New overhead helicopter shots of Wizarding World theme park, Hogsmeade store fronts emerge

From above, Hogwarts looks tiny and you can really see how little they actually built. I dont really like these new pictures. One thing I dont understand is why Hogsmead has to have snow, they do not have snow all year long in the books do they...

OK. Here we go. I wanna say this before everyone else starts posting similar comments to the one above. The key thing to keep in mind here is that while its cool to see pictures like these, THEME PARKS ARENT MADE TO BE EXPERIENCED FROM A HELICOPTERS POINT OF VIEW! When you look at aerial images, you of course will see the backstage areas and the inherent inauthentic nature of the park; its not a real castle and therefore cant be expected to be built as one. What every (good) theme park does, really, is create an elaborate, 3D show for you, the guest. They work it out so that everything LOOKS real, authentic, and believable even when in reality it of course isnt. Haunted Mansion at Disneyland/World is a good example--the "mansion" itself is practically empty, and the ride takes place in a giant warehouse-like building behind it, hidden by trees. But inside the park, youd never know. So now lets discuss the Wizarding World. To say Hogwarts looks "tiny"--well first of all, this was from a helicopter, so of course it does, but yes, it is approximately 1/7 the scale that it would be if it were an actual castle. But to build it full size would be utterly impossible logistically and financially. Universal has spent HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS of dollars on this, and there is complete consensus that it is one of the most detail-oriented, finely completed theme park projects ever. Yes, they did not build every single tower in Hogwarts, but what they did was evoke a perfect image of what the castle should be and build an entire scaled down replica of it. And from the ground, it looks huge. They know how to play tricks with perspective to make things appear taller (or shorter) than they are. And there is a gigantic gray building behind Hogwarts to hold the ride, but when the entire project is finished, it will be all but invisible (at least from the Wizarding World) thanks to trees and other objects.

(continued) The construction of Hogwarts is nothing short of astounding. You wouldnt know it from aerial images obviously, but over one of the big doorways on the castle they built, they have hand-carved the Hogwarts seal and the crests of the four houses around it. And this is over a gateway that is barely visible even from the ground!! Thats one example of detail that proves the unbelievable amount of dedication and meticulousness being put into this project. And in regards to Hogsmeade, yes of course it does not snow year-round anywhere, but they are trying to best represent the spirit and feel of the books and movies, and in the movies (which is the primary visual reference they are using for the park), Hogsmeade is most prominently featured during wintertime. And it stands as a further testament to their ingenuity in making you believe a huge storm just dumped snow on the (fake) village even though youre in the middle of Florida. I have almost never seen an entire project be executed in this much detail and devotion to a source material, and to complain that they didnt make a full-scale replica of the castle insults the designers and builders of this project, most of whom are the best in their work. This is practically an unprecedented achievement in theme park design, and Im thrilled Universal took the time, and spent the money, to get it right.

Im not saying they didnt do this right. It will look AMAZING from the ground. Its just when you look at it from the sky it looks tiny.

Well, yeah, for two reasons: youre much higher than it, and two, the show building behind it is quite possibly the largest building ever constructed for a theme park. It is impossible to state how gargantuan that is, dwarfing even the other huge show buildings for indoor rides. Because the castle is physically attached to it, it has the unfortunate side effect of seeming even smaller (and yes, I was looking at these pictures thinking of fantasies where they built an entire park solely to HP where Hogwarts is this giant, centerpiece building). But I thought these pictures were fascinating--they showed almost everything we havent been able to see, like the entrances to the two coasters, the lines for the rides, amazing details of the shops in Hogsmeade, etc. Im thrilled and amazed that Universal hasnt found some legal reason to make them take down the photos, because theyve negated the entire operation of secrecy theyve had going on for years now.

tl;dnr

Sorry, tduboff, but when you post rants that long, no one reads them.

I read it Filthy_Little_Mudblood and I agree with it entirely. Just because it looks small doesnt change the fact that it is huge and just dwarfed by how large the building behind it is. And yeah, It being covered in snow is both in tune with the hogsmead we see mostly in the films and also adds to the magic of the area. To make it seem like a whole area of the park is in a perpetual Scottish winter in the center of Florida is nothing short of magnificent.

Though I do hope you can walk around the castle part of the castle rather than that be compeletely a front and it be entirely in the back. Id like to be able to look out of a window and see hogsmead below.

Im really excited about the Wizarding World of Harry Potter. But I still believe that Disney would have been a better choice for JK Rowling (or whoever decided it). Most people who go to Orlando are there for Walt Disney World. The "park within a park" would get many more casual visitors rather than hard core fans if it would be located at somewhere like Disneys Hollywood Studios. Couple that with Disneys unbelievable ride theming (ie, tower of terror, expedition everest) it would have been amazing. Dont get me wrong, Im still thrilled, and will definitely visit my next time in Orlando. I just dont know if it will be worth paying for transportation from Disney every single year I go.

philliesphan, I think Disney would have been a horrible choice. I think the meer possibility and thought of Donald and Goofy stepping into Hogsmeade was enough for Jo to let Universal build her world instead of Disney. Indeed, if this were at the Walt Disney World Resort, Harry, Ron, and Hermonione would play second fiddle to Mickey and gang. Universal "star" characters are those from great stories - whether Spiderman, Dr. Seuss, or The Mummy; they are not characters that stand for Universal in general like Mickey and gang stand for Disney in general. It makes sense in this regard. And Universal theming is amazing - read tduboffs posts - this is was one of the most well planned and executed theme park projects in the last decade, if not ever. I dont think Disney could of done any better.

TheWestTower, There is no way that the Disney characters would have entered a Harry Potter themed area. If youve been in WDW, you know that the characters dont go near rides or areas that they have no business being in. And while HP would probably play second fiddle to the original Disney gang, Universal will always be second fiddle to Disney, regardless of HP. All Im arguing is that the popularity (which will already be amazingly high at Universal) would be even higher if it was located in Hollywood Studios.

I hope they put some sort of barrier between the Harry Potter part of the park and the other, because palm trees cant be protruding above your head while youre walking through Hogsmeade!!! And what is the big white building adjoining Hogwarts? I hope thats the rest of it and its just missing the stones and towers, because the "castle" they made so far is really SMALL!!!

philliesphan, exactly, Potter characters would always play second fiddle to the incredibly iconic characters of Disney, whether or not they ever step into the Harrys world. And as for Universal playing second fiddle to Disney, that is entirely arguable. Both highly appeal to slightly different submarkets within the huge Orlando market (Universal to an "older" audience, Disney to a "younger"). Universal has also become synonymous with Orlando an theme parks just as Disney has. I dont think the popularity of the Wizarding World would be determined in which resort it stands, but rather in the quality of the final product. Universal has a long history of bringing literature, movies, and other forms of great storytelling to life at its Orlando Resort, and these aerial pictures prove that they have continued this tradition of high quality with the Wizarding World. I really don

(continued) dont think its popularity at Disney would have been significant enough to say Disney would have been a better choice.

KristinaUA - Read comments two and three of this page - youll learn things about theme parks in general that will make you realize your concerns are unwarranted.

TheWestTower, I realize that the ride will probably be incredible. I am looking forward to it as much as the next Potter fan. But you cant argue with the fact that WDW is more popular than Universal. WDW parks rank 1,6,7, and 8 (and the ones in between are other Disney parks around the globe). Universal Studios Florida ranks 11, with Islands of Adventure ranking up at 14. Dont get me wrong, it will be PACKED the first few years. But 5-10 years from now, when Potter mania will have calmed down, the people who vacation to Orlando for Disney (which is the majority of people), less will be willing to make the trip to Universal (at least just for HP). If it was in Disney, people would visit it because they are already there. Since its at Universal, less people will experience it. However, whats done is done, and Ill be at Islands of Adventure opening day to experience what will be one of the most anticipated theme park project in quite some time.

philliesphan, I live in the UK and I love theme parks and plan to visit America in the future and Disneyworld never even crossed my mind as a place to go. Ive known of Island of Adventure for years and wanted to go there for their epic rides and theming. Disney world are and will always be popular with people with kids and thats to do with Disneys appeal with cartoon animals. Harry Potter should not be amongst such things, Universal is where it should be, At the cutting edge. It will not age, just as Jurassic park wont. People will visit for years to come, then after "pottermania" as you describe it dies down it will carry on drawing in the crowds through being one of the greatest franchises in history.

sam06s2b, thats fine, but that doesnt change the fact that youre in the minority. Maybe not on this site, but in the tourism world, you are in the minority. And as for epic rides and theming, having never been to Walt Disney World, you clearly are not the person to be judging on which park(s) are better. It could have worked at Disney is what Im saying. Few vacation in Universal for a week, simply because there is not enough to do. People can vacation in Disney for a week because of all there is to do. Your argument that Jurassic park wont age, well try all the classic Disney rides that havent aged (ie-Space Mountain, Splash Mountain, Rockin Roller Coaster, Twilight zone Tower of Terror, etc). The idea that WDW is just for people with kids is also absurd. People will visit WWOHP for years to come. But far fewer than if it was located on Disney property. You cant find one statistic that suggests that Universal is more popular than Disney. Not one.

Well, this has been fun to read. I want to say a few things: first, philliesphan I think youre completely right in saying Disneys popularity could have made it a better choice. Theres no arguing Disney has gotten and will always get more visitors than Universal. And execution-wise, it would have been just as amazing as the project were seeing. No doubt about that. But I do believe that despite it being at Universals less-visited park which has far less worldwide name-recognition, that was the overall smarter choice. The biggest problem is that HP and Disney are each too large. Harry Potter, in fact, is probably one of the only cultural entities that in itself could compete with what Disney has become to the world. So to put it in a Disney park would inherently create conflict, even though Mickey and friends of course wouldnt enter that area. Think about Disneys best projects: theyve all either been original (Haunted Mansion, Pirates of the Caribbean, Space Mountain, Thunder Mountain, Matterhorn, Main Street, Rock N Roller Coaster, almost all of Animal Kingdom, almost all of Epcot, etc). And the others have been based off of DISNEY movies or stories (Fantasyland, Mickeys Toontown/Country Fair, Splash Mountain, parades, Buzz Lightyear, every single Pixar ride). There are few exceptions where they use an outside work, but they are important to look at. The biggest (besides Tower of Terror, which is based off something that has little cultural relevance today) are Star Wars and Indiana Jones, which Disney got through partnering with George Lucas.

I dont think its fair to say the Wizarding World should have been somewhere else because of long-term popularity. Those that will want to go there will go there, regardless if its in Disney or Universal. Disney IS more popular than Universal, but that isnt enough to say that one specific area at one Universal park would have done better as another specific area at one Disney park. I personally still worry about how good the quality of the WW would turn out if at Disney. Better said, if it would of been an entire area at all. Outside of Tokyo Disney Sea (which isnt even completely owned by Disney), Disney has little experience dedicating entire areas to one single franchise. The rumors that if Disney won the Potter rights from Jo / WB, they would only build one attraction based on Harrys world and not an entire area like Universal is doing makes sense. Theyve never done such a thing before. Islands of Adventure is dedicated to entire world dedicated one franchise, Hollywood Studious is single rides based on one franchise.

(continued) Now if we look at Star Wars, the way theyve brought the stories to the parks is with Star Tours--an awesome, greatly detailed ride. But one could argue that an entire Star Wars theme park is possible to build, but because of tons of reasons, only one simple simulator ride with a cool line was created. Now it serves its purpose, but most people think of it as "Oh yeah, the Star Wars ride." With Indiana Jones--stories that have even less of a cultural fan base as Star Wars--they have the stunt show at Hollywood Studios (which isnt as important to look at) and the ride at Disneyland. The Disneyland ride is arguably one of Disneys all-time best, with an incredible line and an amazing, thrilling ride system that perfectly references favorite elements from the films. Guests love it. But its just ONE RIDE in a little corner of Adventureland. This is the problem. Most likely, Disney would have done an amazing job with HP, but we wouldnt have gotten the WORLD, because Disneys main priority is making sure the entire park works as a whole. They would not have created, most likely, an entire separate area like Universal is doing. It would have been a cool ride in Hollywood Studios. But putting it in Islands of Adventure--a park whose entire structure is having each land represent movies, comics, or stories--makes perfect sense. It will help boost their attendance immensely (and yeah, itll eventually die down, but the terrified Disney executives who have nothing big planned for this year arent thinking like that). With the amount of marketing being planned for this park, theyre gonna pull it off. Sure, no ones gonna come to Orlando just to go to Universal, but youre gonna see many fewer people coming just for Disney World. And thats saying something.

Haha TheWestTower we both wrote the same argument at the same time! Yeah the fact of the matter is that Disney would not have invested that much money and space to this project, because THEY WOULDNT NEED TO to get visitors to come. Universals number-two status REQUIRED them to make it perfect, in order for it to attract the guests it wants visiting the park.

tduboff & TheWestTower, you both make really good points. I agree with the reasoning that each might be too big for the other. Im probably just still in denial over the fact that my two obsessions, Potter and Disney, were not able to mesh as one. Like I said however, I cant wait until the area opens, Im just putting my opinions and thoughts out there :)

Universal Studios is my absolute favorite place in the whole world. But that does not mean I am totally biased. I am not going to sit here and pretend that is even close to the popularity of Disney because one of the reasons I love it so much is because of its super short lines, whereas Disney has long lines all year long. But it is unfair to just place them next to each other and judge. Where Universal has two different parks Disney has FIVE. And GE just sold the majority of NBC Universal (in which Universal Studios is a subcategory) to Comcast. But hopefully this is just a reflection of GE trying to survive in this economic decline rather than the success of Universal. But this is definitely the best fit for The Wizarding World of Harry Potter. It will become a timeless classic here instead of just blending in at one of the Disney Parks. I cannot wait to go, but I would avoid the opening week and probably months after even since it will be mobbed by people like us : )

Apparently they dont really care about those of us that dont live in the Orlando area making it to the park... I live in Michigan and if they keep waiting and waiting to give us an opening date, it could be MONTHS before I could even get there after it opens. People with jobs cant just drop everything with no notice to take off for Florida. Its crap that they cant even give us a projected date. Honestly, the more time that goes on without a date, the less important I feel as a 10 year fan of Harry Potter...

im super excited!!!! i live in Miami so im only like 3 1/2 hours away...im debating whether or not to go on opening day...i know theres going to be tons of people, so thats the only thing thats making me question that decision...i was there in November and i took several pictures in front of the castle...theres a bridge thats over water in one of the shots that the guy took from the helicopter...thats where i was standing when i took the pictures...and fron the Dueling Dragons ride (the blue & red rollercoasters) you have a great view as well... if any of you can make it out there, i would definitely recommend it!!!! =)

londonlass33, if Universal could give us all a date or even a month, it would. But clearly, they do not know when they will finish building, TESTING and REFINING everything in the park. Its much, much, much more than just having everything build. Minor details have to be added, employees have to trained on-site, rides have to be tested, and a lot of goverment inspections have to take place. Last year, they gave an opening date for another attraction but problems arose and they had to go back on what they orginally said, dissapointing many. Universal will announce a date when it is confident that they can meet that date with a Wizarding World that is of the highest quality... and not rushed. Im sure they understand that many people want a date realesed ASAP so they can plan trips froma afar, but they want to be safe rather than sorry. They dont want people like you travelling from across the country, if not from another continent, only to find out the park isnt quite finished yet. They said Spring 2010, and that can be anywhere from late March to around June.

OMG!!! GET THE F**K OUT!! IT LOOKS SO COOL!!!!!