That's my point - all Columbia's got at the moment is family comedies and Oscar bait. Unless they can get Spielberg over to do Jurassic Park, they're in for a dry spell.
Well, did Ted Turner also acquire TriStar Pictures when he bought Columbia? If so, I could see Hook, Look Who's Talking, Johnny Mnemoric, and especially Jumanji getting the theme park treatment.

Also, if the Gottlieb content also became Turner IPs, then Q*Bert is a potential candidate from that department. Then again, he's their only candidate, but I digress.

I know this revolves around a lot of "ifs", but it could work in their favor here.
 
It doesn’t help that Geekhis had Disney swipe Ghostbusters from Columbia. In the coming years the competition need to be given hit movies too!

I’m still adamant that a haunted house heavily inspired by The Shining would be a good addition for the Warner Bros theme park.

And while neither Columbia nor Warner Bros are nowhere near as experienced in ‘imagineering’ as Disney it’d probably be a good idea to build rides that aren’t directly based on IP.
 
That's my point - all Columbia's got at the moment is family comedies and Oscar bait. Unless they can get Spielberg over to do Jurassic Park, they're in for a dry spell.
Jurassic Park was already spoiled (and later hinted) to be a Disney-MGM production, soooo........ :)

Remind me how 20th Century Fox Triad is doing? Columbia might be able to license Planet of the Apes, Alien and Predator for the right price.
Triad should be doing fine. In fact, I believe they're probably the main player behind the upcoming three-way (or four-way) IP war between Universal, WB, Columbia, and Disney since they have a lot of bankable IPs for theme park attractions like those listed, as well as Star Trek.

In my personal opinion, I think Columbia should get Planet of the Apes (to complement their latest post-apoc franchise) , Universal should get Alien, and WB should get Predator (with the latter two being interchangeable) but that's just me.

And while neither Columbia nor Warner Bros are nowhere near as experienced in ‘imagineering’ as Disney it’d probably be a good idea to build rides that aren’t directly based on IP.
And hey, if successful they can make movies based off them in return! They are IPs in hindsight!
I think it's inevitable that they will have to come up with new original rides (and they have, considering Warner Bros. has Six Flags properties and Columbia does have original attractions), but the IPs are where it's at for the three rival companies (at least IMO).
 
Barren Grove Studio" seems pretty fitting but I wouldn't blame some critic to coin some ridiculously funny/offensive term against Ted Turner just like how Spielberg is called a "theme park whore" ITTL.
I was thinking about something more neutral or even positive 😅

Because Peach Grove Studios is honestly a bit of a mouthful.

I can see someone excitingly scream that they're going to Disney World or Universal Studios, but Peach Grove Studios? A bit too long for that.

And calling it PGS will only add confusion since it's phoneticly similar to PBS.
 
I was thinking about something more neutral or even positive 😅

Because Peach Grove Studios is honestly a bit of a mouthful.
Well since "The Grove" in LA was opened a decade after PGS ITTL, I can see a lot of Atlantans call it as such for their local theme park.

Maybe that could be how they'd walk around the lack of IPs. By getting the likes of Mister Rogers and The Magic School Bus on board.
I wouldn't be opposed to both franchises being part of PGS. They might need more kiddie rides anyways.
 
Last edited:
Filming the movie using water tanks instead of the ocean would save the production a whole lot of time and money. Especially since they wouldn’t need to rebuild the set after a hurricane sinks it like in OTL.
Considering the scale of the film and the sets I don't think that water tanks would work.
But yeah Columbia Peach Grove Studio, we need a good nickname for this,
Ted Turner was angling to have the region called Peachwood, but it seems everyone else wants to call it Y'allywood.
If so, I could see Hook, Look Who's Talking, Johnny Mnemoric, and especially Jumanji getting the theme park treatment.
No its part of Time-Atlantic (long story how it happened).
Not only that but MGM has Hook ITTL. While I could see Columbia getting both Jumanji and Johnny Mnemonic as films and adding Jumanji to their park I can't see how Johnny Mnemonic would work as a park theme.
I’m still adamant that a haunted house heavily inspired by The Shining would be a good addition for the Warner Bros theme park.
Assuming Stephen King lets them, it was his IP first.
 
Maybe that could be how they'd walk around the lack of IPs. By getting the likes of Mister Rogers and The Magic School Bus on board.
I can definitely see a Magic School Bus ride being something like their version of the Body Wars ride at EPCOT.
Considering the scale of the film and the sets I don't think that water tanks would work.

Not only that but MGM has Hook ITTL. While I could see Columbia getting both Jumanji and Johnny Mnemonic as films and adding Jumanji to their park I can't see how Johnny Mnemonic would work as a park theme.

Assuming Stephen King lets them, it was his IP first.

At least they should build the sets in an area of ocean not prone to hurricanes. Which was my point. Rebuilding the set after it sank cost time and money.

Peach Grove having a Jumanji-themed land just makes sense. Plus it'd allow them to include a jungle land without looking like they were copying Disney and Adventureland. Especially if they include a giant Panther statue/rock like in OTL's Welcome to the Jungle. Ironically indirectly copying OTL Disney.

Which was why I suggested that it'd be heavily based on The Shining. If King says no they can just leave it as obvious inspiration rather than the direct source material. And it'd save them having to figure out how to include the naked zombie woman into a ride built in a family-friendly theme park.
 
Hurricanes are pretty common in Hawaii - a different one trashed Jurassic Park just two years before Waterworld. So either we need ASBs to protect the set for two straight years, or the crew takes Spielberg's advice and films inland.
 
Hurricanes are pretty common in Hawaii - a different one trashed Jurassic Park just two years before Waterworld. So either we need ASBs to protect the set for two straight years, or the crew takes Spielberg's advice and films inland.
How common is common? How many hurricanes per season make landfall on Hawai'i? When either film was film how many hurricanes made landfall for those years specifically?
 
Here's a list. Lemme put it this way: Hurricane Iniki wasn't even the only storm that month.
I've seen that list and it says in total 67 tropical cyclones have affected Hawai'i since 1949. This list shows 84 storms for just 1950-1974. I think Hawai'i's doing okay. I also noticed that that same year had only three storms total, so September was just a bad month OTL. Also note the following from the same article:
Hawaii lies in the central Pacific, where about four or five tropical cyclones appear each year, although as many as fifteen have occurred, such as in the 2015 season; rarely do these storms actually affect Hawaii.
 
I've seen that list and it says in total 67 tropical cyclones have affected Hawai'i since 1949. This list shows 84 storms for just 1950-1974. I think Hawai'i's doing okay. I also noticed that that same year had only three storms total, so September was just a bad month OTL. Also note the following from the same article:
Seeing as Hollywood almost always has the misfortune of filming when Hawaii's not okay, it's probably best to reconsider.

Also note they only record land-based damage. A storm's usually nastier out at sea... which in this case, is where the set is.
 
Also note they only record land-based damage. A storm's usually nastier out at sea... which is where the set is.
The set is off shore not in the middle of the sea. By your logic it sounds like they wouldn't count any ships damaged in a bay (which is most likely where the set would be.
Seeing as Hollywood almost always has the misfortune of filming when Hawaii's not okay, it's probably best to reconsider.
I've only heard of this happening twice so far, could you provide some other examples. Also is it is a regular thing I imagine it's just bad timing that the best time to film anything is in the summer when most of the storms happen.
 
The set is off shore not in the middle of the sea. By your logic it sounds like they wouldn't count any ships damaged in a bay (which is most likely where the set would be.

I've only heard of this happening twice so far, could you provide some other examples. Also is it is a regular thing I imagine it's just bad timing that the best time to film anything is in the summer when most of the storms happen.
Green water being "safer" than blue water is a relative term. If a mere monsoon is enough to rip a 50+ metre barge from its moorings and plonk it on a seawall, then even the tailings of a hurricane can most likely wreck a film set. Open ocean means there wouldn't even be a set to come back to!

2018, for one - can't be bothered to find any others at this time of night. I'll repeat, it's probably okay to film on Hawaii, it's filming off the coast of Hawaii that's the problem; Spielberg already told them it'd be a bad idea. Rent a large pool, film there, green screen the rest, the end.
 
Top