Ouch...Universal article

mkt

When a paradise is lost go straight to Disney™
Premium Member
Twilight Zone 1959
Star Wars 1977
Muppets 1976

Most recent Twilight Zone episode: the second revival 2003
Most recent Star Wars Movie: May 2005
Most recent Muppets anything: The Muppets' Wizard of Oz 2005

now lets compare with...

Most recent Back to the Future ANYTHING: Back to the Future: The Animated Series, September 1993
Most recent Jaws film: Jaws: The Revenge(Jaws 4), 1987. To be noted, it is ranked as one of the WORST films ever made
Most recent Earthquake Film: Earthquake... the only one! 1974.

I win!

Not to mention all the rides in Fantasyland that are based on movies that are much older.

True, but Disney's marketing genius makes and limited edition DVD releases them still relevent.
 

PencilTest

New Member
Original Poster
Universal is not better than Disney, no matter how much they say it during orientation. They will not win! If "generate superior financial returns" is part of your mission statement, and you aren't an investment firm, then something is wrong. Don't even get me started on the "good business decision v. bad business decision" nonsense from orientation.
Ah, yes. "We Will Win!" I remember my orientation a few years ago when they were talking about that. It struck me as such a bizarre internal mantra. Instead of a guest-oriented theme ("We'll Give The Best Experience!"), it's like "Dammit, we're gonna beat Disney if it's the last thing we do!"
I thought it was funny.
And don't forget 10/5!
 

pheneix

Well-Known Member
I'm not going to justify most of your comments with a response as there's no need to because of how ridiculous they are. However I will touch this one.

Disney is better. Nothing ridiculous about it. So is Sea World for that matter, and all they have going for them are flowers and fish.

Have you stepped foot on the Haunted Mansion or Space Mountain any time lately?

Yup. I actually used to work at Space Mountain. Both of those rides are in pretty bad shape, but they still don't even come close to the disrepair that BTTF is in. BTTF is straight up uncomfortable to be in. The paint is peeling, there are holes in the pre-show, none of the special effects like the LN2 or the blowing air work, and the air conditioning inside the building is so past useless than even on cold days the average temperature inside the dome is usually 90 degrees or higher. Its a mess.

Ah, yes. "We Will Win!" I remember my orientation a few years ago when they were talking about that. It struck me as such a bizarre internal mantra.

I don't think the campaign itself was a bad idea. It was a guest service focused plan, and it gave employees company wide a goal to rally around and work towards. Of course, when upper management provides NOTHING to help you achieve that goal, there is no real drive to work towards it
 

slappy magoo

Well-Known Member
I mentioned this on a similar thread, but I think it bears repeating, and I do love repeating myself, so here goes...

Part of Universal's dillemma, something they need to constantly invest & re-invest in conquering, is the fact that, in today's market, many of their attractions are based on films that are no longer really considered "classic."

I'm 37. I am and always have been a big movie goer/couch potato. I grew up watching (and in many cases, re-watching) many of the movies around which Universal has built its original Orlando theme park. Most folks around my age probably have as well. But what about their children? Heck what about people 8, 10, 12 years younger than us? HAVE they all seen Back to the Future? Twister? Beetlejuice? Blues Brothers? Jaws (even though I'm sure they can understand what the movie is about)? Heck, I have nieces that have never even seen E.T.! :eek:

And out of all those young'uns (or younger-than-me-'uns) who HAVE seen these movies, do they LOVE those movies? Would they watch them again and again, no matter how many other entertainment options they have available? Would they feel the same way about films based on other, more recent films, like Men in Black or the Mummy? And 10 years from now, how outdated will the Jimmy Neutron and Shrek attractions be?

A major factor Disney has going for them is the idea that their attractions are based on stories and characters that are still popular. I know their re-release schedule has changed somewhat with the advent of DVD, but there are still certain movies that will be re-relased theatrically every 7-10 years. They will keep re-releasing their movies on the home video format du jour, only to then take them off the market a few months later to enhance their emotional value ("gotta get it now!"). More than any other studio, "disney" is your go-to brand name when it comes to getting presents for kids, and many children have impressive libraries of many of the movies upon which Disney bases some of their biggest attractions. Plus, many "original" attractions not based on movies or retrofitted to include them (like HM and PotC).

Sure, there are some "wild cards" in the mix. Personally, I think one day they're gonna take a big hit for continually forcing Stitch upon us. But a large chunk of their rides will be based on movies every child will have, and will give their children some day. Because I don't think the same thing can be said for Universal's lineup of attractions, they either have to focus more on the experience as oppsoed to the tie-in (and admittedly, Revenge of the Mummy does a GREAT job of that), find characters that ARE perennial (like Marvel SUper-Hero Island in IoA), or update attraction areas even more to constantly have rides based on newer hit movies. They could possibly be layered upon existing technologies (the way "Dinosaur" in Animal Kingdom utilizes the same technology and track of the Indiana Jones ride at DL). You know, this year's Back to the Future can be next year's "Shaun of the Dead: Experience It!" or the following years' "Evan Almighty: Storm's a-Brewin'!" and the simulator can remain the same and the action can be chorepgraphed around it. But that's the situation Universal faces- not having enough attractions based on franchises loved by oncoming generations of movie-goers.
 

kcnole

Well-Known Member
Universal does need to update several of their attractions, I agree. BTTF needed either a major major refurb to make it relevant again or something new. I'm still waiting to see what that will be. Earthquake and Twister are both fairly boring no matter what movie they're based on, and I still can't stand the fact that Neutron is there instead of the classic Hanna Barbara characters.

