Fast & Furious: Hollywood Drift coaster (USF) - Opening 2027

[devinp267]

How would anyone new know this? If you're going to have a park with that many layers, that conceptually complicated, just explain it for heaven's sake. Why so secretive?


It's not "that kind of park" unless they do something to convey it. That's my point. You can't "remember" something you've never learned because you are a new customer.


Again, "never presented" is all about history, past familiarity of the park. Set that aside. They are attracting new customers from all over the world, every day, even more now with Epic. It needs to work now, and present something now that makes sense for new customers with no knowledge.

They don't need to spend tens or hundreds of millions of dollars, just spend a frickin' million dollars on sprinkling around a few cues.

Anyway, we disagree, I get it.

No one new would be having this conversation lol. Last thing if on their mind at all. I assure you this is a theme park community topic only

 

[Brian G.]

In all seriousness, it might make more sense to rename the "New York" area to either the "New York Backlot" or "Metro Backlot." That would cover all of the incongruities!

Wouldn’t hurt to rename/rezone a few spots.

 

[DrStarlander]

No one new would be having this conversation lol. Last thing if on their mind at all. I assure you this is a theme park community topic only

They don't have to have a conversation. Cognitive dissonance doesn't require that.

 

[SpatulaShack]

Good lord. The name is obnoxiously stupid for countless reasons, as 9 pages of discourse have pretty clearly pointed out already so at this point all I can offer is a possible "solution" that isn't really a solution so much as a compromise.

Maybe they can just rezone that far corner of New York into its own sub-area / land similar to what they did with Skull Island in what was essentially Jurassic Park in 2016. It would still be ridiculous since Hollywood still exists as it's own land across the park but at least it wouldn't be a step backwards in placemaking and cohesion. Keep most of the land "New York" and make the back area a new version of "Production Central" which left the map when Minions arrived.

 

[Lucky Planet]

Good lord. The name is obnoxiously stupid for countless reasons, as 9 pages of discourse have pretty clearly pointed out already so at this point all I can offer is a possible "solution" that isn't really a solution so much as a compromise.

Maybe they can just rezone that far corner of New York into its own sub-area / land similar to what they did with Skull Island in what was essentially Jurassic Park in 2016. It would still be ridiculous since Hollywood still exists as it's own land across the park but at least it wouldn't be a step backwards in placemaking and cohesion. Keep most of the land "New York" and make the back area a new version of "Production Central" which left the map when Minions arrived.

I know, call the area "familia street " or "calle family"

 

[Frogki]

I think I have a sort of different take on the discourse regarding the GP paying the bills and super fans being... Well, unimportant.

I think the people who create these places are, or should be, always looking to the guest perspective. And that means thinking from the POV of someone who has been to the parks a million times and knows about the Chicago manhole in the ostensibly New York section. (I now understand why the song Chicago plays in this section of the park!)

It also means thinking from the POV of the random tourist who has no inkling of any of the IPs and paid a lot of money to go somewhere fun for their vacation. And it means everything in between.

And ultimately I do think there is a level of wanting to have your cake and eat it too in the discourse occuring here. I can recognize the idea behind the Studios theme and say that it's not good enough from an artistic standpoint to hand waive away inconsistencies just because of that.
While this is a business and it is absolutely beholden to the almighty dollar, at the end of the day why do any of the big thematic stuff if it's just about making people go fast? As someone else pointed out, Six Flags can do that and it's a lot cheaper to go there. There is a level of art that can and should be expected from these places.

Someone made a comment about how hyper realism can actually hinder immersion and I agree with that philosophy, because at the end of the day people attending theme parks are making a choice to go to these attractions, and they choose to suspend their disbelief because they want to enjoy themselves.

With all that said - the name is certainly a choice. I don't think there will necessarily be issues on the level of "What do you mean Hogwarts isn't at Hollywood Studios?!" But I do believe it's an odd choice for this specific ride. But, clones abound throughout the parks - and since this won't be an exact clone, I think it will be super fun! I also think Studio Drift would have been a much more fun way to differentiate this and tie it a nice bow of thematic integrity for the Florida park. But, c'est la vie. The name will work and no one will care once the ride opens, and it sounds like it will be a very fun coaster.

 

[GAcoaster]

WESH did a story with some great video of the site today, and @Alicia was on (with her cat making a cameo too!):

 

[KFCbowlcombo]

I lurk more often than post here. But I just have to say I think the complaints about the name are incredibly overblown. The quality of this ride will likely overshadow any gaps in thematic continuity. Rip Ride Rockit was literally just a music themed roller coaster. If there wasn't a stage next to it, it also would have been severely out of place and the stage really was the only thing creating any semblence of a tangible theme. We're supposed to suspend belief at theme parks. Suspend your belief that the locaton is truly New York and poof, issue resolved.

 

[FatalBubbles]

I'm gonna be honest - I don't think your average generic theme park tourist cares about this stuff.

They care about "big coaster go fast"

Could not agree more. It's hard to see this when you're deep into something like the forum here is, not saying that's bad by the way.

 

[Brian G.]

I think we also need to remember that, even as fans, we still don’t all want the same things out of the parks.

A good comparison is this classic optical illusion.



Same image, same information, but people will have differing reads. Nobody’s wrong, they’re just approaching it from their own angle.

And that gap gets even wider once you factor in the general public. Most guests aren’t thinking about park philosophy or thematic integrity. They’re just reacting to what’s in front of them. What may matter to a longtime fan might just register as “that coaster over there” to someone visiting once every few years.

Everyone’s looking at the same park, but they’re not seeing the same thing.

Same image. Different read.

 

[TheCodeMan95]

And I say this as someone who typically thinks the general public's perspective has a negative impact on park decisions for my personal taste lol.

I think we also need to remember that, even as fans, we still don’t all want the same things out of the parks.

Yeah - if it were up to me we'd have a full Animal Crossing Land and Springfield would be Quahog or South Park, lol

 

[Mad Dog]

This is probably going to be a super popular attraction that marketing will easily milk for a good two years until the Supercharged
building conversion comes on line. Those spinning cars alone will be a visual stimulus to the general public. I could see this becoming as
GP popular, or even more GP popular, than Velocicoaster. Huge kinetic energy, I expect.....This will attract even the non coaster
fans like Hagrids does.

 

[DrStarlander]

And that gap gets even wider once you factor in the general public. Most guests aren’t thinking about park philosophy or thematic integrity. They’re just reacting to what’s in front of them. What may matter to a longtime fan might just register as “that coaster over there” to someone visiting once every few years.

Generally, I agree with your sentiment. But what I see mentioned often is this idea that something needs to be consciously noticed or registered or discussed to have an impact.

The designed environment influences people -- literally, influences them physiologically like heart-rate, but also psychologically and emotionally -- even if they consciously don't know it's happening or why. There is a scientific discipline and literature around this.

Non-designers, non-fans, regular people, are influenced by whether things feel good and right or when they feel bad and wrong, when things are clear and meaningful or unclear and confusing, comfortable and relaxing or uncomfortable and threatening. And it can come down to the paint color, or lighting temperature, or textures, or background sounds or font choices or countless other design-choice details.

And that's why houses, stores, restaurants, hotels, parks, offices, and everything else in the designed world are designed by designers, with intention -- for better or worse. If this stuff only mattered to a small group of super-sensitive people, the designed world wouldn't be professionally designed. Why bother?

So when people claim that because people don't notice, don't discuss the design, it doesn't matter, it's silly. A portrayal of people as these zombie cave-people grunting enthusiasm about a roller coaster as if they are not also influenced by everything else around them, ridiculous.

 

[Brian G.]

Generally, I agree with your sentiment. But what I see mentioned often is this idea that something needs to be consciously noticed or registered or discussed to have an impact.

The designed environment influences people -- literally, influences them physiologically like heart-rate, but also psychologically and emotionally -- even if they consciously don't know it's happening or why. There is a scientific discipline and literature around this.

Non-designers, non-fans, regular people, are influenced by whether things feel good and right or when they feel bad and wrong, when things are clear and meaningful or unclear and confusing, comfortable and relaxing or uncomfortable and threatening. And it can come down to the paint color, or lighting temperature, or textures, or background sounds or font choices or countless other design-choice details.

And that's why houses, stores, restaurants, hotels, parks, offices, and everything else in the designed world are designed by designers, with intention -- for better or worse. If this stuff only mattered to a small group of super-sensitive people, the designed world wouldn't be professionally designed. Why bother?

So when people claim that because people don't notice, don't discuss the design, it doesn't matter, it's silly. A portrayal of people as these zombie cave-people grunting enthusiasm about a roller coaster as if they are not also influenced by everything else around them, ridiculous.

A theme park land or attraction can absolutely influence how someone feels, but they don't need the specific story or framework the designer had in mind, either. Most guests also aren’t dumb or oblivious; they’re just reacting at a basic level: Is it fun?

A street can feel fine without the guest understanding why it’s laid out that way or what historical logic explains it. They’re not actively building a narrative about park philosophy or seeking deeper meaning. They don’t need that layer for it to succeed.

So when I say the GP doesn’t notice, I’m not saying design doesn’t matter or that they are some "zombie cave-people" - I’m saying it matters in a simpler way.

And again, all of this really stems from an attraction name, one that a majority of people have already said (and agreed) could be better.

Since 1990, when USF leaned more into the movie-making side of things, guests have entered Central Park from Hollywood with New York sitting right across the lagoon. Has that ever affected anyone’s enjoyment of the park?

Or more recently: Jurassic World VelociCoaster sits in Jurassic Park. Two different franchise timelines, different casts, different aesthetics. There was some pushback on the name, too, and yet none of that stopped it from being a massive guest favorite or from winning awards.

Even now, with the chance to update JPRA to match Jurassic World and “fix” the inconsistency, most fans actively don’t want that. They want it to stay Jurassic Park despite the mixed timelines.

That kind of says it all. Guests can enjoy something, even love it, without needing every layer to line up perfectly. Design still matters, it just doesn’t always matter in the same way or at the same depth for everyone.

 

[Disneyhead]

What if the facade is a NYC movie theater with a marquee with "Fast and Furious: Hollywood Drift" as the film showing at that theater. As soon as you walk through the false facade you encounter production equipment and themeing implying you have entered the making of the film.

 

[Lucky Planet]

my biggest question is the pre show and queue videos and storyline. the name Hollywood Drift could be easily explained a dozen ways,

(could be as simple as a code name or the name of something within the story, or the name of the vehicles themselves or something,

it's just so easy to NAME something as Hollywood Drift, just a nickname )


but how much story and set up will the queue have?

 

[Jwhee]

What if the facade is a NYC movie theater with a marquee with "Fast and Furious: Hollywood Drift" as the film showing at that theater. As soon as you walk through the false facade you encounter production equipment and themeing implying you have entered the making of the film.

This would make too much sense to ever happen

 

[GAcoaster]

What if the facade is a NYC movie theater with a marquee with "Fast and Furious: Hollywood Drift" as the film showing at that theater. As soon as you walk through the false facade you encounter production equipment and themeing implying you have entered the making of the film.

So you could "ride the movie"?