Why hasn't anyone licensed star trek for a park

SleepingMonk

SleepingMonk

Well-Known Member
There really is a great opportunity there.

I know the scene where Han Solo meets Captain Kirk and they fight those jedis with their phasers....I mean....wow.....great stuff!

To boldly go to a galaxy far, far away!
 
I

Ignohippo

Well-Known Member
ChrisFL said:
Also, if you go to Kennedy Space Center, they have an exhibit which includes several Star Trek things including the original bridge and I believe the engine room from TNG
Click to expand...

Nope. Not still there. That was a limited engagement (see what I did there? Engage! Get it?)

That exhibit now has a semi-permanent home with the CSI Experience on I-Drive in Orlando though.

Sadly, it may be all that's left of the fantastic Las Vegas attraction. Most of the items from that exhibit were sold at auction. Why Paramount didn't make sure everything was kept in tact, so that it could be used again later if the opportunity presented itself, is beyond me. The Las Vegas attraction was really amazing. From what I understand, the Orlando one is terrible by comparisson.

As for a Star Trek theme park presence, I think it also has to with the fact the the ST audience skews a bit older than your general theme park target audience. I don't see many 19 year olds getting too excited about Star Trek. Unlike Star Wars, which now has a new generation of fans thanks to the prequels and Clone Wars tv show, Star Trek has never appealed to the young.

It's unfortunately just too small of an audience to spend hundreds of millions of dollars on attractions for. Hopefully Abrams can change that. Waiting five years between movies doesn't help though.
 
ChrisFL

ChrisFL

Premium Member
Ignohippo said:
Nope. Not still there. That was a limited engagement (see what I did there? Engage! Get it?)

That exhibit now has a semi-permanent home with the CSI Experience on I-Drive in Orlando though.
Click to expand...

Ah ok, thanks for the clarification. I was at KSC right before they were going to add it, and never got to see it
 
Cameorn Eplion

Cameorn Eplion

New Member
I think one reason why is because its a older franchise, Harry Potter, And Avatar are new, And kids love them. Kids really don't know much about Star Trek. Besides that they already have the Star Wars Franchise.
 
englanddg

englanddg

One Little Spark...
Cameorn Eplion said:
I think one reason why is because its a older franchise, Harry Potter, And Avatar are new, And kids love them. Kids really don't know much about Star Trek. Besides that they already have the Star Wars Franchise.
Click to expand...

Kids don't buy park tickets. Part of what Disney does well, that Universal didn't get at first (but they are getting much better at), is that nostalgia doesn't mean nodding to older things in a shameless way, it means buying into events and attractions that actually draw people back.

I'm sure many 30+ year olds who grew up with Star Trek in it's prime (late 80s, all of the 90s), would disagree.

It's probably the fact that Star Trek hasn't made the transition from a weekly drama on TV to a movie franchise well, with few exceptions, that makes it hard to make an attraction for. Plus it's range is so large...what do you do? The Next Generation? Voyager? The recent reboot?

We'll see what happens, I don't think the franchise is dead. It's not Star Wars though in terms of it's mass popularity.
 
Goofyernmost

Goofyernmost

Well-Known Member
Ignohippo said:
As for a Star Trek theme park presence, I think it also has to with the fact the the ST audience skews a bit older than your general theme park target audience. I don't see many 19 year olds getting too excited about Star Trek. Unlike Star Wars, which now has a new generation of fans thanks to the prequels and Clone Wars tv show, Star Trek has never appealed to the young.

It's unfortunately just too small of an audience to spend hundreds of millions of dollars on attractions for. Hopefully Abrams can change that. Waiting five years between movies doesn't help though.
Click to expand...

I wholeheartedly agree with that assessment. Star Trek was hugely and lovingly popular with it's fans, but there were not enough of them to support a theme park 24/7/365. Heck the original series couldn't even find an audience large enough to keep it on the air. Those that loved it were, and still are, obsessively loyal to it. But, alas, not enough of them can get a weekend pass from the asylum to get to the parks. Just kidding, it just seemed like a good place to throw in a Star Trek joke! :p:D:oops:
 
luv

luv

Well-Known Member
I watched Star Trek reruns every weekend as a kid. I like it well enough, but I'm not dying to see a Star Trek thing in a park.

