Villain-Con Minion Blast (General Discussion)

[Alicia]

Hollywood was robbed of Nintendo’s Peach popcorn. We need this.

 

[TheCodeMan95]

Hollywood was robbed of Nintendo’s Peach popcorn. We need this.

That sounds horrific too

 

[tielo]

Really thought there would be more discussion on this really cute and unique banana flavored popcorn stand being confirmed by permits

View attachment 18762

It looks nice but I don't call these statues theming. In the minions movies you don't see statues and cutouts of the Minions just like you don't see Harry Potters face, glasses or scar on every single building. It's on the level of current Disney theming and it's bad. Take Ratatouille for instance, building an animation look Paris (fine) and than pour a ton of rat imagery (fountain, manhole covers etc) on it isn't theming. It devalues what is build in the first place.
Except for the restaurant and Grue's home there is no theming, it's character imagery and it looks pathetic for a park that build the Wizarding World and SNW perfectly.

 

[OrlandoGuy]

If I could spend Universal's money, I would spend a billion dollars in Studios. I would love the front of the park to look more cohesive, much like Hollywood's entrance. I want a Pokemon Land. I want a boat ride and 2 new more animatronic heavy dark rides, plus all of the improved entertainment to open before EU. Uni disagrees with me. I unfortunately have to settle for this decision. I am lacking so much information that is required to make business decisions like this.

Arm chair designing is fun, and a lot of what we come up with would help the parks, or seems more interesting than what we know is coming. But there's an underlying message of "We know better" that makes me uncomfortable if we leave it unacknowledged. I try to make sure I include "I" statements, in most of my posts because :
1. Echo chambers are real in this community.
2. They acknowledge that, honestly, my opinion doesn't truly matter.

Purchasing power is real. Guest feedback is real. Forums are not. As long as we can agree that literally none of this is serious, it becomes instantly easier to be respectful in disagreements.

While I agree that corporations can make mistakes and are far from perfect, that still doesn't change the fact the forums and the GP doesn't have the first-hand information they do - which means they have a leg up in that regard

The same can be said about the well-versed message board yahoo concerning biases and blind spots - and while that doesn't mean an opinion should easily be dismissed as just someone on the forum, I have a hard time agreeing with the yahoo having a better idea than the execs despite the pool of data at their disposal, while we're on the outside looking in.

I think attributing so much importance to a message board post, going as far as to say a “yahoo” online is seriously suggesting any type of superiority over executives in charge, is a HUGE leap. Like, misses a whole entire spectrum between harmless and ridiculous.

For context, I joined here when I wanted to get in the theme park biz and wanted to simulate the idea of high-level boardroom discussions about the parks. Realistic? No. But it was a fun outlet to “talk shop” about the parks, and not just spew nonsense on social media with people that have way less nerdy passion and understanding.

Then I took a break from here because I successfully made into management in the industry.

Then I started posting again when I left, because I sort of missed the real life “high-level boardroom” discussions I got to have at work. Talking theme park ops, capex, satisfaction, etc. is common among people that are paid to do so; it’s meant to be an exercise in brainstorming and collaborative creativity that nobody sees as undermining executive business decisions in real life.

Obviously opinions here don’t mean anything to Universal, but this is the closest thing I’ve found to actually being in those meetings again and talking intelligently (and sometimes even objectively) about the parks with like-minded fans. Bringing up disagreements with certain things, drawing comparisons, “nit-picking” certain things, etc. is part of the fun of acting like a professional in the business, and what separates these conversations from more casual ones had with random friends and coworkers who don’t share the same interest…I can’t speak for everyone, but never have any of these things been a serious indictment on the leadership at UO (and they weren’t when I was on teams that worked there that did the same thing).

If that’s not what this place is for…if it’s meant for a blind acceptance of everything Universal does…then I completely misunderstood the point. And that’s totally cool if that’s the direction this site is going/already is, but know that that’s completely unrealistic in how real conversations about the business go.

 

[TheCodeMan95]

It looks nice but I don't call these statues theming. In the minions movies you don't see statues and cutouts of the Minions just like you don't see Harry Potters face, glasses or scar on every single building. It's on the level of current Disney theming and it's bad. Take Ratatouille for instance, building an animation look Paris (fine) and than pour a ton of rat imagery (fountain, manhole covers etc) on it isn't theming. It devalues what is build in the first place.
Except for the restaurant and Grue's home there is no theming, it's character imagery and it looks pathetic for a park that build the Wizarding World and SNW perfectly.

 

[Parkscope Joe]

Love how this thread has gone from “When will this ride open?” to “Its time for corporate America to BURN!!!!!” in just one page.

Welcome comrade.

I think attributing so much importance to a message board post, going as far as to say a “yahoo” online is seriously suggesting any type of superiority over executives in charge, is a HUGE leap. Like, misses a whole entire spectrum between harmless and ridiculous.

For context, I joined here when I wanted to get in the theme park biz and wanted to simulate the idea of high-level boardroom discussions about the parks. Realistic? No. But it was a fun outlet to “talk shop” about the parks, and not just spew nonsense on social media with people that have way less nerdy passion and understanding.

Then I took a break from here because I successfully made into management in the industry.

Then I started posting again when I left, because I sort of missed the real life “high-level boardroom” discussions I got to have at work. Talking theme park ops, capex, satisfaction, etc. is common among people that are paid to do so; it’s meant to be an exercise in brainstorming and collaborative creativity that nobody sees as undermining executive business decisions in real life.

Obviously opinions here don’t mean anything to Universal, but this is the closest thing I’ve found to actually being in those meetings again and talking intelligently (and sometimes even objectively) about the parks with like-minded fans. Bringing up disagreements with certain things, drawing comparisons, “nit-picking” certain things, etc. is part of the fun of acting like a professional in the business, and what separates these conversations from more casual ones had with random friends and coworkers who don’t share the same interest…I can’t speak for everyone, but never have any of these things been a serious indictment on the leadership at UO (and they weren’t when I was on teams that worked there that did the same thing).

If that’s not what this place is for…if it’s meant for a blind acceptance of everything Universal does…then I completely misunderstood the point. And that’s totally cool if that’s the direction this site is going/already is, but know that that’s completely unrealistic in how real conversations about the business go.

Yes I trust the professionals more and yes I think it’s myopic to make final declarative statements about attractions not even complete yet.

 

[OrlandoGuy]

Yes I trust the professionals more and yes I think it’s myopic to make final declarative statements about attractions not even complete yet.

I trust the professionals as well. I trust movie directors and producers but film critique is a whole business.

And I agree that final declarative statements are a poor choice for a discussion forum—that’s why I’m glad there haven’t been any! Speculation that the ride will be disappointing, questions about the timing/validity, etc. leading up to its opening, sure, but nothing final ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

[Nico]

I think attributing so much importance to a message board post, going as far as to say a “yahoo” online is seriously suggesting any type of superiority over executives in charge, is a HUGE leap. Like, misses a whole entire spectrum between harmless and ridiculous.

For context, I joined here when I wanted to get in the theme park biz and wanted to simulate the idea of high-level boardroom discussions about the parks. Realistic? No. But it was a fun outlet to “talk shop” about the parks, and not just spew nonsense on social media with people that have way less nerdy passion and understanding.

Then I took a break from here because I successfully made into management in the industry.

Then I started posting again when I left, because I sort of missed the real life “high-level boardroom” discussions I got to have at work. Talking theme park ops, capex, satisfaction, etc. is common among people that are paid to do so; it’s meant to be an exercise in brainstorming and collaborative creativity that nobody sees as undermining executive business decisions in real life.

Obviously opinions here don’t mean anything to Universal, but this is the closest thing I’ve found to actually being in those meetings again and talking intelligently (and sometimes even objectively) about the parks with like-minded fans. Bringing up disagreements with certain things, drawing comparisons, “nit-picking” certain things, etc. is part of the fun of acting like a professional in the business, and what separates these conversations from more casual ones had with random friends and coworkers who don’t share the same interest…I can’t speak for everyone, but never have any of these things been a serious indictment on the leadership at UO (and they weren’t when I was on teams that worked there that did the same thing).

If that’s not what this place is for…if it’s meant for a blind acceptance of everything Universal does…then I completely misunderstood the point. And that’s totally cool if that’s the direction this site is going/already is, but know that that’s completely unrealistic in how real conversations about the business go.

Im glad that this space allows you to fill that need and have a high level discussions. But I don’t think that negates my point that not everyone (including myself as indicated) has 1. That personal experience in the field. 2. The ability to separate speculation and theoretical discussion with “rumors.”

I love this board BECAUSE there are people here that are experts in their fields. Over the past 10 years I’ve loved reading posts by people with professional landscape degrees, roller coaster design, engineers, architects, former and current tms etc. We looked to these people to fill in our gaps of knowledge. Fundamentally though, that’s not every conversation, and it feels like that’s happening less and less. This specific conversation boiled down to “I wish Universal would give us more” vs “Here’s all we believe is coming/that sounds good to me.”

The boards are not unimportant, but we have to realize that everyone’s using them for different reasons. I love your reason. That’s not mine though. Doesn’t mean we can’t coexist.

 

[OrlandoGuy]

Im glad that this space allows you to fill that need and have a high level discussions. But I don’t think that negates my point that not everyone (including myself as indicated) has 1. That personal experience in the field. 2. The ability to separate speculation and theoretical discussion with “rumors.”

I love this board BECAUSE there are people here that are experts in their fields. Over the past 10 years I’ve loved reading posts by people with professional landscape degrees, roller coaster design, engineers, architects, former and current tms etc. We looked to these people to fill in our gaps of knowledge. Fundamentally though, that’s not every conversation, and it feels like that’s happening less and less. This specific conversation boiled down to “I wish Universal would give us more” vs “Here’s all we believe is coming/that sounds good to me.”

The boards are not unimportant, but we have to realize that everyone’s using them for different reasons. I love your reason. That’s not mine though. Doesn’t mean we can’t coexist.

I hear you, bro. I’m not trying to assign a purpose to everyone here. Just trying to point out there are a MULTITUDE of reasons someone may bring up a disagreement with a park decision, or a nitpick about a design choice, or what have you…it’s not just an automatic, “I think I know better than the park decision-makers.” That assumption is unfair to the spirit of intelligent conversation about a niche interest.

 

[Brian G.]

I think attributing so much importance to a message board post, going as far as to say a “yahoo” online is seriously suggesting any type of superiority over executives in charge, is a HUGE leap. Like, misses a whole entire spectrum between harmless and ridiculous.

For context, I joined here when I wanted to get in the theme park biz and wanted to simulate the idea of high-level boardroom discussions about the parks. Realistic? No. But it was a fun outlet to “talk shop” about the parks, and not just spew nonsense on social media with people that have way less nerdy passion and understanding.

Then I took a break from here because I successfully made into management in the industry.

Then I started posting again when I left, because I sort of missed the real life “high-level boardroom” discussions I got to have at work. Talking theme park ops, capex, satisfaction, etc. is common among people that are paid to do so; it’s meant to be an exercise in brainstorming and collaborative creativity that nobody sees as undermining executive business decisions in real life.

Obviously opinions here don’t mean anything to Universal, but this is the closest thing I’ve found to actually being in those meetings again and talking intelligently (and sometimes even objectively) about the parks with like-minded fans. Bringing up disagreements with certain things, drawing comparisons, “nit-picking” certain things, etc. is part of the fun of acting like a professional in the business, and what separates these conversations from more casual ones had with random friends and coworkers who don’t share the same interest…I can’t speak for everyone, but never have any of these things been a serious indictment on the leadership at UO (and they weren’t when I was on teams that worked there that did the same thing).

If that’s not what this place is for…if it’s meant for a blind acceptance of everything Universal does…then I completely misunderstood the point. And that’s totally cool if that’s the direction this site is going/already is, but know that that’s completely unrealistic in how real conversations about the business go.

fwiw, the use of “yahoo” came from Casper…
So I was just referring to his post and usage…

 

[Nico]

I hear you, bro. I’m not trying to assign a purpose to everyone here. Just trying to point out there are a MULTITUDE of reasons someone may bring up a disagreement with a park decision, or a nitpick about a design choice, or what have you…it’s not just an automatic, “I think I know better than the park decision-makers.” That assumption is unfair to the spirit of intelligent conversation about a niche interest.

Agreed. It’s not intended as a blanket statement, but at the same time, we have to acknowledge it when it feels like it’s present, exactly so we can talk about it. I could be wrong, so a person can then explain their perspective. I don’t think it’s anti-intelligent conversation to debate. You and I are doing it now and it’s copacetic.

 

[DodgsonHere]

It looks nice but I don't call these statues theming. In the minions movies you don't see statues and cutouts of the Minions just like you don't see Harry Potters face, glasses or scar on every single building. It's on the level of current Disney theming and it's bad. Take Ratatouille for instance, building an animation look Paris (fine) and than pour a ton of rat imagery (fountain, manhole covers etc) on it isn't theming. It devalues what is build in the first place.
Except for the restaurant and Grue's home there is no theming, it's character imagery and it looks pathetic for a park that build the Wizarding World and SNW perfectly.

I don’t think every area has to be SNW or Potter-level immersive, and I don’t think Minions is a franchise that requires (or would even benefit from) a 100% immersive land. Is there really anywhere in the DM movies that’s iconic or has people dying to visit? The statues are pretty funny and cute, I have no issue with them.

 

[PerceptiveCoot]

Banana flavored popcorn!?!?

Right there officer. RIGHT THERE. That’s a horrendous food crime right in front of you!

People like you are why I can't walk down the block to a Cowfish restaurant.

 

[Casper Gutman]

Agreed. It’s not intended as a blanket statement, but at the same time, we have to acknowledge it when it feels like it’s present, exactly so we can talk about it. I could be wrong, so a person can then explain their perspective. I don’t think it’s anti-intelligent conversation to debate. You and I are doing it now and it’s copacetic.

How does it help debate to meet critical comments with, “So you think you know better then the executives, huh?” Just address (or ignore) the issue that was raised.

In a political discussion, someone would look quite silly if they started replying, “So you think you’re smarter then the President, huh?”

 

[Nico]

Be

How does it help debate to meet critical comments with, “So you think you know better then the executives, huh?” Just address (or ignore) the issue that was raised.

In a political discussion, someone would look quite silly if they started replying, “So you think you’re smarter then the President, huh?”

Because I’m a therapist lol. I believe in looking at root cause and the unspoken. That’s the context I’m entering a discussion forum with. There’s also a fundamental difference in how you just wrote it, and what I actually wrote. Yours is a pointed call out. Mine was, hey this makes me uncomfortable when we don’t acknowledge it.

I spend a lot of time on this forum. Not everyone raises this flag for me, but there are some posters who take arm chair design as gospel/the only solution and are frustrated that Universal disagrees (those people weren’t even in this discussion.) Doesn’t negate their opinion, but leads to them having expectations that they are continuously disappointed by. That’s hard for me to come across. Like I said, it’s not a blanket statement, but it definitely exists. I disagree that I shouldn’t raise it as a concept. That’s my opinion. Always happy to debate my opinion.

 

[tielo]

I don’t think every area has to be SNW or Potter-level immersive, and I don’t think Minions is a franchise that requires (or would even benefit from) a 100% immersive land. Is there really anywhere in the DM movies that’s iconic or has people dying to visit? The statues are pretty funny and cute, I have no issue with them.

I respectfully disagree with your statement as we see Universal having 2 theme park area's for the Minions brand that is up to spec. In the sample pics below you see there is at least done an effort to make a fun area and I'm positive Universal Creative would be talented enough to translate this to Illumination Avenue in Orlando. But I'm afraid Karen or the upper bosses at Comcast block it to save a bit of money.

 

[TheCodeMan95]

Inside Universal: Civil War

 

[DodgsonHere]

I respectfully disagree with your statement as we see Universal having 2 theme park area's for the Minions brand that is up to spec. In the sample pics below you see there is at least done an effort to make a fun area and I'm positive Universal Creative would be talented enough to translate this to Illumination Avenue in Orlando. But I'm afraid Karen or the upper bosses at Comcast block it to save a bit of money.

These areas are nice, but it’s interesting how Orlando will likely have the better Minion attraction roster even with less theming. I also don’t know how these would look being pretty much the first thing you see when you enter the park. I never really minded the soundstages, I actually think they’re kinda cool.

 

[Brian G.]

I respectfully disagree with your statement as we see Universal having 2 theme park area's for the Minions brand that is up to spec. In the sample pics below you see there is at least done an effort to make a fun area and I'm positive Universal Creative would be talented enough to translate this to Illumination Avenue in Orlando. But I'm afraid Karen or the upper bosses at Comcast block it to save a bit of money.

I don't think you'll find anyone that will disagree that they would've preferred Minion Park from USJ or even USH's area - but sadly, UO put themselves in a corner with Minion Mayhem to Production Central. It's easier playing Monday Morning QB though, as I don't think you'd find anything in 2011/2012 from anyone suggesting Universal should wait and make Minion Mayhem a signature land.

So within the parameters, this land can still succeed without the need for having the level of immersion of Potter or Nintendo.

Also keep in mind, we still don't know the extent of how the finished product will look.

 

[Alicia]

New permits and delivery docs say some sort of marquee is on the way. Not sure what part of the “land” it’s for, but expected to be same as something from Beijing.

Actually might be for Bake My Day now that I think about it, but would be nice to see a marquee in the street at the land’s entry or something, covered in Minion figures.

EDIT: Okay, given the company listed on shipping reports, I'm gonna say there's a good chance it is for a land marquee covered in Minions:



DOUBLE EDIT: I could see a sign added at the corner before the land where the old Blue Man Group sign was.