Universal Epic Universe (South Expansion Complex) - Now Open!

[JT3000]

Seriously?

You're really going to go this way with it and pretend like you don't know what I mean?

I'm not sure anyone knows what you mean at this point, because I was clearly referring to the former Wicked show in Japan, which was intended to be just as "permanent" as any other attraction, not the Wicked retheme of the Hello Kitty store here. Did you think a show that was meant to be temporary would last 5 years? It had an entire Oz land built around it.

The Lost Continent theater is right on the edge of that Island, they'd hardly have to retheme everything to make it work.

Sure, if you want to have another random theater that doesn't fit into any particular land, most likely just sitting there, taking up valuable space once the show inevitably ends. Otherwise, the smart thing to do would be to use all of what remains of LC for a new land, not further divvy it up into parts.

 

[MrPromey]

I'm not sure anyone knows what you mean at this point, because I was clearly referring to the former Wicked show in Japan, which was intended to be just as "permanent" as any other attraction, not the Wicked retheme of the Hello Kitty store here. Did you think a show that was meant to be temporary would last 5 years? It had an entire Oz land built around it.

Yes, I know you were clearly pointing to the show. I was clearly pointing to how Universal semi-regularly does temporary things to take advantage of what is currently popular or to temporarily promote something not meant to last.

Sorry if I lost you, there.

A show in a general use theater can be like that. The sets get made. The rigging gets set up. the show runs. The show closes. It gets replaced with another show in the very same theater - you know?

You're aware that's a thing, right?

Given the show in Japan only lasted a few years, seems like the right approach for a movie property that may come and go unless they're planning more film adaptions loosely based on the other books... which it sounds like, at least someone is considering.

I mean, maybe this will have Potter-style legs but Potter has Potter style legs thanks to wildly popular books and eleven movies made by the same studio with a singular, cohesive look-and-feel, to date.

... Or I guess - I don't know - build a new theater somewhere in Epic (like that plot near the front) facing Celestial Park that's set up like Hyperion Theater that they can drop the next Live show they want to do into it when the time comes.

But building a new theater from the ground up is going to cost more money and take more time and with the second movie coming out this year, the clock is ticking to hit the apex of popularity with the general public* unless they're turning it into a franchise in which case, sure why not a whole land, I guess?

Or since this is all just speculation, maybe they do nothing at all.

Personally, I'd rather this than an Epic portal devoted to F&TF.

Sure, if you want to have another random theater that doesn't fit into any particular land, most likely just sitting there, taking up valuable space once the show inevitably ends. Otherwise, the smart thing to do would be to use all of what remains of LC for a new land, not further divvy it up into parts.

Because they couldn't just put a different show in the theater appropriate for the land being redeveloped next to it when that time comes, right?

That'd just be madness.

*I know all the theater kidos think the Broadway show is this big part of mainstream pop culture but the first movie was likely seen by more people in the first month than the Broadway and touring show combined have in their entire runs - that's just the magic of cheaper ticket prices and being able to run it in thousands of different places a half dozen times a day with no dark days. If a single movie or two was all it took to sustain popularity of something, there'd be more opening day attractions still open at USF.

 

[JT3000]

Yes, I know you were clearly pointing to the show. I was clearly pointing to how Universal semi-regularly does temporary things to take advantage of what is currently popular or to temporarily promote something not meant to last.

Sorry if I lost you, there.

A show in a general use theater can be like that. The sets get made. The rigging gets set up. the show runs. The show closes. It gets replaced with another show in the very same theater - you know?

You're aware that's a thing, right?

Given the show in Japan only lasted a few years, seems like the right approach for a movie property that may come and go unless they're planning more film adaptions loosely based on the other books... which it sounds like, at least someone is considering.

I mean, maybe this will have Potter-style legs but Potter has Potter style legs thanks to wildly popular books and eleven movies made by the same studio with a singular, cohesive look-and-feel, to date.

... Or I guess - I don't know - build a new theater somewhere in Epic (like that plot near the front) facing Celestial Park that's set up like Hyperion Theater that they can drop the next Live show they want to do into it when the time comes.

But building a new theater from the ground up is going to cost more money and take more time and with the second movie coming out this year, the clock is ticking to hit the apex of popularity with the general public* unless they're turning it into a franchise in which case, sure why not a whole land, I guess?

Or since this is all just speculation, maybe they do nothing at all.

Personally, I'd rather this than an Epic portal devoted to F&TF.



Because they couldn't just put a different show in the theater appropriate for the land being redeveloped next to it when that time comes, right?

That'd just be madness.

*I know all the theater kidos think the Broadway show is this big part of mainstream pop culture but the first movie was likely seen by more people in the first month than the Broadway and touring show combined have in their entire runs - that's just the magic of cheaper ticket prices and being able to run it in thousands of different places a half dozen times a day with no dark days. If a single movie or two was all it took to sustain popularity of something, there'd be more opening day attractions still open at USF.

Of course they could reappropriate the theater space in the future. But would they? This is the same company that's had a theater sitting empty for literally 99% of a park's existence, and you want to put that much faith in them to not allow it to happen again? For an IP that only managed to run for a handful of years in one of their other parks? Not to mention it's simply not an efficient use of the space, even while the show is still active. Whatever eventually replaces the remains of LC is going to need all of that land in order to maximize its potential. Start taking more chunks out of it and you're left with a mini-land at best.

Would I dedicate an entire land to this IP? I think a general Oz theme would play better to an American audience than a Japanese one, and would be immediately recognizable to most people at the very least, but I'm not convinced it would be much of an actual pull for most. Even if they made a great attraction, it would likely end up like Monsters, with one of the shortest waits in the park. However, this would be even more true for Wicked, whether they try to expand the franchise or not. It's niche. So the way I see it, you either do an entire Oz land, which at least bears a resemblance to the version everyone knows, or you don't bother. Either way, we don't need a theater that used to play Wicked sitting off on a thematic desert island somewhere.

 

[Andrew C]

Seems a good chance the universal park in England will get Wicked.

 

[MrPromey]

Of course they could reappropriate the theater space in the future. But would they? This is the same company that's had a theater sitting empty for literally 99% of a park's existence, and you want to put that much faith in them to not allow it to happen again?

I mean that's the question, right? Do they repurpose a theater that's used mostly for overflow queue for Hagrids today (best candidate in terms of size) or shove it in one of the other two spaces that don't have the same capacity (the one in Toon Lagoon would probably be the easiest to get away with theme-wise since that theater sits on it's own between the two islands) and then potentially mothball the location again in a number of years when the show closes or do they build an entirely new theater that they might also abandon after this show, adding a fourth venue to leave unused in the future to add to their collection?

Would I dedicate an entire land to this IP? I think a general Oz theme would play better to an American audience than a Japanese one, and would be immediately recognizable to most people at the very least, but I'm not convinced it would be much of an actual pull for most. Even if they made a great attraction, it would likely end up like Monsters, with one of the shortest waits in the park. However, this would be even more true for Wicked, whether they try to expand the franchise or not. It's niche. So the way I see it, you either do an entire Oz land, which at least bears a resemblance to the version everyone knows, or you don't bother. Either way, we don't need a theater that used to play Wicked sitting off on a thematic desert island somewhere.

And the problem with a general Oz land is nobody controls the IP. The book has been in public domain for nearly 70 years and many have taken their own stab at it. Disney's done a couple different unrelated movies for instance and there's that 1975 Broadway show, The Wiz (which is touring again, btw) that ended up being made into a movie that, funny enough was made by Universal.

You have the 1939 MGM movie which is what everyone thinks of and where the most common look comes from but striking a deal with them today for theme park rights seems kind of silly since that falls into the public domain in less than a decade.

MGM would have had to have been paid for the Broadway show and the movies because the character design of the witch (among other things) was an MGM creation but unless they made Wicked the preamble to their own Oz franchise rather than a prequel to the MGM movie, eventually with their own Dorthy story with look and design they can assign their own copyright to, they would have built a land with an IP anyone could use down to the look/feel and half the soundtrack in a few years and you know what would happen on International Drive if they did that.

For that reason, I think it could only ever make business sense for them to do an entire land if they're going to do a run of movies in their own Oz world, separate from all the other media out there that is distinct and which they at least partially control.

Personally, I don't trust a modern movie studio's creative team's vision to produce something on their own as well made story and music-wise as the live show these movies were made from but we'll (likely) see because even if they don't do anything theme park wise, they'll still eventually want this scrappy cast of characters to go to space, fight a sub and become international spies because "you don't turn your back on family"... or potentially billions of dollars.

 

[Gusey]

If a Wicked land was made at any Universal park nowadays, it would be based on the film franchise rather than the musical. Whilst I'd like a new show at a Universal park as I think that their most recent ones (Bourne, HTTYD, Cirque Arcanus and even Waterworld at Beijing) I'd very happy with a ride just based on the movie with some of the songs, and then some general Oz themed rides

 

[TalkToEthan]

Good god is the theming unreal just everywhere you go.

Too many don’t appreciate the finer things in life.
As for theme parks Epic’s overall visuals destroy anything created outside of Disney Sea. The queues, AA’s, fronts/facades, portals take US themeparking to a new level.

Food be mighty fine, too……not like that garbage found at Universal Studios and to some extent IOA.

