Is there enough space for transformers and Harry Potter 2 in the old Ammity section?

Universal Orlando: Could taking out Fear Factor Live help in getting both instead of just one?

From Shannon Nelson
Posted May 6, 2012 at 11:06 PM
Theres been a lot of rumors about what will replace Jaws and the amity section, Harry Potter/Diagon Alley/Hogwarts express, or Transformers, but I was wondering if there would be room for both?

From Dominick D
Posted May 7, 2012 at 6:37 AM
Probably not, and we should wait for Universal to confirm anything.

From Skipper Adam
Posted May 7, 2012 at 7:57 AM
Well, it has been confirmed that Transformers is not coming to USF for a while now.

From N B
Posted May 7, 2012 at 12:01 PM
Judging from the surveys I have been getting from USF, I think Transformers is coming to Orlando sooner than you might excpect.

From Skipper Adam
Posted May 8, 2012 at 10:07 AM
I'm just going by what Universal has officially said, which is that while Spider-Man is there, Transformers won't come. However, it's been pointed out several places online that Spider-Man and Transformers have the exact same layout, sans elevators. For whatever reason I think if ever, Transformers will replace Spider-Man before being build next to Harry Potter.

From Jay R.
Posted May 7, 2012 at 1:45 PM
Yeah, I can't see them adding Transformers, while Spider-man is still at the top of it's game.

The attractions are nearly identical (excluding their respective character properties / storyline)

I can't see Universal Orlando actually NEEDING Transformers the way Universal Hollywood did.

From Robert Niles
Posted May 7, 2012 at 2:31 PM
Every dollar Avengers makes for Disney is another dollar (and more motivation) Disney has to buy out Universal Orlando's Marvel deal.

Of course, Universal knows this, too.

From Andrew Dougherty
Posted May 7, 2012 at 7:24 PM
So there are pretty good odds that Disney takes spiserman's ride away and builds an identical version in their park leaving us with Transformers the ride, the stars scream jet coaster, bumblebees energy machine ( storm accelatron) and Megatron's Death drop. Interesting combination but, sadly that might take at least a year to totally rip out Marvel stuff and totally replace it.

From Matt Babiak
Posted May 8, 2012 at 4:05 AM
I don't think that Transformers has serious staying power. A ride is fine, but a whole land is outdated within 5 years.

From Skipper Adam
Posted May 8, 2012 at 10:07 AM
IT would be the cheapest and most logical replacement. Besides, the movies aren't done yet...

Robert is right. The more money Avengers makes, the more both sides want the characters, and more willing Disney is to buy the contract. Disney went through the extra mege-expense to buy out Paramount to release the movies themselves... which makes, in my mind, the Universal contract buyout possible.

Nonetheless, I'm gonna remain 100% positive that Transformers is not going next to Potter.

From Tim Odom
Posted May 8, 2012 at 10:38 AM
As a retort to Mr. Niles, every dollar Avengers makes increases the value of it's license to Universal. So, the more successful it is, the more they will ask for it.

As for the subject at hand, I think Universal has stated Transformers is not coming to Orlando, but that could change. If I were to bet where they would put the Transformers ride, it would be to replace either Twister or T2, both aging attractions that probably should be replaced.

From Daniel Etcheberry
Posted May 8, 2012 at 12:28 PM
Universal should build in that space either the Madagascar land or Waterworld.

From Ren Pearson
Posted June 2, 2012 at 10:19 AM
Spiderman and Transformers may have the same layout, but us theme park enthusiasts aside, would the Johnson family of Kentucky who happen to ride both really notice? True they may have similar layouts but they are still two completely different rides in story and look and character. Just that alone would make for a different experience. Theres absolutely nothing wrong with having two rides that are of the same technology, look at Disney's Fantasyland. Many rides with similar layouts and time lengths. But its not the vehicles or tracks that we remember these rides for, but the worlds and stories that they throw us into. I personally welcome a Transformers ride to Universal in the studios park, any day before I welcome a 3d coaster or train ride that ended up in the wrong park.

From Kevin C
Posted June 2, 2012 at 4:03 PM
They should definitely add Transformers at Universal. USF is struggling in comparison to its younger sibling.

I would gut the southeast side of the park that includes T2 and...not much else. It needs a marquee attraction.

From Nick Markham
Posted June 2, 2012 at 9:02 PM
I don't know about "gut" the south east sector. Though it has only two attractions (T2 and Horror Make-Up Show), I always found that to be one of (if not the most) charming aspects thematically of the park.

From Jay R.
Posted June 2, 2012 at 10:07 PM
I kinda see your point Ren, but I still dont think USF is going to spend that amount of money, nearly duplicatting one of its most popular attractions (that it just recently updated) Although I could be wrong.

And you're correct about Disneys ride "blueprint" in fantasyland, but USF is different. Do they currently have any attraction that closely resembles another??? If they do, then maybe they would actually consider adding Transformers.

Between USH & USF, I just see the Hollywood park needing Transformers more so than it's more popular sibling :-), especially when it has already has a popular version of that type of attraction

From Tim Hillman
Posted June 5, 2012 at 5:58 PM
I get the feeling that Robert is implying that Universal is keeping a Transformers ride in their back pocket if Disney decides to get serious about buying out their rights to the Marvel characters.
I just don't think that is plausible. From my perspective, the Marvel characters and themed rides in IOA mean far more to Universal than they do to Disney. Unless Disney comes up with a ton of cash, I can't see Universal giving up Marvel. I just don't see another franchise out there that can replace it with the same drawing power. If they gave up Marvel, IOA would end up being a one-trick Potter.

From steve lee
Posted June 5, 2012 at 7:44 PM
And as Robert said, every dollar Avengers makes is another dollar more Universal is going to charge Disney to get that deal.

Of course, this is all assuming that the Avengers movie manages to make a profit...

From James Trexen
Posted June 5, 2012 at 8:37 PM
Steve, you are aware Avengers grossed 1.3 billion dollars against a 220 million budget, right?

From Dominick D
Posted June 6, 2012 at 1:52 AM
Steve this isn't John Carter :P

From steve lee
Posted June 6, 2012 at 4:07 PM
Looks like a few folks aren't familiar with Hollywood Accounting...

Just google "Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix lost money." Exciting stuff, that.

Now consider that part of Disney's buy-out from Paramount involved paying certain percentages of what Avengers made against a predetermined amount (that amount may have been around 65 million based on it being split between Avengers and next summer's Iron Man 3). I'm not stating that the movie didn't make a ton of money. I'm just saying that they may not classify it as being as "profitable" as we all think it is.

And the rub is Universal couldn't care less. Even if Disney only makes a half a cent per box office dollar, they're only going to look at the worldwide gross when Disney comes over to talk money. Hollywood accounting isn't worth much to the theme park industry (which is a shame, because I have a great math based retheme for Rock and Roller Coaster). Disney can plead that ultimately Avengers lost the company money and Universal can just respond by pointing at a list of the highest grossing movies of all time and laugh the Mouse back across town.

The only people who should really be celebrating the success of The Avengers are the theaters. It's rare for a film to stay popular enough for the theaters to make any money. Between Hunger Games, Avengers, and the upcoming Dark Knight Rises, theaters are going to have one of their best years in quite a while (which hopefully will offset all the money they burned being forced to convert to digital projection).

And as for John Carter...the irony is that John Carter had a bit of an upswing when Avengers came out. I guess it hit dollar theaters the same weekend, because it reentered the US box office charts at #12, with the second best per-screen average of any film in major release.

Crap, that was meant to be a short post.

From Matt Babiak
Posted June 6, 2012 at 4:37 PM
I'm not sure how reliable this is, but I heard the John Carter upswing had to do with it and the Avengers being paired at drive-in(and some regular)theaters. Again, I read about it on a website, so I'm not sure how much of it is true.

From James Trexen
Posted June 6, 2012 at 9:30 PM
FWIW, I don't know a thing about accounting. Never have and never will. And I appreciate that you took the time to explain it thoroughly Steve, but I guess I still don't understand. Therefore, I won't and I'll take your word for it.

From Jason McLaughlin
Posted June 9, 2012 at 10:44 AM
I agree with many of the people on here that Universal is holding back with any type of Transformers attraction at Orlando due to the Marvel situation and Disney but the truth is they do need something over at Universal Studios to boost that park and in my view making it Potter based is going to be a mistake (in the long term, short term it'll work for them)

What Universal should've done is get rid of the Lost Continent area and expand Potter there. Ideally if the Marvel situation wasn't an issue, then you have two great spots to put a Transformers ride, either where T2-3D is or (if the building is big enough) where Twister is (I don't think anyone isn't of the opinion that this attraction needs to go pretty fast)

However as the Disney Marvel issue persists, we'll see Transformers saved for IOA if Disney ever stumped up the cash to buy Universal out and move Spidey & Co to Hollywood Studios. For those saying Transformers hasn't got staying power, it's doing ok for something that debuted in 1984 and two further films are planned to be released over the next five years or so.

So the question remains, what do Universal bring to the Orlando Studios to boost attendance besides Harry Potter?

From James Trexen
Posted June 9, 2012 at 8:16 PM
^Keep in mind that a lot of franchises didn't have staying power at first. At the time Jurassic Park opened in Hollywood, there was only one film with no sequels originally planned. Plus, even though a Cars 3 remains unlikely, there's no doubt that it will be a major success for California Adventure.

From Russell Meyer
Posted June 10, 2012 at 6:59 PM
I doubt they would put Transformers into USF because the ride platform is pretty much idential to Spiderman, which is just next door at IOA. However, if they wanted to build a similar attraction, I could see them closing Terminator to make space for a Transformers attraction. They will need every bit of space in Amity to build the Harry Potter expansion.

The real question is does this expansion pave the way for Universal to eventually separate the Harry Potter attractions from IOA and USF as a 3rd admission.

This discussion has been archived, and is not accepting additional responses.

Top 10 Attendance

  1. Magic Kingdom
  2. Disneyland
  3. Tokyo Disneyland
  4. Universal Studios Japan
  5. Tokyo DisneySea
  6. Disney's Animal Kingdom
  7. Epcot
  8. Shanghai Disneyland
  9. Disney's Hollywood Studios
  10. Universal Studios Florida