Whats the latest on Disney & Harry Potter

[Pumbas Nakasak]

What does Ran Radcliffe's appearance in Equus have to do with the viability of a Harry Potter themed ride/show?

Because real Disney fans dont do nekid, they even shower with swim sits on

 

[darthjohnny]

The franchise is far from over. There are still two movies to be made. Look at other WDW attractions based on movie franchises- Star Wars, Buzz Lightyear, Muppets, Indiana Jones, etc. There haven't been any of those movies recently, and those franchises are not "over."

Like previously said, those franchises you mention have had recent movies and/or are releasing more.

Star Wars will eventually be rereleased in 3D, and will have two full length T.V. shows in the next years, not to mention the hugely successful Episode III released 2 years ago.

The thing is with the franchises you mentioned, they have the ability to go on in new stories and adventures forever.

Harry Potter is very limited to the books, even more than something like Chronicles of Narnia.

And if Harry Potter does die in the end, then there is no way to progress the story further.

And since Harry Potter is such a recent phenomenon, we don't know its staying power. I think that is why people are iffy on the attraction in Disney.

 

[Safari Princess]

Islands can have Harry. That series is not good enough for Disney.

 

[Safari Princess]

Like previously said, those franchises you mention have had recent movies and/or are releasing more.

Star Wars will eventually be rereleased in 3D, and will have two full length T.V. shows in the next years, not to mention the hugely successful Episode III released 2 years ago.

The thing is with the franchises you mentioned, they have the ability to go on in new stories and adventures forever.

Harry Potter is very limited to the books, even more than something like Chronicles of Narnia.

And if Harry Potter does die in the end, then there is no way to progress the story further.

And since Harry Potter is such a recent phenomenon, we don't know its staying power. I think that is why people are iffy on the attraction in Disney.

Here here!

 

[darthjohnny]

Here here!

Thank you. :wave:

 

[PencilTest]

Star Wars will eventually be rereleased in 3D, and will have two full length T.V. shows in the next years, not to mention the hugely successful Episode III released 2 years ago.

If the 3D rerelease thing takes off (big "if" there), I wouldn't be surprised at all to see the seven Harry Potter movies released, too. And as far as tv shows go, the last I checked none of us own a crystal ball, so it's rather impossible to definitively say that Star Wars will have a couple of shows, but HP won't (even though I've heard of the plans for the SW ones).

The thing is with the franchises you mentioned, they have the ability to go on in new stories and adventures forever...and if Harry Potter does die in the end, then there is no way to progress the story further.

This made me think of something funny. (And I'm not knocking this point, I'm just saying.) On one hand, a positive argument can be made that some of these stories can be made go on forever, whereas on the other hand, when Cinderella 3 or Dumbo 2 comes around, we all and moan. Double standard?

And since Harry Potter is such a recent phenomenon, we don't know its staying power. I think that is why people are iffy on the attraction in Disney.

I dunno about this. I mean, we also have Sounds Dangerous--never a phenomenon to begin with--which opened in 1995, same year as The Drew Carey Show started. It's still open, and it sucks! Voyage of The Little Mermaid was open well within a decade of the movie in 1989. Heck, It's Tough to be a Bug opened before a bug's life even came out! And if I'm not mistaken, Sleeping Beauty Castle in Disneyland was built before Sleeping Beauty was released as well. But we're iffy on Harry Potter? (which, by the way, will be ten years old in about a month.)