Not only that, but when they put a big wand up over Hogwarts Castle...people will just freak!!!!:lookaroun
-
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
Not only that, but when they put a big wand up over Hogwarts Castle...people will just freak!!!!:lookaroun
PintoColvig
Active Member
Not if it's the same wand as a certain wand I know.
They are more than welcome to conscript Epcot's wand.
mprice
New Member
Who Cares!?
I got a statement, who cares!? At least on my side of the aacount i could care less whether Disney had Harry Potter or not, first of all, it's not a Disney Creation and unlike some other Disney purchases in the past (ie. Muppets etc.) Harry Potter does not fit into the Disney category if you ask me. From the moment I saw that first thread who knows how many years ago, "Harry Potter Ride" I said "oh no... Disney what are you thinking?" Can anyone honestly see him fitting in anywhere at Walt Disneyworld, save maybe the United Kingdom which would turn out utterly ridiculous, The United Kingdom Pavillion at EPCOT featuring... THE HARRY POTTER ADVENTURE!!! DERRR.... sounds dumb and I like IOA for what it's worth but really "the Wizarding World of Harry Potter?..."...DUMB! That has a half-rate Universla stamp all over it! and if it works for them... good, but I just don't think Harry Potter has a place in Disney... too much creativity there for that. Hey, good books obviously, OK movies, GREAT soundtracks, but Disney material it ain't. Universal... take all you want, but when Disney's least popular theme park (CA) records way higher numbers than your most popular, you got some work to do, and form what I understand, Universal powers that be don't care too much for the parks.
I got a statement, who cares!? At least on my side of the aacount i could care less whether Disney had Harry Potter or not, first of all, it's not a Disney Creation and unlike some other Disney purchases in the past (ie. Muppets etc.) Harry Potter does not fit into the Disney category if you ask me. From the moment I saw that first thread who knows how many years ago, "Harry Potter Ride" I said "oh no... Disney what are you thinking?" Can anyone honestly see him fitting in anywhere at Walt Disneyworld, save maybe the United Kingdom which would turn out utterly ridiculous, The United Kingdom Pavillion at EPCOT featuring... THE HARRY POTTER ADVENTURE!!! DERRR.... sounds dumb and I like IOA for what it's worth but really "the Wizarding World of Harry Potter?..."...DUMB! That has a half-rate Universla stamp all over it! and if it works for them... good, but I just don't think Harry Potter has a place in Disney... too much creativity there for that. Hey, good books obviously, OK movies, GREAT soundtracks, but Disney material it ain't. Universal... take all you want, but when Disney's least popular theme park (CA) records way higher numbers than your most popular, you got some work to do, and form what I understand, Universal powers that be don't care too much for the parks.
ToTBellHop
Well-Known Member
DCA is not Disney's least popular park. You have to head overseas for that. Vive la France?
And, yes, I could've easily seen Harry Potter at WDW. But, I can more easily see Narnia since that would be marketing a Disney property (and if they move this along, they would be marketing one of their existing properties, unlike Universal opening up their HP land about 6 months before the final film premieres.
ToTBellHop
Well-Known Member
Have to? Never. They preferably would, however. From a business standpoint, it makes the most sense to have current additions promote current franchises (and not, for example, to have Finding Nemo attractions sprouting up everywhere 4 years after the film came out). I am pretty sure John Lasseter would like to see future movie-based attractions premiere around the times of the films themselves. And why not? You wouldn't base Rock 'n' Roller Coaster on a band no one cares about anymore, would you?
ToTBellHop
Well-Known Member
this is true, but Disney can make more money if they have a boxed set of all four Indiana Jones films (special theme park edition?) to sell in the giftshop for an Indy ride. They also could cross advertise the ride on all of its Indy 4 DVDs that it would undoubtedly sell, and they could further advertise the new ride right before the film in theatres. Synergy makes more money--and as far as I'm concerned, tasteful synergy like this is great. More money = more investment, and I'd love to see the theme parks shown a bit before films.
disneyparksrock
New Member
Sad but true.
I can't see how people can complain about Uni. having a whole land themed to HP, when the second Disney opens the 20th Pixar themed attraction they will start singing the praises of Disney.
HP is way more popular than any Pixar franchise, and this will bring mega-dollars to Uni.
Competition is very good for both parks.
HP is way more popular than any Pixar franchise, and this will bring mega-dollars to Uni.
Thats debatable.
erasure fan1
Well-Known Member
Thats it, Disney didnt "need" Potter, universal could very much use it. Disney can do better, either with a new ip or an exsisting one.
csmat99
Well-Known Member
Sad but true.
I can't see how people can complain about Uni. having a whole land themed to HP, when the second Disney opens the 20th Pixar themed attraction they will start singing the praises of Disney.
HP is way more popular than any Pixar franchise, and this will bring mega-dollars to Uni.
Agreed, I can't believe so many people want to trash Universal. I love Disney, got married there, my kids have been going there since they were both under 3 months old but we also love to go to Universal. Do I spend more than a 1.5 days...no but that doesn't mean it doesn't have something to offer our family. I agree Universal/NBC have left both parks as is for way to long. Now they can see they need to get back into the game. The first move was finally closing Back to the Future and creating the Simpson’s ride. Now with Harry Potter Universal can get come momentum again. This can only be good for Disney. Disney needs someone to push them, you saw what happened when Universal first opened and took away from Disney's attendance, when Universal made lots of money off of their Halloween fright nights and Disney came out with a Kid's friendly version. Universal will never be Disney and it doesn't have to be. Why do you think Disney is pushing possibly a third water park? Don't you think Sea World's Aquatica has something to do with that? Competition is what drives businesses.
majortom1981
Active Member
hmm
Well Since universal is doing this and six flags is going the disney route , hopefully disney will step it up.
I am nota big harry potter fan so I am glad universal is doing it but I think they are taking a HUGE risk. Harry potter could have a huge die off after the movies and books are done. Disney has their movie studios and cartoon studios to back them up. Meaning that if a rdies characters start to lose popularity they can make movies and cartoons about them to drum up popularity again.
Also i think Harry potter would not have fit in with Disney. IT would throw the whole feel of the park off.
Well Since universal is doing this and six flags is going the disney route , hopefully disney will step it up.
I am nota big harry potter fan so I am glad universal is doing it but I think they are taking a HUGE risk. Harry potter could have a huge die off after the movies and books are done. Disney has their movie studios and cartoon studios to back them up. Meaning that if a rdies characters start to lose popularity they can make movies and cartoons about them to drum up popularity again.
Also i think Harry potter would not have fit in with Disney. IT would throw the whole feel of the park off.
Wow, your avatar is making me think 'Disney needs to get the rights to a Transformers attraction'.
Them getting rights to a Dreamworks/Paramount movie wouldn't be easy, though.
I have been away from the boards for a while, but since this new development I feel like giving my two cents.
I am a huge fan of both Potter and Disney, and even though I am disapointed to see disney did not get the rights I am still very excited to see the world of Harry Potter come to life.
With that being said, I am also a bit skeptical. I was never to keen on Potter becoming a theme park attraction in the firts place...even if it was Disney. I just felt that it would destroy the magic of the books for me.
Anyway, I think Universal is taking a big risk, especially with 235 Million investment on a story we don't know the ending too. What if Harry dies at the end of the last book? If I was them, I would have waited until until Deathly Hallows was released.
Like majortom191 started earlier, disney has their film studio to drumb up popularity if it begins to lagg. Univeral is taking a risk because Potter is not a Universal venture and it has absolutely no control over Potter outside of the theme park setting. J.K. Rowling and WB have the book and film writes, and they are gonna hold on to them for dear life. Disney would be in the same boat if the got the Potter rights. If Harry does die, it's popularity could die and that would hurt USO. But who knows, we will just have to wait and see. It could be a very slippery sloap. I a for one am very excited!
I am a huge fan of both Potter and Disney, and even though I am disapointed to see disney did not get the rights I am still very excited to see the world of Harry Potter come to life.
With that being said, I am also a bit skeptical. I was never to keen on Potter becoming a theme park attraction in the firts place...even if it was Disney. I just felt that it would destroy the magic of the books for me.
Anyway, I think Universal is taking a big risk, especially with 235 Million investment on a story we don't know the ending too. What if Harry dies at the end of the last book? If I was them, I would have waited until until Deathly Hallows was released.
Like majortom191 started earlier, disney has their film studio to drumb up popularity if it begins to lagg. Univeral is taking a risk because Potter is not a Universal venture and it has absolutely no control over Potter outside of the theme park setting. J.K. Rowling and WB have the book and film writes, and they are gonna hold on to them for dear life. Disney would be in the same boat if the got the Potter rights. If Harry does die, it's popularity could die and that would hurt USO. But who knows, we will just have to wait and see. It could be a very slippery sloap. I a for one am very excited!
Wilt Dasney
Well-Known Member
Maybe Rowling quietly tipped off a few people at the top of the chain and assured them that Harry would emerge unscathed.
I kind of doubt it with how tight-lipped she has been about the books prior to release, but it's a thought.
Since1976
Well-Known Member
Knowing how it ends didn't stop Disney from basing the exterior of MGM's STAR TOURS on the village of the Ewoks, who were arguably the most reviled aspect of the series until Jar Jar came along. Nah, I think it would take a stupefyingly bad ending to ruin the magic of Harry Potter's story so far -- but given JK Rowling's record so far, that's not likely to happen.
That will never happen! If anything that will go to Universal as well. BTW, Indy is technically owned by Paramount, Lucas's production company was lucky enough to get the licensing rights to the films, that is almost unheard of these days. And Paramount/Dreamworks will be releasing the 4th installment.
Have you read Half-Blood Prince? I don't think the Ewoke Village compares to the death of a the title character in anyway.