Sirwalterraleigh
Premium Member
An expired franchise in a place where it doesn’t belong at all?Wakanda --> EPCOT ?
…sure seems to “track”, doesn’t it?
An expired franchise in a place where it doesn’t belong at all?Wakanda --> EPCOT ?
But I don't understand.. Isn't Black Panther one of the Marvel characters they explicitly can't use?
He never mentioned WDW. The headline on this website is misleading and overblown. It was just a quick offhand mention about the idea and nothing more.Okay, just saying Wakanda in WDW doesn't track. Not with Black Panther being an Avenger.
Now what if… he was actually referring to Journey into Imagination? Get it?"Imagine bringing Wakanda to life,"
"No, we don't have anything actually planned, we just want you to imagine it."
I was thinking MK?Wakanda --> EPCOT ?
Wakanda as a place and concept could almost certainly be used at WDW. T’Challa is almost certainly off limits, but sure I could see Shuri being possible.But I don't understand.. Isn't Black Panther one of the Marvel characters they explicitly can't use? What's going to be in Wakanda then? Surely they won't continue the 'Shuri is Black Panther' here? Will it just be the Dora Milaje? Will it be a team up attraction featuring the characters they can use, just set in Wakanda?
The Nondescript Coaster Themed Like India or Whatever was still a better return on investment than anything they’d done since. While that’s not due to a rejection of franchises (a term I think better defines the requirement than just IP and explains why older, smaller properties are ignored) it shows how the franchise mandate was not in response to a failure and the serious problems with cost control. Expedition Everest was a huge success that immediately rejected by Iger who was convinced that only franchises could appeal to audiences and were the key to success. While costs were to rise, that view of the unflappable power of franchises justified an acceleration of costs that resulted in things like Pixar Pier costing more than a true E ticket experience.While World of Frozen is pretty, Mystic Manor remains the best ride at HKDL 10 years after opening.
IP alone does not dictate whether an experience is good, as we've seen several times now in the past few years.
While I wouldn’t frame quite like that, I do think the drive for more inclusive representation is probably part of why these specific IPs are on the table. And that’s not necessarily a bad thing, as they are all quite good IPs in terms of their popularity and how they could be used.They're desperate to put DEI in their parks.
That's the only drive.
But I don't understand.. Isn't Black Panther one of the Marvel characters they explicitly can't use? What's going to be in Wakanda then? Surely they won't continue the 'Shuri is Black Panther' here? Will it just be the Dora Milaje? Will it be a team up attraction featuring the characters they can use, just set in Wakanda?
It seems very irresponsible to tease Wakanda without further expanding what it would look like. I think this land with be met with varying enthusiasm depending on what it features.
I don't know about Black Panther, but Wakanda I'd think almost certainly is. Isn't the agreement based on characters? This would be a place in Marvel.Regardless of park, is Wakanda outside the Universal/Marvel agreement of Marvel representation east of the Mississippi River?
Black Panther (T’Challa) is likely off limits for WDW but Wakanda is likely possible to use. And if Uni tried to block such use, you know Disney would be quick to pull out a PR push saying that Uni is preventing the building of an attraction themed to a popular Black character and concept that they are building for inclusion (with the subtle implication that Uni is being racist).Regardless of park, is Wakanda outside the Universal/Marvel agreement of Marvel representation east of the Mississippi River?
Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.