IP'S At Themeparks.

[Jables]

Is it just me who find's IP's at themeparks annoying? (Mostly in the UK)
I think they take away a lot of character from areas or just don't really fit in with a park well. For instance I really don't like Cbeebies land. Of course it's a good idea to add it, it's an extremely popular brand and is sure to bring in lots of new guests and increase revenue. But I don't know, I find them very tacky. One reason is I never think they're that well themed, (then again, Universal Studios and such do a fantastic job) I personally enjoy Storybook Land & the farmyard much more than the tackyness of what I think Cbeebies Land will add to the area. Another example of bad use of IP's is already on park, Sonic Spinball. With I'm sure we can all agree terribly bad theming. I think Sonic doesn't appeal to youngsters anymore. Also, Thorpe Park introducing this new Angry Birds area is cringe worthy. Why is the nations "thrill capital" adding such an old IP more popular with young children who won't go on thrill rides.
Anyway, that's enough moaning from me. What's everyone elses opinion?

 

[Scott]

Intellectual Properties very much depend on how well they are implemented, whether they fit the target market and what they look like when finished.

Some fail miserably like Charlie and the Chocolate Factory. Some do incredibly well like Harry Potter at Universal. It is all down to the implementation and plans surrounding the IP itself. In your example you state how you dislike the idea of CBeebies Land because it sounds 'tacky' and it won't be 'well themed'. I think this is possibly a premature and unfair assumption as from the plans, concepts, ideas and everything else so far - it looks as though it will be a solid, well thought out, nicely themed and entertaining area for its target audience.

 

[Cakey]

I think the main issue with IPs, as demonstrated by the general response to Angry Birds at Thorpe, is that they all have a sell by date. Some last longer than others, but the world today is awfully fond of a fad- with each investment into a themepark being so substantial, it's crucial that Parks start to discern between what is a flash in the pan and what is in it for the long haul. Whilst 'in house' brands/themes may not have the initial pulling power of a popular IP, they certainly have the staying power; because they create characters, worlds and adventures not found anywhere else. Even IP power houses such as the Disney Parks still create attractions with original themes and premises, because an attraction isn't just a billboard to advertise the latest 'must haves' but a story telling medium in its own right.

 

[Danny]

It all depends on the chosen IP really and the quality that the park invests into it.

Thomas Land is such a magical little area and it's been a worthwhile investment for Drayton. The majority of the attractions all feel like they have a purpose [although I beg to differ regarding the latest installation] and allow some fairly standard rides to be wrapped in some of the best theming this country has. In my mind it's certainly one of the best themed areas of any theme park in the UK and the overall standard of the area is to a high.

Nickelodeon Land is something that I find myself constantly questioning. In essence, it is just a mix match of attractions thrown together, with some being more extensively themed compared to others. It did however replace the considerably grim and aging look of Beaver Creek [which I still hold dear to my heart seeing as I spent plenty of time in there as a kid] and looks fairly fresh and generates a pleasant atmosphere for the most part. The overall modern and clean image that the area consists of is the main positive for me, but the layout and execution of some of the independent themes puts a bit of a downer on it. Don't even get me started on the disappointment I released after emerging from the exit of W&G.

The Peppa Pig area at Paulton's also looks fairly well done, although I've not heard much regarding the actual TV show anymore so I'm unsure as to how the area is currently fairing. I'm fairly confident however I'd still appreciate it if I ever visit.

The three areas I've mentioned all appear to have been thoroughly thought out [maybe not so much on Nickelodeon Land, but it could be a lot worse] and the results speak for themselves. The IPs were and still are a success, as is the general quality of them in the parks, which gives me hope in some aspects of introducing further IPs to our theme parks. I'm remaining optimistic for now regarding CBeebies Land as there are some elements that strike me as having potential [I do hope however that the 1m tall fences blend in as opposed to looking like prison fences to keep the kids from escaping].

But with Thorpe's attempt at Angry Birds it really is laughable. Detonator can be quite a daunting ride to a wide audience seeing as it's a drop tower, but having a nest and plastic birds sat atop it is going to look naff. The whole concept seems poorly thought out [I'll admit I'm wrong if I'm presented with proof that shows this project being developed before closed season began] and the IP is a has been. I really do agree with some of the comments made by the public on their social mediums regarding 2010 wanting its craze back. Angry Birds just seems like an IP that has outlived its welcome, yet refuses to bugger off. It seems like a bizarre choice for Thorpe, especially considering the other parks that have pulled it off beforehand will likely have done a better job than the final product yet to be delivered.

 

[Alastair]

In my opinion they only work if they're heavily invested in, or else very cleverly done. Most kids IP's that I've seen are pretty tacky to be honest, even those in more high profile parks (Seasame Street at PortAventura or Seuss Landing at IOA), as they often use the same kinds of rides and all of the theming is shiny and plastic (which is why I don't hold out too much hope for CBeebies).

On the whole though, I think they are a good thing when done well (let's not discuss CATCF), and on coasters there isn't much expectation for theming so it works even better. The Batman/Superman rides at Six Flags parks are a good example - the ride painted in the brand colours with a few boards up does the trick because it's a coaster and the track does the talking.

 

[CoasterCrazyChris]

In my opinion they only work if they're heavily invested in, or else very cleverly done. Most kids IP's that I've seen are pretty tacky to be honest, even those in more high profile parks (Seasame Street at PortAventura or Seuss Landing at IOA), as they often use the same kinds of rides and all of the theming is shiny and plastic (which is why I don't hold out too much hope for CBeebies).

Sesame Street is tacky because it's built from poor theming materials and is out of keeping with the nature of the rest of Portaventura's themed areas. It doesn't help that the attractions, in typical Spanish fashion, are completely uninspired.

On the other hand, I would argue that Seuss Landing is one of the best themed children's areas in the world with an almost unsurpassed level of interactivity and ridiculous level of detail (the bright colours would begin to look bad if not maintained though from the effects on sun bleaching etc).

The problem with CBeebies is that it means Alton Towers will loose a nice rustic naturalistic area in favour of another multicolored children's area. It means that we will lose some of the variety within the park's themes which is a shame. However the press release and SOME of the concept images suggest we will get a high quality finish.

 

[Alastair]

In my opinion they only work if they're heavily invested in, or else very cleverly done. Most kids IP's that I've seen are pretty tacky to be honest, even those in more high profile parks (Seasame Street at PortAventura or Seuss Landing at IOA), as they often use the same kinds of rides and all of the theming is shiny and plastic (which is why I don't hold out too much hope for CBeebies).

Sesame Street is tacky because it's built from poor theming materials and is out of keeping with the nature of the rest of Portaventura's themed areas. It doesn't help that the attractions, in typical Spanish fashion, are completely uninspired.

On the other hand, I would argue that Seuss Landing is one of the best themed children's areas in the world with an almost unsurpassed level of interactivity and ridiculous level of detail (the bright colours would begin to look bad if not maintained though from the effects on sun bleaching etc).

The problem with CBeebies is that it means Alton Towers will loose a nice rustic naturalistic area in favour of another multicolored children's area. It means that we will lose some of the variety within the park's themes which is a shame. However the press release and SOME of the concept images suggest we will get a high quality finish.

Still...when I walked through Seuss Landing it just had that feel that you get from those plasticky kids areas - the same feeling I get when walking through Nick Land, even though the attractions themselves may be of a higher quality.

See what I mean?

 

[Benzin]

Suess Landing is much better area than Toon Lagoon though...

There's only a limited number of rides that a park can have when it comes to flats, and the imagination for Suess' version comes into play with the added soundtrack and interactivity it brings... Even those pictures show a much higher design quality and general area design (though that's mainly down to Nick Land's limited space)...

IPs work when they have effort put into them... It's that simple really, hence why Thomas Land is so liked and CatCF is hated... Places like Plopsaland also understand the importance (especially as their IPs are all aimed at kids) of a very high effort into the theming/presentation of their rides (and they are much more guilty of cloning flat rides)...

 

[Sazzle]

When a ride carries itself in the style of the IP there isn't a problem - Saw: The Ride may be hated by some for its awful riding experience, but there's no denying that the theming is decent enough for a UK park, and the coaster itself suitably scary enough for the target audience.

Any park that attempts a poor IP ride ends up with something that looks as though its simply being sponsored - its easy enough to slap a few branding stickers onto a ride!

Cbeebies Land hopefully won't be as garish as many fear, however I'm a great believer in kids being more attracted to brightly coloured objects, making them more memorable. Neutral decor makes for minimal impact on a toddler!

Sent using Tapatalk

 

[Ted]

It depends on the IP itself, and how it's executed.

For instance, Ben 10 was very popular amgonst kids when Drayton opened it's Vekoma Junior bommerang themed to it in 2011. I felt it was executed well as the themeing is quite decent and the type of ride is more or less perfect for the show's target audience (Children around 8 to 12). An even better example is Thomas Land (also at Drayton) which looks fantastic and lives up to it's IP. As well as Peppa Pig land at Paultons.

A more adult example would be Saw at Thorpe. Whilst the ride itself isn't fantastic, the themeing is very good, and something you'd expect from a ride based on the Saw films.

Poor examples include both Sonic and Charlie at Alton. The former being just a simple repaint of Spinball Whizzer and Sonic stickers plastered everywhere. And of course the latter which we all know why it's bad and doesn't live up to its IP.

 

[BigT]

I think the use of Cbeebies is a superb coup.
The channel is not going to age like one show will and as new popular shows appear they can be added to the area as new or existing rides.
A brilliant idea by whoever had it, the only other IP that will last the distance is Thomas land because he has been around for 20 odd years and is still as popular today as he was.

 

[_nemesis_]

I think theme park IPs should be illegal (however I will reserve judgement on CBeebies), they ruin the escapism feel and bring guest back to the real world, theme parks should take you to another place, and another time, not try and advertise a brand. Places like Dinseyland can obviously have them as it's kind of the point, but parks without anything should create original, interesting and immersive lands, not tacky pre-existing brands.

 

[HaydenCR]

This is just wild speculation, but surely theme parks are considering IP's more, because of a certain Paromount park that may or may not be being built in Kent?

 

[Tom]

An IP park on something like Jurassic Park would be cool but other than that, no. Intrusive and OTT commercial. Having said that I loved Nickelodeon stuff and the Sonic scene in Toyland as a kid so I think I am just old.

 

[Danny]

This is just wild speculation, but surely theme parks are considering IP's more, because of a certain Paromount park that may or may not be being built in Kent?

IPs have been installed in our theme parks long before the plans for Paramount even surfaced. It doesn't have anything to do with the introduction of them in the past, or present. No doubt it will lead to competition when it does eventually get off the ground though.

 

[HaydenCR]

This is just wild speculation, but surely theme parks are considering IP's more, because of a certain Paromount park that may or may not be being built in Kent?

IPs have been installed in our theme parks long before the plans for Paramount even surfaced. It doesn't have anything to do with the introduction of them in the past, or present. No doubt it will lead to competition when it does eventually get off the ground though.

Well that is a point, but I do think that since around 2009, there has been a real surge in parks using ip's and I think its partially to do with competition abroad. Since the economic downturn, I imagine consumers would only want to go to parks that offer a good time, and not just a permanently placed funfair. It's easier for consumers to trust parks if they have IP's because that shows the park isn't a cheap fairground, and actually offers a scene of escapism from everyday life.

 

[djtruefitt]

Although we think of IPs as being fairly new, they have been around for a long time, even in the likes of Alton Towers. Of course we have never seen whole areas themed to an IP, but for many years Alton Towers had Peter Rabbit, then of course there was the Tweenies and even Bob the builder!

 

[_nemesis_]

Although we think of IPs as being fairly new, they have been around for a long time, even in the likes of Alton Towers. Of course we have never seen whole areas themed to an IP, but for many years Alton Towers had Peter Rabbit, then of course there was the Tweenies and even Bob the builder!

Don't forget Nickelodeon.