Disney and Universal working on Marvel deal for Florida?

mahnamahna101

Well-Known Member
Realistically, anything happening to Toon Lagoon is hypothetical. That land is large as-is, with a lot of wasted space. Marvel is more or less a surefire bet. Better to use Marvel to its best potential than to wait around with unused land for a retheme that may or may not happen

But is Doom really Marvel at its best potential? Even with moderate enhancements, it will never be a high-caliber attraction unless it's enclosed and formatted similarly to ToT. At that point, you may as well bulldoze it, take down Carnage and start from scratch with a couple of brand new attractions.

It's the best case scenario - MSHI reaches its full potential, IOA gets two new D/E tickets that significantly increase the park capacity (with Doom and Carnage space, they should be able to fit one major and one moderate), while Toon Lagoon still gets a chance at forming its own identity.

If Universal ever got the rights to LOTR, Nintendo, etc... or if Warcraft becomes a success, or if Universal Creative comes up with a great Land of Oz concept, or perhaps split TL into two mini-lands: Oz and Wonka... there's just so many inspired concepts out there. I would rather see those come to life and get an Avengers E-ticket than only one of the two.

Doom and the Carnage warehouse take up a bigger footprint than the Toon Lagoon theater/game area. More importantly, they're distinctively in MSHI. The TL theater and games area is a little outside of that, and the TL/Marvel would be significantly more jarring than it currently is.
 

GLaDOS

Well-Known Member
Doom and the Carnage warehouse take up a bigger footprint than the Toon Lagoon theater/game area. More importantly, they're distinctively in MSHI. The TL theater and games area is a little outside of that, and the TL/Marvel would be significantly more jarring than it currently is.

Most of your post is blue sky speculation, so I'll focus on this.

Footprint clearly doesn't matter when we're talking about Universal's ability to build dark rides. Transformers is a legitimate E-ticket that takes up relatively little space. I have no doubt in their ability to do something amazing in either space whether it be Doom or the Theater area.

As for the transition, IoA isn't known for its smooth transitions from land to land as is, so I'm not really concerned about that.
 

tl77

Well-Known Member
This stalemate over the film and theme park rights is just stupid, no one wins from the current arrangement so it's going to have to change sooner or later, and it seems like sooner is more likely

At the moment Sony "controls" the Film rights to Spiderman, Universal owns the Theme Park rights in Florida, and Disney/Marvel owns the Spiderman character, but in February Sony and Disney/Marvel cut a deal to "lease" Sony the Spiderman film rights in exchange for letting the Spiderman character make a "guest appearance" in one of the upcoming Disney/Marvel produced films, and this next Sony produced Spiderman film set to release July 28, 2017, and you can read the whole deal here http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/marvel-deal-sony-opts-lease-772251

But basically Sony and Disney/Marvel have decided it's mutually beneficial to "share" Spiderman, and since Spiderman's costume is what make him "famous", and that costume never really changes, this shouldn't effect Universal and their Spiderman themed ride.

The rest of the Marvel film characters are pretty much a total loss in the Orlando theme parks, because the likenesses of the actors playing the characters are much more famous than the comic book images. Technically Universal could make a theme park attraction based on "The Avengers" comic book characters, but not the actors and costumes from the third highest grossing film of all time, which is what most people around the world are familiar with. So sooner or later something is going to have give, because they are all losing money the way it is now.
 

GLaDOS

Well-Known Member
Technically Universal could make a theme park attraction based on "The Avengers" comic book characters, but not the actors and costumes from the third highest grossing film of all time, which is what most people around the world are familiar with. So sooner or later something is going to have give, because they are all losing money the way it is now.

There is nothing in the contract that precludes Universal from using the MCU depictions of the characters. Some have said that's a grey area that may have been worked out by both sides for the upcoming refresh, but the wording of the contract makes it seem like it's very much a possibility.
 

Disneyhead'71

Well-Known Member
Let me try this again, only this time flat out saying the MCU's depictions showed up in IOA several years ago. So I'm thinking y'all are wrong.

img_0153-copy.jpg


img_0155-copy.jpg


large.jpg
 

alphac2005

Well-Known Member
Years ago, I said the current arrangement between Universal and Marvel will not sit well with Disney in the years to come and I predicted that Disney will have those rights returned to it one way or another. Like what always happens here on these forums, I was attacked for having an opinion that was other than the mainstream. That opinion, understandable, is that both Disney and Uni are happy with the status quo of the arrangement; and, therefore, no changes will be made to it. Yes, they are happy, but the value of the Marvel property goes up exponentially if all the rights are collected under one basket. This is exactly what happened with Looney Toons many decades ago. History has a nasty habit of repeating itself. Like I said then, I will repeat, eventually Disney will figure out a way to get all Marvel rights back under a single roof. I don't know how or when, or if it will be Iger or his successor, but it's smart business and will be done eventually.

Disney is dealing with Comcast. Disney isn't dealing with a small outfit. Comcast is ruthless. It's a tad bit of a juvenile statement to say that this will eventually happen. Ironclad legal agreements are made for many reasons. It would be naive (and I think some have made posts as such) to not assume that Universal's management at the time had the foresight to make such a provision knowing that MARVEL could end up in the hands of another corporation. Ironclad legal provisions. PERIOD. That's all that is needed to know here. Things sitting well and legal frameworks are two different animals and sitting well is irrelevant to legal. Universal has a popular area that draws visitors while Disney spends endlessly to market and further the MARVEL brand. It's truly the best of all worlds for Universal.

What are you alluding to about Looney Tunes? Looney Tunes was always under the Warner Bros. umbrella. They licensed characters out to various parks, but the properties never had the fiscal value of Disney especially when home media began with VHS, etc.
 

ford91exploder

Resident Curmudgeon
This may not be a common opinion, but instead of Disney buying FL Marvel rights back why not sell the worldwide theme park rights to Universal. It seems just silly for Disney to have to pay Uni for the rights in FL and then spend money on adding attractions in FL when there are so many other things that could be added. For Universal they would have to spend money re-theming the whole Marvel area. It doesn't seem worth it for either side.

If Universal had the worldwide theme-park rights to Marvel they could ramp up additions in multiple parks to spread costs. Disney would get more money from the deal. I'm just thinking that if you really want to see more quality Marvel stuff in a theme park that's the best route. Disney could use the extra cash to fund something from a galaxy far, far away.

Or more likely fund stock repurchases...
 

WDW1974

Well-Known Member
Reading some of the incredibly naive posts here regarding what an ironclad, in perpetuity contract means as I eat a dry chicken sandwich.

I'd point out the example of the 700 Club on ABC Family, but the people who can't/don't/won't understand would not get that either.

I also get a kick out of reading a post talking about everyone losing under the current arrangement. Where does someone even come up with a conclusion like that?!?!

The facts are EVERYONE -- that is Disney, Universal, Marvel -- are winning (insert Charlie Sheen reference). They are all making boatloads, cruise ship loads, destroyer loads of money under the current agreement.

As near as I can tell, the only ones 'losing' in this deal are whiny Disney fanbois who are upset that Universal holds all the cards in the deck when it comes to theme park rights and that they'll have to go to IOA to experience the characters (characters that many didn't even like before December of 2009 anyway). They can ride Spiderman ,which is still one of the best family themed rides of all time, when they are there ... and then go 'home' to Disney and cavort in the Casey Junior Play While You Pee Fountain.

It's really that simple. Not only is the current agreement good for Marvel, it's good for everyone. Those deals are very hard to come by these days.
 

Progress.City

Well-Known Member
Disney is dealing with Comcast. Disney isn't dealing with a small outfit. Comcast is ruthless. It's a tad bit of a juvenile statement to say that this will eventually happen. Ironclad legal agreements are made for many reasons. It would be naive (and I think some have made posts as such) to not assume that Universal's management at the time had the foresight to make such a provision knowing that MARVEL could end up in the hands of another corporation. Ironclad legal provisions. PERIOD. That's all that is needed to know here. Things sitting well and legal frameworks are two different animals and sitting well is irrelevant to legal. Universal has a popular area that draws visitors while Disney spends endlessly to market and further the MARVEL brand. It's truly the best of all worlds for Universal.

What are you alluding to about Looney Tunes? Looney Tunes was always under the Warner Bros. umbrella. They licensed characters out to various parks, but the properties never had the fiscal value of Disney especially when home media began with VHS, etc.
The text below is copied from Wikipedia. As you can see here, the rights to Looney Tunes were all over the place and were finally reassembled when Warner bought Turner.

