Wicked experiences coming to USH

[Brian G.]

I mean people saying "low effect Wicked redesign and street show wont work"

I'll point to Disney, People LOVE big hero six mini land, no rides and its all food and vibes and people love it, secondly Storytime with Deadpool lets not pretend this is big effort show and people love it

Also for those like it takes time....I've been here for years they have had time to plan every year they don't move the Tram just makes the project cost more and since we all know one day its going to happen all they are doing in delaying it is making it where it will cost the parks more later because inflation.

Anyway, I find it funny some are fighting against the Dreamworks theater not getting a new show after....8 years when the idea for this attraction was for it to be a flex space and get more shows....of course it won't be free to update it but it also won;t cost anything close to the coaster, SNW or even SLOP. It will cost much much less then any of those mostly it would be making a new movie and pre show and maybe new items in the case in the pre show.

Also on people saying I'm wrong on SNW crowds dying, I'm sorry the line for the line has gone wayyyyyy down and the land you can just walk into now...I go to the parks all the time the parks are not are crowded as a year ago. HHN this year was also lighter and while USH is has grinchmas that has days it closes at 6 PM...Disneyland fans are complaining about how busy the parks are right now...so there are easy factors to look at and see the park another SNW or two so it can stay open later then 6 PM on weekdays and have sold out days. I see that as a healthy park

But yeah in the end, I have low exceptions for the park because USH just doesn't want to be bigger, its not that it can't but as other pointed out in Hollywood we can't even get Wicked Meet and greets. People saying it would be too popular? But also we should wait years before adding anything Wicked to the park....ok I guess that makes sense somehow.

But I wish someone was in charge who saw their new hot movies and IPs and USED them. Have an area that every year becomes a new movie.....we all know a FNAF meet and greet would have been huge and nothing and now Wicked...they knew this would be huge and if they didn't then they wow. But Universal is fine with people waiting 3 hours for the Grinch, why not for Glinda and Elphaba?

Anyway Cowmissing on Reddit is making it sound like they might start pushing the park to get bigger...but you guys here keep me grounded and now it will be years before anything happens and part of it I get...Epic, HHN in Vegas and the Texas part have drained the bank for USH to grow until after the LA olymic's

Seriously... enough!!!

 

[Freak]

Dude, why do the Jerrod rants always happen on the most random threads that I never pay attention to? Why???? Why must I keep missing them????

Much to the chagrin of the mods, I’m gonna add my two cents here. If you’re complaining about USH not caring about the park since SNW, they’re building a giant freaking roller coaster right here in the park (That will make many thoosies’ too 10 lists mind you) and they started RIGHT AFTER SNW OPENED. To have this open three years (If not possibly less!) after opening a major new land is pretty good to me!

As for Wicked….It’s not really my thing, but if they can make an awesome new attraction or land out of it that would match Potter levels of quality, then I say bring it!

 

[Clive]

I mean people saying "low effect Wicked redesign and street show wont work"

I'll point to Disney, People LOVE big hero six mini land, no rides and its all food and vibes and people love it, secondly Storytime with Deadpool lets not pretend this is big effort show and people love it

Also for those like it takes time....I've been here for years they have had time to plan every year they don't move the Tram just makes the project cost more and since we all know one day its going to happen all they are doing in delaying it is making it where it will cost the parks more later because inflation.

Anyway, I find it funny some are fighting against the Dreamworks theater not getting a new show after....8 years when the idea for this attraction was for it to be a flex space and get more shows....of course it won't be free to update it but it also won;t cost anything close to the coaster, SNW or even SLOP. It will cost much much less then any of those mostly it would be making a new movie and pre show and maybe new items in the case in the pre show.

Also on people saying I'm wrong on SNW crowds dying, I'm sorry the line for the line has gone wayyyyyy down and the land you can just walk into now...I go to the parks all the time the parks are not are crowded as a year ago. HHN this year was also lighter and while USH is has grinchmas that has days it closes at 6 PM...Disneyland fans are complaining about how busy the parks are right now...so there are easy factors to look at and see the park another SNW or two so it can stay open later then 6 PM on weekdays and have sold out days. I see that as a healthy park

But yeah in the end, I have low exceptions for the park because USH just doesn't want to be bigger, its not that it can't but as other pointed out in Hollywood we can't even get Wicked Meet and greets. People saying it would be too popular? But also we should wait years before adding anything Wicked to the park....ok I guess that makes sense somehow.

But I wish someone was in charge who saw their new hot movies and IPs and USED them. Have an area that every year becomes a new movie.....we all know a FNAF meet and greet would have been huge and nothing and now Wicked...they knew this would be huge and if they didn't then they wow. But Universal is fine with people waiting 3 hours for the Grinch, why not for Glinda and Elphaba?

Anyway Cowmissing on Reddit is making it sound like they might start pushing the park to get bigger...but you guys here keep me grounded and now it will be years before anything happens and part of it I get...Epic, HHN in Vegas and the Texas part have drained the bank for USH to grow until after the LA olymic's

Alright man, go ahead and apply to be the head of Universal Studios Hollywood and run the park your way. We'll see how it goes.

 

[saint.piss]

@Jerroddragon isn't perfect but he's very passionate about the parks and I think that's nice. He cares and that counts for something I guess lol

 

[Jake S]

I promise you can care about something without rigidly defining how it should exist

 

[Brian G.]

I promise you can care about something without rigidly defining how it should exist

And to add, have a conversation about the difference of opinion instead of regurgitating the same tantrum over and over.

 

[viking_wizard_eyes]

Universal Studios Hollywood is not a locals park. It is a tourist park.

Just to push back teeny bit here, and this is somewhat in Jerrod's defense, but I don't think this is reality quite yet. IMO, you couldn't categorize USH as a tourist park prior to the Wizarding World opening, which, in the grand scheme of things, wasn't that long ago. Even then, it was for tourists west of the Rockies for whom flying to Orlando was prohibitive, for whatever reason. I think SNW, a huge new coaster, and potentially a hotel are all clear signals that USH is moving toward becoming a tourist park, but even with SNW open, I don't think it's quite there. We're in a weird limbo.

And I think that's where the frustration for people sets in, where they see these moves toward becoming a tourist park and want to see some acceleration. But this, of course, ignores the unique complications that face USH, and not just the fact that it shares acreage with a working film studio, but also the unique logistics and bureaucracy that comes with existing within Los Angeles County that occasionally make even re-skinning something in the park complicated. (There's a good reason Walt Disney eventually opted to not put Disneyland in Burbank on the same property as his studio.)

I think people who are eager to see USH turn into a multi-day experience need to accept that it will take time, and may not even be possible for a variety of reasons.

 

[Jake S]

Just to push back teeny bit here, and this is somewhat in Jerrod's defense, but I don't think this is reality quite yet.

I think you have it completely backwards. It’s always been a tourists park and is now (imo) slowly becoming more of a locals park. The park is completely founded upon the studio tour — which is something that tourists have often made part of their LA vacation.

 

[viking_wizard_eyes]

I think you have it completely backwards. It’s always been a tourists park and is now (imo) slowly becoming more of a locals park. The park is completely founded upon the studio tour — which is something that tourists have often made part of their LA vacation.

I don’t believe I do. I think your characterization of tourist and local is what’s backwards (due respect).

A “tourist” park is a place people visit expressly, meaning they go there to do that and that alone. I’ve been to Orlando probably close to if not over a dozen times at this point. I’ve never gone to visit Orlando. I’ve only gone visit the parks.

Tourists absolutely make the Studio Tour — and consequently USH — part of their LA vacation, but just a part of it. It’s often lumped in with stops at Griffith Observatory and the Santa Monica Pier and the Walk of Fame and the other LA sites. I would guess many of these tourists are there for a day, two at the most. Meanwhile, lots of locals (like myself) tend to visit the park multiple times per month, if not week.

Disneyland obviously has thousands of locals who visit multiple times per week or month, but the tourists going there are just there to do Disneyland. Most aren’t leaving their hotels, let alone making a trip up the 5. (Remember, this was essentially the entire creative concept behind DCA.) The reason is because the sheer scope of it requires more than one day.

I think people want to see USH have that kind of scope — they want USH to be the kind of park that’s a legitimate tourist destination not just one stop on a tourist’s itinerary. I think those people are pretty misguided on what kind of park USH can be, but I can nevertheless see it as a point of view.

 

[Jake S]

The Eiffel Tower is a tourist destination in Paris. It's not the only reason people go to Paris. I don't understand why Universal Studios being a "stop" for tourists precludes it from being a tourists park anymore than Hollywood and Highland is a tourist trap even though it's not the only reason people visit Hollywood.

 

[Clive]

I don’t believe I do. I think your characterization of tourist and local is what’s backwards (due respect).

A “tourist” park is a place people visit expressly, meaning they go there to do that and that alone. I’ve been to Orlando probably close to if not over a dozen times at this point. I’ve never gone to visit Orlando. I’ve only gone visit the parks.

Tourists absolutely make the Studio Tour — and consequently USH — part of their LA vacation, but just a part of it. It’s often lumped in with stops at Griffith Observatory and the Santa Monica Pier and the Walk of Fame and the other LA sites. I would guess many of these tourists are there for a day, two at the most. Meanwhile, lots of locals (like myself) tend to visit the park multiple times per month, if not week.

Disneyland obviously has thousands of locals who visit multiple times per week or month, but the tourists going there are just there to do Disneyland. Most aren’t leaving their hotels, let alone making a trip up the 5. (Remember, this was essentially the entire creative concept behind DCA.) The reason is because the sheer scope of it requires more than one day.

I think people want to see USH have that kind of scope — they want USH to be the kind of park that’s a legitimate *tourist destination*, not just one stop on a tourist’s itinerary. I think those people are pretty misguided on what kind of park USH can be, but I can nevertheless see it as a point of view.

Respectfully, you are off base here. I strongly disagree with your definition of what a tourist park is. A tourist park is one whose audience is primarily made up of tourists. I obviously can't give out the actual numbers, but I have it on very good authority that Universal Studios Hollywood's #1 demographic - by a long shot - is foreign tourists.

I guess you could say that the park's primary target is "Los Angeles tourists" or "California tourists," but the result is the same -- they're tourists who travel out of their local environment to somewhere new to see the sights and visit attractions. Universal Studios Hollywood has been one of those points of interest, historically and undeniably.

Whether you go to "Orlando" vs "Walt Disney World" is missing the point -- or splitting hairs. You are a tourist who is traveling out of state. Walt Disney World primarily relies on visitors who live more than 100 miles away. The same is true of Universal Studios Hollywood.

I absolutely believe that Universal Studios Hollywood would love to expand its scope and become a destination that requires two or more days to experience, but that does not change the fact that is currently a tourist park. That could change following a radical transformation of the park/resort infrastructure alongside seismic shifts in travel trends (neither of which are impossible), but for now, the park is looking to attract tourists first, locals second.

 

[viking_wizard_eyes]

The Eiffel Tower is a tourist destination in Paris. It's not the only reason people go to Paris.

I mean, I don’t wanna have a semantics debate, but Paris is the tourist destination, and the Eiffel Tour is part of the itinerary. Los Angeles is the tourist destination; the Studio Tour (USH) is a part of the itinerary.

Orlando is not a tourist destination; Walt Disney World is. Anaheim is not a tourist destination; Disneyland is. That’s the difference. People are visiting specifically for the parks.

Whether you go to "Orlando" vs "Walt Disney World" is missing the point -- or splitting hairs. You are a tourist who is traveling out of state. Walt Disney World primarily relies on visitors who live more than 100 miles away. The same is true of Universal Studios Hollywood.

It’s not splitting hairs, for the reasons I stated above. I never denied USH gets a lot of tourists, and that many of them travel a long way to go. My point is about scope, and you kinda proved my point when you said the park would love to become a destination that requires more than two days at the absolute max — it would love to become a tourist destination in and of itself. It’s not there yet. It might not ever be.

 

[AlexanderMBush]

Musing my thoughts on a Non-Wicked topic but I argue @viking_wizard_eyes that USH has always had a touristy appeal as a hook to get people to spend time while in the greater LA/Studio City area, because of attractions like the Studio Tour & Waterworld. But I also think we've had a local element, when we had entertainment as a pivotal element that defined our destination (especially with the comedy club, the nightlife, and the Gibson/Universal).

While we are finally getting more seasonal offerings affixed again with FFN for the First Half of the year, the main clientele for us will be that "tourist" crowd that comes to our park to go to the backlot, and to see the immersive worlds while they can.

 

[KlownzNskullZ]

Universal Studios Hollywood is not a locals park. It is a tourist park. You are treating it as a locals park, which it is not. Disneyland, which is a locals resort, is investing in its parks at about the same rate, give or take. (Yes, they made a bunch of splashy announcements, but they're many years away.)

Universal Studios Hollywood does run special events to appeal to locals -- Horror Nights, holidays, the 60th tram tour festivities, now FanFest, which is a USH exclusive! If you're expecting a new major attraction every year for this park, your expectations are just not realistic, sorry.

Used to be a locals park. Pre potter