Universal Studios Florida announces Fast and Furious ride for 2017

Too bad, Earthquake was a classic and memorable ride. And with that, Universal has replaced almost every single ride I rode there when I was last there in 2005.

Yeah, it's still a classic, and still pretty dramatic I think, even though the name change was completely stupid.

Earthquake was also timeless: neutral setting, stuff goes wrong. I can't imagine Fast and Furious will have the same shelf life. I'm curious if the day will ever come when some exec says "we over-invested in IP and forgot about building engaging attractions that stand on their own."

This seems like a temporal trend rather than the new normal but I'd be the first to admit that might be wishful thinking.

And along with that stupid name came a new concept that was, well,... lacking. They tried their best for audience involvement, but anytime I ever rode it the "finished film" showed perfectly still, bored looking tram passengers. For me it's always good for a laugh, but sadly, that wasn't their intention. They should have left the original attraction alone, at least it was less cheesy.
Attractions based on a single movie or a single special effect eventually wear out their welcome and Earthquake (which I believe was invented for the California park, right?) is decades old. The effects still work, and it can be impressive, but at this point it's probably most successful with first-time riders. Sorry, bjames, that's show biz. Out with the old and on to the next Big Thing.

I'm interested to know what type of ride F&F will be, though. My first thought was that it would likely be a motion based theater (done to death) but this scant information makes me wonder if it will be some kind of traveling motion simulator. (also done...) Hopefully it will be, as promised, something innovative. If the autos in the gallery are indeed originals then that will peak certain interest amongst some. (not me so much...)

The Earthquake/Disaster ride system is on its last legs (quite literally on the mechanical version of life support at this point), so the show building and Beetlejuice theater will be torn down entirely for this. I'm not intrigued by the IP (I watched the 1st movie, didn't find it to my liking and haven't watched one since), but I'm very curious to see how this is changed up from the tram tour version in Hollywood. The total square footage of the area for the attraction is 144k sq. ft., far bigger than both MIB and Gringotts buildings (77k and 87k respectively), so there's a lot of room to work with on this attraction. Compared to the Hollywood show building (53k), this is nearly 3x as big, and the queue definitely isn't going to be taking up the remaining 90k square feet.

I loathe the F and F movies and I would think this would be an IP would a pretty short shelf life, but the most recent sequel made something along the lines of $200 million domestically and $400 million internationally. I think Universal knows what they're doing. Of course, the next sequel may not do as well since it's unlikely that one of the feature actors of the franchise will die during filming.

I liked the revamped version a lot when I was there around 3 years ago.

It's obviously not drawing people into the park, and is probably super, super, super expensive to operate - anybody know what the minimum number of staff required is on this? - so I think it makes sense for retirement. HUGE amount of real estate opening up. I wonder if 100% of it will be used for F&F or if something additional is planned.

At least it was something that had to do with movie production, and wasn't just related to a movie. I think that's the sad thing about the studio parks in Orlando, that there was a time when, even if it was a little thin on reality, you got to see how movies were made. I suppose that doesn't align well with public tastes.

Is there even any sort of production done at the studio parks there? I think there attempt to turn Orlando into a mini Hollywood never really took off.

Jeff said:

I suppose that doesn't align well with public tastes.

CGI doesn't help. The public assumes it's all done in computers now which doesn't really make for sexy attractions.

Either way, I'm not really that sad about it. I get the nostalgia for the original concept of seeing how movies were made, but to me, a lot of those attractions were pretty boring, even as a kid. I still can't fathom how / why the Indiana Jones show at Hollywood Studios is still there. I'd rather be in the movie, so maybe in that way my tastes are a little more current than my typical old fogey opinions.

Hollywood Studios did have film and TV productions done there. Films included Mulan, Lilo & Stitch, Newsies; TV included Mickey Mouse Club and a syndicated revival of Lets Make A Deal. A number of Nickelodeon shows were taped at Universal until they consolidated production in LA ten or so years ago.

I remember being really upset when Jaws was shut down. One of my favorite movies and loved the ride. Then last year we saw Daigon Alley and Hogwarts express. I wasnt that upset any longer.

The Disaster ride itself was fun but going through the special effect process before the ride was painful to me.

Disaster was always a nice chance to sit down in the AC and watching the participants was always entertaining but I am ready for something new in its place.

Yeah, with Jaws gone, where's TS going to propose to Brandi?

I agree it seems like a lame choice to base a new ride on and is far from timeless. Although maybe I'm wrong since there are how many of those movies now? Here hoping it's not either a theater with moving seats or another Spiderman/Transformers clone. Those kinds of rides are starting to seem overdone at Universal. Hopefully it's something unique.

It strikes me as a ride that you don't have to be familiar with the source material to enjoy: while the film franchise may fade, "getting" in a car and going really fast is thrilling on its own.

Theme Park University has a piece up today noting that, once this attraction and Skull Island Reign of Kong have opened, Uni Orlando has will have nine attractions involving projection screens, seven of which require 3D glasses, and wonders how many projection-based attractions would be too many.

They must've read my mind.
But it makes sense in a way. I mean, they've got a lock on the technology which wasn't cheap and as long as there's enough themes and storylines to go around, why not? Plus, don't they boast that they let us "ride the movies"? I can't think of much more appropriate to that claim than plopping us down in front of a movie screen. (or several...)

I went to YouTube to answer my own question about Hollywood's version and it's clear it's the same 360 surround 3d experience like Kong. The difference between the two will be the conveyance. Hollywood has the world famous tram tour to rely on for so many Universal experiences but Florida attractions are for the most part stand alone. So Kong will have Jeeps or Hummers or something to carry us in there and this one will probably be the same only with F&F "cars" to hold riders.

One thing that's so cheesy about the ride is the set up to include the audience. The dialogue is bad and the scenario is far fetched enough to cause a couple of groans. I guess in terms of pure escapism it works, (I know, just like the movies, right?) but it still had me rolling my eyes in places. And to me, that very thing is what makes the difference between a ride that's one and done and one that's enduring and re-rideable.

Jeff said:

I think that's the sad thing about the studio parks in Orlando, that there was a time when, even if it was a little thin on reality, you got to see how movies were made. I suppose that doesn't align well with public tastes.

I for one am very interested in how movies are made. However, today one can get all the information they need, specific to whatever movie they want, by clicking the "Special Features" menu, so that whole park model is pretty much obsolete.

Nowadays, (man, I sound old) rather than engaging their curiosity, which is probably more and more difficult to do today, you simply have to overwhelm them with action. But the U Studios parks have been doing this to great effect for decades now.

RCMAC said:

They must've read my mind.
But it makes sense in a way. I mean, they've got a lock on the technology which wasn't cheap and as long as there's enough themes and storylines to go around, why not? Plus, don't they boast that they let us "ride the movies"? I can't think of much more appropriate to that claim than plopping us down in front of a movie screen. (or several...)

I went to YouTube to answer my own question about Hollywood's version and it's clear it's the same 360 surround 3d experience like Kong. The difference between the two will be the conveyance. Hollywood has the world famous tram tour to rely on for so many Universal experiences but Florida attractions are for the most part stand alone. So Kong will have Jeeps or Hummers or something to carry us in there and this one will probably be the same only with F&F "cars" to hold riders.

One thing that's so cheesy about the ride is the set up to include the audience. The dialogue is bad and the scenario is far fetched enough to cause a couple of groans. I guess in terms of pure escapism it works, (I know, just like the movies, right?) but it still had me rolling my eyes in places. And to me, that very thing is what makes the difference between a ride that's one and done and one that's enduring and re-rideable.

Except Kong here is completely different than 360 out in Hollywood, and not just a difference in ride vehicle (although it will be a unique RV system). It will be a complete attraction, not just an extended buildup and overdone facade for an afterthought of a distraction on a longer, more comprehensive experience. I hope that this F&F attraction will take the same direction, though a lot of the chatter is contradictory right now, and I'm not sure how much stock to put in anything I'm hearing at the moment.