MrPromey
Well-Known Member
Of course they could reappropriate the theater space in the future. But would they? This is the same company that's had a theater sitting empty for literally 99% of a park's existence, and you want to put that much faith in them to not allow it to happen again?
I mean that's the question, right? Do they repurpose a theater that's used mostly for overflow queue for Hagrids today (best candidate in terms of size) or shove it in one of the other two spaces that don't have the same capacity (the one in Toon Lagoon would probably be the easiest to get away with theme-wise since that theater sits on it's own between the two islands) and then potentially mothball the location again in a number of years when the show closes or do they build an entirely new theater that they might also abandon after this show, adding a fourth venue to leave unused in the future to add to their collection?
Would I dedicate an entire land to this IP? I think a general Oz theme would play better to an American audience than a Japanese one, and would be immediately recognizable to most people at the very least, but I'm not convinced it would be much of an actual pull for most. Even if they made a great attraction, it would likely end up like Monsters, with one of the shortest waits in the park. However, this would be even more true for Wicked, whether they try to expand the franchise or not. It's niche. So the way I see it, you either do an entire Oz land, which at least bears a resemblance to the version everyone knows, or you don't bother. Either way, we don't need a theater that used to play Wicked sitting off on a thematic desert island somewhere.
And the problem with a general Oz land is nobody controls the IP. The book has been in public domain for nearly 70 years and many have taken their own stab at it. Disney's done a couple different unrelated movies for instance and there's that 1975 Broadway show, The Wiz (which is touring again, btw) that ended up being made into a movie that, funny enough was made by Universal.
You have the 1939 MGM movie which is what everyone thinks of and where the most common look comes from but striking a deal with them today for theme park rights seems kind of silly since that falls into the public domain in less than a decade.
MGM would have had to have been paid for the Broadway show and the movies because the character design of the witch (among other things) was an MGM creation but unless they made Wicked the preamble to their own Oz franchise rather than a prequel to the MGM movie, eventually with their own Dorthy story with look and design they can assign their own copyright to, they would have built a land with an IP anyone could use down to the look/feel and half the soundtrack in a few years and you know what would happen on International Drive if they did that.
For that reason, I think it could only ever make business sense for them to do an entire land if they're going to do a run of movies in their own Oz world, separate from all the other media out there that is distinct and which they at least partially control.
Personally, I don't trust a modern movie studio's creative team's vision to produce something on their own as well made story and music-wise as the live show these movies were made from but we'll (likely) see because even if they don't do anything theme park wise, they'll still eventually want this scrappy cast of characters to go to space, fight a sub and become international spies because "you don't turn your back on family"... or potentially billions of dollars.

Last edited: