BLACK PANTHER huge hit!

[brb1006]

They could build it in DCA where the Universal / Marvel contract isn’t in play

Pam Hates Penguins is that you? Sorry it's the avatar that got me.

 

[𝐌𝖆𝖓 𝖎𝖓 𝐖𝖊𝖇]

If it was truly in violation of the contract, Universal would probably ask for a cease and desist to close the attraction.

Haven't read the contract but maybe Disney thought the monorail was in loophole territory for being a transportation vehicle and not an attraction. Does the contract specify how the Marvel characters can or can not be used on non-attractions and technically those not "in" the park.

 

[smile]

Ideas can change

... beliefs

 

[𝐌𝖆𝖓 𝖎𝖓 𝐖𝖊𝖇]

Contract question: What about locale? Would Disney be able to circumnavigate the contract by completely avoiding the superhero(s) specifically? For example could they use "Wakanda" as the basis of an attraction so long as that attraction does not specifically mention: the name Marvel and any of the comic/movie's characters?

 

[danlb_2000]

Haven't read the contract but maybe Disney thought the monorail was in loophole territory for being a transportation vehicle and not an attraction. Does the contract specify how the Marvel characters can or can not be used on non-attractions and technically those not "in" the park.

The contract gives Universal exclusive theme park rights to the characters, but it is not clear what would constitute a use by Disney that would violate this.

Contract question: What about locale? Would Disney be able to circumnavigate the contract by completely avoiding the superhero(s) specifically? For example could they use "Wakanda" as the basis of an attraction so long as that attraction does not specifically mention: the name Marvel and any of the comic/movie's characters?

The contract only talks about character licensing, so in theory they could get away with using Wakanda as long as there was no reference to any of the Black Panther characters.

 

[smile]

in theory they could get away with using Wakanda as long as there was no reference to any of the Black Panther characters.

the avland way

 

[Mouse Trap]

"Big Hit", "Blockbuster" I love these terms, but they're all based on take or the money brought in to the box office.

Every year movies get more and more expensive to make and that is passed on where tickets for movie-goers gets more and more expensive. Proportionately and logically, movies take in more and more money. The movies aren’t getting more and more betterer.
They think we’re stupid and that how much money a movie makes is a reflection on its quality. Just not so, but believe it if you will.

I suggest, and put towards the movie-makers, that they simply post actual total ticket sales. I’m guessing they won’t do that because it will show that there really hasn’t been a huge variation of who pays to see a movie.

I bet the comparison of budget and ticket sales between Jaws and John Carter would be glaring.

No one in the entertainment biz cares about tickets sold. It’s all about $$$ generated.

 

[the.dreamfinder]

the avland way

No one cares about the Avatar characters. They love T’Challa and co.

 

[HauntedMansionFLA]

The contract gives Universal exclusive theme park rights to the characters, but it is not clear what would constitute a use by Disney that would violate this.



The contract only talks about character licensing, so in theory they could get away with using Wakanda as long as there was no reference to any of the Black Panther characters.

I guess if WDW was interested in putting a lot of Marvel into their parks, they would develop movie characters that can be used in WDW.

 

[smile]

No one cares about the Avatar characters. They love T’Challa and co.

didn't say otherwise - just referencing dan's theory

 

[Disneyhead'71]

Black Panther is so popular...

Disney is gonna build Wakanda in Toon Lagoon.

And T'Challa and Starlord will have major roles in SW Ep. IX.

 

[smile]

Disney is gonna build Wakanda in Toon Lagoon.

 

[MisterPenguin]

I guess if WDW was interested in putting a lot of Marvel into their parks, they would develop movie characters that can be used in WDW.

Problem is Marvel's most popular characters are in the "families" of Spider-Man, Fantastic Four, X-Men, and Avengers. If you're a Marvel Superhero, you almost certainly served time in one of those groups, it's like the jury duty of the comics. You could make the argument then, that almost every Marvel Superhero is part of one or more of those groups.

Problem with that argument, which I'm sure Universal would love to make, is that the contract very clearly presumes there are Marvel characters who aren't part of one of those groups. If Universal claims that Doctor Strange and GotG are part of one of those families (and they were for a short time), then Disney can say, OK, then, who isn't part of those families... give us a list of all the characters we can use in Orlando. And Universal would be hard-pressed to find any that would meet that criteria of having absolutely no relation to those four 'families.'

So, it's going to be difficult to find the few superheroes that WDW can use. Just look how obscure GotG was to the general public. They're going to have to elevated a lot more little-known characters and puff them up to make them park-worthy. That'll take years and years.

 

[Disneyhead'71]

Problem is Marvel's most popular characters are in the "families" of Spider-Man, Fantastic Four, X-Men, and Avengers. If you're a Marvel Superhero, you almost certainly served time in one of those groups, it's like the jury duty of the comics. You could make the argument then, that almost every Marvel Superhero is part of one or more of those groups.

Problem with that argument, which I'm sure Universal would love to make, is that the contract very clearly presumes there are Marvel characters who aren't part of one of those groups. If Universal claims that Doctor Strange and GotG are part of one of those families (and they were for a short time), then Disney can say, OK, then, who isn't part of those families... give us a list of all the characters we can use in Orlando. And Universal would be hard-pressed to find any that would meet that criteria of having absolutely no relation to those four 'families.'

So, it's going to be difficult to find the few superheroes that WDW can use. Just look how obscure GotG was to the general public. They're going to have to elevated a lot more little-known characters and puff them up to make them park-worthy. That'll take years and years.

When the contract was drawn up, Universal had an addendum list of which characters they could use.

 

[flynnibus]

So, it's going to be difficult to find the few superheroes that WDW can use. Just look how obscure GotG was to the general public. They're going to have to elevated a lot more little-known characters and puff them up to make them park-worthy. That'll take years and years.

What Guardians and Deadpool prove is that Disney/Marvel can make any Superhero they want and it can be big enough for theme parks. Neither example used their past successes in their current success - they were successful purely based on what today's audience was exposed to as marketing and film.

Marvel can basically say "you like those characters UNI? That's ok, we'll make new ones..."

 

[MisterPenguin]

When the contract was drawn up, Universal had an addendum list of which characters they could use.

Cool. First I heard of such a list actually existing even though the contract alludes to such a list being provided Universal.

 

[bhg469]

Black Panther is so popular...

Disney is gonna build Wakanda in Toon Lagoon.

And T'Challa and Starlord will have major roles in SW Ep. IX.

A young T'Challa visited epcot once.. Just saying

 

[MisterPenguin]

A young T'Challa visited epcot once.. Just saying

Wonder what he thinks of DAK's Harambe.

 

[DisneyFan18]

Quick/Dumb Question - Following the idea of using Wakanda as the place where the land is set, shouldn't characters like Shuri, Nakia, or the Dora Milaje be usable within the land as I don't think they are as related to the families that Universal owns as Black Panther, as a character, is?

 

[Tay]

No one cares about the Avatar characters. They love T’Challa and co.

Yeah as much as I loved Wakanda the characters in the film were just as great to me as the country. I think most feel that way. Pandora imo is way popular than the characters in Avatar.

Quick/Dumb Question - Following the idea of using Wakanda as the place where the land is set, shouldn't characters like Shuri, Nakia, or the Dora Milaje be usable within the land as I don't think they are as related to the families that Universal owns as Black Panther, as a character, is?

I think that could be a loophole but Universal would argue that since they’re related to Black Panther then they can’t be used. I really hope Disney/Universal can come to an agreement on characters in Orlando if they’re just going to use the most popular characters other than Spider-Man for Six Flags style rides and a cafe. I think a fair trade would be to let Universal build a ride with a popular Marvel character in Hollywood for the rights to Black Panther. Maybe Deadpool? It’s not like Disney will ever use him anyway in the parks.