All things Universal Studios Hollywood

[mickEblu]

I’d also argue, has universal done anything truly risk taking? Building a new theme park all about popular IP’s is pretty… expected? The scale is in line with their wizarding world offerings, and they’ve overall built something pretty fantastic.

If we want to talk risk taking, Disney shuttering the ROA for expansion is a risk. It’s bold. It’s shocking. No idea if it will payoff in the long run, but for me that’s taking a risk, even if I think it’s… crazy.

Maybe it’s just me but I don’t think there is any context where I can paint what Disney is doing with the ROA at MK in a positive light.

 

[Disney Analyst]

Maybe it’s just me but I don’t think there is any context where I can paint what Disney is doing with the ROA at MK in a positive light.

Yeah I mean. Whatever it is, it’s risky.

 

[Rich T]

… Velocicoaster on the other hand receives some assistance from more lax expectations of Universal by the theme park community.

Ok. I’m going to keep saying this… I know opinion is divided.. But I swear I find Velicoaster and the way it interacts with the land, lagoon and walkways to be stunningly beautiful. That lagoon skyline as seen from Port of Entry has become iconic. And it has energized that area of JP like never before. It brings joy and excitement.

Regarding improving the land going forward, I just have one question for Universal decision makers: How the heck hard is it to bring Beijing’s Walk-around Triceratops to IoA??? That simple addition would make people so happy!!!!!! I can picture the countless awestruck Vlog thumbnails now!

 

[lazyboy97o]

Yeah I mean. Whatever it is, it’s risky.

Not really, especially from their mindset. They’re fixing the park by making it “more Disney”.

 

[Rich T]

If we want to talk risk taking, Disney shuttering the ROA for expansion is a risk. It’s bold. It’s shocking. No idea if it will payoff in the long run, but for me that’s taking a risk, even if I think it’s… crazy.

Not the kind of risk I want to see. From their POV, I imagine them viewing this as a huge chance to sell plastic cartoon toys.

Know what would be a real risk? Expanding Frontierland into the grandest, wildest, most fun and gorgeous Wild West land the planet’s ever seen. With not a cartoon character in sight…

Imagination! Dream a fantastic dream!

Disney: “…. Nawwww…”

 

[Too Many Hats]

But what people often forget is that Universal has not just been making straightforward, wholly positive choices from Potter onward. It's been much more scattered in reality.

True, disappointingly. That’s why I’m very pleased to see that Epic looks so well-done.

I just don’t get the cynicism around here. Why are we are looking at a beautiful new new theme park and saying “Yeah this looks good, but remember the Fallon ride?”

But while people harp on stuff like Webslingers endlessly, they don't really talk about any of Universal's misfires except FATF, because that attraction's badness has become a meme.

Webslingers is so bad. And it’s in a park that has desperately needed help for years. I will never stop criticizing it lol. Disney has the money and talent to have done way better. Same with Pixar Pier. These projects deserve endless shame.

Idk… don’t people talk about Universal’s misfires (particularly the over-abundance of screen rides at USF) all the time? Maybe people discuss it less on this side of the message board because it’s all the way in Orlando. And honestly USH is so far from being a quality theme park that it’s barely relevant to any discussion over here. It’s not a competitor with Disneyland in any sense.

The same Universal that built Hogsmeade and Diagon Alley put in stuff like Jimmy Fallon, the aforementioned Fast and the Furious, replaced several beloved attractions with physical sets/props/attributes with screens, Villaincon Minionblast, etc. They completely gutted the Studios park in Florida in particular of many of the attractions that gave it a personality.

All disastrous attractions. USF has fallen so far, it bums me out.

The same Universal that put in cool new foods and shows at Epic has been content to let their food scene languish in their other parks and skimp on shows even more than Disney has. No one ever talks about how Toon Lagoon has a giant arena that just sits empty, that USF had an arena that they gutted, that Poseidon's Fury and Sindbad just sit there unused, that distinctly Universal entertainment like the Special Effects Show and the Animal Actors are just gone now, not to be replaced with new entertainment.

The same Universal that has made groundbreaking new attractions has put unnecessarily restrictive restraints on a simple dark ride.

The same Universal that "put the park back in theme park" in Celestial Park has apparently forgotten that parks have shade and trees. (And yes, it takes time for new trees to grow in. Could they not have imported mature trees in as other parks have done?)

The same Universal that made Epic beautiful at night likes to close its parks well before sundown most of the year.

Universal, too, eventually fell victim to the current economic cycle and once people couldn't crow about how Universal was eating Disney for lunch attendance, ops, and new attraction-wise (when it was very, very obvious to anyone who looked that basically the entire industry was struggling and Universal, not Disney, was the anomaly), people suddenly, conveniently stopped talking about Universal as much until Epic came along.

Maybe I’m just wading into a discussion for which I have insufficient reference points. I guess I just haven’t witnessed people having lower standards for Universal (I feel like I’ve seen the opposite; complete dismissal of Universal parks yet defensiveness regarding Disneys lackluster recent offerings). IMO all your points about Universal here are completely valid. Food at IOA is indeed pretty bad, Lost Continent is a mess, the parks close too early, etc. I would’ve assumed most people agree with them.

Obviously, there's overlap with Disney here in many areas, and in some places each operator has its own unique issues. But sometimes it's genuinely hard to tell if people are actually enthusiastic about Universal OR if they're just rooting for Universal because they're hoping Disney will struggle, realize its real-or-perceived sins, and immediately revert back to how the parks were run at Insert Personal Golden Age Here, something that almost certainly will not happen in any universe other than the fantasy one people have constructed in their heads.

Ah okay. Here I agree with you completely. You’ve articulated it perfectly, so I’ll just leave it at that.

Personally I am not rooting for Epic because I want Disney to suffer or because I want Disney to build better stuff. It legitimately looks like a fun park in its own right.

 

[Gusey]

I’d also argue, has universal done anything truly risk taking? Building a new theme park all about popular IP’s is pretty… expected? The scale is in line with their wizarding world offerings, and they’ve overall built something pretty fantastic.

If we want to talk risk taking, Disney shuttering the ROA for expansion is a risk. It’s bold. It’s shocking. No idea if it will payoff in the long run, but for me that’s taking a risk, even if I think it’s… crazy.

Technologically, yes. They've created a lot of new ride systems over the decade and a half (since 2010) including the Kuka Arm coaster for Forbidden Journey and Monsters Unchained, Gringotts being a controlled spinning rollercoaster, Jimmy Fallon being a unique flying simulator, Battle of the Ministry being an enhanced SCOOP system, Minion Blast being the first shooter ride where the blasters aren't attached to a ride system. This plus the seamless transitions between screens and real life in Bourne and some of the Epic rides are all much better than Disney have managed so far. When it comes to new ride systems, in the same timeframe (since 2010) the only truly unique ride system Disney has made was the Flight of Passage simulators, with Guardians @ Epcot, Peter Pan @ Tokyo DisneySea and Web Slingers being described as new systems but just something that has existed as another non-Disney park before (Gringotts, Spider Man and Ninjago)

 

[Too Many Hats]

I’d also argue, has universal done anything truly risk taking? Building a new theme park all about popular IP’s is pretty… expected? The scale is in line with their wizarding world offerings, and they’ve overall built something pretty fantastic.

If we want to talk risk taking, Disney shuttering the ROA for expansion is a risk. It’s bold. It’s shocking. No idea if it will payoff in the long run, but for me that’s taking a risk, even if I think it’s… crazy.

I think Dark Universe qualifies as a “risky” land, given the current IP mandates.

Personally I can’t see the ROA demolition as risky. I think it embodies cynicism and greed beyond anything I can excuse.

 

[mickEblu]

Ok. I’m going to keep saying this… I know opinion is divided.. But I swear I find Velicoaster and the way it interacts with the land, lagoon and walkways to be stunningly beautiful. That lagoon skyline as seen from Port of Entry has become iconic. And it has energized that area of JP like never before. It brings joy and excitement.

Ok. I’m going to keep saying this… I know opinion is divided.. But I swear I find Velicoaster and the way it interacts with the land, lagoon and walkways to be stunningly beautiful. That lagoon skyline as seen from Port of Entry has become iconic, and it energizes that area of the park in a way that never existed before. It’s joyous. It’s fun. It looks (I believe) amazing.

Regarding improving the land going forward, I just have one question for Universal decision makers: How the heck hard is it to bring Beijing’s Walk-around Triceratops to IoA??? That simple addition would make people so happy!!!!!! I can picture the countless awestruck Vlog thumbnails now!

I think what you and I are saying can be both be true. It can totally be fun / energetic and a spectacle in its own right while not being the best themed coaster. Case in point - Pixar Pier. I enjoy the kinetic energy, the popcorn lights, the vista etc but also acknowledge the theme isn't great for a Disney park. With that said, what Pixar Pier has going for it is that all that exposed coasters and carny rides are in theme with a seaside amusement park and meets peoples expectations.

 

[mickEblu]

Yeah I mean. Whatever it is, it’s risky.

That I can agree with. In the context of the post I responded to it kind of sounded like it was being painted in a positive light. I don't think its a good or necessary risk.

 

[mickEblu]

Let’s wait to see the final results. I’m very much in favor of cloning attractions for non-overlapping territories.

I agree but only if I am the beneficiary of said clone. Haha. Bring Hagrid's to USH? Sure! Put RSR in Hollywood Studios over in Orlando. Nah.

 

[Disney Analyst]

Technologically, yes. They've created a lot of new ride systems over the decade and a half (since 2010) including the Kuka Arm coaster for Forbidden Journey and Monsters Unchained, Gringotts being a controlled spinning rollercoaster, Jimmy Fallon being a unique flying simulator, Battle of the Ministry being an enhanced SCOOP system, Minion Blast being the first shooter ride where the blasters aren't attached to a ride system. This plus the seamless transitions between screens and real life in Bourne and some of the Epic rides are all much better than Disney have managed so far. When it comes to new ride systems, in the same timeframe (since 2010) the only truly unique ride system Disney has made was the Flight of Passage simulators, with Guardians @ Epcot, Peter Pan @ Tokyo DisneySea and Web Slingers being described as new systems but just something that has existed as another non-Disney park before (Gringotts, Spider Man and Ninjago)

I’d argue Gringotts feels to many like another screen attraction, similar to many universal put out. Barely a coaster. Barely meets expectations of what a gringotts bank coaster should be.

That’s also the number one criticism I hear from people about Ministry, just a bunch of screens with some very impressive death eater figures.

Yet all I hear about the guardians coaster is how it’s the most amazing experience, and nothing like any coaster most have been on.

The truth is, everyone’s mileage may vary on what is seen as ground breaking or innovative.

 

[Rich T]

….That’s also the number one criticism I hear from people about Ministry, just a bunch of screens with some very impressive death eater figures…..

No. No, no, no.

“Just a bunch of screens” is like saying the Mona Lisa is just a bunch of paint dabs.

It’s not the tools and the medium that matter. It’s what you DO with them.

I’ll admit that the first time I rode Ministry, I was AT FIRST disappointed to see it used screens… but…

The disappointment lasted about five seconds…. and then my jaw dropped open, my mind was blown and I was in awe all the way till the end of the ride.

I’ve ridden it 3 times now, and it’s still mind-blowing.
Youtube videos cannot convey what this ride feels like and looks like in person with its high-def imagery, multiple layers, gigantic screens that completely fill your field of vision paired with massive sets, a ton of animatronics (not just Deatheaters) that perfectly mesh with characters on screens, unseen robotic arms moving large setpieces in space to match the motions of your elevator cabin, and then the cabin itself behaving and feeling exactly how one imagines a magical flying elevator would feel as it’s zipping about and being pummeled by enemy spellcasting.

The depth and the scale is breathtaking. The illusions of great heights and vast distances are perfect. No ride has ever before thrust people right into the midst of an epic movie battle and chase scene as completely and believably as this. It’s as if Rise, Gringott’s, Flight of Passage, IoA’s Spiderman and Forbidden Journey all had to exist first so they could all lead up to the creation of this ride as the perfect refinement and expansion of those concepts.

I’m STILL trying to figure out how they do the Time Department sequence.

Anyhow, that’s my two cents of input. And as much as I love this ride, Monsters Unchained is still my new favorite dark ride. Anywhere.

Fun tip: If you happen to be seated at the far right front of the elevator cabin, you might—as you wait to proceed to the unload area—just catch a glimpse of the cabin behind you encountering the final show scene on the last turn, and get a fun little peek at the track and some of the methods in use.

 

[Too Many Hats]

I don't think anyone's genuinely been hating on Universal in this thread. I'm very much looking forward to the new coaster and Epic, and I imagine most are.

You’re right, the cynicism is more over in the main Epic thread of the Univerasal Orlando section of this board. There are people over there seemingly rooting for Epic to fail, cheering every blunder. It’s so dumb.

In bringing up Viper, the intent was to allude to a difference between old school and new school intensity. Viper is a great representation of old school intensity, where it's all about the raw power of the experience, made all the more potent by the imperfect, pre-computer engineering. Viper is one of the last example of rides like that built-among the last that survive, anyway.

Whereas something like Velocicoaster is new school intensity. It is intense, but the coaster is engineered in such a way that the experience is smooth and relatively frictionless compared to the rides of old. Both have their time and place, and I'm sure sooner or later Viper will join all of its megalooping siblings in the great coaster park in the sky. That's why I'm happy it's still around, and I hope I get to ride it at least a few more times before it inevitably departs.

I totally got what you were saying, and it’s exactly how I look at it too. I love the perfectly engineered new school intensity; feels like we’ve entered an exciting new era. For that reason, I’m stoked for Stardust Racers, which I hear is a smooth, airtime machine.

There is something wild and unpredictable about the old school intensity that I will miss, though. Of course, it’s worth noting that during my Viper grey-out visit to MM last year, Twisted Colossus had a 2.5 hour wait and Viper was a walk-on. Speaks for itself.

I don't think I was suggesting that bare coasters were always prohibited in themed environments. Just that putting Velocicoaster where they did kind of mucked up sightlines in that specific area.

Is it the worst thing ever? No (What HRRR and the Transformers building have done to the Studio park next door is much worse IMO). Am I personally bothered by it? Not really, I would much rather have Velocicoaster and the current sitelines than what was there before. But I don't think it's overreaching to say that it's not the cleanest looking visual in the world.

Agreed re: USF. What eyesores. That park has lost so much of its charm.

Regarding Velocicoaster… I’m a huge IOA fan. Prior to Velocicoaster, I loved the view of the park from the edge of Port of Entry — seeing the majesty of the Jurassic Park Discovery Center directly across the lake, surrounded by lushness.

It has really declined over the years. Forbidden Journey is a fantastic ride, but the show building’s visibility was a real sightline blunder (also very avoidable). Velocicoaster fully obliterated the tastefulness of that view. It’s chaos now, with this huge black coaster messing up the forced perspective and obscuring the lovely back side of Hogsmeade village. The park feels smaller, with less depth, than it used to.

I’m sure I’m in the minority here, not only for finding IOA beautiful back in the day (some people will find it crazy I referred to the Discovery Center as “majestic”) but also for having any sort of ambivalence about Velocicoaster. It’s an outstanding coaster and fills the back of the park with kinetic energy. It’s so popular. And parts of it do really blend seamlessly with the Jurassic Park land and are awe-inspiring to watch. At the end of the day, I’m with you; I’d rather have Velocicoaster than not have it. But… there is a part of me that might’ve preferred Jurassic Park when it was quiet and lush and mysterious, and preferred IOA when its sightlines were more deliberate and protected. It’s a trade-off.

have not actually been back to DHS since Slinky Dog was built, so I have yet to see it in person. It does look tacky based only on pictures I've seen IMO.

