Universal's Epic Universe General News & Discussion

[Killer Klown]

Theme park twitter and fan forums aren’t indicative of the general population, bro

Ok but the hype for the land isn’t just within those circles so I don’t get your point? You act as if the monsters haven’t been Halloween staples forever and that they’re all these super obscure characters that nobodies seen in decades.

 

[OrlandoGuy]

ok but the hype isn’t just within those circles so I don’t get your point? You act as if the monsters haven’t been Halloween staples forever and that they’re all these super obscure characters that nobodies seen in decades.

That’s not what I’m saying at all. They’re obviously recognizable and the HHN Team has done a good job reinvigorating the fanbase with the annual Classic Monster houses.

What I’m saying is the Monsters stand the most to gain from a less conventional presentation. Just because Frankenstein’s Monster is recognizable doesn’t mean recreating the village he’s from in a 1:1 recreation of the movies (a la Potter, Pandora, Cars Land, Nintendo, etc.) is the only play because, to be honest, people aren’t familiar enough with the lore of the source material to appreciate it. And playing the land straight as the “scary” or “moody” section probably won’t work either because, let’s be honest, people aren’t scared of the monsters (or the settings from which they came) anymore.

A more satirical twist would’ve been a welcome addition, IMO. Wouldn’t work for Potter or something with insane recognition or a deep understanding of the intricacies of the IP…but for an IP where the most recognizable part are the characters themselves, I would’ve preferred to see the designers have some fun with a new twist on the presentation of those characters.

Please don’t mistake this as me invalidating any fans of the monsters out there…I’m not. I’m just saying that in an IP driven more by recognition and less by mood/setting (at least in today’s standards), a fresh twist on the traditional theme park land would’ve been welcomed.

 

[Killer Klown]

That’s not what I’m saying at all. They’re obviously recognizable and the HHN Team has done a good job reinvigorating the fanbase with the annual Classic Monster houses.

What I’m saying is the Monsters stand the most to gain from a less conventional presentation. Just because Frankenstein’s Monster is recognizable doesn’t mean recreating the village he’s from in a 1:1 recreation of the movies (a la Potter, Pandora, Cars Land, Nintendo, etc.) is the only play because, to be honest, people aren’t familiar enough with the lore of the source material to appreciate it. And playing the land straight as the “scary” or “moody” section probably won’t work either because, let’s be honest, people aren’t scared of the monsters (or the settings from which they came) anymore.

A more satirical twist would’ve been a welcome addition, IMO. Wouldn’t work for Potter or something with insane recognition or a deep understanding of the intricacies of the IP…but for an IP where the most recognizable part are the characters themselves, I would’ve preferred to see the designers have some fun with a new twist on the presentation of those characters.

Please don’t mistake this as me invalidating any fans of the monsters out there…I’m not. I’m just saying that in an IP driven more by recognition and less by mood/setting (at least in today’s standards), a fresh twist on the traditional theme park land would’ve been welcomed.

Ok I agree with most of that, to me it doesn’t seem like they’re going for scary or moody so much as, say, spooky. Which I do think will resonate well since it keeps the monsters in a scary/straight presentation but isn’t actually relying on the monsters being legitimately scary cause, like you said and I agree, nobody is actually scared of them and they clearly want families to enjoy the land as much as the teen/young adult crowd it’ll likely attract.

 

[belloq87]

That’s not what I’m saying at all. They’re obviously recognizable and the HHN Team has done a good job reinvigorating the fanbase with the annual Classic Monster houses.

What I’m saying is the Monsters stand the most to gain from a less conventional presentation. Just because Frankenstein’s Monster is recognizable doesn’t mean recreating the village he’s from in a 1:1 recreation of the movies (a la Potter, Pandora, Cars Land, Nintendo, etc.) is the only play because, to be honest, people aren’t familiar enough with the lore of the source material to appreciate it. And playing the land straight as the “scary” or “moody” section probably won’t work either because, let’s be honest, people aren’t scared of the monsters (or the settings from which they came) anymore.

A more satirical twist would’ve been a welcome addition, IMO. Wouldn’t work for Potter or something with insane recognition or a deep understanding of the intricacies of the IP…but for an IP where the most recognizable part are the characters themselves, I would’ve preferred to see the designers have some fun with a new twist on the presentation of those characters.

