Can the East Coast Marvel Problem Really Be Solved? (Discussion)

Uninversal has something Disney really wants. Why would they ever give it to them? Honestly, even if they just sit on the rights, why would they facilitate Disney getting it back?

You're making an assumption that Universal has something Disney wants. You can't back up that statement. For a company that has more intellectual property than theme park space, I have to think that having your competitor down the road promoting your brands isn't such a bad deal for Disney.
 
The Marvel deal is close to a known cost and likely one of Universal's cheapest licensing agreements, and definitely the most lopsided in terms of cost to popularity. It's a bargain. There are other places they can leverage other properties. Two of Epic Universe's four (five if you include the hub) lands are licensed properties, so it's not like Universal is looking for places to put its own properties.

Marvel is no Harry Potter or StarWars, so is the licensing agreement that cheap?
 

Goofyernmost

Well-Known Member
I think that you're 100% wrong about there not being that many MCU fans. The movie series is the highest grossing series of all time. It actually doubles the closest competition. The MCU is at $18 billion, while the #2 series of all time is Star Wars at $9 billion. You're telling me that the highest grossing movies of all time wouldn't sell as rides? You're talking about Star Wars plus Harry Potter just to get to the MCU's drawing power.
You could be right. I don't now and never have followed MCU. I'm just going by how many people that I have come in contact with concerning their choices. I have no memory of ever meeting anyone, but I have met a boatload that are Star Wars fans. However, that changes nothing as far as I am concerned. I think that both Disney and Universal are in lockstep with their agreements. I don't see Disney caring about past portions that Uni currently has established knowing that the future can bring a lot more fresh, interesting characters for the franchise. Looking ahead, collecting gobs of money for doing nothing more than waving the contract in the air, sounds like a pretty sweet deal for Disney and beneficial to Uni for the time being.
 
Upcoming MCU supers that can be used in WDW are the Eternals, Shang-Chi, and Blade (which would be unlikely since it's likely to be R-Rated).

Other supers and related characters that might be eligible for the parks but might have problems due to lack of popularity or from the 'small screen' or 'too adult' are Agents of Shield, Cloak and Dagger, Runaways, New Mutants, Defenders, Helstrom, Punisher, Blazing Skull.

Other supers not entagled with the MCU continuity that can be used: Big Hero Six and Incredibles.

Who are these characters? Never heard of any of them. Did you make them all up?
 

maxairmike

Well-Known Member
Back when Uni got the license agreement, it was no Potter or Star Wars. So, they locked in a cheap licensing deal.

Uni would have to be hurting big time, or Disney would have to offer huge sums to change the deal.

Yep, I believe the number was $4 million for the perpetual license deal. Marvel was desperate for cash back then.
 
I am still not convinced that the Spiderman and Hulk updates were needed to be in compliance with the contract. The contract says "Each THE MARVEL UNIVERSE shall be operated and maintained in a first class manner consistent with the highest standards of the theme park industry". That's a pretty vague statement.

They absolutely were not needed for compliance. Both attractions prior to the update were by any reasonable interpretation "first-class".

Both of the updates had to do with age of the ride equipment and changing technology, not a failure to be in compliance with the contract.

There is no other way to describe it- the ride equipment for Hulk had simply reached the end of its expected useful life. At the time of closure, Hulk had more cycles than any other roller coaster delivered by B&M. Apparently, it was more than double what each of the Dueling Dragons had cycled.

Logically if Universal is going to replace the ride system then they're likely going to do some upgrades to the show. Most creative teams don't ever look at a ride or attraction as being finished. There is always something they'd like to upgrade, change, tweak, but what they can or cannot do is driven by business decisions, like budgets, prioritization, guest surveys and ridership numbers.

Spider-Man was a little different. The ride system was not in need of replacement, but instead, the projection scenes on the original implementation used 5/70mm film. With the movie exhibition industry phasing out film and switching to digital projection it was logical to retire the film projectors for digital projectors.

Many predicted that it may be impossible to obtain new film prints in the future and certainly the cost was going to increase. Well guess waht? Today there are far fewer film printing houses in operation and while you can still get new prints the cost to do so is considerably more. Again, at the time this decision was made Universal decided to update the animation to take advantage of the capabilities of the new digital projectors and to compensate of the loss of resolution. The end result is a better ride experience, but again it was due to changes in technology and supply, not a failure to operate or mantain the ride in a first-class manner.
 

JIMINYCR

Well-Known Member
I was being sarcastic since most of these characters don't have name recognition yet. I've never heard of Google, what is that?
Maybe not for ( ahem ) older folks but the younger generations certainly know them. And anyone who has Netflix, Hulu, or similaro subscriptions that stream the various series. Binge watching these shows have exploded the character popularity. I got hooked on Agents of Shield and Punisher to watch through the multiple seasons. Now moving onto the others.
 

Robbiem

Well-Known Member
I know people say the uni contract only covers theme parks but do we know what that means? Is it just the park or the whole resort? I remember the debate with the avengers monorail not being able to go to Epcot so I assume Disney could use marvel elsewhere in the resort but not the in parks.

