Posted on 05/31/2007 3:24:28 PM PDT by Teflonic
The first Potter book came out in 1998. Assume the typical reader was 12 years old at the time. In 2009 that typical reader will be 23 and starting to earn real money.
I believe that a mythos exists to sustain a theme park along the lines of Islands of Adventure (a great park by the way). It will not draw Disney like crowds, but it will be a good addition to Universal's multi-park strategy.
As Potter readers grow up and remember fondly the Potter books and movies, they will take their children to the park to also experience that nostalgia. Disney and Universal have been trading on this approach for years. The Potter books and movies appear to have real potential to become timeless. They have great potential for creating a backbone mythos for a theme park (what makes a park more than a collection of rides).
I can imagine..She still lives in Eggland doesn`t she? I believe though she is the first author in history to become a billionaire solely from writing books. Put it this way; Her sixth book sold more copies in 24 hours than “The DaVinci Hoax” by Dan Brown sold in a year.
And you know something? The book is not her idea. She ripped it all off from a video game series that came out in 1991. All she did is remove the sex, but it is all there. The apprentice wizard with the round glasses who goes to wizard school.
http://www.the-underdogs.info/game.php?name=Spellcasting+101
She has paid a billion in taxes. Last I heard, she has taken home about $700M
Finally a reason to go to Orlando!
Thank you rk!
BTW, someone is having a birthday today :-)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1842978/posts
You mean Butterbeer?
Thanks for the heads up! I hate to admit it, but I got so excited about the HP theme park I didn’t even check any other pings. LOL!!
Thanks for the ping RK!
LOL No worries!
It is great news :-)
Exactly. And there's a whole new generation of Potter fans growing up.
My 18-year-old was fascinated by the first Potter book in 5th grade. He graduates next week. But I can assure you he wants to read the last books (as do his parents) and he'd love the theme park.
We're introducing his 7-year-old brother to the books this summer.
Lucius Malfoy is conservative?
How often does Disney add stuff (rides, walk around characters, whole sections) to their themeparks that builds on more recent movies? Plus Disney spent decades building itself as a household name for family entertainment, and they do actually do new stuff with the “core” characters on the Disney Channel.
Enlighten us...
Don’t like it? Don’t go.
The problem comes in 5 to 10 years after the last movie. The big question for Potter merch is how many people will introduce their next generation to it and will it stick. Media entertainment relies on constant renewal, this means new products. It’s a rare thing that manages to stay really popular (like able to support a theme park popular) 5, 10, 15 years after the last new media entry was released. Unless Rowling makes a Gene Rodenberry-esque move of opening up the franchise to other writers (or actually continues it on her own which she keeps saying she won’t do) the 7th book will be the last book and the 7th movie the last movie.
And while I’ve enjoyed the Potter books and movies I just don’t see it able to make the LOTR jump and maintain a substantial following a decade or more after the last new item is released. LOTR pulled that off because it managed to become a key concept in the realm of fantasy fiction, with many imitators and being core source material for fantasy fiction related items (thinking primarily of D&D here). Even a couple years before the first movie came out (the end of the longest stretch without new media for LOTR) most writers in fantasy fiction made their elves like Tolkien’s elves (at least in mannerism and aesthetic), their dwarves like Tolkien’s, etc etc. Anybody that got into fantasy fiction, or fantasy RPGing, would eventually be steered towards LOTR and would find themselves in familiar territory. Which kept it popular, in print, and acquiring new fans constantly.
It’s a rare thing to do in media, finding new fans without making new products is very difficult. Yesterday’s books, movies and music tends to stay in yesterday. The one thing that will help is if Rowling keeps writing something, anything at all. As long as she keeps writing she can get a new audience and that audience will eventually find Potter. The one problem is the first thing she writes that isn’t Potter, especially if it’s known to be part one of a series, will be visciously attacked by the critics and a lot of the Potter fanbase, they’ll declare it a desperate and hollow attempt to make Potter 2 and loudly proclaim she’s gotten greedy and is just trying to make money. I’ve seen the cycle way too many times before, the critics are always bitter about the success of people they ignored, and there’s this wierd section of fandom that have a need to hate everything they’re fans of. That’s probably going to negatively impact sales and might make her decide to hang it up.
One way or the other they should have had this idea a while ago. Even if Potter manages to stay popular enough to keep a theme park open for decades they missed a huge opportunity for revenue by not getting the place open until around the time the last movie will be released.
um...okay...well, that’s more thought than I wanted to put into it on a Friday.
I’d tend to put this into more the “Wizard of Oz” category than LOTR. I just think Harry will be around a long time.
All I know for sure is that my family will be there.
Think about it: built-in audience & curiosity factor to get it started; 7 books covering 7 years, which is standard in TV; and the first book is episodic enough to allow for some self-contained shows while gathering support and short enough that the writers can expand upon some of the characters that will show up later on or who are always minor characters.
Year Two can be done differently from the movie: you can tell it more from Ginny Weasley's point of view (especially since there won't be any big surprise at the end -- everyone knows it).
The later books/seasons will benefit from the extra time alloted to tell the stories properly and you'll be able to fill in the gaps that the movies leave behind.
It won't happen, of course, but I think it'd be an excellent idea. Producers should start filling baby pictures now preparing for the future!
Think about it: built-in audience & curiosity factor to get it started; 7 books covering 7 years, which is standard in TV; and the first book is episodic enough to allow for some self-contained shows while gathering support and short enough that the writers can expand upon some of the characters that will show up later on or who are always minor characters.
Year Two can be done differently from the movie: you can tell it more from Ginny Weasley's point of view (especially since there won't be any big surprise at the end -- everyone knows it).
The later books/seasons will benefit from the extra time alloted to tell the stories properly and you'll be able to fill in the gaps that the movies leave behind.
It won't happen, of course, but I think it'd be an excellent idea. Producers should start filling baby pictures now preparing for the future!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.