Why no LOTR theme park?

[wizards8507]

Disclaimer: This is NOT a bring-Tolkien-to-WDW thread.

I'm just curious as to why people think there isn't a Lord of the Rings park (or at least land) at WDW or with any other number of theme park companies out there. The Lord of the Rings has a following that rivals Harry Potter (though not as active because they aren't currently in the middle of new films) and, I would argue, will be around much longer than HP due to the sheer artistic quality of the literature and film production, compared to the pulpish writing of Harry Potter, with its bad puns and blatant ripoffs of other works.

Perhaps I've tipped my hand as a much bigger fan of LoTR than Harry Potter, but I think my point is fairly objectively valid. Harry Potter is mass-media and primarily juvenile. The Lord of the Rings is equally appealing to mass-media outlets, but is also a rare mix of popular entertainment and classic literature. The themes, stories, creatures, and characters would be more than enough to sustain an entire theme park. Just imagine the following themed attractions:

Moria mine cart w/ Balrog encounter
Flight of the Nazgul
Horse Lords of Rohan
Paths of the Dead

etc. etc. etc.

So my thought is, why hasn't this come to be anywhere?

 

[unkadug]

Because Tolkien died before he could prostitute his creation to the highest bidder. :shrug:

 

[wizards8507]

Because Tolkien died before he could prostitute his creation to the highest bidder. :shrug:

Lol a fair point, but you would assume that Middle-earth Enterprises (a subsidiary of the Saul Zaentz Company) would be more willing to reap profit from the franchise than Tolkien himself would have done anyways.

 

[unkadug]

I would imagine that they have priced themselves out of the realm of SixFlags only leaving the big parks who are leery of building attractions around franchises that they do not totally control.

 

[joannecasey]

Man would I love it if they built a theme park like this !!! I would pay a lotta money to walk through the shire or take a dark ride through Mt. Doom !!!!

 

[CaptainWinter]

Disclaimer: This is NOT a bring-Tolkien-to-WDW thread.

I'm just curious as to why people think there isn't a Lord of the Rings park (or at least land) at WDW or with any other number of theme park companies out there. The Lord of the Rings has a following that rivals Harry Potter (though not as active because they aren't currently in the middle of new films) and, I would argue, will be around much longer than HP due to the sheer artistic quality of the literature and film production, compared to the pulpish writing of Harry Potter, with its bad puns and blatant ripoffs of other works.

Perhaps I've tipped my hand as a much bigger fan of LoTR than Harry Potter,

Perhaps?

but I think my point is fairly objectively valid. Harry Potter is mass-media and primarily juvenile. The Lord of the Rings is equally appealing to mass-media outlets, but is also a rare mix of popular entertainment and classic literature.

I think the claim that LoTR is equally appealing as HP is off the mark. HP swept up kids and a good batch of adults along with them. This from my personal experience among friends & acquaintances, my time spent as a middle-school teacher in the early 2000s, and just witnessing the HP sales phenomena over the past however many years, including book sales.

I know many kids and families that plowed their way through all the Potter books, but almost none who (recently) made their way through LoTR. Maybe you know some exceptions to this?

My guess is, it's simply far less popular, even though the movies were very successful.

If you want to stack up the two series for literary content, though, I'm with you -- I don't think HP holds a candle to LoTR. (Full disclosure: I didn't read all the HPs.) Nor the movies, from the few I've seen.

 

[wizards8507]

If you want to stack up the two series for literary content, though, I'm with you -- I don't think HP holds a candle to LoTR. (Full disclosure: I didn't read all the HPs.) Nor the movies, from the few I've seen.

I know that "literary content" is far from a 1:1 metric for theme park entertainment value, but my main point was that LoTR has already stood the test of time. When I was in grade school, the "rage" for Harry Potter was primarily due to the fact that it was happening right then and there, in our own generation. My point about the relative quality between the two is that The Hobbit was published 74 years ago and remains a powerful, captivating, and relevant piece of fiction. Does anyone seriously think that many people will know who Draco Malfoy is in the year 2071?

Independent of how good and/or popular the books and films are, I think LoTR has such a stronger universe to build on than Harry Potter. HP literally has nothing original in seven novels worth of material. HP reads as a self-parody, while LoTR brings you into a world that you can actually conceive of existing, dragons, magic and all. Which has a more awe-inspiring fantasy connotation: Alastor "Mad-Eye" Moody, or Denethor II, Steward of Gondor?

 

[CaptainWinter]

I know that "literary content" is far from a 1:1 metric for theme park entertainment value, but my main point was that LoTR has already stood the test of time. When I was in grade school, the "rage" for Harry Potter was primarily due to the fact that it was happening right then and there, in our own generation. My point about the relative quality between the two is that The Hobbit was published 74 years ago and remains a powerful, captivating, and relevant piece of fiction. Does anyone seriously think that many people will know who Draco Malfoy is in the year 2071?

Yeah, we might. We still know who Tom and Jerry are.

Independent of how good and/or popular the books and films are, I think LoTR has such a stronger universe to build on than Harry Potter. HP literally has nothing original in seven novels worth of material. HP reads as a self-parody, while LoTR brings you into a world that you can actually conceive of existing, dragons, magic and all. Which has a more awe-inspiring fantasy connotation: Alastor "Mad-Eye" Moody, or Denethor II, Steward of Gondor?

You're right, of course. I'll try to continue arguing this in a friendly spirit.

First, I'm not sure there's any whole fantasy theme park, anywhere. Is there? Not one for HP.

Second, you're arguing from the point of quality. I concede the quality argument, as does highbrow culture, by way of literary acclaim (see W.H. Auden's NYT Tolkien book reviews) and Academy Awards. (Compare to Harold Bloom's skewering of HP.) But quality and popularity are distinct, plain and simple.

Third, a lot of the settings in LotR are unpleasant. They would be vastly expensive to create and not of broad appeal when done. It's hard for me to imagine Mom, Pop and Junior licking ice cream cones in Mordor. Theme parks tend to be pleasant places, selected attractions and Halloween events aside.

We could see a LotR attraction sometime -- that wouldn't surprise me much -- but the moment may have passed. Perhaps when the Hobbit films arrive, people will be reminded of all that wonderful stuff and someone will decide to start building. But a whole theme park seems rather unlikely to me.

And be careful what you wish for. A tacky and/or poorly-maintained LotR park would be worse than none at all.

 

[Wilt Dasney]

And be careful what you wish for. A tacky and/or poorly-maintained LotR park would be worse than none at all.

Absolutely.

I'm just not sure about this idea. I feel that part of the reason HP works at Universal is the tone of the works. There's an underlying sunniness and a kind of frivolity in the Potter world that is occasionally punctuated by brief horror, after which the kids go back to gossiping about who's "snogging" who, or how awful the new Defense professor is.

LotR is, narratively, a slog. Not that the reading itself is tough going, but there's little uplifting about Frodo and Sam's journey with Gollum in the one thread, or Middle Earth's geopolitical maneuvering and giant setpiece battles in the other. The light-hearted moments that exist are more of the "have to laugh to keep from crying" type.

Even the Shire, which is a light-hearted place, becomes a very serious subject, because the hobbits have no idea if they'll ever enjoy those simple pleasures again. I think it's the difference between enjoying hanging out with friends from the perspective of a naif and the perspective of a soldier returning from war. For the second, even life's "unserious" pleasures will take on a serious tone.

Tolkien's world is awe-inspiring and beautiful, but I'm not sure it's a place suited to having families mill around in it. Having a coaster where kids *just barely* avoid the Balrog and walk back out smiling into the sunlight going "that was soooo cool, mom!" and then asking for an Aragorn action figure would feel like a cheapening of the whole product to me.

To the extent my vote counts, I'd rather see this idea stay in the realm of discussion.

 

[unkadug]

I know that "literary content" is far from a 1:1 metric for theme park entertainment value, but my main point was that LoTR has already stood the test of time. When I was in grade school, the "rage" for Harry Potter was primarily due to the fact that it was happening right then and there, in our own generation. My point about the relative quality between the two is that The Hobbit was published 74 years ago and remains a powerful, captivating, and relevant piece of fiction. Does anyone seriously think that many people will know who Draco Malfoy is in the year 2071?

I'm not real sure who he is in 2011. :shrug:

 

[wizards8507]

I'm just not sure about this idea. I feel that part of the reason HP works at Universal is the tone of the works. There's an underlying sunniness and a kind of frivolity in the Potter world.

There's nothing bright and cheery about Dinosaur, Expedition: Everest, The Mummy, or Tower of Terror, either.

I wouldn't expect that the Lord of the Rings park be sunny or frivolous. I would expect it to be badass.

 

[PartOfYourWorld]

There's nothing bright and cheery about Dinosaur, Expedition: Everest, The Mummy, or Tower of Terror, either.

I wouldn't expect that the Lord of the Rings park be sunny or frivolous. I would expect it to be badass.

I agree.

Coming from a huge LOTR fan myself, being able to walk through Middle-Earth would be an awesome experience. (I hope to visit NZ one day just for that LOTR walking tour they have)

As a side note to join the friendly back and forth. I am a 22 year old who grew up on Harry Potter, but I have to admit I do love the LOTR more just because to me the books are more vivid at allowing people to envision what Middle-Earth looks like. LOTR is still alive after many many years

 

[Wilt Dasney]

There's nothing bright and cheery about Dinosaur, Expedition: Everest, The Mummy, or Tower of Terror, either.

Fair enough. But Dinosaur, Mummy and Tower all have an element of cheekiness, as if to tip the audience off that it's OK not to take this stuff too seriously.

As for Everest...well, I suppose you've got me with that one. It really does seem to take itself pretty seriously throughout. So I guess a somber tone with no irony isn't unheard of in the theme park world, even if it does seem to be pretty rare!