Could they add marvel to a resort like Hotel New York in Paris? Maybe turn pop century or an all star into the art of marvel? Or perhaps add marvel themed suites to somewhere like the contemporary themed to Tony Stark or something.

similarly they could maybe do something at disney springs. There was a spiderman musical in new york so a stage show may be possible, maybe replacing cirque? Or perhaps some kind of themed dining experience like planet Hollywood with original artwork and movie props?
 

MisterPenguin

Rumormonger
Premium Member
I know people say the uni contract only covers theme parks but do we know what that means? Is it just the park or the whole resort? I remember the debate with the avengers monorail not being able to go to Epcot so I assume Disney could use marvel elsewhere in the resort but not the in parks.

Could they add marvel to a resort like Hotel New York in Paris? Maybe turn pop century or an all star into the art of marvel? Or perhaps add marvel themed suites to somewhere like the contemporary themed to Tony Stark or something.

similarly they could maybe do something at disney springs. There was a spiderman musical in new york so a stage show may be possible, maybe replacing cirque? Or perhaps some kind of themed dining experience like planet Hollywood with original artwork and movie props?

Contracts are specific as to what they refer to. The Marvel/Uni contract specifies theme/amusement parks (and the never-attempted Marvel game parlors). It also limits advertising and has rules about merchandising fees/profits.

If you're talking about Marvel in Paris, then that doesn't matter because Uni never exercised the option of using Marvel characters in France/Europe, and thus, that windows closed. If you're talking about a Marvel Hotel in Orlando, from the way I read the contract, WDW could do that technically, but they'd have to be very careful about promoting it in the park. And without Marvel M&Gs or attractions... there goes the synergy.

The advertising clause seems to have been interpreted strictly and kept Marvel ads out of the parks (and the Epcot monorail).

However, since the contract isn't about movies, all the MCU movies played in Disney Springs AMC. And ads appeared for the movies all around Orlando (except in a WDW theme park).

As for a Spider-Man play in Disney Springs... is a play an attraction? WDW has a bunch of them in their theme parks. Lawyers, GO!
 

danlb_2000

Well-Known Member
I know people say the uni contract only covers theme parks but do we know what that means? Is it just the park or the whole resort? I remember the debate with the avengers monorail not being able to go to Epcot so I assume Disney could use marvel elsewhere in the resort but not the in parks.

Could they add marvel to a resort like Hotel New York in Paris? Maybe turn pop century or an all star into the art of marvel? Or perhaps add marvel themed suites to somewhere like the contemporary themed to Tony Stark or something.

similarly they could maybe do something at disney springs. There was a spiderman musical in new york so a stage show may be possible, maybe replacing cirque? Or perhaps some kind of themed dining experience like planet Hollywood with original artwork and movie props?

This is a good question. I think there must be some sort of limitation on this because otherwise I would think they would have done a M&G with Marvel characters at Disney Springs, or Marvel character dining at one of the resorts by now.
 

Trackmaster

Well-Known Member
They absolutely were not needed for compliance. Both attractions prior to the update were by any reasonable interpretation "first-class".

Both of the updates had to do with age of the ride equipment and changing technology, not a failure to be in compliance with the contract.

There is no other way to describe it- the ride equipment for Hulk had simply reached the end of its expected useful life. At the time of closure, Hulk had more cycles than any other roller coaster delivered by B&M. Apparently, it was more than double what each of the Dueling Dragons had cycled.

Logically if Universal is going to replace the ride system then they're likely going to do some upgrades to the show. Most creative teams don't ever look at a ride or attraction as being finished. There is always something they'd like to upgrade, change, tweak, but what they can or cannot do is driven by business decisions, like budgets, prioritization, guest surveys and ridership numbers.

Spider-Man was a little different. The ride system was not in need of replacement, but instead, the projection scenes on the original implementation used 5/70mm film. With the movie exhibition industry phasing out film and switching to digital projection it was logical to retire the film projectors for digital projectors.

Many predicted that it may be impossible to obtain new film prints in the future and certainly the cost was going to increase. Well guess waht? Today there are far fewer film printing houses in operation and while you can still get new prints the cost to do so is considerably more. Again, at the time this decision was made Universal decided to update the animation to take advantage of the capabilities of the new digital projectors and to compensate of the loss of resolution. The end result is a better ride experience, but again it was due to changes in technology and supply, not a failure to operate or mantain the ride in a first-class manner.

I find it interesting that they wanted to "update" the Hulk, but they kept the same exact track design before with new materials. To me, the design reeks of a 90s style design and is more or less not that interesting to me. The launch and 0-G roll are awesome, but the rest of the ride isn't anything that interesting, or different than a run of the mill B&M sit-down or floorless. Besides the awesome 0-G roll you had a lame cobra roll, an interesting loop, an uninteresting loop, and two boring corkscrews, without really much else other than transitions to get from inversion to inversion.

I feel like a more modern interesting design would have been lapbars only, gotten rid of the off the rack boring inversions, maybe had 2-3 0-G rolls, a stall with hangtime, more of an emphasis on the course itself and not just the off the rack elements, and airtime. But I guess that the Hulk has been a very popular ride, so people have taken to that layout.

At least they're doing the right thing and making a coaster more my style with Velocicoaster. The dream would be to introduce the tourists to the greatest of RMC, but that may be years away. And it looks like Velocicoaster is going to take up that mantle and have a more extreme and custom design that holds up to the spirit of RMC.
 
Top Bottom