Marvel coming to WDW?!?!

[marni1971]

1. That's part of my point. Shouldn't they've done that by now considering how Universal builds things at a relatively fast pace?.

Do what? The Avengers?

I was told it should start soon after Hulk reopens. They didn't want only Spidey open in MSHL.

 

[Mike S]

So Biff is responsible for this? Now it makes more sense.

Not mine.

Do what? The Avengers?

I was told it should start soon after Hulk reopens. They didn't want only Spidey open in MSHL.

Awesome!!!

Also, @danlb_2000, I didn't notice any price tag but the statue's base had a plaque like something that would be for sale. There's an interesting story I have to share as well. I got stuck on Spider-Man and got the usual offer of getting back in a short line to ride again. After getting seated an older woman sitting next to me said, and I quote, "they would never do that at Disney," to which a man replied, "yeah that's real top notch." This is the general public people. It will take a good amount of more time but they're starting to notice.

 

[AEfx]

Disney would never make a deal that could create a likely situation where IoA ends up topping one of the WDW parks.

Building another ride or two isn't going to "top" anything, well any more than Universal already does...

In any case, Disney doesn't care about the tit-for-tat like you think they do - Disney cares about $$$. If they can profit enough from what Universal does with Marvel, without having to lift a finger, then they will go where they can make the most $$$ for the least effort.

In any case, you miss the point - while I have no personal care whatsoever, I can't help but see how on average the attractions that Universal has added over the past 6 or 7 years have blown the WDW additions out of the water, so yes, I do think for those that really want quality Marvel attractions, they are better served by Universal.

 

[AEfx]

Uh-huh. They've only had FOUR years to build an Avengers ride. Meanwhile, people complained when a Frozen show debuted the summer after the film's release.

What are you talking about?

Because they didn't have one to coincide with the first film?

It's doubtful they could have at that point, if they can now it's a recent thing - Disney has been in heavy negotiations with lots of folks regarding Marvel (hence why we are seeing the absolutely unheard of with Civil War - Spidey appearing).

In any case, they were kind of busy building Potter 2.0, Transformers, etc. etc. - what was Disney doing around the time of Frozen? A big spot of nothing.

You are REALLY reaching here (though I too found the Frozen complaining funny, because people would have complained if they had product ready to go for Frozen for other reasons). Are you really comparing the head on a stick thrown together Frozen show to an actual permanent attraction?

And hmmmm...it's taken them THREE years at Disney to add a Frozen overlay...if you want to go down that route. If that's all the attention WDW gives to the most profitable animated film of all time, it's doubtful that Avengers would get much more - and considering the only Marvel project they actually seem interested in is ANOTHER overlay (of ToT) - come now, are you really that drunk on the Kool-AId?

 

[Mike S]

What are you talking about?

Because they didn't have one to coincide with the first film?

It's doubtful they could have at that point, if they can now it's a recent thing - Disney has been in heavy negotiations with lots of folks regarding Marvel (hence why we are seeing the absolutely unheard of with Civil War - Spidey appearing).

In any case, they were kind of busy building Potter 2.0, Transformers, etc. etc. - what was Disney doing around the time of Frozen? A big spot of nothing.

You are REALLY reaching here (though I too found the Frozen complaining funny, because people would have complained if they had product ready to go for Frozen for other reasons). Are you really comparing the head on a stick thrown together Frozen show to an actual permanent attraction?

And hmmmm...it's taken them THREE years at Disney to add a Frozen overlay...if you want to go down that route. If that's all the attention WDW gives to the most profitable animated film of all time, it's doubtful that Avengers would get much more - and considering the only Marvel project they actually seem interested in is ANOTHER overlay (of ToT) - come now, are you really that drunk on the Kool-AId?

Don't forget Iron Tours.

 

[rael ramone]

I have. Still 80% negative but seeing a lot of the pixie dusters throwing down the things change card. And just read a post by a mommy who is so happy that her 4 year old speshul snowflake will be able to ride it cuz TOT is scawy

I wonder how many have IP addresses that trace to Burbank & Celebration....

(And is that 'snowflake mommy' hoping they'll add 'chilidog burps' to the attraction?)

 

[Donaldfan1934]

Do what? The Avengers?

I was told it should start soon after Hulk reopens. They didn't want only Spidey open in MSHL.

Still should've been done by now is what I'm saying.

 

[Donaldfan1934]

Don't forget Iron Tours.

How about Stark Tours instead?

 

[Donaldfan1934]

That makes no sense. Go ride Spider-Man.

i found a comparison video, and while the character animation and models are vastly improved, they're essentially the same designs. The only real difference is that Doc Ock is weating a coat and even the costume underneath is the same.

 

[Donaldfan1934]

Building another ride or two isn't going to "top" anything, well any more than Universal already does...