When the Looney Tunes and Merrie Melodies began in 1930, although Warner Bros. retained the rights to the cartoons and the Looney Tunes and Merrie Melodies brandnames, Harman and Ising owned the rights to the Bosko characters. When Harman and Ising left Warner Bros. in 1933, their former producer Leon Schlesinger started his own studio for Warner Bros. continuing the Looney Tunes series. Harman and Ising retained the rights to Bosko and began making Bosko cartoons at Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer in 1934. However these cartoons were not a success and in 1937 MGM fired Harman and Ising and formed their own studio to create MGM cartoons, with Harman and Ising retaining the rights to Bosko. Time Warner eventually acquired the characters from their estates. Meanwhile the Schlesinger studio continued to make popular cartoons until 1944 when Schlesinger sold his studio to Warner Bros. and since then, Warner Bros. has owned all rights to all post-1933 characters created by Leon Schlesinger Productions and Warner Bros. Cartoons. The rights to individual cartoons however are in other hands.

In 1955, Warner Bros. sold its black-and-white Looney Tunes (plus the black-and-white Merrie Melodies made after Harman and Ising left) into television syndication through their sale of the cartoons to Guild Films.[23] The copyright to those cartoons were assigned to Sunset Productions. These cartoons were distributed by Guild Films until it went bankrupt and was bought by Seven Arts. Seven Arts bought WB, and WB gained rights to the black and white cartoons.

In 1956, Associated Artists Productions (a.a.p.) acquired for television most of Warner Bros' pre-1950[24][25] library, including all Merrie Melodies(except for those sold to Sunset and Lady, Play Your Mandolin!) and color Looney Tunes shorts that were released prior to August 1948. Unlike the sale to Sunset Productions, a.a.p. was allowed to keep the Warner titles intact and simply inserted an "Associated Artists Productions presents" title at the head of each reel (as a result, each Merrie Melodiescartoon had the song "Merrily We Roll Along" playing twice).[26] Two years later, United Artists bought a.a.p. (which also bought Paramount's Popeye films) who merged the company into its television division; United Artists Television.

In 1981, UA was sold to MGM, and five years later, Ted Turner acquired the pre-May 1986 MGM library. He also acquired the rights to the a.a.p. library. In 1996, Turner's company, Turner Broadcasting System (whose Turner Entertainment division oversaw the film library), was purchased by Time Warner who also owned Warner Bros. Today, Warner Home Video holds the video rights to the entire Looney Tunes/Merrie Melodies animated output by virtue of Time Warner's ownership of Turner Entertainment.
 
Last edited:

tribbleorlfl

Well-Known Member
From the contract (emphasis added):



It makes sense to me that "other products" would include movies, which would mean that Universal could use MCU or other movie versions of the Marvel characters. However, @marni1971 said earlier that the movie depictions of these characters fall into a bit of a legal gray area, so I won't fully commit to that position at this time.

EDIT: I spoke without thinking, see this post for continued discussion.

There is nothing in the contract that precludes Universal from using the MCU depictions of the characters. Some have said that's a grey area that may have been worked out by both sides for the upcoming refresh, but the wording of the contract makes it seem like it's very much a possibility.
Without being privy to the referenced "style guide," my guess is it does not feature the film looks. Otherwise, I would think the new m-n-g costume that debuted for Cap in June 2011 would have featured his CA:TFA look to capitalize on the film's release.

Plus, Marvel makes it clear the comic books and films are completely separate entities, and I would think it's in their best interests to not confuse customers by blending the two.

Let me try this again, only this time flat out saying the MCU's depictions showed up in IOA several years ago. So I'm thinking y'all are wrong.

img_0153-copy.jpg


img_0155-copy.jpg


large.jpg
Those life-size fiberglass statues were manufactured by Hollywood Collectibles, and still available for around $4k. I think there's a big difference with UO developing rides and attractions featuring MCU likenesses and buying those models at retail and displaying them in a store (for all we know, they were available for purchase). One requires a license, the other does not.
 

GLaDOS

Well-Known Member
Without being privy to the referenced "style guide," my guess is it does not feature the film looks. Otherwise, I would think the new m-n-g costume that debuted for Cap in June 2011 would have featured his CA:TFA look to capitalize on the film's release.

Plus, Marvel makes it clear the comic books and films are completely separate entities, and I would think it's in their best interests to not confuse customers by blending the two.

The contract also specifies that any versions of the characters "in other products" are under the existing contract. Again, it's probably a grey area. One that may have been ironed out recently.
 

CJR

Well-Known Member
Actually Id rather Universal handled that property as well considering how well themed Hogsmeade, Diagon Alley and even Springfield are.

I agree completely. Given the stuff Universal has now proven they can do, it would be awesome to see what they could accomplish with a nice budget.

I think Disney could do an OK Marvel land if they wanted to, but Universal would get us something just as good, if not better, in much less time (let's face it, Disney would take at least another half-decade to get us a small land with two Marvel rides). The time thing alone makes this all in our best interest as guests.
 

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

Back
Top Bottom