Universal Studios: ‘Bourne Stuntacular’ to open in spring of 2020

WDWTank

Well-Known Member
I don't want to beat a dead horse to the point where everyone else here is banging their heads against a wall. But I'll take one more stab at this before I move on.

Let me reiterate that I liked the first two Terminator movies just fine. They are both very good for what they are (a low-budget cult movie and a big budget actionpalooza). T3's not good, but it's watchable. This is where the repetition really begins to wear thin. Salvation at least attempted to do something new, but that's about all it had going for it. The execution was really poor on that one. Genisys tried to have its cake and eat it too with a reboot/sequel hybrid that disappointed most. I have heard Dark Fate isn't much better. It gets back to the original cast, but doesn't have anything new to say.

Your franchise summaries are comically broad. Yes, all the HP movies involve wizards and all the F&F movies have action scenes. That doesn't make them functionally copies of one another. Watch one of the Christopher Columbus Potters and compare it to one of the later entries in the franchise. They are radically different beasts.

Most sequels are unnecessary. It's especially hard to make a sequel to something like Jurassic Park because the premise has a problem baked into it. Why would anyone ever go back to the island? All of the JP sequels have struggled with this issue and I would argue that none of them have ever overcome it. Harry Potter and Fast & Furious are more open to sequels. Our heroes can have multiple adventures.

The Terminator also has a limiting premise. The entire story is told in the first movie. We know everything we need to know about this world by the time the credits roll. There's not a lot of drama left in the war between man and machines when you know going in how it's going to end. The heroic John Connor will lead humanity to victory. If you deviate from that, you're not really making a Terminator movie anymore. Might as well call it something else. But if you stick to it, you're very limited in the stories you can tell.

Cameron seemed to be aware of that which is why he basically retold the same story in T2 but with bigger action and special effects. Audiences watching the revolutionary CGI in T2 weren't all that concerned that Cameron was hitting the same story beats. The action scenes were next level. Very few sci-fi action movies, Terminator or otherwise, could touch what Cameron did with T2. Which is why Schwarzenegger's career suffered post T2 and why Cameron never revisited the series. There's no story left to tell.

People have argued with me that you could tell stories about the post-apocalyptic period before humanity's ultimate victory. You can, but why? We know the outcome already. You'd be better off setting your story in a new world which isn't constrained by Cameron's prophesy. He doesn't have a copyright on killer robots. Do something new. You could also set a story after the machines are defeated, but again, why not just do something original at that point?

Most of this more relevant to the movie franchise itself than it is to Universal theme parks. The best fit for a theme park attraction is more complicated than the subjective quality of the source material and its ability to generate infinite sequels. For example, no movie series is as evergreen as James Bond, but it would be challenging to build a 007-themed land.

I started this conversation by suggesting that Terminator probably isn't as relevant as a lot of its diehard fans think it is. The soft box office performance of Dark Fate this weekend supports my argument. Once you get past the people who grew up on the original movies, it doesn't have a lot of devotees.



They have to work within the existing footprint. That building couldn't house a dark ride. It was built for a show.
Terminator 2 is a timeless sci-fi action thriller movie. I didn’t see the film when it first game out (I was -7 years old), but the attraction opened me up to the first Terminator movie and eventually the second installment :) Terminator is a part of pop culture in many ways, and it made sense as an attraction of some sort. I think it could’ve lasted longer if it was a ride, or an interactive land akin to Galaxy’s Edge where guests go forward in time to fight the Future Machine War.

I still remember when I was in preschool and I think I talked about Terminator in class (or brought it up) and my teacher said in a Schwarzenegger voice, “I’ll be back” :)
 

WDWTank

Well-Known Member
Advertisement
Another thing I forgot to mention is that the timing of the T2:3D closure announcement was awkward. Judgment Day was remastered and rereleased in theaters (I saw it, best movie theatre experience I’ve had in a LONG time back then) and Terminator 6 was already announced and in the works. It’s almost as if Universal has a bias of shutting down cool and interesting attractions with a timeless variable and replacing them with weird synergetic ideas forced by Comcast. A Tonight Show themed show is not a bad idea, but to make it a ride is really unnecessary. A Fast & Furious ride where guests ride in a bus instead of a hot rod. Let’s not forget that many of the rides/attractions that were built prior to Hagrid’s were basically copy/paste screen simulators were guests just sit in a tilting vehicle in a stationary position for most of the duration; the queues are better than the rides. Now I haven’t been on Hagrid’s yet (for a variety of reasons) but the consensus I’m getting and even saw on video is an amazing experience. Now if Universal built most of their new attractions with that approach, I think more people would be pleased and the Studios Park would have a stronger attraction lineup.
 

Giss Neric

Well-Known Member
Looks great!!!!! A very worthy successor to Terminator IMO
I admit that I skipped through some parts and just watched the action. The action parts were great and very clever, and the screens and practical stuff were utilized well, but the speaking parts were a bit boring.

I haven't watched any Bourne movies. I don't have to understand really the scenario but as long as I'm entertained by the action then I'm good.
 

mergatroid

Well-Known Member
Firstly I've only seen it on video but even so the effects look amazing and the performers look excellent too. For me personally though I enjoyed the Terminator show far more which is a shame as it feels what came before was better. I can only judge it on what I see on a screen but from this I just don't 'feel' a story line that interests me, I'm more just waiting for the next effect. The ending is very much an anti climax, as he neither wins nor loses as such and is a bit meh compared to the previous show.

I don't want to dump on it for a few reasons, especially as being there in person may blow my mind with the special effects that I forget the bits that aren't so impressive. Also on the video of it I watched, the last scene where the two cars go over the edge looked slightly botched? As in the blast of smoke which is supposed to hide the transition from physical to screen was either out of sync or there wasn't enough smoke and you could clearly see the cars lower through the stage. As this is early on in it's opening, hopefully that's something they can work on?

However I just can't stop thinking "They replaced Terminator with this"? Terminator had the iconic characters and music that I had a connection with, I escaped into the story line more and it ended with me wanting more and feeling pumped. Had this not replaced Terminator and been added to the park then I would probably feel differently about it? But who knows perhaps next March when we visit in person I'll feel differently, I'm hoping to anyway.
 
Last edited:

Disneyhead'71

Well-Known Member
Firstly I've only seen it on video but even so the effects look amazing and the performers look excellent too. For me personally though I enjoyed the Terminator show far more which is a shame as it feels what came before was better. I can only judge it on what I see on a screen but from this I just don't 'feel' a story line that interests me, I'm more just waiting for the next effect. The ending is very much an anti climax, as he neither wins nor loses as such and is a bit meh compared to the previous show.

I don't want to dump on it for a few reasons, especially as being there in person may blow my mind with the special effects that I forget the bits that aren't so impressive. Also on the video of it I watched, the last scene where the two cars go over the edge looked slightly botched? As in the blast of smoke which is supposed to hide the transition from physical to screen was either out of sync or there wasn't enough smoke and you could clearly see the cars lower through the stage. As this is early on in it's opening, hopefully that's something they can work on?

However I just can't stop thinking they replaced Terminator with this? Terminator had the iconic characters and music that I had a connection with, I escaped into the story line more and it ended with me wanting more and feeling pumped. Had this not replaced Terminator and been added to the park then I would probably feel differently about it? But who knows perhaps next March when we visit in person I'll feel differently, I'm hoping to anyway.
Terminator was not only feeling pretty dated by the time it closed, but was also suffering from some particularly expensive to fix technical issues. The silver reflective coating on the main screen was wearing off badly and was requiring the entire screen to be replaced. And Universal's rights to the IP were coming to an end and Cameron wanted more money to re-up because they were rebooting the franchise with Schwarzenegger and Hamilton and they were convinced it would be a big hit (haha). Universal determined the popularity of the aging IP didn't warrant additional investment.
 

mergatroid

Well-Known Member
Terminator was not only feeling pretty dated by the time it closed, but was also suffering from some particularly expensive to fix technical issues. The silver reflective coating on the main screen was wearing off badly and was requiring the entire screen to be replaced. And Universal's rights to the IP were coming to an end and Cameron wanted more money to re-up because they were rebooting the franchise with Schwarzenegger and Hamilton and they were convinced it would be a big hit (haha). Universal determined the popularity of the aging IP didn't warrant additional investment.

Interesting stuff, I wasn't aware of any of that. I'm hoping next March that this blows me away when I see it myself. Even taking into account the show needing replacing, I still find the lack of story line, no connection with the characters and a 'meh' ending disappointing.

It's like my view on'The Hall of Presidents' in the Magic Kingdom in some respects. I appreciate the technology and work to make the Presidents look so life like, I appreciate the thought and planning that was involved in creating it and I appreciate that many others love it. However it just doesn't really work for me in the sum of all its parts. I'm hoping though that when I experience Bourne next year that it changes my mind.
 

Jwhee

Well-Known Member
Terminator was not only feeling pretty dated by the time it closed, but was also suffering from some particularly expensive to fix technical issues. The silver reflective coating on the main screen was wearing off badly and was requiring the entire screen to be replaced. And Universal's rights to the IP were coming to an end and Cameron wanted more money to re-up because they were rebooting the franchise with Schwarzenegger and Hamilton and they were convinced it would be a big hit (haha). Universal determined the popularity of the aging IP didn't warrant additional investment.


The 3D was painful to watch towards the end.

the thing though that sets T2 apart from Bourne was that T2 was a full fledged, rounded out E-Ticket. Everything from the queue to the preshow up until the end of the attraction was an immersive “Cyberdyne” experience.

Bourne lacks this, it’s just a show. It’s no Gary Goddard masterpiece. The show itself is extremely good, although in a different (lower) league than T2 as a whole
 

MickeyMouse10

Well-Known Member
I don't know what you guys are talking about. This show looks so awful I found my self laughing throughout it. The screens (yep screens again. Universal can't help themselves) look fake, the action is badly choreographed (awful ending and ridiculously obvious running in place) and to state it plainly... it's just lame.

It was so bad I had to rewatch it on Youtube, so I could get yet even more enjoyment out of The Bored Craptacular. I would have rather Terminator remain than this mess. Though it's had some bombs as of late, it seems more iconic and timeless than Bourne will be in 10 years.
 

lebeau

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
I don't know what you guys are talking about. This show looks so awful I found my self laughing throughout it. The screens (yep screens again. Universal can't help themselves) look fake, the action is badly choreographed (awful ending and ridiculously obvious running in place) and to state it plainly... it's just lame.

It was so bad I had to rewatch it on Youtube, so I could get yet even more enjoyment out of The Bored Craptacular. I would have rather Terminator remain than this mess. Though it's had some bombs as of late, it seems more iconic and timeless than Bourne will be in 10 years.

Oh look. Someone who doesn't typically post in this subforum dropped in with an opinion. I shall alert the media.
 

mergatroid

Well-Known Member
I don't know what you guys are talking about. This show looks so awful I found my self laughing throughout it. The screens (yep screens again. Universal can't help themselves) look fake, the action is badly choreographed (awful ending and ridiculously obvious running in place) and to state it plainly... it's just lame.

It was so bad I had to rewatch it on Youtube, so I could get yet even more enjoyment out of The Bored Craptacular. I would have rather Terminator remain than this mess. Though it's had some bombs as of late, it seems more iconic and timeless than Bourne will be in 10 years.

You do realise that Terminator was a screen based attraction in a building built for a theatre screen based attraction don't you? Were you expecting them to cram a roller coaster in there or something?

I'm with you on Terminator being much better, but I wouldn't call Bourne lame.
 
Last edited:

MickeyMouse10

Well-Known Member
You do realise that Terminator was a screen based attraction in a building built for a theatre screen based attraction don't you? Were you expecting them to cram a roller coaster in there or something?

I'm with you on Terminator being much better, but I wouldn't call Bourne lame.

I think Terminator blended the two much better than Bourne. The Boring Craptacular reminds me of one those old Hollywood movies where Cary Grant (or whoever) is pretending to drive a car in front of a screen. My little nephew did a better job reenacting "Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: The secret of the ooze".

Another thing they should have factored into this whole mess. Bourne isn't a marketable IP that sells merchandise. Whose buying a boring T-shirt with boring lettering? What did they use for the font "Times New Roman"?

I'd rather they put in either a new ride or a better IP (James Bond) with less screens. This is a prime location that is being wasted with drudge.
 
Top Bottom