O-Town77

Keep in mind that South Florida has had several major theme parks (100 - 350 acre ones) -- which all failed. They had Africa USA (which Walt Disney himself nearly purchased) -- which was similar to Animal Kingdom in Boca Raton, closed in 1961. They also had Pioneer City, that closed after only 2 years in Davie. Six Flags Atlantis Water Park and Pirate's World are also among the defunct offerings. Poor traffic infrastructure and bad weather are nearly always blamed for South Florida's failure to be able to sustain a real theme park. Lion Country Safari keeps trying to expand into a real theme park with roller coasters, but their neighbor's have blocked their ambitions for the past 30 years. Zoo Miami is probably the only prospect that might eventually happen, but it's been "in the works" for over a decade with no results thus far.

+1 That is without question, IMO. Kent paid $100,000 to buy a wood coaster (Starliner) -- but it ultimately cost around $5 million to relocate and refurbish it. Starliner was the final straw that sent Cypress Gardens into bankruptcy, it cost a lot more to move and rebuild than estimated (and all the debt finished them off). The Dania Beach Hurricane is a larger coaster than the Starliner, but it would need less modification (than Starliner) to meet current safety standards -- so I'd guess the cost would probably be about the same.

Isn't that what we all said about Hard Rock Freestyle Fail Park?!!? I don't know, that was a little before my time as a member here. I haven't been to Ferrari World yet, but from what I can tell it is in a better location than Hard Rock Freestyle Fail Park. I think the biggest drawback to Ferrari World is that it is supposed to be the world's largest indoor amusement park. Indoor parks have a lot of cost to maintain (climate control, building maintenance, etc.) -- so whether they can generate enough attendance to keep up with all those related costs remains a big unknown. They wouldn't be the only park to close down their expensive rides during an off-season. I guess we'll know at lot more in a year or two.

+1 I think the key to success would be to gradually build the park. All the other attempts for amusement parks in Miami such as Pirate's World -- were quickly built as large attractions..... And they were too big and costly to profitably sustain for the area (and too crude to compete with Disney). I could definitely see a rides area added to Zoo Miami and doing quite well. But the Miami politicians are kidding themselves if they think that they are going to rival Universal or Disney for attendance for anything they build in that area. Further, considering all the traffic problems they currently have in that area -- having Disney levels of attendance would be unbearable for the existing roads.

We'll this is a relatively new park and I'm sure they'll work out the bugs in the schedule. As a car nut, I plan to visit this park as soon as I get some free time. Dubai has had some pretty ambitious projects that probably went too far -- but Ferrari World seems like one of the better planned projects that could be profitable in the long- term.

Early January usually rocks, too. I remember going to Disney last year and everything was a walk-on.... including the big rides that normally take 45-90 minutes for the line.

What I have in bold DID NOT happen yesterday at the press conference. All that was announced was that an expansion was taken place in Orlando. Great, so the Media is messing up the details some more.

That's the most logical thing to do IMO. I don't think we'll be waiting too long for an official announcement, either. I'm guessing they will release the details and artwork in January to celebrated the 100th Anniversary of Universal Pictures. As for Sinbad -- I'm pretty sure he's gone and Potter will own that real estate along with the rest of Lost Continent. The Disney Unplugged web site is now reporting that the Potter expansion is indeed intended for IOA: http://www.disunplugged.com/2011/12/06/update-on-happenings-at-universal-orlando/ That web site is still reporting that the future use of Jaws is still unknown. My gut feeling is that Amity will be turned into some sort of Alien themed section -- so a Transformers attraction can be added beside the existing Men In Black. Spielberg did let it slip that a Transformers ride was being considered for Florida in an interview last year. I'm just guessing right now..... And yes, that mini golf course looks epic.

I'm sorry, I didn't explain myself. I was rather expressing my rage over the fact that our local news station cited rumors it would be happening in the studios with a train linking the two parks as a fact. Now, all the students at my school are 100% convinced it is a already approved deal. Just a little frustrated with people asking me at school. Sorry for the mixup. +1 I think that's exactly the only thing that is going on in this thread for the last couple of pages. The local news has acted like these rumors are a done deal -- I remember many of the same local news outlets reporting about Six Flags Orlando was about to built in the exact same fashion about a decade ago. Until Universal issues the press release and artwork -- we simply have no idea = It is anybody's guess.

I think you keep missing what I've said. I'm in agreement with what you are saying: Harry Potter will expand. What I've said is that I think the Potter expansion will replace the remainder of Lost Continent at IOA -- and that they've got something different planned for the Jaws area. I just don't buy into the train shuttling between the 2 parks rumor.

I kinda hate to admit that I own all the Harry Potter books and have all the Blurays. I actually like Potter -- but I agree with you that it will fade in 5 years. Lord of the Ring* was absolutely huge 5 years ago -- but that has faded. It's just a natural progression.... I own all those movies, too. The Hobbit movie could re-invigorate it -- who knows?

