I could see up to three attractions, within a mystical type land.
LOTR - Fellowship of the Ring - Musical type stage show.
LOTR - The Two Towers - Roller Coaster Type Attraction.
LOTR - Return of the King - Dark Ride type attraction.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
NO Harry Potter for Disney!
- Thread starter PKD
- Start date
I could see up to three attractions, within a mystical type land.
LOTR - Fellowship of the Ring - Musical type stage show.
LOTR - The Two Towers - Roller Coaster Type Attraction.
LOTR - Return of the King - Dark Ride type attraction.
disneyparksrock
New Member
Not really. J.K. isn't one to give her HP property away to just anyone. The only reason she let WB make the movies is because she would get to oversee them, and make sure they were staying true to the books.
Not an individual book, but the sum of the books overall. There are hundreds upon hundreds of Star Wars expanded universe books, comics, etc. The sum of the money they bring in, per year, is higher than the sum of the sales of Harry Potter books.
Lord of the Rings, in the past 50 years, has probably sold more books than Potter. LotR movies have also done better than Potter. PotC movies have done better as well. There was only one Potter movie that grossed over $300 domestic, whereas all the LotR movies did that, as well as all the Pirates movies (ok, so I'm counting a few weeks early on AWE, but it will get there)
Potter is a popular franchise, sure. But its not the 'be all, end all' of franchises like some want to believe. Sure, I'd love to be the one making the boatloads of cash it brings in. But its not the most popular franchise out there.
disneyparksrock
New Member
What makes you so sure that HP will die. Most Disney movies have stood the test of time, and HP is more popular than any single Disney movie. (As a franchise.)
You drink the Kool Aid I guess.
Believe what you want, but its about the money. If it was about doing it correctly and doing the best possible attraction for Potter fans, where the most Potter fans would see it and enjoy it, she would have taken Disney's offer.
disneyparksrock
New Member
I love Disney just as much as the next person, but they were only willing to make a ride, while Universal would make a whole land. Therefore I think that HP will be done better at Universal. Also HP fits more at Universal than Disney.
What makes you so sure that Universal will screw this up.
Trying to get a biased Disney fan to see that Universal can be just is good is way to hard.:brick: :brick:
If you are judging popularity by money, thats one thing, and its not fair to compare a single movie, say, 'The Lion King' to all the Harry Potter movies combined. If you want to take a single movie and compare it to another, you have to adjust for inflation. Here's a list.
http://www.boxofficemojo.com/alltime/adjusted.htm
If you are judging popularity by the number of fans, remember that with the internet, you see a lot more fans of newer properties than of older ones. Movies like Snow White basically influenced the entire country I don't think you can make that same argument for Potter.
Not sure about worth but the water tunnel used in Poseidon's Fury was said to have been $1 Million back in 98 when they built it.
You can't make the argument that its 'not about the money' and then say 'why shouldn't she take the deal that would give her more money'. Sorry. Disney didn't do the deal because Rowling wanted more than a single attraction, and the MONEY that comes from licensing multiple attractions. You don't think they are paying her more for an entire land then they would have for a single ride?
Universal has NEVER been 'just as good'. They've had more than enough time to try and do that, and they can't. They are an alternative to Disney, but they aren't, and never will be, 'just as good'. You can like them all you want, and yes, Disney doesn't do some things right. But there is no argument to say that that Universal is Disney's equal.
Matpez
Well-Known Member
disneyparksrock
New Member
I never said the Star Wars books as a whole didn't make more money than HP, I said that no single SW book has done better then a single HP book.
Okay maybe HP and LOTR are tied, but both franchises (This includes books, movies, toys, etc.) are more popular than things like Pirates or even Shrek. I can't think of a franchise besides SW thats more popular than HP, except maybe LOTR (but it's close), so please tell me what these franchises are that you're talking about.
Pete C
Active Member
Universal can match Disney on theming...there is no question about it. IOA is easily as impressive as any Disney park from a theming perspective and in some areas more so. The castle of dueling dragons is utterly incredible in every way, as is the tree restaurant. I think Universal is going to hit a home run with this project. It's possible that both Disney and Universal drew up plans and they chose IOA due to their vision. Competition is a good thing, and IOA needs this. It is a great park and this is just in time when the park is slowing down and in need of something new. Not only is this new but it is massive! More great things at IOA just means Disney will have to step up and deliver more new attractions in the future.
disneyparksrock
New Member
I didn't say Universal is just as good as Disney, I said it can be as good.:hammer: Yes, I do prefer Disney overall to Uni., but there are some things that Uni. does do better than Disney, and I believe that HP probally would be one of them.
bferrara16
Active Member
I'm with the camp that thinks this is a better move for those who enjoy the Harry Potter series (fits w/ Universal, Universal will focus on it more than Disney would have, it promotes competition, etc.)
Also, as far as a long-lasting franchise, I would say that Potter works much better for longevity than Jurassic Park.
I hate to see the re-theming of Dueling Dragons only for the reasons that 1) a new coaster for HP means more coasters and 2) DD is actually well-themed as it is... Plus what are they going to do with that castle? Tear it down? Have two castles? Will it become part of Hogwarts???
Also, as far as a long-lasting franchise, I would say that Potter works much better for longevity than Jurassic Park.
I hate to see the re-theming of Dueling Dragons only for the reasons that 1) a new coaster for HP means more coasters and 2) DD is actually well-themed as it is... Plus what are they going to do with that castle? Tear it down? Have two castles? Will it become part of Hogwarts???
Spider Man. Higher grossing movies. Not to mention the 60 years of comics and cartoons.
Toy Story. Extremely popular. Next movie will make boatloads.
Indiana Jones will gross more than any HP movie when that film comes out.
X - Men. Comics are extremely popular. Movies did extremely well. Spin off movies will do well too.
Pirates is more popular, both moviewise and merchandising wise.
LotR is a more popular franchise, and its long term legs are proven. Another 400m+ is guaranteed when the new movie based on 'The Hobbit' is released.
Heck, you can even mention Mickey.
Universal will focus on it, but saying Disney wouldn't is wrong. They always do big pushes on their newest big attractions, like they did with EE.
Yes, its a better franchise then Jurassic Park, thats for sure. And Jurassic park has a HUGE presence at IoA, in fact, I would say too much of one, so yeah, they have, at Universal, given one property a huge portion of the park. Would Potter be a better choice for giving it too much land? Yeah, I can agree with that.
Re-theming DD is kind of odd, because they are going to theme it to HP, which has a huge young audience. A lot of these children aren't going to be able to ride DD, so I don't quite understand why they would do that. Well I do, its to get another HP themed attraction without spending as much money as building a whole new attraction, but that they are going to do it with DD is odd.
disneyparksrock
New Member
That is matter of opinion and you or I could never really prove how Uni. compares to Disney on a quality level, becuase its strictly an opinion. Someone could say they like Six Flags more than Disney and Uni. and they wouldn't be wrong. It's just an opinion.
disneyparksrock
New Member
I could agree with you on Spider-Man and Mickey. I already said that LOTR is probally just as popular as HP. However the other things on your list are no way more popular than HP. Toy Story being more popular as a franchise than HP?:ROFLOL:
EpcotServo
Well-Known Member
Yay! I think Harry Potter wasn't right for Disney, and that Universal Orlando will be able to bring that world to life quite well. And IOA will be getting something new!
:sohappy:
:sohappy:
It's really hard to compare things done at different times, in different ways. The LOTR rings books have been around long enough that I read my dad's when I was 12 (and now I'm 37). No book sale there, but one more fan was created. Star Wars came out when I was 8 and I saw it 40 + times in first and second run theatres. In fact, if memory serves it may have been in first run theatres for around a year. Of course, a more recent movie franchise can't compete with that because so many more offerings are competing for screen space. HP is new, hot and all of its things sell well because it is on its first iteration. What about 30 years from now. Are you gonna buy your kid or grandkid the books and DVDs or just loan/give them yours? My point - all of these things are extremely popular. I don't think you could come up with a good metric to even compare them. But, they are all popular enough that if a land or entire theme park were to be devoted to any of these franchises it would almost be an assured to be a hit. Furthermore, it would be extremely easy to come up with multiple attractions for all of these things that people like.
Champion said:
Could you explain this a little more? I think it wouldn't be hard to do an entire LOTR theme park, never mind a land.