Fast & Furious: Supercharged - General Discussion

[shiekra38]

Throwing another thing in here: Demanding anyones job or career over theme park additions is insane, there's a larger discussion in social media about creative works and we forget how much is a group effort. As much as I'm not happy with results (and neither are Comcast) that's between the high ups of UC and their bosses, not us. Criticize the art, not the artist.

Ironically, the worst part of the ride is the 360 portion...the rest is passible imo

The only thing is, the 360 portion is most of the 'ride'

It would appear as if they have noticed what people want moving forward and are adjusting and changing to meet the needs...They can't exactly replace every single ride with a screen all at once

No.

I was joking

 

[belloq87]

Ultimately, yes; but all research & data show the GP has been loving UO's additions, even the screen rides - so that bit can be explained.

If this is true, then where's all this talk coming from of Universal "getting the message" about screens that people have been talking about here in recent months? The implication is that Universal knows they've gone overboard, but how do they know that if the guests aren't telling them so?

Except Kong "proved" that taking something from the Hollywood tram tour and plussing it could work.

You'd have to agree, though, that Kong was significantly more plussed and fleshed-out than Supercharged ended up being. Kong adds so much more to what its Studio Tour counterpart has to offer.

 

[Disneyhead]

Throwing another thing in here: Demanding anyones job or career over theme park additions is insane, there's a larger discussion in social media about creative works and we forget how much is a group effort. As much as I'm not happy with results (and neither are Comcast) that's between the high ups of UC and their bosses, not us. Criticize the art, not the artist.



No.

From Twitter today...

 

[Brian G.]

If this is true, then where's all this talk coming from of Universal "getting the message" about screens that people have been talking about here in recent months? The implication is that Universal knows they've gone overboard, but how do they know that if the guests aren't telling them so?

My post was referencing pre-F&F. After F&F, there obviously has been some rise in awareness and changes. Remember, when F&F was green-lit - Kong and Fallon weren't open.

From Twitter today...

1000% agreed.

At the end of the day, it's a theme park. You can be critical, but some take it a bit too far.

 

[shiekra38]

Mark Woodbury. And Bill Davis (president of UOR) should also be held responsible.

Ironic that people want Woodbury's head when he was one of the OGs that helped with the original planning of USF and helped with the development of IOA

I get the screenz era...It makes sense from a hindsight perspective why Universal chose that route for so long

I think the next era will be better

 

[Parkscope Joe]

From Twitter today...

It's way more complicated than that, USF ain't Disneyland. There's too much nuance for this thread. But lets be real, F&F Supercharged doesn't earn any of that discussion.

 

[Evan]

I think it can simply comes down to the idea that some IPs just aren’t as timeless... or don’t lend themselves as well to a theme park ride application.

I think the only possible thing people want after seeing a F&F movie is to get in a super sick car and go fast... and that isn’t what they get at UO.

 

[xxbrothawizxx]

I'd like to see them try to improve the attraction by redoing the CG at the very least and rewriting the club scene.

It's a bummer this was green lit before Uni was sure Nintendo was going to the new park. Test track with drifting and a small simulated jump would have easily been a 20 year attraction.

It's interesting how this ride mirrors the changes in the movie industry.

 

[AstroOwl52]

I think it can simply comes down to the idea that some IPs just aren’t as timeless... or don’t lend themselves as well to a theme park ride application.

I think the only possible thing people want after seeing a F&F movie is to get in a super sick car and go fast... and that isn’t what they get at UO.

In defense of the F&F franchise, they aren't just a meaningless car movies with nothing of value in them. For as insane as they are, the action scenes do still use practical effects and sequences in a CGI-heavy industry. When you see a F&F movie, you can point to a chain of explosions or a epic car crash and say "yeah, they actually did that."

They're entertaining action films with memorable characters, impressive stunts, a overarching theme of family and bondship and a solid continuity for longtime fans with post-credit scenes that could rival Marvel. (The intro to Shaw in F6 is a wonderful example of this)

Long story short, if Jimmy Fallon, Barney and Dudley Do Right can have a place in Universal's parks, F&F deserves a spot as well. In fact, i'd put my chips down on saying that the F&F franchise will have a solid lifespan in our cinematic history. What they lack in substance, they make up for it in heart, charm and craftsmanship.

As for lending themselves to a theme park... Test Track. That's all i really need to say. Just reskin that for F&F and boom, the franchise fits into a theme park. Job done.

 

[GAcoaster]

When it comes down to it, the pendulum has swung back (as it always does in the theme park industry), and the trend of "virtual" everything which was seen as a great innovation, and the next big thing, and a way to make attractions that could cheaply and easily be updated with a new projections and concepts is fading out. All the VR stuff added to coasters, all the screen based attractions, etc, have all become dated and most will be discarded on the pile of "that was a thing?" some day.

We've seen that done right (Spiderman, Potter, etc.) it can be used effectively and works well, while at the same time we've seen it falls short if not plussed properly. It takes making mistakes to learn sometimes. I think Universal has learned a valuable lesson with F&F and will get better overall because of it.

 

[RFRees]

I think it can simply comes down to the idea that some IPs just aren’t as timeless... or don’t lend themselves as well to a theme park ride application.

I think the only possible thing people want after seeing a F&F movie is to get in a super sick car and go fast... and that isn’t what they get at UO.