This You obviously haven't read the books ... The fact is, the last 3 movies could have VERY EASILY been split into 2 movies each. At least Book 5 and Book 7. And if I'm not mistaken, JK Rowling was against the idea of splitting the books into two movies at first. Even with the two movies, there was still a LOT that was left from the books, there was just no way to cram it all in there. Where are you seeing that there is going to be another Twilight book? There is one more movie coming out next year, that's IT. And as somebody who has read that piece of crap (again, my daughter wanted to read it), it's the most anti-climactic 1/2 of a book. You want to talk about a studio stretching 1 movie into 2 for financial reasons, there you go. The last 1/2 of Breaking Dawn is basically going to be 2 hours of standing around doing nothing ... kind of like the last 45 minutes of Return of the King. Dude, Jaws 3D!! Come on!!! Give it some props!!! How does an "author" end a film franchise? She can end the books, which she has ... for now. Does anybody REALLY think this is the last we'll see of Harry Potter? Actually, I've read all seven books. Which is exactly why I don't think the ending to Deathly Hallows works. I just don't buy that someone with Harry's talents and skill would just walk away from it all -- just because they grew up or they defeated the villain. I mean seriously, if you had the ability to fly on your own -- would you stop doing it just because you grew facial hair??????

Right, but I think you're failing to take into account the staying power of a franchise like this in a theme park. Is Little Mermaid or Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs coming out with any more movies? No? Someone tell Disney to stop construction on New Fantasyland! Does Splash Mountain draw huge crowds year after year? Who the hell has watched the Song of the South lately? Characters can stay recognizable loooong after they stop producing new books or movies, just look at pretty much everything Disney builds. Your Generation Z argument isn't very convincing. If the parks build quality attractions around a highly recognizable franchise, there's obviously potential for long term popularity. Star Wars still has a huge fan following, I don't see why Harry Potter won't. And while Twilight may be popular now, there characters aren't as easily recognizable and the story doesn't have the broad appeal that HP does. Characters are recognizable in theme parks because they generally get remakes / new films in theaters. Snow White is getting a new film coming out next year. A new live action Little Mermaid film is in development. All franchises fade -- and some reboots flop miserably when trying to bring them back. Look at what happened recently to Knight Rider and Charlie's Angels.

I don't understand how having staff there to scan tickets would be more expensive than operating Jaws. Jaws is really expensive to run and maintain. The explosion is expensive, the upkeep on the boats and scenery is expensive. Operating an outdoor water attraction in Florida requires a lot of maintenance work. When you say that Jaws has high operating costs, I don't think Universal is as concerned about paying the staff members for the ride as they are with the other costs. Trains are also expensive to operate as well. Which is why the Monorail only services 2 parks (out the 4) at Disney. Considering the limited nature of the train proposed (mainly for transportation), I don't think the accountants would go for it at Universal. The marketing department generally pushes for new attractions, not transportation when it comes to theme park expansions historically. A dark ride is easy to advertise, but a tram ride doesn't generally move the turnstyles.

I think I get it. The wild card is that J.K. Rowling doesn't live in Hollywood -- She lives in England. The "make a quick buck" rules don't apply to her mindset -- she already is rich beyond her dreams. She was incredibly smart to retain full control of her property which is something the creators of the previous mentioned franchises did not do. That is the difference. Control. Even Spielberg got burned by not having control over his early works (which got recycled as stock footage for TV movies). But Lucas and Rowling have control.

Again, everything is a rumor until Universal officially announces it. You can even expect concept artwork for the new project when it is officially released. But until that happens, it is all rumors and speculation.

Well, Fantasyland is based on a majority of classic fairy tales -- not just Disney properties. Harry Potter is a modern book series and a fairly short one at that. Second, Men in Black 3 comes out this summer. Mummy 4: Rise of the Aztec is currently in development by director Rob Cohen. Leonardo DiCaprio is currently developing a new Twilight Zone movie. Bill and Ted 3 has been written and Keanu Reeves recently revealed plot details. and yes, LOL -- there is a new King Kong movie on the way -- based on the book Kong: King of Skull Island. I'll also add that a new Terminator film is also on the way. Those are all active -- simply because the producers know they need to keep them running to stay relevant for the general public. But, to reiterate -- the Harry Potter film franchise has been (prematurely IMO) ended by its author.

Well, those are definitely rumors -- until Universal officially announces it. I'm very skeptical of the train concept running between the two parks. One of the primary reasons Jaws is being removed is to reduce operating costs. A train in which tickets would need to be checked by cast members to park hop would likely be just as expensive to operate -- if not more than Jaws. Again, I have no doubt that Harry Potter will get an expansion at IOA. But I still remain unconvinced that they will add HP to both parks that have very different themes. I actually have a few friends that still work in USF management -- and they told me that the licensing for Harry Potter does not include both Florida parks currently. Whether they renegotiate that contract is anyone's guess. As far as they know, nothing has been decided yet for the Jaws area except that they want something newer. There are several ideas that they are considering, but they declined to share them with me. They did say the official announcement will come soon -- probably Q1 2012.

Right, but I can't think of many people in Hollywood more "bankable" than James Cameron, can you? Michael Bay? But you are right, he does have the golden touch. (Still waiting for a Kukla Arm "Aliens" ride) Hell, the more competition, the better. As long as Disney comes out on top. Nick "For my Career's sake" Wells True. I'd say Steven Spielberg, Michael Bay, George Lucas and James Cameron are all incredibly bankable. Personally, I think Avatar is one of Cameron's weaker projects based on its concept -- not box office returns. I think "the Abyss" would make a cooler attraction than Avatar if they could pull off the water effects. Just think about a submarine ride where you end up being chased by "water snakes." I doubt the technology is possible, but it would be amazing if they could pull it off.

As to the articles I was referring to: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204261704574276261288253316.html http://www.examiner.com/book-in-national/the-twilight-vs-harry-potter-debate-team-potter-and-team-twilight-take-on-question-1 http://www.eonline.com/news/ask_the_answer_bitch/once_all_harry_potter_better_twilight/187768 Harry Potter Versus Twilight..... is like the old Star Wars Versus Star Trek debates. Twilight has a long way to go to match Harry's box office, yet according to most of the articles -- Potter fans are moving to the Twilight book series since they have run out of new Potter books. E! Online found that the Harry Potter series was better overall -- of course, they've had nearly twice as many movies / books to perfect it. Personally, I like Potter better -- so I'm probably biased. But, there is a huge Twilight following out there that I can't discount. It would be a popular land if created, too.

Perhaps, I'm selling it short. I just think J.K. Rowling really did an "Amanda Bynes retirement" -kinda thing with Harry Potter. Retired it way too early. Forcing the studio to try to stretch out 7 books into 8 films due to the lack of storylines, yet Warner wanting to keep the films going. But without the films in theaters, I know it will fade like everything else does. I am totally shocked that theme parks haven't done more with Bond. There is just so many opportunities to work with at this point....

I'm not trying to convince everybody of anything. I simply agree with what a lot of media outlets have already said. That Harry Potter is fading and is gradually being replaced by Twilight. Don't kill the messenger. Twilight will eventually fade and probably be replaced by Vampire Diaries -- who knows? BTTF is no longer relevant enough for Universal to keep it at their parks. I own the trilogy and love the films. But kids don't know them unless their parents force 'em to watch the DVD's. I think you are getting hung up on the semantics of the term fad. Just because something runs its course, doesn't mean it still isn't great to watch for nostalgia. Just like Generation Z won't know Harry Potter because there won't be any new books or films -- they will only know it when parents introduce them to "the classics" since it will fade from pop culture (without new offerings). I don't see people hanging posters of Catherine Bach (Daisy Duke) on their walls anymore, either. Time marches on.

Ill have to agree. Its a power house of a franchise. It will have lasting impact, because my generation will turn their children on to Harry Potter, just like my generation of parents turned us on to their pop culture. This will continue to have a lasting impact for years to come. If anything is going to be a fad in Orlando, it maybe Avatar at Animal Kingdom, which could turnout to be flop, who knows? Nick "Cant believe I just defended UO over WDW" Wells It may have a lasting impact, but one without anything new to offer in 4-5 years when this land would be built. I do agree that Avatar is probably a mistake -- one successful film is a bit risky to base a half billion dollar themed land on. What happens if Avatar 2 is a huge box office flop? Suddenly, that expensive land at Animal Kingdom is tarnished. Also, there are a ton of franchises available with lasting impacts. Many which fit the "ride the movies" theme of Universal Studios better than Potter.

Keep in mind, J.K. Rowling has very tight control over the rights to Harry Potter. If she says, no more -- then that's the way it stays. Almost all the other franchises you mentioned didn't have a creator with such firm control over its content (Excluding Star Wars, since Lucas also has that kind of power).

As much as I loved the highly successful Back to the Future trilogy -- it probably qualifies for "fad" status since Universal already yanked the ride from most of its parks. Movies fade from memory if they don't make it to theaters every few years. If a franchise goes long enough without a new movie -- the public usually forgets it. We are talking about something that only lasted for 7 books -- there have been far more prolific franchises as to # of volumes and people will look to new books/movies after they finish reading those 7. By comparison, Ian Fleming wrote 12 James Bond books in roughly that same time period. He provided a lot more storylines to draw from... which is what has propelled 22+ films to be made so far. Again, no end in sight for Bond. But J.K. has retired HP (and in my opinion, a little too early).