Universal Studios Florida: What Do We Think About It?

[Clive]

Specifically referring to IPs not yet represented at the parks, what properties does Universal have that can realistically work in a theme park setting that haven't been utilized yet?

What would an Oppenheimer experience be? I don't want to sound negative, since I love hearing a bout blue sky ideas, but I'm not exactly sure what's left in the Universal library.


Yes, and I hope Universal realizes the popularity/success of HTTYD - Isle of Berk at Epic, and finds a way to go back into IOA/USF and make better experiences with the DreamWorks characters, same with Illumination.

I'm sure I'm missing a franchise or two, but glancing through their library, it would appear their most popular, adaptable, and untapped IPs are... ones that previously had attractions - Jaws, Back to the Future, and Alfred Hitchcock.

You mentioned Sing, which has received an attraction in Japan, and Wicked, which is all but guaranteed to get larger park attractions if the second film is a success. Mamma Mia! is unlikely because there's no real way to replicate the characters in a theme park setting without resorting to filmed media.

 

[Wesker69]

You mentioned Sing, which has received an attraction in Japan, and Wicked, which is all but guaranteed to get larger park attractions if the second film is a success.

And Wicked was also previously a show/Oz land formerly in Japan

When it comes to IPs, you have to be creative & think outside of the box. Because even the less popular or well-known can end up as great rides/attractions.

Also... give me a damn Casper ride
(can't remember if that was Universal owned or distributed, but still lol)

 

[Clive]

And Wicked was also previously a show/Oz land formerly in Japan

When it comes to IPs, you have to be creative & think outside of the box. Because even the less popular or well-known can end up as great rides/attractions.

Also... give me a damn Casper ride
(can't remember if that was Universal owned or distributed, but still lol)

The Wicked show/Oz land was of course based on the musical, but your point is well taken.

Casper was indeed a Universal film. Its score has been used in at least one Universal Studios Florida nighttime show, and it also had a temporary "behind the scenes" experience with props and sets back when it came out.

 

[Wesker69]

Casper was indeed a Universal film. Its score has been used in at least one Universal Studios Florida nighttime show, and it also had a temporary "behind the scenes" experience with props and sets back when it came out.

Okay. That's what I thought, but my brain was temporarily thinking "Sony" for some reason (which didn't sound right).

Soooo yea. Give me Casper lol

 

[belloq87]

I think Universal is still trying to find a way to cater to all groups.

Except the group that enjoys more traditional (read: non-thrill, non-simulatory) dark rides!

When will it be our turn?

 

[Frank Drackman]

I'm sure I'm missing a franchise or two, but glancing through their library, it would appear their most popular, adaptable, and untapped IPs are... ones that previously had attractions - Jaws, Back to the Future, and Alfred Hitchcock.

You mentioned Sing, which has received an attraction in Japan, and Wicked, which is all but guaranteed to get larger park attractions if the second film is a success. Mamma Mia! is unlikely because there's no real way to replicate the characters in a theme park setting without resorting to filmed media.

Crazy (to me) that they ended up with Felix the Cat when they acquired Dream Works. I imagine they could do some neat things around that IP but not sure of a whole environment (which seems to be what is wanted these days)

 

[TheCodeMan95]

I'd love for them to eventually do a fully realized Shrek land like Berk (but that will probably never happen)

I'm curious to see if they'd attempt to do more with SpongeBob if it's popular in the Texas park.

 

[TheUniC6]

I'd love for them to eventually do a fully realized Shrek land like Berk (but that will probably never happen)

I'm curious to see if they'd attempt to do more with SpongeBob if it's popular in the Texas park.

I have always through Shrek needed a full land to do the IP justice. There might be hope with that one at UGB however. At USF best we can hope for is a dark ride to take over AA assuming It doesn't get folded into Pokemon.

Spongebob sounds like it would be more of an overlay they could apply to TL in IOA.