In any case, Disney doesn't care about the tit-for-tat like you think they do - Disney cares about $$$. If they can profit enough from what Universal does with Marvel, without having to lift a finger, then they will go where they can make the most $$$ for the least effort.

In any case, you miss the point - while I have no personal care whatsoever, I can't help but see how on average the attractions that Universal has added over the past 6 or 7 years have blown the WDW additions out of the water, so yes, I do think for those that really want quality Marvel attractions, they are better served by Universal.

Yes, they both care about money, but you know what else is important to Disney, branding and reputation. While they have zero control over what's alread there, the last thing Disney would want is for them to have an MCU related addition that could lead to IoA topping DAK or especially DHS. As you know, both of those parks are receiving major enhancement, so they would want to keep Universal from using the MCU (aka, the Disney owned epicenter of 2010's cimema) if they have any control over it at all. If Universal some how ends up using the MCU for future additions and its because of a contract re-negotiation with Disney, it would create a lot of bad press on Disney's front because they would be willingly shooting themselves in the foot. Yes, Disney profits from Marvel Superhero Island, but not as much as they would for even the cheapest addition to one of their parks. In short, no major corporation would be stupid enough to allow their competitor to 1-up them even more than some people already think they're already doing on their own.

 

[Pumbas Nakasak]

you dont half talk mince. But fair play you shouldnt be knocked for having the confidence to pass opinion as fact even when the opinion is that of a complete spanner.

 

[AEfx]

Yes, Disney profits from Marvel Superhero Island, but not as much as they would for even the cheapest addition to one of their parks.

That is where you are mistaken.

It costs them ZERO for Universal to promote and sell their products. It's ALL pure profit. Versus spending a few hundred million in hopes that people will come and buy merchandise they are already buying at Universal and Disney profits from.

In any case, it's clear you can't see past the fan perception of the relationship - I understand, I used to think similarly to you. But then I realized, like most here, what really goes on between them - and the only folks who are stuck on making this a Disney ego issue are Disney fans, not Disney itself.

 

[Donaldfan1934]

you dont half talk mince. But fair play you shouldnt be knocked for having the confidence to pass opinion as fact even when the opinion is that of a complete spanner.

While you didn't reply to any of my comments, I'm going to safely assume that this is a shot at them since I made the last few posts. These boards are for the discussion of different points of view regarding Disney and theme parks in general. I'm not trying to be rude with my arguments, so if I may have come across as such, I apologize. I was just these two completely valid points about potential corporate stupidity.

1. If Universal ends up remodeling Marvel Superhero Island with a theme that is directly based on the MCU and could've done it at any time, then they will look stupid for wasting their time building other additions and changes first when they should've done it the second the Avenger's opening weekend numbers came in 4 years ago.

2. If Universal ends up remodeling Marvel Superhero Island with a theme that is directly based on the MCU and had to get Disney to in some way re-negotiate the contract in order for it to happen, then Disney looks beyond incompetent for their agreeably letting their competitor strike them down with their own weapon instead of just leaving them either stagnant or winding up with a product that the general public would deem as inferior.

My point is that the speculation in the past year or so will end up making one side seem at least somewhat amateurish. It just seems so odd that there wasn't so much talk about this being a real possibility a few years ago.

 

[lazyboy97o]

i found a comparison video, and while the character animation and models are vastly improved, they're essentially the same designs. The only real difference is that Doc Ock is weating a coat and even the costume underneath is the same.

You're still just ignoring the issue. It's not a comic book basis nor is it consistent to that old vision. Your whole point is debunked and you should just admit it.

Yes, they both care about money, but you know what else is important to Disney, branding and reputation. While they have zero control over what's alread there, the last thing Disney would want is for them to have an MCU related addition that could lead to IoA topping DAK or especially DHS. As you know, both of those parks are receiving major enhancement, so they would want to keep Universal from using the MCU (aka, the Disney owned epicenter of 2010's cimema) if they have any control over it at all. If Universal some how ends up using the MCU for future additions and its because of a contract re-negotiation with Disney, it would create a lot of bad press on Disney's front because they would be willingly shooting themselves in the foot. Yes, Disney profits from Marvel Superhero Island, but not as much as they would for even the cheapest addition to one of their parks. In short, no major corporation would be stupid enough to allow their competitor to 1-up them even more than some people already think they're already doing on their own.

There is nothing in the contract prevent new forms and it makes no sense. The deal was supposed to be the starts of Universal building Marvel lands around the world. It makes no sense for a new park in 2014 to be stuck with 1994 imagery.

 

[lazyboy97o]

While you didn't reply to any of my comments, I'm going to safely assume that this is a shot at them since I made the last few posts. These boards are for the discussion of different points of view regarding Disney and theme parks in general. I'm not trying to be rude with my arguments, so if I may have come across as such, I apologize. I was just these two completely valid points about potential corporate stupidity.

