CorkscrewFoley Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 I liked the X-Men films, but Wolverine felt like it was missing something, and as for Cat-Woman, I have no desire to see it. So I suppose in the next film, they'll cast Nic Cage as someone who can regenerate hair, when it's clear as day, he's as bald as Mr. Burns. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homeboy23 Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 It fills a hole in their entertainment offerings for demographics. Obviously the existing Disney brand caters very well to families with kids from 0-12 or so with various characters and licenses. The tween/teenage girl market has been good for Disney, they can just pump out new versions of Hannah Montana/Jonas Brothers. For adults, they have Miramax. They never really had a good property for the teen to early 20's male demographic. Well, now they do. That is really true. They can reach out to boys ages 13-20 ( and older )with this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tkkyj Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 Ooh! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tatertot3710 Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 ^^^^ Yeah, that's exactly what they were saying on the news. Even smaller kids like the superheroes. A lot of kids go as superheroes for Halloween and I could see it being a big hit at the theme parks. What would be really cool, although I don't see it happening, is a Marvel theme park at WDW. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
speedracer Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 As far as Disney using these characters in the stateside parks... DCA's pretty much filled up right now for a couple years, and I can't see them putting anything Marvel in Disneyland proper. Hollywood Studios would be the best place for them, in my opinion. True, but there's also that 3rd gate Disney will have fill in once DCA is built up to a full day park. Would LOVE to see a Marvel adventure park built out here to diversify the resort's offerings from strictly Mickey/Pixar! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freestylenut Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 Farness to the movies… Fox is the one that keeps screwing them up, not Marvel Iron Man, Hulk (last release) was Marvel… Wolverine, X-men, Cat Woman, etc. were all destroyed by Fox. I think this is a brilliant move on Disney. First they take Spielberg and get Dream Work’s distribution rights from Universal, now this… I think it’s also some what personal. The amount of royalties, licensing, etc. This purchase could exceed even Harry Potter in the “big picture” and future growth. As long as Disney keep’s Jon Favreau to direct the movies, it’s all good. That’s a lot of materials and properties. Tv Shows, Games, Movies, toys, publishing… If Michael Eisner was behind this I would be terrified, but Iger seems to but much more aggressive “so far” and has a much better quality output strive. Sorry to call you out, but your post is ALL wrong. Dreamworks was purchased & is being distributed by PARAMOUNT..not Disney! (it'd be weird to have both Pixar AND Dreamworks Animation films distributed by Disney wouldn't it?) And Catwoman is not even a Marvel character...its DC, screwed up by Warner Bros. I think it was smart of Disney to buy Marvel...I don't like the "team up" personally, but from a business standpoint, its win-win, mainly for Disney! As for Universal, I think they are royally SCREWED! Being that the Universal Orlando Resort is the MAIN competitor for walt Disney World, there is NO doubt in my mind Disney will either withdraw the license or charge them an exhorbant fee which will force Universal to re-theme Marvel Super Hero Island!... Universal Disney Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Clinksalot Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 I wonder if anybody knows the details on the Universal deal for the Marvel characters and themeing. The Marvel Characters were already removed from USH in Jan of 2008. I'm sure there are negotiations every so often and I'm sure Universal doesn't want to negotiate with Disney on this. Disney can price them right out of the franchise. Then again, if Universal has an iron-clad contract for the rights in IOA for the next 20-30 years, there isn't crap Disney can do about it. As sad as it would be to see Spiderman gone from IOA, I'd LOVE to it moved to DCA. Let Universal have the POS Terminator franchise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Electerik Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 It's fairly standard for licensing agreements to include clauses that cover such eventualities. I'm willing to be that Universal is safe for at least 10 years, and probably longer (considering their investment in it). The sci-fi retheme would be easy enough, though, long-term. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cgodsey Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 http://www.orlandosentinel.com/business/orl-bk-disney-marvel-entertainment-083109,0,2559631.story This article says Universal has the rights over Spiderman, Hulk, and a couple other characters over any park east of the Mississippi and that the contracts seemed to be perpetual as long as the attractions stay open. Could Disney use these characters on the west coast or perhaps oversees? I would bet yes and I am sure they will in the future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
raptorcrew2002 Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 Sorry to call you out, but your post is ALL wrong. Dreamworks was purchased & is being distributed by PARAMOUNT..not Disney! (it'd be weird to have both Pixar AND Dreamworks Animation films distributed by Disney wouldn't it?) And Catwoman is not even a Marvel character...its DC, screwed up by Warner Bros. Man I did bomb the Catwoman I was trying to think of the worst flicks, ha. But as for Dream Works. February 09, 2009 THE WALT DISNEY STUDIOS ENTERS EXCLUSIVE LONG-TERM DISTRIBUTION AGREEMENT WITH DREAMWORKS STUDIOS STEVEN SPIELBERG & STACEY SNIDER ALIGN WITH DISNEY TO DISTRIBUTE AND MARKET THEIR LIVE-ACTION MOTION PICTURES http://corporate.disney.go.com/news/corporate/2009/2009_0209_dreamworks_studios.html Aug 17, 2009, 05:04 PM ET In a recent interview, Snider succinctly summed up the business and creative aims of the reincarnated studio. "Commercial, quality entertainment is the mantra," she said. In other words, don't expect any art films or limited releases, as DreamWorks begins to pump movies through Disney's distribution pipeline. Its agreement with the Burbank studio also provides for TV and home entertainment distribution of its film titles. At least for now, DreamWorks is staying put in its offices on the backlot of Universal, which once distributed its films before Paramount bought the indie and operated it as an off-site production division for two years. ? Not sure if I missed something but that was my understanding... I also think Wes hit it right on the nail with the demographics. Disney really has needed more age range in its content very badly. But beside merchandise I do not expect to see any Marvel rides for a while. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BeemerBoy Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 LOL at all the "Disney is cut throat....Disney is evil" comments. We would've heard the same recycled crap if Disney had acquired Potter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
netdvn Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 Why does this not surprise me for some reason? I remember not too long ago, I was flipping to Toon Disney, when all of a sudden, I realized the entire network's lineup consisted of Batman, Superman, Iron Man, Incredible Hulk, Spider Man, Fantastic 4, Power Rangers, etc with the occasional Pinky and the Brain, Animaniacs, and classic/modern Disney Channel cartoons (Ducktales, Rescue Rangers, Tale-Spin, etc). My guess is that Disney has the rights to the SatAM cartoons that used to air on Fox Kids in the 90s and they decided to expand that to possibly include movies, comic books, merchandise, etc. For some reason I don't think this sale will affect Marvel Superhero Island though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
denning Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 Fact is disney has smart lawyers and likely did due diligence, their is zero way that would allow the purchase if it required them to let Universal keep its properties just down the road. Spiderman is a big draw for IOA and losing it will hurt. Therefore making Potter seem like a lateral move as opposed to an improvement. This is not like the videogames where they will take a wait and see approach, the Orlando themepark is the core of their business and the rivalry with Universal is very real. They need to protect it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ParkTrips Posted August 31, 2009 Author Share Posted August 31, 2009 They never really had a good property for the teen to early 20's male demographic. Well, now they do. And that's exactly what their spokesman said in an interview on CNBC this morning as to why they made the move. I personally doubt Disney parks will feature Marvel themed rides/areas, but I'm also doubting that Universal will keep their attractions as they currently are. Just think if they retheme the Marvel island, almost half the park will have been rethemed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rba13 Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 http://www.orlandosentinel.com/business/orl-bk-disney-marvel-entertainment-083109,0,2559631.story This article says Universal has the rights over Spiderman, Hulk, and a couple other characters over any park east of the Mississippi and that the contracts seemed to be perpetual as long as the attractions stay open. Could Disney use these characters on the west coast or perhaps oversees? I would bet yes and I am sure they will in the future. Disney always wanted to expand in California. DCA was an initial bust for them, but now they are doing better. I bet Disney starts working on another Supersize parking structure so they can claim land from the parking area to expand DCA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SharkTums Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 OMG, do you really think IOA could retheme an entire Island!??! Oh wait...that's what they're already doing. Stupid Harry Potter!!!! Eh, this really doesn't seem to affect me, nor bother me in any way, shape, or form. I don't think we'll see Space Mountain rethemed as Hulk, and if Hulk gets rethemed to Battlestar Gallactica, well, cool! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meteornotes Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 You know, Universal owns SyFy. SyFy shows a lot of great movies on Saturday nights featuring sharks. These movies would make excellent ride themes. Just saying... dt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SharkTums Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 ^See, this is why we should be in charge of things. Forget the Harry Potter overlay, Dueling Dragons should have become Mega Shark vs. Giant Octopus!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jew Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 Fact is disney has smart lawyers and likely did due diligence, their is zero way that would allow the purchase if it required them to let Universal keep its properties just down the road. Spiderman is a big draw for IOA and losing it will hurt. Therefore making Potter seem like a lateral move as opposed to an improvement. This is not like the videogames where they will take a wait and see approach, the Orlando themepark is the core of their business and the rivalry with Universal is very real. They need to protect it. I'm not sure why everyone keeps looking at this deal from a theme park point of view. $4B is A LOT of money to spend on something that will only cause a competitor in one of their businesses to have to spend a fraction of that to re-theme one section of one of their theme parks. Not to mention the fact that if Universal does have to re-theme that island, Disney just gave them the platform to launch a new ride/marketing blitz... But the bigger picture of why Disney made this deal is what what Wes said: filling a hole in their demographics. Now they have their foot very much in the door for an extremely lucrative demographic that was previously untapped. Look no further than how all the Marvel movies have done at the box office to see why they REALLY made this deal... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BeemerBoy Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 ^See, this is why we should be in charge of things. Forget the Harry Potter overlay, Dueling Dragons should have become Mega Shark vs. Giant Octopus!!!!!! Or think about a MS v. GO dark ride. They could just use the same scene in every other room, and throw in a Lorenzo Lamas animatronic.....or just Lorenzo Lamas (same difference). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cfc Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 They should replace the Indiana Jones stunt show with "Spider-Man v. Mega Shark" or maybe "The Incredible Hulk v. Giant Octopus." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sam06pr Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 Wow Disney must be really mad at Universal for taking Harry Potter and the Kuka Arms...lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robbalvey Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 It fills a hole in their entertainment offerings for demographics. Obviously the existing Disney brand caters very well to families with kids from 0-12 or so with various characters and licenses. The tween/teenage girl market has been good for Disney, they can just pump out new versions of Hannah Montana/Jonas Brothers. For adults, they have Miramax. They never really had a good property for the teen to early 20's male demographic. Well, now they do. I'm going to re-quote this again because it's one of the only *really* intelligent comments posted to this thread (and I encourage others to re-post this again if the thread goes off on some stupid tangent.) I don't think that "What to do with the Universal land" was the first thing on their mind when making the deal. Nor does it have ANYTHING to do with Universal makin a deal with Harry Potter or anything of the like. Remember, when Disney makes a business decision (especially a 4 billion dollar business decision) they look at the HUGE picture. How these properties will fit into EVERYTHING they do. Not just theme parks, or more specifically one land in a theme park. And if you look, it is not hard to find some cross-pollination of worlds. For example, here is a Universal Studios commercial posted to the Disney-owned ESPN website: http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=3877333 When I worked at the Disney Studios we had to work with ESPN quite a bit, and the way it worked then is ESPN still operated as a sperate entity. They still make their own deals, licensing agreements, and if we needed to work with an ESPN property, we still had to pay certain licensing fees, even though they were owned by the same parent company. The same applied to ABC and I'm going to assume that Marvel will feature a similar buisness model. I wouldn't worry too much about it right now. --Robb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meteornotes Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 ^See, this is why we should be in charge of things. Forget the Harry Potter overlay, Dueling Dragons should have become Mega Shark vs. Giant Octopus!!!!!! THIS IS THE BEST IDEA EVER! Seriously, how awesome of a theme would that be for this ride? I'm imaging the queue and pre-show now. And laughing like a madman. This so needs to happen. Giant sharks > Harry Potter. dt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taytig Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 Financially the revenue from licencing the characters is huge! This alone in an income giant. I don't think we have to worry about seeing Mickey and Wolverine side by side any time soon. I say good for Disney for making a great financial decision that will make them a lot of money in the future.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now