The more we learn, the more it's pretty clear it's not really a FB landfantastic beasts has not been a huge IP for them, despite it's relation to Potter. Still have a hard time seeing them devoting a land to it.
and there has been issues with delays and losing Depp. Although I am a fan of Depps replacement Mads Mikkelsen.fantastic beasts has not been a huge IP for them, despite it's relation to Potter. Still have a hard time seeing them devoting a land to it.
I mean since LOTR is unlikely, and I think the plot is large enough to hold 2 lands anyways, I feel that’s destined to be something Illuminations
I have a serious question, and I am not trying to anger any fanboys with this one. Do you guys really think that How To Train Your Dragon has the legs to stay relevant enough to be one of the key anchors for this park by the time it opens? I try to stay up to date with recent animated films and have seen the three HTTYD films each more than once, and I enjoy them to an extent, but I rarely hear about them outside of its cult fanbase online. I work around children and it is very rare that I hear these movies brought up among the kids, especially compared to other popular animated film franchises. I have also never seen any of them with any clothing, toys, or other merchandise surrounding the property or its characters. I noticed that none of the three films have made over $1 Billion in the box office, (The franchise has altogether, but not any of the films on their own) and that is typically the mark that Disney and Universal set for a franchise nowadays before investing in a ride, let alone a massive land based on the IP. Coming in at the 11th highest grossing animated franchise, I think that a more general land for Dreamworks or Illumination properties would be the smarter decision here as opposed to building a land based around an already completed (and not super profitable, or memorable) franchise. I realize this discussion is useless as plans can be typically set in stone, but I just wanted to hear some of your opinions on this.
Yea, I love HTTYD, but I feel like a bigger DreamWorks area with different minilands for each film makes more sense.I have questioned the wisdom of a full HTTYD land since we started hearing about it. If one looks at domestic box office, there's a clear downward trajectory of the three films (for a variety of reasons: the first was a surprise hit, the second came out probably a year too late to really capitalize, the third arrived even further down the line, etc.), and by the time the park opens, it will have been six-ish years since a HTTYD movie was in theaters.
I absolutely think there's a place for a major HTTYD attraction in a theme park, but I do not subscribe to the line of thought that it can sustain an entire area all to itself, and it's easily the land I have the least interest in at this point (based on what we've heard so far about what it will have on offer).
Oh you sweet summer child. KidZone is eternal.Ok ok, but if Illuminations is going to "anchor" EU.... then what the hell is going to replace KidsZone
Yes, expansion plot. Although odd they didn’t mention Potter, but maybe that’s expected so they’re trying to please new partners more, not sure. Wizarding World will happen in some form I’m sure.Are you talking about the Wizarding World area, or the adjacent expansion plot?
I can't possibly envision an Illumination property replacing Wizarding World stuff, as I think that would unbalance the entire park (leaving the Classic Monsters as the only "live action"/potentially-edgy area).
I have questioned the wisdom of a full HTTYD land since we started hearing about it. If one looks at domestic box office, there's a clear downward trajectory of the three films (for a variety of reasons: the first was a surprise hit, the second came out probably a year too late to really capitalize, the third arrived even further down the line, etc.), and by the time the park opens, it will have been six-ish years since a HTTYD movie was in theaters.
I absolutely think there's a place for a major HTTYD attraction in a theme park, but I do not subscribe to the line of thought that it can sustain an entire area all to itself, and it's easily the land I have the least interest in at this point (based on what we've heard so far about what it will have on offer).
...Do you guys really think that How To Train Your Dragon has the legs to stay relevant enough to be one of the key anchors for this park by the time it opens?...
Dreamworks mash-up would work, but the burden of proof is then on Universal to create a compelling original land that marries all the aesthetics.
I think HTTYD was chosen not because they can sustain the IP, but because they needed to hit multiple goals. They need a large, low intensity land that has a variety of family friendly offerings and counter balances the more crowded or involved lands in the rest of the park. I'm sure they've designed lands for other properties, but I imagine they chose Dragons since the basic premise has appeal regardless of IP popularity. Adults probably wouldn't want to spend time in the Trolls universe, Universal doesn't know what to do with Shrek and Madagascar yet, and they may want to port Kung Fu Panda wholesale someday pending the end of an exclusivity deal with Beijing.
Dreamworks mash-up would work, but the burden of proof is then on Universal to create a compelling original land that marries all the aesthetics.
I still don’t see the sense in limiting the land to a single IP though.I think the use of Dragons is less about the “How to Train Your” part and more about the “Dragon” part of the IP. Dragons are a safe aesthetic for a theme park. It’s why they’re commonly used in parks across the country. It’s also what makes the IP the “safest” Dreamworks IP to anchor a land.
I don’t necessarily disagree.I still don’t see the sense in limiting the land to a single IP though.