Originally Posted By Mr X would be a really shocking and depressing headline to read, wouldn't it?? :O
Originally Posted By RobinsonCrusoeEsq That's just about what the headline looked like to me. I'm very afraid.
Originally Posted By Mr X Wow...that's the kind of angry face I would expect to see if such a headline ever came up! >:/ I like it!
Originally Posted By WorldDisney I got no problems with it, as long as the walk thru isnt the storyline of Ang Lee's Hulk....ugh!
Originally Posted By Bob Paris You know, one thing I am actually worried about is will this mean the incredible Spidey attraction will have to be removed from IOA? I would HATE to see that go, since it fits into IOA SO WELL. Indeed, I would almost begrudge it even going into WDW because then we'd have all these pathetic Disney dweebs, who right now talk about going to Uni Florida as if it's crossing the train tracks into the seedy area of town, who would RAVE about it, like they'd just discovered it. PLEASE leave my Spidey in IOA.
Originally Posted By WorldDisney Honestly Bob, I dont see that happening! I mean, I dont uderstand how all of this works, but could they do that? Take away a ride that was licensed and under contract waaaay before Disney entered the pictured...which, uh, was yesterday lol. Again, I think people are getting waaay ahead of themselves on some of this stuff. Universal Singapore has a couple of Marvel attractions due out early next year for their new theme park and I dont see them scraping these muliti million dollar rides tomorrow all of a sudden, but thats just me I guess. We will just have to see what happens. And yes, from someone who has been on Spiderman in Florida and Japan, I love, love, LOVE that ride!!! If that ride is taken away, I imagine a percentage of these park's guest as well, so believe me, if they were force to close them, I dont see them doing it without a fight at least.
Originally Posted By mawnck >>could they do that? Take away a ride that was licensed and under contract waaaay before Disney entered the picture<< No.
Originally Posted By friendofdd This is the top story in today's O/C Register. It is just above a picture of "Pyro-cumulus" clous towering over downtown LA. Disney parks could add heroes By SARAH TULLY Marvel characters from Spider-Man to Captain America could go into Disney theme-park rides and shows under an agreement announced Monday. But don't expect to see any new comic-book attractions in Disneyland soon. One theme-park expert predicts that Walt Disney Co. officials will take their time integrating Marvel characters into theme parks, possibly starting slowly with parades, events and merchandise before building rides. “I don't think they are going to immediately have Spider-Man walking down Main Street, because it's not a good fit,” said David Cobb, the creative director at Thinkwell Design and Production in Burbank, who has worked in the theme-park industry for almost two decades. Disney announced Monday that it was planning to buy Marvel Entertainment Inc. for about $4 billion. Disney would acquire about 5,000 characters, including Iron Man, X-Men, Spider-Man and the Fantastic Four. The Disney and Marvel boards have approved the deal. Marvel shareholders must now do so. The deal is expected to be finalized by the end of the year. The deal could affect Orange County, where Disney is the largest private employer with 20,000 local jobs and two theme parks – Disneyland and Disney's California Adventure. Walt Disney Co. spokesman Jonathan Friedland said no decisions have been made about how local parks would be affected by the Marvel deal. In an interview with CNBC, Bob Iger, Disney's president, said that Marvel characters will have a place in Disney theme parks. “Marvel characters have already proven to be strong in terms of theme-park attraction, and we believe there are a lot of opportunities around the world; not in every one of our parks, because there are some existing agreements that we obviously have to honor, but in a number of places for us to use the Marvel characters to basically help us grow our theme-park business and better entertain people,” Iger said. Marvel already is part of Universal's Islands of Adventure park in Orlando, which has a specific Marvel Super Hero Island that includes the Amazing Adventures of Spider-Man and the Incredible Hulk Coaster rides. Comic-book characters roam the park. A Universal Orlando spokesman released a statement saying the Disney deal would not affect guests. The Disney-Marvel agreement would honor existing agreements, including Marvel's studio contracts on big movies, including “Iron Man.” But Disney could eventually take them over as deals end. Cobb, the theme-park expert, said Disney will need to figure out where Marvel characters fit in the theme parks, especially Disneyland. He noted that Disney has slowly added Pixar features to local parks. It took 20 years for construction to begin on a ride based on the 1989 “The Little Mermaid” movie at Disney's California Adventure. Cobb said he expects Disney will first put merchandise in its stores. Then it could add holiday events or shows to gauge interest. For now, Disney likely will concentrate on completing the renovation of Disney's California Adventure before adding Marvel themes. “I don't see Disney rushing into that willy-nilly,” Cobb said, especially related to Disneyland. “Superheroes aren't necessarily an instant fit.”