It’s perfectly fine, IMO. Not the best themed attraction ever, but it’s acceptable for what it is.

If I have any frustration with Universal, or to be more specific, discussions about Universal in the past 3-4 years or so, is that it seems like there are two main thoughts, and only two main thoughts, that people express about Universal over that time period:
1.) (when Universal does something good) "See, SEE!!! Look at that! Universal's doing amazing and making Disney look bad! Universal rules and Disney drools!"
OR
2.) (when any criticism of Universal is offered at all) "Well what do you expect, they're not Disney, of COURSE it's going to have __________ (insert less good element here)! Be reasonable!"

#1 is insufferable and not worth anyone’s time. But #2 should be pointed out and refuted whenever expressed. I like to think I hold them both to similar standards, but maybe I’m blind to some of my biases.

The thing is, Universal and Disney often set out to do different things. So a 1:1 comparison is not always possible.

Like, if Disney changes a lightbulb to a slightly different hue, it's treated like Disney did it on purpose because Disney KNEW how you and/or the fanbase felt about the lightbulb so OF COURSE they had to screw it up to spite you and all fans, just because they could and they wanted to show that they were smarter than all you dumb fans!!111 But if people say anything remotely negative about Universal, especially if a sweet new ride and/or theme park just opened that might help punish Disney for its real or perceived sins, people rush to defend them and give them all the benefit of the doubt in the world.

I might push back a little here. Lightbulbs, I hear you. But recently Disney has been making decisions that do kind of suggest they DGAF — or at least don’t know what they’re doing. They’re paving the Rivers of America. They put minimal effort into their Splash replacement. They dropped a bomb on Epcot, spent 5 years moving dirt around and achieved essentially nothing noteworthy. WDI’s leadership seems lost.

Meanwhile (right or wrong) it’s still kind of easy to see Universal as the scrappy underdog eagerly building fun new parks and attractions. This isn’t reality, but I can understand the impulse, and why people view and judge the companies so differently at this moment. Disney is so powerful and dominant; why couldn’t they have invested more money and resources into Tiana’s Bayou Adventure? Again, it’s not correct to hold the companies to wildly different standards, but I understand being particularly critical of Disney at this moment.

But really, it goes both ways. This is ancient history at this point, but when Diagon Alley opened, Disney stans pointed to Gringotts’ few-weeks delayed opening as evidence Universal was in over its head (they’re doing the same thing now with Epic’s issues). But where were they when Rise was delayed 9 months?

It’s all so dumb. I am going to continue taking the very very brave stance of loving all fun theme park nonsense and cheering for every quality project, like Rise and Secret Life of Pets and Adventureland Treehouse and Cosmic Rewind and Monsters Unchained.

 

[Phroobar]

Not the kind of risk I want to see. From their POV, I imagine them viewing this as a huge chance to sell plastic cartoon toys.

Know what would be a real risk? Expanding Frontierland into the grandest, wildest, most fun and gorgeous Wild West land the planet’s ever seen. With not a cartoon character in sight…

Imagination! Dream a fantastic dream!

Disney: “…. Nawwww…”

Westerns and cowboys are not hip right now. Certain groups even see them as "problematic". When was the last time a western made money at the box office?

 

[Phroobar]

You’re right, the cynicism is more over in the main Epic thread of the Univerasal Orlando section of this board. There are people over there seemingly rooting for Epic to fail, cheering every blunder. It’s so dumb.



I totally got what you were saying, and it’s exactly how I look at it too. I love the perfectly engineered new school intensity; feels like we’ve entered an exciting new era. For that reason, I’m stoked for Stardust Racers, which I hear is a smooth, airtime machine.

There is something wild and unpredictable about the old school intensity that I will miss, though. Of course, it’s worth noting that during my Viper grey-out visit to MM last year, Twisted Colossus had a 2.5 hour wait and Viper was a walk-on. Speaks for itself.



