Jurassic World Huge Opening, Biggest Worldwide Ever

June 14, 2015, 1:53 PM

"Jurassic World," the fourth film in the series, became the highest global opener of all time with a staggering $511.8 million in its first days in theaters. It also devoured a number of domestic box office records with a $204.6 million take, the Rentrak media-measurement company estimated on Sunday."

Replies (76)

Edited: June 15, 2015, 5:37 AM

Makes you wonder why Universal choose to build a King Kong attraction at IOA rather than expanding and improving their existing Jurassic Park experiences into a whole Jurassic World adventure.

Edited: June 15, 2015, 6:53 AM

Avengers has the biggest US opening weekend at 207 Mil so this is #2 all time USA opening at 204 million.

World Openings was HP Deathly Hallows -Part 2 at about $493 mil - so this is the new winner at over $500 mil..

Great for Universal!!!!

Furious 7 was huge now this....

And we did see it last night - Very enjoyable, tons of action....
Maybe a little predictable at the end... But still we liked it a lot...

I wonder how big Star Wars will be in December?
$220 Million first weekend?

Edited: June 15, 2015, 7:58 AM

@James: Sorry, I think you're wondering, but not me. Movies are a roll of the dice. You don't know if you have a Jurassic World domination or a Tomorrowland flop. If Disney upgraded Tomorrowland, wouldn't it regret it? They are waiting until well after Star Wars 7 opens before they start construction.

Theme park attractions don't always have to be that closely aligned with the movies that tie together. For all the Frozen tie-ins, it is a phenomenon that cannot be duplicated, but people still knock it. I think the Jurassic Park attractions are likely at an end. Disney didn't add anymore Pirates attractions after 4 movies in the series.

BTW: Universal added the Velociraptor meet and greet. Looks amazing.

June 15, 2015, 9:57 AM

I think Anon's on the right track. We're talking about a franchise that peaked in 1993 and a fourth film that had two lame sequels that preceded it. If audiences remembered the trash that was Jurassic Park 3, they might have ignored this one like the plague. By marketing Jurassic World to try and be just like the original along with using Chris Pratt as the leading man, they've now got a guaranteed success on their hands. Jurassic World will see it's day at IOA, there's no doubt about that at this point. I'm sure Universal's Imagineers are already working on their plans.

June 15, 2015, 10:44 AM

Disney did however modify Pirates to include new scenes, new animatronics, and a slightly changed narrative. While I don't see a new ride being introduced due to this movie, a rework on the existing attraction would be more than welcomed. At the very least a complete overhaul on the Visitors Center would be more than welcomed.

June 15, 2015, 10:47 AM

Aren't the Imagineers at Disney and Universal has Universal Creative team...

Does not matter really, I am just pointing that out.

Edited: June 15, 2015, 11:46 AM

Jurassic World is reminding me a lot of last year's Guardians of the Galaxy in that everyone had modest expectations and then it blew them all away. I'm curious what it is, as I don't think it's just Chris Pratt. It will be interesting to see how it does for the remainder of its run.

As for the theme park side, I think it will depend a lot on how the Fantastic Beasts movie does next year. If that film does well, I could definitely see Universal sticking with Harry Potter for the moment until they are certain Jurassic Park is actually a viable franchise and Jurassic World wasn't just a fluke. However, if the Fantastic Beasts movie doesn't do so well I definitely see them going with more Jurassic Park attractions. Whatever Universal's next major project ends up being, it will likely have to compete with Star Wars Land, so while Harry Potter has been massively successful continuing to focus on that franchise might not be the best idea.

June 15, 2015, 1:00 PM

AJ - Don't forget Universal has Nintendo.

SO Nintendo will be their next large addition.. After Skull Island...

June 15, 2015, 1:04 PM

Anon writes: "They are waiting until well after Star Wars 7 opens before they start construction."

I Respond: So you are contending that Disney will not green light 'Star Wars' attractions unless the box office receipts somehow justify construction?

June 15, 2015, 1:06 PM

Court E- The difference is the Pirates movie was based on the ride, not the other way around like Jurassic.

Edited: June 15, 2015, 1:24 PM

@THC: It is increasingly likely unless you heard of any announcement before December 18, 2015. That's 6 months and counting down. What are the odds? Too close to call?