Originally Posted By Hans Reinhardt "Honestly Bob, I dont see that happening! I mean, I dont uderstand how all of this works, but could they do that?" I think it will happen eventually. I give Disney five to ten years to get this all sorted out, but based on the way that Disney has protected it's properties in the past I can't see the company allowing its franchises to be featured in a competing theme park a few miles from WDW for eternity.
Originally Posted By WorldDisney Maybe not, but I'm guessing that Spiderman ride was meant to be there as long as IOA was around and I'm GUESSING some ironclad contract to say that ride operates there as long as universal wants it is in hand as well. I'm guessing though since its Disney we are talking about and they can buy out 3rd world countries if they wanted, they would probably come to some deal with Universal in time. But it doesnt sound like everyone should just shut down their rides and close all their Marvel movie projects next week either. And I dont see Universal giving up its number one attraction in the entire park without a fight either...especially since there are now THREE more Spiderman films now in development lol.
Originally Posted By Hans Reinhardt These things tend to be cyclical, so there is no reason to assume that any character based attraction not owned by Universal will be there until the end of time. Sure, this is a different case, and the fact that the characters are featured at IoA complicates things, but the main point is that Disney will no doubt use it's leverage as the owner of Marvel to do what is best for Disney. I suppose the other way around this dilemma is for Disney to buy Universal's theme park operations...
Originally Posted By gadzuux >> He noted that Disney has slowly added Pixar features to local parks. << Slowly?! Who's she kidding? The past few years have seen Nemo, Buzz, Monsters Inc. and Toy Story attractions, and an entire land devoted to 'Bugs Life'. In addition, tons of Pixar characters have invaded parades and merch. >> It took 20 years for construction to begin on a ride based on the 1989 “The Little Mermaid” movie at Disney's California Adventure. << And - of course - Ariel is NOT a Pixar character. The OC Register is better suited to wrapping fish and lining bird cages.
Originally Posted By WorldDisney <<These things tend to be cyclical, so there is no reason to assume that any character based attraction not owned by Universal will be there until the end of time. Sure, this is a different case, and the fact that the characters are featured at IoA complicates things, but the main point is that Disney will no doubt use it's leverage as the owner of Marvel to do what is best for Disney. I suppose the other way around this dilemma is for Disney to buy Universal's theme park operations...>> Sure I get that, but the Spiderman ride is a $100+ million attraction alone!! Who in their right mind, with even just a hint of business sense, is going to build something like that just to have an expiration date on it from the beginning?? Especially if it turns out to be a wildly popular attraction which it is obviously. I cant see how anyone with a lick of common sense wouldnt make these contracts ironclad that as long as they operate that ride, they keep the license of that character...or someone pays them mad money for them to shut it down in the first place. (Which I could see Disney doing lol...hell, I dont put Murder past Disney if they really want something ;D) But anyway, I was at the OTHER site and someone explained that Universal DOES have an agreement that these characters are in place in that park as long as that park is open, so if true, none of that stuff is going away. However, they ALSO made the point Universal only has a contract for their top characters, ie Spiderman, Hulk, Xmen, Fantastic 4, etc, but not the other 4,995 Marvel has. And only exclusive rights east of Mississppi river. Anything west is fair game baby!! So when you think of it that way, Disney can still produce all the other characters it wants at its parks and anything West if fair game....IF what was stated is true (but it came off the internet, of course it is ). Anyway, they dont seem to have a problem building several attractions with the same character in them in one theme park, this wouldnt be too much of a stretch to have the same character in two seperate theme parks on separates sides of the country. Hell, when Spiderman the movie was in limbo hell with who owned the rights, there was a threat that two seperate movie studios threatened to make their own Spiderman movies (Sony and FOX) before they finally got it resolved. Stranger things has happened in corporate America.
