The Future of Lost Continent

[Legacy]

They just built a Stunt Show based on Jason Bourne. No one is planning their vacation around Jason Bourne

Again, Bourne isn’t something that could actively discourage people in the US. The original three movies were well-received, and are what most people immediately associate with the franchise. Waterworld has been a punchline in this country for over two decades. They’re two IPs in very different positions.

I think fans who know a lot about their fandoms tend to forget that they’re outnumbered by non-fans who are coming into something with wildly different preconceptions. Waterworld, despite how good we know it is, isn’t going to be the crushing draw Universal wants from a show that requires that large of a budget.

 

[Nick]

Again, Bourne isn’t something that could actively discourage people in the US. The original three movies were well-received, and are what most people immediately associate with the franchise. Waterworld has been a punchline in this country for over two decades. They’re two IPs in very different positions.

I think fans who know a lot about their fandoms tend to forget that they’re outnumbered by non-fans who are coming into something with wildly different preconceptions. Waterworld, despite how good we know it is, isn’t going to be the crushing draw Universal wants from a show that requires that large of a budget.

Bourne is so not a “crushing draw”

 

[JungleSkip]

Again, Bourne isn’t something that could actively discourage people in the US. The original three movies were well-received, and are what most people immediately associate with the franchise. Waterworld has been a punchline in this country for over two decades. They’re two IPs in very different positions.

I think fans who know a lot about their fandoms tend to forget that they’re outnumbered by non-fans who are coming into something with wildly different preconceptions. Waterworld, despite how good we know it is, isn’t going to be the crushing draw Universal wants from a show that requires that large of a budget.

I don’t forget that at all. I just think you’re letting personal feelings about a movie cloud what adding Waterworld would do to GP views on booking a vacation to UOR, which is “not much”, which would be about equal to the technologically advanced Jason Bourne show they just built.

 

[joelbryant11]

Would Waterworld fit in the FFL space? I like LC’s theme a lot, it just needs a ride.

 

[Legacy]

I don’t forget that at all. I just think you’re letting personal feelings about a movie cloud what adding Waterworld would do to GP views on booking a vacation to UOR, which is “not much”, which would be about equal to the technologically advanced Jason Bourne show they just built.

I actually like the movie. I’d actually like to see it in Orlando. Logically though, if we think about the likely perspective of non-fan theme park attendees (again, who greatly outnumber the fans), Waterworld in Orlando is going to be met with snickering. Bourne as an IP, for as much as the theme park fans want to deride it, is two decades more relevant and markedly more popular.

 

[Nick]

I actually like the movie. I’d actually like to see it in Orlando. Logically though, if we think about the likely perspective of non-fan theme park attendees (again, who greatly outnumber the fans), Waterworld in Orlando is going to be met with snickering. Bourne as an IP, for as much as the theme park fans want to deride it, is two decades more relevant and markedly more popular.

You are vastly over-estimating the appeal of Bourne in 2020 imo. As much as I am a big fan of the park, the people surrounding myself are what I consider the "general public" as far as awareness level. Pretty much none of my family and friends have seen Bourne with many not knowing what it is. When we went to the park, they liked it. That's because IP doesn't matter for stunt shows.

 

[Legacy]

You are vastly over-estimating the appeal of Bourne in 2020 imo.

Compared too?... We’re talking Waterworld into LC, right? Objectively, by every metric available to Universal, Bourne is going to be more popular than Waterworld in the US.

 

[Nick]

Compared too?... We’re talking Waterworld into LC, right? Objectively, by every metric available to Universal, Bourne is going to be more popular than Waterworld in the US.

First, Bourne already exists at USF, so no, we aren't talking compared to Bourne. We're talking WaterWorld compared to the nothing that exists in the Sindbad Theater.

Second, even if we were talking about Bourne, that's like comparing the relevance of the half dollar coin to the $2 bill.

 

[Legacy]

Second, even if we were talking about Bourne, that's like comparing the relevance of the half dollar coin to the $2 bill.

The $2 bill is still 400% more valuable.

And sure, Waterworld is better than nothing. But if we’re replacing “nothing,” why pick Waterworld when there are far better in-house IPs?

 

[Nick]

The $2 bill is still 400% more valuable.

And sure, Waterworld is better than nothing. But if we’re replacing “nothing,” why pick Waterworld when there are far better in-house IPs?

Because R&D doesn’t need to be done on Waterworld, for one thing.

 

[Viator]

Because R&D doesn’t need to be done on this, for one thing.

Exactly. Waterworld, unlike any other stunt show--has working blueprints for the shows across four versions. It'd be extremely easy to bring and work in a form of the show. They'd need to be careful, sure, but it's not an impossibility.

 

[Cup_Of_Coffee]

I feel people are over, and underestimating both shows here. From a tourist who does enjoy shows (wouldn't book a vacation for one, but if its opening the year I plan to go wouldn't hurt to have it added onto a day), and from a family who enjoys shows but is NOT the theme park nerd I am.

1. I don't think anybody see's "Bourne Stuntactular" and says "oh, no way in HELL am I going there", nor do a large portion say "BOURNE SHOW OMFG BOOK ME 2 WEEKS IN ORLANDO". It is not a vacation draw.
2. HOWEVER, I know from planning with my mom in the past, and with my ex last year, that the shows really help and do. "attract" us a bit. For example, my BF was worried about USF a little because of all the screens, so I explained all the shows and streetmosphere there and he was a bit more sold. We had a wonderful time at USF, but without seeing the marketing of the shows I think felt it was mainly 4-D attractions.