Agreed re: USF. What eyesores. That park has lost so much of its charm.

Regarding Velocicoaster… I’m a huge IOA fan. Prior to Velocicoaster, I loved the view of the park from the edge of Port of Entry — seeing the majesty of the Jurassic Park Discovery Center directly across the lake, surrounded by lushness.

It has really declined over the years. Forbidden Journey is a fantastic ride, but the show building’s visibility was a real sightline blunder (also very avoidable). Velocicoaster fully obliterated the tastefulness of that view. It’s chaos now, with this huge black coaster messing up the forced perspective and obscuring the lovely back side of Hogsmeade village. The park feels smaller, with less depth, than it used to.

I’m sure I’m in the minority here, not only for finding IOA beautiful back in the day (some people will find it crazy I referred to the Discovery Center as “majestic”) but also for having any sort of ambivalence about Velocicoaster. It’s an outstanding coaster and fills the back of the park with kinetic energy. It’s so popular. And parts of it do really blend seamlessly with the Jurassic Park land and are awe-inspiring to watch. At the end of the day, I’m with you; I’d rather have Velocicoaster than not have it. But… there is a part of me that might’ve preferred Jurassic Park when it was quiet and lush and mysterious, and preferred IOA when its sightlines were more deliberate and protected. It’s a trade-off.



It’s perfectly fine, IMO. Not the best themed attraction ever, but it’s acceptable for what it is.



#1 is insufferable and not worth anyone’s time. But #2 should be pointed out and refuted whenever expressed. I like to think I hold them both to similar standards, but maybe I’m blind to some of my biases.

The thing is, Universal and Disney often set out to do different things. So a 1:1 comparison is not always possible.



I might push back a little here. Lightbulbs, I hear you. But recently Disney has been making decisions that do kind of suggest they DGAF — or at least don’t know what they’re doing. They’re paving the Rivers of America. They put minimal effort into their Splash replacement. They dropped a bomb on Epcot, spent 5 years moving dirt around and achieved essentially nothing noteworthy. WDI’s leadership seems lost.

Meanwhile (right or wrong) it’s still kind of easy to see Universal as the scrappy underdog eagerly building fun new parks and attractions. This isn’t reality, but I can understand the impulse, and why people view and judge the companies so differently at this moment. Disney is so powerful and dominant; why couldn’t they have invested more money and resources into Tiana’s Bayou Adventure? Again, it’s not correct to hold the companies to wildly different standards, but I understand being particularly critical of Disney at this moment.

But really, it goes both ways. This is ancient history at this point, but when Diagon Alley opened, Disney stans pointed to Gringotts’ few-weeks delayed opening as evidence Universal was in over its head (they’re doing the same thing now with Epic’s issues). But where were they when Rise was delayed 9 months?

It’s all so dumb. I am going to continue taking the very very brave stance of loving all fun theme park nonsense and cheering for every quality project, like Rise and Secret Life of Pets and Adventureland Treehouse and Cosmic Rewind and Monsters Unchained.

It all depends on what company you are rooting for. Which in itself is dumb since neither company cares about you. They just want your money.

 

[lazyboy97o]

I just don’t get the cynicism around here. Why are we are looking at a beautiful new new theme park and saying “Yeah this looks good, but remember the Fallon ride?”

Unfortunately this seems to be the view at Universal.

 

[Rich T]

Westerns and cowboys are not hip right now. Certain groups even see them as "problematic". When was the last time a western made money at the box office?

Hip, schmip. It wasn’t long ago that Disney was called foolhardy for making a big-budget pirate movie. (Pre-release, one major entertainment magazine snarkily said, “Haven’t we learned ANYTHING from ‘Cutthroat Island?” (A huge pirate movie flop). Lone Ranger didn’t flop because it was a western: it flopped because it was an awful movie.

The image, style, mythology and music of the American Wild West is timeless and beloved the world over. The Red Dead Redemption series remains one of the biggest-selling videogame franchises of all time. Western-themed films and shows continue to find their audience and earn praise.

Big Thunder remains one of the greatest and most-loved rides on the planet.

Woody, Jessie and Bullseye are beloved Disney characters.

Country music is still a major genre.

Cowboy hats and boots never die.

Horses are awesome.

Some people can’t separate the wondrous imagery, mythology and heroism from the injustices that occured in the past. But that same wonderful imagery and mythology can also be used to educate as well as entertain. Walt Disney did a remarkably good job with that at both DL and in his western themed TV shows and films.

I say you don’t throw out the baby with the bathwater.

Do I expect Disney to build a grand Wild West land? Not in my lifetime. It’s too risky! In fact, I wouldn’t be at all surprised if WDW’s Big Thunder were to be converted to Toy Story Railroad: Jessie’s Rootin’ Tootin’ Save-The-Critters Adventure.

 

[PiratesMansion]

I think it’s great that Disney now has true competition on the east coast for a decent slice of the demographic they cater to - though anyone can see it’s clearly still not apples to apples. Universals prime demographic is still teenagers and young adults. If you don’t like hanging upside down or going 60 miles per hour through hairpin turns there is still very little to consume a vacations worth of entertainment that an all ages family wants. Can universal truly become a multigenerational vacation experience without tacking on Disney or a cruise to the itinerary ? Not convinced just yet , but they are clearly upping their game

Undoubtedly.

And one of the most interesting things about all of Universal's decisions over the past decades is that they have done a great job of positioning Universal Orlando as a viable competitor to Walt Disney World, very successfully. And yet, Universal Hollywood still remains a relatively compromised theme park by comparison. Maybe it's just because it's so far away from Disneyland, perhaps it's because they have more severe spacial issues and have to share with the studio. But it's notable to me how Universal is seemingly content to leave Hollywood as this weird half-formed park. I don't know how to solve this, but it strikes me that always giving Orlando full-out lands and Hollywood the highlights version every single time doesn't do a whole lot to give the park any leverage against Disneyland, or even fix any of its weaknesses. Despite the expansions over the years, it feels oddly stagnant in many ways.

Not the kind of risk I want to see. From their POV, I imagine them viewing this as a huge chance to sell plastic cartoon toys.

Know what would be a real risk? Expanding Frontierland into the grandest, wildest, most fun and gorgeous Wild West land the planet’s ever seen. With not a cartoon character in sight…

Imagination! Dream a fantastic dream!

Disney: “…. Nawwww…”

In fairness, IP: The Theme Park isn't really showing a whole lot of imagination either. And that describes at least two of Orlando's three Universal parks.

I’m sure I’m in the minority here, not only for finding IOA beautiful back in the day (some people will find it crazy I referred to the Discovery Center as “majestic”) but also for having any sort of ambivalence about Velocicoaster. It’s an outstanding coaster and fills the back of the park with kinetic energy. It’s so popular. And parts of it do really blend seamlessly with the Jurassic Park land and are awe-inspiring to watch. At the end of the day, I’m with you; I’d rather have Velocicoaster than not have it. But… there is a part of me that might’ve preferred Jurassic Park when it was quiet and lush and mysterious, and preferred IOA when its sightlines were more deliberate and protected. It’s a trade-off.

Absolutely.

I might push back a little here. Lightbulbs, I hear you. But recently Disney has been making decisions that do kind of suggest they DGAF — or at least don’t know what they’re doing. They’re paving the Rivers of America. They put minimal effort into their Splash replacement. They dropped a bomb on Epcot, spent 5 years moving dirt around and achieved essentially nothing noteworthy. WDI’s leadership seems lost.

Meanwhile (right or wrong) it’s still kind of easy to see Universal as the scrappy underdog eagerly building fun new parks and attractions. This isn’t reality, but I can understand the impulse, and why people view and judge the companies so differently at this moment. Disney is so powerful and dominant; why couldn’t they have invested more money and resources into Tiana’s Bayou Adventure? Again, it’s not correct to hold the companies to wildly different standards, but I understand being particularly critical of Disney at this moment.

Disney absolutely deserves a lot of criticism for their big missteps and letting the parks fall into the hands of people who fundamentally don't understand them, but the lightbulb example wasn't just chosen at random. People go at Disney for literally everything. Eisner talked about getting letters when a bench at Disneyland was moved. And because of that, it makes it all the easier for the company to just disregard the fanbase altogether. If people are screaming at the rooftops over minor and/or irrational things, it becomes easier for the company to assume that ALL fan criticism is irrational and incorrect and they should just do whatever they want because they'll get yelled at anyway.

And being the scrappy underdog shouldn't shield anyone from criticism. This season of Survivor, there was a (boring) strong people alliance, and scrappy underdogs that people hoped and prayed would do something, anything, to upend the power structure. Yet instead of upsetting the status quo, the underdogs metaphorically paced about and bumped into the furniture, ignored several warnings from others who were being voted out about what was happening, refused to work with people they didn't like for even one vote to put themselves in a better and more powerful position, etc.

If Universal actually wants to unseat Disney, they have to stop greenlighting attractions that just indulge in their worst impulses. Sure, they're not at all in a bad position today. But imagine where they could be today if they had better focused after the initial windfall of Hogsmeade.

 

[mickEblu]

Undoubtedly.

And one of the most interesting things about all of Universal's decisions over the past decades is that they have done a great job of positioning Universal Orlando as a viable competitor to Walt Disney World, very successfully. And yet, Universal Hollywood still remains a relatively compromised theme park by comparison. Maybe it's just because it's so far away from Disneyland, perhaps it's because they have more severe spacial issues and have to share with the studio. But it's notable to me how Universal is seemingly content to leave Hollywood as this weird half-formed park. I don't know how to solve this, but it strikes me that always giving Orlando full-out lands and Hollywood the highlights version every single time doesn't do a whole lot to give the park any leverage against Disneyland, or even fix any of its weaknesses. Despite the expansions over the years, it feels oddly stagnant in many ways.

In fairness, IP: The Theme Park isn't really showing a whole lot of imagination either. And that describes at least two of Orlando's three Universal parks.

Absolutely.

Disney absolutely deserves a lot of criticism for their big missteps and letting the parks fall into the hands of people who fundamentally don't understand them, but the lightbulb example wasn't just chosen at random. People go at Disney for literally everything. Eisner talked about getting letters when a bench at Disneyland was moved. And because of that, it makes it all the easier for the company to just disregard the fanbase altogether. If people are screaming at the rooftops over minor and/or irrational things, it becomes easier for the company to assume that ALL fan criticism is irrational and incorrect and they should just do whatever they want because they'll get yelled at anyway.

And being the scrappy underdog shouldn't shield anyone from criticism. This season of Survivor, there was a (boring) strong people alliance, and scrappy underdogs that people hoped and prayed would do something, anything, to upend the power structure. Yet instead of upsetting the status quo, the underdogs metaphorically paced about and bumped into the furniture, ignored several warnings from others who were being voted out about what was happening, refused to work with people they didn't like for even one vote to put themselves in a better and more powerful position, etc.

If Universal actually wants to unseat Disney, they have to stop greenlighting attractions that just indulge in their worst impulses. Sure, they're not at all in a bad position today. But imagine where they could be today if they had better focused after the initial windfall of Hogsmeade.

Shouldn’t the powers that be at a multi billion dollar company be able to differentiate between the crazy stuff and when the criticism is warranted? Take the decision to turn the ROA at MK into a Cars ride for example. You have not only a huge portion of the fan base but also former star imagineers saying it’s a bad idea and yet they seem to be full steam ahead. You even have a large percentage of typically Disney can do no wrong vloggers that are not afraid to say this is a bad idea. You even have Forbes getting in on the action. So if they still want to blame a few crazy “tree huggers” for their poor decisions that’s on them.