Article on Universal-Disney

[hokielutz]

Dirty? :brick:

Blaring music in IOA? Each island has its own custom score --- it's not like they've got hip-hop/rap or rock music playing.

Nemo,

The Dirty and blaring music that the Orlando writer referenced came from his views of the Universal Studios... not Islands of Adventure.

 

[VillanovaBlue]

Nemo,

The Dirty and blaring music that the Orlando writer referenced came from his views of the Universal Studios... not Islands of Adventure.

And by the way, they have stuff like Foo Fighters playing on Super Hero Island...last time I checked that was "rock music"...

The music may be themed for each area, but there is some stuff that would be considered "blaring" to some folks...

 

[sknydave]

lol @ "dirty music"

 

[hokielutz]

Sorry about posting something along the same lines of Slappy's reply from above. I did not read his until after posting my thoughts that have some variation but are similar. I guess we were thinking along a similar wavelength:


Here's one more observation about the "classics" argument that I see going on in this thread.

Both parks have rides/attractions that are based on "classic" movies. Disney has a lot of classic animation as its basis and Universal has classic action/sci-fi/thriller live action movies. Disney has attractions based off of Peter Pan, Snow White, and Dumbo; while Universal has attractions based on Jaws, ET, Earthquake, and BTF.

My hypothesis is that most children are raised on the fairy tales and cartoons that Disney uses in its parks... thus those attractions that are based on those classics will stand the test of time more so than attractions based on adult live-action movies.

These Disney produced fairy tales and cartoon movies will outlast any live action feature to a child. Children are not told of the stories of the monster sized shark that hunts people... or the child who befriended a lost alien. The first stories they learn are 90% of the time going to be classic fairy tales. And Disney has an overwhelming marketshare in that department for feature films and cartoons. Live action films will only be discovered by children when they reach an age where they can comprehend those types of movies. By that time... the older classic movies (jaws, et, BTF, etc) will be yesterday's news and young adults will want to ride the newer movies. Everyone may watch the movie at some time and appreciate it... but not enough to ride it.

I do give Nemo credit because his comments did mention that Disney had several attractions based on live action films like Indiana Jones, Star Wars, etc... And yes... these attractions will eventually lose their appeal if they are not revised, rehabbed, and/or propped up by outside events.

To Universal's credit, they have made an attempt to incorporate some childhood elements like Barney, Woody Woodpecker, Dr Seuss, and Popeye. Only one of these is part of a classic childhood story and they will need more development in the classics to sustain interest into the future.

I believe the Disney animation attractions will live on because most everyone knows the stories behind it. Most kids know the characters as they grew up and wished they could fly like Peter...get a kiss from Snow White, Play in the hundred acre wood with Pooh, and see Dumbo fly around the Big Top. All these atractions will have infinitely longer life-cycles than those from Universal, so Universal has to have a long term plan for changing out attractions at regular intervals as new famous movies come out... or find classics of their own that will stand the test of time.


Sorry for the long ramble... but I just couldn't get these thoughts out of my head until they were written down.

 

[hokielutz]

lol @ "dirty music"

Sorry if I did not clearly show that "Dirty" meant the state of the Universal Studios park; and 'Music" was for the loud music the park has blaring. But you are right... it is funny :lol:

 

[Disneyfanman]

My visits to Universal have become far less frequent during my annual trips to Orlando. The reason is simple for me. They haven't added anything new, with any frequency. I just don't get jazzed up over the Suess train thingy. Although I might ride it if I went to the park anyway. Every time something new and interesting pops up, I spend a day there. That means since 1999 (the IOA year), I went once to see MIB, once to see Mummy and Shrek, and that's it. IOA closed the Dino encounter (Which I liked) and opened a coaster and teacup ride (which I do not). They also permanently closed one of their three show arenas.

Disney, on the other hand, seems to add or change something every year that gets me all fired up. This year I saw for the first time: Nemo, the changes in pirates, and EE. I missed the Nemo Musical previews by two weeks. Turtle Talk was there the year before, but I missed it and saw it for the first time. Really cool.

Last year I saw Stitch (Yech, but it was new), and Soarin', which was incredible. They also updated Small World and I thought they did a wonderful job with it. LMA was new too (Although I haven't been able to find the time to see it)

The year before I saw Philharmagic and Mission Space. Probably something else too. I think the TOT profile changed too. I think Wishes started then also, which is a really great show.

IOA and AK opened a year apart, I think. When they opened, IOA was, by far, the better park. Since then AK has added the whole Asia section, changed their big musical twice, and added EE, which is supurb. They are building a new restaurant for next year. I now enjoy AK more than IOA. EE really pushed it up over the top for me.

So it really doesn't take much........I visit Orlando every year, and go where the new stuff grows. Disney has done that, and US hasn't. I have found US to be clean, safe, friendly, and fun. But if they want my money, they have to provide me with an ever-changing mix of attractions, and also variety. Things that my wife (Who doesn't like thrill rides) can do with me (Who likes everything). I would rather go on attractions with her than do them alone. She really hates IOA because everything there hurts her back, or makes her sick except for (interesting but brilliant) Spidey. She can go all day at any Disney park and never want for things to see and do.

So to fix Universal............Invest wisely and provide an ever changing roster of attraction variety. Keep your classics, and vary the rest. Do something different at IOA. And I will return with my wallet.

 

[Lucky]

I fully agree with the main point of the article on Disney v. Universal. It's a little one-sided though, in calling it your father's theme park because of all the dated references.

jungle Cruise was inpsired by "The African Queen" (1951). The Twilight Zone aired from 1959-64. Aerosmith was formed in 1970, and Steven Tyler is 58 years old. Does that make MGM your grandfather's theme park?

Disney does a better job than Universal with its parks. But that's because it invests more money and effort, not because it's more hip.

 

[slappy magoo]

Eh, hokielutz made my point better than I did, and with a much shorter ramble to boot! It is about what constitutes a "classic" film. 10 years ago, I never would've imagined kids growing up not having seen a movie like Back to the Future, 20 years ago, I felt the same way about Jaws. They were each 10 years old or so at that time, but were such iconic films that I thought they would practically be taught in school.

But that's not really the case, and when it comes to memorable, time-tested characters, Disney has a leg up. It puts UO at a disadvantage in that they need to update even more to keep the park contemporary because nostalgia, over rides or the movies they're based on, doesn't fly at Universal. And if they can't or don't want to spend the money on that upkeep, the end result is a decaying theme park that mocks the original intention. That, to me, is the saddest thing. It's almost like a complete lack of foresight. They spent hundreds of millions if not billions of dollars to start a mini-empire, Disney-esque in its scope but with an attempt to be hipper. And at some point, it seems that a decision was made to stop, that what they had was enough. THEN they stopped spending the money to keep it up. Maybe they weren't getting the attendance numbers they thought they'd get for their efforts, and stopped trying. Maybe Universal started facing other transactions where they needed to spend the money (like buying NBC). But there will come a point of no return, where they'll lose the tourists they get, and they'll tell their friends how far Uni has fallen. They need to nip some things in the bud.

 

[DisneyMusician2]

I have a 2-year old cousin who is hooked on Snow White. She has the dress and is happy to parade around in it all day. Not too many kids dressing up as Jaws out there. This stuff just doesn't go over as well as it used to. Fairy tales are made for these kids, and no matter how old we get, they will continue to be timeless stories for the imagination.

 

[hokielutz]

jungle Cruise was inpsired by "The African Queen" (1951). The Twilight Zone aired from 1959-64. Aerosmith was formed in 1970, and Steven Tyler is 58 years old. Does that make MGM your grandfather's theme park?

Disney does a better job than Universal with its parks. But that's because it invests more money and effort, not because it's more hip.

one point to make is that Aerosmith... although formed its band 30+ years ago... has made numerous albums and hit tracks since then. Some chart toppers in the last decade which make them relevant to the current times.

Also... the three examples you gave don't really apply to the rides like some of the universal movies such as ET and back to the future. The RnRC and TOT use Aerosmith & Twilight Zone as a theme to tie the whole experience together in a perfect package. The rides are not direct knock offs of the band and TV show. The rides themselves could theoretically have a popular existence without the name brand theming. Also at the same time... other name brands could be inserted as a replacement if licensing is not renewed.