I'd take it over Avatar, lol, but it isn't high on even my list.

I think you need to be a serious fan to really think this would be a great idea. And there just aren't enough Trekkies out there, I don't think.
 
pumpkin7

pumpkin7

Well-Known Member
I'm just hoping the Experience on I - Drive stays open long enough for us to go see it next June. By the sounds of it, it might not be :(
 
MaryJaneP

MaryJaneP

Well-Known Member
englanddg said:
Kids don't buy park tickets. Part of what Disney does well, that Universal didn't get at first (but they are getting much better at), is that nostalgia doesn't mean nodding to older things in a shameless way, it means buying into events and attractions that actually draw people back.

I'm sure many 30+ year olds who grew up with Star Trek in it's prime (late 80s, all of the 90s), would disagree.

It's probably the fact that Star Trek hasn't made the transition from a weekly drama on TV to a movie franchise well, with few exceptions, that makes it hard to make an attraction for. Plus it's range is so large...what do you do? The Next Generation? Voyager? The recent reboot?

We'll see what happens, I don't think the franchise is dead. It's not Star Wars though in terms of it's mass popularity.
Click to expand...


So are you saying that ST needs to have Justin Bieber as Captain Kirk? And here I thought no theme park attraction was because ST had an educational/morality lesson in each episode rather than pure fantasy. Maybe I missed those aspects in wizarding and blue people.
 
flynnibus

flynnibus

Premium Member
People really should have seen the Vegas attraction before making judgement. It was stellar and yes, superior to Disney quality in many ways. I think it suffered from their pricing model (which they tried to remedy, but kept the up front cost too high IMO) and a bit from the Hilton's location.

They ran it for 10 years, and claimed over 3 million visitors. Even tho I said it was too expensive, I don't think an attraction like this could operate stand-alone. It was just too expensive labor wise.
 
ajrwdwgirl

ajrwdwgirl

Premium Member
I'm just glad that disney hasn't gotten hold of Star Trek. Although it might be better than the Avatar stuff. Not a big fan of either.
 
Clever Name

Clever Name

Well-Known Member
This is a great idea. Take all the Star Trek characters and pit them against all the Star Wars characters in a Dancing With the Stars format. I'll bet that Darth Vader and Captain Kirk can get jiggy.
 
cheezbat

cheezbat

Well-Known Member
I was a HUGE Next Generation fan. I always wanted to visit the Star Trek Experience in Vegas, but it was gone before I ever had the chance. The last movie was really good, and if it's a sign of things to come, the next installment might be good as well.
I'd like to see what someone like Universal would do with this property, since Disney is already using Star Wars, and the Cedar Fair parks didn't care to spend the money to keep the Paramount attractions. Uni had a smaller yet cool attraction way back in the day based on the original movies. Just think what they could do now with the transporter simulation, alien starship attacks, all the cool alien drink and food concoctions...
 
Magenta Panther

Magenta Panther

Well-Known Member
M.rudolf said:
Dumb question does any one know why star trek has never been licensed for a US theme park. Seems like a nobrainer to me
Click to expand...

Well, I think the issue is, Star Trek tackled deep sociological issues, and made some waves in its original incarnation. While Star Wars was always more fun and humorous and adventure-based. That's the difference between the two franchises. And maybe why one lends itself to a theme-park attraction while the other doesn't.
 
M.rudolf

M.rudolf

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
Magenta Panther said:
Well, I think the issue is, Star Trek tackled deep sociological issues, and made some waves in its original incarnation. While Star Wars was always more fun and humorous and adventure-based. That's the difference between the two franchises. And maybe why one lends itself to a theme-park attraction while the other doesn't.
Click to expand...
That's what I figured I just thought this could be a missed opportunity with the last film being as well regarded as it is
 
flavious27

flavious27

Well-Known Member
They had the star trek experience in vegas before. There isn't a reason that a park could not have a similar attraction, I don't see Paramount dragging their feet when pimping out the trek ip.
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom