More Marvel at Disney World? Maybe?

[Hakunamatata]

This year is Spider Man's 50th anniversary. Disney has a new cartoon coming out, a new movie, a big story arc in the comics, etc. Never give up your flagship property!

I think Xmen trump Spidy when it comes to flagshipness........

 

[GLaDOS]

I think Xmen trump Spidy when it comes to flagshipness........

No way, no how.

Spider-man movie grosses (3 movies): $2,496,346,518

X-Men movie grosses (5 movies): $1,890,097,619

 

[Hakunamatata]

No way, no how.

Spider-man movie grosses (3 movies): $2,496,346,518

X-Men movie grosses (5 movies): $1,890,097,619

Three movies and now they are having to restart the story for spidey. Xmen - 5 movies and they are still exploring new territory.

 

[GLaDOS]

Three movies and now they are having to restart the story for spidey. Xmen - 5 movies and they are still exploring new territory.

And? It's not like they had to completely restart the series. There was plenty to still explore. The studio made the decision to reboot.

Spider-man is the face of Marvel comics. To say any different is showing an ignorance of the comics landscape.

 

[lazyboy97o]

If anyone has a lead on a somewhat solid number for what Universal paid for the Marvel contract, I'd appreciate a tip. I've scoured a few databases and can't find a number for just Marvel. I remember the talk being $2 billion, but that number appears to be related to the entire IOA park, and not just the Marvel contract. I do remember it was a rather large cash infusion to Marvel at the time, though (mid to late 90s), and a relative steal for Universal/MCA. I'm starting to get the feeling it would be somewhere around or north of about $100 million, but that's just my personal thought after thinking and reading through some articles and databases.

The original numbers are censored in the contract posted on the SEC's website. What is important is that the annual licensing fee has a set annual increase which correlates to the Consumer Price Index. So the only thing that is going to make the Marvel contract extremely expensive for Universal is if inflation goes completely nuts, a situation in which none of us win.

 

[Skip]

If the investors are getting anxious about the current cap-ex creating physical attractions and experiences, do you really think they'll approve of the kind of cash that would have to be dropped on Universal just to get back the right to build an attraction at one resort? We're talking about dropping as much or more than a new "ground breaking" attraction before they even begin to talk about the actual physical experiences. I don't think that would sit well with the investors right now. This is a complication for one single Disney destination, and one only. Sure, it's their "biggest," but it's just one. And the possibility for some horrible brand confusion with the resort up the highway is gigantic. People aren't going to say "Oh, all the Marvel stuff is at Disney" and be done with it. People think Harry Potter is at Disney, still! There's already some brand confusion just with the merchandise being available that is easily observed as a guest.

This is a very complicated issue, and for now (and the foreseeable future) the answer is and remains "due to the contract, it isn't happening." If you think Universal is "backing away" from Disney on the monorail issue, you're not paying attention.

If anyone has a lead on a somewhat solid number for what Universal paid for the Marvel contract, I'd appreciate a tip. I've scoured a few databases and can't find a number for just Marvel. I remember the talk being $2 billion, but that number appears to be related to the entire IOA park, and not just the Marvel contract. I do remember it was a rather large cash infusion to Marvel at the time, though (mid to late 90s), and a relative steal for Universal/MCA. I'm starting to get the feeling it would be somewhere around or north of about $100 million, but that's just my personal thought after thinking and reading through some articles and databases.

Excellent post. Love Monk's comments as well.

By the way, I'm totally with the theory that the monorail is testing the waters for legal limitations. What I'm also pointing out that Disney will go no further (except the already out of place merchandise) without significant legal action from Universal.

Those of you who voted "yes" are missing a key point - while Disney owns Marvel characters, they do not have the rights for them in theme parks east of the Mississippi, period. No getting around that outside of paying an obscene amount of money to buy out the contract. For those of you who think its simply possible to construct a new contract that lets Universal keep what it has but let's Disney build as well... It'd be up to Universal, who would of course say "nope."

