Interesting rumors about marvel in dl & wdw

[AEfx]

Yeah, I've never got what the big deal is there.

It's not that it's a "big deal", but some people are going "OH NOES THEY DI'NT!" over the Marvel stuff, and are in the same breath, "We want more Pixar/Disney instead."

The Pixar films were originally distributed by Disney, which basically means they used Disney's print-making and theatrical distribution network. They were licensed to the parks early on, but there was never anything "Disney" about the actual making of the films.

So normally I don't think people care much or would mention it, but when the same people who don't "get" that Pixar is really no different than Marvel - it's just that Disney came along to Pixar earlier in it's lifetime. Woody is *not* a Disney created character, but all these years later there really is no perceptible difference. I know it sounds like sacrilege to some, but it's very conceivable Marvel won't be particularly different in a decade or two.

For me personally, the reason I point this out is because I see these extreme knee-jerk reactions to any mention of Marvel ("Not in MY park!!!"), but they are perfectly fine with every SINGLE park being invaded by Pixar, and that a disproportionate number of rides/attractions/etc based on Pixar above all else abound. Heck, they have TWO rides at WDW themed to the SAME movies where you take a slow car ride and shoot at stuff.

People are acting like Spidey is going to replace Tink in Wishes. A ride or two and some walk-arounds would be great - and although I dislike a lot of gender-specific notions, I have to say, yeah, it would be nice to have some characters for boys to meet who don't look like a generic underwear model with black goop in their hair, or pirates (which, great and all - really a role model you want for kids? LOL).

 

[Biff215]

It's not that it's a "big deal", but some people are going "OH NOES THEY DI'NT!" over the Marvel stuff, and are in the same breath, "We want more Pixar/Disney instead."

The Pixar films were originally distributed by Disney, which basically means they used Disney's print-making and theatrical distribution network. They were licensed to the parks early on, but there was never anything "Disney" about the actual making of the films.

So normally I don't think people care much or would mention it, but when the same people who don't "get" that Pixar is really no different than Marvel - it's just that Disney came along to Pixar earlier in it's lifetime. Woody is *not* a Disney created character, but all these years later there really is no perceptible difference. I know it sounds like sacrilege to some, but it's very conceivable Marvel won't be particularly different in a decade or two.

For me personally, the reason I point this out is because I see these extreme knee-jerk reactions to any mention of Marvel ("Not in MY park!!!"), but they are perfectly fine with every SINGLE park being invaded by Pixar, and that a disproportionate number of rides/attractions/etc based on Pixar above all else abound. Heck, they have TWO rides at WDW themed to the SAME movies where you take a slow car ride and shoot at stuff.

People are acting like Spidey is going to replace Tink in Wishes. A ride or two and some walk-arounds would be great - and although I dislike a lot of gender-specific notions, I have to say, yeah, it would be nice to have some characters for boys to meet who don't look like a generic underwear model with black goop in their hair, or pirates (which, great and all - really a role model you want for kids? LOL).

I definitely agree with you that done correctly, some Marvel in the parks could be a good thing. But I disagree about the similarity to Pixar. Disney made a decision many years ago to distribute the Pixar movies and therefore attach their name to them. They clearly did not take this decision lightly, and although they had little control over the actual movies, they certainly saw something there that was worthy of the Disney name and they were in from the start. Fortunately this was one of the good decisions, and today all the movies are probably considered more Disney than even Pixar.

Marvel is definitely different. They have made some great movies through the years, but Disney had no opportunity to be a part of most of that success. Sure, the opportunity didn't come along until later in the game, but most people are not going to rewind 10 years and now consider the Spiderman trilogy "Disney". They've developed their name elsewhere, and in particular in the Universal theme parks. It's always going to be a more difficult sell than the Pixar properties IMO. They're just two very different animals.

 

[Uncle Lupe]

But I was on a Magical Express Bus in June and over the intercom the driver started talking about the Marvel situation and he said something along the lines of "So all those rides in Islands of Adventure are going to be moved into Disney World, and Disney is going to have an entire roller coaster park!"

. :dazzle:

My local McDonald's owner was telling his employees this rumor a month ago, maybe he was on your bus. Specifically said that they are building a entire new park with the Marvel Character rides. :lol: I just laughed and walked away.

Food wasn't they only junk he was serving that day.

 

[Darth Angelo]

Marvel bought the Distribution rights to Iron Man 3 and the Avengers from Paramount last year. This means that next year when we all go see The Avengers, we will see the Disney Castle bumper before the movie opens.

Big deal right, well Disney does like to have big movie openings like they do Pirates. The set-up a screen outside at Disneyland and roll out the red carpet. So I do think that they will do this next year for The Avengers and in 2013 for Iron Man 3.

Slowly we will see Marvel Characters in Disney Parks. Slowly, we will see Disney's name next to Marvel's in movie credits. And eventually (and this might take 10 years or so) we will all think of Marvel like we think of Pixar, as Disney one in the same.

There is already plans for movies from other Marvel characters that the general public have never heard of, like Powerman & Iron Fist, Deadpool, Dr. Strange. And when these movies get made, even though they are Marvel, we will know them as Disney.

Do we need an Avengers ride right now? No.

Do we nee Innoventions retheamed to the Stark Expo? No.

But think about it, the ability to get a whole new legion of fanboys into Disney parks. That whole dress-up as Spiderman and Ms. Marvel crowd that spends tons of money at Comic-con each year.

Think about how we are all with Disney. Now replace Disney with Marvel.

If an Iron Man, Thor meet and greet will sell tickets and annual passes, I say do it.

 

[quirkle]

Marvel bought the Distribution rights to Iron Man 3 and the Avengers from Paramount last year. This means that next year when we all go see The Avengers, we will see the Disney Castle bumper before the movie opens.

Big deal right, well Disney does like to have big movie openings like they do Pirates. The set-up a screen outside at Disneyland and roll out the red carpet. So I do think that they will do this next year for The Avengers and in 2013 for Iron Man 3.

Slowly we will see Marvel Characters in Disney Parks. Slowly, we will see Disney's name next to Marvel's in movie credits. And eventually (and this might take 10 years or so) we will all think of Marvel like we think of Pixar, as Disney one in the same.

There is already plans for movies from other Marvel characters that the general public have never heard of, like Powerman & Iron Fist, Deadpool, Dr. Strange. And when these movies get made, even though they are Marvel, we will know them as Disney.

Do we need an Avengers ride right now? No.

Do we nee Innoventions retheamed to the Stark Expo? No.

But think about it, the ability to get a whole new legion of fanboys into Disney parks. That whole dress-up as Spiderman and Ms. Marvel crowd that spends tons of money at Comic-con each year.

Think about how we are all with Disney. Now replace Disney with Marvel.

If an Iron Man, Thor meet and greet will sell tickets and annual passes, I say do it.

I see your point and I never said No Marvel anywhere - I just don't agree with them being in the "true" (IMHO) parks like MK. I can totally see Marvel as part of DHS - but that doesnt seem to be happening- ever.

If they can bring back some of the more obscure characters as Disney characters and put them in DHS OK - not MK. It is about theming it correctly - placing them where they belong. My husband would wait for a Captain America M&G, he would love to go on a Spidey ride (he has never been to Universal) I just don't want this done in a shoddy way.:shrug:

 

[juniorthomas]

From day 1, the Pixar movies felt very Disney to me so their inclusion in the parks felt very natural. Marvel has such a long history pre Disney so the connection is/will be much harder for me to make.

I get that. Marvel has a very "free agent" vibe about them, which will certainly make them seem like more of an outsider than Pixar. But then again, we went through this with the Muppets. They were a strong brand, and now they're under the Disney umbrella. Seems to be working out okay...

 

[McClane713]

Hey all, been reading for years, it took this subject to actually get me to create an account though. I have been a huge comic book nerd for years, especially Marvel. I'm excited about the possibilities of Marvel and Disney together now. Having said that, I am hesitant about seeing the two combined in the parks. Not because of the "not in my park" mentality mentioned above, but I'm a firm believer in keeping to the surrounding theme. With the mix of the right character in the right area, I think it could work out and eventually be accepted. Iron Man definitely has a place in Tomorrowland, and I think he'd look awesome as a walk around character. Also Captain America having a meet and greet in Liberty Square also makes sense to me. Adding a Savage Land to Animal Kingdom is a bit of a stretch, but still keeps to the theme if done right. My point is, matching the right characters to the right environment could work, just don't force them all in at once no matter what park just to get them exposure.

 

[Nemofinder]

Universal only has rights to certain characters. Spiderman the Hulk, etc. are off limits at least until contracts expire, but Ironman and Thor are free game, adding credibility to the Stark Expo rumor. I think it sounds like a great idea, expanding horizons for a wider audience, pirates are beginning not to cut it, and Tony Stark could give Tomorrowland an actual piece of tomorrow in a fun way.

 

[danlb_2000]

Universal only has rights to certain characters. Spiderman the Hulk, etc. are off limits at least until contracts expire, but Ironman and Thor are free game, adding credibility to the Stark Expo rumor. I think it sounds like a great idea, expanding horizons for a wider audience, pirates are beginning not to cut it, and Tony Stark could give Tomorrowland an actual piece of tomorrow in a fun way.

Actually, they have the rights to quite a few characters. From the contract:

"a character is “being used by MCA” if (x) it or another character of the same “family” (e.g., any member of THE FANTASTIC FOUR, THE AVENGERS or villains associated with a hero being used) is more than an incidental element of an attraction, is presented as a costumed character, or is more than an incidental element of the theming of a retail store or food facility;"

Thor and Ironman are both part of the Avengers so they have the rights to those characters.

 

[NoChesterHester]

Unless a new shared deal is reached I have yet to see any real evidence that any Marvel characters can be used at WDW. I just don't know why it would be in Universal's interest to allow the agreements to change.

 

[SerenityinPA]

Please excuse my ignorance, but is Marvel still creating new characters/comics?

If so, could Disney/Pixar and Marvel combine forces to create a new hero/story? Could be intertesting to see what they come up with.

Just saying..

 

[RSoxNo1]

Universal only has rights to certain characters. Spiderman the Hulk, etc. are off limits at least until contracts expire, but Ironman and Thor are free game, adding credibility to the Stark Expo rumor. I think it sounds like a great idea, expanding horizons for a wider audience, pirates are beginning not to cut it, and Tony Stark could give Tomorrowland an actual piece of tomorrow in a fun way.

Stark Expo is rumored for Disneyland - as of right now those characters are not available for use in Disney World.

Please excuse my ignorance, but is Marvel still creating new characters/comics?

If so, could Disney/Pixar and Marvel combine forces to create a new hero/story? Could be intertesting to see what they come up with.

Just saying..

Yes, they have a similar arrangement with Stan Lee as well.

 

[juniorthomas]

Please excuse my ignorance, but is Marvel still creating new characters/comics?

If so, could Disney/Pixar and Marvel combine forces to create a new hero/story? Could be intertesting to see what they come up with.

Just saying..

That's a great thought. I wonder who the most recent new Marvel character is... You'd have to think that the new deal means Disney would have a bright future, comic book property wise

 

[lebeau]

That's a great thought. I wonder who the most recent new Marvel character is... You'd have to think that the new deal means Disney would have a bright future, comic book property wise

Sure, they create new characters all the time. But most of them have ties to the existing characters. And most fail to catch on. Try to think of any character created by Marvel in the last 20 years who has any kind of popularity.

My go-to example, Deadpool, turned 20 in February. He's connected to the X-Men and would be completely inappropriate for Disney anyway.

Fanboys want the super heroes they grew up with. Marvel and DC have a lousy track record selling readers on new characters. Don't look for Marvel to conjure up some new franchise that Disney will use in the parks to get around the Uni contract. If Marvel could have done that, they'd have done it decades ago.

 

[sublimesting]

Welcome to Hollywood Studios!!!! Be sure to visit Sounds Dangerous.

 

[Master Yoda]

I have no idea if there is a correlation but, if Disney's purchase of Marvel made the picture featured below possible, I think that we can all agree that it was money well spent.

 

[juniorthomas]

Sure, they create new characters all the time. But most of them have ties to the existing characters. And most fail to catch on. Try to think of any character created by Marvel in the last 20 years who has any kind of popularity.

My go-to example, Deadpool, turned 20 in February. He's connected to the X-Men and would be completely inappropriate for Disney anyway.

Fanboys want the super heroes they grew up with. Marvel and DC have a lousy track record selling readers on new characters. Don't look for Marvel to conjure up some new franchise that Disney will use in the parks to get around the Uni contract. If Marvel could have done that, they'd have done it decades ago.

Any new character, though, has a decent chance of catching on though. Having that in our pockets is relatively nice.

 

[juniorthomas]

I have no idea if there is a correlation but, if Disney's purchase of Marvel made the picture featured below possible, I think that we can all agree that it was money well spent.

I would see his movie in a heartbeat.

 

[Kamikaze]

I have no idea if there is a correlation but, if Disney's purchase of Marvel made the picture featured below possible, I think that we can all agree that it was money well spent.

Oh. My. God.
As this was from Gawker, in what context was this posted?

 

[Studios Fan]

I don't think it was from Gawker. It's a teaser poster for the Muppets movie coming out at Thanksgiving.