Marvel coming to WDW?!?!

[Quinnmac000]

Isn't there a clause in the Univeral contract saying that Marvel would need to be involved if any fundamentally changes. I heard that they had to be very specific on the Spiderman refurb a few years ago because of it.

I'm pretty sure the problem was the costume design didn't fit Marvel style guidelines if I remember correctly.

 

[Phil12]

Wow, stereotyping of millennials. Never seen that before.

 

[Mike S]

When things like radio and TV are included no "duh" Sherlock. We live in the 21st century. We're not living in tribal villages. My grandpa watches a lot of TV. Want to stereotype old people next?

 

[PizzaPlanet]

I got a feeling they aren't.

How would you like an Avengers E ticket?

There's no way it would be based on the MCU.

 

[RSoxNo1]

If ToT would ever get re themed (hopefully never) with an IP, it would be interesting to see how the new Alice: Through the Looking Glass turns out. If it's a strong enough movie and details to fit the attraction.

 

[Haymarket2008]

I'd be shocked at an Avengers E ticket in IOA. But. But. As of this summer, nothing in IOA would be under construction, so they just may have the ability to do so. Not many people care for Doom so it's not as though crowd control would be EXTREMELY hurt.

I'm pretty sure an Avengers E ticket is legitimately happening. That's been on the docket for a while now.

 

[Wikkler]

Oh gods, It reminds me of those youtube comments.
"I gave aspirin to my grandmother while a nurse checked her out.. I'm a Doctor of the levels of Gregory House, Mordin Solus and all the super doctors of the universe! in a single entity!"

Great way to start off the 100th page....

 

[Wikkler]

Uh, I believe the offensive stereotype you made that I was referring to was "all millennials listen to/care about trashy hip-hop music."

 

[Matt_Black]

What's the music they twerk to? Is that still a thing, the twerking? Is twerking on fleek?

 

[Donaldfan1934]

Maybe has to give reasonable approval. That is a rather well established concept. They can't just keep saying "No!" because their bosses at Disney want them to stall the project. If it is in accordance with Marvel's established image then they have no grounds to refuse approval.

i get what you're saying, but it seems like there would be some loop holes in the the broad definition of reasonable approval. For example, I can see that Universal's rights to the to the MCU versions of the characters. Marvel might be able to stop that ride if that were to happen. I think there must be some legal issues because it makes no sense that Universal would've built Fallon, Kong, or even Diagon Alley if they had unlimited use of the characters from easily one of the biggest movie franchises the planet right now. Why else would they not have fast tracked an Avengers ride the second after the movie came out?

 

[lazyboy97o]

i get what you're saying, but it seems like there would be some loop holes in the the broad definition of reasonable approval. For example, I can see that Universal's rights to the to the MCU versions of the characters. Marvel might be able to stop that ride if that were to happen. I think there must be some legal issues because it makes no sense that Universal would've built Fallon, Kong, or even Diagon Alley if they had unlimited use of the characters from easily one of the biggest movie franchises the planet right now. Why else would they not have fast tracked an Avengers ride the second after the movie came out?

There is no loop hole. Re-read the contract. A Marvel Cinematic Universe attraction also comes along with the very high costs of hiring the likes of Robert Downry Jr.

Universal also isn't following Disney's reactionary philosophy. They're not just chasing the latest box office performer for their parks.

 

[Matt_Black]

i get what you're saying, but it seems like there would be some loop holes in the the broad definition of reasonable approval. For example, I can see that Universal's rights to the to the MCU versions of the characters. Marvel might be able to stop that ride if that were to happen. I think there must be some legal issues because it makes no sense that Universal would've built Fallon, Kong, or even Diagon Alley if they had unlimited use of the characters from easily one of the biggest movie franchises the planet right now. Why else would they not have fast tracked an Avengers ride the second after the movie came out?

Yeah, especially how the Uni supporters go on and on about how fast Uni can build stuff. When I brought that up before, I got a host of non-answers, including "Well, they don't really need to, Marvel isn't that popular anyway." ?!?!?

 

[Donaldfan1934]

There is no loop hole. Re-read the contract. A Marvel Cinematic Universe attraction also comes along with the very high costs of hiring the likes of Robert Downry Jr.

Universal also isn't following Disney's reactionary philosophy. They're not just chasing the latest box office performer for their parks.

It's not just chasing box office appeal, its about further incorporating timeless characters into the park. I personally don't think that Universal has a lot of evergreen franchises in their parks. Although there are a few and Marvel is definitely one of them. Most of the characters have been around for roughly 50 years before the movies truly took off and the movies have made them even stronger by putting more obscure characters into the spotlight. The movies being extremely well received by both critics and audiences certainly helps their longevity as well. If you don't think that Universal is a 'flavor of the moment' type operation like Disney is, than explain things like Despicable Me, Michael Bay's Transfomers, and Jimmy Fallon as recent or upcoming additions to the park. Fact is, both companies LOVE to take advantage of strong IP and Marvel is by far among the strongest so not taking advantage of it is completely bullheaded.

 

[matt78]

From what I understand, just Spider-Man is part of the deal. Reports have surfaced that Sony is revisiting the idea for a Venom film given the success of Deadpool, and Disney/ Marvel has absolutely no say in that.

I think this is really stupid on Sony's part. Why wouldn't they wait to see how Spider-Man performs before they make any other plans. If the new Spider-Man is a big hit they would be better off continuing to work with Marvel to make spinoffs for the likes of Venom, Black Cat, Silk, Carnage & the Miles Morales version of Spider-Man. They should also have Marvel help them with the reboot of Men in Black since they have no idea what to do with it considering they are going to cross it over with 21 Jump Street.

Also I can't figure out why Marvel and Universal haven't made a deal similar to Marvel and Sony for the rights to a solo Hulk film and Namor. It makes no sense for Universal to just sit on the license when the could be making a ton of money by working with Marvel.

 

[Matt_Black]

I think this is really stupid on Sony's part.

Stupid, yes, but bear in mind this is the same studio that seriously considered an Aunt May solo prequel movie. What the heck would the plot have been? How she learned to make wheatcakes?

 

[Donaldfan1934]

Yeah, especially how the Uni supporters go on and on about how fast Uni can build stuff. When I brought that up before, I got a host of non-answers, including "Well, they don't really need to, Marvel isn't that popular anyway." ?!?!?

You hit the nail on the head here. You can't go on about Universal building super fast and create excuses for them not building more Marvel.

 

[lazyboy97o]

It's not just chasing box office appeal, its about further incorporating timeless characters into the park. I personally don't think that Universal has a lot of evergreen franchises in their parks. Although there are a few and Marvel is definitely one of them. Most of the characters have been around for roughly 50 years before the movies truly took off and the movies have made them even stronger by putting more obscure characters into the spotlight. The movies being extremely well received by both critics and audiences certainly helps their longevity as well. If you don't think that Universal is a 'flavor of the moment' type operation like Disney is, than explain things like Despicable Me, Michael Bay's Transfomers, and Jimmy Fallon as recent or upcoming additions to the park. Fact is, both companies LOVE to take advantage of strong IP and Marvel is by far among the strongest so not taking advantage of it is completely bullheaded.

You can't have it both ways. Either Universal should have acted following one film to exploit new found popularity or they have something with legs and don't need to act rashly.

 

[Disneyhead'71]

Universal has been building pretty consistently since 2007. Even though they aren't building what you want at the moment doesn't mean they won't get around to it. They already have 2 E Tickets under construction in the park right now, and one of them is Marvel. There is more to come.

 

[George]

What's the music they twerk to? Is that still a thing, the twerking? Is twerking on fleek?

Interestingly enough, I'm a mid 40 something and my workout routine has been 3.4 hours of twerking per day for two decades.

 

[Mike S]

Interestingly enough, I'm a mid 40 something and my workout routine has been 3.4 hours of twerking per day for two decades.

Should've copyrighted it. Lost millions.