USF Project?
- Thread starter Nick
- Start date
-
Signing up for a Premium Membership is a donation to help Inside Universal maintain costs and offers an ad-free experience on the forum. Learn more about it here.
- Status
I brought the up in another thread, but is Harry Potter still a big enough property that will bring people to the parks? It doesn't have a lasting appeal like Star Wars or Marvel does. I think it might be overkill at this point. It's been 6 years since the last movie and Fantatic Beasts wasn't exactly a smash hit. People move on to other things.
I'm glad they're moving forward more quickly than before, I just don't think they were sleeping. I think they were focusing on room capacity due to increased attendance/future projects, but now Disney's projects have kickstarted the attraction phase.
- Dec 21, 2016
- 1,342
- 2,373
HE SAID "GLOWING AWAY" it's a trap... it's still closing!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Ok I'll stop
..... For real this time....
Ok I'll stop
..... For real this time....
This has been debated before with actual statistics about all of them; they're all huge properties with more than enough followings for each, end of story.
I disagree. The kids that read those books, in 1997 - are having kids now. They will read them and watch the movies with them, and those groups will be vacationing to uni for the next few decades.
I was 10 in 1997, we've brought my son who is 9 to universal the last 3 years, and haven't been to Disney since 2013. (we were huge Disney people before that)......my sons reading Sorcerers stone as we speak, with Hedwig next to him and his interactive wand in his hand. HP has huge staying power imo.
- Jul 14, 2015
- 1,592
- 2,573
I mean... I think its gotta be MIB/Mummy/T2 if FFL is something different and E.T. is confirmed staying. (I hope it's T2...)
- Jul 7, 2015
- 356
- 483
It's definitely in the same league as Star Wars and Marvel. Star Wars and Marvel have just been around a lot longer but give it time and Harry Potter will feel just as timeless (it already is to some people).
ET is not confirmed to be staying, just hasn't been included in the existing Nintendo plans.
NOTHING IS SAFE! Time to freak out. :dance:
- Jun 29, 2017
- 37
- 62
No #melt here.
Just thought the discussion was entering dangerous territory using definitive language like 'since we are losing MIB'.
Just thought the discussion was entering dangerous territory using definitive language like 'since we are losing MIB'.
Since I messed up on the previous page.
WE ARE NOT LOSING MEN IN BLACK
(at least not imminently.)
WE ARE NOT LOSING MEN IN BLACK
(at least not imminently.)
Lol, *narrator voice*: “But it wasn’t.”Sadly yes
MOD NOTE: It wasn't.
- Jan 31, 2013
- 83
- 85
As I've said countless times, if it was built before Potter, just assume it's going to close in the next decade.
- Jun 29, 2017
- 37
- 62
- Jul 18, 2008
- 6,742
- 5,461
- Feb 28, 2015
- 3,820
- 7,312
Really don't have an issue with this. I don't see anything wrong with replacing rides and think Disney should do it more often.
Mummy feels the most dated at this point. Especially with Fallon making the NY section of the park all shiny.
But more importantly, a Mummy replacement could act as counter-programming to Nintendo. If you put a new ride at MIB, people would have to pass Nintendo to get to the MIB ride. That isn't helping crowd control at that part of the park. A new ride at Mummy would push crowds down Animation Courtyard to bypass the path to Nintendo altogether.
But more importantly, a Mummy replacement could act as counter-programming to Nintendo. If you put a new ride at MIB, people would have to pass Nintendo to get to the MIB ride. That isn't helping crowd control at that part of the park. A new ride at Mummy would push crowds down Animation Courtyard to bypass the path to Nintendo altogether.
I was referring to Disney's slumber. Universal has been pretty wide awake for the past 7 -8 years.- Status
