Jurassic World VelociCoaster Construction Thread (Opening June 10) | Page 40 | Inside Universal Forums

Jurassic World VelociCoaster Construction Thread (Opening June 10)

  • 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
Not open for further replies.
Kong makes more sense at studios in place of disaster/earthquake to me. Cramming King Kong into Jurassic park seems like a poor move. I would rather they use the space to do something new.
 
I wonder if they're floating a Kong rumor (in JP) just to see what kind of reaction it gets, and really could overlay/replace Disaster with Kong instead of just fixing up Disaster. That would make some sense...more sense than any of the latest rumors have lately.
 
I wonder if they're floating a Kong rumor (in JP) just to see what kind of reaction it gets, and really could overlay/replace Disaster with Kong instead of just fixing up Disaster. That would make some sense...more sense than any of the latest rumors have lately.

That's what i was thinking..but that would be an awful lot of 3D attractions. Then again it would be a lot better than Disaster which is my least favorite ride by far in Universal Orlando..
 
They could possibly do a mix of 3d with animatronic kongs for the disaster building, like 3d on the way to the big show room at the end with a bunch of physical effects

Yeah. 3D was quick and cheaper than another Kong at Hollywood; they have a whole theme park ride to do one little tunnel of screens won't do. They need to go bigger than that with real effects.
 
Some thoughts: If (and thats a big if) USF were to import Kong from Hollywood to Orlando, it could not act as a stand alone attraction. It'd have to be lengthened dramatically. In addition, it would not thematically make sense in the Disaster Building. A journey through skull island in the middle of San Francisco wouldn't fly. Jurassic Park would make more sense in comparison (although it doesn't fit there either). In my opinion it is a unique attraction that I'd love to have, but the "too much 3D" mantra is a valid one. Hopefully some of their 3D attractions (Shrek and T2 come to mind) go under the knife in the next few years in order to reset the balance of the park.
 
Some thoughts: If (and thats a big if) USF were to import Kong from Hollywood to Orlando, it could not act as a stand alone attraction. It'd have to be lengthened dramatically. In addition, it would not thematically make sense in the Disaster Building. A journey through skull island in the middle of San Francisco wouldn't fly. Jurassic Park would make more sense in comparison (although it doesn't fit there either). In my opinion it is a unique attraction that I'd love to have, but the "too much 3D" mantra is a valid one. Hopefully some of their 3D attractions (Shrek and T2 come to mind) go under the knife in the next few years in order to reset the balance of the park.

If it was a true import, yes, Skull Island would make no sense in San Francisco. However, if it's more of a reboot from the old attraction, New York could expand? :shrug:
 
I'd love to see Kong back in USF, but I think they'd need a current Kong movie that was green lit to build a new attraction in UOR. Spiderman is my favorite theme park attraction and I'm sure TF will be awesome as well but I really need some AAs and practical tangible effects for a change of pace.
 
I'd love to see Kong back in USF, but I think they'd need a current Kong movie that was green lit to build a new attraction in UOR. Spiderman is my favorite theme park attraction and I'm sure TF will be awesome as well but I really need some AAs and practical tangible effects for a change of pace.

You can't make a (respectable) sequel to King Kong. It's very much a one-off story. And whether or not the first film currently deserves an attraction is debatable. The movie is nearly 8 years old, but it was also one of the highest grossing films in studio history and a highly recognizable story.

With that said, there is nowhere currently on UO property where USH's attraction would make sense thematically. Neither would it be a good idea as a standalone attraction. I'd kill for a proper dark ride on Skull Island, but it would have to go behind MIB and Simpsons. It can't be shoehorned into any current lands in either park.
 
The kong section in california works well as its just part of the tour, would never work as a stand alone ride.

Would be an awsome start to a coaster, start off go through the tunnels then drop into the coaster ride trying to escape from Kong :)
 
The kong section in california works well as its just part of the tour, would never work as a stand alone ride.

Would be an awsome start to a coaster, start off go through the tunnels then drop into the coaster ride trying to escape from Kong :)

Great idea!
 
I don't think it should have anything to do with Kong. This is Jurassic Park and I'm hoping for a JP themed expansion. I like that each park (USF and USF) can have their own attractions. I guess both will now have Potter and Transformers attractions, but I think they should keep Kong there. I'm just excited to see this part of the park get some attention.
 
Still holding out hope for a heavily themed Amber Mine Coaster akin to BTTM, a fairly large river adventure refurb, and the addition of more streetmosphere (i.e: AA dinos scattered throughout the island and camp jurassic, including the raptor AA from Singapore). In fact, I'd be thrilled if the expansion yielded these results.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.