Please don’t mistake this as me invalidating any fans of the monsters out there…I’m not. I’m just saying that in an IP driven more by recognition and less by mood/setting (at least in today’s standards), a fresh twist on the traditional theme park land would’ve been welcomed.

But then you risk losing the people who actually even care at all about the Monsters in the first place. I would be beyond annoyed if -- after asking Universal, for decades, to do something substantial with their greatest and most iconic horror characters -- the company turned around and delivered a radical reinvention that was barely recognizable as the original thing.

Might play great with the average guest, but why go out of your way to avoid giving fans (however small a group that might actually be) what they want when it seems perfectly possible to create a land to satisfy everybody?

It's the same problem Universal Pictures has run into when trying to "reinvent" the Monsters as blockbuster action movies. There's a reason VAN HELSING underperformed, and a reason DRACULA UNTOLD and the Tom Cruise MUMMY bombed: they were too far removed from what people (even the general audience) expect from those characters.

 

[Killer Klown]

But then you risk losing the people who actually even care at all about the Monsters in the first place. I would be beyond annoyed if -- after asking Universal, for decades, to do something substantial with their greatest and most iconic horror characters -- the company turned around and delivered a radical reinvention that was barely recognizable as the original thing.

Might play great with the average guest, but why go out of your way to avoid giving fans (however small a group that might actually be) what they want when it seems perfectly possible to create a land to satisfy everybody?

It's the same problem Universal Pictures has run into when trying to "reinvent" the Monsters as blockbuster action movies. There's a reason VAN HELSING underperformed, and a reason DRACULA UNTOLD and the Tom Cruise MUMMY bombed: they were too far removed from what people (even the general audience) expect from those characters.

That’s why I think the classic Halloween/love letter to the original films style approach they seem to be going for is the perfect choice. It’s exactly what people expect from the monsters since they’re pretty much the poster children for what people expect when they think of classic Halloween, that way they can be presented as scary and not a joke but not in a way that you’re expected to be actually scared of them. Plus it capitalizes on the fact that Halloween is becoming extremely popular with teens and young adults while still be suitable for families since classic Halloween is not scary just like the monsters. it also isn’t relying on people knowing the lore from the films but can still include nods and such to them for the diehards. It’s as close to an “everyone wins” as I think they could’ve possibly gotten.

 

[OrlandoGuy]

But then you risk losing the people who actually even care at all about the Monsters in the first place. I would be beyond annoyed if -- after asking Universal, for decades, to do something substantial with their greatest and most iconic horror characters -- the company turned around and delivered a radical reinvention that was barely recognizable as the original thing.

Might play great with the average guest, but why go out of your way to avoid giving fans (however small a group that might actually be) what they want when it seems perfectly possible to create a land to satisfy everybody?

It's the same problem Universal Pictures has run into when trying to "reinvent" the Monsters as blockbuster action movies. There's a reason VAN HELSING underperformed, and a reason DRACULA UNTOLD and the Tom Cruise MUMMY bombed: they were too far removed from what people (even the general audience) expect from those characters.

I actually don’t disagree at all (less the point about the movies’ failures, which are just too different a medium to transfer the logic that cleanly). I just think the tourist trap angle had merit too, and would’ve been infinitely more interesting.

I also keep chuckling at the idea that we weren’t supposed to infer that “tourist trap” meant something tacky. I mean, you could literally use that as a catch-all for almost every “played straight” land out there the more I think about it (JP, Carsland, Hogsmeade, Diagon, Adventureland, Marvel, Lost Continent, Pandora, etc.) but that term isn’t used for anything but Dinoland.

 

[jarmor]

Almost everyone knows who Frankenstein is, not a hard sell.

You mean the Monster. . .

 

[Cup_Of_Coffee]

You mean the Monster. . .

Yes, at the very least “this is a land of Monsters” is an easy sell. I think this will be a big hit.

 

[Brian G.]

You mean the Monster. . .

Don't be that person…

 

[luckoftheirish]

So….what you’re describing is just a regular theme park land then

I actually thought the cheesy tourist trap angle would’ve been clever for THIS land specifically. That a bunch of tacky and overly friendly signs, shops, photo ops, etc. are actually hiding something sinister was a cool concept I thought…especially since playing the monsters straight or scary will almost assuredly not have the desired impact on the majority of guests, who will either be a.) largely unfamiliar or b.) not really scared by the monsters (pls don’t hate me @belloq87 ).

