Disney to buy Marvel Entertainment

[jt04]

Skimmed the pages...Splitting headache...

Must...take...Aleve...

:hurl:


p.s. Pumbas Nakasak, you are one of the funniest members here.

Agreed.

Why do you think I like to get him stirred up? Much fun.

Let's not forget the Pixar uproars we still have to this day.... Pixar = Disney and soon Marvel = Disney... :sohappy:

Yep, yep, yep. And the characters work perfect at DHS and possibly DTD.

I find this absolutely hilarious. It's announced that Disney buys Marvel, all of the Disney fanboys are in an uproar cheering that they'll get tons of Marvel stuff for Walt Disney World while Universal will be forced to (or in jt's absurd case, choose to) remove the Marvel theming from Islands of Adventure.

Now we learn that Disney will have to honor the supposed contract that allows Universal exclusive rights to the Marvel's main properties (and possibly more) east of the Mississippi. All of the fanboys, and jt, are silent. WDW has gotten the short end of the stick again.

Meanwhile, Universal isn't losing its island. Still want to claim it's going to be rethemed, jt?

So Iger decides for Uni now? He's just sending a signal that if Uni wants to keep IoA as is, it's fine by him. Why wouldn't it be? But in the halls of Universal's inner-workings, my bet is it's a massive dilemma.

Iger is a genius. :king:

PS -- Please don't scare Evan with thoughts of Marvel characters in Epcot. That's just cruel. However, the UoE possibilities someone mentioned are compelling.

 

[SirGoofy]

Possibly, I don't know. But from what we do know of the contract, nothing themed to the X-Men, Spider-Man, The Incredible Hulk, and the Fantastic Four, arguably four of Marvel's five biggest properties (the fifth being The Avengers). Even then I somehow doubt the accuracy of that, given that the Avengers are actually present in the island (Captain America Diner, Stark Industries Power Plant, etc.)

I'm most interested to see if Stark/Iron Man is included in the deal. I think an Iron Man ride would be great. It won't happen, but the possibility would make me happy.:lol:

I'm slightly more interested in Tokyo possibilities. I don't know what the agreements are over there, but Universal must have some right to at least the Spider-Man franchise since they have a clone of the Orlando attraction there. Tokyo Disneyland isn't run by the Disney Company, but the Oriental Land Company... who supposedly can use anyone in the Disney character library. Given that the Marvel characters are now apart of Disney, I wonder if Tokyo will be able to utilize them... imagine what they could come up with under an insane budget only Japan could muster up!?

Agreed. A Tokyo funded Avengers ride would probably blow my brain out of the back of my skull.

 

[MKeeler]

Fourth Great Idea of the Day -

Peter David (noted Disney fan, including Adventurer's Club Fan) writing Disney Comics.

 

[The Conundrum]

Why do you think I like to get him stirred up? Much fun.



Yep, yep, yep. And the characters work perfect at DHS and possibly DTD.



So Iger decides for Uni now? He's just sending a signal that if Uni wants to keep IoA as is, it's fine by him. Why wouldn't it be? But in the halls of Universal's inner-workings, my bet is it's a massive dilemma.

Iger is a genius. :king:

PS -- Please don't scare Evan with thoughts of Marvel characters in Epcot. That's just cruel. However, the UoE possibilities someone mentioned are compelling.

I actually agree with JT here to an extent. Why would Universal want to promote charecters owned by a competitor? (Although maybe they would?) It just seems wierd to me.

It would be like Disney saying "Sure go ahead and set up a King Kong ride over at DHS and you guys can enjoy the revenue from it. We don't mind".

 

[Skip]

So Iger decides for Uni now? He's just sending a signal that if Uni wants to keep IoA as is, it's fine by him. Why wouldn't it be? But in the halls of Universal's inner-workings, my bet is it's a massive dilemma.

Iger is a genius. :king:

Go on continuing to dream various Iger fantasies. From what we know, it sounds like Universal's got complete control of the situation and holds exclusive rights EAST OF THE MISSISSIPPI. At minimum, their four biggest franchises. At maximum, almost all of the ones worth mentioning.

 

[tirian]

So Iger decides for Uni now? He's just sending a signal that if Uni wants to keep IoA as is, it's fine by him. Why wouldn't it be? But in the halls of Universal's inner-workings, my bet is it's a massive dilemma.

Iger is a genius. :king:

Even if Universal insists on upholding the contract, they have to pay royalties to Disney—and every piece of Marvel merchandise sold at Universal Studios will profit the Walt Disney Company.

That is genius.

(BTW, Hollywood R/R/Rockit is awesome fun, and HP is looking good. Time for the New Fantasyland to get movin' along.)

 

[HMF]

LOL What next - Disney to buy the rights to Dr. Suess?

:lookaroun

Then they get more Licensing fees from Universal.

 

[tirian]

Go on continuing to dream various Iger fantasies. From what we know, it sounds like Universal's got complete control of the situation and holds exclusive rights EAST OF THE MISSISSIPPI. At minimum, their four biggest franchises. At maximum, almost all of the ones worth mentioning.

Universal controls the theme park rights. That's it. Spiderman, Dr. Doom, the Hulk, and Storm will be Disney properties after the deal goes through, and will merely be inside a Universal-owned theme park, similar to how neither ToT, Star Wars, nor Indiana Jones actually belongs to Disney.

 

[Cmdr_Crimson]

This is very interesting including that Many marvel cartoons were being shown on Toon Disney/Disney XD for quite some time...And no one could even realize that something seemed to be brewing when Disney released many of the FOX Spiderman and Hulk cartoons into different dvd's..

Now it seems that with IOA now having Disney, Time Warner & 20th Century Fox in a Universal Park it's an all out battle on the Islands & Studios..

 

[Skip]

Even if Universal insists on upholding the contract, they have to pay royalties to Disney—and every piece of Marvel merchandise sold at Universal Studios will profit the Walt Disney Company.

That is genius.

(BTW, Hollywood R/R/Rockit is awesome fun, and HP is looking good. Time for the New Fantasyland to get movin' along.)

Well sure. That's definitely genius, I don't deny that. But while Disney will most likely be getting some royalties, it sounds like the chances of a Florida Marvel addition will be slim to none (and even if it were an option, I wouldn't put it past them to not do anything with it).

The whole promoting a competitor's product idea, however, is misguided. Once again, I will point out that Universal already "promotes" competitor's products in the form of Shrek 4D, The Simpsons Ride, Men in Black, Jimmy Neutron's Nicktoon Blast, and soon The Wizarding World of Harry Potter. A cut of all the merchandise based on these characters go to their respective studios. It will be no different here.

 

[Disneyfan1981]

I wouldn't dismiss it so early on. Green Lantern has become one of the bigger DC franchises now. It's not like it's a Booster Gold movie we're talking about here.

He is one of the bigger players now. He still has a long way to go and I'm speaking from a person who loves GL more than Batman, more than Superman or any other DC property.

But still, if you ask the casual movie goer who Green Lantern is, I doubt they'll know.

Movie goer sure because there has never been a sole Green Lantern project before First Flight, the Campbell GL will change that even if its horrible because it'll be in the social consciousness.

True, plus the fact that they went with Hal is going to confuse the hell out of people who only know the Green Lantern as John Stewart on the Justice League show.

It will confuse people by seeing a white guy as GL if they are only familiar with the cartoon but WB/DC has been mishandling GL for a while now. Kyle Rayner was introduced during Superman: The Animated Series but given the Hal Jordan origin even the Brave and the Bold spotlit Guy Gardner instead of John or Hal. There is a lot of work that has to be done with GL to get him neat and clean before the film and I think you'll see that happening soon.

I'm excited for it. Although I think they used the perfect man to play the Flash for GL.

Agreed, it doesn't help that Reynolds was tied to Goyer's Flash for a long time before it went nowhere. I'm shocked that he'd play Hal especially considering Hal is a bit more straight-laced but then again I never saw Ledger as the Joker either.

They don't even have to put him in costume. He can just be Tony Stark. And I'm not saying make every exhibit Stark, just make them the host. It would get me into Innoventions more than once a year.

They don't even have to have Tony there, it could just be sponsored by Stark Industries to get away with the cross-pollenation.

Marvel characters weren't and will never be meant to be in Disney parks!

I will never understand this mentality. It really is no different than seeing Indiana Jones or the Star Wars characters or even the Pixar characters if you want to get really technical. Not to mention its a rarity to see a character walking around that doesn't have something specific to do in that park. I see Woody and Buzz at DHS but rarely at MK even though there is a Buzz attraction. I see Rafiki at DAK but never at MK....why would Spider-Man be wondering around Epcot if there isn't a reason to have him there? Disney hasn't done that in the past...

 

[jt04]

I actually agree with JT here to an extent. Why would Universal want to promote charecters owned by a competitor? (Although maybe they would?) It just seems wierd to me.

It would be like Disney saying "Sure go ahead and set up a King Kong ride over at DHS and you guys can enjoy the revenue from it. We don't mind".

Did you take a smart pill about 2 weeks ago? Cause I can actually read your posts now without my head popping off. And they actually make sense. Especially this one. :wave:

 

[tirian]

I actually agree with JT here to an extent. Why would Universal want to promote charecters owned by a competitor? (Although maybe they would?) It just seems wierd to me.

It would be like Disney saying "Sure go ahead and set up a King Kong ride over at DHS and you guys can enjoy the revenue from it. We don't mind".

Actually, as long as it's the classic Kong and not the new one, Disney would talk to Warner Brothers, not Universal. The Kongfrontation attraction was based on the 1970s remake, not the 1933 original.

 

[tirian]

Well sure. That's definitely genius, I don't deny that. But while Disney will most likely be getting some royalties, it sounds like the chances of a Florida Marvel addition will be slim to none (and even if it were an option, I wouldn't put it past them to not do anything with it).

The whole promoting a competitor's product idea, however, is misguided. Once again, I will point out that Universal already "promotes" competitor's products in the form of Shrek 4D, The Simpsons Ride, Men in Black, Jimmy Neutron's Nicktoon Blast, and soon The Wizarding World of Harry Potter. A cut of all the merchandise based on these characters go to their respective studios. It will be no different here.

Quite true, and Disney promotes several competitors too. (Watch American Idol on Fox!)

 

[Skip]

Universal controls the theme park rights. That's it. Spiderman, Dr. Doom, the Hulk, and Storm will be Disney properties after the deal goes through, and will merely be inside a Universal-owned theme park, similar to how neither ToT, Star Wars, nor Indiana Jones actually belongs to Disney.

And? So what? This happens in constantly in Disney with examples you already mentioned, and has occurred in Universal as well. Life goes on. The attractions will remain. My point is that it appears that Disney won't be able to make Florida Marvel-based additions thanks to the previous contractual exclusivity. (And again, I bet even if they could, it would be woefully underused just like Star Wars, Indiana Jones, and the Muppets. Pity.)

 

[tirian]

And? So what? This happens in constantly in Disney with examples you already mentioned, and has occurred in Universal as well. Life goes on. The attractions will remain. My point is that it appears that Disney won't be able to make Florida Marvel-based additions thanks to the previous contractual exclusivity. (And again, I bet even if they could, it would be woefully underused just like Star Wars, Indiana Jones, and the Muppets. Pity.)

I know, and I'm adding that either way, Disney wins. I'm adding to your statement, not contradicting it! :wave:

 

[_Scar]

Do we have Venom?

 

[Skip]

I know, and I'm adding that either way, Disney wins. I'm adding to your statement, not contradicting it! :wave:

If Disney "wins" in your book, fine, I'm not going to waste my time arguing you. The only reason I'm so passionate about all this crap in the first place is that I love Marvel Super Hero Island, especially The Amazing Adventures of Spider-Man. As long as these fantastic attractions continue to operate and expand with minimal interference, I don't really mind what goes on at Disney.

 

[Pumbas Nakasak]

Do we have Venom?

There the new band at the UK pavillion

 

[JimboJones123]

The Universal Studios boards and websites must be going crazy wondering what is going to be left of their parks.

Wait, is there any Universal Studios message boards and web sites???