If I don't "get it," why is most everyone agreeing with me? Stop acting like you know something the rest of us don't. When you're losing this badly, perhaps it's time to look at your own argument and see how flawed it is, rather than continuing to push it stubbornly.
Sorry, I don't play games - "winning" or "losing". I'm just replying to what is being said to me, I wouldn't be "pushing it stubbornly" if people weren't making snarky replies questioning what I've written by people who refuse to see the writing on the wall.
Just because a couple of you are heck-bent that Spiderman is there to stay doesn't make it correct or logical.
/shrug
Well you are entitled to your belief of the subject but that it your faith on it. Not what is ultimately sure fire going to happen.
Universal did not just spend millions of dollars to update Spiderman so they could get rid of it in the near future to get rid of it in order to spend multi millions of more dollars so they can make it into a less popular property.
No, they spent millions of dollars upgrading the infrastructure to make it easier to do a swap-out later.
The ride film was easily the most negligible part. People have tried to argue that, but they don't understand the concept. Merging CGI with live action is very expensive because of the time, effort, and manual detail needed. The five minutes or so of ride film is completely CG, and all the elements still existed. At that point, it's a matter of moving a few objects around, messing with textures, and then reoutputting at a higher resolution. Five minutes of CG animation redone using existing elements didn't cost them millions of dollars - given the raw material, it could practically be done on a MacBookPro.
Everything else was upgrading infrastructure, to the same specifications used in...Transformers.
And a few people have now told you that the timing is not as exact as you say. You also ignore that the Transformers project began and was announced YEARS before Disney purchased Marvel. You haven't answered why Universal was once willing to just drop Marvel but is no longer willing. Your theory only makes sense if there was in issue regarding the contract and if Transformers was created after Disney bought Marvel.
The timing is right on the money, I've been on them. Reviewers at other sites have pointed it out as well. It's close enough to be obvious that fire is within the range of the fire machine already in Spidey, same with the wet features.
As to the timing, I didn't ignore it, it's irrelevant.
The sale of Marvel was not unexpected. If Disney hadn't bought it, it would have been someone else. Universal has been prepared for it for quite some time, it seems. If you notice, Superhero Island is built rather generically compared to the rest of the park. It fits in thematically because comic books are a flat medium, so the sparse, flat signage works - but there is little permanence there. The theming on the two other attractions is in signage only (although it would fit better at USH, even Hulk's color could be reused for a "Nick Slime" coaster, for but one example). They have a ride that could replace Spiderman (Transformers). And that's Marvel Island.
My guess is they have always known that it wasn't a permanent fixture, and have always had an "escape plan", which we are now seeing.
If I'm wrong, so be it. Not sure why some of you find it so threatening, aside from not wanting to lose Spiderman - which I, too, would rather not happen. But it's kind of illogical to think that Universal and Disney, either side, wants to be in bed together like this - people can make assumptions about merchandise, etc., but to be honest - I'm betting part of it will have to do with how well the Spiderman film this summer does how quickly or not the parties depart.
I don't know how anyone logically thinks this status quo will be maintained, but hey, I wouldn't mind - I prefer Spiderman to Transformers, so I'd love to be wrong; but I just don't believe that to be the case, in spite of the fact a few of you seem to agree that I am wrong.
