Marvel coming to WDW?!?!

marni1971

marni1971

Park History nut
Premium Member
Matt_Black said:
Yeah, especially how the Uni supporters go on and on about how fast Uni can build stuff. When I brought that up before, I got a host of non-answers, including "Well, they don't really need to, Marvel isn't that popular anyway." ?!?!? o_O
Click to expand...

Donaldfan1934 said:
You hit the nail on the head here. You can't go on about Universal building super fast and create excuses for them not building more Marvel.
Click to expand...

Because they're currently building another three E tickets and totally refurbishing a forth?

They have their hands full and will for the foreseeable future. Avengers, Pets or Crumpet. So hard to decide which to do first.

Though I'd bet Avengers. Even if Marvel isn't the be all and end all to them.
 
ford91exploder

ford91exploder

Resident Curmudgeon
marni1971 said:
Because they're currently building another three E tickets and totally refurbishing a forth?

They have their hands full and will for the foreseeable future. Avengers, Pets or Crumpet. So hard to decide which to do first.

Though I'd bet Avengers. Even if Marvel isn't the be all and end all to them.
Click to expand...

I'd agree that Avengers is most likely, Loved the trailer for Pets but it's just the trailer so far.
 
lazyboy97o

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
doctornick said:
They certainly could, but would need to get a new deal with Marvel Studios to do so (and obviously, would have to contract with the actors themselves for the likeness). Now, I personally believe such discussions and agreements have already happened and have paved the way for the Avengers ride (and perhaps the re-do of the Hulk going on). But I don't think that Uni could simply unilaterally utilize new/updated versions of the characters that didn't exist at the time of the original contract.

If you don't think this is the case, then could they use the Fox developed versions of the X-Men or Sony's developed Spider-Man in their rides without specifically contracting with those studios?
Click to expand...
There is no language saying which date of style guide is to be used. This is a perpetual deal and it makes no sense to have it stuck in 1994. That completely undermines the benefits for Marvel of the deal being perpetual.
 
marni1971

marni1971

Park History nut
Premium Member
Donaldfan1934 said:
Well they don't own Potter or Transfomers either and everything involving them came up when they wanted them.
Click to expand...
Totally different circumstances.

Comcast didn't own Universal when the Potter deal was finalised. The deal was a last ditch attempt by GE to save the park they were running badly. Comcast arrived when Potter was half built.

Transformers wasn't meant to come to Orlando. It was a tax write off. The decision to build was taken in a matter of days.
 
Last edited:
marni1971

marni1971

Park History nut
Premium Member
Donaldfan1934 said:
Aside from the attractions (particularly Spider-Man) and their improvements, the land itself is very dated and cheap looking. Just look at these photos and try and tell me that it would look the same if it were built today. http://www.wdwinfo.com/universal/Photos/Marvel-Super-Hero/pages/24-Marvel Super Hero Island.htm
Click to expand...
You seem to be letting your opinion get in the way of fact.

The land was an expensive one to build, and designed very precisely to look like a non descript comic page. Hence the signs, for example.

You do know about the expensive colour changing paint don't you?
 
Q

Quinnmac000

Well-Known Member
marni1971 said:
Because they're currently building another three E tickets and totally refurbishing a forth?

They have their hands full and will for the foreseeable future. Avengers, Pets or Crumpet. So hard to decide which to do first.

Though I'd bet Avengers. Even if Marvel isn't the be all and end all to them.
Click to expand...

Based on timelines and whether Universal is trying to be reactionary or pro-active, Avengers and Crumpet would be the first choices with Pets being last. This thought process is due to synergy. A new Grinch films comes out in 2018 which with Grinchmas and a new Mt Crumpet ride would be a major burst to tourism for IoA during the holidays. However breaking ground on Avengers ride and having it up between the release of Infinity War Pt 1 and Pt 2 give Universal free promotion and hype to promote the land.

Pets is in a losing corner as potentially being pushed back unless it is a major success to which Universal can launch a franchise but even then it took Comcast two films for them to create the Minion Mayhem.
 
Mike S

Mike S

Well-Known Member
marni1971 said:
Because they're currently building another three E tickets and totally refurbishing a forth?

They have their hands full and will for the foreseeable future. Avengers, Pets or Crumpet. So hard to decide which to do first.

Though I'd bet Avengers. Even if Marvel isn't the be all and end all to them.
Click to expand...
Crumpit is actually back in consideration? YES!!! :D
 
Donaldfan1934

Donaldfan1934

Well-Known Member
Quinnmac000 said:
Insiders and fan sites also said Universal was never getting Nintendo theme park rights for years and then out of nowhere, Nintendo broke the news. Universal is loud mouthed about some things and really quiet about others and just because someone on the forums isn't talking doesn't mean things aren't happening behind closed doors.

You keep changing goal posts to try to discredit someone in very high regards who would know information about it and should honestly be trusted when saying its going to happen as they are in the know.
Click to expand...
The Nintendo thing was less about Universal and more about theme park rights in general. What happened in that situation was that Nintendo had to take drastic measures to become profitable again so they resorted to things that they said they'd never do like theme parks and smart phone games. Here, its a suspiciously strange case of making something that should be a higher priority a seemingly lower one.
 
Donaldfan1934

Donaldfan1934

Well-Known Member
marni1971 said:
You seem to be letting your opinion get in the way of fact.

The land was an expensive one to build, and designed very precisely to look like a non descript comic page. Hence the signs, for example.

You do know about the expensive colour changing paint don't you?
Click to expand...
Its an opinion, but its an opinion that a lot of other people seem to have as well, even some Universal fans. It may have been expensive, but the only place there where the money really shows is Spider-Man.
 
Donaldfan1934

Donaldfan1934

Well-Known Member
marni1971 said:
Totally different circumstances.

Comcast didn't own Universal when the Potter deal was finalised. The deal was a last ditch attempt by GE to save the park they were running badly. Comcast arrived when Potter was half built.

Transformers wasn't meant to come to Orlando. It was a tax write off. The decision to build was taken in a matter of days.
Click to expand...
My point is that they've been able to build and expand upon them fairly liberally once the deals were made.
 
lazyboy97o

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
Donaldfan1934 said:
One expansion and the fact that Hogwarts and Transformers have been put into 2 additional Universal parks at whim.
Click to expand...
How do you know they were at whim?

The original Wizarding World of Harry Potter deal was with Universal City Development Partners (the partnership between General Electric and The Blackstone Group which owned the Universal Orlando Resort) and includes 22 clauses related to approval.
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1262449/000119312507178559/dex1041.htm

Do you have the Transformers deal handy? It seems likely that it would have been a global licensing deal. The attraction was designed for Universal Studios Hollywood and then sat in development hell for a period of time until it received funding by Resorts World Sentosa. So hardly an example of acting on a whim.
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom