Lord of the Rings and more coming to DHS?

[Bairstow]

I understand your point, I just wonder if "finishing" an existing park is going to bring new guests. I don't think so .. Personally I'd prefer a better AK or DHS as well, I just think mgmt would favor a big splash rather than an in park evolution. Speaking strictly from a business standpoint ..

Disney pivoted away from attracting new guests back in the early 2000s.
Turning half-day parks like Hollywood Studios or Animal Kingdom into full day parks, or even 1.5 day parks means longer stays, which means longer resort rentals, more food sales, additional merch, etc.

 

[GoofGoof]

I understand your point, I just wonder if "finishing" an existing park is going to bring new guests. I don't think so .. Personally I'd prefer a better AK or DHS as well, I just think mgmt would favor a big splash rather than an in park evolution. Speaking strictly from a business standpoint ..

Sure worked for IOA. Tons and tons of new guests came just for Potter. I don't think you need an entire new gate to add meaningful attendance numbers.

 

[wdwfan4ver]

I understand your point, I just wonder if "finishing" an existing park is going to bring new guests. I don't think so .. Personally I'd prefer a better AK or DHS as well, I just think mgmt would favor a big splash rather than an in park evolution. Speaking strictly from a business standpoint ..

I disagree with you in terms of a bigger splash. The first fact is the attendance would go down at DHS and AK with a new park because a 3 reasons.

1.) Universal in increasing numbers for booth theme parks by adding new attractions.
2.) DHS not getting anything new when 5th park comes means park goers from that park will be going to the new Disney 5th park instead.
3.) The 3rd reason is Americans wouldn't book another day to Florida for a 5th WDW park because of the amount of off days Americans have compare to the folks of other countries like in Europe.

Finishing an existing park will do benefits than a new 5th park opening at WDW would for 4 reasons. Here are the 4 reasons:
1.) The Orlando area already has a lot of theme park and is almost over saturated and this would be a big problem if Universal adds a 3 gate before WDW adds a 5th gate.
2.) Universal has proved improving an existing gate will draw more people like Harry Potter did for IOA.
3.) Disney's DCA theme park expansion increased attendance by a lot.
4.) People will have less need to use their park hopper and that would be a great thing in the eyes Disney in terms of money spent at AK and DHS. The fact is if a Park goer only stays at a theme park for 4 hours starting at gate opening, that person isn't likely going to spend a lot of money on food or merchandise.

 

[BryceM]

Sure worked for IOA. Tons and tons of new guests came just for Potter. I don't think you need an entire new gate to add meaningful attendance numbers.

And for DCA as well.

 

[Voxel]

I disagree with you in terms of a bigger splash. The first fact is the attendance would go down at DHS and AK with a new park because a 3 reasons.

1.) Universal in increasing numbers for booth theme parks by adding new attractions.
2.) DHS not getting anything new when 5th park comes means park goers from that park will be going to the new Disney 5th park instead.
3.) The 3rd reason is Americans wouldn't book another day to Florida for a 5th WDW park because of the amount of off days Americans have compare to the folks of other countries like in Europe.

Finishing an existing park will do benefits than a new 5th park opening at WDW would for 4 reasons. Here are the 4 reasons:
1.) The Orlando area already has a lot of theme park and is almost over saturated and this would be a big problem if Universal adds a 3 gate before WDW adds a 5th gate.
2.) Universal has proved improving an existing gate will draw more people like Harry Potter did for IOA.
3.) Disney's DCA theme park expansion increased attendance by a lot.
4.) People will have less need to use their park hopper and that would be a great thing in the eyes Disney in terms of money spent at AK and DHS. The fact is if a Park goer only stays at a theme park for 4 hours starting at gate opening, that person isn't likely going to spend a lot of money on food or merchandise.

I will agree with this. Its Disney's and Universals to not build any more parks for the time being and to focus on improvements. Honestly I believe we will see a 3rd gate at Tokyo or Disneyland before we see a 5th gate at Disney World.

 

[Laura Ellen]

Please...no more Lord of the Rings...just no. I have to live it everyday, i really don't want to have to deal with it on my holiday.

 

[Bairstow]

Please...no more Lord of the Rings...just no. I have to live it everyday, i really don't want to have to deal with it on my holiday.

You're from New Zealand, then?

edit: Hahahahahahahahahaha

 

[Laura Ellen]

You're from New Zealand, then?

edit: Hahahahahahahahahaha

Yeah and they changed our labour laws for those movies. I mean people can come here for that stuff, we have the Hobbit village etc. It's kinda how i feel about Avatar coming to WDW.

 

[GoofGoof]

You're from New Zealand, then?

edit: Hahahahahahahahahaha

Or a hobbit

 

[Bairstow]

Yeah and they changed our labour laws for those movies. I mean people can come here for that stuff, we have the Hobbit village etc. It's kinda how i feel about Avatar coming to WDW.

That's why I'm not sure I see the point in trying to make a theme park area based on the Peter Jackson movies.
Unless you can just put guests on airplane to the New Zealand countryside, it's going to be a bit of a letdown.

 

[JimboJones123]

I understand your point, I just wonder if "finishing" an existing park is going to bring new guests. I don't think so .. Personally I'd prefer a better AK or DHS as well, I just think mgmt would favor a big splash rather than an in park evolution. Speaking strictly from a business standpoint ..

