• ℹ️ Heads up...

    This is a popular topic that is fast moving Guest - before posting, please ensure that you check out the first post in the topic for a quick reminder of guidelines, and importantly a summary of the known facts and information so far. Thanks.

  • ⚠️ Online Safety Act Changes

    We've made some changes to the forum as a result of the Online Safety Act. Please check the post in guest services for further information.

Blackpool Pleasure Beach: 2025 Discussion

Journey to Hell:
🎃👻 Pleasure Beach Resort is back with Journey to Hell in 2025!

🕳️ New for 2025: ABYSS – a live-action scare zone inside the 120-year-old River Caves, now crawling with demons and secrets. Think haunted history meets immersive horror.

Plus, four returning scare zones:
🐇 Down the Rabbit Hole – Alice has snapped.
🧠 Cabinet of Curiosities – grotesque, bizarre, unforgettable.
🚂 Vault of Shadows – inside the world’s first Ghost Train.
🕸️ Twisted Tunnels – Victorian passageways with a sinister twist.

PLUS!
🎢 Unlimited night rides on Grand National, Launch Pad, Derby Racer & Flying Machines.
🎶 Live music, roaming actors, witch parade, and our favourite - Lougarock the 7ft werewolf!!
🍸 Halloween cocktails + themed bites to fuel your night.

🗓️ October 23 – November 1
🎟️ Tickets from £39.50 → Book early with code JTH10 for 10% off (ends Sept 13!)

▶️ If you want to see how our 2024 visit to Journey to Hell went, check out our video in the comments!

#JourneyToHell #pleasurebeach #blackpoolpleasurebeach #blackpoolhalloween
Click to expand...

Sooooo a scare attraction in river caves? So no work ACTUALLY taking place or being done for this “reimagination” then no?
 
b2311e said:
A couple of new entrants to the ride availability page

Impossible will be closed during September and October 2025.
Dora's World Voyage will be closed during September and October 2025.

Impossible, fair play, that will be for JTH (and little of value is lost).

Pretty sure Dora didn't see the end of the season last year either?
Click to expand...
Impossible, Big Dipper, Dora, and Skyforce were all open on my last visit. When I go later this month, they will all be closed, plus the potential of Big One being closed in the wind and any unexpected downtime. I’ve missed the place, but I really don’t regret making the decision not to renew my season pass back in 2021. I’ve only been once since then.
 
I renewed. But only because I know I’ll make a weekend visit in 2025 and also take advantage of a couple of free partner parks. I’ll just be a tad annoyed if the amazing £125 offer becomes cheaper on Black Friday.
 
Bert2theSpark said:
Or they’ve already gutted good parts of the attraction and are putting some pop-up Halloween props to replace the blank spaces within…
Click to expand...

My money is on ------ They haven't done anything at all.

I also doubt they will be gutting it. I honestly can't see it being wholesale changes to all of the scenes.

If you look at Valhalla, the stuff they added was pretty minimal and mostly static, apart from those ghost things before the last drop that you can hardly see. Ghost train changes have all been static scenes aswell, as have the recent additions to W&G

I hope I am wrong and we get a brand new ride experience with different scenes and new animatronics. But if its an in house job then i think thats a stretch.
 
Last edited:
The reasons for rejection seem very shaky to me. Whilst in isolation one could argue that placing amusement rides on a historical pier is not in keeping, the a risky context is that these rides will sit next to all of those other rides which are already there. The area is not high quality - it’s a hotch-potch of car park, tarmac, poor quality buildings (including the Council’s own tin shed holding one of the Illuminations displays), flashing lights, advertising hoardings etc.

In my opinion this feels like a short sighted decision which is driven more by an anti-development slant. Blackpool needs investment and denying this sort of application runs the risk of deterring other future investment.
 
venny said:
The reasons for rejection seem very shaky to me. Whilst in isolation one could argue that placing amusement rides on a historical pier is not in keeping, the a risky context is that these rides will sit next to all of those other rides which are already there. The area is not high quality - it’s a hotch-potch of car park, tarmac, poor quality buildings (including the Council’s own tin shed holding one of the Illuminations displays), flashing lights, advertising hoardings etc.

In my opinion this feels like a short sighted decision which is driven more by an anti-development slant. Blackpool needs investment and denying this sort of application runs the risk of deterring other future investment.
Click to expand...
The Southbeach Streetfood shipping container food village on the opposite side of the road is due to open early 2026. I presume this got planning approval because it’s not got a Waltzer as a centrepiece.
 
IDB said:
The Southbeach Streetfood shipping container food village on the opposite side of the road is due to open early 2026. I presume this got planning approval because it’s not got a Waltzer as a centrepiece.
Click to expand...

That and the council have seen Southport doing well out of a new food market and want in on the action.
 
It’s a very good point, that the quality of the development was criticised, and yet the same Planning Department recommended a stack of shipping containers sat across the road for approval.
 
The pier development would fall foul of the "Nothing is to be built on the west of the tram tracks" (except the piers and Metropole that were already there, the Sandcastle building that replaced the old outdoor pool, the lifeboat/RNLI building, and more recently the tourist info/registry office/cafe that the council wanted so it could demolish the Albert Road registry office).

I suppose the shipping container development replaces an empty plot of land next to a toilet, the pier one puts more stuff on the west of the tracks, not actually on the pier, but next to it (on an area of land that was previously beach, but reclaimed when the new sea wall was built). Not sure why they leant so heavily into the quality aspect (might make sense if this was North Pier, but South Pier is already full of similar rides) when they already have their reason to refuse.

The only way to get something approved that side of the tracks is if the council wants it there.
 
And "the Family" would object to any competitive development on that land south of the actual pier, as they were granted exclusive rights to entertainments in that area when they gave up the prom land for the widening for the extension of the tramlines south of the south pier.

I may have typed this more than once in the past,
Comes with the "build what they like" planning rules.
 
Katy said:
The only way to get something approved that side of the tracks is if the council wants it there.
Click to expand...
I can appreciate the log flume somewhat. But they literally stick a funfair opposite the Tower with a Star Flyer every year. I presume this doesn’t fall under the same planning restrictions?
 
IDB said:
The Southbeach Streetfood shipping container food village on the opposite side of the road is due to open early 2026. I presume this got planning approval because it’s not got a Waltzer as a centrepiece.
Click to expand...
I just don't see how this will be a success though, sure the food might be good. But it's outside facing the Irish sea next door to a massive Wetherspoons that'll undercut them on prices, and the ability to sit indoors or outdoors.
 
Katy said:
I suppose the shipping container development replaces an empty plot of land next to a toilet.
Click to expand...
The land in recent years was leased by the Pleasure Beach, they allegedly had plans for the land but clearly nothing happened. Or the more likely contender would be lease the land so another tacky ghost train cant be built on it.

When I heard the announcement of the shipping containers being placed there I originally thought that it was the Pleasure beach's doing, direct competition with spoons would of been brilliant for them. Me personally id rather sit in a nice warm pub then sitting outside shipping containers.
 
rob666 said:
And "the Family" would object to any competitive development on that land south of the actual pier, as they were granted exclusive rights to entertainments in that area when they gave up the prom land for the widening for the extension of the tramlines south of the south pier.

I may have typed this more than once in the past,
Comes with the "build what they like" planning rules.
Click to expand...

“The Family” raised a long list of objections via a consultant. They were extensive.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top