Steve writes in to say that ...
An interesting article has popped up about Harry Potter and Universal. You can find it here. Last year, you reported that Disney had signed a Letter of Intent with Rowling. Any word on where that has gone?
An interesting article has popped up about Harry Potter and Universal. You can find it here.
Last year, you reported that Disney had signed a Letter of Intent with Rowling. Any word on where that has gone?
Oh, no ! Not Harry Potter again !
Sorry. You're going to have to forgive me, folks. But given the public pounding that I took the last time I wrote about Harry Potter & theme parks, I have to admit that I'm a little gun-shy when it comes to this particular subject.
Never mind that I had rock-solid sources on that Disney-has-a-letter-of-intent-with-J.K.-Rowling story. Once Ms. Rowling reportedly told the Leaky Cauldron that there was "no truth" to that tale, millions of Harry Potter fans worldwide immediately dismissed the idea. Saying to themselves that "If Jo says that that article is wrong, then it must actually be wrong."Meanwhile, I've still got my inside guys telling me that J.K. has been working with WDI on this project. And that Ms. Rowling has some very definite ideas (I.E. She wants guests to enter through Diagon Alley, then board the Hogwarts Express for a trip to Harry's school). Which -- on paper -- sounds wonderful. But -- strictly from an operational point of view -- would be guest flow & hourly capacity nightmares.
Anyway ... I wish that I could go into greater detail about this Disney / "Harry Potter" theme park thingy. But given the relatively small size of the crew that worked on this particular project, if I shared the rest of what I know ... Well, I'd definitely wind up burning a source. Maybe even costing someone their job at Walt Disney Imagineering.
And given that I really don't want to do that ... Why don't we address the topic that Steve originally asked me about? Which concerns that article that was recently posted over on About.com about Universal Studios Islands of Adventure theme park. The key passage in Arthur Levine's report reads as follows:
" ... Universal's creative wizards plan to substantially change one of the park's five islands and re-theme it to the stories and characters of one of the most popular children's franchises. And I mean hugely popular. The new attractions and land should be ready to fly in 2009 or 2010."
Given that General Electric (Which owns 80% of Universal NBC, the media conglomerate that -- along with The Blackstone Group, a private equity firm -- now owns & operates Universal's four theme parks) hasn't sunk any real money into its Florida parks for the past three years ... To now suddenly pull a 180, spending the tens of millions of dollars necessary to turn IOA's "Lost Continent" section into a "Harry Potter" -themed realm (Never mind the multi-million dollar licensing fee that would have to be paid out annually to J.K. Rowling) ... That just seems wildly out of character to me.
Sooo ... How's about I propose an alternate scenario? Perhaps Mr. Levine at About.com (As well as the guys over at Screamscape) simply misunderstood what they'd been told. Could it be possible that this reported IOA retheming, which is supposed to be built around ...
" ... the stories and characters of one of the most popular children's franchises."
... actually doesn't involve Harry Potter. Let's remember that -- just last year -- Universal Studios Japan rethemed the entire western section of that theme park around another very popular series of children's books which features witches & wizards. Thus creating the "Land of Oz."
Could it be that Universal has now somehow acquired the stateside theme park rights for the Wizard of Oz characters? I was under the impression that Oz Central LLC had those rights locked up. Which is why -- for several years now -- that company has been talking about building a $500 million Oz-themed theme park & retail, dining & entertainment complex just outside of Wheatfield, NY.
Copyright Oz Central LLC
The way I hear it, the folks behind "The Magical Lands of Oz Theme Park and Resort Area" haven't yet been able to raise the money necessary to begin construction. Which is why this project has basically been on hold for the past 18 months.
So could it be that NBC Universal -- while it was securing the theme park rights for the "Wizard of Oz" characters for its Japanese theme park -- also made some sort of backdoor deal? One that would then allow that media company to acquire the stateside rights for this same set of characters should the Wheatfield, NY project ever fall through?
I mean, Universal does have this history of swiping characters right out from under the noses of companies that think that they already have all of the necessary rights locked up. How many of you remember those "Adventures of Rocky & Bullwinkle" tapes that Buena Vista Home Video sold back in the early 1990s? Given how well these VHSs were selling, the Walt Disney Company started giving some very serious thought to bringing these Jay Ward characters into its theme parks. With a particular eye toward adding a "Bullwinkle" -themed thrill ride to Disney-MGM.
So what happened? While Disney executives were sitting on their large mouse-shaped behinds, thinking that -- just because BVHV was doing such a good job with the selling of those "Adventures of Rocky & Bullwinkle" tapes -- that Mickey already had the inside track when it came to acquiring the theme park rights to Jay Ward's characters ... Someone else was watching.
You see, what these Mouse House execs didn't realize was that Universal officials had also noticed how well all of those "Bullwinkle" VHSs had been selling. Which is why they then went behind Disney's back and -- while Mickey wasn't looking -- cut a deal with Jay's widow, Ramona & acquired the theme park rights to these same characters that the Imagineers were already designing an attraction around.
Naturally, when Disney learned about this backdoor deal, they were large-scale PO'd at the Ward family. Whereas Universal officials ... They were downright gleeful that they had put one over on the Mouse.
Sooo ... When you take that story into account ... Now I really am beginning to wonder what's going on here. Could it be that NBC Universal just pulled another Bullwinkle on the Mouse? While Disney was dithering over theoretical hourly ride capacity for its proposed "Potter" project, did Universal slip in on the QT and cut a quick deal with J.K.?
My gut (and my inside sources) tell me that Disney still has "Potter" sewn up. I mean, didn't WDI just bring Bryan Jowers (I.E. The guy who did those great concept paintings for Disneyland's "Indiana Jones Adventure" attraction and Disney's Animal Kingdom theme park) back in to work on some extra-special project? Some stunning painting that was then supposed to be used to close the deal with a particularly prickly client?
Which sounds (to me, anyway) like it could be J.K. Rowling. But -- then again -- maybe what Bryan has just been hired to paint is a beauty shot of that indoor theme park thingy that the Walt Disney Company wants to build in Singapore? Or perhaps that park that the Mouse wants to build in Shanghai.
If that's really the case ... Then maybe what Arthur Levine & the guys over at Screamscape are now saying is true. That this is Ramona Ward revisited. More importantly, that Universal Studios officials may have just pulled off the theme park coup of the century.
Please forgive me if it sounds like I'm waffling. Because (let's be honest here) I am waffling. You can probably smell the butter & syrup from there ... But there's really too much information on the table right now to determine which wizard actually is about to set up shop over in IOA's "Lost Continent."
Could it be Harry Potter or the Wonderful Wizard of Oz? And why does all of this talk of an attraction redo seem to center around "Poseidon's Fury" ? I mean, wasn't this elaborate effects-filled show just retooled back in 2001? So why do yet another redo now?
Let me make a few phone calls, folks. If I hear anything this weekend, I'll be sure and come back & update this particular edition of "Why For."
UPDATE: Holy cr@p ! Arthur Levine & the guys over at Screamscape are right. The Mouse got Moosed again!
I'll have a full report up tomorrow as part of this week's Monday MouseWatch column. But -- trust me folks -- Disneyana fans are NOT going to be happy after they read tomorrow's article.
I don't really see how Oz could fit into the existing Lost Continent. Harry Potter or LOTR would seem to make much more sense. I really like IOA and hope they do something big since nothing besides Storm's teacups and the Flying Unicorn have been added since opening.
Hmmm, can't really decide if I would be more attracted to a Oz or Potter theme park. I like some of the movies (they just seem to be getting worse; Potter 4 was a disaster) and all the books, but still.. The Wizard is a classic, and will always be better than that Potter guy.. Hmmm..
Still, interesting article :)
Why was BVHE selling "Rocky & Bullwinkle" tapes?
And, I hope that Disney doesn't make a "Harry Potter" attraction...I don't feel that he belongs at a park (if anything, he'd have to go to MGM, but even then I'd be sad). Personally, I have nothing against HP, but I've never read the books or seen the movies...it's just not my cup of tea, I don't think. But how would he fit in at WDW? Sure, Star Tours and Indiana Jones are at MGM, but those are both from George Lucas, and that somehow makes it okay in my mind (maybe since those attractions have been there for so long).
As much as my feelings about John Lasseter being in charge of WDI, I'm hoping that he wouldn't allow a HP attraction in a Disney park. I'd take another Pixar attraction over a HP attraction anyday. I want to see more Disney attractions, though.
A HP attraction would be very very popular, that's for sure.. But I agree that it might not fit in..
Considering how much Jay Ward didn't very much appreciate Walt, I've always found the later Rocky & Bullwinkle cash-ins to be rather odd.
But, anyway... I'm not quite sure why *any* theme park rights need to be negotiated as long as they stick to the L. Frank Baum books. All of those books, and thus the characters within, are in the public domain. If they were to include the books and characters by the people that Baum entrusted to continue the series (or his grandson that wrote an Oz book years ago), then I would see where they would need to get any kind of theme park rights.
But, if they were negotiating Oz rights -- well, they might as well negotiate with Shakespeare's family over use of his plays.
Let's not forget the rumored 3rd Gate for CA. I don't think JK is going to settle for a slot in the back end of MGM or a retro fit of Universal's IoA folks. I smell a mini-park / half day gate here, IF (repeat IF) Jim's sources are correct and Disney has a lock on the rights...
Putting Harry Potter in IOA would be a WASTE OF TIME plain and simple.
That section of the park while, right now correctly themed to welcome that is too small to encompass the wonderful world of Harry Potter.
Just seems like it would have to half assed. Dueling Dragons has nothing to do with HP. Neither does the themed castle you walk through to get to the ride. It would be expensive to re-theme that, and if they didnt, it would stick out like sore thumb.
Ntm. Have you SEEN the characters walking around at Universal? Theyre not bad. But, its nothing like Disney. If anyone here got the chance to meet the queen from Narnia at Disney, youd see that Disney doenst half-ass when it comes to characters.
As to Universal aquiring the rights to Bullwinkle and friends? Yeah. A lot of good that did them. After they shut down basically the only place outside of the internet you could buy Bullwinkle merch (The Wassamatta U store on Toon Island) and the dismal state Dudley Doo-rights ride is in (ntm its never open) They really are using that to its advantage. Great job making kids of today aware of these hilarious cartoons. Kids dont know who Dudley and Bullwinkle are these days (and thats sad.)
And then. Please. Who would want a wizard of oz themed land? And how would that tie into the rest of the park. Seriously. And with 'that other park' across the way, Why would Universal even want to have a land that had the same things in it? There are enough people now who go to universal searching for the Great Movie Ride. Why confuse them further? But really. Who sat down to look at whats popular in the 21st century in America and would decide "yes! Wizard of Oz! Tornados, Witches, Yellow Brick Roads! Call Ted Turner! We're doing it!" I just dont think the appeal is there. We already get to check out the yellowbrick road, dorothy and the witch at MGM. What else is there to tell? What rides could possibly be re-themed to that (Dueling Witches? no)
Im not sure If i believe Disney has the rights to HP either. I think JK would be smarter to open her own theme park, and do things right. I can see starting out on diagon alley (main street) and then boarding a train or a boat (remember 1st years get to take a boat) to Hogwarts Castle. Then the Themed areas within. Where you can sit in on a Potions class with snape (perhaps using the Turtle Talk Technology) Going outside to the Quidditch Field (roller coaster), checking out Hagrids hut and his magical creatures class (dark ride with animatronic creatures).. etc etc etc
Right now, Disney doesnt have the space in its parks to do it right. And with the HP franchise being as enourmous as it is, you can bet they will do it once and they will do it right.
http://www.screamscape.com/html/islands_of_adventure.htm
Screamscape posted some interesting news yesterday...
Regarding Poseidon's Fury, the 2001 retheming greatly killed that attraction for me. Instead of the CG Poseidon (voiced by Tim Curry to boot!), we get some guys dressed like they came out of a cheesy 1950s movie about Greek gods. The story is weaker without the aha of discovering this old man with you was Zeus all along. And the show's final effect of suddenly reappearing in the room you were in is dead, since the first room was changed, but the second one was not to match it. Sigh, I miss the original.
I can't believe someone hasn't built an OZ park by now. An attempt was made a few years ago in Kansas - but local bitching and constant attacks on the project by that yellow rag of a newspaper, The Kansas City Star, finally made the company behind the project throw up its hands and abandon it. (I knew people involved with the project. They had great ideas for the park. It could have been great for the state and the local economy. KS missed out. I guess it deserves a nothing park like "Worlds of Fun".)
I'm glad the Potter project didn't get built at Disney. Let Universal have it. The Harry Potter phenomenon may not stand the test of time. Will anybody even care about the series after the last book is published? I know I won't. They're strikingly unimaginative. The only reason I read them is to find out what happens to the characters, but Rowling has no gift for stirring prose or new ideas. J. R. R. Tolkein that chick is not. Besides, Disney has Narnia, so what does it want with Hogwarts?
Gee, Jim, I thought you weren't going to step into this one? ;)
A couple thoughts:
The people who currently work at Poseidon are convinced that it is going to be Harry Potter. Which means it probably won't be, becuase front-line employees are always the last to know anything...
BUT if it is HP, I can see this:
1) Retheme the Sindbad area and install a HP stunt show
2) Minor retheme of Merlinwood area and Dueling Dragons
3) New E-ticket to replace Poseidon -- possibly based on Kuka Robocoaster technology? (Anyone else notice the "Strong Arm" project codename?)
However, the Oz concept seems much more likely. Yes, the original LFB novels are public domain, as are the original illustrations. (Take a look at USJ's new Oz expansion to see how they have been adapted for that park.)
What DOES require rights negotiations is the musical Wicked, which would be the centerpiece of any new Oz development at UO. The good news is that the USJ version of Wicked is an excellent show, better even than the B'way production (they focus on a half dozen of the best songs, and get rid of Fierro entirely). If it came here, it's only competition would be the new Finding Nemo musical at DAK.
The better news is that the rights to the novel & musical are owned by NBC/GE (originally purchased for movie rights until S Schwartz insisted on making it a musical). So there is a good possibility that it could happen. But the bad news is that the B'way and touring companies are still going strong, and it's doubtful they'd undercut their own profits by adding it to a stateside park, at least until the BO drops off...
Oh, and the voice of Poseidon in the orginal version of the attraction was Jeremy Irons, not Tim Curry. You can still hear Irons' voice saying "Poseidon" just as the gate to the water vortex opens. The only theme-park character I'm aware of Curry voicing was SIR in the preshow of the long-gone Alien Encounter at Disney. If you really want to hear Tim Curry at Universal, you can always see him in "The Rocky Horror Picture Show" (Universal Cineplex, 2nd & 4th weekend of every month @ midnight, plug plug plug!!!)
Seth
"(I.E. She wants guests to enter through Diagon Alley, then board the Hogwarts Express for a trip to Harry's school). Which -- on paper -- sounds wonderful. But -- strictly from an operational point of view -- would be guest flow & hourly capacity nightmares."
How do you figure, Jim? The concept would dictate a design that addresses THRC and flow issues. Perhaps guests enter seventeen identical Diagon Alleys and board 47 identical Hogwarts Expresses. As long as the Guest experience is seamless, capacity can be taken care of many ways. That's why there's more than one Starspeeder in each Star Tours...
Froomius Boojum is correct, the Oz books are public domain. The true difficulty in designing an Oz-themed ANYTHING is that the 1939 MGM musical has become the "Oz of Record" for most humans, who don't even know there is a series of books.
Any straying from a Judy Garland-Dorothy dancing through a musical Technicolor MC Escher painting with three vaudeville hams in elaborate suits gets folks very confused--and those visual styles and character concepts ARE locked into rights with MGM/Turner/Warner.
Maybe it's just me, but doesn't it seem like Harry Potter might mesh nicely with some of the unused ideas from the Beastly Kingdom area that never turned up in Animal Kingdom as originally planned?
I could see an Oz land working in IOA, especially since Japan's got a version of "Wicked" that would work as a great draw for the area. The problem is, though, that I'm not sure how you'd fit Oz into a park that's designed around thrill rides unless you were to ditch the Seuss region, and I don't see that happening.
As much as Oz makes sense, though, it seems like a Harry retrofit would work wonderfully in IOA, especially given the theming of the Lost Continent area as it stands now. It'd be a relatively easy switch - would you even have to change the name of Dueling Dragons? It'd fit with the first challenge in the Goblet of Fire competition - and it would give Universal a bigger draw than what Marvel, Jurassic Park, and the random assortment of toons do now. I'm torn as to which option I think is more likely. Time will tell, I guess...
First, you say "Given that General Electric (Which owns 80% of Universal NBC, the media conglomerate that -- along with The Blackstone Group, a private equity firm -- now owns & operates Universal's four theme parks) hasn't sunk any real money into its Florida parks for the past three years ... To now suddenly pull a 180, spending the tens of millions of dollars necessary to turn IOA's "Lost Continent" section into a "Harry Potter" -themed realm (Never mind the multi-million dollar licensing fee that would have to be paid out annually to J.K. Rowling) ... That just seems wildly out of character to me." But then you say it's possible they're doing just that, but with a different franchise? So what, you can't believe they'd lay out the money to get Potter, but they'd do it to get Oz?
And maybe the lack of development was to gather up a war chest for just this eventuality.
So let's see if I understand this. Disney definately has theme park rights to Harry Potter - characters that Disney Co won't receive any licensing fees for 99.9% of the available merchandise tie-ins, and characters that the marketing guys probably notice are "aging" and facing "declining popularity." So if the Pixar deal was 'discouraging', this deal is scary to the core, and is positioned to cost Disney Co far more, since I don't think JK accepts paper stock for payment.
Let's take a trip to Tokyo Disney Seas - a fairly popular theme park. Raging Spirits and Storm Rider pull in the crowds without any movie tie-in. Journey to the Center of the Earth and 20,00 Leagues are based on the works of that currently en vogue novelist Jules Verne. Other rides are based on Disney characters. Popular park with popular rides - no additional license fees or picky novelists.
Who has rights to what isn't important. Bid the rights up then let Universal have them. Meanwhile, open a new E ticket in every park, every 2-3 years. The competition will be spending all their money on licensing fees, while Disney Co should be spending its money on new rides.