That said, they do have some classic rides that would cause a massive uproar if they were removed. Jaws and ET are still wonderful experiences and if they even considered removing them I'd have a fit. MIB is ways better than Buzz Lightyear, and The Mummy blows Rockin Roller Coaster out of the water.

So yes, they have some work they need to do and some investment that needs to be made in the parks, but lets no pretend like they're some God awful desert of s__________ess. I still have a wonderful time everytime I go.
 

JLW11Hi

Well-Known Member
Yeah, too bad they got rid of the Hanna Barbera properties. (or lost them..?) If anything, those were the most relevant and immortal characters that the park showcased. Jimmy Neutron sure as hell isn't going to last long in the minds of kids.
 

JT3000

Well-Known Member
I mentioned this on a similar thread, but I think it bears repeating, and I do love repeating myself, so here goes...

Part of Universal's dillemma, something they need to constantly invest & re-invest in conquering, is the fact that, in today's market, many of their attractions are based on films that are no longer really considered "classic."

I'm not sure I understand where you're coming from. Films don't become less classic. That would somewhat defeat the meaning of the term. A classic film is a classic film. I noticed you brought up Jaws and E.T. and questioned their status as classics. If even those two are not classic films, then by your reasoning, Universal doesn't have any. You know, since none of us young'ins are familiar with Universal's original monster films. ;) Frankenwho?

Jaws was released a decade before I was born. That didn't keep me from seeing it. And E.T. is quite simply the best live-action children's film ever made. If parents don't show it to their kids, that's their fault. Thing is, little kids can't even grasp what a "classic" is, nor do they care. That's why the park has things like Shrek and Jimmy Neutron. When they're old enough, they'll realize the significance of the films the park's attractions are based on, even if their parents aren't the ones who showed it to them. That's part of what makes a film classic. It doesn't have to be a 60-year-old Disney film that's shoved down the throat of every child in America from day 1.

But for the record, Twister and Earthquake were never classics and never will be. I don't know what they were thinking. :lol:
 

slappy magoo

Well-Known Member
I'm not sure I understand where you're coming from. Films don't become less classic. That would somewhat defeat the meaning of the term. A classic film is a classic film. I noticed you brought up Jaws and E.T. and questioned their status as classics. If even those two are not classic films, then by your reasoning, Universal doesn't have any. You know, since none of us young'ins are familiar with Universal's original monster films. ;) Frankenwho?

Poor choice of phrase, you're right. When I was typing "classic," I was thinking more in terms of familiarty & popularity than their genuine status as "classic" films. WDW has attractions based on movies that are far older (the movies, not the attractions per se) than most if not all of the movies that UO's attractions are based on. But if people are unfamiliar with the movie that an attraction is based on, they might be less likely to try the attraction, no matter how much they might wind up enjoying it. It certainly would be less likely to hit them on an emotional, nostalgical gut-level. Like I said, I have nieces who have no idea who or what E.T. is, but they get every Disney movie as it's released on DVD, if not by their parents, then by other family members when birthdays or Christmas roll around. I try to keep them up-to-date with those "classic" movies, but I'm just one man, ya know?
 

cmatt

Active Member
at are no longer really considered "classic."

I'm 37. I am and always have been a big movie goer/couch potato. I grew up watching (and in many cases, re-watching) many of the movies around which Universal has built its original Orlando theme park. Most folks around my age probably have as well. But what about their children? Heck what about people 8, 10, 12 years younger than us? HAVE they all seen Back to the Future? Twister? Beetlejuice? Blues Brothers? Jaws (even though I'm sure they can understand what the movie is about)? Heck, I have nieces that have never even seen E.T.! :eek:

Well im 21 :wave: and ive seen all of those :lol: courtesy of the beeb and itv over here in the uk - who only seem to have the broadcast rights to those films :veryconfu and nothing else.

IMHO - the up-to-date rides (i.e nothing circa 1980's) are still viable - and thrilling. Walking into univesal studios i had a kind of shrinking feeling that never subsided untill i left... when i was 9 it was bloody fantastic! but now (perhaps it was the time i went) it was dead, and it seemed well, more of a place you can go in for free and pay to go on the rides seperatly.

Although i hate to admit to the article - i can kind of agree :lookaroun
Islands of adventure was great however :sohappy:
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom