-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
More Info on UO's New Attractions
- Thread starter pheneix
- Start date
Disneynutcase
New Member
New Line has "Lord of the Rings," and if I'm not mistaken, New Line is now a subsidiary company of Time/Warner/AOL. I found this out when I was pitching a "hot" project around Hollywood right around the potential industry strikes last year. A company over at WB liked what I had but couldn't get WB brass to buy it (they had a self-imposed spending freeze). This production company also had made films thru New Line and I when I asked them to take the project to NL, I was told something like "same rules because it essentially is the same money/overlord."
Out in L.A., there's always been a bit of a stink about Warners and Hanna Barbera characters being at Six Flags parks and everything else (except for Disney) being at Universal. The "Funtastic" simulator ride has really been the only thing that ever crossed the alleged line in the sand.
Paramount has sold rights to it's properties to other parks like Great America (at least to the one in San Jose). There's also some "Star Trek" thing in a Las Vegas casino.
I work in the film industry, and find the fact that the new high-tech ride is supposed to be part of a "franchise" very intriguing. The Mummy makes the most sense being that there are already three related films that were substantial hits with two more (one starring the Rock, another with Brendan Fraser) being mulled around. The "Scorpion King" sequel looks like it will definately be made. But another actual "Mummy" adventure, at least with the Mom/Dad/Kid on a special-effects extravaganza, seems likely as well.
Another ride for Jurassic Park would be interesting because it would have to be a lot different than the current attraction AND not diminish the current ride. Kind of a damned if the do, damned if they don't thing.
For the life of me, I've been trying to rack my brains for any other "franchise" sequels that Universal can pull out of it's bag. Any effects driven hit that they have has already been made into a ride or show of some sort.
B.T.W.--no way they'll be getting "Harry Potter," not unless the climate between TW/AOL and Vivendi/Universal changes OR so much coin gets exchanged that inspires all "rights" aggression right out the window.
The fact that WB did "Scooby Doo" with a sequel already being planned all but sealed the death of "The Funtastic World of Hanna Barbera." Doesn't help that WB and Hanna Barbera sold the rights to use Scooby for a plethora of other rides throughout the world.
Again, think about it. The movie "Scooby Doo" was a qualified summer hit that Universal doesn't really want to support because it takes potential box office and merchandising away from their pockets. Hence, a "get your own park" approach.
Out in L.A., there's always been a bit of a stink about Warners and Hanna Barbera characters being at Six Flags parks and everything else (except for Disney) being at Universal. The "Funtastic" simulator ride has really been the only thing that ever crossed the alleged line in the sand.
Paramount has sold rights to it's properties to other parks like Great America (at least to the one in San Jose). There's also some "Star Trek" thing in a Las Vegas casino.
I work in the film industry, and find the fact that the new high-tech ride is supposed to be part of a "franchise" very intriguing. The Mummy makes the most sense being that there are already three related films that were substantial hits with two more (one starring the Rock, another with Brendan Fraser) being mulled around. The "Scorpion King" sequel looks like it will definately be made. But another actual "Mummy" adventure, at least with the Mom/Dad/Kid on a special-effects extravaganza, seems likely as well.
Another ride for Jurassic Park would be interesting because it would have to be a lot different than the current attraction AND not diminish the current ride. Kind of a damned if the do, damned if they don't thing.
For the life of me, I've been trying to rack my brains for any other "franchise" sequels that Universal can pull out of it's bag. Any effects driven hit that they have has already been made into a ride or show of some sort.
B.T.W.--no way they'll be getting "Harry Potter," not unless the climate between TW/AOL and Vivendi/Universal changes OR so much coin gets exchanged that inspires all "rights" aggression right out the window.
The fact that WB did "Scooby Doo" with a sequel already being planned all but sealed the death of "The Funtastic World of Hanna Barbera." Doesn't help that WB and Hanna Barbera sold the rights to use Scooby for a plethora of other rides throughout the world.
Again, think about it. The movie "Scooby Doo" was a qualified summer hit that Universal doesn't really want to support because it takes potential box office and merchandising away from their pockets. Hence, a "get your own park" approach.
Sketch105
Well-Known Member
Shrek was overrated. I'm the minority on this it seems.
I still think it makes sense to have a new Jurassic Park attraction. For one thing, while the 3rd sequel was not as strong as its predecessors, (TAKE THIS WITH A GRAIN OF SALT PLEASE) Rumours say that Spielberg is willing to pilot the 4th one and take it in a new direction. Plus there is room in the JP area for another attraction, and it would balance the parks pretty well (Universal gets 2 smaller attractions while IOA gets one big one.)
Second, the Mummy franchise, while successful, has shorted out. Scorpion King is a spin-off, and not really a part of the franchise because it was had a lower budget and featured none of the signature effects of the Mummy filims, as well as featuring none of the characters except The Rock. Even with Scorpion sequel talks it seems unlikely they would make an attraction off of this. A JP sequel seems to come out every 3 or 4 years, while The Mummy and the Mummy Returns came out within 2 years of each other. With the JP 3 sequel out on video, then we could still see one before 2004 when this attraction is supposed to open. I don't see Universal adding 3 attractions to one park without a big e-ticket for IOA. Plus Universal MiB is just barely 2 years old, and Universal seems to space out the installation of its big e-tickets (even if this is not intentional and merely how things flow at Universal, thats just the impression I get) while changing their smaller attractions (Studio 54, Xena/Hercules show/Ghostbusters/Murder She Wrote) more frequently. That's my two cents.
I still think it makes sense to have a new Jurassic Park attraction. For one thing, while the 3rd sequel was not as strong as its predecessors, (TAKE THIS WITH A GRAIN OF SALT PLEASE) Rumours say that Spielberg is willing to pilot the 4th one and take it in a new direction. Plus there is room in the JP area for another attraction, and it would balance the parks pretty well (Universal gets 2 smaller attractions while IOA gets one big one.)
Second, the Mummy franchise, while successful, has shorted out. Scorpion King is a spin-off, and not really a part of the franchise because it was had a lower budget and featured none of the signature effects of the Mummy filims, as well as featuring none of the characters except The Rock. Even with Scorpion sequel talks it seems unlikely they would make an attraction off of this. A JP sequel seems to come out every 3 or 4 years, while The Mummy and the Mummy Returns came out within 2 years of each other. With the JP 3 sequel out on video, then we could still see one before 2004 when this attraction is supposed to open. I don't see Universal adding 3 attractions to one park without a big e-ticket for IOA. Plus Universal MiB is just barely 2 years old, and Universal seems to space out the installation of its big e-tickets (even if this is not intentional and merely how things flow at Universal, thats just the impression I get) while changing their smaller attractions (Studio 54, Xena/Hercules show/Ghostbusters/Murder She Wrote) more frequently. That's my two cents.
rocketman23
New Member
Why are we even discussing the Mummy??? It will be for IOA and IOA has no place for a Mummy attraction.
WDWFREAK53
Well-Known Member
Do you know something pheneix??? SPILL IT
WDWFREAK53
Well-Known Member
Universal as in the (2 parks, 3 hotels) or as in Universal Studios (the single park). Because I highly doubt that a Mummy coaster will put Universal ahead of Disney (for one attraction)
WDWFREAK53
Well-Known Member
Originally posted by pheneix
Roller coaster?!?
Damn, these rumors just get crazier all the time...
Ok, you've officially wet my whistle...it's NOT a coaster like the rumor??? Spidey clone??? Don't TELL me what it is...just compare it to a couple of attractions that are already built.
WDWFREAK53
Well-Known Member
Mummy?
Oh...and is it technology that exceeds M:S, Test Track, or Journey to the Center of the Earth?
WDWFREAK53
Well-Known Member
C'mon...don't tell me the theme...that's fine...
Just tell me...in your OPINION...
Better than those 3 rides (technologically speaking)
Test Track is the most technologically advanced ride in the world (along with Journey)...is it more advanced?
WDWFREAK53
Well-Known Member
LOL I do (of course) but if he "knows someone" then he can't spill anything...
>>>Just tell me...in your OPINION...
Better than those 3 rides (technologically speaking)
Test Track is the most technologically advanced ride in the world (along with Journey)...is it more advanced?<<<
From what I have heard, it is extremely hard for me to make an accurate assessment at this point. I'm not sure if it will be the most technologically advanced ride, but that isn't the goal either. What I have been hearing is what they want to do [and I should note that I have been out of contact with just about everybody in Florida for a while now, damn phone bill killed me], rather than how they will do it. Mr. Gault says that it will get the greenlight soon, so evidently they are far into the development process.
If it does turn out to be the most advanced, then fine. But the focus is on developing a good story and immersive experience, and that's the way it should be. No one will argue that Spiderman is more advanced than Test Track, but it certainly is a heck of a lot better.
Better than those 3 rides (technologically speaking)
Test Track is the most technologically advanced ride in the world (along with Journey)...is it more advanced?<<<
From what I have heard, it is extremely hard for me to make an accurate assessment at this point. I'm not sure if it will be the most technologically advanced ride, but that isn't the goal either. What I have been hearing is what they want to do [and I should note that I have been out of contact with just about everybody in Florida for a while now, damn phone bill killed me], rather than how they will do it. Mr. Gault says that it will get the greenlight soon, so evidently they are far into the development process.
If it does turn out to be the most advanced, then fine. But the focus is on developing a good story and immersive experience, and that's the way it should be. No one will argue that Spiderman is more advanced than Test Track, but it certainly is a heck of a lot better.
WDWFREAK53
Well-Known Member
agreed (about Spiderman being better than Test Track...but I do like Test Track (the THRILL) aspect of it is really lacking though)
Ok, if it's not the most technologically advanced...will it put us through something that we've NEVER done before? (like with M:S...it's supposed to take us to space and be soooo accurate that even NASA astronauts agree)...