Advertising a brand new stunt show, Waterworld OR Bourne, also 2 entirely different experiences, is always a plus and other than natural costs that come with it, absolutely never hurt. Bourne looks cool but people mainly go to UOR for Potter lets be real, but hearing seeing a highly rated stunt show only adds to their day, and hopefully good word of mouth comes from it. I think the GP fall in the middle somewhere between these arguments.

 

[OhHaiInternet95]

I feel people are over, and underestimating both shows here. From a tourist who does enjoy shows (wouldn't book a vacation for one, but if its opening the year I plan to go wouldn't hurt to have it added onto a day), and from a family who enjoys shows but is NOT the theme park nerd I am.

1. I don't think anybody see's "Bourne Stuntactular" and says "oh, no way in HELL am I going there", nor do a large portion say "BOURNE SHOW OMFG BOOK ME 2 WEEKS IN ORLANDO". It is not a vacation draw.
2. HOWEVER, I know from planning with my mom in the past, and with my ex last year, that the shows really help and do. "attract" us a bit. For example, my BF was worried about USF a little because of all the screens, so I explained all the shows and streetmosphere there and he was a bit more sold. We had a wonderful time at USF, but without seeing the marketing of the shows I think felt it was mainly 4-D attractions.

Advertising a brand new stunt show, Waterworld OR Bourne, also 2 entirely different experiences, is always a plus and other than natural costs that come with it, absolutely never hurt. Bourne looks cool but people mainly go to UOR for Potter lets be real, but hearing seeing a highly rated stunt show only adds to their day, and hopefully good word of mouth comes from it. I think the GP fall in the middle somewhere between these arguments.

TBF, properties that single handedly get people to plan a trip are extremely rare (unless you’re Disney, the brand of which IS that sort of property in itself). Harry Potter is the only one at Universal I can think of (again, that’s one more than at pretty much every other park chain not named Disney on earth), though Mario will join that list.

 

[Mad Dog]

A really great attraction can transcend the value of IP, and that's what Universal has with Waterworld. IP need not apply in this case. IP isn't relevant there.

 

[Cup_Of_Coffee]

TBF, properties that single handedly get people to plan a trip are extremely rare (unless you’re Disney, the brand of which IS that sort of property in itself). Harry Potter is the only one at Universal I can think of (again, that’s one more than at pretty much every other park chain not named Disney on earth), though Mario will join that list.

Totally agree, and as others have said, a good attraction outweighs the IP. Regardless, as you said, not many IPs are massive draws like the ones you mentioned. Good rides are though, some people know the Mummy is a good ride, so along with Potter USF is a good choice. But, they aren’t going to USF because of their love for the Mummy franchise.

This is why I never got the argument SLOP was a bad IP to use. Regardless of the films, it’s a dark ride about cute and funny pets, it will most definitely outlast the films if the ride is done decently. Remmmebr some people look at Potter as “Wizards and spells!” Which it sorta is but they may not look at it from a die hard fans point of view, so with a SLOP ride the general public sees a ride about pets. Sometimes it’s far more simplistic than we make it out to be

 

[SeventyOne]

In my initial review of Bourne, I said it would've been a lot more fun if it was 007 or Mandalorian or a more recognizable IP. That said, there's a lot more 40-something dads with Potter-fan kids who recognize and have a generally positive impression of the four or five Bourne movies (and spin-off USA network show) than there are theme park superfans who hear "Waterworld" and think cool stunt show rather than Kevin Costner bomb.

Cf. Bill & Ted fans convinced the third movie would be so popular UOR would have no choice but to bring the show back.

 

[OhHaiInternet95]

In my initial review of Bourne, I said it would've been a lot more fun if it was 007 or Mandalorian or a more recognizable IP. That said, there's a lot more 40-something dads with Potter-fan kids who recognize and have a generally positive impression of the four or five Bourne movies (and spin-off USA network show) than there are theme park superfans who hear "Waterworld" and think cool stunt show rather than Kevin Costner bomb.

Cf. Bill & Ted fans convinced the third movie would be so popular UOR would have no choice but to bring the show back.

Didn’t Uni distribute Spectre? Dunno if that would’ve given them a free license (no pun intended) to do Bond, but in any event the appeal of synergy likely made Bourne more appealing.

Of course, I assume they’re going to have to find a new show for HHN.

 

[shiekra38]

Just bc i don’t think i’ve seen this posted, Waterworld Land’s restaurant, Drifter’s Cantina, is looking great! Guessing they’ll be serving seafood?
View attachment 13568View attachment 13569

Wouldn't hate seeing this stuff in IOA

Although it does kind of give me POE vibes haha

 

[Nick]

In my initial review of Bourne, I said it would've been a lot more fun if it was 007 or Mandalorian or a more recognizable IP. That said, there's a lot more 40-something dads with Potter-fan kids who recognize and have a generally positive impression of the four or five Bourne movies (and spin-off USA network show) than there are theme park superfans who hear "Waterworld" and think cool stunt show rather than Kevin Costner bomb.

Cf. Bill & Ted fans convinced the third movie would be so popular UOR would have no choice but to bring the show back.

No one is arguing that Waterworld is overly popular. It's that Bourne just isn't much special. Plus, shows are about the actual experience. The Waterworld show would be incredibly popular in Orlando, I have no doubt about that. The IP doesn't matter. It's just that people would wander in wanting to sit down and they would get a kick ass show.

Also, anyone who thought that about B&T was crazy first of all. Second, B&T was released in the middle of a pandemic, which hurt it even more.

 

[USO92]

...Is Bourne? O:

In my personal opinion? No. Do I think they could have done something different with that space, sure. I feel the Bourne series is a legitimately good movie series but one that will be marketable long term in the form of a stunt show? No.

So, in the same vein, a Waterworld-esque stunt show probably would not be in the best interest of Uni for the same reasons. Not that they're doing that and not that my personal opinion matters but for the sake of conversation...