Iger decided to include Star Wars 7 into the design. It would seem silly to announce the project and have the public confused about its design without any knowledge. Announcing it early will give away the plot. Announcing it afterwards will create excitement, but certainly, they can quietly remove it if box office receipts are disappointing. Disney can hedge its bets. I doubt there is any cause for concern in any case.

June 15, 2015, 1:56 PM

Brian, I wasn't forgetting about Nintendo. I maybe should have been a little more specific as I was only referring to major film franchises. In my mind, Skull Island, Nintendo, Jurassic Park, Harry Potter sounds like the likely order of developments for the rest of the decade, with the latter two possibly being flipped based on how successful Fantastic Beasts ends up being.

Anon, I think it's very likely that Disney will announce Star Wars Land at this year's D23 event. However, I think they may wait until the next event (2017) to announce exactly what it contains. That way, in the extremely unlikely event that Episode VII is a failure they will be able to change things around easily. I really think Disney will want to have the land open by the end of the decade, and in order to make that construction will need to begin next year. While I could be wrong, I highly doubt Disney would wait until something was well under construction before announcing the project.

Edited: June 15, 2015, 2:24 PM

Jurassic World revised weekend box office:
#1 ALL TIME!! Until the weekend of Dec 18th.

June 15, 2015, 2:54 PM

Which is still a monumental feat considering Jurassic Park just doesn't have the fan base Star Wars has. Universal has a win with this movie, and I wouldn't be surprised if updates to the land weren't in Blue Sky phases already.

Edited: June 15, 2015, 7:22 PM

@Anon "Movies are a roll of the dice" is not necessarily true. For one thing, Jurassic World is the third picture in the series to break the all-time opening weekend record after Jurassic Park in 1993 and Lost World in 1997. For another thing, even the third film (which I liked infinitely better than Lost World just because it had William H. Macy in it) had a big first weekend ($50M+) and grossed over $550M. The JP franchise, regardless of the outcome of this particular movie, is bigger, better, and more relevant than King Kong. Therefore, I am sure I am not the only person wondering why Universal would choose King Kong over Jurassic Park.

@Others As for the next Star Wars film, if Phantom Menace (easily the second worst film in the series behind Return of the Jedi which is easily one of the worst movies ever made) can gross over a billion dollars worldwide, then it doesn't matter what JJ Abrams does to the franchise, it will make tons of money. No one has to worry about it failing at the box office. It may hurt future Star Wars efforts if it is as lousy as Jedi or Menace, but Star Wars 7 will be the biggest movie to open in 2015 bar none.

Edited: June 15, 2015, 8:03 PM

@James. "why Universal would choose King Kong over Jurassic Park."

So if I failed with the box office response, then I have one more. KING KONG. It is not a choice of one over the other. JP already has a presence in the park. There's already a dinosaur ride. You want more dinosaurs? Like I mentioned with Star Wars, a premature announcement will reveal the plot. The movie is still playing. They are still cashing out at the movies before it can move to the theme park. But you're not talking about that much new attractions. Is there a second Pirates ride?

As for Star Wars, Disney does not need to wait for the next sequel. There's enough valuable material. Yet this is what we're left with.

Avatar is clearly about the first movie. They will build to the existing storyline.

"The JP franchise, regardless of the outcome of this particular movie, is bigger, better, and more relevant than King Kong."

No, it would be true if you didn't add regardless into the sentence. There's no way to measure relevance without knowing box office. King Kong sequel came well after JP3 and was more relevant just before JW.

Edited: June 15, 2015, 8:35 PM

Jurassic Park should have been expanded in the park because Jurassic Park obviously moves the needle (even when the latest movie is just a thinly veiled remake of the first flick), while for the most part, King Kong does not. Instead of tens of people planning trips for the opening of Kong at Universal in 2016, there would be tens of thousands of people planning trips to take their kids to see the latest and greatest Jurassic World attraction. Remember, the first iteration of Harry Potter was one new ride, a few shops, and a restaurant - yet millions visited. Jurassic Park probably would not elicit that same response, but it would have been significantly larger than anything Kong will muster. Heck, only a couple handfuls of diehard fans even cared when the last Kong attraction was replaced with the Mummy. But how many people would scream "bloody murder" if the Jurassic Park River Adventure got axed?

I agree about Star Wars - Disney could be adding attractions immediately if they wanted. But no matter what happens with SW7 (and I am sure it will make lots of money) SW will come to the parks. It is the biggest franchise on the planet.

Finally, Jurassic Park is more relevant than King Kong simply because it is about dinosaurs and dinosaurs are always popular with kids. Way more popular than some hairy ape who always ends up dying at the end of the movie.

Edited: June 15, 2015, 9:07 PM

King Kong fought dinosaurs in the Universal tram ride. King Kong is a fan favorite. A debate in TPI was over King Kong and Fast and Furious. King Kong won hands down.

You keep referring to Jurassic Park. It's Jurassic World. If you don't know the difference, would an expansion make any difference? JW is more a reboot than a sequel. The dinosaurs are portrayed generically and a new ride would not add anything. It will be more chase scenes.

Dinosaurs are still extinct. They did nothing for Disney with the same named movie and Animal Kingdom ride.

Edited: June 15, 2015, 9:45 PM

I did refer to the new movie as Jurassic World, you just missed it when you skimmed my post having already decided on a response. Jurassic Park is the movie franchise, Jurassic World is the latest installment. And Jurassic Park the franchise is (adjusting for inflation) bigger than both King Kong and Fast and the Furious, neither of which interests me in the least.

You do make a good point that JW is just more of the same, but how is that fact different from King Kong or Fast and Furious? More of the same is the mantra for the movie industry these days as original programming has hit an all time low. Obviously from the box office results, people are fine with more of the same.

And yes, dinosaurs are extinct, but at least they existed (in some form or another), which is more than I can say for King Kong.

Finally, what's wrong with the Dinosaur ride at DAK? I like it, and it still pulls in people as does that entire area of DAK, even if most of us niche theme park enthusiasts hate the Dinorama. If anything, Dinoland's popularity with the GP is just further proof that dinosaurs are more relevant than big apes.

Edited: June 15, 2015, 9:52 PM

I didn't miss it. You wrote Jurassic Park numerous times and Jurassic World barely once in your previous post. That you wrote "Jurassic Park is the movie franchise, Jurassic World is the latest installment." dilutes the Jurassic World brand in the theme parks, which was supposed to be the selling point of the expansion.

"expanding and improving their existing Jurassic Park experiences into a whole Jurassic World adventure."

From very first post. It still makes no difference.

Edited: June 15, 2015, 10:02 PM

I wrote Jurassic Park when I referred to the franchise, Jurassic World in reference to the latest flick. Not sure what else you would have me do. I could have been more clear in my first post and written, "...including a whole new Jurassic World Adventure" instead. But no matter, it could be called Jurassic Poop and people would still pay good money to see it on screen or at IOA. You can bet "Jurassic" they would! ;)

Nite, nite, Anon. It's way past my bedtime.

June 16, 2015, 6:18 AM

James, why the hate for King Kong? I think that Kong is the sort of character that people love and that makes for great entertainment in a theme park given its larger-than-life status. Many of your concerns seem to be a matter of personal taste, which is fine. But I think that Kong is going to be a huge hit for IOA, and I will be excited to check it out.

Edited: June 16, 2015, 7:25 AM

No hate, really, just think choosing Kong was a bit of a misstep for Universal - the first one in a while. I don't know of anyone who was calling for more King Kong in the parks prior to Universal's decision to move forward. However, enjoy your visit, it shouldn't be too crowded as long as you avoid the initial media blitz when the attraction opens.

June 16, 2015, 7:41 AM

Agree to disagree. I think any new attraction's opening will pale in comparison to anything related to Harry Potter opening, but Kong is a well-loved character that has held staying power for generations and lives beyond the movies he has been in. What would have been a better choice for development?

June 16, 2015, 10:15 AM

Jurassic Park could actually benefit with a "Jungle Cruise" inspired attraction, where you gently go past Dinosaurs without any "chase" scene. This would be a great opportunity to employ the hamster balls as a ride vehicle, and it would add a ride that younger patrons could enjoy which the park desperately needs.

June 16, 2015, 10:36 AM

The Jurassic Park River Adventure is essentially a "Jungle Cruise" in the beginning before it turned into a flume ride. One option is the land based jeep ride, but this was taken by Disney's Animal Kingdom Dinosaur ride and the new King Kong ride will use the concept as well. There are two more options. Jurassic World featured a monorail and a single rider globe vehicle. Either vehicle could be a screen based ride. The monorail could be a Universal Studios style tram ride. The globe glass vehicle could be in an Imax style theater.

Okay, too much seen it done that.

How about just an indoor dinosaur exhibit next to Camp Jurassic. Or they rebuid the Pteranodon Flyers to hold full sized riders and large Dinosaurs.

June 16, 2015, 11:41 AM

The problem is it becomes a flume ride with a large steep drop. You also have large loud dinosaurs flying out from the darkness. This makes your ride geared for slightly older patrons. IOA needs more family/kid rides. Not everything needs a "chase, or something goes wrong" scene.

Why would either attraction need to be a screen based attraction? Why couldn't physical sets be used outdoors with animatronics and no "chase" scene. I'm not saying they couldn't be a screen based either. I feel a tracked ride going around the perimeter of the land in hamster balls where nothing bad happens would be a great fit, and a for sure hit.

Edited: June 16, 2015, 3:06 PM

@James: ""Movies are a roll of the dice" is not necessarily true. For one thing, Jurassic World is the third picture in the series to break the all-time opening weekend record after Jurassic Park in 1993 and Lost World in 1997. For another thing, even the third film (which I liked infinitely better than Lost World just because it had William H. Macy in it) had a big first weekend ($50M+) and grossed over $550M."

In studying the box office, King Kong earned $50M+ domestically on opening weeked in 2005. King Kong earned $550M worldwide.

JP3 earned 50M+ on opening weekend and worldwide grosses is only $368M, not $550M. You mixed up your numbers.

Therefore, King Kong was BIGGER than Jurassic Park 3. On the whole, The Lost World earned $618M. The Original JP earned $1 Billion.

In trying to understand why Universal picked King Kong over JP, if you think this question should be answered, previous box office was modest for JP3 so the box office prediction for Jurassic World should be equally modest as the fourth installment. It can certainly do better with inflation as part of the projections.

Then you have this new article.


"‘Jurassic World’s All-Time Record: Why The Town Didn’t See It Coming Until It Happened"

"On Thursday, in a straw poll of studio execs, Deadline received three different answers in regard to Jurassic World‘s domestic opening: The predictions were $115M, $125M and $135M. The thought that Jurassic World would make $172M+ and push Universal Studios past $1B at the 2015 B.O. would have been a ballsy projection — $145M tops according to one distrib analyst."

"Universal distribution president Nicholas Carpou told Deadline on Sunday, “Jurassic World isn’t a drop-off movie for the kids, but their parents want to see it too.” Given the multi-generational interest in Jurassic World, some believe that tracking’s inability to pulse kids and families hindered a better prediction on the grosses (that’s why it’s a challenge to put a finger on the opening of Disney family pics). Furthermore, millennials — the smartphone generation — are fickle. Between the time they are polled earlier in the week and the weekend, they can change their mind entirely in terms of attending the movies with their friends."

Just a roll of the dice.

Edited: June 16, 2015, 5:15 PM

I was adjusting for inflation on the JP3 numbers and plugged in the wrong year... It made about $495M adjusted. But my point was really that the first two movies both broke box office records, so two out of three films were huge and all of them were profitable.

No one could have predicted the massive success that JP4 is having (especially being as mediocre of a movie as it is) but that it would be a hit goes without question. ALL of the JP films were hits.

And if you think the Universal Creative decision makers who greenlit Skull Island aren't kicking themselves daily and sweating about the receipts of the upcoming Kong reboot, then you are fooling yourself.

Edited: June 16, 2015, 5:20 PM

No, of course they won't kick themselves. King Kong is a legacy character of Universal and equally profitable. This is not an "either or" situation. When Jurassic World ends its run, they can decide to do an expansion. More money for Universal Creative. No one wants to be sitting around waiting for work. They already have their hands full with Nintendo. Just wait in line.

They could be marketing their existing JP attractions, but pretty quiet on that front. I suspect Diagon Alley is the star attraction and they don't need competing messages.

June 16, 2015, 6:21 PM

So James, by the same merit, should Disney have pushed up Star Wars instead of Avatar because the former is a guaranteed money maker that will benefit from it's upcoming new release while barely anybody cares about the Avatar movie right now? I'm not trying to start a debate here. I'm just wondering why it's a big deal that Universal chose their projects the way they did.

Edited: June 16, 2015, 6:39 PM

Avatar is in DAK, Star Wars is presumedly going into DHS. Different parks, different expansion plans. Truly not an either/or situation. Now, should Disney be expediting both projects? IMHO, yes, but with profits soaring and attendance rising, what's their motivation?

As for Universal, Kong is taking up valuable real estate where additional JP attractions could go. So it really is an either/or. And, Kong is in no way equally popular with JP.

Hey, but at least Universal continues to add new stuff which is good. Maybe not the best stuff in the case of Kong, but you never know. Maybe the new Kong movie will beat the odds and be a major cultural phenomenon just like Jurassic World. We'll see.

Edited: June 16, 2015, 7:15 PM

Did you see the map of Jurassic Park and King Kong Skull Island? JP is huge and KK is taking a very small footprint. Perhaps JP could be better developed. King Kong could very well do better than JP as a new attraction. Theme park rides don't need to rely on source material. JP is handicapped because of all the existing dinosaur rides out there. The well may be dry, but making a new movie would appear to be easier in this respect. Kong doesn't have to beat JP. It needs to be different.

BTW: 4 JP movies does not mean 4x more popular. You're only as popular as the last movie.

June 16, 2015, 7:39 PM

Star Wars 7 may very well beat Jurassic World at the end of its run. But it wouldn't break 200 million opening weekend that's not the way that month plays out. IOA can still add the Amber Mine Train in the old Triceratops Encounter and the Dark Ride Concept for the Discovery Center and simply relocate the Raptor Encounter and that would give IOA 6 attractions plus the midway and relocate the Triceratops to the old boat dock area for a seventh attraction.

Edited: June 16, 2015, 8:00 PM

Using your logic, Anon, then JP4, which is headed for a $1.5B take, is three times more popular than the last Kong film.

Look, I am not saying a Kong attraction won't be fun - on the contrary it might be wonderful. It just seems to me, an armchair Imagineer like the rest of you, that expanding JP made a lot more sense than going back to a tired old franchise with little appeal outside of old fogies like me - an opinion backed by the huge impact of the latest blockbuster film in the blockbuster Jurassic Park franchise.

But I know, Universal can do no wrong, so far be it from me to fire off even the slightest amount of criticism in their direction.

@Robert I am curious why you think Star Wars won't have a shot at the opening weekend record. It opens on a Friday, right around the holidays when most kids are off school, there's no competition, and it's Star Wars. What am I missing?

Edited: June 16, 2015, 8:07 PM

"Using your logic, Anon, then JP4, which is headed for a $1.5B take, is three times more popular than the last Kong film."

So its okay Kong gets its space? Not even 25% of the combined acreage. Seems like you want JP to get everything according to your logic.

JP does need a makeover. The existing rides are tired. Turning the land and rides into Jurassic World will improve it nonetheless. It will be a measured slight change. A few Chris Pratt references and narration. New Signage. Done.

June 16, 2015, 8:35 PM

Okay. And a brand new attraction to top it off - but no, we're out of space. Tsk tsk.

Edited: June 16, 2015, 8:56 PM


June 16, 2015, 8:59 PM


June 16, 2015, 10:35 PM

There's still space for a hamster ball ride using bridges to pass over (or under?) the pathways and looping around the perimeter of the land and in front of (behind?) the visitors center for a loading station. A tracked (hidden track?) with scenes of dinosaurs with a very thick jungle as a back drop is viable. Pushing the service road back slightly sets up even more potential.

Edited: June 17, 2015, 12:23 AM

James, I can't speak for Robert, but it would be hard for Star Wars to usurp the record. Many schools will still be in session December 18, likely being the last day before winter break. Therefore, many kids, teenagers, and adults who work as staff will be forced to see it at night, assuming there aren't too many sold out showtimes. Jurassic World benefitted from it's June release since many people could see it all of that Friday.

As for the space issue, the Triceratops Encounter site still goes unused, so that should be the location of a new ride. Heck, they can even gut the inside of the Discovery Center if they wanted and retain the facade as the entrance. The exhibits there are barely interactive and the food is passable at best.

Court, a hamster ball ride would interesting, but might cause problems for people with claustrophobia. And with the Florida sun beating down, a glass ball might get too hot inside for safety.

June 17, 2015, 6:30 AM

The largest December Openings are in the 100 million dollar range with the LOTR franchise (one of the biggest franchises ever). The reason always given is that people have more distractions with shopping and holidays, also weather can be detrimental at times for the movie revenue. While Avatar and Titanic both opened in the holidays they both made they money of the course of their run and consistency and not from a record breaking opening. Star Wars would need to double up an LOTR opening, while a 50% increase would put it in the 150 million area and potential to exceed JP total cume.

June 17, 2015, 6:33 AM

Heck you could always use a portion of the lagoon for JP as they did open up the aquatic aspect of dinos in this installment of the franchise

June 17, 2015, 10:50 AM

There are always ways to combat the sun. I'm just saying JW presented the ride vehicle and I would not be surprised to see something similar to it in the future. It would be Universal synergy at its finest. And the lagoon could always be reclaimed to accommodate space.

June 17, 2015, 4:04 PM

WRT Star Wars 7, I would just say, never underestimate the power of the Force!

June 17, 2015, 8:17 PM

for comparison

Return of the King did 72 million in Opening Weekend in December and a total of 377 million in 2003

Star Wars III did 108 million Opening Weekend in the Summer and a total of 380 million in 2005

Thinking 150 to 160 is a safe bet for SW7 but could end up with more than JW when all is said in done, depending on reviews.

Edited: June 17, 2015, 9:24 PM

Return of the King was a three hour and ten minute movie and had fewer showtimes because of it.

Star Wars 3 was hampered by a couple of fairly underwhelming preceding episodes.

It has been ten years since we last saw a live action Star Wars film, and 32 years since the original cast was showcased. Demand for Star Wars related product is high, and the fan base is significant. Some analysts are predicting the new film could eclipse the $2B mark worldwide, and if so, it could indeed shatter a few high profile records.

Reviews don't usually matter these days. The metacritic rating for Transformers 4 was abysmal and it was the biggest film of last summer. The reviews of JP4 have been tepid at best, but the money keeps rolling in... Critics don't seem to have the power to influence box office like they once did.

Whatever happens, SW7 is easily my most anticipated movie of the year. I can't wait to see it.

Edited: June 19, 2015, 4:32 PM

On a side note, it looks like Universal solved their space issue when it comes to building a new Jurassic World attraction: Universal Studios Japan! From recent Screamscape reporting it looks like USJ is getting a Jurassic World themed B&M Flyer in 2016.

Which would you rather have: a King Kong themed reboot of the defunct Jaws attraction, or a world class, highly themed flying coaster? Personally, I think Florida can always use more themed coasters - especially if they are a bit on the thrilling side. But, I am not going to allow myself to be bitter - it just makes facial lines.

June 19, 2015, 5:19 PM

I'd rather get a more unique ride than a coaster... All I imagine is a themed queue with a hardly themed coaster similar to Dragon Challenge.

Edited: June 19, 2015, 5:32 PM

The King Kong ride is on a truck like vehicle, not a Jaws fishing boat. Thematically and technology, it's not Jaws either. They will have a huge animatronic and use 3D screens and be inside buildings like the original King Kong attraction. Universal already has a kid friendly flying attraction. If they want to add a new Jurassic World attraction, they can remove Discovery Center, Camp Jurassic, and another unused section. King Kong is in a very small footprint compared with Jurassic Park.

A flying coaster will duplicate the Dragons coaster next door. It will seem too similar with suspended seats.

June 19, 2015, 5:38 PM

I always prefer a good high quality themed attraction over a coaster. There are a huge number of good coasters at every run of the mill coaster park, but only a finate number of really good unique theme park attractions. I'm really looking forward to Kong.

Edited: June 19, 2015, 8:27 PM

You all are selling Universal short. Gringotts is a highly themed coaster. Mummy is a highly themed coaster. We're not talking about Rip Ride Rockit here, we're talking about something potentially fantastic AND for thrill seekers. What could Universal Creative do with a "big boy" Manta style flying coaster and a Jurassic Park theme? Certainly something much better and far more exciting than King Kong meets the Great Movie Ride.

