Do theme parks still need franchises?

Hot take, but they could also create new IPs again. It's sad to think that rides like Haunted Mansion, Pirates of the Caribbean, or "it's a small world" would never get greenlit today.

The best themed environments are those that would have succeeded regardless of if they were based on a pre sold IP. The original Disneyland lands were themed to franchises popular at the time but have proven to be timeless due to the quality of the execution. In that same vein modern successful lands like Dinosaur Zoo, Magic School, Alien Outpost, Route 66 and (probably) Dragon Island would work regardless of the popularity of the books and movies upon which they are based, albeit on a smaller scale.

I agree it would be smart for both regional and destination parks to create original IP with the potential to be evergreen regardless of how many tickets & books are sold or how often a franchise entry is streamed.

I get why they got for IP and sometimes it works. But yes, old school to wish more original takes. I really thought Islands of Adventure worked better with original tales for Dueling Dragons and such and miss some more original things for Epcot. Probably not happening yet some potential there.

Train of thought thoughts here:

When was the last non IP attration for universal and disney? Rip Ride Rocket, mission space/test track??

Seaworld needs more IP even though they do have great nonfiction edutainment offerings.

I appreciate that Epic is going to have celestial.

Themepark fanboys like us will go to themeparks and appreciate rides regardless of source material and judge the ride based on its merits.

Basic casual normies will go to a park based on IP.

Parks needs to do both. If I'm disney/universal, I hedge my bets and build out my great rides around my stories. Have my cake and eat it too.

Last thought:
Give figment his own disney plus series and update the damn ride.

The latest original attraction from Disney that was not tied to IP was Mystic Manor. Enough said...while I might not have ridden it in person, it's the primary reason Hong Kong is on many bucket lists. Original characters and an amazing original score.

IP appeals to fans of a franchise while alienating guests who have little or no exposure to it. Original creations invite "everyone" to ride and decide for themselves whether it gains a place in their hearts. I would LOVE to see original concepts return no matter how much allegiance I have to certain IPs.

Ok this has been one I have thought about for a while. There are 2 options, one, movies do horribly and theme parks will gradually move to non IP, which is great for us theme park fans, but regular people and the theme park itself will suffer, because most people go to theme parks to enter the worlds of the movie. I mean, just look at harry potter! (sorry dueling dragons fans) I can see how non-ip rides can be good, I just dont think people want to visit a land that they don't know, or visit a land with characters they know and love and get to visit a world they have only seen in dreams. For example, compare alton towers, chock full of non ip lands and attractions. Everyone who has visited alton has loved it. but compare it to universal or disney. they like ip because of the story and connection to them (heck even a percy jackson land would be uber popular.) we grade things on their thrill or excitement level, but other people got to the parks because of the ip and then grade the rides. the second,(and probably more likely option, sorry) is that we are in a dry spell right now and will resume with some of the best and most technologically advanced attractions in the world (due to comp from epic) and high world class lands and stories connected with them. maybe someday not so far into the future, instead of reading a book or watching a movie to go into a world, you go to a theme park.

No Harry Potter eh? Sounds like an opportunity for Discworld. I can dream can’t I?

I think the Waterworld show at Hollywood proves a great experience isn’t made by a great IP.

I think non-IP lands and attractions are important to allow a park to stay evergreen in the face of changing tastes and societal norms, but ultimately, I think modern theme parks need known IP in order to draw enough guests and to be truly successful. Universal is taking a big risk putting their non-IP land front and center at Epic Universe, and forcing guests to walk through Celestial Park to reach the 4 IP-themed portals.

To be fair, celestial park is a very pretty place with rather loose theming, similar to how disneyland has main street, not tied to an ip but very important and iconic. it will just be a pretty place to walk through on the way to the actual lands. if it had in your face lore that's not just pretty park owned by higher beings with portals, and something with a story as heavy as the other ip in the park, we would probably have a problem. it only has 2 rides, and none of them have a real story that follows an ark.

@Russell
I think the bigger risk for Universal with Epic is that visitors don't see Celestial Park as a 'land' at all, but simply as a transit and dining area. The fact that it will only have 2 attractions will reinforce this view. As such I don't think Celestial Park as such is a risk because it will keep that sense of 'otherness' going between portals but guests who have been promised 5 lands, and who haven't read up on what they contain (i.e. most visitors) may feel a little disappointed, regardless of how stella those 4 remaining lands are.

@David Brown
“… regardless of how stella those 4 remaining lands are.”

I see what you did there :)

An original ride can be the basis for a successful IP as occurred with Pirates of the Caribbean. The failure of Haunted Mansion was more likely awful screen plays than a lack of demand. A quality Country Bears movie could easily do as well, or better, than the Paddington franchise.

There are a lot of theme parks out there that make limited if any use of outside IP and still provide a fantastic experience, so no, theme parks don't need franchises to survive. However, in order to create a multi-day theme park resort that attracts people from a long distance away and encourages them to spend several days on the property, something beyond simple thrill rides and basic concepts of a theme is required. That is why Disney and Universal lean so heavily on IP...they're going after a broader audience that includes a sizable portion of people who are visiting for the properties first and the thrills second. IP is the easy way to get people into the gate, and it's why the big players get over twice the visitation of even the most notable regional theme parks. Does that IP need to come in the form of a film franchise or streaming series? No, but when the parks are run by companies in that business it's the most natural fit.

hey, i know this is off topic but im actually new to this community, is there any advice any of you can give me, perhaps some lingo?

I think IP will ALWAYS have a place in theme parks.

Honestly, Universal's original park was built on the foundation of "movies" & recognizable properties. Jaws, ET, Back To The Future, King Kong, A-Team, Backdraft, American Tale...

There's a built in audience there, BUT...there's also the merch...with IP branding merchandise can go far beyond originals. In fact, originals must endure the test of time before really capitalizing on merch (Haunted mansion, pirates)

There will highs & lows...but again looking at Universal...in an odd way, they were always set up to "constantly change IP's". so there is a blueprint on how to proceed when something falls out of favor with the public.

@epicuniversefan. Welcome to Theme Park Insider!! Its a great community with cool people!

In terms of the lingo, you'll definitely pick it up along the way, haha. IP (Intellectual Property)

I hate to say, but most of those Universal IPs (Jaws, ET, Back To The Future, King Kong, A-Team, Backdraft, American Tale...) are no longer culturally relevant, making the Universal Parks feel outdated. I remember non-theme park fan relatives visiting USF and telling me they thought it was weird that there were Mummy, ET, and Men in Black attractions.

@DangerGoat - And I think that's the double-edged sword of utilizing IP in theme parks. The more engrained in the public consciousness an IP is, the more expensive and more difficult it is to employ in a theme park setting (Harry Potter, Star Wars, Marvel, and DC). Parks are essentially paying those licensing fees (or in the case of Disney, paying to fully own the IPs) to access a wider audience and have built in fans for their products. While rides like RotR, Hagrids, and Spiderman are all great theme park attractions, it's their IPs that draw audiences beyond the thrill seekers to turn their parks into must-see destination attractions. IP gives theme parks an appeal they would not otherwise have if they were utilizing in-house or generic themes. Think about it, if not for movies and other marketing endeavors, PotC and HM probably wouldn't be nearly as popular and iconic as they are now.

However, for as much as IP can be a blessing in drawing a far larger audience than a generically-themed theme park attraction, using an IP that goes stale can quickly go south and be difficult to maintain that wider audience. It's a careful calculus that needs to be performed to strike that balance where the amount being paid to license and maintain an IPs presence in a theme park boosts that park's profile to draw enough additional interest over a generic-themed area/attraction.

There's also been a shift from "riding the movies" that Universal used to revolutionize the utilization of IP in theme parks to what we see now where we're fully immersed in the worlds of our favorite movies, games, and literature. The level of immersion that's expected now cannot just be changed out when an IP is no longer the flavor of the month, so when a park commits to an IP, they are doing so expecting it to be operating for 20 years or more.

@DangerGoat...That was my point. The majority of Universals attractions, even the original ones, were based on IPs that were popular at the time.

When they stopped being culturally relevant (AmericanTale, Backdraft, etc.) They were replaced / updated with current IPs. Now something like Jaws, King King, & Back to the Future have a storied connection (and fanbase) to Hollywood.

But we've seen Universal constantly cycle through franchises & eras, so it currently represents IPs that have something present recognizability.

@Jay R. Really? I mean, there's a Jason Bourne stunt show that (while admittedly cool) has no pop culture relevance in 2025. And that's a newer attraction!

I will say that at least Epic Universe (other than the How to Train Your Dragon land) focuses on IPs with a more significant cultural impact.