolution since EPCOT has been reactionary. Church street station becames a hit - they built pleasure island. Wet and wild popular -they built water parks. Mini golf popular - they built fanta.... Off-site hotels grow - they add a bunch of on-site rooms. Universal announces a studios park - they rush MGM to the market with limited attractions. BGardens has an animal park - we get AK with limited attractions so it can open before IOA. Sure there are more.

I sure hope they react again. I think they have enough time to greenlight some of the more decent quality attractions that have been sitting in the queue.

battlefield2freak
07-26-2007, 04:37 PM
The issue isn't who will still be king of the hill, but rather will Disney's attendance growth be impacted because more people decide to spend a day at Universal. A few percentage points difference in growth can have a big profit impact on the parks. We don't need a reduction, just flat or low growth to get Wall Street's attention.

I thought most of WDW's evolution since EPCOT has been reactionary. Church street station becames a hit - they built pleasure island. Wet and wild popular -they built water parks. Mini golf popular - they built fanta.... Off-site hotels grow - they add a bunch of on-site rooms. Universal announces a studios park - they rush MGM to the market with limited attractions. BGardens has an animal park - we get AK with limited attractions so it can open before IOA. Sure there are more.

I sure hope they react again. I think they have enough time to greenlight some of the more decent quality attractions that have been sitting in the queue.

disney has not been acting reactionary since eppcot. MGM was already being planned in the early 80's before universal announced there orlando park. and walt disney had wanted to have on site resorts at DLR but then all the builidng started happening around the resort so when he was mapping out the WDW park he wanted to have enough land for on site resorts. and why would you go off site if there is disney hotels on site with transportation to all the parks and hotels. and also walt had wanted to do somehting with animals so thats why AK is there not because Busch made a animal park. when disney does somehting most people dont realize the time they out in for designing. take EE for example, they sent a crew of researchers to nepal for 1 year and then came back and made the final plans for it and then started construction. all of that happened since 2001 '02. they have rarely acted reactionary and they will not need to react to HP.

lockedoutlogic
07-26-2007, 08:35 PM
A few things:

MGM was originally a pavilion in EPCOT that was thought up around 1985....remember that Michael Eisner was a hollywood guy who worked for ABC (where he created Schoolhouse Rock...with out which none of us would have ever found the train to conjunction junction...nor would we know it's function) and Paramount (where he was heavily involved in films such as Flashdance, Star Trek, Raiders of the Lost Ark, Saturday Night Fever and Grease...among others)...
So the genesis of a hollywood land was only natural.
They...of course...did accelerate the park to beat the opening of Universal In Orlando...that is pretty much an admitted fact.

Disney's other park moves in the late 80's and 90's were not reactionary.
Typhoon Lagoon and Blizzard Beach were a natural follow up to the world's first water park...and that was River Country.
Animal Kingdom was a project that was well underway before IOA was anywhere close to a reality. The prep work alone was rumored to have started around 1990..perhaps even earlier. Eisner famously included the park in his "disney decade" speech in 1990.
Busch Gardens in Tampa had been there in some form since the late 1960's...you can't make a reasonable link to AK.
Disney..again...may have rushed opening to trump IOA or even Discovery Cove...but the generally accepted reason is most likely financial.
Disney's estimates on how much AK cost to the public have been...well...shall we say "liberally on the low side"
Pleasure Island was a goal of Eisner's that he stated in his early days at Disney...Church Street Station may have influence the concept some....but not in any measurable way.
Citywalk at Universal is absolutely a reaction to PI though...

Again...to be clear...universal's attendance is not an issue for WDW....
Disney reported over 47 million visitors last year....universal would be lucky to get 10 on an average year.
Disney...while keeping an eye on universal and sea world....is really like a giant swatting at a gnat.

Besides...those that want to go to universal for a day or even two from their time in orlando....already do...have done it for fifteen years...and still end up in WDW for four or five days...if not more.