1. If Universal ends up remodeling Marvel Superhero Island with a theme that is directly based on the MCU and could've done it at any time, then they will look stupid for wasting their time building other additions and changes first when they should've done it the second the Avenger's opening weekend numbers came in 4 years ago.

2. If Universal ends up remodeling Marvel Superhero Island with a theme that is directly based on the MCU and had to get Disney to in some way re-negotiate the contract in order for it to happen, then Disney looks beyond incompetent for their agreeably letting their competitor strike them down with their own weapon instead of just leaving them either stagnant or winding up with a product that the general public would deem as inferior.

My point is that the speculation in the past year or so will end up making one side seem at least somewhat amateurish. It just seems so odd that there wasn't so much talk about this being a real possibility a few years ago.

You clearly don't understand the scale of time that goes into a project. Nor are you the pulse of all that is discussed.

 

[Pumbas Nakasak]

While you didn't reply to any of my comments, I'm going to safely assume that this is a shot at them since I made the last few posts. These boards are for the discussion of different points of view regarding Disney and theme parks in general. I'm not trying to be rude with my arguments, so if I may have come across as such, I apologize. I was just these two completely valid points about potential corporate stupidity.

1. If Universal ends up remodeling Marvel Superhero Island with a theme that is directly based on the MCU and could've done it at any time, then they will look stupid for wasting their time building other additions and changes first when they should've done it the second the Avenger's opening weekend numbers came in 4 years ago.

2. If Universal ends up remodeling Marvel Superhero Island with a theme that is directly based on the MCU and had to get Disney to in some way re-negotiate the contract in order for it to happen, then Disney looks beyond incompetent for their agreeably letting their competitor strike them down with their own weapon instead of just leaving them either stagnant or winding up with a product that the general public would deem as inferior.

My point is that the speculation in the past year or so will end up making one side seem at least somewhat amateurish. It just seems so odd that there wasn't so much talk about this being a real possibility a few years ago.

Look I dont really care personally, I have no interest in comic books or the characters. But those, with far more interest than I, have taken time to humour your quite frankly mental ramblings and engaged you in discussion. Sadly you seem to have taken this as validation of interest in your personal fantasies.
The lack of discussion may be down to those, who live in some form of reality in terms of theme park developments, believing what you wish to discuss is pie in the SKY.

If your auntie had baws shed be your uncle.

 

[Quinnmac000]

The funny thing is why are you complaining about Universal not creating an avengers ride 4 years when Disney could've also done it at the same time on the west.

Anyways as the contract has been up for debate many times, BriMan over at Orlando United broke it down what Disney can and can't do and what rights Universal has in regards to Marvel. Maybe then some questions will finally stop.

 

[Donaldfan1934]

That is where you are mistaken.

It costs them ZERO for Universal to promote and sell their products. It's ALL pure profit. Versus spending a few hundred million in hopes that people will come and buy merchandise they are already buying at Universal and Disney profits from.

In any case, it's clear you can't see past the fan perception of the relationship - I understand, I used to think similarly to you. But then I realized, like most here, what really goes on between them - and the only folks who are stuck on making this a Disney ego issue are Disney fans, not Disney itself.

Yes, It costs Disney nothing, but the cheapest, bare bones overlay or even just a Star Wars weekends or Frozen Summer Fun type deal would end up making them more money. Not only would Disney making money on exclusive Marvel merchandise, food, and beverages, but it brings in a whole new group of paying customers to come to their park where they could possibly buy other merchandise, food, and beverages. If DHS were to have something like this, it would only increase the likelihood of these people staying at one of their resorts so they can visit the other 3 parks where they can buy even more merchandise, food, and beverages. Its not just about the Marvel profit, but the overall profit. So while I'm sure Disney is fine with mooching off Universal with the deal as is, they certainly don't want to create a situation in which Universal takes the overall profit and attendance away from them. From what I've heard, Disney has taken the buzz about Potter to heart when it comes to making SWL. So much so that they even got one of the designers on Potter to lead it. Like you, I know that corporations aren't black and white and can always work together. The hypothetical situation we speak of here, however, seems highly unlikely since it would ultimately end up detracting from Disney's overall product in a much bigger way than Potter did. I also think that it would be just as unlikely that re-negotiations that would work in Disney's favor since it would detract from Universal's overall product in big way. This is the reason why I'm going against these theories and believe that the contract will remain unchanged.

 

[marni1971]

woah!..

UNI is getting an avengers ride?

That's the plan.

 

[lazyboy97o]

I also think that it would be just as unlikely that re-negotiations that would work in Disney's favor since it would detract from Universal's overall product in big way. This is the reason why I'm going against these theories and believe that the contract will remain unchanged.

The problem is that you are just making up aspects of the contract.