Originally Posted By FerretAfros I know that the Tomorrowlands are a mess across the board, but I still like to trick myself into thinking that someone at WDI has half a clue about what should go there. I know that it's rare that they remove any attraction these days, so I just hope that the ones they add are appropriate. Clearly my expectations are too high
Originally Posted By FerretAfros And for the record, I think that HKDL's TL actually does a pretty good job of having a consistent vision and style throughout the land. However, nothing about this addition seems to mesh with that
Originally Posted By Witches of Morva ORDDU: It's really too early to criticize this upcoming attraction since there aren't yet enough details given about it. But it does seem as though the opening date of late 2016 is incredibly long unless they aren't going to start construction until 2015.
Originally Posted By oc_dean ^^^ It's pretty obvious through their own descriptions and artwork, that it involves robotic "monsters" terrorizing the streets of present-day Hong Kong. And Iron Man comes to the rescue, and the flight simulators are along the ride. I swear .. I thought I stumbled on Universal's website. Because this is exactly what they would do. A bland looking building. A ride about joining in with your favorite super hero .. in a shoot'm-up adventure set to a modern day city, (in TOMORROW land) being leveled by bad guys. It's quintessential "Universal". We went from the dubious "If it's good enough for Six Flags" mantra ... to now - "If it's good enough for Universal." The Disney company has forgotten how to be the leader they were before. Now they just "follow" the others, once under them. Acquiring Marvel is fine, for a park separate from the "Disneyland"s. Trying to have their cake and eat too by combining the two into one - It's water to oil.
Originally Posted By oc_dean >>HKDL is getting all the cool stuff.<< I wouldn't call the Toy Story play land, or an Iron Man version of Star Tours "cool stuff". Grizzly Gulch, and Mystic Manor ... yes.
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt "I wouldn't call the Toy Story play land, or an Iron Man version of Star Tours "cool stuff"." It's all better than what Disneyland Park has received in the same period, which has basically been a Princess meet & greet and Starbucks.
Originally Posted By dagobert >>>I wouldn't call the Toy Story play land, or an Iron Man version of Star Tours "cool stuff".<<< I have experienced TSPL at WDSP and it is definitely not a cool stuff. It's so cheap that it shouldn't be in a Disney park. However I think the Iron Man attraction doesn't sound that bad, but I would have prefered Star Tours, since it's the same ride technology. Does anyone know, maybe leemac, why WDI chose Marvel? Or was the decision made by HKDL's management.
Originally Posted By dagobert >>>Whether it fits or not, Marvel's existing licensing contract with Universal for Islands of Adventure make it impossible for Disney to include them in any theme park in the eastern half of the US. They could do something at DLR, but there's less space to work with out there<<< You're right. I didn't think about the legal issues with Universal about Marvel. >>>Just when I was getting hopeful by the popularity of the non-franchise-based (yet still very cartoony) additions for Mystic Point and Grizzly Gulch. I guess I was expecting too much and they needed to put me in my place<<< I'm also sick and tired of franchised based attractions. I guess until 2016 it will not change. Maybe a new CEO has other visions for the parks.
Originally Posted By Brad "Have Disney imagineers been on Spider-Man or Potter yet?" That was my first thought too. Sad that Disney is STILL being trumped by Universal........from 1998. Lame.
Originally Posted By Brad "Whether it fits or not, Marvel's existing licensing contract with Universal for Islands of Adventure make it impossible for Disney to include them in any theme park in the eastern half of the US." Thank God! Can you imagine IOA having to close Spidey so WDW can put in a Wolverine spinner?
Originally Posted By dagobert Just out of interest. Is it possible for Universal to build more rides based on Marvel in the future? Or does it just allow them to keep the current rides and prohibit Disney from building one at WDW? And what about Japan and California? There are also Universal parks. Why aren't they included in the contract?
Originally Posted By FerretAfros >>Yep, I sort of expected more, but apparently Star Tours was already slated to go in this spot, so in a sense it's a step up from what was on the original agenda for HKDL.<< I guess it's a step up. Star Tours took place "A long time ago..." so having a contemporary setting is at least heading in the right direction. Still not exactly futuristic >>I'm also sick and tired of franchised based attractions. I guess until 2016 it will not change. Maybe a new CEO has other visions for the parks.<< I was pretty unhappy when Iger announced he would stay until 2016 (he had previously announced 2015). He has overseen some great acquisitions, like Pixar, Marvel, and LucasFilm, but the company has become creatively bankrupt under his policies. From what we've seen, they're not planning much for after he leaves, so those first couple years without him could be pretty bleak, but hopefully they'll focus on new material for the studios and parks.
Originally Posted By FerretAfros >>And what about Japan and California? There are also Universal parks. Why aren't they included in the contract?<< I'm not really sure why the contract had the geographic limits that it does. At the time, Marvel was relatively unpopular, so I don't think Universal thought there was a huge threat of competition copying their park; Universal may have also realized that they weren't going to build another park like IOA, so they wouldn't need the additional rights. Additionally, it would have allowed for other park operators, like Cedar Fair or Paramount, to add Marvel themed areas to their parks out west, which would have benefitted the somewhat-struggling Marvel brand. It wasn't until after Islands of Adventure opened that the Tobey Maguire SpiderMan films came out, followed a few years later by Iron Man, the start of the Avengers series, and Disney's acquisition. Marvel has had huge popularity in recent years (pushed in part by the deal that Iger put together), but when IOA opened they were much more of a niche market
Originally Posted By HokieSkipper <<It's quintessential "Universal". >> No, it's not. Because Universal would have given it a ride system from this decade, not the 80s. And it would immediately be one of the best rides on the planet instead of just a simulator. <<And what about Japan and California? There are also Universal parks. Why aren't they included in the contract?>> For the record, the contract did include California, and there were plans to build something Marvel related in USH until Blackstone wanted out and decided to throw all the money UPR had at WWoHP hoping to spur on possible buyers for their stake. Uni then let the Marvel contract in Hollywood lapse. Japan is a different story. I'm not sure what the agreement is there, as they too have the Amazing Adventures of Spider-Man ride.
Originally Posted By believe >>> I'm no expert, but I feel like it could end up being more expensive to ship the massive simulators halfway around the world than it would be to build new ones <<< It's actually much cheaper to ship stuff to asia than it is to ship to the US. Since the US imports so much from asia, the ships going back to asia go back empty. Therefore, it's a bargain to export.
Originally Posted By FerretAfros Perhaps that's true, but the simulators are still enormous. There's no way to get them to the port without completely taking them apart, since they're about the width of a 2-lane road. At that point, I could see a lot of benefits to working with all new parts, so that the long-term maintenance will be easier Then again, Iger doesn't really care what happens after 2016, so there's a good chance the Iron Man attraction will debut with 27 year old simulators
Originally Posted By leemac <<Oh lord, are we still in denial about Tomorrowland? Ferret you know that Tomorrowland is just a hodge-podge dumping ground for anything that WDI thinks is remotely Sci-fi/futuristic. In fact, DL may have the only Tomorrowland with an attraction (Innoventions) actually showcasing real world technological advancements. And by technological advancements I mean the latest products from Best Buy and SkyMall.>> HKDL's TL had a broad unified theme - everything from the two restaurants to the attractions. Sure you can always argue that Stitch and Buzz don't completely mesh with the theme but it is in the same ballpark. Filming an attraction that involves aliens destroying HK for TL is asinine. It doesn't fit at all to the TL theme. The Powers-The-Be think it will pander to the local audience to feature HK in the storyline which is even more asinine. Stars Wars can't go to HKDL at the moment for reasons I can't reveal. The show building was set up to accommodate ST originally so it does make sense to repurpose it with the Body Wars ride vehicles for HKDL - but I just wish it was for another property or at least a different storyline. This is a relatively cheap filler (particularly as Tony Stark won't feature - RDJ will voice the attraction though - although I'd wager his dialog is eventually either minimised or entirely eliminated due to cost - I bet Jarvis takes the lead). I hated this idea from the outset and have been pretty upset about it - from the ugly bulky architecture to the overall conceit. I guess I need to get a life but I'm pretty convinced it will negatively impact a land that has been well-executed IMHO since opening.
Originally Posted By leemac <<Just out of interest. Is it possible for Universal to build more rides based on Marvel in the future? Or does it just allow them to keep the current rides and prohibit Disney from building one at WDW?>> Yes - the contract gives Uni the rights to certain characters in perpetuity. They can continually refresh or expand their offerings under the current deal. They is a huge library of other Marvel characters that could be used at WDW though.
Originally Posted By leemac <<I'm not really sure why the contract had the geographic limits that it does.>> USJ has always been a licensed park - they had to sign their own deal for individual rights which is why IPR like Hello Kitty could be used.
Originally Posted By leemac <<For the record, the contract did include California, and there were plans to build something Marvel related in USH until Blackstone wanted out and decided to throw all the money UPR had at WWoHP hoping to spur on possible buyers for their stake. Uni then let the Marvel contract in Hollywood lapse.>> Blackstone had a stake in USH? I thought it was just Orlando.
