Leaderboard

"Merlin still about originality" With respect, this couldnt be further from Merlin's real intentions and procedures. Sorry for the looong post! Merlin started off buying already-successful attractions and turning them into formualted 'IPs' (The Dungeons brand, the Sea Life brand, the 'Eye' brand, etc) so that they could be cheaply copied all over the world. So it makes sense that now they are trying to seek other brands too. They now stipulate dark rides have IPs and that they grow their "IP portfolio" every year. Merlin – the parent company, not their parks (much to Merlin's annoyance) – were never about originality or entertainment. Nick Varney has never stopped talking about brands and IPs in this way since Merlin began. So not the death of originality, but we've already a huge decline in creativity, entertainment and value for money. In his own words, "IPs are the future of theme parks", and if you don't think so, you're wrong, he says. Therefore, so long as this is belived, I do see the death of (most) originality at Merlin owned parks. When you licence an IP, you are bound to design only within the parameters given by those who own the IP. It's a fundamentally different process to creating an attraction for the sake of entertainment business. You're no longer creating business out of how good your entertainment offering is. Instead you're making a deal – I'll use your already successful 'brand' to guarantee my own success regardless of what I make, while I pay you money for it. So the entertainment is completely secondary, and that's what the entertainment industry is understandably irked by. It's dark rides that suffer the most from this model, the (completely wrong) assumption that any dark ride 'WILL fail' if it doesn't have an IP, based completely on assumption by people who have no experience with entertaining people whatsoever. We already have a public who are more easily beguiled by massive global marketing, which isn't actually interested in entertaining people at all. Whenever parks appear in conversation with people I chat to, it's an expectation that theme parks are just based off movies and TV shows, that they're just an extension of 'franchises'. This wasn't the case when I was young and the families I used to visit parks with. There are always exceptions, but honestly I don't like the expectation that kids should just respond to the biggest brands they see on TV, rather than be surprised and imaginative. Also, there's no identity if a park like Chessington becomes a patchwork of fad IPs and declined (once fantastic) old rides. It just becomes a competition of whose brands are bigger, which is why Legoland Windsor wins, despite being currently the worst value family park in the UK. I'm only grateful that so far it's turned out alright, with IPs that suit. Gruffalo is charming for a British family park, not like the other IPs that were considered for it... This is the work of the people having to deal with the stipulation to use IPs, in finding the least-worst option, or designing the most creative solution around the limitations. Cbeebies Land is the cheapest, nastiest, falling-apart IP refurb I have ever known in a UK park. But even then, the designers tried their best with what they got. Personally I like the look of the new Hocus Pocus plans so far. It seems like this IP is less restricting to design than usual, so really it could be any walkaround but just has the Gruffalo name and characters slapped on top. But again, we almost got a different IP refurb this year, which thankfully was persuaded against. Tiger Rock had a cool station overlay and new drop, but the rest was the last thing the ride needed. It had been in a shocking state for years, but no money was allowed to be granted until the "zoo brand" quota could be ticked. This isn't how you properly develop a great zoo or a great park. And if not zoo theme, then it must have an IP! Nothing else will get approved. Scorpion Express was done with a tiny budget and is not nearly as entertaining as the original ride. A tarmac queue, dead scorpions, a standard coaster on flat ground, a cool theme but much less of it than before. The Swarm is drab and a very stingy realisation of what could have been a great area. I don't think any one is actually that entertained by the theme, but enthusiasts like it because it had that enthusiast appeal, so fair enough to them. The ambulance on its nose is the best moment, something memorable and not just a scrap vehicle parked on a pavement with some cheap water effects. Wicker Man was great, very entertaining, surprising and made for a great themed coaster. Fantastic! Everyone loves it and the public really get into it with the build-up to the ride. A great turn for the better. But then Merlin immediately hand the park "Alton Towers Dungeons" the next year.

I feel like I can reply to this now (because I'm going to talk about the much loved Disney brand here as it seems oddly relevant). The reason I am okay with IP's is because in general, Merlin don't actually do a bad job with this. Gruffalo, Peppa Pig World at Garda and Heide, Cbeebies land, How to train your dragon to name but a few are high quality rides/areas and IMO are good*. I'm going to couple that with the fact that Merlin are still very much about originality. Look at The Wicker Man or The Swarm and I'll thrown in the recent refurbishments of Runaway Train into Scorpion Express and Dragon Falls into Tiger Rock as examples of where Merlin actually on the whole get things pretty right when it comes to rides and attractions. *Thorpe is the exception, here is an example of absolute disaster but then the original attractions like Derren Brown also get this disastrously wrong. Now the reason I bring up Disney is because the CEO recently came in for a bit of stick for a certain quote. Now Disney fans got themselves into a right rut about the apparent Expedition Everest put down implied here for Bob Iger and I got a bit annoyed too. The idea that Toy Story Land or Frozen Ever After has the same integrity, narrative strength and artistry as a ride as thought out and cared for as Everest is almost insulting. But here's the thing, I understand the perspective. What I dislike about modern Disney is that the days of Phantom Manor or Mystic Manor seem to be over. IP's are all we get. So far, Merlin aren't doing this and seem to be adding IP's where its relevant or where an improvement can be seen. TLDR, IP's shouldn't be feared or seen as death of originality in theme parks.

I don’t mean to be harsh in my negative posts most of the time, and I am it’s because I think they could do better rather than deliberately grudge them. The biggest concerns I see are of newer attractions having the bare minimum of what seems acceptable and older stuff looking delipidated and falling apart. Whilst there are actually people who care in the departments, they usually have to travel the earth and sea for higher to grant the most basic upkeep. Too often little things from quirky theming to additional features are removed but not replaced,because they are seen as inessential and unimportant to most. I have noticed many of these chiseled away from all the park’s in recent years, from the crypt and chandeliers in Vampire, queueline features in Dragon and the tunnel on (the now likely deceased) Loggers. Don’t get me wrong, I love the Gruffalo ride and it’s probably one of my favourite attractions at the park. However I sometimes look at it and think, they could’ve done even more, from more scenery in places, less cardboard walls and maybe a couple. More animatronic items. An actual moving Gruffalo would have been one hell of a show-stopper if they could’ve done that. I understand various limitations may have prevented that, but oh well. Wickerman (inspite of flaws some say) is proof when things are done properly, the park’s can create great, impressive and memorable attractions. It’s one of the few attractions created Merlin that would not look out of place at somewhere like Efteling or Europa. It can be done again, but they need think more outside the box instead of using the same few rules over again.

Think you're getting a very skew impression of enthusiasts online from a relatively small representation, or online exaggerations. Enthusiasts on the whole don't hate theme parks, unless they're very confused and getting themselves wound up. It's because these parks could be fantastic today and so much more than the way Merlin develop/run them. In the wider picture, I think it's clear that a park made up of a patchwork of IPs and underwhelming attractions will make for a very commercial feeling, mediocre day out. Merlin do it because they don't care about parks long term or even mid term. They just want whatever cheapest option can be used to boost sales that year. If guests respond better to cheap attractions cloaked by a well-known IP slapped on top, then that only makes a case for the decline of the theme park industry. Been shown over and over again that there's much greater value in originality for parks and guests in the long term. The Merlin parks are fast becoming quite esoteric in terms of actual entertainment, relying on growing a 'Merlin brand' following with the beguiled public, rather than simply entertaining guests and giving them a good experience. Europa's IPs you mention are either very self-contained areas (Arthur) that actually live up to the IP, or are very minor attractions. They don't make up sizeable parts of the park or replace classic attractions with IPs at every opportunity. Also I think in the bigger picture, enthusiasts were glad to see IL Bubbleworks go and had actually been wanting a replacement for years. It was appauling that IL Bubbleworks ever happened to Prof Burp's in the first place. And that thank god Gruffalo was a good ride in the end, if dull for what a family dark ride could be. Room On The Broom will probably be similar.

anything called chandler