Originally Posted By SleepingBeauty82 I'm not going to get caught up in the speculation of what COULD happen. Why get all upset. When they actually announce something official, I'll worry.
Originally Posted By Hans Reinhardt "Sure I get that, but the Spiderman ride is a $100+ million attraction alone!! Who in their right mind, with even just a hint of business sense, is going to build something like that just to have an expiration date on it from the beginning?? Especially if it turns out to be a wildly popular attraction which it is obviously." Because they make their money in gate receipts and merchandise/food sales on the strength of the attraction's draw. "I cant see how anyone with a lick of common sense wouldnt make these contracts ironclad that as long as they operate that ride, they keep the license of that character...or someone pays them mad money for them to shut it down in the first place." Aren't the original Back to The Future attractions now operating with different themes and characters? Wasn't the ET Ride repurposed for The Mummy? You can't say that this kind of retooling hasn't been done before after a contract expired or a franchise was deemed not worthy of having a dedicated attraction. I'm not saying that it will be easy to do, but there's little point in Disney owning these properties if they aren't going to reign in on how they are being used.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>I'm not saying that it will be easy to do, but there's little point in Disney owning these properties if they aren't going to reign in on how they are being used.<< I agree, and i think Disney will move every way possible to find a way to get the Marvel characters out of Universal parks. Likewise, I am sure the folks at Universal are in talks with DC as we speak. I haven't been on the Spider-Man ride, but with some reworking, couldn't it work just as well as a Batman ride? (If not that, perhaps Garfield?)
Originally Posted By WorldDisney "Sure I get that, but the Spiderman ride is a $100+ million attraction alone!! Who in their right mind, with even just a hint of business sense, is going to build something like that just to have an expiration date on it from the beginning?? Especially if it turns out to be a wildly popular attraction which it is obviously." <<Because they make their money in gate receipts and merchandise/food sales on the strength of the attraction's draw.>> Okay you lost me a little bit here. You seem to be emphasizing my argument oddly. Of course, if you have an attraction that is doing that, why would you put an expiration date on an attraction that helps bring in those gate/food recipts in the first place?? I know I'm missing something in your argument, but you are saying the reason why I think they would do everything in their power to keep it around. ESPECIALLY now considering this is the one attraction that can rival nearly anything else in WDW, it would be suicide to lose it, or unless the Harry Potter section is just that good. "I cant see how anyone with a lick of common sense wouldnt make these contracts ironclad that as long as they operate that ride, they keep the license of that character...or someone pays them mad money for them to shut it down in the first place." <<Aren't the original Back to The Future attractions now operating with different themes and characters? Wasn't the ET Ride repurposed for The Mummy? You can't say that this kind of retooling hasn't been done before after a contract expired or a franchise was deemed not worthy of having a dedicated attraction.>> Of course, but thats apples and oranges man. That's THEIR decision to change or close an attraction just like Disney does with theirs every year and thats usually when the attraction is simply no longer popular or they cant find another sponser for it. But to be FORCED to close an attraction over a contract dispute, one that is popular mind you and not fall to the one wind like the examples you gave, because of a third party is a little unheard of. Again, I'm not saying its not possible, I'm stating they would have to be complete idiots in negotiating for these licenses in the first place to let this even happen?? IOA is built on these franchises just like Disneyland is built on Mickey, Donald, Pixar and the whole gang. You take away that HUGE identity for this park, you kill this park. Turn it around, if PIXAR (before Disney bought it) decided one day to sell itself to Paramount Pictures, you honestly think EVERYTHING PIXAR that was built and sold in those parks now would cease to vanish?? Disney wouldnt have been smart enough