Originally Posted By DAR <<It would be pretty easy to swap out DC characters for Marvel characters at IOA, if Uni felt compelled to go that route.>> Except DC characters are at the Six Flags parks. Well Universal could do a Hellboy ride they released those films so maybe something there could happen. A Hellboy ride would be pretty sweet.
Originally Posted By Disneyday I'm sorry, Spiderman is fun, probably their best attraction so far, but I don't think it is as great as other people claim it is. I feel like the entire Marvel section of IOA is a bit Six Flags thematically. - According to Nicke Finke, a Hollywood columnist, the only Marvel characters that Universal is allowed to use are the ones that they've already turned into attractions - Spiderman, Hulk, Dr. Doom, and I believe Storm is the other one. She believes that Disney may be able to use the rest of them. There won't be anymore characters licensed to Universal. She also said that she believes that Disney will buy the theme park license back when that section of IOA becomes less popular.
Originally Posted By Spyderman >>I'm sorry, Spiderman is fun, probably their best attraction so far, but I don't think it is as great as other people claim it is. I feel like the entire Marvel section of IOA is a bit Six Flags thematically. - According to Nicke Finke, a Hollywood columnist, the only Marvel characters that Universal is allowed to use are the ones that they've already turned into attractions - Spiderman, Hulk, Dr. Doom, and I believe Storm is the other one. She believes that Disney may be able to use the rest of them. There won't be anymore characters licensed to Universal. She also said that she believes that Disney will buy the theme park license back when that section of IOA becomes less popular.<< That would be never. Considering the land houses 2 of IOA's staple e-tickets plus an addition thrill ride and the fact that it is one of the first lands you can go through the area will never loose popularity. It also helps that Marvel will constantly have a stream of new films in theathers keeping the attractions "relevant".
Originally Posted By Sport Goofy << I wonder if Universal is shell-shocked about this? >> Probably not as much as the folks at GE that have been trying to find a way to sell the parks off. This probably doesn't change much in terms of the day-to-day business model for these parks, but can't help but lower the value of the assets when you look at them as something to be sold to another investor.
Originally Posted By WilliamK99 I don't think Universal will enjoy paying Disney rent on using their property... I have a feeling that when Harry Potter Land opens, and Universal is basically giving Marvel free advertisement in the parks, Universal will be quick to make a deal to give the characters back to Disney in exchange for some money.
Originally Posted By DAR <<Universal will be quick to make a deal to give the characters back to Disney in exchange for some money.>> And you know Disney is going to especially want to have all aspects of Spiderman, theme parks, movies, tv, merchandise, publishing. You don't pay 4 billion and not get the flagship character. That's like buying the St Louis Cardinals but only being able to use Albert Pujols as a pinch hitter.
Originally Posted By DAR It'll still be released by Sony. But I would imagine any future Spiderman films Disney going to be working a deal out.
Originally Posted By Disneyday I believe that with all of the Marvel films now produced by other studios, Disney will share in the profits. However, they could make more money if they produced it in-house. There are still thousands of titles that haven't been optioned by studios.
Originally Posted By leobloom >> I have a feeling that when Harry Potter Land opens, and Universal is basically giving Marvel free advertisement in the parks, Universal will be quick to make a deal to give the characters back to Disney in exchange for some money.>> The reverse is true, too. If Disney wants to advertise Marvel characters, they're basically doing free advertising for Universal IOA. IOA isn't going to get rid of Marvel just because of Disney. Why are Disney fans having such a hard time with this concept?
Originally Posted By Sport Goofy << I believe that with all of the Marvel films now produced by other studios, Disney will share in the profits. However, they could make more money if they produced it in-house. >> I don't know the specifics of the Marvel film licensing agreements, but these are usually based on revenues/licensing fee and not profits. So, Disney pretty much makes bank regardless of whether a film is profitable or not. I think Disney probably doesn't mind getting a check cut to them for films that they don't have to finance.
Originally Posted By Spyderman Marvel's contract with Sony for the Spider-Man films is basically that Sony get's to hold onto the film rights forever so long as they are constantly making a new spider-man film or are "actively developing" one. So they can literally pay some guy to keep writing scripts all day long with no intention of using them and that counts as "active development". Fox studios (X-men, Wolverine, Daredevil) is notorious for this. As for the films Sony already has Spider Man 4, 5, and 6 locked and I remember a few years ago reading that ideally Sony wants it to be a "James Bond" franchise with 20+ films over the years!
Originally Posted By Disneyday I thought that when there is a deal like this that there would be a change of ownership clause in the contract. This would allow the new owner to negotiate a new contract if they wish.
Originally Posted By WilliamK99 I thought that when there is a deal like this that there would be a change of ownership clause in the contract. This would allow the new owner to negotiate a new contract if they wish.<< I am pretty sure, that right now Disney has an army of lawyers going over each and every one of these contracts looking for anything that supports that. But like I mentioned earlier, Sony may own Spider-man movie rights, but Disney owns Spider-man's TV rights, so we could see a Spider-man TV show on ABC....
Originally Posted By tonyanton Also, the films set-up at Paramount (Iron Man, Thor, Captain America, The Avengers) are for distribution only...so even with the Paramount name at the start of the film, Disney/Marvel only pays a small percentage distribution fee and gets to keep all profits. This is the same for Universal and any future "Hulk" films. The Sony and Fox films however are "owned" by those studios. That said, Disney/Marvel still collects some royalties. Regarding the theme parks, it is rumored that the big new Transformers attraction at USH will use the same system as IOA's Spidey attraction. If Universal really didn't want to pay continued royalties out to Disney/Marvel, they could always turn "Marvel Island" into a "Transformer/G.I. Joe Island (Hasbro)" island instead. I never thought the theming of Marvel Island was that great anyway at IOA compared to some of the other areas (like Jurassic Park, Lost Continent, and Seuss Landing).
Originally Posted By Hista98 i wonder if the new broadway spiderman musical, will now be presented by disney theatrics
Originally Posted By Hista98 I think what may worry some is that we do not want to see Marvel intrude into MK for sure -- the fit likely is in the DHS- which badly needs something. Marvel is at least as family friendly as Aerosmith which surprisingly to me I've read little complaints about. ( I have none as they are one of my fave American bands- but still surprised not more backlash) - That won't happen all marvel theme park rights east of the mississippi are helc by universal, so it will only apppear in disneyland.
Originally Posted By Jim in Merced CA <Why are Disney fans having such a hard time with this concept?> Because if it was a truly good fit, it wouldn't have to be explained and justified. It would just make sense.
Originally Posted By WilliamK99 <Why are Disney fans having such a hard time with this concept?> Because if it was a truly good fit, it wouldn't have to be explained and justified. It would just make sense.<< It does make perfect sense.... Disney's weakest market right now is Boys age 11-17... Buying Marvel gains them 5 to 10 years because if they were to build a brand, it would take years for it to gain a following, now they have a ton of characters to make a few Disney XD shows, gain a huge following, and now Disney is raking in the money... Hell I have a feeling we will be seeing a few Marvel TV movies over the next few years as HSM, and the Witches movie have helped Disney rake in a ton.... Trust me , if you are thinking about this from a pure financial stand point it makes perfect sense.