Yes, yes it would. Do you not remember the impact that Everest had?

 

[JimboJones123]

Disney pivoted away from attracting new guests back in the early 2000s.
Turning half-day parks like Hollywood Studios or Animal Kingdom into full day parks, or even 1.5 day parks means longer stays, which means longer resort rentals, more food sales, additional merch, etc.

Not to mention the fact that you will be building from scratch. Parking lots. Parking lot gates. Tram ways. Bus stops. And this is just the outside of the gate. It makes no sense at all to add an extra 2-4000 jobs and plumbing, and electrical including at least one more power grid if not two. Ideally, each park should be able to keep guests occupied for 1.5 days with MK being a 2 day park. This means that guests can spend their full 7 days at WDW and still have few more things to leave for next go around.

 

[JimboJones123]

That's why I'm not sure I see the point in trying to make a theme park area based on the Peter Jackson movies.
Unless you can just put guests on airplane to the New Zealand countryside, it's going to be a bit of a letdown.

Just like London? Why would a theme park do a London expansion?

 

[Bairstow]

Just like London? Why would a theme park do a London expansion?

London actually makes perfect sense. Tall buildings (or rather, buildings that look tall) are a cinch for theme park designers.

It's stuff like this that you can't exactly build.

 

[JimboJones123]

London actually makes perfect sense. Tall buildings (or rather, buildings that look tall) are a cinch for theme park designers.

It's stuff like this that you can't exactly build.

Or beyond this door? Come on now. Outer Space seems pretty vast as well, but that has not stopped a Mission to the Moon/Mars, Star Tours, or Mission: Space from being made.

 

[JimboJones123]

d

London actually makes perfect sense. Tall buildings (or rather, buildings that look tall) are a cinch for theme park designers.

It's stuff like this that you can't exactly build.

Can we also get complaints that Rock and Roller Coaster is not realistic because you don't see another car of traffic during the whole attraction? LA? Hello?

The Hollywood Hotel puts seats in a freight elevator? How can they load mattresses in there with all those seats?

Where do all the internal organs go when somebody sits inside of Dumbo?

 

[Bairstow]

d

Can we also get complaints that Rock and Roller Coaster is not realistic because you don't see another car of traffic during the whole attraction? LA? Hello?

The Hollywood Hotel puts seats in a freight elevator? How can they load mattresses in there with all those seats?

Where do all the internal organs go when somebody sits inside of Dumbo?

Realism has nothing to do with it.

When you try to adapt a movie or other property to a theme park setting the goal is to adequately meet or exceed the guests' expectations based on what they've previously seen regarding that property. The reason why Carsland and Wizarding World are so successful is that they do this very well, though this is in large part due to the fact that the properties they were adapting translated very readily to a theme park setting. The Lord of the Rings Stories, specifically especially Peter Jackson's versions of them rely very heavily on conveying positively massive areas, usually outdoors. Most of the iconic scenes and locations from the film rely so heavily on location shooting in the New Zealand countryside that I fear a theme park adaptation of anything besides a very specific scene from the stories would not be successful.

A lot of this is simply due to the way that Peter Jackson shoots things. After all, his style of film is what lead Universal to adopt the giant wrap-around projection tunnels for the new King Kong attraction at Hollywood.

 

[Laura Ellen]

A Lord of the Rings theme park or even a ride would draw people, as TWWOHP does with HP fans. BUT, it kinda already exists. I mean you can visit the sets in New Zealand and go to WETA. Also, the family would probably never let it happen, they tried to use a LOTR theme in slot machines and that got struck down. LOTR is fictional, but the film's advertising and press is so heavily invested in New Zealand as literally being "Middle Earth", that it could really never match what already exists.

 

[JimboJones123]

A Lord of the Rings theme park or even a ride would draw people, as TWWOHP does with HP fans. BUT, it kinda already exists. I mean you can visit the sets in New Zealand and go to WETA. Also, the family would probably never let it happen, they tried to use a LOTR theme in slot machines and that got struck down. LOTR is fictional, but the film's advertising and press is so heavily invested in New Zealand as literally being "Middle Earth", that it could really never match what already exists.

So if only 20% of Americans own a passport, the target audience for this would only be 80% of Americans?

 

[JimboJones123]

Realism has nothing to do with it.

When you try to adapt a movie or other property to a theme park setting the goal is to adequately meet or exceed the guests' expectations based on what they've previously seen regarding that property. The reason why Carsland and Wizarding World are so successful is that they do this very well, though this is in large part due to the fact that the properties they were adapting translated very readily to a theme park setting. The Lord of the Rings Stories, specifically especially Peter Jackson's versions of them rely very heavily on conveying positively massive areas, usually outdoors. Most of the iconic scenes and locations from the film rely so heavily on location shooting in the New Zealand countryside that I fear a theme park adaptation of anything besides a very specific scene from the stories would not be successful.

A lot of this is simply due to the way that Peter Jackson shoots things. After all, his style of film is what lead Universal to adopt the giant wrap-around projection tunnels for the new King Kong attraction at Hollywood.

So basically you don't care what the masses want, you just don't get it so it is stupid.

Makes perfect sense.