Hm but unless Uni is certain I don't see why they would jump the gun on it.
This is going to be interesting for sure.
Hm but unless Uni is certain I don't see why they would jump the gun on it.
This is going to be interesting for sure.
I suppose you could say that October 8th is T2's.......Judgment Day
Right, which is why I'm currently leaning towards Bourne...but they could surprise me
Just seems weird that they're vague about it if it's a property they already own. I know they don't always announce the replacements right away, or even until halfway through construction, but eh...maybe I'm just holding out hope for Bond over Bourne.
Hm but unless Uni is certain I don't see why they would jump the gun on it.
This is going to be interesting for sure.
Well, then! That's encouraging.
I don't see any way a Bond deal could be finalized to the point that Universal would already be acting on it. It was reported just yesterday that Apple and Amazon are now vying for the Bond distribution rights, too.
I don't see any way a Bond deal could be finalized to the point that Universal would already be acting on it. It was reported just yesterday that Apple and Amazon are now vying for the Bond distribution rights, too.
Damn....Universal is really trying to show Disney they can compete against Star Wars. and here originally all I thought we were getting was another Potter ride...I think you play to your strengths, and Universal really has never been all that good at character-based shows. Plus, just from a diversification argument, 2019 with the following lineup hits a bunch of different demographics:
-SLoP replacing Shrek
-Stunt Show replacing T2
-New Potter E-Ticket
Real talk: I see a lot of "But man, Bourne is a dead/bad franchise". I would mostly agree with that. It's an odd choice for a show if that's what it is...
Yet Waterworld is probably the best theme park stunt show of all time and that movie was a giant turd.
So...Waterworld stunt show replacing T-2. Got it.
Counterpoint: Waterworld is (from what I've heard) an amazing show, but it was made around the same time as the movie so they didn't know that it'd be a flop. Meanwhile basing a brand new 2019 attraction off the Bourne franchise would be like Disney making a big new show based off... Bolt, or something. It just seems off.Real talk: I see a lot of "But man, Bourne is a dead/bad franchise". I would mostly agree with that. It's an odd choice for a show if that's what it is...
Yet Waterworld is probably the best theme park stunt show of all time and that movie was a giant turd.
Counterpoint: Waterworld is (from what I've heard) an amazing show, but it was made around the same time as the movie so they didn't know that it'd be a flop. Meanwhile basing a brand new 2019 attraction off the Bourne franchise would be like Disney making a big new show based off... Bolt, or something. It just seems off.
Plus, if someone asks what is Bourne, and hears it is kind of like James Bond, then it is like: cool, let's watch it.Counter-counterpoint: But Waterworld flopped and flopped HARD, yet the show has been around for 22 years. Bourne is still a recognizable name that will draw some attention, and if the show is even 1/2 as good as Waterworld it won't matter what it's based off of. And if they manage to snag Bond, it means it will be a bigger draw.
I don't think this project is meant to push the gate count up significantly. It's there to improve their offerings and replace an aging show.