Universal's New Park/Site B Blue Sky Thread

[Parkscope Joe]

So turns out Universal can't use Fantastic Beasts even if they wanted to without signing a new agreement with WB.

Explain.

 

[quinnmac000]

Explain.

Per the theme park agreement between Universal and WB, just for the 7 books and films that go along with those books does Universal have the rights to. They can have Newt in the park as he is mentioned in the books but Magical New York can not be presented as its not in any of the 7 books or films.

Theme Park License between Warner Bros. Consumer Products, Inc.

 

[Brian G.]

Per the theme park agreement between Universal and WB, just for the 7 books and films that go along with those books does Universal have the rights to. They can have Newt in the park as he is mentioned in the books but Magical New York can not be presented as its not in any of the 7 books or films.

Theme Park License between Warner Bros. Consumer Products, Inc.

I wonder if there is a loophole since technically.... Fantastic Beasts book was featured in Book 1.

(Not that I think it's coming anyway, just curious thoughts)

 

[IzzyB]

Per the theme park agreement between Universal and WB, just for the 7 books and films that go along with those books does Universal have the rights to. They can have Newt in the park as he is mentioned in the books but Magical New York can not be presented as its not in any of the 7 books or films.

Theme Park License between Warner Bros. Consumer Products, Inc.

But this is just a very small speed bump. If Universal wanted to use the IP, they could. WB would happily sign a contract that includes these films. All parties involved have a very good relationship.

 

[fryoj]

Hell, to read that, they have to WB's permission to do anything from putting in a new ride to doing a tv ad.

 

[misterID]

Are there solid plans for the third gate? If FB is a huge, it would be interesting to see what happens as its set in New York with their own Ministry Of Magic so it would have a completely different setting than the other parks.

Nintendo is perfect for a huge footprint in a third park.

 

[JungleSkip]

Nintendo is perfect for a huge footprint in a third park.

Nintendoland, as it sits now, is too perfect to slot out of USF. USF needs this more than the 3rd park does, IMO.

Plus, there's no reason more Nintendo can't go into Park 3.

 

[IzzyB]

Nintendoland, as it sits now, is too perfect to slot out of USF. USF needs this more than the 3rd park does, IMO.

Plus, there's no reason more Nintendo can't go into Park 3.

Agreed. USF needs this. The third park will have other Nintendo IPs, DreamWorks stuff, and other things. I don't see them waiting to put Nintendo in the 3rd gate. I totally get why people want this and I hope that ET stays. But USF needs this type of property.

 

[JungleSkip]

Agreed. USF needs this. The third park will have other Nintendo IPs, DreamWorks stuff, and other things. I don't see them waiting to put Nintendo in the 3rd gate. I totally get why people want this and I hope that ET stays. But USF needs this type of property.

Yea, it's kind of funny to me how many people want to move Nintendo out of USF when it addresses so many of their complaints about the park. This land will add 3-4 legit family attractions to the park.

 

[anihilnation]

Nintendoland, as it sits now, is too perfect to slot out of USF. USF needs this more than the 3rd park does, IMO.

Plus, there's no reason more Nintendo can't go into Park 3.

Since it seems to the two main rides for Nintendo-land are Mario Kart and Donkey Kong, I expect Hyrule in the third park.

I would like fort another ride using the Kuka-arm, would be great with an IP like Pacific Rim, especially if you could enclose the RV so that it really feels like you are in a mecha.

 

[quinnmac000]

But this is just a very small speed bump. If Universal wanted to use the IP, they could. WB would happily sign a contract that includes these films. All parties involved have a very good relationship.

Small speed bump correct but leads me down this line of thinking. Warner Bros is probably never going back into theme parks. Six Flags pays 3.3 million a year for the rights to WB. The only ways Six Flags gets rid of Looney Tunes and DC rights is if Six Flags get bought out by Comcast, Disney, Paramount, or Fox, Warner Bros gets bought out by any company, or if they don't pay the license fee. That leads to me thinking Warner Bros will never get back in the theme park business in the US at least until 2027 when the agreement with Six Flags ends/will need to be renewed. Comcast loves content . I could easily see a bulk licensing agreement for the rest of WB rights not used by Six Flags for theme park use (Cartoon Network, Hanna Barbera, Adult Swim, Fantastic Beasts, and all the other franchises) being beneficial for Comcast to get and as a package deal less annoying than making new agreements something big comes on the scene.

 

[Parkscope Joe]

Per the theme park agreement between Universal and WB, just for the 7 books and films that go along with those books does Universal have the rights to. They can have Newt in the park as he is mentioned in the books but Magical New York can not be presented as its not in any of the 7 books or films.

Theme Park License between Warner Bros. Consumer Products, Inc.

Awesome, thanks! Since there's a strong working relationship with UC/WB so I bet an ammendment or new agreement can be created.

 

[JungleSkip]

I would like fort another ride using the Kuka-arm, would be great with an IP like Pacific Rim, especially if you could enclose the RV so that it really feels like you are in a mecha.

That's more or less what the Millennium Falcon ride is rumored to be, so it's possible.

 

[misterID]

Yea, it's kind of funny to me how many people want to move Nintendo out of USF when it addresses so many of their complaints about the park. This land will add 3-4 legit family attractions to the park.

My complaint isn't against Nintendo in USF, just that even if you get ET out, which I disagree with, it's still not a lot of land for what it could be.

I wouldn't turn it down. Yes, I'd love more family dark rides. I think it would be better to have a park built around the IP in some dream scenario. Again, I'm NOT against it, I'm sure it will be cool.

 

[Scott W.]

Yea, it's kind of funny to me how many people want to move Nintendo out of USF when it addresses so many of their complaints about the park. This land will add 3-4 legit family attractions to the park.

I don't think it belongs in the park but I can see how it can fix the issues.

Ideally, I'd like to see Universal Studios change over time to be real locations with whatever franchises is in that area (Beverly Hills, London, San Fransisco, New York) and IOA to be fantasy locations with whatever IPS fit in that location, which is kind of the way it's heading.

You could expand this to the 3rd park by having cartoon locations and hopefully give each park their own identity but you would severely limit what can go into the 3rd park.

 

[JungleSkip]

My complaint isn't against Nintendo in USF, just that even if you get ET out, which I disagree with, it's still not a lot of land for what it could be.

I wouldn't turn it down. Yes, I'd love more family dark rides. I think it would be better to have a park built around the IP in some dream scenario. Again, I'm NOT against it, I'm sure it will be cool.

I think you should, and I normally hate this phrase, wait and see what they do. I don't think this land is going to feel small or cramped in at all if what we've heard is true.

I don't think it belongs in the park but I can see how it can fix the issues.

Ideally, I'd like to see Universal Studios change over time to be real locations with whatever franchises is in that area (Beverly Hills, London, San Fransisco, New York) and IOA to be fantasy locations with whatever IPS fit in that location, which is kind of the way it's heading.

You could expand this to the 3rd park by having cartoon locations and hopefully give each park their own identity but you would severely limit what can go into the 3rd park.

I don't think you're completely wrong, but the parks are beyond this possibility. What do you do with Springfield in this situation? Or Jurassic Park? Or Toon Lagoon?

 

[Mike S]

Yea, it's kind of funny to me how many people want to move Nintendo out of USF when it addresses so many of their complaints about the park. This land will add 3-4 legit family attractions to the park.

I take that to mean "no carnival rides," correct?

 

[JungleSkip]

I take that to mean "no carnival rides," correct?

I was not talking about flat rides, but that doesn't mean there won't be any of them. The original plans I heard did have a flat ride package in them, but that was a while ago.

 

[Macfr3ak]

(Cartoon Network, Hanna Barbera, Adult Swim, Fantastic Beasts, and all the other franchises)

Shoot for all these properties id pay a handsome amount to own WB...

My complaint isn't against Nintendo in USF, just that even if you get ET out, which I disagree with, it's still not a lot of land for what it could be.

I think you're forgetting what Universal was able to do with the JAWS property. Many people made similar statements all to be blown away by what was done in that "small" amount of land. Trust me I am more than positive that some concept art and ideas were shown to Nintendo before this deal was signed and they must have LOVED it. Nintendo is not the type of company that licenses its products away to just anyone.

Nintendo Partners with Universal Parks & Resorts | Page 120 | Orlando United Forums

for a picture of the land

 

[Scott W.]

I don't think you're completely wrong, but the parks are beyond this possibility. What do you do with Springfield in this situation? Or Jurassic Park? Or Toon Lagoon?

It's a tough one. You would effectively be having a massive shuffle of all the parks. You'd have to move MIB to NY, move Springfield, Despicable Me and Shrek to the 3rd gate. I'd also move F&F to Beverly Hills and have that whole area rethemed to LA. You'd free up a lot of room in the park.

I think Toon Lagoon could move to the 3rd gate and Jurassic Park would still fit in to IOA.

With the rides that moved to the 3rd gate, you could do something new with the IPs. Simpsons and Despicable Me are all rethemes of older rides, so I'd love to see what could be done with these with new tech.

Obviously this would never happen as the cost would be astronomical to create a little bit of order and with a 3rd gate, you really want something all new.