 

[OrlLover]

Except the group that enjoys more traditional (read: non-thrill, non-simulatory) dark rides!

When will it be our turn?

Hopefully the next decade or so any new additions will largely cater to this group. They have definitely neglected this segment for a long time.

Maybe Uni execs feel like they can’t compete with Disney in this aspect.

 

[belloq87]

Maybe Uni execs feel like they can’t compete with Disney in this aspect.

They would be wrong to feel that way.

Secret Life of Pets in Hollywood is as good as any Disney dark ride in the D-ticket-ish range.

 

[Jake S]

I think it’s fairly evident Universal is perfectly capable of delivering all-ages attractions. But I understand why they might choose to prioritize attractions that skew toward to older families that are easier to peel away from Disney.

I’d love for them to get into the family boat ride game, though!

 

[OrlLover]

They would be wrong to feel that way.

Secret Life of Pets in Hollywood is as good as any Disney dark ride in the D-ticket-ish range.

I agree they are very much capable of pulling it off.

 

[belloq87]

I think it’s fairly evident Universal is perfectly capable of delivering all-ages attractions. But I understand why they might choose to prioritize attractions that skew toward to older families that are easier to peel away from Disney.

I’d love for them to get into the family boat ride game, though!

You can prioritize certain things without completely ignoring other things, especially when those other things -- even just one of those other things! -- would help to fix the flaws in USF’s current lineup.

And look, I'd be beyond excited about larger-scale, E-ticket dark rides that aren't reliant on screens, too. I just don't think it's plausible they'll ever deliver practical things on the scale of a Kongfrontation or the main show scene in Earthquake anymore, so I see the family-friendly type as the more likely way to get more traditional dark ride vibes into the park.

 

[TheUniC6]

You can prioritize certain things without completely ignoring other things, especially when those other things -- even just one of those other things! -- would help to fix the flaws in USF’s current lineup.

And look, I'd be beyond excited about larger-scale, E-ticket dark rides that aren't reliant on screens, too. I just don't think it's plausible they'll ever deliver practical things on the scale of a Kongfrontation or the main show scene in Earthquake anymore, so I see the family-friendly type as the more likely way to get more traditional dark ride vibes into the park.

My money is still on Pokemon or whatever replaces Simpsons finally being that large E ticket dark ride for USF. It's just a matter of when Universal decides to retire Simpsons.

 

[OrlandoGuy]

My money is still on Pokemon or whatever replaces Simpsons finally being that large E ticket dark ride for USF. It's just a matter of when Universal decides to retire Simpsons.

As someone who knows next to nothing about Pokémon besides the overarching concept of it, I’ve wondered about its value as a potential expansion…is its reach wide, or is it deep?

What I mean by that is when you look at the major franchises represented at the parks today (Marvel, Jurassic Park, Mario, Harry Potter, etc.), the size of the fandom can be easily quantified by box office receipts.

Meanwhile, Pokémon is touted as one of (if not the) most valuable IP in the world…but look at the buy-in required to be a fan. At minimum you’re probably buying video games and cards.

Hypothetically, if a movie ticket costs $10 and a video game costs $50, wouldn’t you divide the value of the Pokémon IP by 5 before you compare it to other potential IP?

And even then, if you just look at top-selling games by Nintendo console, Pokémon is underrepresented compared to Mario, and only cracks the top 5 for (I think?) two of the Gameboys?

My point being, is Pokémon truly a sure thing? Or is its value inflated by a very passionate fanbase that’s much narrower than your typical blockbusters?

 

[Cup_Of_Coffee]

As someone who knows next to nothing about Pokémon besides the overarching concept of it, I’ve wondered about its value as a potential expansion…is its reach wide, or is it deep?

What I mean by that is when you look at the major franchises represented at the parks today (Marvel, Jurassic Park, Mario, Harry Potter, etc.), the size of the fandom can be easily quantified by box office receipts.

Meanwhile, Pokémon is touted as one of (if not the) most valuable IP in the world…but look at the buy-in required to be a fan. At minimum you’re probably buying video games and cards.

Hypothetically, if a movie ticket costs $10 and a video game costs $50, wouldn’t you divide the value of the Pokémon IP by 5 before you compare it to other potential IP?

And even then, if you just look at top-selling games by Nintendo console, Pokémon is underrepresented compared to Mario, and only cracks the top 5 for (I think?) two of the Gameboys?

My point being, is Pokémon truly a sure thing? Or is its value inflated by a very passionate fanbase that’s much narrower than your typical blockbusters?

Pokémon is the highest grossing IP on the planet. It’s beyond, a sure thing.

 

[mccgavin]

Meanwhile, Pokémon is touted as one of (if not the) most valuable IP in the world…but look at the buy-in required to be a fan. At minimum you’re probably buying video games and cards.

Hypothetically, if a movie ticket costs $10 and a video game costs $50, wouldn’t you divide the value of the Pokémon IP by 5 before you compare it to other potential IP?

I don't think you're looking at the whole picture. Pokémon is a MASSIVE multi-media franchise, and not all of the different sub-sections of the fanbase overlap.

Some people are primarily invested in the animated series, while for others, their main exposure is Pokémon GO and other free applications. Like Hello Kitty/Sanrio, it's been a successful lifestyle brand, with merchandise being very popular at mainstream outlets.

Pokémon might be one of the most accessible IPs out there simply due to the sheer amount of ways to engage with it. I'm not sure if the general public even perceives it as primarily being a "video game" property anymore.

And even then, if you just look at top-selling games by Nintendo console, Pokémon is underrepresented compared to Mario, and only cracks the top 5 for (I think?) two of the Gameboys?

The last two sets of mainline Pokémon games are respectively the 6th and 7th best selling games on Nintendo Switch (which itself is the second best selling system of all time). They both have just under 27 million copies sold, which is a very significant success.

 

[UniversalRBLX]

USF needs what DCA is about to go through, a massive overhaul with 3 new major additions and a whole new land that wows people IMO. Hoping this is in the horizon.

I'd love for them to eventually do a fully realized Shrek land like Berk (but that will probably never happen)

I'm curious to see if they'd attempt to do more with SpongeBob if it's popular in the Texas park.

I really hope executives realize how popular HTTYD - Isle of Berk is, and are considering similar experiences for other DreamWorks properties.

 

[belloq87]

USF needs what DCA is about to go through, a massive overhaul with 3 new major additions and a whole new land that wows people IMO. Hoping this is in the horizon.

I agree that I absolutely think this is the level of work that the park needs over a (fairly) short period of time.

I doubt Universal sees it that way, but would love to be wrong.

 

[OrlandoGuy]

Pokémon is the highest grossing IP on the planet. It’s beyond, a sure thing.

Oops…think you didn’t read past the first paragraph.

I don't think you're looking at the whole picture. Pokémon is a MASSIVE multi-media franchise, and not all of the different sub-sections of the fanbase overlap.

Some people are primarily invested in the animated series, while for others, their main exposure is Pokémon GO and other free applications. Like Hello Kitty/Sanrio, it's been a successful lifestyle brand, with merchandise being very popular at mainstream outlets.

Pokémon might be one of the most accessible IPs out there simply due to the sheer amount of ways to engage with it. I'm not sure if the general public even perceives it as primarily being a "video game" property anymore.


The last two sets of mainline Pokémon games are respectively the 6th and 7th best selling games on Nintendo Switch (which itself is the second best selling system of all time). They both have just under 27 million copies sold, which is a very significant success.

I guess that’s my point, there are so many outlets through which to solidify your Pokémon fandom, and the buy-in cost is so much larger than that of a movie, is the IP valuation in a vacuum the only way to look at it?

With that said, I didn’t know how well the games sold. I just googled a quick hit graphic. I suppose 27 million is a decent number