You can't say the same of ET, BTF, Jaws, or T2. Those rides, and several others at Universal/IOA are direct knock-offs of the movie and can't exist without it.

 

[PKD]

The Blueman Group will be good for a while, but I know for a fact that the show wont change once it starts and that will draw locals away from it after they have seen it once, unlike EE and other recent investments at WDW with keep drawing people in, and more importantly back in for a 2nd, 3rd, 4th look.

Cirq hasn't changed their show in the last 10 years and that hasn't hurt them at all. I don't see Blue Man Group being any different.

 

[Lucky]

one point to make is that Aerosmith... although formed its band 30+ years ago... has made numerous albums and hit tracks since then. Some chart toppers in the last decade which make them relevant to the current times.

Also... the three examples you gave don't really apply to the rides like some of the universal movies such as ET and back to the future. The RnRC and TOT use Aerosmith & Twilight Zone as a theme to tie the whole experience together in a perfect package. The rides are not direct knock offs of the band and TV show. The rides themselves could theoretically have a popular existence without the name brand theming. Also at the same time... other name brands could be inserted as a replacement if licensing is not renewed.

You can't say the same of ET, BTF, Jaws, or T2. Those rides, and several others at Universal/IOA are direct knock-offs of the movie and can't exist without it.

Good points. I agree with you. Universal has some nice individual attractions, but it is missing the Disney "magic" for sure.

 

[dreamscometrue]

Great post Disneyfanman!

 

[sandicinderelli]

The thing was just refurbished not too long ago, looks perfectly fine.


Raiders of the Lost Ark - 25 years ago
Star Wars - 29 years ago
Muppet Show/Muppet Movie - 30 years ago/27 years ago
The Little Mermaid - 17 years ago
Honey, I Shrunk the Kids - 17 years ago
The Twilight Zone - 47 years ago

There's also the MK dark rides based on films that came out 50+ years ago....


It's supposed to be funny....and if you want to talk about stuff being "painfully visible," why not mention the "painfully visible" KUKA Robocoaster system that the angler fish is attached to in The Seas with Nemo and Friends?


Oh, so there are no decorations currently up in USF/IOA and they both don't have special Christmas events?


Talk about an old attraction....yeah, it's only 8 years old here, but it's been around Disneyland for 14.


Crowd management at Disney is good?


Dirty? :brick:

Blaring music in IOA? Each island has its own custom score --- it's not like they've got hip-hop/rap or rock music playing.


Only from around the lagoon, and it's not like you can't get a position that doesn't show them.


Monsters, Inc. Laugh Floor Comedy Club in TOMORROWland
Star Tours in a soundstage that looks like the Ewok Forest


Um, I believe they only say that in the Horror Make-Up Show....

As for "get out!"....which attraction(s) were they actually saying that at?


Yeah, I'm sure merchandising just said one day, "Hey, let's make a knock-off of this one WDW t-shirt!"

Have you thought about countering by writing your own article and sending it to Thomas? I think you make some pretty good arguments/rebuttals.

 

[bayoutinkbelle]

I have AP to both Disney and Universal, but I did agree with some of what the article (and some of the posters here) have said. Universal does have some rides that I love, but I have been disappointed by the customer service and upkeep at times. I had a blast at HHN in October, but was annoyed at how trashy the parks were at times and that some sit-down restaurants were closed during the height of the day. I could excuse the restaurant closures as an off-season thing, but I saw the same thing when I was there in June.

And, yes, I had loads of fun at HHN, but that was because my friends and I took the RIP tour and bypassed all the lines. There is no way I'd do that event without something like the tour!

I really hope the powers that be at Universal turn it around because I do believe the competition is good for both organizations -- and for us, in the long run.

Please don't take this post as a belief by me that all Disney does is perfect and fine. I don't believe that (Tusker House, anyone? ). But that's my .02.

 

[PacMan2006]

I agree, the rides are old in the first park. They did replace the Hitchcock attraction, which I liked, with a new Shrek attraction.

