-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Lord of the Rings and more coming to DHS?
- Thread starter Oddysey
- Start date
ExtinctJenn
Well-Known Member
I suppose there is a lot bigger scope to the whole Marvel purchase that made it worthwhile (bigger than using the characters in parks) so that isn't too surprising. Still, good lawyers can find a loophole where there isn't one. HAH!
Good lawyers are good at backtracking. Especially ones with mouse ears.
danlb_2000
Premium Member
Don't forget, it's not like this is a contract with some mom-and-pop business that the Disney lawyers can bully, this is a contract with Comcast who I am sure has it's own cadre of very clever lawyers.
ToTBellHop
Well-Known Member
Do they wear them in front of the judge? Complete with "Atty." embroidered on the back? I'm enjoying this imagery. Some judges might go for "Why? Because we like you!"
Did Knee
Active Member
I think it would depend how it was done. It would be entertaining to JUST do cameos, short homages where the characters dip in and out of scenes without being an integral part of the story. Just tipping the hat to them, that way would be fun. That's all I'm saying.
ChrisFL
Premium Member
The only thing that came close was the Avengers Monorail wrap, and I'm sure lawyers from both sides were keeping a CLOSE eye on that...since it basically drove right up to the entrance of MK, but not technically IN the park...
JimboJones123
Well-Known Member
The Universal Marvel deal is HUGE for Disney. Oh, you want to go to the other guys, thanks for not only sending $$$ our way while doing it, but seeing all that wonderful brandig for our billion dollar movies and hundreds of million dollar TV shows.
Bairstow
Well-Known Member
I suppose this is why neither the Avengers nor Ironman monorails were ever put on the EPCOT loop.
doctornick
Well-Known Member
There's actually plenty of characters from Marvel that could be used in WDW; they just aren't popular enough to base any sort of attraction on them. I don't expect to see a Punisher or Blade attraction any time soon. The question really becomes about characters where is is not clear if they would be prohibited -- using SHIELD, for example, is definitely a murky case depending on how widely or narrowly a "family" for a character is defined.
That said, if SHIELD were possible to be used, I think an interactive game (a la Agent P or SOTMK) based on SHIELD in DHS would be a easy to implement option.
That said, if SHIELD were possible to be used, I think an interactive game (a la Agent P or SOTMK) based on SHIELD in DHS would be a easy to implement option.
danlb_2000
Premium Member
Punisher was originally a Spiderman villain and Blade was an Avenger at one point. I am not Marvel expert, but I think it would be very hard to find a Marvel character that wasn't at some point tied to Spiderman, X-Men, Avengers or Fantastic 4.
Lord_Vader
Join me, together we can rule the galaxy.
Looking at it from the outside, it looks like S.H.I.E.L.D. is the organization that brings the AVENGERS together, but that does not necessarily make all members of S.H.I.E.L.D. members of the Avengers, IE Phil Coulson or Maria Hill.
Wilt Dasney
Well-Known Member
For what it's worth, Disney isn't exactly blowing anybody's mind with Marvel in the parks they CAN use it freely. Not yet anyway. Until they announce something bigger than a virtual Iron Man game at Disneyland, WDW fans don't have to feel like they're missing out on anything.
Bairstow
Well-Known Member
...at least not until Shanghai Disneyland opens...
Sped2424
Well-Known Member
Well coulson is a creation of mark fergus and not in the comics (he is now due to his popularity.)
Hot Lava
Well-Known Member
I know, but perhaps they could come up with some new superheroes on the coattails of the established Iron Man, Capt America, etc . . .[/quote]
Isn't this why they are making this Guardians of the Galaxy movie? Pretty obscure characters (seems like a flop in the making to me
). There was a lot about all this on deadlinehollywood when the deal with Marvel and Disney was done. The comments sections have a lot of info. And I am fairly certain this is not just inherited contracts from Marvel. Disney had Universal had to work out terms also. Uni is now pretty restricted with what they can do. No adding, and even improvements or additions to existing rides are tightly regulated.
danlb_2000
Premium Member
I know, but perhaps they could come up with some new superheroes on the coattails of the established Iron Man, Capt America, etc . .
Isn't this why they are making this Guardians of the Galaxy movie? Pretty obscure characters (seems like a flop in the making to me
The contract was inherited as part of the Marvel acquisitions. I have seen nothing to indicate that Uni couldn't expand the Marvel presence as long as the follow the terms of the contract. I see nothing in the current contract that would allow Disney to outright deny a request from Uni to expand Marvel. Uni has also done a major upgrade to Spiderman since the acquisition so Disney is obviously allowing them to do some improvements.
Last edited:
Hot Lava
Well-Known Member
Isn't this why they are making this Guardians of the Galaxy movie? Pretty obscure characters (seems like a flop in the making to me
The contract was inherited as part of the Marvel acquisitions. I have seen nothing to indicate that Uni couldn't expand the Marvel presence as long as the follow the terms of the contract. I see nothing in the current contract that would allow Disney to outright deny a request from Uni to expand Marvel. Uni has also done a major upgrade to Spiderman since the acquisition so Disney is obviously allowing them to do some improvements.[/quote]
I do not have all the info at hand, but like I said DH had a lot in a bunch of stories about it.
danlb_2000
Premium Member
I do not have all the info at hand, but like I said DH had a lot in a bunch of stories about it.[/quote]
Yes, I remember someone pointing this out and I believe a lot of it was incorrect information. Although a re-negation of the contract is possible, I doubt Uni would have agreed to that since they have a pretty good deal with the contract the way it is. Marvel was no where near as popular when the contract was made as it is now. The yearly fee Uni has to pay was set at the time of the contract and was limited to increases only at the rate of inflation. Given the current popularity of the movies Uni is probably getting a bargain with this deal.
Note: Quoting is screwed up, an I don't feel like fixing it.
Last edited: