There's no official word on when T2 might close, but after seeing this show again for the first time in years, I'm convinced that the sooner it closes, the better. T2's time is past, and its presence in the park at this point actually has become a liability. Universal can't get going with installing a replacement quickly enough.
Here's why T2's become a liability for the park:
Californians hate Arnold Schwarzenegger now
Forget Jack Dawson. In 1990s Hollywood, Schwarzenegger was the King of the World. But that was before Schwarzenegger trashed his reputation among Californians by serving seven dysfunctional years as governor, leaving office as the most unpopular governor in California history.
Sure, it's The Terminator up there on screen, but the people hissing when he appeared in T2: 3D were booing the man who played him. Californians don't want to be reminded of the Schwarzenegger administration.
It's embarrassing to watch Cyberdyne Systems' vision of the future that's already here, or past
Any attraction that portrays the near future, as T2: 3D did when it opened in 1996, runs the risk of becoming laughably outdated if it's not refreshed within a few years of opening. T2 hasn't been, and now some of its pre-show "predictions of the future" are unintentionally, and embarrassingly, hilarious.
Video chat? Tablet computers? A grandmother will have 5,000 channels of television, and if she can't decide what to watch, the TV will decide for her?
We're not laughing with you, T2: 3D. We're laughing at you. Worse, though, are the kids who aren't laughing at all. They can't understand why we're supposed to care about the lame versions of iPads and TiVos that Cyberdyne is showing us during the pre-show. Apathy is death for a theme park attraction.
The 3D projection looks terrible next to Transformers and Kong
At one point during the show, I took off my 3D glasses and asked Brian, "Are you seeing this in 3D?" He chuckled, shook his head and replied, "No, it's all out of synch."
At very few times did the images on screen "pop" out into space as they should in a 3D film. Instead, as is too often the case with years-old 3D projections, I saw plenty of double or ghost images in 2D instead. T2 is worse now than Disneyland's Captain EO for inferior projection. Next to the sharp, stunning, world-class 3D imagery of King Kong and Transformers, T2's 3D seems especially inferior.
The story setting still doesn't work
T2's always had great in-theater effects, and USH's performers typically give great performances. But it's always bothered me that we start the presentation inside a Cyberdyne auditorium, then somehow end up outside the theater - in the future - around and inside the SkyNet headquarters. Okay, so I guess the entire theater-full of people were transported along with John Connor and The Terminator when they busted out of Cyberdyne - and no one in the future battle ever sees us there.
But even if we accept that, a big narrative setting problem remains. When Connor goes through the portal to return to the present time, we don't go with him. We stay behind to watch The Terminator battle the T-1,000,000. When SkyNet's destroyed, the portal goes with it. How do we survive and get back, when the Terminator doesn't? Heck, he's a lot stronger and more durable than we are.
The great in-theater effects, performances and (at the time awesome) 3D easily overcame these weaknesses back in the 1990s. But this is far from Universal Creative's best work today. Here's hoping Universal pulls the plug quickly and greenlights a better attraction for its fans and guests in Southern California.
So what could that be?
The hot rumor of the moment is Universal will duplicate Orlando's upcoming Despicable Me show for the T2 theater in Hollywood. But it's fun to imagine another couple possibilities as well.
What if Universal moved Shrek 4D over to the T2 theater, then rebuilt its exterior to become a Singapore-like Far, Far Away castle? That'd allow Universal to raze the existing Shrek theater to clear space for an expanded Hogsmeade for its version of the Wizarding World of Harry Potter. Shrek would fit better thematically in front of the European facades near the current T2 theater anyway.
What if we wanted a fresh attraction in the space, rather than a relocation or Orlando import? How about a new 4D show featuring Dr. Seuss characters and stories? Universal Studios Hollywood lacks anything from the Seuss Landing land in Universal Orlando's Islands of Adventure. A new Seuss 4D show would add a welcomed family-focused attraction in the park, and if Universal threw in a Caro-Seuss-El on the site of the Coke Soak, that'd be a solid mini-land for the park. (Coke Soak could go to the site of the old Stunt Show theater if there's an ongoing contractual obligation to maintain it.)
What do you think about T2: 3D and its future, both in Hollywood and Orlando? The comments await your thoughts.
Tweet
I felt Schwarzenegger's performance as Governor has hampered by the Legislators. In other words, if Californians wanted him to succeed, why do we keep electing the same dysfunctional legislators that are in the pocket of the Unions? We get what we deserve. Nonetheless, his pardon of the son of former Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez was the worse thing he did to cement his cronyism image.
I'm a big fan of the Terminator franchise so I'm disappointed that they didn't keep the attraction in good shape. It was the best 3D presentation at its debut and it blew Disney away. Disney never had an answer and still doesn't.
As for the show's continuity, I never had a problem with it. The problem is expecting every 3D attraction to be exactly the same in presentation.
That being said, I think Shrek 4D is even worse, so lets not keep that one either. Dr. Suess makes some sense, but I don't imagine it being as ambitious as T2 3D was.
I wouldn't mind seeing Despicable Me replace it as the park could use a nice family ride.
The live performers do a great job, but I agree it's time for something else.
I'd actually lean toward not having another "3d show" type of attraction. I'd take the T2 space (and Coke Soak) & come up with something different. With the Studio Tour, Shrek 4D, Waterworld, Animal Show, Blue's Brothers, I think the park has enough "audience viewer" type of attractions for it's size.
I think the T2 space could be used for a dark ride of some kind.
I would love to see a "dark ride" in that building - even expanding into Coke Soak - but I doubt we'll ever see something like that.
My personal preference would be a live stunt show over there - outside with the valley and mountains as the background.
Unfortunately the advancement in 3D technology at the Imax has killed the 3D wow factor at the theme parks.
Projections are blurry and until about a year the screen had a horrible wrinkle that worsened the image. Smoke effects are never working properly so u can see the screen move up & down. Pre show is horribly out dated. As for whats to go here I think with the success of the Lorax a dark ride featuring suess characters would attract the young crowd.
Shrek will most likely be sacrificed for Harry Potter which is great as shreks tech and seats are out dated with D Box moving forward, back, left, right, up, down, around and shake. Why haven't these d box seats been used in more theme parks(D box made TRON a good movie as i wanted to walk out but stayed for the effects).
I would like to see it stay in some form in much the same way as you can still ride the original Star Tours (in Paris, I believe. Do correct me if I'm wrong). I guess I love nostalgia and for a memorable attraction to cease existing seems a shame. In Margate there were plans (there still are presumably) to create a park filled with original and old theme park rides which I think is a wonderful idea; it is history after all.
Also reiterating what BehindTheTheme Disney-Universal said, plot wise Tron: Legacy wasn't a great movie. But that said I would be surprised if Disney don't adapt that in some way (more that ElecTRONica, I mean). Considering how much of a flop John Carter was, a Tron sequel seems inevitable considering how much it made and that it is essentially a fledgling franchise as most people who saw it probably hadn't seen the original. Disney aren't going to want to take many (if any) risks following Mars Needs Moms and John Carter so I would expect more Tron, Pirates and animated classics.Plus Tron's unique visual style would be perfect for Disney to innovate and to attract older visitors without using Marvel too much.
I've always thought Disney & Universal should have a walkthrough exhibit highlighting intem or so from former attractiions.
It' could be like a timeline or history of the park. USH could have an ET bike, something from BTTF, etc.
Even Disney could have something on mainstreet, yesteryear type space that contained either mini replicas or an actual part of the ride.
WaterWorld will be saved.
I didn't know the Hollywood version was such a crumbling mess and, if so, should be replaced. Leave the Orlando version alone.
As for the replacement, I really don't want anything similar to what the park already has. No 3D/4D movie (at least as long as Shrek 4-D is around), which I believe is what Despicable Me is; in fact, the park has enough shows. They really need a ride. However, not another motion simulator since the park already has Simpsons and Transformers. I really hope that the replacement would be either something from another Universal park that isn't similar to a ride already present at USH or a completely unique ride (provided it is not a Harry Potter attraction).
Whatever happens, I just really hope Waterworld doesn't get the ax. It may be old, but I don't think there is a better stunt show anywhere and it still plays to capacity crowds.
I could care less what happens at Universal Hollywood, but I would hate to see the one in Orlando go away.
The only attraction that needs to stay is Water World. The attraction that's a bajillion times better than the movie, and is the best stunt show in North America!
That said, if Universal would like to replace the 4D show with a Shrek dark ride someplace in the park within the next decade, that would likely make me a very, very happy theme park writer.
First Kong then Jaws then Back to the Future. Now T2:3D and soon it will be Twister because the attraction itself really is nothing spectacular now and even with the cutting edge pre-show to Disaster the main part of the ride remains the same and lacks believability.
Within a few years the park as I knew it when we moved to Orlando in 2003 will be gone. I am excited, however, that all of our theme parks in Orlando are getting some pretty substantial upgrades! Keeps things fresh and that helps lessen the sting of annual passes!
If the Orlando version is in fine working order and still pulling in crowds that are pleased, then I say leave it alone.
But the Hollywood park is already limited in terms of attractions (versus) Orlando, so even 1 subpar attraction, isn't a great use of space.
Like I said, I like the terminator series, but the current attraction, in it's current state (especially in light of transformers, & the new hp, etc) doesn't deliver.
Very interesting discussion here about a show that's near and dear to my heart. I conceived, co-wrote and co-directed "Terminator 2: 3D" (together with Jim Cameron and Gary Goddard), so I've been following its impending demise with very mixed emotions.
Despite being so close to the attraction for so long (I was involved in all three installations around the world), I have to agree with you: the time has come to bid adieu to the Connors and their cybernetic pals.
You're quite right that above all, time has passed the show by. Not just because of our governor, but because the Terminator movies themselves have fallen far from the public consciousness. The series certainly peaked with "Terminator 2: Judgment Day," and the subsequent installments have taken us further and further away from the jaw-dropping power of the Cameron originals. (The story has also gotten way out of sync with the Universal attraction. When Cameron worked with us on the show, we planned it so that he could wrap a third sequel around it gracefully. But when he left the series, later producers went off in totally different directions, leaving the attraction orphaned in the time stream.)
You're also absolutely right that the technology references -- especially in the Pre-Show video, and even more so in the Queue video -- are comically outdated. When we wrote the show in 1993-95, there wasn't even a standard name for the internet! (If you pay attention, you can hear us use the Al Gore term, "Information Superhighway.") There might have been an opportunity to update those shows five or ten years ago, but now it's probably too late.
I'm especially sorry to hear your report that the show isn't being well maintained. (Haven't seen it myself for a while, so I'll have to take your word for it.) That sort of thing comes and goes, and I'd sort of hoped T2 would at least go out with its head held high. I'm sure the good folks at USH will do the right thing. Last I looked, the Osaka version was actually the most polished and best maintained, if you'd care to see what it was really supposed to look like.
The one place where I'll respectfully disagree with you is in your critique of the multiple-format story structure. I've heard a few people criticize the way we jump from "live theater" in Act I, to "pure movie" in Act II, to "immersive opera" in Act III. This non-literal reality progression is actually one of the things I'm proudest of. Often in the theme park world, we let ourselves become excessively focused on creating a literal, totally air-tight logical reality for our attractions. But who said that was the only way to go? What's wrong with a certain level of theatrical abstraction? Did you complain about the radical format changes in "Kill Bill," or the manic reality shifts of "Moulin Rouge"? I believe audiences actually enjoy being creatively challenged, and like it when a show throws them a mental curve ball, forcing us to become partners in the storytelling effort.
That's not to say we were completely random in our choice of formats; quite the opposite. As we conceived it, T2:3D is presented in the format that works best for each act. The first Act is a live presentation, the second is a huge chase sequence, and the third is a monstrous underground world... so the show changes format to present each part of the story in its best light. (We put a lot of effort into creating interesting transitions between these different formats to signal the audience that a change was happening, and give them permission to go along with the shift.)
In a sense, you could argue that we, the audience, make a subtle transition during the show: from physical visitors at a Cyberdyne Systems demo, to the invisible observers of a much bigger story that spans time and space. I've always loved the way this turned out, and I'm still disinclined to apologize for it.
Thanks for your great work on TPI, and it's a pleasure following this very interesting discussion. See you all at the last performance: I'll buy the beers.
Robert, I agree that a Shrek dark ride would be better then the 4D show right now.
This article has been archived and is no longer accepting comments.
Or doing a Combo Shrek setup. 4D show + Donkeys Crazy Carriage ride. (Similar to a Crushes Coaster but instead of a Turtle Shell/Under water highway; you'd be on a run away carriage that spins around as you traverse through the Shrek universe)