Universal's New Park/Site B Blue Sky Thread

[Galaxy Defender]

I still can't imagine the new park having more than 50% animation and video game based attractions. If it gets above that it will just be known as a cartoon park.

That would leave half the park filled with live action IPs, none of which we know for sure.

 

[Collin]

The book thing is urban legend. Dudley Do-Right was a tv show.

That whole land though is based on comics and Dudley Do-Right was a comic as well. Popeye was a tv show but also had some comics.

 

[JungleSkip]

That whole land though is based on comics and Dudley Do-Right was a comic as well. Popeye was a tv show but also had some comics.

The TV shows came first. Kong was a movie. The original plan for Toon Lagoon was Looney Toons, and they definitely were not from books.

 

[Magic-Man]

I still can't imagine the new park having more than 50% animation and video game based attractions. If it gets above that it will just be known as a cartoon park.

That would leave half the park filled with live action IPs, none of which we know for sure.

Couldn’t you say the same for IOA? Toon Lagoon, Seuss, and Marvel are all based on cartoons.

 

[Scott W.]

Springfield.

*mic drop*

I’d dump Simpson’s first chance I got.

 

[Galaxy Defender]

Couldn’t you say the same for IOA? Toon Lagoon, Seuss, and Marvel are all based on cartoons.

IoA was originally supposed to be Cartoon World. They decided against that idea and specifically brought in JP and LC to balance out the park. IoA is still heavily cartoon based which is why I can't see the third park being more than 50% cartoon.

 

[happy bunny rabbit]

Zelda not being “Based on a book” would never stop Uni from putting in in IOA.

 

[quinnmac000]

IoA was originally supposed to be Cartoon World. They decided against that idea and specifically brought in JP and LC to balance out the park. IoA is still heavily cartoon based which is why I can't see the third park being more than 50% cartoon.

Ehhh. I thought it was because Jurassic Park was a success was why it changed not because they wanted to balance out live and animated properties.

 

[TheSnitchSeeker6214]

Is Jaws possible to comeback to a 4th Park I brought this up before but The Meg by Warner Brothers is releasing this summer and if done well it’s supposed to have a few more films just like I guess Jaws 2, 3, the revenge. If done well do you think we would really see a Meg attraction in the park being attacked by a 70ft AA megaladon? Since it’s Universal it should be Jaws. Eh I give up I guess people are Done with Bruce but I’m not. I feel like we may be able to see one more thing from Jaws that was in the films to be added to a future attraction. If we’ve seen it all from Bruce though I guess it’s time to move on. But The Meg shark looks pretty scary if anyone seen the trailer.

 

[quinnmac000]

Is Jaws possible to comeback to a 4th Park I brought this up before but The Meg by Warner Brothers is releasing this summer and if done well it’s supposed to have a few more films just like I guess Jaws 2, 3, the revenge. If done well do you think we would really see a Meg attraction in the park being attacked by a 70ft AA megaladon? Since it’s Universal it should be Jaws. Eh I give up I guess people are Done with Bruce but I’m not. I feel like we may be able to see one more thing from Jaws that was in the films to be added to a future attraction. If we’ve seen it all from Bruce though I guess it’s time to move on. But The Meg shark looks pretty scary if anyone seen the trailer.

.....why would they use a WB film about a dinosaur shark for a ride when they already have a film full of dinosaurs including one that lives in water...thus saving them giving up more money to outside parties?

 

[TheSnitchSeeker6214]

Yeah ok Megladon is really not a Mossasaur I get that but it would still be as terrifying in my opinion to see yes Jaws I’m talking about The Meg being a success if popular enough could ressurect Jaws. But Mossasaur has been proved to be the main star Dino of these new JW films.

 

[Ridgepole]

I still am intrigued by the project 314 PI theory. A giant central "castle" which sides facing prospective lands are themed differently. Minas Tirith, Frankenstein, Oz etc. Pick your IP. A buried access road to the center for logistics, TMs , backlot stuff. A central lagoon while pretty is kind of a waste of space.

 

[GAcoaster]

No company would create an entire park based on one IP, especially one they don't own. Even one they do own is a HUGE gamble.

Spending hundreds of millions on anything in a park is a risk, but if your park only has that one thing and something happens to taint the brand or it simply falls out of favor and you're stuck. If you have several IPs and one tanks, your park can still stay open and profitable while you retool the dud.

While Nintendo and Dreamworks may be key parts of a park, neither are worth a billion dollar+ gamble of its own park.

 

[Magic-Man]

No company would create an entire park based on one IP, especially one they don't own. Even one they do own is a HUGE gamble.

Spending hundreds of millions on anything in a park is a risk, but if your park only has that one thing and something happens to taint the brand or it simply falls out of favor and you're stuck. If you have several IPs and one tanks, your park can still stay open and profitable while you retool the dud.

While Nintendo and Dreamworks may be key parts of a park, neither are worth a billion dollar+ gamble of its own park.

Pixar is the only IP I could see getting its own park, and that’s only due to the fact that there’s so much variety there. Just look at Pixar Pier and TSL.

 

[shiekra38]

Pixar is the only IP I could see getting its own park, and that’s only due to the fact that there’s so much variety there. Just look at Pixar Pier and TSL.

You know, Pixar is a god example of how I believe Universal will handle Dreamworks and Nintendo...Sprinkle it throughout each park and focus heavily on certain IPs

Also, the IOA is literature and Studios is movies argument is dead

 

[Mike S]

No company would create an entire park based on one IP, especially one they don't own. Even one they do own is a HUGE gamble.

Spending hundreds of millions on anything in a park is a risk, but if your park only has that one thing and something happens to taint the brand or it simply falls out of favor and you're stuck. If you have several IPs and one tanks, your park can still stay open and profitable while you retool the dud.

While Nintendo and Dreamworks may be key parts of a park, neither are worth a billion dollar+ gamble of its own park.

If an all Nintendo park were a consideration it wouldn’t be only Uni footing the bill. For something like that Comcast would likely request Nintendo to chip in a good amount as well and wouldn’t consider the proposal otherwise. Nintendo themselves would probably like owning a portion of the park themselves too. It wouldn’t be your typical IP deal. An entirely separate contract would probably be written up for it.

 

[Scott W.]

If an all Nintendo park were a consideration it wouldn’t be only Uni footing the bill. For something like that Comcast would likely request Nintendo to chip in a good amount as well and wouldn’t consider the proposal otherwise. Nintendo themselves would probably like owning a portion of the park themselves too. It wouldn’t be your typical IP deal. An entirely separate contract would probably be written up for it.

That makes the most sense as it stops Nintendo pulling the plug without taking a massive financial hit. If it was a 50/50 partnership then Universal would probably give that some serious thought as it also reduces their risk in half.

 

[fryoj]

That makes the most sense as it stops Nintendo pulling the plug without taking a massive financial hit. If it was a 50/50 partnership then Universal would probably give that some serious thought as it also reduces their risk in half.

And splits their profit while tying up their land and potential for more profit. The cost of building the park is almost irrelevant in the long run. Whats a few billion dollars 10 years after it opens? That deal only makes sense if they get a piece of Nintendo in the deal.

 

[Ridgepole]

If Comcast gets moving the tax write off will pay for it.

 

[shiekra38]

Then the news will finally be right when they say a new "Nintendo theme park is coming to Universal Orlando"

With Universal's luck they'd say "a new Nintendo land in Volcano Lagoon water park"