'Doctor Strange' preview coming to One Man's Dream in October

Donaldfan1934

Donaldfan1934

Well-Known Member
doctornick said:
To be clear, it isn't as clear cut as "is the character an Avenger?" but rather "is the character in the same family as a character used at Universal?" That's significant because what you are really asking is something more like "Is this character in the same family as Captain America?" more or less and it becomes questionable. Lawyers could make arguments for either side effectively as to what constitutes a "family".

That said, the biggest issue with Dr. Strange IMHO is that he was in the Defenders for a while with the Hulk (who is obviously used at Uni). But that was a long time ago and forgotten/not really referenced any more and all of the involved characters were established ahead of time on their own as solo guys. Which begs another question about "families" -- does an established character with their own mythos suddenly become a member of another character's "family" by serving together on a superhero team?



That looks like incidental use anyway and wouldn't be covered by the contract (Dr. Strange is also pictured on one of the panels in IoA as well, which would also be incidental). Furthermore, any past use in California is irrelevant since the are no longer currently used. If IoA closed down the Marvel land and stopped using the characters, then Disney would be free to use any characters at WDW since the prohibition comes into play specifically because Uni is using them.
Click to expand...
Thanks for clarifying the contract. I find it really difficult figuring out what incidental use really means. You can see that Ant-Man has the same treatment in IoA, yet he must be too much of an Avenger for his preview to have been shown at WDW. Like you said, "family" can be hard to define especially when it comes to the Avengers.
 
Donaldfan1934

Donaldfan1934

Well-Known Member
doctornick said:
Regarding the use of the OMD theater for the preview, I wholeheartedly agree with having the Walt show there all the time (until the attraction closes). They should use the Sounds Dangerous theater for previews (the SW clip show is pointless) or the flex theater near RNR. Or, since they are re building the park anyway and the movie previews seem to be an ongoing thing, why not build a theater specifically for use for previews, including having in theater effects the way the Magic Eye does. Would at least provide a permanent solution but be appropriate for an entertainment theme for DHS.

As for previews, I'd guess Dr. Strange would last until Moana replaces it and then Rogue One replaces that.
Click to expand...
What you said here is flawed because it uses common sense. There is no use for common sense at TWDC, only money.
 
Magenta Panther

Magenta Panther

Well-Known Member
Donaldfan1934 said:
What you said here is flawed because it uses common sense. There is no use for common sense at TWDC, only money.
Click to expand...

This. Plus we must remember that Walt's company is now being run by craven merchandisers. The only legacy they respect is Walt's ability to create a successful, profitable company. What they don't get is that he did that by creating memorable, high-quality original works/adaptations and by believing that "quality will out". Uncle Roy Jr. once said that "Disney is not a 'brand'". To Iger and company, that's all Disney is. Sad...
 
D

doctornick

Well-Known Member
Magenta Panther said:
One Man's Dream should stay open no matter how high or low the attendance numbers are. And the film about Walt's life should not be replaced by flash-in-the-pan Iger purchases. Doing so lowers Walt's legacy to the level of Iger's. And that's just sickening.
Click to expand...

Of course -- trying to keep this on topic -- Marvel is hardly a "flash in the pan" company. The company was founded over 75 years ago, starting to produce comics only 2 years after Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs came out. Dr. Strange himself first appeared in 1963 and, in addition to the comics, has appears in various animated shows and a live action TV movie before, obviously in addition to the upcoming MCU film.
 
Princess Leia

Princess Leia

Well-Known Member
Donaldfan1934 said:
Thanks for clarifying the contract. I find it really difficult figuring out what incidental use really means. You can see that Ant-Man has the same treatment in IoA, yet he must be too much of an Avenger for his preview to have been shown at WDW. Like you said, "family" can be hard to define especially when it comes to the Avengers.
Click to expand...
I think it'll be pretty hard for Ant-Man to show up at Disney World. Universal isn't using him, but he was one of the original founding Avengers (even though Disney is using Scott Lang more than Hank Pym).
 
Last edited:
D

doctornick

Well-Known Member
Donaldfan1934 said:
Thanks for clarifying the contract. I find it really difficult figuring out what incidental use really means. You can see that Ant-Man has the same treatment in IoA, yet he must be too much of an Avenger for his preview to have been shown at WDW. Like you said, "family" can be hard to define especially when it comes to the Avengers.
Click to expand...

Here's the actual contract if you want to read it yourself. I will say that I lot of people have a lot of different interpretations of things, so even quoting the contract doesn't quell all the arguments.

IMHO, there's a ton of wiggle room for both sides to make arguments over who is or is not excluded from being able to be used at WDW.
 
Donaldfan1934

Donaldfan1934

Well-Known Member
doctornick said:
Here's the actual contract if you want to read it yourself. I will say that I lot of people have a lot of different interpretations of things, so even quoting the contract doesn't quell all the arguments.

IMHO, there's a ton of wiggle room for both sides to make arguments over who is or is not excluded from being able to be used at WDW.
Click to expand...
Thanks again. With a contract this complex, its always good to take another look at it as developments on both sides are made. I have made arguments about it on here in the past so I know how open ended the language can be.
 
ford91exploder

ford91exploder

Resident Curmudgeon
Projectile vomiting over the latest incursion into the former 'One Man's Dream' now known as 'Iger's Current Hot IP Theater' the former showed the power of dreams and imagination, The current usage shows the power of 'Ego and too much easy money'

Note to Iger just shoot the lock off your collection of treasury shares and buy out the Universal contract so you can have what you REALLY want a MARVEL park in FL.
 
Princess Leia

Princess Leia

Well-Known Member
NothingRhymeswithOrange said:
Interesting theory here... could it be that anyone after 1994 that has joined the Avengers is available to use in WDW? This would make sense since Doctor Strange didn't officially join the Avengers until 2010 but was involved in comic events with the Avengers like Infinity Gauntlet.
Click to expand...

I've thought about it, and I think it's a valid idea.
 
NothingRhymeswithOrange

NothingRhymeswithOrange

Well-Known Member
hakunamatata said:
I think Disney is doing things like this to see if they can test the water. They are trying to either get a reaction out of Uni or get Uni to make a move that somehow voids the licensing agreement.
Click to expand...

Well if somehow this theory is true and Disney has the rights to use any Marvel character post 1994 that wasn't an official Avengers, X-Men, or FF member, or in the Spiderman family then this has the makings for a pretty awesome Marvel Superhero land (if done correctly). With Marvel clearly trying to expand its cinematic universe by adding characters that aren't in the core 4 (Iron Man, Cap, Thor, Hulk), it could open up a ton of opportunities for WDW to get in on Marvel. This would be great branding for DL and WDW to be able to provide different Marvel experiences on each coast, having the original Avengers on the West, and newer Avengers on the east with only GOTG being used in both (but with different ride experiences).

This is all speculative, but after reading the contract numerous times its a logical debatable flaw that the contract has that Disney can use in their favor.
 
pax_65

pax_65

Well-Known Member
Donaldfan1934 said:
Depressing, just depressing. Without Roy, the Disney legacy is heading towards the point of no return.
Click to expand...

I admit that I've been pretty negative and critical lately but still I think things will turn around. Disney has lots of awesome cast members, and I hope sooner or later management will realize that the secret to their theme park success is being true to the ideals that Walt put in place so long ago - because that's where the Magic comes from! :)
 
Hakunamatata

Hakunamatata

Le Meh
Premium Member
NothingRhymeswithOrange said:
Well if somehow this theory is true and Disney has the rights to use any Marvel character post 1994 that wasn't an official Avengers, X-Men, or FF member, or in the Spiderman family then this has the makings for a pretty awesome Marvel Superhero land (if done correctly). With Marvel clearly trying to expand its cinematic universe by adding characters that aren't in the core 4 (Iron Man, Cap, Thor, Hulk), it could open up a ton of opportunities for WDW to get in on Marvel. This would be great branding for DL and WDW to be able to provide different Marvel experiences on each coast, having the original Avengers on the West, and newer Avengers on the east with only GOTG being used in both (but with different ride experiences).

This is all speculative, but after reading the contract numerous times its a logical debatable flaw that the contract has that Disney can use in their favor.
Click to expand...
I agree. Have similar ride experiences just themed differently on the coasts. Dynamic yet more cost effective.
 

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

Back
Top Bottom