As far as the journey into the world of stockwatch....
WDW is one of Disney's cash cows for Disney's other ventures.
When the stocks take a hit....Disney's first response is how to boost theme park attendance to stabilize the revenue....
It's not as though a stock dip is going to do anything of significance for the planning at WDW....perhaps delay some things...but really nothing more.

It's not as though a huge market hit is going to be squelched by a new land to counter Universal's Potter-ville....

let's be serious here.....
....or let's not be so serious and talk about going to WDW...not it's longterm impact on our portfolio.
If you want a good stock tip...i hear amazon did well yesterday:thumbsup:

Speedy1998
07-26-2007, 09:34 PM
As has been stated previously in this thread, the HP attraction at Universal will be popular no matter what WDW adds. The key is to bring those coming down to the Orlando area to the Disney parks. That has never, really, been a problem.

I am not so sure of this. If Universal does not get it just right they have the potential of ending up with a huge flop. The problem with
HP is that everyone thinks they know what it should look like, if Universal fails to meet those expectations it will create alot of disappointment with the fans, who will not come back.

lockedoutlogic
07-26-2007, 10:47 PM
I am not so sure of this. If Universal does not get it just right they have the potential of ending up with a huge flop. The problem with
HP is that everyone thinks they know what it should look like, if Universal fails to meet those expectations it will create alot of disappointment with the fans, who will not come back.

the other thing is that Harry Potter is not going to last forever...

it has been around for over 10 years now...and many kids who read the initial books are out of high school....and it's not as though children's phenomenons have a lot of staying power...

when is this new land scheduled to open? if it is more than 2 years from now...it could be a complete disaster.

Rowlings will laugh her way to the bank though..that is certain

Polynesian Dweller
07-26-2007, 11:17 PM
It was announced that the planning is for an opening of HP land in 2010. That is too late. Don't underestimate how quickly the ending of the series will lead to a decline in the enthusiasm. Most of the HP hype right now has been about the ending of the series. Now that it has ended people will move on to the next event just like they moved on from Lord of the Rings.

Yes, people will visit it and it will have an initial rush, but HP as a phenomenon will be over and people will already be thinking of other things. We just don't know what they are because they haven't been produced yet.

MORTIMER
07-27-2007, 09:52 AM
While I agree that Disney will not have to add anything to compete with Potter and that it will ultimately only help Disney's business, I would love to see a Star Wars land.

Secondly, I think several of you are seriously underestimating how big Harry Potter really is. I took my 10 year old to get the 7th book last week and we went to the midnight party at our local Barnes & Noble. The store has two stories and is very large, it became so packed that they had to have police at the doors and a line formed that wrapped completely across the parking lot. All of this for a BOOK!

I strongly beleive that Harry Potter is the Star Wars of my kids generation, just as I was excited to take my kids to the rerelease of the original Star Wars movies, my kids will do this with my grandkids some day, only it will be to see Harry Potter. It doesn't matter that the last movie will be out in 3 years, it has taken on a life of it's own.

BMan62
07-27-2007, 11:42 AM
It was announced that the planning is for an opening of HP land in 2010. That is too late. Don't underestimate how quickly the ending of the series will lead to a decline in the enthusiasm.

...

Yes, people will visit it and it will have an initial rush, but HP as a phenomenon will be over and people will already be thinking of other things.

As far as the ending of the series goes, well, there are two more movies in the offing, the second of which (based on "Deathly Hallows") should be out in 2010, if the release schedule remains relatively constant. This would give the park a pretty good opening boost. I could see a couple years of really active business before it cools down.

The second point I quoted from your message not only goes for HP, but also for POC. Right now, there is a push on this board, and elsewhere, to Pirate everything in WDW. In a couple years, since the movie series is finished, this will calm down and get 'old.'

larworth
07-27-2007, 11:49 AM
Reactionary may not be the apt description in all cases, but surely a mix of reaction, preemption, copy, and influence are clearly evident. Disney has not been above copying someone else’s concept and taking it to another level. We have clear examples where park opening timelines have been impacted due to competitor moves. It would be a bad indictment on management if it was so arrogant as to ignore what was going on around it. No matter what market share it had. I don’t think the question is that Disney never reacts, but was action in this case is warranted.

It is possible that a very successful HP effort will bring more tourists to FL and both parks will enjoy more attendance. However, AK showed this is not necessarily the case. It cannibalized attendance from the other Disney parks, and didn’t create the longer stays or more visits Disney hoped for. I believe Disney came to view Orlando as a fairly mature and saturated market and their WDW investment strategy post AK has followed suit.

If HP is popular, but the market does not get a huge influx of new visitors, than Disney would have less business than it would have otherwise. I can see where it might be prudent to have something interesting to offer, not too long after HP opens, in hopes that any HP migration is short lived. So if your Disney, do you wait and see (with your loooong development times) or do you greenlight a few extra projects now?

battlefield2freak
07-27-2007, 12:04 PM
As far as the ending of the series goes, well, there are two more movies in the offing, the second of which (based on "Deathly Hallows") should be out in 2010, if the release schedule remains relatively constant. This would give the park a pretty good opening boost. I could see a couple years of really active business before it cools down.

The second point I quoted from your message not only goes for HP, but also for POC. Right now, there is a push on this board, and elsewhere, to Pirate everything in WDW. In a couple years, since the movie series is finished, this will calm down and get 'old.'

exactly. the HP will calm down a few years after harry potter 7 which might be released in 2009 since they have been putting a new film in the movies each year. and another point why does everyone think disney should react. they have no need to. if they are going to do something the are going to do something which will last for a long time not something like HP.

lockedoutlogic
07-27-2007, 04:12 PM
While I agree that Disney will not have to add anything to compete with Potter and that it will ultimately only help Disney's business, I would love to see a Star Wars land.

Secondly, I think several of you are seriously underestimating how big Harry Potter really is. I took my 10 year old to get the 7th book last week and we went to the midnight party at our local Barnes & Noble. The store has two stories and is very large, it became so packed that they had to have police at the doors and a line formed that wrapped completely across the parking lot. All of this for a BOOK!

I strongly beleive that Harry Potter is the Star Wars of my kids generation, just as I was excited to take my kids to the rerelease of the original Star Wars movies, my kids will do this with my grandkids some day, only it will be to see Harry Potter. It doesn't matter that the last movie will be out in 3 years, it has taken on a life of it's own.


I don't think there is a "star wars" of this or any future generation.

Harry Potter has been an amazing franchise...but it will only decline from here on out.
New products are introduced to children everyday...and there attention spans are now challenged by an amazing wealth of mass media bombardment.


Star Wars...as those of the Gen X and pre-gen X generations know it.....will never happen again.

Think about it from a historical perspective...the wizard of oz and gone with the wind ran in first run theaters for 10 years....by the time Star Wars was released...it ran for almost 3 years...an amazing feet for the late 70's.

And so now the paramaters have shrunk more and more over the last 30 years.

Don't underestimate the factors that made star wars what it was.....
Large scale marketing....adult and child appeal....and the introduction of what can be described as "special" sound and visual effects.

It was a perfect storm of pop culture...but don't forget that the time period was part of that as well.

The period from 1975-1995 may..in fact..go down as the most enjoyable time to live in american history....
Developing technology...but not an onslaught of it.....foreign concerns...but no real imminent threat....money spread across the spectrum of society as never seen before...and the first generation of children who's imaginations were unleashed because the restrictions on entertainment due to costs and technology were beginning to be eliminated...

Star Wars can never occur again as it currently stands....
the main reason is that the sheer amount of entertainment options availabe does not allow an audience to be captivated by a single entity for a large period of time.

There's just too much out there for the public to become personally attached to one thing...as many were with star wars.

The best that can be done now is to vary products and offerings to develop a sort of "brand" loyalty....
some companies have done this......you know where i'm going with this one...;)

And let's not skirt the issue here....the new Star Wars movies were a failure almost anyway you slice it.
A 300 million dollar gate revenue is great....but the new trilogy fell well short of the legendary status that it's predecessors had.
In many ways...they hurt the previous films.

It probably would have been better not to mess with it...in the long run.

The kids that saw 1,II, and III have..by and large...already moved on....
something that the original star wars generation never did....my generation.

Ask yourself? do you ever hear an old star wars fan saying that the newer films are even in the same ballpark as the originals? no...not even close....the highest praise i have heard is "III was "ok"...or "good"

If Disney were ever to build a Star Wars land...which they could never do because they don't own the license and the merchandise revenues that go with it....they would be bombarded with requests to fill said land with old empire strikes back and return of the jedi themed rides...

Lucas would never allow it....he cares more about the CGI and Digital Format used to film the new movies than the fact that the originals are far superior and stirred an emotional response in audiences that will never be equaled....

But i've never seen star wars....is it anygood?:secret:

Darin M
07-27-2007, 05:40 PM
Create a new Pirates movie with a bunch of new attractions to open in MK simultaneously. Then cast Daniel Radcliffe (Harry Potter) to be in the new Pirates movie, and have Jack Sparrow send him to "the locker"

battlefield2freak
07-27-2007, 06:02 PM
uh disney cant make a ride with HP in it because they dont have rights to do it. and yes star wars is good all 6 overall and he was making plans back when the 3rd came out to release all 6 in 3-D and on a boxset DVD.

John
07-27-2007, 07:44 PM
I think most posters in this thread have their Disney Blinders on. Harry Potter books are classics that will be read by generations. This is not going away.

Statements like "it has been around for over 10 years now...and many kids who read the initial books are out of high school....and it's not as though children's phenomenons have a lot of staying power..." kill me.

If that were true, most of what Disney is based on would be gone by now.

These books have not only captured the imagination of kids but many adults - myself included.... and if the Park at Universal is done right, it will be something we visit every trip to Orlando. I already think Universal has a great product that has only been getting better - and now with the addition of this Francise, they are going to start stealing vacation days from Disney.

Don't let the fact that most of you have been to Disney multiple times or even yearly discount the fact that for many americans, this may be a once or twice a childhood trip to Orlando in which famalies look at their options in addition to taking a Disney vacation. If Universal can sucessfully get a bigger chunk of folks to even plan just one day away from Disney, that will impact WDW.

Don't underestimate a book and movie series that will have been around 10 years. This is a cultural phenomenon, the likes of which we havn't seen in a long, long time.

Speedy1998
07-27-2007, 11:16 PM
I think most posters in this thread have their Disney Blinders on. Harry Potter books are classics that will be read by generations. This is not going away.

.

I agree with this, I mean look how long Davy Crockett stuff was sold in DL and WDW. (Actually come to think of it I think I heard the Ballad of Davy Crockett when I was in Frontierland in June). Anyway, what I was saying is that this is so popular (it sold and average of 100 copies per second all day on the 21st) that if Universal does not do it just right, it will hurt their attendance. On the other hand Disney has been proving for years that if you slap a popular character on a mediocore attraction, you drive up the popularity of that attraction. So I will guess we just have to wait and see.

AndrewJackson
07-28-2007, 09:23 AM
I see the HP park as a big success for the first 6-8 years, then Universal struggling to keep attendance high.

The last HP book has just been written. This means that the last HP movie will be released in about 4 years. A couple of years later, kids will be on to something else. At this point the HP park will seem very dated, and attendance will begin dwindling.

While I agree with some of what JohnY stated, I think it would have been wiser to simply build one or two attractions on the books, not an entire theme park.

Figment!
07-28-2007, 12:53 PM
... I think it would have been wiser to simply build one or two attractions on the books, not an entire theme park.They are not building an entire theme park, just retro-theming the Lost Continent area of the park (despite their marketing team using the term "theme park with in a theme park" ).

The new "island" is slated to open with three rides (2 retrofitted, and 1 brand new).

MichaelMouse2379
07-28-2007, 06:15 PM
And let's not skirt the issue here....the new Star Wars movies were a failure almost anyway you slice it.
A 300 million dollar gate revenue is great....but the new trilogy fell well short of the legendary status that it's predecessors had.
In many ways...they hurt the previous films.

It probably would have been better not to mess with it...in the long run.

The kids that saw 1,II, and III have..by and large...already moved on....
something that the original star wars generation never did....my generation.

Ask yourself? do you ever hear an old star wars fan saying that the newer films are even in the same ballpark as the originals? no...not even close....the highest praise i have heard is "III was "ok"...or "good"

If Disney were ever to build a Star Wars land...which they could never do because they don't own the license and the merchandise revenues that go with it....they would be bombarded with requests to fill said land with old empire strikes back and return of the jedi themed rides...

Lucas would never allow it....he cares more about the CGI and Digital Format used to film the new movies than the fact that the originals are far superior and stirred an emotional response in audiences that will never be equaled....

But i've never seen star wars....is it anygood?

Lockedoutlogic, I hope you were kidding that you've never seen it, because if so then how would you know that the last 3 werent any good. Not to make this a Star Wars movie critique but epsiode I,II, & III grossed $925million, $648 million, $848 million worldwide respectively. If that is failure, I want that type of failure. Yes some Star Wars geeks were unhappy with the new films because quite frankly nothing would have pleased them. All of those people that told you they hated the newer films said they wouldnt see the next one, and guess what... they went and saw the next one, adorned in their darth vader outfits. And thats exactly what they would do with a Star Wars land, they would be there in droves. You will never please everyone. Quite honestly I liked the older movies growing up, but I cant say I enjoyed them more than the new ones. I am able to seperate the two. Sometimes when you are younger you remember things to be a lot better than they really are. I think thats whats going on with the people that dont like the newest ones. There are still young kids today that love the newer episodes, maybe even more than the older episodes, and thats where Disney could capitalize on the older gen that loves the older episodes and the newer gen that loves the newer episodes. Just seems like smart business move to me, not to mention I love all the Star Wars movies and would spend a whole day at MGM rather than the 4 or so hours I do now.

jedigrrrl
07-28-2007, 07:21 PM
the other thing is that Harry Potter is not going to last forever...

it has been around for over 10 years now...and many kids who read the initial books are out of high school....and it's not as though children's phenomenons have a lot of staying power...

when is this new land scheduled to open? if it is more than 2 years from now...it could be a complete disaster.

Rowlings will laugh her way to the bank though..that is certain

Potterland could open in 10 years and people will flock to it. It has staying power. It is not a fad. As a HP fan, I know that for a fact. However, Universal will just let it rot like the rest of it's parks where everything is poorly maintained and herky jerky and smells humid.

People keep posting that KIDS will be on to something else in a few years, but a huge portion(possibly the majority) of the fans are adults.

jedigrrrl
07-28-2007, 07:31 PM
I think most posters in this thread have their Disney Blinders on. Harry Potter books are classics that will be read by generations. This is not going away.

Statements like "it has been around for over 10 years now...and many kids who read the initial books are out of high school....and it's not as though children's phenomenons have a lot of staying power..." kill me.

If that were true, most of what Disney is based on would be gone by now.
These books have not only captured the imagination of kids but many adults - myself included.... and if the Park at Universal is done right, it will be something we visit every trip to Orlando.

Don't underestimate a book and movie series that will have been around 10 years. This is a cultural phenomenon, the likes of which we havn't seen in a long, long time.

EXACTLY EXACTLY EXACTLY!!

PirateLover
07-29-2007, 10:20 AM
John said it best in his post.

Having read the last book, I am now more sure than ever that Harry Potter will live on for generations to come. It isn't just a "kid's" phenomenon. These are extremely well crafted works of fiction that created an entirely new world for people to escape into and whose fans span generations. If Universal puts some love and care into this area (and if Jo gets any say) than it could be a smash hit and I will definitely go there and take at least a day away from my WDW trip.