to think ahead if PIXAR ever got sold that it couldnt use Toy Story ever again and hence its rides, parades, shows, merchandise, etc in their theme parks the next month? And thats just ONE franchise in a long line of them now used everywhere for their parks. I dont see Disney being that idiotic and anything that was in that park STAYS in that park regardless who got PIXAR in the end. Now, FUTURE properties are a different story (and why Disney bought them in the first place...greedy bastards lol). Now build a $2 billion park with imported brand characters as valued assessts knowing that all it takes for Marvel to fold or sell its company to someone else to get itself screwed in the process. It seem like there would be exclusivity rights and safeguards to keep this brand. Seems like common sense business 101. I'm sure with the new Harry Potter land, the same deal would be in place, otherwise whats the point of forking over hundreds of millions in licensing fees and building these attractions is if all it took was for JK Rowling to decide to pass all her rights to Paramount Pictures 2 years later and screw them again if they want to build a Harry Potter theme park and close down your new, well publicized (and guessing highly profitable) new land?? <<I'm not saying that it will be easy to do, but there's little point in Disney owning these properties if they aren't going to reign in on how they are being used.>> Well, obviously Disney knows thats not the reality either, at least in the foreseeable future. I mean, there ARE pending contracts with other companines as well who isnt going to just roll over and hand Disney their multimillion dollar deals and franchies they made and built up with Marvel long before they showed up unless they just buy them out. For example, Sony Studios has the rights to the Spiderman films, they plan to make THREE more of these. Why, because their top 5 films to date are Spiderman 1,2 and 3. FOX has the XMEN films, they have made 4 already and they have THREE more in development now of different variations of that franchise. Xmen films clearly are big for them as well. Its no way FOX and SONY are going to just hand these things to Disney just so they can start making their own Spiderman and Xmen films. Sure I'm guessing there is a point to maybe turn over the rights, but even then that could be a long time from now and these studios probably has in their contract as long as they keep making the films, they keep the rights, hence why there are so many damn sequels, prequels, reboots and everything else. This is my point, just because they bought Marvel, it doesnt mean they can go in and start making their own version of other studio film rights anytime they want now or demand these companies stop making these films, so why do people think it would be any different for theme park licenses?? I doubt it works that way. The Marvel characters in Universal are not going anywhere soon, certainly not the attractions. I imagine there will simply be some characters at Universal and there will be some at Disney. Parmount Pictures plans to make their own Disney-like theme parks with their own properties, been on the boards for years now and plan to use Indiana Jones even though Disney has that character and uses that character in 4 of its theme parks. They simply wont be done in the same area if the place ever gets built. I can even see Universal cutting Disney a check in the future to continue using those characters, but I dont see Universal simply giving them up altogher anymore the studios giving up their movie franchiese anytime soon. To be honest, this is kind of a moot point, because Universal has already said the deal with Disney wont change their operations in anyway.
Originally Posted By WorldDisney <<I haven't been on the Spider-Man ride, but with some reworking, couldn't it work just as well as a Batman ride?>> No offense K2M, but you have to really ride it. Its a veeeery intricate and complex ride that really has Spidermans signature all over it. Its like asking if they could change the Indiana Jones ride at DL into a land based POTC instead . I mean sure, I guess they could, but you basically have to make an all new ride with save maybe the track. Everything about it practically would have to be changed to make a lick of sense. And you are talking a year down at least in the process for the changes. Again, I dont see Universal #1 attraction and most expensive attraction to date in Florida AND Japan mind you going anywhere anymore than I see Disney losing the POTC ride because they sold the film rights to Warner Bros.