This is what I do appreciate about the original park though: They are actually attractions that seem original. Anyone can slap up the latest, highest, and fastest roller coaster and attach "The Hulk" name to it. But at least E.T is a ride unlike any other regarding the flying bikes. Or being hunted down by a shark in the water with Jaws. Or the immersion of live action with 3D in Terminator.

Overall though, Universal does need more and better rides. It's tough though. I wouldn't want them to, say, remove the E.T ride for an attraction based on a movie that came out 3 years ago. The Mummy ride is intense and fun, but come on, who even truly REMEMBERS the Mummy movies?! They were forgettable, and won't be remembered at all 10 years from now. Everyone knows Jaws. I don't care if you are 10...you know the Terminator. You know E.T.

So it's tough. I always loved Universal for a long time because I got to "ride the movies." I am a huge Disney fan, but 10 years ago, not even Disney could touch the experience of interacting with a movie you grew up loving. I remember the days when Back to the Future was a huuuuuuuuuuge ride. Now it's a five minute wait. I thought the theming queue of the NYC Subway for the Kong ride was brilliant, as were the sets in that ride.

One thing you didn't mention is this...I feel Universal's problem isn't just that they ignore their outdated attractions...but that at Universal, there isn't much to experience BUT the rides. And most are all thrill rides. At Disney, you have rides but you also have great shows. The Lion King is arguably better than anything you could see on Broadway. Beauty and the Beast is a great show. I haven't seen the Nemo show yet. So Disney has quality shows. Disney also has great parades and music. When you are tired of walking around for hours in the sun, chill out, grab some ice cream, and watch the parade go by. It's a nice change of pace. Disney also have excellent light shows. Fantasmisc, Illuminations, Spectromagic, etc. The parks are open later and have amazing night shows. Universal, at the times that I go, closes at 7 pm. I never understood that as Universal caters to the younger crowd.

And lastly, I feel that there isn't much to "see" at the Universal park(s). At Disney, you love the rides, shows, and parades, etc...but you also love seeing the characters walking around the park. Or you love seeing the castle up in person. Or the Tree of Life. Or the great gardens or country's at Epcot. What about Universal makes it special? What about Universal truly makes you want to go back? Even if you have been to Disney a bunch of times, and been on the rides, I still feel Disney is going to be a unique, original experience each time you go because they offer so much more than just rides. With Universal...I dont even want to go to Universal this time when I head back to FL for my Disney trip in April. It just has gotten a stale feel to it. IoA is nice...I like the Spiderman ride and the theming is much better than the original Universal park. But even then...I feel like there's not enough variety at their parks in general.

 

[Legacy]

I agree, the rides are old in the first park. They did replace the Hitchcock attraction, which I liked, with a new Shrek attraction.

This is what I do appreciate about the original park though: They are actually attractions that seem original. Anyone can slap up the latest, highest, and fastest roller coaster and attach "The Hulk" name to it. But at least E.T is a ride unlike any other regarding the flying bikes. Or being hunted down by a shark in the water with Jaws. Or the immersion of live action with 3D in Terminator.

Overall though, Universal does need more and better rides. It's tough though. I wouldn't want them to, say, remove the E.T ride for an attraction based on a movie that came out 3 years ago. The Mummy ride is intense and fun, but come on, who even truly REMEMBERS the Mummy movies?! They were forgettable, and won't be remembered at all 10 years from now. Everyone knows Jaws. I don't care if you are 10...you know the Terminator. You know E.T.

So it's tough. I always loved Universal for a long time because I got to "ride the movies." I am a huge Disney fan, but 10 years ago, not even Disney could touch the experience of interacting with a movie you grew up loving. I remember the days when Back to the Future was a huuuuuuuuuuge ride. Now it's a five minute wait. I thought the theming queue of the NYC Subway for the Kong ride was brilliant, as were the sets in that ride.

One thing you didn't mention is this...I feel Universal's problem isn't just that they ignore their outdated attractions...but that at Universal, there isn't much to experience BUT the rides. And most are all thrill rides. At Disney, you have rides but you also have great shows. The Lion King is arguably better than anything you could see on Broadway. Beauty and the Beast is a great show. I haven't seen the Nemo show yet. So Disney has quality shows. Disney also has great parades and music. When you are tired of walking around for hours in the sun, chill out, grab some ice cream, and watch the parade go by. It's a nice change of pace. Disney also have excellent light shows. Fantasmisc, Illuminations, Spectromagic, etc. The parks are open later and have amazing night shows. Universal, at the times that I go, closes at 7 pm. I never understood that as Universal caters to the younger crowd.

And lastly, I feel that there isn't much to "see" at the Universal park(s). At Disney, you love the rides, shows, and parades, etc...but you also love seeing the characters walking around the park. Or you love seeing the castle up in person. Or the Tree of Life. Or the great gardens or country's at Epcot. What about Universal makes it special? What about Universal truly makes you want to go back? Even if you have been to Disney a bunch of times, and been on the rides, I still feel Disney is going to be a unique, original experience each time you go because they offer so much more than just rides. With Universal...I dont even want to go to Universal this time when I head back to FL for my Disney trip in April. It just has gotten a stale feel to it. IoA is nice...I like the Spiderman ride and the theming is much better than the original Universal park. But even then...I feel like there's not enough variety at their parks in general.

I quote this post because I primarily feel that it supports both arguments well... so don't take anything I say personally.

The accusation that Universal suffers because of their licenses is a complete lack of observation. You cannot tell me that Splash Mountain is popular because Song of the South is a hit with today's generation. A couple of people in this thread have mentioned that "Mummy is a great ride... but who remembers the movies?"... I ask them if they have ever seen Uncle Remus on celluloid. Or have they ever seen The African Queen? I don't believe a good license makes a good attraction.

Shoot, look at Stitch.

But in this same post you point out the largest difference (and most easily fixed) between the parks and that is lack of entertainment. In the beginning Universal was extremely heavy in Street-mosphere characters and surprise shows. I remember watching Doo Wop groups in front of Mel's and seeing too many face characters to count along Hollywood Blvd. But in the slump Universal faced following it's opening they have continued to get cut... and the characters they still for two parks are a fraction of what they had for one. If Universal could get some decent, live entertainment that FITS (Doo-Wop Group, Street-bands) the area I think less people would complain about their being nothing to do. All a 15 minute set does is distract people... and Universal is lacking in the distraction department. That's why it's "dirty" and the music "blaring". People have time to see it.

That's why people who know the most about Disney complain the most because they don't get distracted anymore. They can actually see what's wrong now.

I personally feel that Universal's biggest weakness though is the one thing that it can do nothing about. The fact that Universal is NOT Disney hinders it in a unparalleled way. The parks (and which ever company owns it at the time), no matter how hard they try or how good they are will never be able to beat Disney. Not because Disney is actually better... I feel they both have incredibly strong points (and I do feel that Universal beats Disney out conceptually)... but because Disney was here first and nothing can ever beat Nostalgia. Disney can't even beat Nostalgia.

Sorry for the rant. And I like said... don't take anything I say personal.

 

[PacMan2006]

I quote this post because I primarily feel that it supports both arguments well... so don't take anything I say personally.

The accusation that Universal suffers because of their licenses is a complete lack of observation. You cannot tell me that Splash Mountain is popular because Song of the South is a hit with today's generation. A couple of people in this thread have mentioned that "Mummy is a great ride... but who remembers the movies?"... I ask them if they have ever seen Uncle Remus on celluloid. Or have they ever seen The African Queen? I don't believe a good license makes a good attraction.

Shoot, look at Stitch.

But in this same post you point out the largest difference (and most easily fixed) between the parks and that is lack of entertainment. In the beginning Universal was extremely heavy in Street-mosphere characters and surprise shows. I remember watching Doo Wop groups in front of Mel's and seeing too many face characters to count along Hollywood Blvd. But in the slump Universal faced following it's opening they have continued to get cut... and the characters they still for two parks are a fraction of what they had for one. If Universal could get some decent, live entertainment that FITS (Doo-Wop Group, Street-bands) the area I think less people would complain about their being nothing to do. All a 15 minute set does is distract people... and Universal is lacking in the distraction department. That's why it's "dirty" and the music "blaring". People have time to see it.

