Okay, the *asterisk: While everyone know that Mickey Mouse is the foundational character of the Walt Disney Company, Mickey was not Walt's (and Ub Iwerk's) original cartoon character. That was Oswald the Lucky Rabbit, who from his creation until recently was the property of Universal Studios.
Speaking of Universal, what characters spring to mind for Disney's biggest rival in the theme park business? These days, it might be Harry Potter, or the Minions, or a T-Rex from Jurassic Park. But for most of its history, the public associated Universal most with its classic monsters: Dracula, The Wolfman, Frankenstein's Monster, etc.
And that's the problem for Universal. The studio has failed over the years to protect and cultivate its most iconic characters, unlike the way that Disney has with Mickey Mouse and the rest of the Big Five (Minnie, Donald, Goofy, and Pluto). That's a lost opportunity for Universal, which needs every creative weapon it can summon if it wants to continue to take market share from Disney in the markets where its theme parks compete.
Not that Universal hasn't tried to make things right by its monsters recently. But Universal's attempt to craft a Dark Universe franchise to revive the monsters' popularity has failed.
Okay, maybe it's too early to write off the Dark Universe. Marvel co-produced a lot of movies before establishing its now wildly-successful Marvel Cinematic Universe. It's unfair to expect Universal to establish an MCU-level franchise with just one film. But if Universal saw that its Dark Universe already was on a path more like Warner Bros.' troubled DC Extended Universe than Disney's MCU, why wait to change direction and take a different route?
Still, that means Universal continues to lack a defining presence for its woefully underutilized monsters. Universal starts at a disadvantage to Disney with its monsters, since a group of creepy killers doesn't exactly project hospitality the way that Mickey does, with his ever-present smile and outstretched arms. But Mickey didn't start life as a goodwill ambassador. He's a mouse, for goodness' sake — a rodent typically associated with filth. And early Mickey? He could be... well, a bit of a jerk. Disney intentionally has refined the character over the years to make him more suitable as a mascot.
Should Universal do the same with its monsters? Should it recast them as a family-friendly crew of welcoming mascots? No, because Universal is not Disney. Universal long has promoted itself as having more of an edge than Disney — a destination where sarcasm and scares are just as much a part of your day as more cheerful fun.
It's not that Universal's monsters are repellent. Far from that, Dracula might be the most alluring all of monsters, with Frankenstein's Monster attracting a following that's as oversized as he is, too. There's clearly appeal here, one that Universal needs to tap into as it further develops these characters and their stories for its movies, TV networks, and theme parks. Don't make DC's mistake of creating a bleak and dour universe for these monsters. Universal's monsters should be a mix of scary, suspenseful, and a little bit sexy, inhabiting clever, entertaining stories that make us want to spend time with these creatures.
Ultimately, great characters in great stories build fan bases. That's something that Disney has had to remind itself of with Mickey Mouse in recent years, too. For many fans, Mickey had become the character you have to meet to Disney because, well, he was the character you were supposed to meet at Disney. Mickey became meta, with almost no one remembering why Mickey had become popular in the first place. That's why Disney in recent years has reinvested in new animated shorts to remind people that Mickey is a character with a personality and stories to tell. And that's why Disney finally is giving this rebooted Mickey Mouse his own ride in a theme park for the first time, with the upcoming Mickey and Minnie's Runaway Railway at Disney's Hollywood Studios in Florida.
Universal's monsters deserve the same. These are the icons of Universal Studios and they should never be reduced to signs in the parking garages, or walk-around characters that no one wants to stop and meet. No, Universal should not make its monsters into another Mickey. But it should invest in them with the same level of renewed commitment that Disney is now showing to Mickey Mouse.
Tweet
Look at Universal's film distribution output in the last few years. It mostly releases horror movies. That they fail to revive a Dark Universe is pure irony. The Mummy revival failed since they tried to turn it into an action movie with Tom Cruise. I would advise them to be cautious with any other potential franchise. Dracula could have potential, but these blood suckers have enough sunlight with the many television series in the last decade like the Vampire Diaries and True Blood. Let's move on.
Their animal based animated movies have hit a wall. The Secret Life of Pets was overhyped. They should come up with something new to feature in the Universal Park. It should be based on human characters so people can relate to them.
What Universal fails to realize is they have classic horror icons, but they feel like they have to flash them up. Why were the Hammer films popular in the day? They kept the gothic feel to the films. There is no reason to make those movies CGI action-fests. That is not what they are. It is OK to push the limits on the horror. They did in the 30's. Hammer did in the 50-60's, and they can do it now. Give Guillermo del Toro $60 million, say it has to be gothic horror, it can push the limits, but do what you want. Don't try to make a Marvel universe out of it.
Studios ar trying so hard to start a franchise, that they are failing to tell a good story in the first place. Franchises will not come with good stories, they will come with great stories, visionary directors, with all aspects of the production firing all all cylinders. A production micro-managed by suits and a big star before the cameras even roll are not likely to start a franchise with a gothic horror IP from the 30's.
Mickey is still here, because Disney never forgot what they have. The Mummy tanked, because Universal failed to realize what they have.
I agree it's disappointing that universal haven't utilised their classic horror icons in their Halloween nights
Universals mascot is more diffuse: movies. Advantage to this is that you can choose your mascot...
Mascots for Universal could include the much more relevant, exciting, and interesting characters from Harry Potter, Fast and the Furious, Transformers, Men in Black, The Mummy, Despicable Me, E.T., Marvel, Dr. Sues, Jurassic World, The Simpsons, and many others.
Oh, and if you want a "cute" mascot from Universal that is also highly relevant, in the near future they will be able to use Mario, Luigi, Princess Peach, and friends.
There's a story about it here.
"Luke Evans definitely isn't convinced that his version of Dracula has been staked through the heart.
The Fast & Furious star played the immortal vampire in 2014's Dracula Untold, which had been tipped as being connected to what has become Universal's Dark Universe of monster movies.
Dracula Untold was very successful at the worldwide box office with more than $200 million in ticket sales, but its reviews were poor.
Evans has now acknowledged the film's flaws, but suggested to Screenrant that he'd like another shot at playing Dracula alongside Tom Cruise's Mummy hunter, Russell Crowe's Dr. Jekyl and Javier Bardem's Frankenstein monster in the shared Dark Universe."
http://www.digitalspy.com/movies/news/a840508/luke-evans-wants-dracula-in-universal-dark-universe/
Punch in the gut line
"Unfortunately for Luke, The Mummy director Alex Kurtzman recently told Digital Spy that it's unlikely that Dracula Untold will ultimately connect to the Dark Universe."
I'm not sure why E.T.'s appeal didn't last, maybe it was too 80's, but my personal opinion is that they shouldn't have included some cuss words, it seems like Spielberg was trying to make it more 'cool', but I think if you want it to stay a true family classic, the even small amount of cussing cheapened it.
I think Mario will be the future mascot for Universal, only he can compete with Mickey.
The hundreds of cartoons played like gangbusters until about 1985, when Universal repackaged them in a 65-episode series that mostly contained later, duller shorts. They took all others off the air as a strategy to focus attention on the new package. Then they reran that new package into the ground in syndication, never revising or refreshing it, until the rigid and relatively poor selection of cartoons drove viewers away.
Later, in about 1999, Universal created an all-new Woody show. Fox aired it for one year and dropped it. That didn't have to be the end; it aired around the world for numerous additional seasons. But Universal has never released those extra seasons here, nor has it put them out on DVD or Blu-ray.
What does Universal hope to gain by sitting on a valuable property, losing money as its popularity dies? The monsters weren't the first victims.
And please tell me why a mechanical Jaws is not swimming in the lagoon at Universal Studios?
This article has been archived and is no longer accepting comments.
That's not necessarily a bad thing, is it?