What will Disney Do with MarvelWalt Disney World: So Disney has Marvel, what will they do?
From Anthony MurphySo what can Disney do with its newly bought Marvel Characters that would not be a copy of Marvel Island at IOA?
Posted August 31, 2009 at 10:23 AM
I bet they can tap Ironman.
But where to put it? DHS?
Comments in chronological order. Most recent at the bottom. This discussion has been archived, and is not accepting additional responses.
From Tim WMy hoping would actually be for Disney to evoke the closure of Marvel Island at IOA.
Posted August 31, 2009 at 11:15 AM
That way they can have complete freedom with the newly acquired franchise of characters. And they really won't want UOF to have the only spiderman ride. Its a huge franchise that they will want at their own park! Honestly Universal should have done something to stop this from happening because im sure their marvel land will unfortunately crumble!
As for a land im sure many want to come to DHS, Marvel will sit nicely where the backlot tour is. It can sit in the middle of pixar place and streets of america. The major characters should be used(xmen, spiderman, fantastic four, and the avengers). They can and will do a really great job with a Marvel land and will be the perfect addition to DHS. Im positive they can do it much better than universal!
As for other thoughts in my mind, Does this mean the marvel park planned for Dubai would reside under the disney name. And would the spiderman musical coming out next year become part of disney theatrical?
From Gareth HStick em in the parade for now, sell the life outta items (Comic stores to come ;)) and Transformers ride at DHS.
Posted August 31, 2009 at 11:03 AM
Thats my predictions in the short term!
From Dan BabbittGareth I beleive Transformers is Hasbro not Marvel.
Posted August 31, 2009 at 11:32 AM
But can I hear Rock N' Roller Coaster Staring Ironman?
From Robert NilesThe Marvel contracts with Universal appear to preclude any Marvel characters going into Disney World, at least for the time being.
Posted August 31, 2009 at 11:41 AM
But at Disneyland? Whole 'nuther story there.
Marvel seems a horrible fit for Disneyland Park, and tough for Disney's California Adventure, given the current renovation plans.
Can anyone say "third park?"
Stick the characters in an afternoon parade at DCA for now, then build 'em a new park for 2016?
From Anthony MurphyAs mentioned, I think Disney hit a gold mine because it expands their base on the boys side to a little higher of an age. Disney (itself), outside the parks, have pretty much have given up on preteen and teen boys just because they can't think of any hit for them. Of course, Disney does own ESPN...
Posted August 31, 2009 at 11:54 AM
From Tim WReally thats so sad Mr. Niles. I really thought Disney could polverise the heck out of Universal and finally get them back for stealing beastly kingdomme ideas and harry potter. Darn!
Posted August 31, 2009 at 11:55 AM
From TH CreativeMr. Niles writes: "Stick the characters in an afternoon parade at DCA ..."
Posted August 31, 2009 at 12:00 PM
I Respond: I'm gonna try and forget you ever made such a suggestion.
From Raul AraozI am not sure how Universal stole either of those things. Eisner let the Beastly Kingdom team go, in his later tenure, due to his paranoid budget cuts. Universal simply hired them.
Posted August 31, 2009 at 12:03 PM
Both Disney and Universal competed to get Rowling to give them the rights to Harry Potter. Universal simply won out based on her favorable view of The Lost Continent and Seuss Landing.
From TH CreativeI must say that the acquisition of Marvel means it is going to be "put up or shut up" time at WDI. As I have indicated on another thread, Universal Creative has (of late) out paced Walt Disney Imagineering. With such a diverse number of characters in the Marvel Universe, WDI has the opportunity to create something spectacular.
Posted August 31, 2009 at 12:07 PM
In Florida, the properties would fit right in at Disney Hollywood Studios. Between now and 2021 (the 50th anniversary of WDW) WDI could put two Marvel themed attractions or shows into the park, upgrade Star Tours and/or the Great Movie Ride and suddenly DHS could be the best park in Orlando.
From brian lochridgeI already posted this on the front page but it fits here to.
Posted August 31, 2009 at 12:40 PM
This just in, Disney will retheme most of its
Jungle Cruise will become Adventures in the Savage Land staring Ka-Zar, loin cloth and all.
Tom Sawyers Island will become Genosia, with Magneto granting safe haven to all mutants.
Space Mountain will become the Fantastic Fantastic 4 ride featuring Galactus.
Cinderella’s Castle will become Dr Dooms Castle, equipped with Water spraying Doom Bots.
Liberty square will be rethemed to WWII Europe with 3 daily street shows featuring Red Skull and Capitan America
The Haunted Mansion will be rethemed Ghost Riders HWY to HELL.
Stitches great escape will remain untouched
From brian lochridgeI was just on some of the Disney boards and they are filled with people saying they don't want Superheros in the parks. They only want to see them in DHS. Thats the problem if your a marvel fan. Disney dosn't need Marvel and I'm affraid Marvel will get poor treatment moving in with the mouse.
Posted August 31, 2009 at 12:57 PM
From Robert NilesThis deal is primarily about reaching "tweenager" boys on the Disney Channel, and later, through films. Disney's been weak with boys in that age group, as its cable TV offerings have skewed heavily toward girls.
Posted August 31, 2009 at 1:08 PM
Theme parks come third in this deal, after TV and movies. And Disney will place its Marvel theme park attractions wherever it feels they will most appeal to tweenager boys.
Nothing is going anywhere soon.
From TH CreativeBrian writes: "I was just on some of the Disney boards and they are filled with people saying they don't want Superheros in the parks. They only want to see them in DHS."
Posted August 31, 2009 at 1:14 PM
I Respond: So they stay in DHS. I think they'd fit nicely in the Studio park in Paris, as well. Or perhaps their own Disney gate in Florida. As IOA has shown, the Marvel characters work well in theme parks.
Brian writes: Thats the problem if your a Marvel fan. Disney dosn't need Marvel.
I Respond: Oh really?
As Bllomberg Press reported today, in the third fiscal quarter of 2009 Disney's film studios reported "a loss." As in red ink.
Bloomberg continues: "At a time when movie franchises dominate ticket sales, Marvel has produced a top 10 picture almost every year this decade.
Three “Spider-Man” films have taken in $2.5 billion worldwide for Sony Corp. since 2002, according to film researcher Box Office Mojo.
“X-Men Origins: Wolverine,” distributed by News Corp.’s Twentieth Century Fox studio, has taken in $179.8 million in U.S. theaters this year, to rank eighth. It has pulled in $363.4 million worldwide, says Box Office Mojo, which is owned by Amazon.com Inc.
“Iron Man,” released by Viacom Inc.’s Paramount Pictures in May 2008, generated $585.1 million worldwide and was the second-biggest U.S. release of 2008, according to Box Office Mojo.
Come on and check out the (DISNEY OWNED) Franchise Train.
Iron Man 2 (May 2010)
Thor (May 2011)
Captain America (July 2011)
Spider-Man 4 (2011)
The Avengers (May 2012)
From brian lochridgeI speaking only from a Themepark point of view.
Posted August 31, 2009 at 1:34 PM
As far as everything else it's probably a great move for Marvel as long as Disney does the same thing they did with Pixar. Leave them alone and let them do their own creative thing.
Disney will get no part of the Spiderman Movies or X men franchise until their pre existing contract is up. With Spiderman 4 on the Horizon and a Magneto Spin off in the works Disney will have to wait to capitalize on some of Marvels biggest characters. That was one of marvels biggest mistakes. The first Movie they controlled was Ironman and that showed that Marvel knows how to make a Superhero movie.
From TH CreativeMr. Lochridge writes: Disney will get no part of the Spiderman Movies or X men franchise until their pre existing contract is up.
Posted August 31, 2009 at 1:55 PM
I Respond: If you are talking about whether or not the Disney parks will "get" a Spider-Man or X-Men themed attraction, I'd respond with "So what?" Marvel has 5,000 characters to choose from. Further a Spidey attraction has already been done. A solid Iron Man attraction would be fine.
This was a huge win for Disney and may have turned Stan Lee into a billionaire.
From Nick MarkhamSorry! Double Post! Just too excited!
Posted August 31, 2009 at 2:43 PM
From Nick MarkhamI just got back from school to see this! UNBELIEVABLY THE BEST, THE MOST AMAZING MOVE DISNEY HAS MADE FOR A LONG TIME! You won't believe how excited I am! Not only can Disney attract all Marvel fans but they can go deeper into the field of thrill rides, getting the abbility to create amazing thrill rides for years to come!
Posted August 31, 2009 at 2:38 PM
Oh, this is a great day!
From Tim WI really wish we wouldn't have to wait for attractions to come out. Because that is the way it seems now....
Posted August 31, 2009 at 2:54 PM
From Raul AraozThis is a long-term investment. You will not see a lot of fruit from this deal until the second decade.
Posted August 31, 2009 at 3:13 PM
TV is probably where you will see the first signs of product from this deal. Expect many new Marvel cartoons on the Disney Channel. Perhaps a major show on ABC.
The internet should get a major Marvel/Disney push as well.
As far as movies go, Disney is going to have to wait for Sony's deal with Spider-man and Fox's deal with X-Men, Fantastic Four and Daredevil to run out before Disney can make much from those properties.
Distribution deals are already in place with Paramount for The Avengers characters, but Disney can profit from those. They just will lack the Disney branding.
In other words, Disney won't really be able to attach their logo on significant Marvel films for a decade.
While there are 5,000 Marvel characters, Most people outside of the comic community probably couldn't name more than 100 of them. The rest are very fringe.
The theme parks are going to be the last place to see significant change from this. Like Robert said, expect a parade at DCA, but not much else until the 50th anniversary of WDW.
Universal has the rights for the east coast. Disney is probably going to want to buy them out, but Universal will ask for a boatload of money. Don't expect this to happen for at least 10-15 years. The one place you can might see something is in a third Marvel gate at Disneyland.
This is a great deal for the future of Disney, but everyone is going to have to be patient before we see anything significant come out of it.
From TH CreativeRaul writes: As far as movies go, Disney is going to have to wait for Sony's deal with Spider-man and Fox's deal with X-Men, Fantastic Four and Daredevil to run out before Disney can make much from those properties.
Posted August 31, 2009 at 3:15 PM
I respond: I'm not sure what you mean by "make much." If Disney owns Marvel they will certainly benefit financially from the revenue generated by the films. Miami Herald: "Iger noted (today) that when it bought Pixar, that company also had third-party licensing agreements."
Raul writes: ... Disney won't really be able to attach their logo on significant Marvel films for a decade.
I Respond: Does that even matter? I don't recall Disney slapping its brand on the Muppets to any great extent.
Raul writes: While there are 5,000 Marvel characters, Most people outside of the comic community probably couldn't name more than 100 of them.
I Respond: So Disney has 100 characters to draw from? In terms of attraction development they only really need one, right? I suggest Iron Man.
Raul writes: The theme parks are going to be the last place to see significant change from this.
I Respond: I don't understand what you mean by "significant change." But if you are claiming it will be a long time before an attraction opens ... five years.
Raul writes: Universal has the rights.
I respond: To what, exactly? The Orlando Sentinel: "Marvel also has various deals with the two-park Universal Orlando. The agreements governing two of Universal's hugely popular rides, The Amazing Adventures of Spider-Man and The Incredible Hulk roller coaster, appear to be virtually perpetual deals. According to Universal's filings with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, Universal Orlando retains American rights east of the Mississippi River for as long as its ATTRACTIONS are in operation."
If the rights related specific characters are limited to those associated with attractions, then Disney can't build rides in Orlando based upon Spidey, Hulk, Storm and Dr. Doom -- but why bother when there are already attractions based upon those licensed properties?
I imagine that in the very near future we will learn if Iron Man is a free agent, if so, it would be a tempting add to DHS for the 40th anniversary.
From TH CreativeTHC is on the hunt!
Posted August 31, 2009 at 4:17 PM
I just pulled this from 'Marvel Entertainment 2008 Annual Stockholders Report.'
We license our characters for use at theme parks, shopping malls and special events. For example, we have licensed SOME of our characters for use at Marvel Super Hero Island, part of the Islands of Adventure theme park at Universal Orlando in Orlando, Florida, and for use in a Spider-Man attraction at the Universal Studios theme park in Osaka, Japan."
Please note the use of the word "some."
From TH CreativeTHIS JUST IN: I just received an email from Sara Clark The Orlando Sentinel reporter covering the story.
Posted August 31, 2009 at 4:33 PM
From our review of the licensing agreement, it appears that Universal has rights to the characters that are integral parts of its attractions, as well as those characters’ “families.” So, if they have a Storm attraction, they get the whole X-men family.
Under that logic, I don’t think Iron Man is off limits for the Florida park.
From Phil BeskaI wonder if that will hold true for special teams. The Hulk was a part of the avengers who included Iron Man, both are founding members of the team. Though both characters are really more thought of as strong stand alone heros. I wouldn't think Iron Man would be a hands off property, but you never know when it comes to legal interpretations. I'm all for some sort of thrilling Iron Man attraction at DHS though. The Marvel universe feels most at home to me in this park. Wow, Disney, Star Wars, Indianna Jones, Pixar, The Muppets, Twilight Zone, Aerosmith and now Marvel. Man, DHS is primed to be THE Disney park for everything cool.
Posted August 31, 2009 at 5:08 PM
From Tim Wyea unfortunately that just leaves iron man as the decent and well known character. Unfortunately how it sounds right now, the fantstic four can't be included since they have their villain in the park as well as a restaurant. Is captain america included since he has a character and a restaruant at IOA? Knowing all the details are starting to put a damper on the theme park side of the deal. But it is nice to know that the spiderman ride won't be leaving IOA anytime soon and eventually disney will open more attractions. Im sure Universalwill try to hold on to its Marvel island as long as they can.
Posted August 31, 2009 at 5:27 PM
BRING ON THE IRON MAN at DHS!
From TH CreativeYou know what Tim, I don't think Disney WANTS Spider-Man out of Universal. Nor do I think they want to closed Marvel Super heo Island. This cicrcumstance actually allows Disney to promote its own properties and sell retail products at a competing theme park. At the Orlando Airport the Universal Store boasts giant marquee pics of the Hulk and Spider-Man. They may as well be pics of Mickey and Minnie.
Posted August 31, 2009 at 5:39 PM
To take it a step further, if Universal wants to open another version of Spider-Man (arguablly their BEST attraction) at another park they would have to negotiate with ... Disney. If Universal wants to expand Super Heor Island (unlikely, but stil ...) they would have to negotiate with Disney.
This is one of the most intriguing developments in ... well theme park history.
From Raul AraozDisney will just make the licensing fees from Marvel's already existing deals with Sony and Fox.
Posted August 31, 2009 at 5:52 PM
I think it is wishful thinking to expect a major Iron Man attraction at DHS for the 40th. The plans would have to be designed. Unless, there is an existing concept at WDI that could easily have the character slapped on.
The legal battles that could be formed over the word "families" is another wrench in the socket. Universal could argue that the Marvel characters have co-existed with each other in many comic books. That would also delay any Marvel attractions at WDW.
Either way, I agree that these are going to be interesting upcoming years for the theme park industry. The only way that Universal can trump Disney is if they team up with Blackstone and buy the Busch parks.
From TH CreativeRearranging Raul's words: "Disney will make all the money Marvel's been making in existing deals with Sony and Fox."
Posted August 31, 2009 at 6:17 PM
From Raul AraozSemantics 101 by TH. ;)
Posted August 31, 2009 at 6:53 PM
From James RaoFinally Disney can make the oft-discussed Spider-man killer. Oddly enough, it will be called Spider-Man II: The Ride. Much like the movies, the sequel will be better than the original.
Posted August 31, 2009 at 8:41 PM
Let's just hope we never see a Spider-Man III ride... ugh! ;)
From Raul AraozWhat? You have a problem with Peter Parker's emo dance? Didn't love Venom being played by Eric Forman?
Posted August 31, 2009 at 8:49 PM
Spider-man 2 was so good and set-up a part three so well. Pity. Hopefully, parts 4 and 5 and rectify this.
From James RaoSpider-Man III was just too...much. And you're right, it didn't help that it followed perhaps the best Super Hero film of all time.
Posted August 31, 2009 at 8:56 PM
From TH CreativeRaul writes: Universal could argue that the Marvel characters have co-existed with each other in many comic books.
Posted September 1, 2009 at 4:02 AM
I Respond: While I obviously have little knowledge of the specific contract terms (and I am assuming the same of Raul) the Sentinel reporter I exchanged emails with wrote: "From our review of the licensing agreement ... I don’t think Iron Man is off limits for the Florida park."
And sure, legal acion would be a hassle. but it would not halt the design of an attraction -- or at least blue-sky concepts.
If I'm at Disney, I am considering a Manta-like suspended coaster, themed for Iron Man. The kicker ... make it an indoor-outdoor coaster.
Toss a new Star Tours film, a revamped GMR and another B-List feature (a la American Idol) and DHS becomes one of the top three parks in Orlando -- quality not attendance.
From Raul AraozOh, I have no doubt that WDI is already throwing around blue sky concepts for potential Marvel attractions.
Posted September 1, 2009 at 7:30 AM
John Lasseter, himself, got so excited at a meeting between Marvel and Disney last week, lawyers had to stop him from torpedoing the deal.
My point with the contract is that the legalese seems to be grey enough that it will prevent anything significant from being built at WDW, with Marvel characters, for a couple of years.
From Casey S.so here it is... best idea ever that won't be used and may cause uprising; Marvel Island = 2015 harry potter expansion. Let next 5 years build the harry potter theme park brand, then let disney buy out the marvel island. knock everything down leaving the hulk coaster (to be re-themed to death eaters flying around london ala the 6th film) and spiderman (to be update into the gringotts bank ride everyone want). the rest of the island becomes london and doom alley to diagone alley . the expansion of the magiquest game and storm force... sorry you will have to make room for the train station and platform 9 3/4 that you will be able to take around the outside of the park straight to hogwarts. maybe some boats across the lagoon too.
Posted September 1, 2009 at 9:03 AM
From Tim WSo you are suggesting two harry potter lands across the lake from each other?
Posted September 1, 2009 at 11:12 AM
From brian lochridgeUniversal should go after DC and retheme Marvel Island to Gotham/Metropolis. You can argue the batman franchise is bigger than anything Marvel has.
Posted September 1, 2009 at 11:55 AM
From Casey S.IT would be two parts of the world of harry potter, life in london and life at hogwarts connected by train and boat with two other islands in between on both sides. most people feel that lost cont. will get potterized in years to come anyhow. I say let LC live and make IOA into one of the most unique theme park layouts.
Posted September 1, 2009 at 12:10 PM
From Anthony MurphyDC is at the Six Flags Parks.
Posted September 1, 2009 at 12:39 PM
From Raul AraozOf course, Universal actually created designs for a Gotham City and Batman ride in the early stages of Islands of Adventure.
Posted September 1, 2009 at 12:37 PM
They switched to Marvel, probably because Six Flags already had a contract in place for the DC characters. At the time, Marvel was in financial straits and the contract was more financially beneficial for Universal.
From Tim WYea unless Universal purchased DC, i wouldnt see anything like that happening ever. Im sure if they end up closing marvel island they will go to another franchise either owned by universal or one that im sure they will purchase so the same mistake will not be repeated. As for the rest of IOA's future im sure the lost continent will be fully over taken by harry potter within the ongoing years. Im sure seuss landing will add a lorax ride depending on the success of the movie. My best idea for a marvel island replacement would be something sci fi ala star trek or a monster/horror movie zone. Or maybe even james bond land full of high action! Any of those themes im sure could serve as a worthy replacement!
Posted September 1, 2009 at 12:42 PM
From Jeff MLike I posted in front page area my concluding thoughts on what may happen? I wrote this....."Here's something I'm thinking of..... Most of us have heard something about another/or 5th park idea to come to Walt Disney World. Last I've heard, that had been put on hold? Now, what Disney was planning from what I remember was a adventure style park with rock climbing walls/mountain, zip lines, etc.... Can you just imagine Marvel super hero involement with this one? Swing on zip lines like Spiderman, etc.... sure opens up a lot more for ideas".
Posted September 1, 2009 at 12:58 PM
Anyone care to add to it??? Thoughts? Ideas?
From brian lochridgeYes DC is at Six Flags and Marvel was at Universal. Just because six flags has it now you can't tell me DC wouldn't jump at the chance to upgrade to a park like Universal.
Posted September 1, 2009 at 1:01 PM
IOA acctually had plans for the Marvel Island to be Gothom when planning began. I can't find the link but the plans looked amazing.
From brian lochridgeJeff, I'm a 31 year old man that would jump at the chance swing on a zip line with Spiderman or Fly with Ironman.
Posted September 1, 2009 at 1:06 PM
I can only hope Disney decides to build a Pixar/Marvel Park. I'm not going to get my hopes up but a boy can dream can't he.
From TH CreativeWhat makes anyone here think that Warner Bothers would sell DC to Universal? DC has been a subsidiary of Warner Bros. Entertainment since 1969.
Posted September 1, 2009 at 1:20 PM
Here's a link to Gotham Island info
From TH CreativeAnd (once again) to hell with the idea of building a fifth park. Use the money to add more attractions to the existing parks rather than waste eight or nine figures on back of house support facilities that would be required in the construction of a new park.
Posted September 1, 2009 at 1:26 PM
From brian lochridgeThey wouldn't have to buy DC, they would just have to by the rights to use the characters, just like they did with Marvel.
Posted September 1, 2009 at 1:36 PM
From Jeff MBrian, I agree.... this boy is dreaming, but so did Walt in his day. Fingers crossed here!
Posted September 1, 2009 at 1:49 PM
TH - why the ill replies? In typical TH fashioned replies... TH writes.... "And (once again) to hell with the idea of building a fifth park. Use the money to add more attractions to the existing parks rather than waste eight or nine figures on back of house support facilities that would be required in the construction of a new park."
From TH CreativeBrian,
Posted September 1, 2009 at 2:15 PM
Okay, why would Warner Brothers be interested in selling the DC characters rights to use in the park. Why would Universal spend any money to retrofit really successful attractions that already have affiliated licensed properties that are paid for? Also why would Universal spend millions more when they just spent millions for the Potter rights?
You get more bang (and more dreamy-dreams) for your buck by adding new attractions to existing parks.
Also Walt is not dead. He's in a state of suspended animation (cryogenics). Just like my friend Jungle James Rao.
From Jeff MTH, I agree with you whole heartedly about the bang for your buck theory. Maybe that is why there is a new coaster based on the Monsters movie spoken about, etc.... All I'm saying is that there are many options/ideas that Disney can do to add on to their existing parks! I'm ALL for that!
Posted September 1, 2009 at 2:33 PM
I'm just saying that with this new acquisition of Marvel to Disney, the door opens wider and leaves more options for Disney to explore. Again, for me, and I'm just saying "for me", I wouldn't want to mix comic super-heros with proven Disney attractions. I feel a new park in the years ahead with more "extreme" attractions offers Disney an even wider fan base. I'd just love to know that this may be possible! Then maybe we would not hear how Disney is too tame, etc... Why not dream of monopolizing the theme park industry? Offer all kinds of current and future thrills to the masses!
How did Gordon Grecko state it in Wall Street the movie???..... Greed for the most part is good! Just good business if played right!
TH, if Walt hasen't passed, then please show me the way to "suspended animation" like James. Now that's an E-ticket to dream of! :)
From brian lochridgeTH
Posted September 1, 2009 at 2:20 PM
Why wouldn't Warner Brothers want to sell the character rights to Universal? You’re talking about exposure that you can't get anywhere else. Six Flags does a pitiful job of marketing the DC universe. Marvel has taken over the comic book industry of late and DC could use the shot in the arm that Universal would give it.
Now I know Universal won't touch Marvel Island until they absolutely have to but I'm talking about the future of the park. Universal won't want Marvel in there park any longer than they have to have it since the mouse now controls it. People already think Universal is a part of Disney, the last thing they want is for people to confuse there park with Disney.
TH writes: I'm a moron
I respond: I couldn't agree more.
From Nick Markham^ You have a point with the DC comics. And in my opinion, it is easier to create a ride based on DC comics than Marvel. I mean think about it:
Posted September 1, 2009 at 3:01 PM
What kind of coaster would you make themed to Spider-Man?
And you can really theme any kind of coaster to Superman and have it be a success.
From Nick MarkhamAs another thing I have thought up, I have found one way that Universal can beat Disney's big buyout. They would need to come up with a whole lot of money, and some of you might say this is impossible, but how many people really thought Disney was going to go plop down 4 billion for Marvel out of nowhere? So, with this being said, here is what Universal should do, if they can come up with the money:
Posted September 1, 2009 at 4:23 PM
- Release Wizarding World of Harry Potter succesfully
If they can do this, it would, ultimately, beat out Disney's big group of Disney, Pixar, ABC, and Marvel, compared to Universal, NBC, Harry Potter, Dc Comics, Dreamworks, Sea World, Seseme Street, and Busch Gardens franchises!
From TH CreativeBrian writes: Now that I think about it why should we dream, we should just ask TH to tell us what he thinks and agree with that.
Posted September 1, 2009 at 4:52 PM
I Respond: Well I guess you could ask me. But I suggest you seek more than one person's opinion before drawing a conclusion. For example:
Of course there are TPI posters who disagree. Reviewing past threads there are some very creative ideas. The board offers a means to express those ideas -- and for others to comment on them.
Even those of us who some regard as(ahem) "morons."
From James Rao^^I still agree. No new parks until Wonders of Life gets "new life" as something other than a staging area for special events that are of no interest to me and mine. Too many dead areas in the existing parks... build them up first, then expand out when there is "no more room at the inn."
Posted September 1, 2009 at 5:21 PM
From TH CreativeQuite an ambitious proposal, Nick. But as you write: "They would need to come up with a whole lot of money, and some of you might say this is impossible ..."
Posted September 1, 2009 at 5:26 PM
Well "implausible" might be a better choice of words -- especially due to Universal's enormous debt that they need to restructure early next year and (as I understand it) the real possibility that Spielber may exercise a butout clause in his consulting contract (potentially costing Universal hundreds of millions).
But as you note "...but how many people really thought Disney was going to go plop down 4 billion for Marvel out of nowhere?"
Hmmm .. it was a surprise. But there's a difference, isn't there?
Your strategy focuses on investing heavily in theme parks (destination entertainment). The Marvel deal includes films, toys, video games, DVDs, television and revenue streams other than theme parks.
From Derek PotterWhat will they do?
Posted September 1, 2009 at 8:48 PM
For now they will collect money...lots of it, pure and simple. Money from merchandise, box office receipts, comics, etc will be rolling in. In a few years they will make plans to incorporate Marvel into their theme parks, but I don't think that the Disney properties (especially Orlando) will see Marvel for a couple of years. If IOA is still using Marvel then, look for Disney to attempt a buyout. Until then, you still get to go to IOA for your Spiderman fix.
From brian lochridgeWays to Re theme Marvel Island to DC
Posted September 2, 2009 at 6:55 AM
Hulk becomes Superman ride, Superman is trapped in a Kryptonite cell by Lex Luther(the Tunnel), then we here here Superman say something like " I must get out, Must save the city" The beginning of the Superman Theme Plays soft and grows louder and you then break free of the cell(shoot out of the tunnel) and the ride starts. Repaint it Red Blue and Yellow
Spiderman Ride becomes a Batman ride. Batman has as many or more bad guys to choose from as Spiderman. You have Joker, Cat Woman, Penguin, Killer Croc, Scarecrow, Harley Quinn, I could go on and on. It would take some work but the overall Idea could be the same.
Re theme Doom Ally as a the Jokers Funhouse, with the Doom Ride being one of Jokers big Jokes where you think you're going to Die but you don't.
I know this is out there but I just wanted to share my Ideas.
From TH CreativeWow! And to that let me add WOW!
Posted September 2, 2009 at 8:24 AM
Chicago Tribune: "If it works out, Marvel's chief executive, Isaac "Ike" Perlmutter, 66, will pocket a hefty payday. His 37 percent stake in Marvel is now worth about $1.5 billion."
From TH CreativeMr. Potter writes: "If IOA is still using Marvel then, look for Disney to attempt a buyout."
Posted September 2, 2009 at 8:57 AM
I Respond (with all due respect): It seems to me Disney has no motivation (reason) to "buy out" anything from Universal. Every report indicates that Universal's licensing agreement is for specific characters (Spider-Man, Dr. Doom, Hulk and Storm (X-men) and that the agreement is limited to theme park placement east of the Mississippi.
Then there's this from the 'Marvel Entertainment 2008 Annual Stockholders Report: "We license our characters for use at theme parks, shopping malls and special events. For example, we have licensed SOME of our characters for use at Marvel Super Hero Island."
Not the use of the phrase "some of our characters."
Then there was the email reply I received from Sara Clark The Orlando Sentinel reporter covering the story: "From our review of the licensing agreement ..."
Meaning the Sentinel has reviewed the agreement.
Ms. Clark continues: "... it appears that Universal has rights to the characters that are integral parts of its attractions ... under that logic, I don’t think Iron Man is off limits for (a Disney) Florida park."
In short, Disney doesn't need the characters licensed by Universal to give Marvel a presence in their parks.
But why would Disney even want to build a Spider-Man or Hulk attraction, when its already been done? How does that benefit the company's bottom line?
Of course this is my interpretation, so if you think I am wrong, by all means, punch me out.
From brian lochridgeIt's about public perception here, Universal will not want Spidey Hulk or Cap in there parks any longer than they have now that Disney basically owns them. Big win for the Disney parks, think of the kid who says I want to go to Disney world and ride the Spiderman ride. His parents plan a trip to Disney not realizing there going to the wrong park. If I'm Disney I put Marvel Characters everywhere once this deal goes down just to confuse the public and bring more people to Disney than Universal.
Posted September 2, 2009 at 9:00 AM
From Phil BeskaI wonder where the characters that appear in the super hero parade fall into under the licensing agreement. Granted, it's not a Hulk coaster or Spiderman ride type of attraction, but it still is considered an attraction of some sort, and as such I would imagine that you would still need the licensing rights to use characters such as Wolverine, Captain America, Cyclops and Rogue. So the question is, do these characters stay off limits also now, because of their involvement in a parade, no matter how cheesy the costumes may be.
Posted September 2, 2009 at 9:54 AM
From TH CreativeThus far, no one has provided any reason for Disney to "buy out" anything from Universal regarding theme park licensing. Marvel starts paying dividends from day one via television, films, toys, DVDs, video games and publishing. And while I have not read anything that has said Disney cannot build an attraction in Orlando based on Iron Man, it doesn't mean a gate-crasher will open at WDW for another five years.
Posted September 2, 2009 at 10:17 AM
When Disney rakes in video game licensing money in September (Marvel: Ultimate Alliance 2) and box office licensing money next May (Iron Man 2) stockholders will be happy.
No buy out necessary.
From Anthony MurphyMaybe they want to bring Spiderman from IOA to DHS.
Posted September 2, 2009 at 11:39 AM
From brian lochridge
Posted September 2, 2009 at 12:10 PM
I'm starting to think this wasn't as much about money as it was Disney firing a shot across Universals bow with HP coming.
Last year, Marvel had $676 million in revenue, of that only $367 million was income. $47 million of the income came from comics. That's under 13%.
Last year, Disney had $37.8 BILLION dollars in revenue and made $4.4 billion in income. That means once Marvel is added in to Disney, they'll only make an additional ONE PERCENT.
I can't see with those figures why else Disney would make this purchase other than to try and bring Universal to its knees.
From TH CreativeMr. Lochridge's assuming your figures are correct:
Posted September 2, 2009 at 12:46 PM
You wrote: Last year, Marvel had $676 million in revenue, of that only $367 million was income.
You continued: Last year, Disney had $37.8 BILLION dollars in revenue and made $4.4 billion in income.
$367 million is actually 8.25% of $4.4 billion.
And this is TOTALLY an academic question: where do you get 1%?
From Amanda JenkinsI know it is hard to wait and see what Disney will do with Marvel regarding attractions, movies, cartoons and such; but with Disney, usually it is well worth the wait. I think that with that "magic" touch that Disney has, things can only get better. I'm ready for Disney to get some more revenue so that we can have more needed refurbs, more expansion of existing parks, and hopefully a new Magic Kingdom parade :-p Oh and get rid of Disco yeti...
Posted September 2, 2009 at 3:47 PM
From James Rao^^Here, here!
Posted September 2, 2009 at 4:26 PM
From Dan MI don't really see this as too much of a purely creative acquisition by Disney. This deal was very likely done by Disney to capitalize on the TV, maybe movies, and ESPECIALLY the merchandising opportunities presented by Marvel Characters. Look at what the Cars franchise has done for Disney. So far, Cars merchandise has brought in 5 BILLION in revenue to the Walt Disney Company. Aside from the Pirates franchise, Disney really had no other properties in this boys demographic. Now, even if Disney doesn't distribute a single Marvel movie in at least the next five years (likely more for other properties) they will still capitalize on all of the Marvel products that these movies are advertising. Even Universal will be selling merchandise in their parks that bring in revenue to Disney!
Posted September 2, 2009 at 7:16 PM
From a purely financial standpoint, this is an absolutely brilliant move for Disney. Even if they overpayed now, they will no doubt recoup their initial buyout and earn much more in return. Disney fans are saying how horrible this is that they could possibly see Captain America walking down Main Street, and Marvel fans are predicting Doom and Gloom because their beloved comics and films will be ruined by Disney's interfering suits. Personally, I think that Disney will just let Marvel be Marvel, and give them the ample financial support and advertising that they really didn't have before. I don't think that we'll see them in the parks anytime soon, but regardless, this wasn't done to spite Universal and it was still a very good buy for Disney.
From Dan BabbittBrian first off thats Marvel's figures using there marketing teams and what not. Now imagine using Disney marketing and distribution power. Its a no contest, no brainer in the end!
Posted September 2, 2009 at 7:31 PM
Not only are they going to get the boy teenagers but they are also going to get the 20, 30 and 40 year old males either watching the movies, dvds, comics and merchandise. Who isnt going to buy shirts and stuff at the park? I would love a shirt with Spiderman flying around the Tower of Terror, or the Hulk ripping apart the Tree of Life?
If Disney wanted to the could sell ice to escimoe's.
From Dan MJust one more thing I wanted to add that hopefully will be shorter than my novel above. This really is a completely different financial move than adding to the existing parks would be. Look over to the right. Just wrap your mind around how much the Disney parks blow away the others in attendance. With the parks performing this well, it really is hard for a Suit to justify the Imagineers plans for all of their ambitious expansions, even more so when it isn't attached to an existing franchise. I'd love to see more attractions, and do think that in the long run, quality expansion builds the reputation for the parks and really is an great investment, but people are going to go to the parks regardless, and the return on investment simply won't be nearly as significant as something like the Marvel merchandise. Hopefully, things like attendance exploding after the DCA refurb make them realize how important expansion and quality really are.
Posted September 2, 2009 at 7:35 PM
From Dan BabbittBut Dan you have to realize if you look at this in the big picture there going to make a LOT of money off this. And they make money even if they dont do any rides or attractions at the parks! They will add new revenue streams to there merchandise, movies, books, comics and whole bunch that I didnt mention.
Posted September 2, 2009 at 8:02 PM
But I know TH has said this a couple months ago where construction cost have gone down over the past year with the recession because of construction companies just looking for work. So I wouldnt be surprised if WDI has known about the deal for awhiling and were preparing for the transaction and will reveal the attractions at D23 convention or buy the new year. So all I gotta say is by-by Backlot Tour and Catastrophe Canyon you were good while it lasted and hello Iron Man and Captain America!
From TH CreativeAdding to what Mr. Babbit has offered, it is also very likely that WDI has either developed or encountered ride systems and technology that they have been dreaming of using but have not yet found the right licensed property -- be it a Disney franchise or something else.
Posted September 3, 2009 at 5:56 AM
I have seen that happen before ... first hand.
From Gareth HWhy do people think that Universal would have such an issue with Disney owning Marvel? Why would universal "Want everthing Marvel out of the park"?
Posted September 3, 2009 at 6:52 AM
What are all of these parks in the business for? To entertain guests? No. To make money.
Lets look at this. Disney buy Marvel, big to do in the press. Big talk everywhere "Oooh, Disney will do this, Universal will get rid of that"
All this talk is publicity, its news, and all it does it get Both Park owners out there.
Disney didn't buy Marvel for the rights to build park attractions, they did it because they want to make money from movies, TV shows and licensing (And comics of course). And they will. Its a very long term investment, but like so many other purchases, who's to say that at some point down the line it won't get sold on again!
Universal out ZERO financial outlay on this purchase but they benefit from the publicity.
"Mom, I wanna go see the Marvel Superheroes"
Most tourists, people who take a one, two, or even three week vacation to Florida, will hit a few of the parks here, not just Disney, or Universal, or the Worlds of Discovery parks.
WoD parks benefit too from people coming to the area to see the other attractions.
Why is it that you see so many billboards from the airport, on the way to the hotels or down any interstate, advertising the parks and attractions? Because once people get here they decide to do something other than what has already been booked. Kids, the ones who stare in awe out of the car windows, the adults who look around and see the billboards and what they have to offer, make those decisions to go where they want.
Other parks will win from Harry Potter opening. Tve amount of Brits I know who are making secial trips over once it opens, just because the kids are in love with the HP movies!
It's win win for everyone!
The only losers in the themepark industry are the ones who don't spend money of attractions, aquisitions or advertising, and so far, all of the Orlando parks are doing a pretty good job of making sure they are seen!
From TH CreativeWhy does everyone on this board have to use the name "Timmy" when illustrating their opinions?
Posted September 3, 2009 at 8:25 AM
From Gareth HBob just sounds so old, Timmy sounds young and fun :)
Posted September 3, 2009 at 8:48 AM
From Tony DudaI use little Billy and Susie to illustrate a point. Timmy just makes me think of South Park. TIMMY!!!!!!
Posted September 3, 2009 at 1:34 PM
From David GrahamThat's all I can think of when I hear Timmy as well Tony lol
Posted September 3, 2009 at 1:40 PM
From Gareth HCould go Jimmy, "what a gr, what a grrrr, what a grrrrrr, what a grrrrreat audience!"
Posted September 3, 2009 at 1:41 PM
From brian lochridgeTimmy loves Spiderman, it's that simple.
Posted September 3, 2009 at 1:57 PM
From TH CreativeStill trying to figure out Mr. Lochridge's math.
Posted September 3, 2009 at 5:27 PM
He posted: Last year, Marvel had $676 million in revenue, of that only $367 million was income.
He then posted: Last year, Disney had $37.8 BILLION dollars in revenue and made $4.4 billion in income.
$367 million is actually 8.25% of $4.4 billion.
I'm just trying to understand how he came up with 1%.
From Dan BabbittI think he used 1% because it seemed like a great number to agree with his point!
Posted September 3, 2009 at 7:49 PM
From Tony DudaIt looks like a straight forward investment. $4 billion with a $367 million per year income is a 9.1% return annually. I wish all my investments gave me 9.1% annual return.
Posted September 3, 2009 at 9:29 PM
From TH CreativeDan: "Ya think?"
Posted September 4, 2009 at 3:09 AM
Tony: "I hear ya!"
From Nick MarkhamWell, screamscape and now I agree that Disney and Universal or almost "at war" now as when Universal took the Harry Potter idea, something I guess Disney wanted to use a while back, Disney went and bought Marvel. Don't you just love these theme park battles, especially when it means lots of awesome rides? :D
Posted September 4, 2009 at 6:02 AM
From Dan MThis goes far beyond wanting to strike back at Universal for Harry Potter. I'm sure that theme parks were probably considered during this deal, but they were probably considered last. Disney bought Marvel first for TV series, then for merchandise, then for films, and then lastly for Theme parks. This isn't simply a licensing deal as Harry Potter is for Universal. Once all of Marvels prior contracts run up or are bought out, Disney will have COMPLETE control of Marvel. Imagine JK giving Universal complete control of Harry Potter.
Posted September 4, 2009 at 7:10 AM
From TH CreativeBut remember, while the Disney must honor third party licensing agreements, Disney still makes revenue related to those agreements. It's just that once those agreements run their course then Disney makes A TON MORE money. So while Sony holds movie rights associated with Spider-Man, Disney will still earn a share of the revenue associated with Spider-Man.
Posted September 4, 2009 at 7:58 AM
And there's a nice silver-lining associated with this arrangement. Using the Spidey example again, (as I understand it) while Sony holds the film rights it also shoulders the production costs. Meaning while Disney earns its percentage based upon the licensing agreement, it does not have to risk investing the millions of dollars associated with producing a Spider-Man film.
And you know what else, because of Disney's corporate heft (as in "our lawyers are bigger than yours") you can be DAMN SURE that Disney is going to collect every dime of the revenue owed to them.
From Dan MTH, Disney has an even better deal I believe with the five films they promised to Paramount. When Marvel made the Paramount deal, I believe that the company was in a better financial situation then when it made the Fox/Sony deals for the other characters and was planning to finance the films themselves through Marvel's production company. While Paramount was signed on as a distributor, their distribution fee was only 8%. So Disney/Marvel has complete creative control over these films, but they also have to finance them. However, I'm sure the box office returns will be great and Disney is bringing in a large cut of that revenue.
Posted September 4, 2009 at 11:04 AM
From Bob MillerTH, my ex-brother-in-laws' first name is Timmy. My ex-mother-in-law(God rest her soul), must have thought that was a cute name to give her young son, but he's about 45 years old now. Timmy is his legal name, but he uses Tim instead.
Posted September 4, 2009 at 2:47 PM
From TH CreativeFrom the Orlando Sentinel - By Jason Garcia
Posted September 9, 2009 at 2:10 PM
While the Walt Disney Co.'s $4 billion acquisition of Marvel Entertainment Inc. does not pose a near-term threat to the future of Universal Orlando's popular Marvel-themed attractions, it could still create headaches for the resort.
In taking over Marvel, Disney will inherit the theme-park licensing contract Marvel has with Universal — along with all of the rights contained within it. As a result, Disney is poised to gain veto power over some of Universal's marketing materials, audit rights over some of its finances, and more.
That's on top of the annual licensing fees and merchandise royalties that Universal pays to Marvel — but, soon, to Disney.
"It's an unusual situation. Awkward is a good word for it," said Harold Vogel, a stock analyst and author of Entertainment Industry Economics. "They're obviously competitors, and there's an interest in keeping aspects of these deals private. And now Disney will have some access to it."
Universal declined to discuss fallout from the Disney-Marvel pact Tuesday, beyond reiterating comments made Monday that both Marvel Super Hero Island at Islands of Adventure and Marvel characters such as Spider-Man and the Incredible Hulk will remain "an important part" of the resort.
From Tiffany AlfonsoI was first skeptic and fearful about Disney buying Marvel, since it poses a threat to both Walt Disney World and its most-impacted rival, Universal Orlando. The latter would outsource the superheroes from IOA's Super Hero Island to WDW, but I was relieved to realize that UO has a pact that it would be the sole user (east of the Mississippi) of the heroes, even with Disney's buyout. The other Disney resorts elsewhere - well, that would upset many Disney purists (I'm not much of one, and I don't mind Kermit or Chewbacca mingling with Mickey in DHS).
Posted September 9, 2009 at 2:46 PM
Muetti, a Disneyphile like me, assuaged my fears and doubts of seeing Spidey hosting a character breakfast with Donald - she predicted that the more adult stuff would remain at UO, while the heroes would allocate to WDW, but it has to happen once the pact expires in the future.
From Nick MarkhamAs much asI do love Disney, and as much as this is a good buisness term for them, they sure are playing dirty. For this fihgt alone, I am rooting for Universal, as they have not ever done something like this to Disney. But I guess this is buisness and buisness alone.
Posted September 9, 2009 at 2:58 PM
I would find it cool if Universal got the rights to Dc Comics which would be even better for Marvel Island as DC comics is easyier to build rides for. And if not, they can transform Spidy to the Transformers ride like Uni. hollywood is getting. I could also see it being awesome if they changed MArvel Island to a futuristic theme and created a large Star Trek Ship with different rides in the ship, among which including Doctor Doom's Fearfall and Storm Force Acceleration.
From TH CreativeMr. Markham, how on earth is this "playing dirty?"
Posted September 9, 2009 at 3:09 PM
All analysis published regarding the motivation to buy Marvel is because it fills the need to provide entertainment for "tween boys" -- a demographic that Disney neglected in favor of Hannah Montana, the 'High School Musical' franchise and the Jonas Brothers (all entertainment aimed at "tweener girls"). With this in mind the Marvel characters will be a PERFECT addition to the new Disney XD channel -- that is aimed at a target market of male children from ages 6 to 14.
Further analysis is that Disney has the worldwide marketing power to dramatically elevate the Marvel characters' visibility all over the planet.
Further the decision does not have any detrimental impact upon Universal's business model. They can continue to use the licensed Marvel characters in perpituity. As Mr. Vogel pointed out the circumstance may be "awkward" but -- in my opinion -- IOA is still home to the best dark ride and the best coaster in Central Florida.
Considering it is widely accepted Disney's main motivation was to dramatically expand the Marvel brand and increase its gross revenues and profit, and also considering that there is no really detrimental impact upon Universal's business model, How can this be an example that Disney is "playing dirty?"
From Nick MarkhamThe "playing dirty" I was refering to was I guess only a minor part of the buy of Marvel. Universal and Disney have been rivals for years, firstly. Secondly, Universal seemed to supposedly take Disney's idea for a future HArry Potter attraction. And three, just when Universal starts to really advertise "the only place you can meet a superhero" and "where heros live" and "Amazing Adventures of Spider-Man voted best attraction", Disney goes and buys Marvel. Yes, this is most liekly only a piece of why Disney bought Marvel, but it is part of it indeed.
Posted September 9, 2009 at 3:42 PM
Though like I said, buisness is buisness. Though Disney is not taking to the Marvel buy very well though, as while it turns out, they can't break the already made contracts with any studio for movies (with attractions however, they can), and they have said the only place MArvel is going to find a place in the parks is as a sort of MArvel Weekend (think a version of Star Wars Weekends), which really isn't taking the chance of owning Marvel to use. Basically, they will be taking all of the great Marvel in Universal and not even relinquishing it at their own parks. How very "nice" to all of the people who love Marvel Attractions.
From TH CreativePosted with all due respect:
Posted September 9, 2009 at 5:14 PM
Mr. Markham: Universal and Disney have been rivals for years, firstly.
I Respond: Not much of a rivalry. Despite the fact the Universal Creative designs better attractions Disney dominates Universal. Magic King attendance in 2008 17 million. Universal attendance in 2008 6.2 million.
Mr. Markham: Universal seemed to supposedly take Disney's idea for a future Harry Potter attraction.
I Respond: And (if that is true) would that be an example of Universal (ahem) "playing dirty?"
Markham: And three, just when Universal starts to really advertise "the only place you can meet a superhero" and "where heros live" and "Amazing Adventures of Spider-Man voted best attraction", Disney goes and buys Marvel.
I Respond: "Just when?" They've been pimping Spidey and Hulk since the park opened in 1999 -- as in a decade ago. having said that, there is no indication that Disney intends to use any of the Marvel IOA characters at the Disney theme parks. As for "the only place you can meet a superhero" you'll find The Incredibles at DHS.
Mr. Markham: Though Disney is not taking to the Marvel buy very well though, as while it turns out, they can't break the already made contracts with any studio for movies ...
I Respond: "As it turns out?" Are you implying that Disney only found out about Marvel's licensing deals AFTER they bought Marvel? Give me a break!
While there are third party licensing agreements related to the Marvel properties there is no denying that the films (which generated millions for Marvel) will also generate millions for Disney. The DVDs, toys, publications, video games and other products (which generated millions for Marvel) will also generate millions for Disney.
Mr. Markham: (with attractions however, they can), and they have said the only place Marvel is going to find a place in the parks is as a sort of Marvel Weekend (think a version of Star Wars Weekends).
I Respond: "They have said?" Who exactly is "They?" I don't expect Disney to put Spider-Man or Hulk in their parks. Those characters already have a presence in a major theme park. If I were a betting man, I'd say "if" (and or "when") Disney puts a Marvel character in their parks it would be Iron Man.
A side note: As I noted in the previous post, there is no reason for Disney to use this deal to hurt Universal. They own Spider-Man and Hulk and Dr. Doom and Storm. Those characters have a major theme park presence that does not cost Disney one thin dime.
From rick stevensI agree with earlier posts that the acquisition of Marvel will not be seen in the parks for a few years. It will, however, affect the television end of Disney. What is there for tween boys? Even shows that star males are geared more for females. This should help them attract a new demographic.
Posted September 9, 2009 at 8:31 PM
After this is in place, then they will start to move the characters into the parks. If you really think about it, the majority of the Marvel comics are dealing with adolescence angst and can be a bit on the dark side. Not really the realm of Disney. Both do make some pretty good villains.
I can see them using this as a way to either redevelop some of the parks, or creating totally new ones. I was always a Marvel fan, I was not much of a DC reader. I am also a big fan of Disney. This being said, I am anxiously waiting to see what Disney can do with Marvel.
Another thought, could this be the first steps in acquiring the parks that have Marvel characters? Stupid on my part, but interesting to ponder.
From Anthony MurphyDisney just wants to rule the airwaves on TV. Marvel gives them something for the boys while Disney has the girl market down pat. Hannah Montana is EVERYWHERE!
Posted September 9, 2009 at 9:16 PM
I do not think the theme parks really crept into their mind, but they wouldn't mind having a couple of Superheros here and there.
Disney just wants you to watch their stuff.
From TH CreativeAYE-EM Writes: "Hannah Montana is EVERYWHERE!"
Posted September 10, 2009 at 3:59 AM
I Respond: It's true. I woke up early this morning and Hannah Montana was standing in my backyard. So I say "Hannah Montana, why are you standing in my backyard. And she said, "I already stood in your front yard. And I wanted the best of both worlds."
From David GrahamTH, sometimes your thought patterns scare me lol.
Posted September 10, 2009 at 7:27 AM
As for the whole merger part, I'm not a comic book fan, Marvel or DC, but I see the money and needed areas for Disney to fill. As it's been pointed out, it's not going to change really anything for Universal, unless they wanted to build a new ride in Marvel, then Disney would have to approve as well as advertising I think they would get a say now too.
From Anthony MurphyWhat about Pepe the King Prawn? :)
Posted September 10, 2009 at 8:14 AM
TH, you brighten up my dull mornings with your literal translations of mine and others posts.
Still, Disney can now get into the Superhero arena. Somebody should buy DC.
From Phil BeskaI don't see Warner Bros. getting rid of DC any time soon. They've just announced the creation of a new company, DC Entertainment, who will focus on the DC brand across all forms of media and entertainment.
Posted September 10, 2009 at 8:26 AM
With the exception of Batman in recent years, Marvel has owned DC comics movies repeatedly at the box office. It's no secret that Warner would like to emulate a lot of what Marvel has been able to do with there properties and create a steady stream of movies featuring there iconic characters as well.
Not too long ago it was announced that a Justice League movie was in the works, with offices for preproduction opening up in Australia. The writers strike, as well as what was said to be an inability to get the script finalized (I guess the two would go hand in hand) eventually led to the demise of the project. In the wake of the JL movie, Warner/DC opted to take a page out of Marvels movie making book, and instead release individual character movies to introduce each hero, culimanating in a blockbuster Justice League movie, much in the way Marvel is working towards there Avengers movie.
With all of this, I highly doubt Warner will be selling off DC anytime soon. Chris Nolan is penning the next Dark Knight movie write now, which I'm sure will be another huge success for the studio. The long term success for all of the DC universe movies is something I'm sure Warner is banking on. The closest I could see to DC showing up in IOA would be another licensing agreement, such as was the case with Marvel. It could happen, especially with the restructuring within Warner/DC Entertainment, and the fact that Six Flags hasn't exactly been lighting the world on fire with there rights to the brand.
Although, there are more Six Flags parks across the country than there are any other park, which may see greater exposure for the brand as a whole. Perhaps DC has been content with the merchandise end of things, having products in so many different parks. Maybe things will change now, and quality will become a major factor as well. Though I must admit, I have enjoyed some of the Six Flags/DC barely themed coasters over the years. Still, a Justice League type of Spiderman ride gets me giddy when I think about it.
Now, MOVE THAT BUS....err I meant, CLOSE THIS THREAD!!!!
This discussion has been archived, and is not accepting additional responses.
Plan your theme park vacation with our readers' travel guides:
Top U.S. Theme Parks
Walt Disney World's Magic Kingdom
Other Top International Parks
Readers' Top Themed Rides
Top Roller Coasters
Top Theme Park Shows
Features, News and Advice
2013 Blog PostsJan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May
2012 Blog PostsJan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May Jun. Jul. Aug. Sep. Oct. Nov. Dec.
2011 Blog PostsJan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May Jun. Jul. Aug. Sep. Oct. Nov. Dec.
2010 Blog PostsJan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May Jun. Jul. Aug. Sep. Oct. Nov. Dec.
2009 Blog PostsJan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May Jun. Jul. Aug. Sep. Oct. Nov. Dec.
2008 Blog PostsJan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May Jun. Jul. Aug. Sep. Oct. Nov. Dec.
2007 Blog PostsJan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May Jun. Jul. Aug. Sep. Oct. Nov. Dec.
2006 Blog PostsJan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May Jun. Jul. Aug. Sep. Oct. Nov. Dec.
2005 Blog PostsDec.
2004-2005Staff column archive