That's why people who know the most about Disney complain the most because they don't get distracted anymore. They can actually see what's wrong now.

I personally feel that Universal's biggest weakness though is the one thing that it can do nothing about. The fact that Universal is NOT Disney hinders it in a unparalleled way. The parks (and which ever company owns it at the time), no matter how hard they try or how good they are will never be able to beat Disney. Not because Disney is actually better... I feel they both have incredibly strong points (and I do feel that Universal beats Disney out conceptually)... but because Disney was here first and nothing can ever beat Nostalgia. Disney can't even beat Nostalgia.

Sorry for the rant. And I like said... don't take anything I say personal.

I see what you're saying, but do you really think most people know Space Mountain is even based off of anything?

The thing with Universal is that they bill it as "ride the movies." If you are going to refer to your park like that, then you need two things:

1) Good rides

2) Good movies

Now, granted, it doesn't matter how good your ride is...eventually it will get stale. BTTF was great, but it's old and outdated. But, honestly, would you rather ride "Jaws" or "Deep Blue Sea?" Everything about these classic movies and rides helps create the experience. The license, name, music during the rides, etc. You can't tell me it's not important.

If the E.T ride was just a ride about a completely different character, it would be fun, but not as special. The fun thing about "riding the movies" is that you are experiencing a movie world brought to life. Scenes you loved are now not just on the screen, but live and in person. You are, in essence, living IN the movie. That was the whole part of Universal's parks.

As for the lack of Universal entertainment...it's not JUST the characters though. Where are the great night shows? Where is the spectacle? In a MOVIE theme park, their night shows could be incredible if they put effort into it.

Universal won't even reach Disney status unless they pander to a more diverse crowd. Right now, they target the teen and young adult crowd. There needs to be something for everyone. Rides that someone 7 or 70 can enjoy. Theather type shows. Night performances, etc.

 

[nibblesandbits]

That's why people who know the most about Disney complain the most because they don't get distracted anymore. They can actually see what's wrong now.

This could be the truest thing I've read in a long time.

 

[Piebald]

I went today for the first time in about 6 years. I had never been to IOA (I've lived in FL all of my life and never got around to going) and hadn't visited US in awhile either. I figured today was the day to check it out. My buddy who works there insisted we go at 2 because he said "we could probably do it all in 2 hours"----He wasn't exaggerating or kidding at all.

Before I continue, I want everyone to know that even though I am a CM I am by no means one of those anti-universal people. Now that that is out of the way.....WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED!?!? My childhood memories were completely shattered upon entering. It looked like a bomb had fallen on that park. When we went through the gates we noticed a lot of very VERY weird streetsmosphere people out (I guess from the Macys day parade). It was a joke.... these people looked like someone you hire for 5$/hour to make animal balloons at your kids party. Very weird indeed. There were some cute girls though.... but anyways...

The park seemed dirty and everything had less than a 10 minute wait. Ironically, the Mummy had a 5 minute wait. Mummy was OK... a little cooler than what I expected but nothing amazing by any means. BTTF is horrible and shouldn't even be opened. Didn't care to do anything else since I remember everything as they haven't added a whole lot since I last visited.

I won't be totally negative though. I enjoyed IOA... I loved how it was themed and some of the rides were pretty cool. Spiderman is awesome and to be honest it's better than anything Disney currently has (at least at DL and WDW). Didn't do the water rides since it was cloudy and chilly out but I imagine they're fun too. Once again lines were listed as 5 minutes long and we just walked onto everything. It was pretty sad to see how incredibly dead those two parks are. I would give anything to walk around WDW and walk onto everything like we did today.

My only real complaint is the team members there. They weren't rude or anything that I've read on the boards, but they just seemed "blah". I saw a lot with their hands in their pockets...arms crossed...looked bored..... hell, I saw one woman PL__________G HER EYEBROWS!

Basically the place needs to get it together. IOA is fine as far as the park goes but the Studios is seriously lacking and looked like a piece of crap.