Kamikaze
Well-Known Member
Thats fine and all, but your post was basically 'they could get away with it if people cared about the area'. People don't care about Fantastic Beasts, so by your own reasoning they shouldn't be able to get away with it.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Universal Epic Universe (South Expansion Complex) - Opens May 22 2025
- Thread starter Bob Harlem
- Start date
sonoma15
Well-Known Member
Disagree. The wand shop is a much better experience (has much cooler effects than just some audio and lighting) and doesn't cost hundreds of dollars to do. Also sounds like this wand experience might be different from the ones in the other parks.
Surferboy567
Well-Known Member
Your argument falls flat though, Galaxy’s Edge is also based in a timeline the vast majority of Star Wars distain. To be clear, I’m mostly not one of them that’s a story for a different thread.
The only difference is the flagship attraction is based on the thing that people (including me) actually want.
Kamikaze
Well-Known Member
No, because there's only one. Not a duplicate in another WDW park. Thats my entire point. Has nothing to do with the attractions.
The selling point is 'here's this thing that you can already do somewhere else'.
dav23
Active Member
Some are overthinking this a bit. People love Diagon Alley and Hogsmeade because they are wonderful places to just be. In contrast, Galaxy's Edge is a post-apocalyptic junkyard with one really cool ride.
This land will succeed because it looks beautiful and has all the things that people love about the other HP lands: interactive wand displays, nicely themed streets, restaurants and butterbeer. It's a place people will want to exist in, never mind the E-ticket ride and show. IP matters only so much, and the Fantastic Beasts movies will have very little to do with people's enjoyment of this place.
This land will succeed because it looks beautiful and has all the things that people love about the other HP lands: interactive wand displays, nicely themed streets, restaurants and butterbeer. It's a place people will want to exist in, never mind the E-ticket ride and show. IP matters only so much, and the Fantastic Beasts movies will have very little to do with people's enjoyment of this place.
Last edited:
Mike S
Well-Known Member
Why are you obsessing over two things that aren’t the main draw of this land?
Starship824
Well-Known Member
- In the Parks
- No
The new land looks great but is there really only one ride?
Surferboy567
Well-Known Member
This
Wendy Pleakley
Well-Known Member
Galaxy's Edge is different in that the Disney Star Wars era looks and feels like classic Star Wars. Even if you don't like the new characters, Rise of the Resistance feels like you're in an original trilogy Star Destroyer.
The Wizarding World movies just don't have the same feel as the first eight movies.
The land seems to be an odd mashup of two timelines, but it is what it is. I imagine most people won't care. Just like we accept Star Tours goes all over the place, a theme park land is more about the general experience than a strict adherence to film timelines.
Kamikaze
Well-Known Member
I'm not 'obsessing', I'm just pointing out that something Universal is doing here would be absolutely panned if it was Disney doing it. And you two are creating cope on the fly.
Mike S
Well-Known Member
Something else to consider is that this land is coming with an entire park of new experiences. Mentioning Butterbeer and a wand shop isn’t going to disappoint anyone lol.
No one is coping here. You’re just desperate to start
.
Last edited:
DCLcruiser
Well-Known Member
Star Tours is not real. It is a ride on a movie set.
Coaster Lover
Well-Known Member
- In the Parks
- No
I feel like there is a fundamental difference though.
The light saber cost/experience is all about the experience of building a light saber and then having a neat souvenir. Other than taking pictures, there's not a lot you can "do" with your lightsaber around Galaxy's Edge (and that's fine).
The wand cost/experience is less about the experience of getting the wand (though that is a fun experience on its own), but what you can do with the wand around the land. WWoHP at EU will have interactive wand elements around the land and as such, you'll need a thematically appropriate/in universe place to sell those wands. As such, it only makes sense that all three lands have their own places to buy wands. From the looks of it, it doesn't seem like the EU version will have the "wand chooses the wizard" element, but will mostly focus on the retail aspect [likely highlighting some of the FB wands]) and that's fine with me.
The interactive wand aspect at both WWoHP lands at Universal Orlando remain exceptionally popular and I'm hopeful the wand elements here will be just as neat (and possibly more technologically advanced) than the ones previously seen to really step up the experience.
sonoma15
Well-Known Member
Why does what Disney does or the hypothetical reaction to what they do even matter?
UniversalIsMid98
Active Member
- In the Parks
- No
Universal has released a new video introduction into The Wizarding World Of Harry Potter – Ministry Of Magic:
Here’s an animated fly-through video:
More details:
Details Revealed About The Wizarding World of Harry Potter – Ministry of Magic at Universal Epic Universe
Magical details released!blog.discoveruniversal.com
Why wasn't Pokemon considered for this new park, I get it that it was rumored for Studios for a while, but Pokemon is way more beloved than this overrated franchise that has its author getting recent backlash and with good reason
Mike S
Well-Known Member
The same backlash that led to the biggest video game release of last year? That backlash? Not to mention the continued success of the 2 lands Universal already has.
Nobody cares lol.
Edit: this isn’t a statement of my opinion on the issue. This is a statement of facts about how the general population feels about Rowling’s opinion on the issue.
Last edited:
sonoma15
Well-Known Member
My guess is because EU was already years into planning when they got the Pokémon rights. Also, if Pokemon was to come to EU potter still would've happened. It would've gone into a different plot of land.
Disneyhead'71
Well-Known Member
Architectural Guinea Pig
Well-Known Member
- In the Parks
- No
Super Nintendo and HTTYD are both "meh" and "ok cool" for me, but Universal Monsters and Potter kick up the hype imo- WHO DOESN'T WANT TO SEE THAT UGLY TOAD PUNISHED???
Happy Birthday Harry Potter! Haters gonna keep hatin'
Happy Birthday Harry Potter! Haters gonna keep hatin'
Coaster Lover
Well-Known Member
- In the Parks
- No
Hogsmead at IOA must be set no later than 1997 (the year Dumbledore dies) given that he is present in Forbidden Journey
Diagon Alley at Uni Orlando theoretically is set in early May 1998 (the year Deathly Hallows is set) given the events that take place in Escape from Gringotts)
Yet the two lands have a train that connects them that would seem to imply that they take place at the same time (which they cannot)
Ministry of Magic is set no earlier than late May 1998 so we already know that it isn't the same timeline as the other two lands... it really sets the lands to be visited in chronological order from IOA, to UOR, to EU to create the full "trilogy" as they described it. The rest of Wizarding Paris can be exactly the same as it is in Fantastic Beasts so long as they include none of the FB characters. There is no reason to assume that many of the shops and such seen in Fantastic Beasts wouldn't still be around 70-80 years later (Olivander's itself is believe is over 1600 years old by the time of the events of Harry Potter). Someone already posted that Eddie Redmayne would reprise his role, but I guess they could always have him appearing in a portrait or as a ghost or something and still keep the timeline (at least of the EU land) consistent... though honestly, if they included Newt in the "flesh", only the biggest fans would question/complain...