CaptainJessicaSparrow
07-30-2007, 03:00 AM
Wait - so none of you guys still read Grimm's Fairy Tales or Peter Pan? Tom Sawyer? Huck Finn?

Cause you know, those are kids' books....and they aren't just a fad. But that's just my theory.

I'm 22, and I'm still in love with Harry Potter. And I still love Disney. Will I go to the opening for the Harry Potter land? Heck yes! In full, Slytherin gear to boot.

Do I think it will hurt WDW attendence? Not really. I agree with most of the statements in which people are being blinded by their overwhelming love for Disney....they can sit back and watch Universal open the Potter World and still be fine if they wanted. Because Disney isn't going to suffer.

lockedoutlogic
07-30-2007, 06:26 AM
Lockedoutlogic, I hope you were kidding that you've never seen it, because if so then how would you know that the last 3 werent any good. Not to make this a Star Wars movie critique but epsiode I,II, & III grossed $925million, $648 million, $848 million worldwide respectively. If that is failure, I want that type of failure. Yes some Star Wars geeks were unhappy with the new films because quite frankly nothing would have pleased them. All of those people that told you they hated the newer films said they wouldnt see the next one, and guess what... they went and saw the next one, adorned in their darth vader outfits. And thats exactly what they would do with a Star Wars land, they would be there in droves. You will never please everyone. Quite honestly I liked the older movies growing up, but I cant say I enjoyed them more than the new ones. I am able to seperate the two. Sometimes when you are younger you remember things to be a lot better than they really are. I think thats whats going on with the people that dont like the newest ones. There are still young kids today that love the newer episodes, maybe even more than the older episodes, and thats where Disney could capitalize on the older gen that loves the older episodes and the newer gen that loves the newer episodes. Just seems like smart business move to me, not to mention I love all the Star Wars movies and would spend a whole day at MGM rather than the 4 or so hours I do now.

Um...yeah...I might have been kidding with the statement about not seeing star wars....

I practically worshiped it for 25 years....right up until about the point where i walked out of the theater after AOTC...at the west side AMC, no less...and realized that the phantom menace wasn't...in fact...a fluke...

Lucas had just made bad movies....

Too many dead end story lines....no smooth transitions in the screenplays....and, with a few exceptions...really bad acting. Not to mention the over reliance on CG effects...something that other comtemporary filmmakers avoided in LOTR, Spiderman, and X-Men. While all of those used CG...it was still the live actors that drove the story....star wars did not do this. Other than McGreggor..the actors were stiff and you just didn't buy the tension in the story...something that has been a requirement of good story telling since Homer...

It was like they tried to make all the old fans happy...with story lines like the Boba Fett backstory....and still hook a bunch of 7 year olds.

They just weren't that good...and you don't know how that pains a lifelong fan to say that...

Their box office gross is more an homage to the legacy that the first 3 films had than a reflection of the quality of the newer 3....not to mention inflation puts them well behind the original 3

That's kinda a given point at this juncture....


As far as the Harry Potter thing...don't misunderstand me....

I do think that Harry Potter has been a very unique thing....especially since it is based on...yikes!...reading!?!?

But I just think the shelf life of your average phenomena has decreased greatly in the last 15 years...

To compare it to Star Wars and early Disney is not really accurate because the time periods have changed and our technology and preferences have changed with them....

I believe..resulting in a much shorter attention span on the whole and diminishing how much one entity can captivate the public as a whole.

It seems that the "Happy Potter" blinders are on here as well...as some of the disputes are obviously from diehard adult harry potter fans...which there are many....

But to seriously think that my children can be enthralled by a book series that has 10 years worth of dust on it is not really being based in reality...

Children's tastes are very much determined by what they can download, order on demand, and go to the Toys R Us and buy for themselves....

Once the shelves are empty and the media doesn't pay attention....what draw will there be to Harry Potter?

That's all I'm saying....

MichaelMouse2379
07-30-2007, 01:03 PM
Lockedoutlogic,

I would agree that if you want to get overly picky yes, episode I, & II weren’t that good, I still found them entertaining though. However I thought Episode III was up there with the IV, V, VI.
Back to the topic at hand... My whole point is not whether all the movies are great, it's simply that regardless of whether all six of the movies were great or not it still has a big following, and a land dedicated to it would be extremely popular. Would you go even though you hated the last three movies? My guess is yes absolutely. So whether you loved the last three movies is irrelevant to whether you would go. I mean many people hated POTC: At Worlds End, but is the series still popular? Yes, is the ride still popular? Yes.

Whether or not Disney even decided to do something like this, they need to do something to spice up this park because right now MGM is my least favorite park. I usually only spend a half day there at most, and if it weren’t for the few gems (TOT, RnRC, TGMR) I probably would skip it altogether.

lockedoutlogic
07-30-2007, 04:40 PM
Lockedoutlogic,

I would agree that if you want to get overly picky yes, episode I, & II weren’t that good, I still found them entertaining though. However I thought Episode III was up there with the IV, V, VI.
Back to the topic at hand... My whole point is not whether all the movies are great, it's simply that regardless of whether all six of the movies were great or not it still has a big following, and a land dedicated to it would be extremely popular. Would you go even though you hated the last three movies? My guess is yes absolutely. So whether you loved the last three movies is irrelevant to whether you would go. I mean many people hated POTC: At Worlds End, but is the series still popular? Yes, is the ride still popular? Yes.

Whether or not Disney even decided to do something like this, they need to do something to spice up this park because right now MGM is my least favorite park. I usually only spend a half day there at most, and if it weren’t for the few gems (TOT, RnRC, TGMR) I probably would skip it altogether.

I got your point...

Here's the simple reason why a star wars area is never realistic....creative control and revenue residuals...

The thing that Lucas was probably best know for was retaining everything Star Wars as intellectual property and then turning it into huge merchandising revenues.

Disney also does this...they are perhaps the best at it...

So you have 2 hollywood entities that would demand almost complete control....from a money standpoint as much as creatively....

So there ends the discussion. As i had said earlier...the fact that they did almost nothing to capitalize on the prequels proves that there really isn't that much cooperation between the two...

Disney has showed that they have to be in charge many times in the past....a few good example are their relations with the state of florida and city of orlando...and even somewhate obscure things...like how they pigeonhole shows on ABC that they do not own and dictate costs and distribution contracts...NYPD Blue and Boston Legal being two perfect examples.

So while i think star wars intensive theme parks would probably do very well...it would take and untimely death or two to get the egos out of the way that are involved....

Wolf
07-30-2007, 04:56 PM
I vote for Pirate Land! That would be totally sweet! Have a ride like BTMR but with a pirate battle. Have a meet and greet with Sparrow, Davy Jones and Lizzy. (Not to mention if they threw a Norington in there I'd be beating down the gates :blush:)

OMG KH Land would rule my world! I feel bad for admitting that I am extremely excited for HP land, I have never gone to WDW and left for any reason cept we went to Medieval Knights once (:ack:) But I will have to when HP world opens. (I've read em since the 3rd came out and have 1 HP tattoo already and am desiginig another)

PirateLover
07-30-2007, 10:05 PM
But to seriously think that my children can be enthralled by a book series that has 10 years worth of dust on it is not really being based in reality...

Children's tastes are very much determined by what they can download, order on demand, and go to the Toys R Us and buy for themselves....

Once the shelves are empty and the media doesn't pay attention....what draw will there be to Harry Potter?

That's all I'm saying....
It's up to you as a parent to keep the magic alive. When I grew up, was I playing nintendo and buying power rangers and WWF figurines from Toys R Us? Sure. But guess what. I was also reading Roald Dahl, Chronicles of Narnia, etc because my parents instilled a love of reading in me. I read all of L. Frank Baum's books as a child as well How many years of dust were on all of those novels? Have you read the Harry Potter books? Because if you did than you would realize that these books will not be collecting dust in 10 years. They will be passed on to a new generation who will love them just as much as we did. Harry Potter fans have just continued to snowball for 10 years now since the release of the original books. There are still 2 movies to be released and along with an encyclopedia of everything in the Potter world so Pottermania will not be dying out anytime soon. As I said before, Potter land or whatever you want to call it will not steal me away from WDW a week, but it will for at least a day. It is not a MAJOR threat the Disney but please don't brush it off as just a fad.

lockedoutlogic
07-30-2007, 10:28 PM
Ok...ok...now we're getting out of hand....

To say that potter is "no big deal" would be an understatement...

To say that "there's no way it's a fad" is a definite overstatement.

what do we know about potter right now?
It has been an amazing success as a children/ pre-teen series....that doesn't mean that many adults don't like it...but it is directed at the 12 year type age group

It has been a tremendous success on the big screen...no doubt

But that's it...no one knows if it has staying power or not....because it has been "new" to this point...we don't know what will happen when the new material ends...but we know it will end in a few short years.

So all of our "opinions" are just that...you are entitled to yours..I to mine....
Please don't tell me "please don't brush it off as a fad"....we'll call it common courtesy...I know that there is an opposing side to my opinion...that is why it is an opinion


My stance is that the odds are that potter will fade...and the chances are more than even that it will fade very shortly after IOA's new development....

I'm sure that many people will hold on and pass on their interest in the future...but i believe it to be naive to think that the bottom won't fall out of the potter bandwagon.

But we'll all wait and see...I'm banking that america's attention span is getting progressively shorter and shorter...something that we have proven time and time again.

And yes...I have read 5 of the 7 potter books...they were easy reads and pretty good...i've enjoyed the movies greatly...the last one in IMAX....

But I just can't see how potter will outlast all most other entertainment franchises in this respect.

We'll see....this much I know...IOA has been fairly stagnant for awhile...since they really have the same attractions today as they did in 99...the upgrade will be a welcome addition in the short term...and probably will see a visit from me....
....but i'm not so sure i'll be waiting in 3 hour lines for the Quidditch Coaster in 2015....

we shall all wait and see....no one "knows"....

KevGuy
07-31-2007, 01:56 PM
Are you people nuts!! They should secure the rights to Transformers and make a planet Cybertron!! :D

battlefield2freak
07-31-2007, 02:40 PM
transformers @_@ id let universal do that because it just wouldnt fit witht he MGM theme. one thing i want to point out is Dsiney doesnt need to react to a HP land and you will see that when it is done and it has been opened for one year. i can understand why you all think hey need to since HP is so cool and has many fans right now but you have to think like a business: what will it look like in the future not the present. after the movies are done yes it will start to fade but not that quick as some of you have posted. i have read all 7 books and have seen 4 of the 5 movies so far and i enjoyed them all, but im not particualry to worried about this HP land at IOA simply because like the rest of IOA people well start visting the land less and less each year about 2-3 years after it opens as its evident with the other lands at IOA.

PirateLover
07-31-2007, 03:02 PM
Ok...ok...now we're getting out of hand....
Ummm...ok? Don't see that. I was just stating and defending my position same as you. Your prerogative is that HP is a fad that will fade and mine is that is a phenomenon that will lessen, but always have appeal. As you said yourself, everyone is entitled to their opinion, and I don't appreciate being labeled as naive to think that children will still be excited over these books in the future, despite what other advances in gaming are made or what tv shows come out. Now whether or not IOA's HP rides are any good, that will be the real test.



we shall all wait and see....no one "knows"....
Exactly....:cool:

battlefield2freak
07-31-2007, 03:30 PM
Now whether or not IOA's HP rides are any good, that will be the real test.


that and when they will start recieving the IOA spring rehab where all the water rides almost are closed and about 25- 50% of the park is closed for rehabs that last over 1 month at times. happened last time we went. the ripsaw falls was closed, most of the cat and the hat land, popeye ride and other small rides was down for rehab at one time, i figured they would take lessons from WDW and close them every now and then and not all at once.