Honestly, the IPs they’re opening aren’t the hottest, with the exception of Nintendo which we’ll have seen plenty of by the time it opens here. It would’ve been smart to play with the presentation of the lands rather than just hoping people are really into the 100-year-old monsters, Harry Potter v.3, and How to Train Your Dragon…all IMO

I mean what IPs would you have used instead? They probably didn't wanted multiple Nintendo lands and also wanted to use properties they own like monsters and HTTYD. The only one that feels missing to me is Shrek but I'm guessing they would prefer to see if Shrek 5 is a success before creating a land

 

[OrlandoGuy]

I mean what IPs would you have used instead? They probably didn't wanted multiple Nintendo lands and also wanted to use properties they own like monsters and HTTYD. The only one that feels missing to me is Shrek but I'm guessing they would prefer to see if Shrek 5 is a success before creating a land

Well I dont know, the point wasn’t really to say they could’ve done any better, just that what’s there (specifically Monsters and Dragons) could maybe be more interesting with more unique presentations than straight recreations.

Although on that subject, I wouldn’t have limited each land to one IP…besides Nintendo, I would’ve gone generic themes that could fit multiple IPs in them whether they be licensed or smaller in-house properties. And while we’re at it, how has Universal still done nothing with Marvel?

 

[salismetho]

Although on that subject, I wouldn’t have limited each land to one IP…besides Nintendo, I would’ve gone generic themes that could fit multiple IPs in them whether they be licensed or smaller in-house properties. And while we’re at it, how has Universal still done nothing with Marvel?

I think the goal of this park was to use the new single-IP land concept and take it to the extreme. Also Universal can't do anything with Marvel except maintain what they already have

 

[luckoftheirish]

I think the goal of this park was to use the new single-IP land concept and take it to the extreme. Also Universal can't do anything with Marvel except maintain what they already have

Couldn't they add something new to superhero island? Weren't they working on a Ironman ride for awhile?

 

[salismetho]

Couldn't they add something new to superhero island? Weren't they working on a Ironman ride for awhile?

Just looked into it and yeah I was wrong. The sticky part is that Universal can't use the MCU versions of the characters and has to be careful not to do anything that Disney could argue damages the brand. Maybe they just decided it wasn't worth their while?

 

[Alicia]

Just looked into it and yeah I was wrong. The sticky part is that Universal can't use the MCU versions of the characters and has to be careful not to do anything that Disney could argue damages the brand. Maybe they just decided it wasn't worth their while?

Marvel has to approve everything new every step of the way. That’s the biggest sticking point, as they can be a pain in the butt.

Although, they have proved they can work together with recent updates like the Hulk revision.

 

[salismetho]

Marvel has to approve everything new every step of the way. That’s the biggest sticking point, as they can be a pain in the butt.

Ohh ok yeah that's probably why I assumed Universal couldn't make any new Marvel stuff. It'd be shocking if Disney approved an all new Marvel attraction for their competitor but here's to hoping :toast: ray:

 

[JoeCamel]

Ohh ok yeah that's probably why I assumed Universal couldn't make any new Marvel stuff. It'd be shocking if Disney approved an all new Marvel attraction for their competitor but here's to hoping :toast: ray:

They still get a cut of the action so maybe...

 

[tielo]

For the monster area we see the mansion that looks like a gothic building in Belgium but that doesn't fit completely with the German like village from the movies. Maybe it could be looking something like this (maybe toned down a bit):

The side towers that are very tall could look something like this:

Sure it will be a weird mashup but it would fit a bit more, no?

 

[Parkscope Joe]

Anyone who thinks HTTYD is a mid IP is sus, to use the parlance. I get we're all jaded millennials but HTTYD has had three movies, several shorts, and three television series, including one still running. All within 12 years. It's big.

 

[Cup_Of_Coffee]

Anyone who thinks HTTYD is a mid IP is sus, to use the parlance. I get we're all jaded millennials but HTTYD has had three movies, several shorts, and three television series, including one still running. All within 12 years. It's big.

I think they chose the perfect 4 lands to open with. Not trying to be too fan boy-ish, but this all sounds genuinely perfect.