I agree with your entire post, but I don't feel the first paragraph fits with F&F. The IP fits great with a theme park ride, but as you said I'm the second paragraph, people thinking about F&F probably just want to go fast themselves.

It would have worked well as a coaster (eg Rock n Rollercoaster), or perhaps a ride like Cars/Test Track.

 

[OrlandoRising]

I'm sure you're good John. Thanks for stopping by! Also, if you don't mind giving your professional opinion, a Mad Max ride would be awesome right? Right? Somebody back me up on this.

I don't really have a professional opinion on it. As a fan of the film, yeah, it has some intriguing possibilities. They could also skimp on any water fountains in the queue in the name of immersion.

To put my journalist hat back on, I'd be very surprised if, beyond Nintendo, Universal licenses IP from other companies permanent attractions in the next few years (HHN is a different animal). The current feeling within the company is there's plenty of Universal-owned IP to be exploited within the theme parks.

 

[tankart150]

I'm sure you're good John. Thanks for stopping by! Also, if you don't mind giving your professional opinion, a Mad Max ride would be awesome right? Right? Somebody back me up on this.

I love that idea

 

[AstroOwl52]

I don't really have a professional opinion on it. As a fan of the film, yeah, it has some intriguing possibilities. They could also skimp on any water fountains in the queue in the name of immersion.

To put my journalist hat back on, I'd be very surprised if, beyond Nintendo, Universal licenses IP from other companies permanent attractions in the next few years (HHN is a different animal). The current feeling within the company is there's plenty of Universal-owned IP to be exploited within the theme parks.

Yep, that sounds about right. I still do have my fingers crossed that the rumors of Classic Monsters and How To Train Your Dragon Lands are true. They both deserve a bigger prescene in the parks.

Also, i hope they don't remove the Water Fountain because honestly, the courtyard in front of the ride is the only thing I like about Supercharged.

 

[Arjy]

I agree with your entire post, but I don't feel the first paragraph fits with F&F. The IP fits great with a theme park ride, but as you said I'm the second paragraph, people thinking about F&F probably just want to go fast themselves.

It would have worked well as a coaster (eg Rock n Rollercoaster), or perhaps a ride like Cars/Test Track.

Why must a certain select set of peope always chose to push everything as a roller coaster?

To simply state that it could have been a coaster is far more lazier and cheaper than the version they put out. These people do my head in - with literally every IP, they will always swing to the 'make it a coaster' nonsense. Shrek - make it a coaster. Secret Life Of Pets - make it a coaster with inverted loops over and over and over. Minions - make it a coaster that never ends with a 90 degree fall that is repeated over and over again.

This is lazy creative thinking.

What happened to creativity and setting boundaries for innovation in ride development and story?

The sad case, is Universal was the king of innovation at one time. They've become stale of late. Stale that's beginning to smell. Fast N Furious lent itself to many possibilities of creativity - instead we were lumbered with one of those most mind numbingly lazy attractions they've ever put out.

If this is true, then where's all this talk coming from of Universal "getting the message" about screens that people have been talking about here in recent months? The implication is that Universal knows they've gone overboard, but how do they know that if the guests aren't telling them so?

Because it's not true.

No one at Universal, attending, fans, critics have been telling them their recent screen additions have been good. Kong, Fallon, Furious have all been classed as underwhelming to the horrendously feacal matter. They've had their excuses why they were poor - be it space, budget, filler, and Universal Hollywood.

No one has praised them.

 

[Brian G.]

Because it's not true.

No one at Universal, attending, fans, critics have been telling them their recent screen additions have been good. Kong, Fallon, Furious have all been classed as underwhelming to the horrendously feacal matter. They've had their excuses why they were poor - be it space, budget, filler, and Universal Hollywood.

No one has praised them.

Yeah - that’s not true. If you’re just gonna ignore it to push your agenda then this convo is going nowhere.

And last warning, stop double posting.

 

[Arjy]

Yeah - that’s not true. If you’re just gonna ignore it to push your agenda then this convo is going nowhere.

And last warning, stop double posting.

No agenda. If there were rave reviews for Kong, Fallon, and Furious - can you point me to them?

Kong had mild reviews, Fallon was excused by most as it was a filler and took up little space (still didn't add to great reviews), and well Furious was just hated. All had a universal love for the set up, queuing, but general dislike of the ride systems and over use throughout the parks of screens.

 

[JungleSkip]

No agenda. If there were rave reviews for Kong, Fallon, and Furious - can you point me to them?

Kong had mild reviews, Fallon was excused by most as it was a filler and took up little space (still didn't add to great reviews), and well Furious was just hated. All had a universal love for the set up, queuing, but general dislike of the ride systems and over use throughout the parks of screens.

Kong and Fallon both have high GSAT scores. Furious is a bust, but the other two are far from it

 

[Scott W.]

Kong and Fallon both have high GSAT scores. Furious is a bust, but the other two are far from it

Fallon is like the Today Cafe.

Sound like crappy synergy getting forced on the parks but are surprisingly welcomed.

 

[JungleSkip]

Fallon is like the Today Cafe.

Sound like crappy synergy getting forced on the parks but are surprisingly welcomed.

I would like Fallon a lot more personally if Minion Mayhem and Shrek weren’t right next door. But in a vacuum it’s a totally solid attraction with a great queue and some fun live entertainment.

Kong on the other hand is one of the best rides at the resort (IMO)