Also, the previous poster was correct in noting that Marvel was originally supposed to be Gotham - some slick concept art exists. I hear the backup plan for Marvel (contract buy out or otherwise) is to retheme it to Singapore's Sci Fi City, with a modified Transformers ride in place of Spidey, Battlestar Galactica in place of Hulk, and the Accelatron stay... Well... The Accelatron..

 

[Hakunamatata]

And? It's not like they had to completely restart the series. There was plenty to still explore. The studio made the decision to reboot.

Spider-man is the face of Marvel comics. To say any different is showing an ignorance of the comics landscape.

:dazzle:

 

[Bob Saget]

And? It's not like they had to completely restart the series. There was plenty to still explore. The studio made the decision to reboot.

After the Cinematic debacle known as Spider-Man 3, yeah they pretty much had to restart the series. Everything good about the first two installments had been destroyed by this love-traingle of a mess.

 

[Captain Chaos]

After the Cinematic debacle known as Spider-Man 3, yeah they pretty much had to restart the series. Everything good about the first two installments had been destroyed by this love-traingle of a mess.

What do you mean??? You didn't like Emo Peter Parker??? LOL...:lol:

 

[GLaDOS]

After the Cinematic debacle known as Spider-Man 3, yeah they pretty much had to restart the series. Everything good about the first two installments had been destroyed by this love-traingle of a mess.

There was very little good about the first two installments if you ask me. But people seemed to like the Universe/style. People would have still flocked to a fourth. Most were angry at the decision to reboot instead of continue.

 

[Captain Chaos]

There was very little good about the first two installments if you ask me. But people seemed to like the Universe/style. People would have still flocked to a fourth. Most were angry at the decision to reboot instead of continue.

Wasn't the decision to reboot based more on the fact that Sam Remi (is that his name??) 4th installment was not accepted by the studio, or maybe he refused to come back.. I forget which I read... And that they decided to go with a reboot instead of waiting for a 4th installment script because if they didn't do something in a certain amount of time, Marvel would have regained full rights to the Spiderman movies going forward???

 

[GLaDOS]

Wasn't the decision to reboot based more on the fact that Sam Remi (is that his name??) 4th installment was not accepted by the studio, or maybe he refused to come back.. I forget which I read... And that they decided to go with a reboot instead of waiting for a 4th installment script because if they didn't do something in a certain amount of time, Marvel would have regained full rights to the Spiderman movies going forward???

They went with reboot because Raimi's 4 would have been expensive to do. That was the main reason.

 

[Mawg]

Marvel just doesn’t feel like Disney to me, IMHO they should keep it out of the Magic Kingdom and Animal Kingdom, if they want to add some ride to the studios OK, or create a 5th gate even better. But Marvel just doesn't ring Magical to me. Action and high adrenaline yes.

 

[Bob Saget]

What do you mean??? You didn't like Emo Peter Parker??? LOL...:lol:

LOL, yeah that, and the fact they Topher-Grace-i-fied Venom and gave the character 10-min of screentime at best, not to mention the final climactic moments consisted of more crying & apologizing than action. Too many reasons to count, but the cause was lost.

Not that I'm worried about the reboot. Christopher Nolan rebooted a Batman series after what many believe were the worst 2 superhero disasters of all time (Batman Forever, and Batman & Robin). Despite what skeptics predicted, Nolan took a dead series, resurrected with what has been (imo) the greatest franchise/trilogy in modern time.

If the Spidey reboot has even half the quality of Nolan's Batman Begins/Dark Knight series...we'll be in for a good ride.

 

[Captain Chaos]

They went with reboot because Raimi's 4 would have been expensive to do. That was the main reason.

I knew I spelled his name wrong.. :lol:

I new I read something about Raimi in the reasoning why they decided to reboot...

 

[Captain Chaos]

LOL, yeah that, and the fact they Topher-Grace-i-fied Venom and gave the character 10-min of screentime at best, not to mention the final climactic moments consisted of more crying & apologizing than action. Too many reasons to count, but the cause was lost.

Not that I'm worried about the reboot. Christopher Nolan rebooted a Batman series after what many believe were the worst 2 superhero disasters of all time (Batman Forever, and Batman & Robin). Despite what skeptics predicted, Nolan took a dead series, resurrected with what has been (imo) the greatest franchise/trilogy in modern time.

If the Spidey reboot has even half the quality of Nolan's Batman Begins/Dark Knight series...we'll be in for a good ride.

Let me see what annoyed me with Spider-man 3:

1) Emo Peter Parker
2) Too much screen time for Sandman
3) Not enough screen time for Venom (yes, I love me some Venom)
4) Topher Grace, don't care for him as an actor and hated he played Venom

List can go on....

I'm actually worried about the Superman reboot too (I know this isn't Marvel related.... But, that is for a DC thread not Marvel...

 

[fosse76]

Three movies and now they are having to restart the story for spidey. Xmen - 5 movies and they are still exploring new territory.

They re-started the story for one reason: timing. They had to start production on a new film by a certain date or the owner could re-take ownership. Marvel on its own wouldn't have done anything with them, so Sony would have been able to keep the rights until a new script was developed. The new Disney-Marvel Company was watching the clock, so Sony decided the easiest thing to do to get a movie going was to re-start.

 

[Atkins]

LOL, yeah that, and the fact they Topher-Grace-i-fied Venom and gave the character 10-min of screentime at best, not to mention the final climactic moments consisted of more crying & apologizing than action. Too many reasons to count, but the cause was lost.

Not that I'm worried about the reboot. Christopher Nolan rebooted a Batman series after what many believe were the worst 2 superhero disasters of all time (Batman Forever, and Batman & Robin). Despite what skeptics predicted, Nolan took a dead series, resurrected with what has been (imo) the greatest franchise/trilogy in modern time.

If the Spidey reboot has even half the quality of Nolan's Batman Begins/Dark Knight series...we'll be in for a good ride.

The director of this film isn't Nolan. This film is being directed by a nobody. I don't know why the fans have such faith this film will be good. You complain about "Emo Parker," which was funny, but the trailer for the new film looks emo as heck. It's going to be a Spiderman movie about teen angst with a newcomer director being bullied by the stuido into bending to their will. Good luck with that.

 

[GLaDOS]

The director of this film isn't Nolan. This film is being directed by a nobody. I don't know why the fans have such faith this film will be good. You complain about "Emo Parker," which was funny, but the trailer for the new film looks emo as heck. It's going to be a Spiderman movie about teen angst with a newcomer director being bullied by the stuido into bending to their will. Good luck with that.

Have you ever read a Spider-man comic? Because the old ones were full of teen angst, as is Ultimate Spidey,

Marc Webb is far from a nobody, and has said time and time again that he wanted to bring out the humor/sarcasm of Peter Parker, something that was ignored in the previous ones.

This will actually be a Spider-man movie. Not a goofball comic strip of a movie like Raimi's were.

 

[Atkins]

Have you ever read a Spider-man comic? Because the old ones were full of teen angst, as is Ultimate Spidey,

Marc Webb is far from a nobody, and has said time and time again that he wanted to bring out the humor/sarcasm of Peter Parker, something that was ignored in the previous ones.

This will actually be a Spider-man movie. Not a goofball comic strip of a movie like Raimi's were.

It's going to be Twilight in Spiderman form. Marc Webb only directed a bs teen angst movie before. Raimi is an icon. You people don't know how good you had it honestly. This is like going from Tim Burton to Joel Schumacher. Although, actually Shcumacer is a better director and was more tested than Marc Webb, so maybe that's not fair. This smacks of corporate bean counter decision making. That's why a nobody director was chosen. They wanted someone cheap who can be bullied by the studio into letting Sony make the creative decisions like they tried to force on Raimi with Spiderman 3.