CaptinEO
Well-Known Member
Ghostbusters is probably dead as a series, the new movies didnt do all that well.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
All things Universal Studios Hollywood
- Thread starter Darkbeer1
- Start date
Professortango1
Well-Known Member
I've been seeing Potter wane though due to franchise fatigue as well as Rowling's persistent trolling and hate mongering. I've heard many folks talk about not giving any more money to Potter in the wake of the current human rights violating climate and the new series.The thing is, Potter is one of the most brilliant and appealing fantasy worlds of our age—not to mention theme park perfection. No one thinks about Rowling while there. The creation has, thankfully, taken on its own life, and the creation has a ton of positive things to say about equality, inclusion, compassion and kindness. Dumbledore’s gay and the Hogwart’s Legacy game has a very strong, courageous trans character in it.
But, that aside, yes, yes, yes on a greater variety of Universal IP’s going forward, absolutely!
I’m imagining what they could do if they took the technology of Ministry and used it on a Back to the Future or Jaws attraction. Or How to Train Your Dragon. Lord of the Rings? Zelda? I think they’re just getting started blowing people’s minds.
Do I think that the theme parks lands are in danger? Lord no, but it would be smart to start exploring other options rather than building more and more Potter-themed stuff. For so long I've heard Disney fans say "we don't visit Universal because they can't hold a candle to Disney." The only consistent exception has been the Wizarding World lands. Which, if you're not too keen on funding hate, isn't a slam dunk sales pitch.
"Come visit our park where we have one incredible land. And it helps fund one of the worst modern-day celebrities to continue her bigotry." It would be like if Disney's only well themed land/ride was themed to Splash Mountain or the live action Mulan.
Rich T
Well-Known Member
My current opinion—which could change or be totally wrong—is that the new Potter series coujd have almost no impact at all on the big Pop Culture perception of the franchise… unless it’s the greatest TV show ever made and they get absolutely everything right. The Potter movies were lightning-in-a-bottle: Right time, right place, right cast, right creatives. And though the 8 films only cover the most basic plot elements of the novels and leave out some very important details, they succeeded in making that world completely accessible and relatable to the GP, and it’s hard to imagine a TV series on a pay network overtaking it. But, heck, nothing’s impossible.
mickEblu
Well-Known Member
What did JK Rowling say so bad? I keep seeing her name mentioned. I finally caved and googled it. The tweet about menstruation and women? Please tell me people aren’t losing their minds over this?
Professortango1
Well-Known Member
She's been very politically active in pushing for/celebrating anti-Trans policies and bills. Giving money to her actively contributes to the erasure of Trans people.
mickEblu
Well-Known Member
I dunno. I just found this article and seems like a pretty rational / harmless take:
J. K. Rowling Faces Backlash for Transphobic Tweets About Menstruation
“J. K. Rowling continues to align herself with an ideology which willfully distorts facts about gender identity and people who are trans.” —GLAAD
www.cosmopolitan.com
Professortango1
Well-Known Member
That article is about 5 years old. It might behoove you to look at more recent events. It would be like wondering what's everyone's beef about a certain President deporting Americans without due process and then pulling up an article from 2015 discussing him privately bragging about being able to harass women.I dunno. I just found this article and seems like a pretty rational / harmless take:
J. K. Rowling Faces Backlash for Transphobic Tweets About Menstruation
“J. K. Rowling continues to align herself with an ideology which willfully distorts facts about gender identity and people who are trans.” —GLAAD
mickEblu
Well-Known Member
It’s the first thing that came up. I’m not sure I care enough to investigate further but I’m pretty sure I will not agree with the people bashing her.
Rich T
Well-Known Member
Other options, sure. Absolutely. But I strongly believe that most people don’t listen to or care about Rowling’s opinions and just enjoy the stories and park lands… which absolutely champion inclusion, equality, kindness, the embracing of those different from oneself, creativity and courage. The wizarding world has grown beyond its creator and become its own thing. The books, movies and park lands make people happy for all the right reasons.
That said. and as much as I really, really like Wizarding Paris at EU, I do agree that’s quite enough Potter for now.
Of all the things I love about Epic Universe, the most delightful turn of events for me, as a HTTYD fan, is how much guests are adoring The Isle of Berk and how brilliantly alive, fun and loveable that land turned out. My impression after 5 trips to EU is that Berk is making people insanely happy, Hiccup’s Wing Gliders coaster is the park’s sleeper hit, the live show is a smash, and the Toothless Meet n’ Greet is going to end up as the biggest rope-drop priority on Earth.
I’m hoping Universal is paying big attention and perhaps shifting some expansion dollars from the Potter franchise to a certain tribe of Vikings.
Professortango1
Well-Known Member
If you're for erasing of Trans people and dunking on their struggle and pain; then I suppose you might find no issues with her statements. A lot of people, especially theme park fans, are typically against human rights violations.
I just think it's oddly telling that the same people supporting her now have a lot of overlap with the people who wanted to ban her books decades ago.
Nirya
Well-Known Member
The failures of the Fantastic Beasts series did nothing to dissuade them from making more Harry Potter, I doubt the relative success or failure of the TV series will do the same.
JK Rowling being a TERF is the bigger problem for the series, especially given that it is alienating to a fanbase that is generally not receptive to those views and were willing to overlook a lot of problematic elements of the books (goblins being a stand-in for Jewish stereotypes, the characters of Seamus and Dean being stereotypically Irish and black, house elves in general, inventing wizard Hitler to get around having a universe where the wizards did nothing about actual Hitler) because for them it was a gateway to a magical world where you were accepted for who you are. So much of the books are about fighting for what's right and accepting people from all walks of life (Hermoine is a Mudblood, Harry and Dudley get right up to the line of becoming friends, the Weasleys are portrayed as the good guys because of their love of Muggle culture); heck, Dumbledore is a canonically gay character that everyone in the book just accepts and doesn't think about. That stuff resonated with the fanbase, so for Rowling to turn around and be exclusionary towards a specific group is a huge slap in the face to those fans.
It's a pretty big problem for HBO/Max, who have spent the past weeks trying to distance the show from Rowling as much as possible (going so far as to say she'll have influence but they are making sure it is as minimal as possible), but when you have current actors signing pro-trans rights petitions publicly only to have Rowling turn around and say she couldn't fire them even if she wanted to, or her getting into arguments with the actors from the movies regarding her views, it becomes an open question of how much will people be willing to support the brand going forward as long as it is tied so intrinsically to an author who they despise. It's a real "Death of the Author" situation where many in the fanbase have simply tried to divorce the series from Rowling in their minds, but that only goes so far.
JK Rowling being a TERF is the bigger problem for the series, especially given that it is alienating to a fanbase that is generally not receptive to those views and were willing to overlook a lot of problematic elements of the books (goblins being a stand-in for Jewish stereotypes, the characters of Seamus and Dean being stereotypically Irish and black, house elves in general, inventing wizard Hitler to get around having a universe where the wizards did nothing about actual Hitler) because for them it was a gateway to a magical world where you were accepted for who you are. So much of the books are about fighting for what's right and accepting people from all walks of life (Hermoine is a Mudblood, Harry and Dudley get right up to the line of becoming friends, the Weasleys are portrayed as the good guys because of their love of Muggle culture); heck, Dumbledore is a canonically gay character that everyone in the book just accepts and doesn't think about. That stuff resonated with the fanbase, so for Rowling to turn around and be exclusionary towards a specific group is a huge slap in the face to those fans.
It's a pretty big problem for HBO/Max, who have spent the past weeks trying to distance the show from Rowling as much as possible (going so far as to say she'll have influence but they are making sure it is as minimal as possible), but when you have current actors signing pro-trans rights petitions publicly only to have Rowling turn around and say she couldn't fire them even if she wanted to, or her getting into arguments with the actors from the movies regarding her views, it becomes an open question of how much will people be willing to support the brand going forward as long as it is tied so intrinsically to an author who they despise. It's a real "Death of the Author" situation where many in the fanbase have simply tried to divorce the series from Rowling in their minds, but that only goes so far.
mickEblu
Well-Known Member
The only statements I know of are the ones in the article I shared. I provided you with an article. Please provide me with an article sharing your point of view.
Professortango1
Well-Known Member
I just have anecdotal evidence, so I know its not necessarily indicative of the masses, but I've had a lot of folks swear off Potter in the last 5 years or so. And if you're a Disney fan looking for that Disney-level experience, USH only really has Potter right now to attract you. If you are opposed to Rowling, that one land isn't going to convince you to buy a ticket to Universal.Other options, sure. Absolutely. But I strongly believe that most people don’t listen to or care about Rowling’s opinions and just enjoy the stories and park lands… which absolutely champion inclusion, equality, kindness, the embracing of those different from oneself, creativity and courage. The wizarding world has grown beyond its creator and become its own thing. The books, movies and park lands make people happy for all the right reasons.
That said. and as much as I really, really like Wizarding Paris at EU, I do agree that’s quite enough Potter for now.
Of all the things I love about Epic Universe, the most delightful turn of events for me, as a HTTYD fan, is how much guests are adoring The Isle of Berk and how brilliantly alive, fun and loveable that land turned out. My impression after 5 trips to EU is that Berk is making people insanely happy, Hiccup’s Wing Gliders coaster is the park’s sleeper hit, the live show is a smash, and the Toothless Meet n’ Greet is going to end up as the biggest rope-drop priority on Earth.
I’m hoping Universal is paying big attention and perhaps shifting some expansion dollars from the Potter franchise to a certain tribe of Vikings.
I also am floored by the HTTYD land. I'm not a fan of the films, which is totally fine because I'm not the target demographic in any way, but the land looks incredible and is my biggest draw to EU. Isle of Berk is exactly what Galaxy's Edge should have been.
Nirya
Well-Known Member
A timeline of JK Rowling's transphobic shift
A list of the 'Harry Potter' author's transphobic comments
theweek.com
I did a search for "JK Rowling trans" and this was the second link after the most recent news. This isn't that hard.
Professortango1
Well-Known Member
J.K. Rowling celebrated UK Supreme Court ruling with a cigar. Backlash was swift.
As JK Rowling took to social media to praise what she called "TERF VE Day," actors like Nicola Coughlan called out the author's anti-trans statements.
www.usatoday.com
Pedro Pascal Slams J.K. Rowling's 'Heinous Loser Behavior' As She Celebrates Anti-Trans Legislation
The 'Harry Potter' author celebrated a new U.K. supreme court ruling with a cigar.
This is to say nothing of how she made a "secret Trans" the villain of a book she wrote and how her more recent novels reveal her bigotry towards overweight people and the impoverished. She's a pretty ugly human being and loves to punch down on groups that have long been drawn to her work. Hence the backlash, as many fans feel betrayed and why they vow to try and stop personally funding her and her active use of power against marginalized people.
mickEblu
Well-Known Member
A timeline of JK Rowling's transphobic shift
A list of the 'Harry Potter' author's transphobic comments
I did a search for "JK Rowling trans" and this was the second link after the most recent news. This isn't that hard.
Just skimmed through it. Seems like a woman with (IMO) a rational opinion. She’s not bashing anyone. She’s sharing her views on the subject and because she’s a gazillionaire she can do that unlike all the actors from her films speaking out against her so they’re not blackballed by Hollywood.
Last edited:
mickEblu
Well-Known Member
J.K. Rowling celebrated UK Supreme Court ruling with a cigar. Backlash was swift.
As JK Rowling took to social media to praise what she called "TERF VE Day," actors like Nicola Coughlan called out the author's anti-trans statements.www.usatoday.com
Pedro Pascal Slams J.K. Rowling's 'Heinous Loser Behavior' As She Celebrates Anti-Trans Legislation
The 'Harry Potter' author celebrated a new U.K. supreme court ruling with a cigar.www.glamour.com
This is to say nothing of how she made a "secret Trans" the villain of a book she wrote and how her more recent novels reveal her bigotry towards overweight people and the impoverished. She's a pretty ugly human being and loves to punch down on groups that have long been drawn to her work. Hence the backlash, as many fans feel betrayed and why they vow to try and stop personally funding her and her active use of power against marginalized people.
Ok I’ll check these out. Thank you
Professortango1
Well-Known Member
So a woman who wrote children's books knows more about gender than world scientists? And thinks it's okay to laugh and mock them as they have their identity stripped away.
Here in the US we have now countless stories of Trans people being unable to attain legal ID's because they are forced to use the gender assigned at birth and if the DMV thinks they don't fit the description of that gender, they are told they cannot take the picture and need to return looking like their assigned gender. And this is just the beginning.
Taking the rights and voices away from marginalized people is pretty universally seen as bad. And using your insane amount of money to do that is universally seen as bad. And actively harming the fanbase which gave you that power is pretty universally seen as bad. And mocking those who cry out in anguish over such erasure and discrimination is pretty universally seen as bad.
Definitely a double edged sword, and not to say my ideas are the only way Universal could problem solve. A really well done interactive Ghostbusters ride packed to the gills with projection mapping and special effects (no more AR imo) seems like such a slam dunk. Men In Black is my favorite shooting ride in the world so I'd love to see UC take a swing at a modern version. Unfortunate that the recent Ghostbusters films haven't served the IP too well.
A slow boat ride to complement Jurassic World would be a great fit from a ride system perspective and Shrek is easily one of the most timeless properties (with family appeal) they have the rights to.
Something science fiction-y would be a good thematic complement to what they have with Nintendo, Potter, Jurassic, Minions mix, and would be more varied than something like more Potter or Darkmoor.
If we're looking at the plots they have, it seems like there's really room for 3 more full lands or areas
| Expansion Pad | Space | Potential IP |
| Falls Lake | 10.1 acres | LotR, Hagrid's |
| Lower Lot + Backstage Expansion | varies | Pokemon? |
| Tram Plaza | 6.3 acres | DiagonMoM, Darkmoor, |
| Simpson's Replacement | 1.1 acre | ?? |
I didn't mean to suggest that they'd be able to execute instantly, but just that it would be faster than developing original attractions for USH vs cloning or even "adapting" IP to new ride systems to keep the domestic parks differentiated, if they do hope to open a major attraction around the Olympics excitement. For example, my understanding is that the process to bring Monsters Unchained to Hollywood, would be faster than trying to adapt the Monsters ride assets for the Jurassic World Scoop system or something brand new.
Totally possible they don't feel the need to have a brand new ride and could lean into Fan Fest type events or other marketing buzz.
TheDisneyParksfanC8
Well-Known Member
There has been speculation on the IU forums that the studio tour load/unload could move, allowing them to expand the Simpsons replacement into that spot.