Guardians of the Galaxy Mission Breakout announced for Disney California Adventure

[Californian Elitist]

I think problem was Disney had already dragged its feet (since 2009) with getting anything Marvel in the parks, so we have a re-theme instead of something purpose built.

That's true. Still, what would have a few extra years hurt? It's already been nearly a decade since acquisition. Lol.

 

[truecoat]

Disney Springs is not a theme park, so the contract does not apply.

Not all Marvel characters are covered by the Universal contract. Doctor Strange and the Guardians in particular are not included, and fair game for use within the WDW parks as a result.

But why not call it Marvel to begin with? The change from Super Hero HQ changed last summer.

 

[mickEblu]

This and the fact that you don't have to even know what "Cars" is to enjoy the land.

Yes and also one thing that I think goes unnoticed is that through time, the themed lands/ attractions become brands themselves, regardless of an IP tie in or not. After a certain amount of time the guest isn't going to Radiator Springs from the Cars Universe, they are going to Cars Land at California Adventure. Whether the franchise is still relevant after 20 years does not matter. All that matters is that what the land/ attraction offers is still amusing.

With that said, personally I would of preferred that original concept for Car(s) Land.

 

[mickEblu]

I am curious to know (though I doubt we ever will) how much of the Uni contract discrepancies played into their decision to not get something Marvel-related up and running until now.

I would assume that had a lot to do with it. Also, that they were already building Cars Land and they were probably waiting to see which Marvel IP (that could be used on both coasts) would be popular enough to base an attraction on.

 

[mickEblu]

Im wondering if its still "Marvel Studios" or has it just gone off to its own land with literally no connection to DCA

Good question. I'm thinking they ll ditch the studio thing.

 

[Stevek]

This and the fact that you don't have to even know what "Cars" is to enjoy the land.

Very true, one of the most immersive lands in any Disney park IMO. I can get completely lost in all the details.

 

[sunsetblvd26]

(that could be used on both coasts)

Off-ish topic, but to be honest that's a big reason why I don't like the use of GotG for DCA in general. There are so many Marvel characters that could have cool rides that there simply won't be room for even if there was an endless budget, so why not save GotG for Orlando as one of the few that can be used there? And then expand DCA with some of the big Marvel names (and if they truly were dead set on overlaying the tower, they could have chosen a character/movie that could at least fit in with the area thematically because it doesn't completely take place in outer space).

 

[mickEblu]

Off-ish topic, but to be honest that's a big reason why I don't like the use of GotG for DCA in general. There are so many Marvel characters that could have cool rides that there simply won't be room for even if there was an endless budget, so why not save GotG for Orlando as one of the few that can be used there? And then expand DCA with some of the big Marvel names (and if they truly were dead set on overlaying the tower, they could have chosen a character/movie that could at least fit in with the area thematically because it doesn't completely take place in outer space).

I agree. At least we can rejoice in the fact that WDWs tower was saved from GOTG. So it won't be a complete clone and TOT still exists stateside... for now

 

[HMF]

I don't think Radiator Springs Races was able to do this as effectively. When I ride it, I feel like they intended it to have the rider "live" the Cars movie. Splash Mountain didn't try and have the rider "live" Song of the South. Part of this is because in RSR, you're the subject, not a character in the ride. It then uses elements of Cars to tell the story with you as the star.
.

Most of the best rides in Disney History use this formula.

 

[HMF]

No one said they can't fix things. DCA definitely supports their ability to fix things. DLR is far superior ending this decade than it started. I know there is a fixation around the basis of ideas, but yes DLR is heading in a good direction.

The only outstanding item is Tomorrowland and it deserves more than a coat of paint. I'm willing to wait for the bigger plans to coallesce.

DCA is not completely fixed. In fact I would argue they are breaking it again with GOTG: MB DL's Tomorrowlad has been a joke since 1998. Granted, it's less of a joke than it was then but still a joke.

 

[HMF]

No. They can't use the Marvel name on attractions. That why we had Super Hero HQ in TL.

From the Marvel/Uni contract:

East or West of The Mississippi – permitted uses shall be limited to the use of specific Marvel characters and Marvel may not permit a licensee to use the name “Marvel” as part of the attraction name or marketing.

Still think buying Marvel was a good idea? What good is owning something when you can't use it.

 

[HMF]

That article is super helpful, but man that stuff makes my head spin.

So, basically, Disney gets to reap the benefits of Marvel cinematically, but Universal gets to then use those same characters willy-nilly in their parks to their own advantage.

Honestly, why was Universal's terminating their contract with Marvel NOT part of the agreement Disney made when deciding to purchase Marvel at all? Surely someone in legal foresaw a problem with this down the line.

Also, when Universal pays licensing fees for the use of Marvel, doesn't that money sort of go right back into Disney's pocket?

Which is why Disney's purchase of Marvel was a really, really stupid idea. The only advantage they get from it is a few extra dollars on Bob's paycheck.

 

[HMF]

I just wonder what would have happened if this same thing had gone down with Star Wars.

Essentially, Universal (or whoever) could have built and operated Star Wars land, and the best Disney could do would be to utilize Admiral Ackbar in an area called "Space Fighters".

That's exactly what would happen and shows what a dumb money-grubbing move the Marvel deal was.

 

[HMF]

I think problem was Disney had already dragged its feet (since 2009) with getting anything Marvel in the parks, so we have a re-theme instead of something purpose built.

Maybe they were dragging their feet because some people in WDI correctly noticed that Marvel does not work with the Disney BRAND.

 

[SSG]

Still think buying Marvel was a good idea? What good is owning something when you can't use it.

1. A fantastic idea as the 10's of billions Disney has brought in from movies and merchadising shows.
2.. They are using it ( see point 1 above). Maybe not how you personally want it used, but that's another story.

 

[HMF]

1. A fantastic idea as the 10's of billions Disney has brought in from movies and merchadising shows.
2.. They are using it ( see point 1 above). Maybe not how you personally want it used, but that's another story.

They are using legal loopholes to use it. As for how I would have it used. I would sell it at the first possible opportunity and re-invest the money back into the Studios and Parks..

 

[Travel Junkie]

I can understand from a pure business perspective why Disney bought Marvel and from a business perspective it has worked very well.

On the theme park side it can work in certain instances. Ironically it can go after Universal's primary market of park goers and diversify the type of fan Disney parks attract. However, they can't use much of it in Orlando where it would work in DHS. It doesn't fit in DL and demographically fits in DCA, but not thematically. Disney went with demos and $ over thematic integrity.

 

[Phroobar]

Still think buying Marvel was a good idea? What good is owning something when you can't use it.

They did.

Captain America Civil War
= Worldwide: $1,153,304,495
That is a good reason to buy Marvel.

 

[SSG]

They are using legal loopholes to use it. As for how I would have it used. I would sell it at the first possible opportunity and re-invest the money back into the Studios and Parks..

What loophole? Disney bought Marvel. Disney is making money from that purchase by producing movies and merchandising of the IP that they purchased. What they can’t do is use certain characters in some of their parks. They are using the characters they can where they can, and more is likely to follow.

As for what you would do with Marvel, you can hold whatever opinion you like, but what Disney is doing is probably the more relevant point. Disney isn’t selling Marvel. Why would they?

 

[HMF]

Disney isn’t selling Marvel. Why would they?

If they cared about their BRAND they would. Sadly, all they seem to care about is $$$$$$ so.