 

[Jayspency]

If a Wicked land was made at any Universal park nowadays, it would be based on the film franchise rather than the musical.

Adding to that, I think it would be a little bit of a missed opportunity if universal were to do a land specifically based on the Wicked movies. There's so much you could do with the Oz world that if they were to put wicked in the parks I think they should do an Oz themed land with attractions from Wicked and the original Wizard of Oz. Plus, since Oz is known by multiple generations, people would be familiar with the world even if they haven't seen the wicked movies. But maybe you could make that argument for a Wicked land anyway since its already in Oz?

 

[Tom Morrow]

Getting a little tired of someone every now and then attempting to re-energize the narrative that "Epic Universe is the most beautiful, most creative, and most immersive theme park EvEr MaDe". It objectively is not, and everyone who isn't a terminally online theme park nerd that has made "prefers Universal over Disney" their identity has come to terms with this. Note that none of us are saying its bad, but it is not constructive to apply such blind praise to a park that is imperfect in many ways and could be improved over the years if they take actual constructive criticism to heart.

Only two of the park's five lands match the thematic immersion level set by the likes of Diagon Alley, Galaxy's Edge, Pandora, and a few others. The rest of the lands are full of views of backstage, dumpsters, outside of the park, the water treatment plant, expansion plots, etc.

Only two rides in the park give Disney a run for their money on their level of technical prowess (Monsters and Ministry), and word on the street is that Universal is already severely lacking in the upkeep of the show quality (not that Disney wouldn't also do this...)

The park as a whole is nowhere near as immersive as even Animal Kingdom down the road. Epic does not "DeSTrOy DiSnEy".

 

[JT3000]

Getting a little tired of someone every now and then attempting to re-energize the narrative that "Epic Universe is the most beautiful, most creative, and most immersive theme park EvEr MaDe". It objectively is not, and everyone who isn't a terminally online theme park nerd that has made "prefers Universal over Disney" their identity has come to terms with this. Note that none of us are saying its bad, but it is not constructive to apply such blind praise to a park that is imperfect in many ways and could be improved over the years if they take actual constructive criticism to heart.

Only two of the park's five lands match the thematic immersion level set by the likes of Diagon Alley, Galaxy's Edge, Pandora, and a few others. The rest of the lands are full of views of backstage, dumpsters, outside of the park, the water treatment plant, expansion plots, etc.

Only two rides in the park give Disney a run for their money on their level of technical prowess (Monsters and Ministry), and word on the street is that Universal is already severely lacking in the upkeep of the show quality (not that Disney wouldn't also do this...)

The park as a whole is nowhere near as immersive as even Animal Kingdom down the road. Epic does not "DeSTrOy DiSnEy".

I don't know why you're so flustered by differing opinions on the park, but you really think only two rides in Epic are on Disney's level of "technical prowess?" As if every ride at Disney is a cutting edge E-ticket?

 

[Purduevian]

I don't know why you're so flustered by differing opinions on the park, but you really think only two rides in Epic are on Disney's level of "technical prowess?" As if every ride at Disney is a cutting edge E-ticket?

don't disrespect the magic carpets of Aladdin like that

 

[wdwfan4ver]

Only two of the park's five lands match the thematic immersion level set by the likes of Diagon Alley, Galaxy's Edge, Pandora, and a few others. The rest of the lands are full of views of backstage, dumpsters, outside of the park, the water treatment plant, expansion plots, etc.

You overrated Galaxy's edge. Making a land time sensitive can be a big mistake for a theme park land, and it was in this case. The fact is Galaxy's Edge takes place in sequels time land and that means no classic Characters for Galaxy's Edge. People want classic Star Wars Characters That also meant gave an excuse why Star Wars Launch Bay existed so long at Animation Courtyard.

Also a lot of people wanted Galaxy's edge to have a planet that already existed in the movies and Disney didn't do that. That is an issue to a lot of people because the Harry Potter theme park lands are based off lands that existed in Harry Potter Movies.

 

[AidenRodriguez731]

You overrated Galaxy's edge. Making a land time sensitive can be a big mistake for a theme park land, and it was in this case. The fact is Galaxy's Edge takes place in sequels time land and that means no classic Characters for Galaxy's Edge. People want classic Star Wars Characters That also meant gave an excuse why Star Wars Launch Bay existed so long at Animation Courtyard.

Also a lot of people wanted Galaxy's edge to have a planet that already existed in the movies and Disney didn't do that. That is an issue to a lot of people because the Harry Potter theme park lands are based off lands that existed in Harry Potter Movies.

I mean uh... isn't Isle of Berk also incredibly time sensitive. I think Galaxy's Edge is more impressive than trying to make Tatooine or something as well.

 

[AidenRodriguez731]

Too many don’t appreciate the finer things in life.
As for theme parks Epic’s overall visuals destroy anything created outside of Disney Sea. The queues, AA’s, fronts/facades, portals take US themeparking to a new level.

Food be mighty fine, too……not like that garbage found at Universal Studios and to some extent IOA.

I might be a nitpicking but I would not consider seeing cars driving past within 5 seconds on their highly themed "Viking Village" coaster as a "finer thing" nor taking US themeparking to a new level.

If Epic Universe is the new level, I hope we go tf back. The park was built to look very nice in simple instagram shots and off rides where you can't film. Very grand. But it fails at being a great amusement park with its horrid capacity issues, obvious lack of theming on certain rides (Monsters + Isle of Berk have this problem the most), and severe lack of shade. It's like every single land is made to be shot on vlogs/pretty for pictures but it starts losing that substance for me very quickly when you're actually in the park.

 

[Andrew C]

Getting a little tired of someone every now and then attempting to re-energize the narrative that "Epic Universe is the most beautiful, most creative, and most immersive theme park EvEr MaDe". It objectively is not, and everyone who isn't a terminally online theme park nerd that has made "prefers Universal over Disney" their identity has come to terms with this. Note that none of us are saying its bad, but it is not constructive to apply such blind praise to a park that is imperfect in many ways and could be improved over the years if they take actual constructive criticism to heart.

Only two of the park's five lands match the thematic immersion level set by the likes of Diagon Alley, Galaxy's Edge, Pandora, and a few others. The rest of the lands are full of views of backstage, dumpsters, outside of the park, the water treatment plant, expansion plots, etc.

Only two rides in the park give Disney a run for their money on their level of technical prowess (Monsters and Ministry), and word on the street is that Universal is already severely lacking in the upkeep of the show quality (not that Disney wouldn't also do this...)

The park as a whole is nowhere near as immersive as even Animal Kingdom down the road. Epic does not "DeSTrOy DiSnEy".

lol. Why you mad?

 

[AidenRodriguez731]

lol. Why you mad?

I mean just seems like they're a big fan of something and tired of seeing it be crapped on by people for some pretty shallow/stupid reasons

 

[Andrew C]

You overrated Galaxy's edge. Making a land time sensitive can be a big mistake for a theme park land, and it was in this case. The fact is Galaxy's Edge takes place in sequels time land and that means no classic Characters for Galaxy's Edge. People want classic Star Wars Characters That also meant gave an excuse why Star Wars Launch Bay existed so long at Animation Courtyard.

Also a lot of people wanted Galaxy's edge to have a planet that already existed in the movies and Disney didn't do that. That is an issue to a lot of people because the Harry Potter theme park lands are based off lands that existed in Harry Potter Movies.

Agreed. Zero energy in galaxy’s edge. Not to mention they cut the crap out of it from the get go.

 

[Andrew C]

I mean just seems like they're a big fan of something and tired of seeing it be crapped on by people for some pretty shallow/stupid reasons

Such is life.

 

[Andrew C]

If Epic Universe is the new level, I hope we go tf back. The park was built to look very nice in simple instagram shots and off rides where you can't film. Very grand. But it fails at being a great amusement park with its horrid capacity issues, obvious lack of theming on certain rides (Monsters + Isle of Berk have this problem the most), and severe lack of shade. It's like every single land is made to be shot on vlogs/pretty for pictures but it starts losing that substance for me very quickly when you're actually in the park.

How many times you going to repeat this influencer park nonsense? What universal has done post Covid gets people excited. What Disney has done is a joke. And some Disney fans now see more value in going to universal than Disney (me included). Deal with it. Or don’t.

 

[Sir_Cliff]

I don't know why you're so flustered by differing opinions on the park, but you really think only two rides in Epic are on Disney's level of "technical prowess?" As if every ride at Disney is a cutting edge E-ticket?

I haven't been there, so take my opinions with as much of a grain of salt as you please, but my impression is that in terms of attractions Epic has a lot going for it. I think where some dissonance arrises for people who are primarily fans of Disney parks is when rollercoasters that pay a lot less attention to immersion within the park let alone a specific land are counted as headliners when if Disney built similar attractions we would all be up in arms.

In general, I do kind of agree with @Tom Morrow's point that all this comparing of the theming with TDS is perhaps overshooting the runway. During construction, all the talk was that this was going to rival TDS in terms of theming and immersion. Then it opened and people started commenting on the issues with sightlines within and outside of the park and the response was borderline mocking about those who were concerned about sightlines as that was just a Disney thing and not something Universal or its fans worried about. Now we're back to Epic being more immersive than any park other than TDS. So, which is it?