The Spirited Seventh Heaven ...

[Captain Chaos]

Part of me is thinking that Frozen would work in AK, have an arctic section, (plus penguins because they are cute and this is Disney they can magically travel north) would give a whole new land, along with creatures of interest of which AK currently has nothing similar to, and could have a frozen ride, and some other elements added in and would be a perfect place for a meet and greet with Anna and Elsa

And any indoor areas, such as penguin viewing rooms, would be a nice cool area to escape the heat that is sometimes stifling in that park particularly i find

Remove Frozen from what you described and I'd be all for it... An Arctic addition to AK would be pretty interesting... And we all know Disney could half the penguin encounter and still do it better than SeaWorld's poor excuse for a ride.. LOL...

 

[tamotu99]

Im not saying make an frozen land set in the arctic, more make an arctic land, and have a frozen ride or show in there, but it is no way the focus of the land, much like you (will soon) have a lion king attraction in Africa, not a lion king land. And then also a nicely tucked away sympathetically themed meet and greet area

Hey even have a restaurant with character dining, that would add a nice addtion to evening dining that will be needed with a full day park

 

[PhotoDave219]

To the other poster in the thread, I do like Universal quite a bit.

The most recent addition to Universal was Transformers which is an exact clone of the ride in USH, which in my opinion was a weakened replica of Spiderman which opened in 1999.

Potter is original, but they lost a family ride in Jaws in the process of its removal. Kong may be original, we will have to wait and see(I loved Kong 360 in Hollywood).

Disney is getting a Frozen overlay, an updated Soarin, and an all new original land in Avatar(and this is just what we know). Disney and Universal look to both be expanding, and that is a good thing.

We will have to wait and see with Disney.

Frozen hasn't been officially announced yet - what happens in the Panama Canal Zone stays in the Panama Canal Zone - and it's rumored to be a mere overlay of an old attraction.

Soarin? That's just changing the film & programming. It's an overlay. It's not needed IMO.

Avatar? That project keeps being scaled back but it's something new....

 

[doctornick]

I'm talking about those who are seriously into roller coasters (not including kiddie coasters like Space Mountain and Thunder Mountain). My uncle loves Magic Mountain, but can't stand Disneyland, for reasons I don't think I need to mention. I have friends who are the same way.

If one is seriously into coasters and real thrill rides, then yes any Disney park is not going to satisfy that yearning. But that doesn't mean that a Disney park couldn't appeal to Mr. Thrill Ride Junkie with other sorts of offerings. A lot of people are fully capable of enjoying both high intensity thrill rides and relaxing immersive dark rides.

That doesn't mean that Disney parks are going to appeal to everyone. Of course not. Nothing in this world has universal appeal. But Disney parks tend to have offerings that can be enjoyed by a fairly broad audience who might be looking for different things. (And Uni parks do too, I don't think this is unique to Disney.) This is more true that your typical Six Flags type park.

 

[SJN1279]

You say that as if it's a good thing.

To me it is.

And replaced it with the Hogwarts Express, not to mention Gringotts is far more family friendly than Forbidden Journey

Hogwarts Express is only for guests with a two park ticket, and Gringotts has a height requirement. So Universal Studios lost its only family attraction without a height requirement for Potter 2.0.

 

[lazyboy97o]

To me it is.


Hogwarts Express is only for guests with a two park ticket, and Gringotts has a height requirement. So Universal Studios lost its only family attraction without a height requirement for Potter 2.0.

And the vast majority of people will simply be outraged that they have to buy the ticket they were already planning to buy.

But you're still trying.

 

[Disneyhead'71]

To me it is.


Hogwarts Express is only for guests with a two park ticket, and Gringotts has a height requirement. So Universal Studios lost its only family attraction without a height requirement for Potter 2.0.

I'm OK with that. You keep going back to the "no height requirement" thing like it some sort of big deal.

 

[tissandtully]

When the characters are meeting right outside their flagship store? No. Disney could stop it if they wanted. They have not.

A random IHOP franchise is not on their radar no matter how badly some of you seem to want it to be.

Whatever, I work with lawyers and copyright all day long, I can tell you they definitely would be on Disney's radar, especially since it's owned by a huge corporation, even if it is just a franchise.

 

[asianway]

I'm OK with that. You keep going back to the "no height requirement" thing like it some sort of big deal.

The toddler kingdom is just a couple sees down the road

 

[roodlesnouter]

To me it is.


Hogwarts Express is only for guests with a two park ticket, and Gringotts has a height requirement. So Universal Studios lost its only family attraction without a height requirement for Potter 2.0.

Don't worry, plenty to come for the younger ones.

 

[Californian Elitist]

If one is seriously into coasters and real thrill rides, then yes any Disney park is not going to satisfy that yearning. But that doesn't mean that a Disney park couldn't appeal to Mr. Thrill Ride Junkie with other sorts of offerings. A lot of people are fully capable of enjoying both high intensity thrill rides and relaxing immersive dark rides.

That doesn't mean that Disney parks are going to appeal to everyone. Of course not. Nothing in this world has universal appeal. But Disney parks tend to have offerings that can be enjoyed by a fairly broad audience who might be looking for different things. (And Uni parks do too, I don't think this is unique to Disney.) This is more true that your typical Six Flags type park.

I'm not saying that Disney absolutely cannot appeal to anyone who is a roller coaster nut. I never said people aren't capable of enjoying all kinds of ride. I said Disney parks don't offer something for everyone. I'm specifically talking about people like my uncle and some of my friends who absolutely LOVE big-time roller coasters and nothing else. As you can guess, they don't like the Disney parks in CA, whatsoever. I don't even bother asking them if they'd like to go with me to Disney because I know the answer is not only going to be a no, but it's going to be a hell no. You guys are agreeing to what I've been saying.

 

[marni1971]

Outside of Potter, all Universal has done in recent years are clones or overlays of existing attractions.

Keep going. Please. Or get to the point.

Or perhaps remember it was GE, Vivandi and Blackstone if you're trying to lay blame.

But what's the wrong parent company between friends eh?

 

[acishere]

Soarin? That's just changing the film & programming. It's an overlay. It's not needed IMO.

Isn't an additional theater also part of the Soarin' overlay? The ride has such a ridiculously long wait that it would be good investment to increase capacity.

The ride film needs to be cleaned and converted to digital anyway. So a new film can help differentiate it from the California Adventure version, which makes it a much more unique offering to Epcot. It doesn't fix the lack of attractions there, but it isn't a waste of money.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Isn't an additional theater also part of the Soarin' overlay? The ride has such a ridiculously long wait that it would be good investment to increase capacity.

The ride film needs to be cleaned and converted to digital anyway. So a new film can help differentiate it from the California Adventure version, which makes it a much more unique offering to Epcot. It doesn't fix the lack of attractions there, but it isn't a waste of money.

Disney's California Adventure will also be getting the new film paid for by the Chinese. This time they're just bothering with unique endings. That's hardly a significant differentiator and absolutely not a differentiator for the "people don't notice" crowd.

 

[Mike S]

I must have missed that bit?

Page 28.

 

[GLaDOS]

Hogwarts Express is only for guests with a two park ticket, and Gringotts has a height requirement. So Universal Studios lost its only family attraction without a height requirement for Potter 2.0.

Disaster has no height requirement. Not to mention the multitude of shows, Despicable Me's non-moving seats, etc.

And the vast majority of guests who go to Universal Orlando have two park tickets. So your Hogwarts Express qualifier is effectively and empty complaint

 

[acishere]

Disney's California Adventure will also be getting the new film paid for by the Chinese. This time they're just bothering with unique endings. That's hardly a significant differentiator and absolutely not a differentiator for the "people don't notice" crowd.

It is not significant. I was hoping there would be more to it than that. I still like the idea of a new ride film though. A ride about California in Florida always seemed a bit odd to me.

 

[tamotu99]

I think there should be a soarin film for each Disney Park ( Magic Kingdom style) in the world, and you should get a random show each time, it would fit with the theme better when it announced next flight to ....

 

[Tigger1988]

Whatever, I work with lawyers and copyright all day long, I can tell you they definitely would be on Disney's radar, especially since it's owned by a huge corporation, even if it is just a franchise.

Then their radar is shot because like I mentioned this franchise has been doing this on a weekly basis for a decade or more.

 

[PhotoDave219]

Isn't an additional theater also part of the Soarin' overlay? The ride has such a ridiculously long wait that it would be good investment to increase capacity.

The ride film needs to be cleaned and converted to digital anyway. So a new film can help differentiate it from the California Adventure version, which makes it a much more unique offering to Epcot. It doesn't fix the lack of attractions there, but it isn't a waste of money.

Not to my knowledge.

Given that it has had at least an hour wait for about 9 years, I'd say it works the way it is.

Besides, there are better ways of spending money in future world that don't involve updating an attraction that doesn't need it. IMO.