The Bourne Stuntacular - General Discussion

[Amity6]

Right, so it begs the question -- what's different?

1) More immediately recognizable and/or appealing IP - I'd wager more people know what Terminator is versus Bourne, in part because it has several iconic images between the "Terminator skeleton," the T-1000, and Arnold; Bourne does not have an iconic image that immediately grabs the average guest or connects them to the IP, in part because they can't use Matt Damon's likeness
2) Prominence in resort marketing - Terminator frequently made flashy appearances in Universal print and filmed media (again, with iconic images; Bourne lacks these); this was in part because it was a headlining addition in the mid 1990s
3) Easier for guests to plan/find showtimes - As I recall, Terminator more or less ran continuously for, say, the first decade of its run? As popularity waned, they pivoted to frequent showtimes, which were handily featured on park maps (as we've just seen)
4) Different park flow/attraction mix - Pre-Diagon, guests moved throughout the park differently. Back to the Future used to be a weenie, and for a time, Men in Black was the biggest/newest ride. All of these factors pulled guests to the right, where they were more likely to encounter the (IMO) more prominent and eyecatching attraction signage. There was also a greater emphasis on shows over rides during Terminator 2's peak years.

T2 was much better

 

[Parkscope Joe]

I think a few targeted tweaks would go a long way. Updating the presentation and giving it a new name would be a strong start.

The entrance doesn’t say much, I think they could rework it to stand out and say “it’s an attraction”. Horror Make Up entrance looks like a show.

 

[TheCodeMan95]

The entrance doesn’t say much, I think they could rework it to stand out and say “it’s an attraction”. Horror Make Up entrance looks like a show.

This is a big reason I think. The entrance to Bourne looks like an entrance for restrooms

 

[OrlLover]

Personally I think it’s the IP.

I don’t think people care enough to go out and watch this show even though it’s get high praise.

If your main demographic is not invested then that’s a recipe for a disaster.

 

[UniversalRBLX]

I think a grandeur entry sign would do wonders, a traditional art deco marquee would be great.

I'd also get rid of the unnecessarily long preshow. Trim it down to a 1-2 minute best of Jason Bourne reel and safety info. The preshow doesn't start until the designated showtime, and the show doesn't start until~15 minutes after the posted showtime?

 

[Skold]

I love this show but, man, that pre-show with those video screens floating around behind that woman is just brutal.

 

[Parkscope Joe]

Personally I think it’s the IP.

I don’t think people care enough to go out and watch this show even though it’s get high praise.

If your main demographic is not invested then that’s a recipe for a disaster.

I dunno if I agree, there's plenty of attractions with lackluster IP that draw guests. See: WaterWorld, Tron, etc.

 

[Legacy]

I dunno if I agree, there's plenty of attractions with lackluster IP that draw guests. See: WaterWorld, Tron, etc.

I like this point, because your examples actually highlight some of the issues. Tron is a large, brightly lit/colored coaster that serves a second weenie in Tomorrowland. WaterWorld is a loud, open-air stunt show you can hear outside its venue. In both of those, have a sense of exactly what they are without getting in line. They trigger curiosity and interest despite their IPs.

Bourne looks like nothing. It can only rely on its signage and the IP to actually draw attention to it. T2:3D was more engaging IP with a better sign. Honestly, Bourne could probably do with a large screen over the entrance with a splash video of what the attraction is.