And, Anon, flying coasters feel completely different than inverted coasters. There is no comparison or overlap, imho. Besides, Court E is right, Dragon Challenge has been nerfed to the point of obsolescence since it stopped dueling. It should be torn down and replaced with an attraction worthy of inclusion in the Wizarding World.

Edited: June 19, 2015, 8:35 PM

You said USJ solved their space issue. How will this apply to IOA especially with the theming? You're all over the place with your two posts and you also mentioned Jaws.

Edited: June 19, 2015, 8:49 PM

Hmmmm.... it really isn't fun if I have to go back and explain things.

I said Universal solved their space issue by building in USJ rather than IOA. It was sarcasm. And King Kong will be like Jaws in that it will be a scripted, guided tour where you encounter a robotic bad guy. The difference being King Kong isn't as popular as Jaws. Or as scary. Or as cool. And he smells like rotten bananas and B.O.

Anon you take things a bit too literally, like that big beefy dude in Guardians of the Galaxy. And if you have muscles like him, then I apologize for everything I ever wrote that raised your ire, and you were always right and I was always wrong.

June 19, 2015, 9:10 PM

No where have you described the USJ flying coaster is themed. It is a mere coaster that solves a space issue. I'm serious here because your attempt at a joke is completely after the fact and you make no sense. You're bitter because you want a Jurassic World attraction and dislike King Kong. How wonderful of you to share your feelings.

Edited: June 19, 2015, 9:26 PM

Here's the article that makes no mention of a coaster or anything.


Not sure if this is a joke too.

Edited: June 20, 2015, 4:26 AM

Check Screamscape.com for the inside scope. Also the link you posted does indeed mention a Manta style coaster in an aviary setting. Screamscape just confirmed it, and Lance is usually right.

As for it being highly themed...that's just a guess, but if Universal Creative just plops down another piece of trash like Dragons Challenge, then what's the point? I can't imagine Universal would make such a mistake. They're perfect.

Edited: June 20, 2015, 6:41 AM

James: A little communication gap. I wasn't looking at the coaster as a themed indoor attraction. That, to me, is really a different ballgame & whole different genre. That, of course is something I would personally be in favor of.Sorry for the communication confusion....One aside though. Lance is probably correct in this case since the park has already leaked some clues, but his Screamscape site usually has more bad information than any major theme park site. He's even worse than Jim Hill. LOL When it comes to Universal info, the only credible sites are TPI, OU, Parkscope and sometimes OI. The rest are usually just copying something they read from those sites, especially the OU forums.

Edited: June 20, 2015, 6:59 AM

The nature of the beast is that Screamscape deals in rumors even when those rumors are still in the Blue Sky stage (like Jim Hill), so many of them do not always come to fruition - though they were true at the time. However, when Screamscape comes out and says, "Screamscape sources have confirmed that the new Jurassic Park themed ride...will be a B&M Flyer" you can usually take it to the bank. I should have been more specific on when "Lance is usually right."

June 20, 2015, 7:14 AM

James; Or deep dark sea stage. Good recovery. LOL Have a great weekend.

Edited: June 20, 2015, 7:15 AM

Posting is duplicating.

Edited: June 20, 2015, 8:42 AM

Indeed. Thanks, Rob... getting ready to take the family to see INSIDE OUT today. Critic and user reviews are off the charts so I have high expectations for the first original Pixar film in a few years. It likely won't unseat Jurassic Poop this weekend, but it should do very well. If it makes enough money, the aforementioned Jim Hill has proclaimed that we may see a new Inside Out based Imagination Pavilion at Epcot. So go see it, gang, the future of Epcot depends on you!

June 20, 2015, 11:53 AM

Wasn't Jurassic Park at IOA opened by "John Hammond" as a sister park to the main one on Isla Nubla? This way, new attractions and rides can be added without regard to strict movie stories. As others said, JP has lots of land to add new stuff.

Edited: June 22, 2015, 10:16 AM

Another $102 million in domestic sales. JW will be the fastest in film history to $1 BILLION! Money talks and guests are drawn to Jurassic World.

June 22, 2015, 12:29 PM

It's official. Jurassic World is bigger than Avengers: Age of Ultron.


"First off, JW will cross $1B sometime later today, as expected. Secondly, Disney has reported its finals for its newcomer Inside Out which has grabbed $130.7M worldwide while its Avengers: Age Of Ultron has an international take of $918.3M and is yet to bow in Japan."

Edited: June 22, 2015, 7:54 PM

Gratz to Jurassic World and especially to the next Indiana Jones, Chris Pratt.

More importantly, as far as Orlando and particularly Epcot are concerned, is that INSIDE OUT, which is an amazing movie, earned $91M domestic making it the highest opening weekend ever for an original story (something not based on a previous property). The former record holder was Avatar with $77M back in 2009. It was also the second highest opening weekend for a Pixar film behind Toy Story 3. With glowing critic reviews and an A+ rating from viewers, expectations are set at $300M domestic which could lead to a new Inside Out Imagination Pavilion sometime in the near future. Keep your fingers crossed, people, and make sure to go see this modern, animated masterpiece.

June 22, 2015, 8:06 PM

Shouldn't Inside Out be better used to revive Wonders of Life? Isn't Imagination more about exploring creativity while Inside Out is a (fictional) way of seeing how the mind works? I've yet to see the movie (will do so tomorrow), but I would think Cranium Command would be perfect for this.

June 22, 2015, 8:15 PM

Imagination already has the ride vehicles in place. A swap is easier than redoing Wonders of Life, which is closed for years and nothing is left except for the building.

My only concern is the design of the characters that look rather simple. A bit like Monsters.

Edited: June 22, 2015, 8:17 PM

On a side note, Pete Docter, the director of Inside Out, did work as an animator on Cranium Command, so there's obviously an influence. However, Inside Out deals more with the mind and emotions while Cranium Command was more about how the body physically does things. Sadly, I think it is very unlikely that anything in Wonders of Life ever resurfaces. As I understand it, and as Anon stated, the place has been gutted, including Cranium Command. But a rebuilt from the ground up Wonders of Life Pavilion would be fine by me.

Edited: June 23, 2015, 8:25 AM

I never seen such excitement to put IP into EPCOT. That's the opposite of the usual preference. I guess there is so much wrong with the Imagination Pavilion that something needs to be done. I would hope they make the new ride into a classic that doesn't need to be constantly updated. The original Imagination was terrific, but they ruined it to continue a corporate sponsorship that didn't last. The game has changed with EPCOT. They have to justify the rehab with attendance increases and merchandise sales. Can they succeed with Inside/Out? Just too early to tell. I expect Inside/Out to earn as least as much as Monsters. Perhaps $600 million.

On a side note, I heard the Animation attraction at Disney Hollywood Studios will close to make way for an Inside/Out show. This might preempt any other Inside/Out attraction.

June 26, 2015, 10:04 AM

My 2 cents. I would like a retheaming of River Adventure. It's just as fun as ever, but it would do better with a Jurassic World theming.

June 26, 2015, 10:24 AM

I saw the movie Jurassic World yesterday and was kind of underwhelmed. I did see why it is a blockbuster hit but the editing cuts were weird (where did the matches come from?). The trailers and ads contained both spoilers and scenes not in the movie. As for theme park additions, Kiddie rides on baby dinos and color the rapter blue in the encounter, maybe hang a great white shark over the lagoon.

July 1, 2015, 2:49 PM

What can you say, everything Universal touched turns to gold these days.

July 1, 2015, 6:45 PM

Not everything. I don't think we'll be seeing any Ted 2 attractions any time soon....

July 2, 2015, 9:50 AM

But Ted 2 will make a profit at box office. Most movies never get an attraction.

Edited: July 2, 2015, 2:13 PM

Including advertising and distribution costs Ted 2 will have to make around $140M to break even. As of yesterday it stood at $68M worldwide. To make a profit, Universal will likely have to wait for the dumb schmoes that buy the Blu-Ray/DVD or pay the rental fees to see the film once it has quietly completed its inconsequential run at the local multiplexes. It's pretty much a flop.

This discussion has been archived and is no longer accepting responses.

Park tickets

Weekly newsletter

New attraction reviews

News archive