Universal Orlando Resort Expansion (Part 1)

[Scott W.]

For a roller coaster? There have been serious discussions by VIP's in UC about removing and/or rearranging backstage buildings on the opposite side of the park (eastern side), but not for a large thrill coaster. I don't know if person's got their wish or not.



Sorry, sometimes I don't read closely enough. You were quite clear about it in hindsight. :wave:

For anything really. Upon looking at it on google earth, you could have a ride entrance near the current paths and have the ride push back.

 

[Teebin]

For anything really. Upon looking at it on google earth, you could have a ride entrance near the current paths and have the ride push back.

And you are saying that you heard a rumor that persons at Universal were looking into doing this on the western side of USF?

 

[sjago13]

You can easily route a one floor corridor under the hogwarts express. For instance you could have something like rock&roller coaster launch under then have a big show building backstage. If they wanted they could have a corridor that goes under and opens up into a land build behind the tracks. For instance you could easily tuck a land behind the new york library facade or between mummy and disaster. Just build a facade to cover tracks and a covered hallway that opens up back stage.

You can have a land that loops behind mummy and even expand out IOA some by replacing Lost continet and putting a show building behind the tracks and using old area for walking/other stuff.

 

[Nick]

Yeah, if they're ever going to build back there now, they're going to have to do it the "Space Mountain way" as I like to call it. Have an on stage facade and then walk for a long time to get to the ACTUAL ride building.

 

[captainmoch]

The backstage behind Mummy plot would be a cool place to put the Magical Congress of the U.S.A. if they don't save that for a third park.

 

[fryoj]

I think all of the soundstages between HRRR and Seuss would be an easier location to expand onto. No reason they couldn't move anything that actually films there to the new property. Now HHN might be another issue.

 

[Nick]

I think all of the soundstages between HRRR and Seuss would be an easier location to expand onto. No reason they couldn't move anything that actually films there to the new property. Now HHN might be another issue.

Maybe with Park #3, they move HHN over there, which would allow for USF and IOA to stay open and they could purpose build the new park with HHN use in mind as well.

 

[grizzlybarely]

Maybe with Park #3, they move HHN over there, which would allow for USF and IOA to stay open and they could purpose build the new park with HHN use in mind as well.

On a similar note, there was a discussion on Twitter about how Park #3 could have wide-enough streets to support the largest Macy's parade floats.

 

[JungleSkip]

Maybe with Park #3, they move HHN over there, which would allow for USF and IOA to stay open and they could purpose build the new park with HHN use in mind as well.

From what I understand, it'll be the opposite, with parts of the new land being used to ensure HHN stays at the original resort.

 

[Mad Dog]

Although I would doubt a third park would duplicate a NYC area. And that's a major part of the reason for the parade at the Studios. That's the ambiance.

 

[JungleSkip]

There's a movie in the pipeline and more importantly a new series is coming soon as well.

A new series that will be exclusive to CBS's online subscription service. AKA no one will see it outside of people that are already diehard Trekkies.

 

[s8film40]

A new series that will be exclusive to CBS's online subscription service. AKA no one will see it outside of people that are already diehard Trekkies.

Well this is just CBS's way of entering the streaming market. Cable is dying and everyone obviously is deciding how they want to enter the next generation of television. If the show is successful it will do well and bring people to this platform and if that platform doesn't work but the show is showing success they'll just move it to whatever avenue they decide to shift to. This format seems to be working for HBO and Showtime and certainly streaming only shows have proven to do well. It really just all depends on how well the show itself does.

 

[JungleSkip]

Well this is just CBS's way of entering the streaming market. Cable is dying and everyone obviously is deciding how they want to enter the next generation of television. If the show is successful it will do well and bring people to this platform and if that platform doesn't work but the show is showing success they'll just move it to whatever avenue they decide to shift to. This format seems to be working for HBO and Showtime and certainly streaming only shows have proven to do well. It really just all depends on how well the show itself does.

If the show was on Netflix or Hulu or Amazon I'd agree with you. Ain't nobody getting CBS's streaming service.

 

[*Q*]

A new series that will be exclusive to CBS's online subscription service. AKA no one will see it outside of people that are already diehard Trekkies.

I think there's a decent chance that their subscription service will fail and they move the series back to the network, a cable channel, or one of the more general streaming services. And even if the new series does stay on their service, the head of Paramount was recently quoted about exploring possibilities with a Star Trek universe like Marvel's, so Star Trek may blow up again the way it did in the 90s. I have no doubt that the Paramount execs are looking at what's happening with Star Wars and are trying to figure out if they can pull off the same thing. It's kind of funny, because nearly the same thing happened back in the 70s, Star Wars was pretty much responsible for getting Star Trek into theaters and reviving the franchise. All this has happened before, and it will happen again. (Bringing it back around to Universal )

 

[JungleSkip]

I think there's a decent chance that their subscription service will fail and they move the series back to the network, a cable channel, or one of the more general streaming services. And even if the new series does stay on their service, the head of Paramount was recently quoted about exploring possibilities with a Star Trek universe like Marvel's, so Star Trek may blow up again the way it did in the 90s. I have no doubt that the Paramount execs are looking at what's happening with Star Wars and are trying to figure out if they can pull off the same thing. It's kind of funny, because nearly the same thing happened back in the 70s, Star Wars was pretty much responsible for getting Star Trek into theaters and reviving the franchise. All this has happened before, and it will happen again. (Bringing it back around to Universal )

You have much more faith in Star Trek than I do.

 

[s8film40]

If the show was on Netflix or Hulu or Amazon I'd agree with you. Ain't nobody getting CBS's streaming service.

Well it's new and we really don't know how well it's going to work. All the content providers really want to get into the market directly. If they start pulling their content from Netflix and Hulu in favor of their own platforms Netflix and Hulu could easily become a thing of the past.

 

[s8film40]

You have much more faith in Star Trek than I do.

I think it's definitely a wait and see thing, if it goes the directions the recent movies went I think it will bomb. Being that it's CBS instead of Paramount running it I think they may go a different direction, so it certainly has potential to create success.

 

[IzzyB]

Well it's new and we really don't know how well it's going to work. All the content providers really want to get into the market directly. If they start pulling their content from Netflix and Hulu in favor of their own platforms Netflix and Hulu could easily become a thing of the past.

I think this will bring cable back. The people going away from cable are doing it because they can pay for 2 or 3 services and it is cheaper than cable. If each channel does their own thing at such high monthly costs then people will just move back to cable that is cheaper.

 

[*Q*]

You have much more faith in Star Trek than I do.

I mean, yeah, I'm obviously a little biased, but completely aside from that, the head of Paramount has pretty much come right out and said they're planning on making a lot more Star Trek, so... I guess I also have faith in their desire to jump on the connected universe bandwagon.

 

[Scott W.]

You can easily route a one floor corridor under the hogwarts express. For instance you could have something like rock&roller coaster launch under then have a big show building backstage. If they wanted they could have a corridor that goes under and opens up into a land build behind the tracks. For instance you could easily tuck a land behind the new york library facade or between mummy and disaster. Just build a facade to cover tracks and a covered hallway that opens up back stage.

You can have a land that loops behind mummy and even expand out IOA some by replacing Lost continet and putting a show building behind the tracks and using old area for walking/other stuff.

If they ever opened up the back like that, I wonder if they would have a path connecting the two parks.