Disney buys Marvel Comics...Future of Universal?

[LaTiNoObSeSeDSFGAm]

Take a look at this link.
http://perezhilton.com/category/business-blitz/



It says:
"The Walt Disney Company has purchased Marvel Entertainment Inc. for $4 billion in cash and stock!!!!

Wow.

Disney now owns the catalogue of 5,000 Marvel characters, including Fantastic Four and X-Men.

The big wigs over at Mickey Mouse's house hope that by owning the comic book characters, Disney will now appeal to a larger audience than tween girls obsessed with Miley Cyrus and the JoBros.

"It helps Disney add exposure to a young male demographic it had sort of lost some balance with," says David Joyce, analyst for Miller Tabak & Co.

Disney CEO Robert Iger believes the combination of Marvel's "strong global brand and world-renowned library of characters" will go along smashlingly with Disney's "unparalleled global portfolio of entertainment properties."

What do U think of the big merge????"


So now that Disney has purchased Marvel comics does this mean that its the end of the Superhero section at Islands of Adventure? Renaming the HULK ride?

[Goku1910]

This belongs in the "Off-Topic" section, but I have to agree, Disney is becoming too big. It's starting to become like a monopoly, they are just taking out all of their competition, and right now, as it stands, their only worry is dreamworks.

What's next? The Jonas IronMen?

[LaTiNoObSeSeDSFGAm]

Sorry for it being in the wrong forum. Its crazy though. I just wonder what will happen to Universal. Im really looking forward to what they will rename the rides to. Im just glad that Disney didnt buy DC comics. I would rather have that to be under Warner Bros.

[rct2wizard360]

This belongs in the "Off-Topic" section

This is COMPLETELY relevant to the theme park industry.

Probably one of the best moves I've seen in awhile.
Now before you all start freaking out, the folks over at CinemaBlend made this little list to calm all of you down.

1. Disney owns Miramax. The pseudo-indie isn't what it was when the Weinsteins were introducing mainstream America to indie edge in the 90s, sure. But Disney has owned the studio even since those days-- Pulp Fiction was released by Miramax when it was owned by Disney, for Christ's sake. Clearly this is a studio unafraid of edge when cordoned off in the proper sector.

2. Disney owns Pixar. The animation geeks were freaking out when this merger happened in 2006. But you know what's happened since then? Ratatouille, Wall-E and Up, plus a ton of money to make more movies like that by selling Cars-themed bedspreads to 5-year-old boys. Instead of curbing John Lasseter's vision, they put him in charge of all animation. Clearly this is a studio unafraid of creative license.

3. Disney knows from marketing. I mean, duh. If you think Iron Man and Spider-Man action figures are ubiquitous now, just wait until they come under the watch of the people who have made sure that every girl under the age of 10 has a Hannah Montana-themed something. Just like it was for Pixar, this isn't inherently a bad thing. Kids need toys and kids love the characters and more toys mean more storytelling opportunities for just those characters. Clearly this is a studio unafraid to make a bunch of money on ancillary stuff and spend it perpetuating the cycle.

4. Disney really wants boys to pay attention. This may be the biggest reason of all to hold your horses. With the exception of Cars, Disney hasn't really been able to tap into a young boy market, and they really have no cachet among teens. There's no way they would scare off Marvel's core fanbase of teen boys by cleaning up Tony Stark or toning down the action in Spider-Man. Not that those two characters will be under Disney any time soon-- Paramount and Sony are still hanging on to their respective deals-- but I guarantee they'll be using that model going forward with whichever Marvel character is up at the plate next. Clearly this is a studio well aware that you, the fanboy, are their golden calf, and you will not be sacrificed.

5. Disney still has John Lasseter. This really just applies to the spectre of straight-to-DVD animated Iron Man adventures, in which Tony Stark fights Tinkerbell or some nonsense. As head of Disney Animation, Lasseter has done away with that crappy treatment of Disney's characters. While there will likely be a lot more Marvel character animation, apparently much of it on the Disney XD channel, don't expect it to be as miserable as the fates that befell The Little Mermaid and Jafar in the 90s. Clearly this is a studio with more respect for its characters than it used to have.

I'm excited to see where this goes.

[Goku1910]

This belongs in the "Off-Topic" section

This is COMPLETELY relevant to the theme park industry.

Only this part is:

So now that Disney has purchased Marvel comics does this mean that its the end of the Superhero section at Islands of Adventure? Renaming the HULK ride?

[monsterfan99]

This belongs in the "Off-Topic" section, but I have to agree, Disney is becoming too big. It's starting to become like a monopoly, they are just taking out all of their competition, and right now, as it stands, their only worry is dreamworks.

What's next? The Jonas IronMen?

Disney actually have a 30 picture distribution agreement with Dreamworks.

[rb1]

Disney is turning into walmart except the fact that they charged to much for a ticket. Why cant they just buy SF and CF and get it all over with they are selling some Disney stuff at GA. Could you imagine being able 2 use youre season pass on every Disney park. Arent they planning on buying SEAWORLD too though is that still going on.

[zjohn1988]

Universal is safe with Marvel Super Hero Island in IOA. They still have a contractual agreement with Marvel and there are patents filed to keep the current attractions in IOA until the park or section of the park become defunct. Universal will not however be able to build new Marvel attractions in the future. Also right now, there is a park currently under construction overseas which is entirely themed to Marvel and owned by a private company and also slightly be Universal(?)

[FParker185]

I'm good without a $1000 season pass.

[Ilovthevu']

I guess it's good for Disney to have a new product to sell (On Toon Disney, or whatever it's called they do air Spiderman I think already.), but the thing to me is that Disney is making movies that are mostly Pixar, and where are the real Disney movies? I think the studio lost money, and that's probably because they can't come up with anything. Pirates, and Toy Story along with cars appeal to guys. However, look at Pirates and it's something they had in the parks already. Has Disney run out of ideas? Is that the reason why they are buying Marvel, and the reason why they bought Pixar? Where is Disney original stuff? I don't see it. Oh, yeah Alice in Wonderland in 2010 is really original. Basically, my point is that they are buying up other properties because they don't know how to create new stuff anymore.

[Director_Guy]

^ http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0780521/

Also, Bolt? Enchanted? Where have you been? Just not paying attention?

[LaTiNoObSeSeDSFGAm]

^ I think he meant that Disney is running out of ideas for boys. And it does make sense what he said. A lot of the new stuff Disney made is mostly towards girls. Enchanted/ Princess and the Frog/ Hannah Montanna/ Jonas Brothers/ Selena Gomez. Whereas the only ideas that might be suited towards boys are Zac and Cody/ maybe Bolt (never seen it) and of course Pirates and Toy Story. If you look at what Disney has for girls compared to boys, the ratio is unbeatable in favor for the girls side. Smart move by Disney.

[LaTiNoObSeSeDSFGAm]

sorry "ILOVETHEVU" I referenced you as "he said" but I have no idea what gender you are.

[Ilovthevu']

^That's okay. I'm a guy.

Enchanted to me was a mock of the princesses even though it was done by Disney. That's not original. Bolt was original even though I didn't see it.

That's 1 movie every year by pure Disney, and not Pixar. The Pixar stuff is truly original coming from Disney even though where would Disney be without Pixar? If you can't create another superhero to get people interested, well why not just buy some? Look at the Witch Mountain movie. That's a remake movie.

I guess Disney is just good at just copying others though (Grim Tales). That's where Snow White, Cinderella, Alice and Wonderland, and so on came from.

I guess the question is also how many princesses can you have also? They are going to add another one with this Prince and Frog movie. What else is there to explore besides princesses for girls? I think that after Beauty and the Beast, and Little Mermaid the company started to go down hill. Than, they bought Pixar to help it out, and it is helping it out.

The thing with the guys in the park is that you have Tower of Terror, Expedition Everest, Mission Space, Test Track, you have Rockin Roller Coaster, A Bug's Life (Who likes bugs? Guys in my opinion), Toy Story, A Nightmare Before Christmas apparel, Space Mountain, Big Thunder Mountain Railroad, dinosaurs, and such but where's the Space Mountain movie, where's Big Thunder movie, and so on? I think Marvel would help them in the Disney movie studio more than the parks. Sure, Magic Kingdom has a lot of princess stuff, but yet the other parks are surrounded with guy things too. If Disney could make something like Spiderman, or Transformers they would get a lot of money for that stuff, but again can't they think of there own creation? Is that hard for them (a movie and television based company) to create a new superhero or superheroes?

What's ironic is that I was playing the Spiderman game on Wii because I rented it, and this game is fun, but it has the same evil villians all throughout the game. Sure, they change costumes, but they are virtually all the same. It was getting boring towards the end the game quite frankly. Sure, it has main villians, but they are after all the cloned people.

This is a little unrelated to the Disney purchase, but I just want to say something. I didn't really care for Spiderman 2, and 3 (the movies). To me, they are too much like chick flicks, and I think the reason is because the villians in those movies don't have henchmen like going back to Batman 1 (the original one), Joker had henchmen, and for the second Penguin has henchmen, and (I forgot about the 3rd one), but the for the 4th one, Mr. Freeze has them. So, what's the point? The point is that if you are battling a villian in a movie, who else is going to fight the good guy? It's always going to be Spiderman versus Doc Oc, and there is no one else there to beat up other than Doc Oc in that 2nd Spiderman movie. I think in the 3rd there were 2 villians, but still that's not much in my opinion.

The first movie in opinion was great, and that's a lot because introducing all the characters, but the 2nd and 3rd I didn't care for. I don't know about this deal anyway. Marvel came out with 2 Hulk movies, and I think they were garbage (my opinion), they already came out with 4 X-Men movies, they already came out with 3 Spider-man movies, and how many more characters do they have that would be popular? You have Iron Man, and maybe that Captain America that could have a movie. I like DC characters better. Hulk is about the military, and so is Iron Man. Captain America is about the war.

Spiderman is cool, but he's kind of weak compared to Superman, Flash, Batman, Wonder Woman, and even Green Lantern in my opinion. X-Men is awesome, but sometimes it's a little too much about Wolverine in my opinion. I rather see all the characters than just focus on one. They had a Wolverine movie now, and now they have a Wolverine cartoon (Wolverine and the X-Men).

[monsterfan99]

^People hate new things, plain and simple. Thus why Disney and every other movie studio do re-makes all the time. Making a movie now a days is stupid simple. All you need is an attractive female and male leads and special effects. That right there will make you at least 75 million domestically. Make it a sequel of a popular movie and you are over 100 million mark. It doesn't matter if the first movie was awful (the Fast and the Furious) people will go like cattle.

This is true for anything really. Madden, Guitar Hero and World of Warcraft expansion sell like hotcakes. Most music sounds the same. Restaurants are mostly chains with very little that is different. It is just the way humans are.

[vprlvr456]

^^ Enchanted wasn't written by a "Disney" writer, it's by the guy who wrote Blast from the past and Preminition. It was also supposed to be a lot darker, but it didn't fit the "Disney" mold.


Why do I know this? Because my uncle wrote it.

[rct2wizard360]

This is a lot less about what goes on in the parks and a lot more about what goes on with the money.

Look at the Disney/Pixar relationship. Talk to ANYBODY from Pixar, and the word Disney rarely comes out of their mouth. Disney is in no way helping Pixar besides money. Hell, they opposed computer animation back in the day and then came crying back to Pixar for a deal. Disney puts out the movies that Pixar makes so then Disney gets a big fat cut of the profit. Hell, Bolt which was a "Disney Animation Studios" movie was nearly all Pixar work.

Ilovethevu, there's one Pixar movie coming out every year as well in case you didnt notice. Wall-E last year and Up! a year later.

This is by no means in anyway a theme park oriented goal. Disney has no market for 9-12 year old boys. The J-Bro's, Hannah Montanta have that age market completely SET for girls. They own that market right now, no questions asked. But what are the boys doing? Honestly try and tell me the ONE thing all grade schools boys are into these days. You can't. It's so diverse. Boy's dont play with hot-wheels anymore. You could say sports but that's not something that the computer game kid can go do. There's not something that they ALL tune into anymore, besides going on Xbox Live at night and annoying the hell out of me. It's an empty market and Disney wants to grab a hold of it. Despite the ratings on the movies, most kids have seen Dark Knight/Iron Man/Hulk. (Yes I know Batman is not Marvel) Grade School boys eat that shit up. Last halloween you couldnt walk a block without seeing a little guy in a Joker costume. I saw a few Iron Mans and Hulks as well. It's the one thing that every little boy thinks is totally badass. If Disney can town down the adult lives of the not-so-super-human counterparts, they'll hit the jackpot.

[CoasterDave316]

This belongs in the "Off-Topic" section

No, it's in the right forum.

Leave the moderating to the moderators.

[vprlvr456]

Yeah, Disney is goig out of hand with 6-12 year old girl market, HVE YOU SEEN JONAS?! That show is the stupidest thing I've ever seen

[Ilovthevu']

Wow, what I heard from a podcast, this sounds like a sour deal to me. They said that the next 3 Spiderman movies (I can't believe 3 more) would be by Columbia (not Disney), and X-Men is through Fox because of long-term contracts. To me, those are 2 major parts of Marvel that they aren't getting. To me, if you own Marvel, you should have all the characters, and all the movies, not just some.

[Trailblazer Tony]

I think, within the context of the amusement park industry, this will have no adverse affect on Universal whatsoever! First off, like John said, Marvel Superhero Island is under contract and will not change, the Hulk will remain the same (or it at least won't change for the reasons of Disney's purchase), and the actual characters in the park should still roam as they do now. Secondly, I doubt Disney will decide to build any attraction based off the Marvel comics simply because it has been done successfully before by Universal (and to some who don't read comics, by Six Flags with Superman and Batman ) and would only be compared to the Universal Versions. Thirdly, Universal has enough attention coming their way with the new Harry Potter world and the very interesting Hollywood Rip Ride Rocket, so I doubt the lack of new Hulk or Xmen rides will even be noticed.

That being said, it should be interesting to see what Disney manages to do with the company now that it possesses ownership! In regards to the "monopoly" talk, I believe Disney has been on track for that for many many years, this choice seems no different than the choice to operate ESPN or ABC or anything else Disney plays major roles in!

[Ilovthevu']

^People have said when they built it, why Six Flags, why? Why are you putting a Batman clone (SFFT) in when Sea World has one already? Shame on you. Well, why go Sea World at all when you can just go to Six Flags is what Six Flags and I think. To me, Sea World is too expensive for just a zoo for rides, but that's my opinion, and they are competition with one another.

Maybe, some people are thinking well we enjoy the superhero island at Universal Studios the most, and if Disney puts in like those attractions, why go to that park anymore?

[monsterfan99]

^ That is what they are doing with Sum of All Thrills right now. They are making their robo coaster ride a small diversion while Universal is making it the end all of theme park rides. My guess is Disney is hoping people go to EPCOT before Universal (which is true for families that do both places in one trip) and laugh at the Universal ride.

I'm not sure if that will work, but if it does, it will be the biggest news story of 2010 or 2011(whenever WWoHP opens.)

With the Marvel stuff, odds are there will be no rides going to WDW for years if at all due to the contracts. Reports are Disney would not be able to advertise east of the Mississippi River. Now the other 3 Disney resports, and maybe Tokyo if the park owners pay, is another story.

[BP317]

I dont get why so many of you are convinced this purchase is related to theme parks. As rct2wizard said Disney is very succesful with the young female crowd: princess brand, Hannah Montana, High School Musical, Jonas. All of which are total cash-cows. Buying Marvel is basically the same thing but with the young male crowd, its a great business deal in my opinion.

[Ilovthevu']

But they aren't getting all movies they should be getting because of contracts. Spiderman, and X-Men are big time money producers with those movies, but they aren't getting them. That's why I think it's a sour deal, but it's my opinion.

Top grossing movies all time: Spiderman was number 8 (the first one), number 12 (the second one), and number 17 (the third one). Disney can't make a Spiderman movie though until they the contract with Columbia is run out, and I think they said 6 more movies with Columbia. X-Men the Last Stand was number 62 which is further down, but still number 62 out of how many movies that have come out in a lifetime.