Marvel coming to WDW?!?!

[lazyboy97o]

Fact is, the contract refers the comics specifically because none of the movies even existed yet.

Total and complete bullocks. There is no part of the contract which you can quote to back up this statement. Just visiting the park disproves this false concept.

 

[the.dreamfinder]

I have. Still 80% negative but seeing a lot of the pixie dusters throwing down the things change card. And just read a post by a mommy who is so happy that her 4 year old speshul snowflake will be able to ride it cuz TOT is scawy

Hmm... where have I heard that sentiment before?

 

[HauntedMansionFLA]

Is Marvel coming or not? It seems like a no since they couldn't even bring the monorail with the avengers wrap into EPCOT.

 

[the.dreamfinder]

So if an arrangement was made with Disney and Universal, it sounds like Disney will allow Universal to make an Avengers attraction using characters from the movie, and in turn Disney can use the Guardians of the Galaxy characters with no issues.

There would be no issues with GotG at the Florida parks. The only issue is they can't brand it as a Marvel ride. That's it.

 

[Donaldfan1934]

Total and complete bullocks. There is no part of the contract which you can quote to back up this statement. Just visiting the park disproves this false concept.

I looked at the contract and while you are correct that it doesn't start exclusively comic book characters, it does state this in section 29
C.
"Whenever Marvel has “reasonable” rights for rejection of approval hereunder, the basic criteria to be used by Marvel may include inconsistency with (i) basic story line, (ii) the powers, (iii) basic personality traits, (iv) physical appearance (including clothing or costume), and/or (v) living habitat or environment relating to such character as portrayed in Marvel’s exploitation of such character in comic books or other products for the particular time period being depicted by MCA." https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1262449/000119312510008732/dex1057.htm
From what I can infer from this, time period may be something as unchangeable as the families of characters Universal does and doesn't own the rights to. if you look at the Hulk construction walls, you can see that it is classic comic artwork and not Avengers movie screenshots . Also, if "Just visiting the park disproves this false concept" is referring to the statues in the gift shops, that is in and of itself a false concept since Disney is still able to sell Avengers merchandise in their parks regardless. Just check out Merchant of Venus next time you visit the Magic Kingdom. If anything, the statues prove a desire by Universal to move towards the movie versions. My whole point about Universal is that if they can do it, they would've done it already. As far as IPs go, there aren't many bigger than Marvel right now, not even Universal's own Minions.

 

[Kman101]

I feel like the fans are just always reading so much into the contract and trying to sort out this family or that family .... I think everyone involved with this knows what they're doing. If Guardians can be in WDW, then they can be. Some loose family connection isn't going to matter like some think it does ... I don't think Disney will ever be at all desperate or interested in putting the Avengers family into WDW. There are other things they can do. And besides, it's not like they've rushed anything since they've bought it. Maybe they want to see if it has staying power?

 

[lazyboy97o]

I looked at the contract and while you are correct that it doesn't start exclusively comic book characters, it does state this in section 29
C.
"Whenever Marvel has “reasonable” rights for rejection of approval hereunder, the basic criteria to be used by Marvel may include inconsistency with (i) basic story line, (ii) the powers, (iii) basic personality traits, (iv) physical appearance (including clothing or costume), and/or (v) living habitat or environment relating to such character as portrayed in Marvel’s exploitation of such character in comic books or other products for the particular time period being depicted by MCA." https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1262449/000119312510008732/dex1057.htm
From what I can infer from this, time period may be something as unchangeable as the families of characters Universal does and doesn't own the rights to. if you look at the Hulk construction walls, you can see that it is classic comic artwork and not Avengers movie screenshots . Also, if "Just visiting the park disproves this false concept" is referring to the statues in the gift shops, that is in and of itself a false concept since Disney is still able to sell Avengers merchandise in their parks regardless. Just check out Merchant of Venus next time you visit the Magic Kingdom. If anything, the statues prove a desire by Universal to move towards the movie versions. My whole point about Universal is that if they can do it, they would've done it already. As far as IPs go, there aren't many bigger than Marvel right now, not even Universal's own Minions.

A time period being depicted is not at all the time period when the contract was signed. That whole clause is about content.

I'm not talking about merchandise being proof that the depictions are only from the comics.

 

[FigmentJedi]

A time period being depicted is not at all the time period when the contract was signed. That whole clause is about content.

I'm not talking about merchandise being proof that the depictions are only from the comics.

And I'm pretty sure Doctor Octopus going from the 90s cartoon look to the Spider-Man 2 design for the HD upgrade to the Spider-Man ride is proof enough that they aren't limited to comic designs.

 

[lazyboy97o]

And I'm pretty sure Doctor Octopus going from the 90s cartoon look to the Spider-Man 2 design for the HD upgrade to the Spider-Man ride is proof enough that they aren't limited to comic designs.

Just the first part of your statement is proof. A television show is not a comic book.

 

[the.dreamfinder]

Just the first part of your statement is proof. A television show is not a comic book.

Also, isn't there an Iron Man statue in one of the gift shops that's based on the design from the 2008 film?

 

[FigmentJedi]

Just the first part of your statement is proof. A television show is not a comic book.

Well I think the Spider-Man 90s show was very much a product of its time in terms of its designs. You had that orange and green get-up in both that show and the comics. But I'm pretty sure most of the animation produced for the three rides were all using the 90s Marvel cartoon character models and studios anyways.

 

[Quinnmac000]

I looked at the contract and while you are correct that it doesn't start exclusively comic book characters, it does state this in section 29
C.
"Whenever Marvel has “reasonable” rights for rejection of approval hereunder, the basic criteria to be used by Marvel may include inconsistency with (i) basic story line, (ii) the powers, (iii) basic personality traits, (iv) physical appearance (including clothing or costume), and/or (v) living habitat or environment relating to such character as portrayed in Marvel’s exploitation of such character in comic books or other products for the particular time period being depicted by MCA." https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1262449/000119312510008732/dex1057.htm
From what I can infer from this, time period may be something as unchangeable as the families of characters Universal does and doesn't own the rights to. if you look at the Hulk construction walls, you can see that it is classic comic artwork and not Avengers movie screenshots . Also, if "Just visiting the park disproves this false concept" is referring to the statues in the gift shops, that is in and of itself a false concept since Disney is still able to sell Avengers merchandise in their parks regardless. Just check out Merchant of Venus next time you visit the Magic Kingdom. If anything, the statues prove a desire by Universal to move towards the movie versions. My whole point about Universal is that if they can do it, they would've done it already. As far as IPs go, there aren't many bigger than Marvel right now, not even Universal's own Minions.

The fact you keep trying to argue with people who are in the know and have insider information on whats happening at Universal won't bode well for you.

1. That clause means the moment Hulk gets updated to present day MCU, the rest of Marvel Super Hero Island will have to get a similiar upgrade to fit the time line.So you aren't helping your cause pulling that out.

2. Disney may own Marvel but they can't let them owning Marvel affect anything in regards to the contract nor are Disney staff allowed to be privy to Universal plans for future attractions because you know because there are LAWS in place for stuff like that.

3. Comcast and Disney are choosing their own battles. Comcast and Disney may have a load of lawyers on retainer but I doubt they want to spend time in court over things that will end up hurting both of them later on.

 

[Quinnmac000]

The weatherman met with Chinese President Xi Xinping.
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/disney-chairman-bob-iger-meets-891287
View attachment 140845
"What The Walt Disney Company has been able to achieve in China, I think, is a perfect example of cooperation, but it also came after years of understanding, years of building up a deep respect for one another and appreciation for each other’s interests.”
Sure thing Bob

Sumner Redstone did it better back in 2006 and actually got a TV channel.

 

[Matt_Black]

3. Comcast and Disney are choosing their own battles. Comcast and Disney may have a load of lawyers on retainer but I doubt they want to spend time in court over things that will end up hurting both of them later on.

I'll agree with this part, anyway. On another message board, someone asked why Disney isn't fighting FOX harder to get back the Fantastic Four rights. I suggested that Disney doesn't care enough, and they want to play relatively nice with FOX in order to hopefully get the Star Wars Original Trilogy rights back someday.

 

[the.dreamfinder]

Sumner Redstone did it better back in 2006 and actually got a TV channel.

Yeah, Bob would like people to forget how the success of others in China because it makes his accomplishments less substantive than they appear.
(Meant to post that in the SPIRITED thread. My bad.)

 

[Mike S]

The fact you keep trying to argue with people who are in the know and have insider information on whats happening at Universal won't bode well for you.

1. That clause means the moment Hulk gets updated to present day MCU, the rest of Marvel Super Hero Island will have to get a similiar upgrade to fit the time line.So you aren't helping your cause pulling that out.

2. Disney may own Marvel but they can't let them owning Marvel affect anything in regards to the contract nor are Disney staff allowed to be privy to Universal plans for future attractions because you know because there are LAWS in place for stuff like that.

3. Comcast and Disney are choosing their own battles. Comcast and Disney may have a load of lawyers on retainer but I doubt they want to spend time in court over things that will end up hurting both of them later on.

Universal would have to go to Marvel for approval though, but I guess that doesn't necessarily mean that Disney would be privy to the plans.

 

[Quinnmac000]

Universal would have to go to Marvel for approval though, but I guess that doesn't necessarily mean that Disney would be privy to the plans.

Fact, Disney would not be privy to anything at all. Marvel wouldn't be even allowed to discuss anything regarding future Universal attractions with anyone at Dis (UC can talk directly to WDI about ideas and spill them themselves but Marvel is not able to). Same with Marvel not discussing plans that DIS has with UC. Why? Most of the ride ideas etc are protected under NDAs and other legal documents. Marvel can go ahead and pass it up the chain but the moment they do its a lawsuit and Comcast would raise a huge deal about it and when it comes to corporate espionage, it would look really bad on Disney.

 

[Bob Harlem]

There have been rumors of Disney/Universal discussions about Marvel. The best I can tell, Universal holds most all of the cards, only in the gray areas like Guardians and the Cinematic Universe might there be a problem. So negotiations would probably be around that. From what I can tell the tradeoff is an agreement to not give Disney issues about using Guardians, and Universal gets to use the MCU. That makes a lot more sense than the speculation on screamscape, etc. (Which basically has no positives for Universal)

 

[Donaldfan1934]

A time period being depicted is not at all the time period when the contract was signed. That whole clause is about content.

I'm not talking about merchandise being proof that the depictions are only from the comics.

Well, the depictions of the characters and land have been virtually unchanged since it opened. What other movie depictions are there if not for the gift shops? I'd like to know.

 

[CaptainAmerica]

I don't know where this idea Universal can't use MCU versions but to clear things up they are allowed to use any versions of the superheroes as long as it is canon.

They can use miles morales as Spider-Man due to he was spider man in the comics but can't make Spider-Man suit purple because it's not canon.

I'm sorry, but this is asinine. "Canon" has nothing to do with it because "canon" is 1) legally meaningless and 2) completely controlled by Disney / Marvel. Your logic would allow Disney to publish a comic book saying "haha just kidding, the last 75 years of comic book history was just an elaborate dream sequence and none of it is canon anymore. Suck it, Universal."