• The new WDWMAGIC iOS app is here!
    Stay up to date with the latest Disney news, photos, and discussions right from your iPhone. The app is free to download and gives you quick access to news articles, forums, photo galleries, park hours, weather and Lightning Lane pricing. Learn More
  • Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
    Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.

Guardians of the Galaxy coming to Energy Pavilion at Epcot

Status
Not open for further replies.
lazyboy97o

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
BrianLo said:
I've made this argument before. Universal's rights are not forward looking. A Star Wars/Avengers comic cross over does not bestow Universal the rights to Rey in their Marvel land. That sounds ridiculous, but how about the Incredibles playing in the Marvel sandbox?

Infinity War clarifies nothing, what Disney does in the Marvel Cinematic Universe today (which they play within their movie rights) has nothing to do with a contract based on comic book licensing from the 90's for a theme park. Either they can use the Guardians now or they can't.

Another one that I think people just wrongfully assume Universal has the retroactive full rights to that they don't... Fantastic Beasts.
Click to expand...
The rights are forward looking. Under EXCLUSIVITY, "plus any characters developed or acquired or licensed in the future." That same clause excludes Star Wars characters or the Incredibles because they would be the type of licensed characters excluded in that same paragraph.
 
Lucky Rabbit

Lucky Rabbit

Well-Known Member
lazyboy97o said:
I did not make any claim that the contract was for all characters.
Click to expand...

lazyboy97o said:
The rights are forward looking. Under EXCLUSIVITY, "plus any characters developed or acquired or licensed in the future." That same clause excludes Star Wars characters or the Incredibles because they would be the type of licensed characters excluded in that same paragraph.
Click to expand...
I'm not following you on how the Guardians appearing in an Avengers movie makes a difference. If you understand it was not for all characters then what would be different? Comic book characters and their respective families interact all the time.

Take for instance Big Hero 6: http://marvel.wikia.com/wiki/Big_Hero_Six_(Earth-616) they have interacted with Spider-Man and the X-Men. This happens because they are Marvel properties and exist within the same universe. Should that mean because of comic interactions that Universal has theme park rights to Baymax?
 
Movielover

Movielover

Well-Known Member
From what I understand Uni has the rights for only certain characters and I believe those are Spider-Man, The Avengers, Fantastic 4, and X-Men. Uni can continue to uses these characters uninterrupted. Disney can use characters like Dr. Strange and Guardians because they were unknown/not in Uni's contracts. Disney also can not use the name MARVEL anywhere. Please correct me if I am wrong.
 
S

seascape

Well-Known Member
Movielover said:
From what I understand Uni has the rights for only certain characters and I believe those are Spider-Man, The Avengers, Fantastic 4, and X-Men. Uni can continue to uses these characters uninterrupted. Disney can use characters like Dr. Strange and Guardians because they were unknown/not in Uni's contracts. Disney also can not use the name MARVEL anywhere. Please correct me if I am wrong.
Click to expand...
You are absolutely correct. Universal can continue to use the characters they have the rights to forever as long as they follow their obligations.
 
lazyboy97o

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
Lucky Rabbit said:
I'm not following you on how the Guardians appearing in an Avengers movie makes a difference. If you understand it was not for all characters then what would be different? Comic book characters and their respective families interact all the time.

Take for instance Big Hero 6: http://marvel.wikia.com/wiki/Big_Hero_Six_(Earth-616) they have interacted with Spider-Man and the X-Men. This happens because they are Marvel properties and exist within the same universe. Should that mean because of comic interactions that Universal has theme park rights to Baymax?
Click to expand...
Public perception regarding who is part of those families.
 
JEANYLASER

JEANYLASER

Well-Known Member
:confused: Guardians of the Galaxy will be rollercoaster ride for replacement for the Universe of Energy. Does the D23 Expo will make that announcement for the Epcot makeover. :confused:
 
Last edited:
davis_unoxx

davis_unoxx

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
TheDad said:
I understand why Universal would want to incorporate the Marvel IP in their Parks. It is money maker for sure, but in a way I don't understand; because Universal at least for me is starting to water down their brand too much in their own parks. They probably have as many IP's affiliated with their parks at this point than their own IP's. Not sure if it matters though. As long as they can monetize something in their theme parks they probably could care less what they are promoting.

With all of this being said, is the Guardians attraction that is coming to Epcot the same attraction that will be built in Disneyland?
Click to expand...
No, it will not.
 
Mike S

Mike S

Well-Known Member
BrianLo said:
Another one that I think people just wrongfully assume Universal has the retroactive full rights to that they don't... Fantastic Beasts.
Click to expand...
They probably did get them though even if they were separate. Probably at the same time they got the TV rights.
 
U

UpAllNight

Well-Known Member
Universal have a boat load of character rights that they 100% do own that they could focus on before bothering what Disney get up too.

Having visited Marvel SuperHero Island this year I can tell you that the place is looking rather dated. Spider-Man & Hulk (average re-do) aside, the fascades, vibe, Characters, Dining & streetmosphere are all terribly 90s and very underwealming when put up against Potter. I'm astonished with such licensing at their disposal that this area hasn't come on.

There's opportunities here for great themed dining & if they removed Dr Doom they have a large area out the back for a new E-Ticket. They also have the Toon Lagoon theatre they could repurpose....seriously that theatre has been there nearly 20 years and has never hosted anything worthwhile. Meanwhile they hold the rights to Marvel next door.
 
marni1971

marni1971

Park History nut
Premium Member
TheDad said:
Thank you... I don't know where I heard it but I thought I heard it mentioned somewhere that the ride system was based off of the Avengers ride system and that it was a "super" E-ticket and the cost of the attraction is what has slowed down development of it.

Put this in a " I heard a friend tell a friend" box.

Here's to hoping whatever they put there will aesthetically fit the park.
Click to expand...
Avengers in DCA will be a worthy attraction. I wonder if they or USF will open their version first!

The Energy coaster has had ride system technical issues yes, and the proposed cost has also been an issue. Having not seen details of the DCA ride system I can't say if they're the same.
 
Hatbox Ghostbuster

Hatbox Ghostbuster

Well-Known Member
UpAllNight said:
Can't agree here. Epcot is in a desperate state of urgent investment. I think the best we can do is be glad there's money being spent and hope for the best.
Click to expand...
They're already spending money on Epcot with Rat and the proposed changes coming to the spine. This is just Chapek-mandated IP-insertion for the sake of IP-insertion, not the park's overall benefit. IMO.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

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

Back
Top Bottom