MSHI Expansion?

[Mike S]

You don't have to but you'd be removing a drop tower type attraction and there is only about 2 acres there, so you've got roughly the same amount of land as ToT. One way or another, they're going to have to develop a vertical ride system. If transformers can move you up and down without you knowing, imagine how freaked out you'd be not realising you've travelled 150ft into the air and finish with a giant drop.

@Disneyhead has said on Magic that a backstage warehouse will also be removed.

 

[Scott W.]

@Disneyhead has said on Magic that a backstage warehouse will also be removed.

There's certainly enough room for a Spider-Man type building in that area.

Your Thanks Shanghai photo cracks me up every time.

 

[IAmFloridaBorn]

I wouldn't go for a drop ride however. Just because you're using Stark Tower as the facade doesn't mean the ride has to go in the tower itself.

I LOVE DOOM. But if Universal is smart, they'd opt out of the drop tower business with their next Marvel SuperHero Island move.

 

[IAmFloridaBorn]

There's certainly enough room for a Spider-Man type building in that area.

Your Thanks Shanghai photo cracks me up every time.

Universal has learned to build up. There probabaly would be no need for a show building that size for one ride again unless they just want too. But they have options if DOom is removed.

 

[Mike S]

I'd also like to add that no Avengers expansion would be complete without a shwarma place.

 

[Viator]

I LOVE DOOM. But if Universal is smart, they'd opt out of the drop tower business with their next Marvel SuperHero Island move.

Personally, with a Marvel E-Ticket; I have to imagine that this would be more likely.

In a way, it makes sense. Get rid of two birds, with one stone. You also keep SFA, albeit rethemed and lessened in its line; but it'd work out better. And as for the ride tech, I believe it was said a long while back that they were toying with using the Kuka benches, so I could see a extension of the contract if that's what they'll do.

 

[quinnmac000]

Shawarma is by far the worst theme park food. The smells, the spices, etc rolling in your stomach on a warm day plus the smell. Add in the storm force and the hulk. No no no.

 

[Disneyhead]

Shawarma is by far the worst theme park food. The smells, the spices, etc rolling in your stomach on a warm day plus the smell. Add in the storm force and the hulk. No no no.

5-6 beers would calm that stomach down.

Or not.

 

[Stitch_101]

The resistance I could see from Marvel would be how this could possibly affect actors current contracts. If RDJ has signed a contract for 2 more movies for example, does filimg scenes for a ride, count as a movie?

Yeah, I agree. Any of the actors could make the case that this counts from the movies left on their contract.

There is a big difference between a movie and filming for an attraction, and as it is not uncommon for actors and actresses to appear in theme park attractions anymore, I'm willing to guarantee there is a distinction in their contracts. Besides, the biggest clincher here is who their contracts are with: Disney. If Universal were to build an Avengers attraction based on the MCU, even with Disney's full corporation, additional contract negotations would likely have to take place.

 

[quinnmac000]

There is a big difference between a movie and filming for an attraction, and as it is not uncommon for actors and actresses to appear in theme park attractions anymore, I'm willing to guarantee there is a distinction in their contracts. Besides, the biggest clincher here is who their contracts are with: Disney. If Universal were to build an Avengers attraction based on the MCU, even with Disney's full corporation, additional contract negotations would likely have to take place.

Catch is their contract isn't with Disney but Marvel Studios. RDJ is out of the game as he has finished as his films he is contractually obligated to do so he could easily refuse. Chris Evans loves being Captain America and he has 2 more films left on his contract and has openly stated he would extend if he could. Chris Hemsworth as Thor is available. Mark Ruffalo still has 4 films. Scar Jo could refuse as she is done along with Jeremy Renner and their contracts are like RDJ which are film to film. Sebastian Stan as Bucky could also be involved.

However, reading the contract this statement makes it seem Disney/Marvel has to provide the actors if Universal requested regardless. Mainly because the actors fall under key personnel as they are the faces of the characters and protray the characters. Doesn't matter if Disney wants it or not but per the contract, Comcast could raise a big stink about it and send Disney/Marvel to arbitration.

Marvel will reasonably cooperate in making information, artwork, archive material, key personnel, etc. available to MCA in order that MCA can creatively develop THE MARVEL UNIVERSE and exploit its rights hereunder. MCA will reimburse Marvel for its reasonable costs in this regard, including time of non-executive personnel and their reasonable travel expense.

 

[Stitch_101]

Catch is their contract isn't with Disney but Marvel Studios. RDJ is out of the game as he has finished as his films he is contractually obligated to do so he could easily refuse. Chris Evans loves being Captain America and he has 2 more films left on his contract and has openly stated he would extend if he could. Chris Hemsworth as Thor is available. Mark Ruffalo still has 4 films. Scar Jo could refuse as she is done along with Jeremy Renner and their contracts are like RDJ which are film to film. Sebastian Stan as Bucky could also be involved.

However, reading the contract this statement makes it seem Disney/Marvel has to provide the actors if Universal requested regardless. Mainly because the actors fall under key personnel as they are the faces of the characters and protray the characters. Doesn't matter if Disney wants it or not but per the contract, Comcast could raise a big stink about it and send Disney/Marvel to arbitration.

The "key personnel" clause wouldn't apply to the actors though as they are not technically Marvel employees. The point of the key personnel addition is to insure key member inside Marvel are available while planning attractions.

Edit: And even if by some chance that clause did apply to the actors, it would be reliant on the actors contract. If they are not contractually obligated to be available for theme park attractions, Universal couldn't then press Disney and Marvel to violate that contract.

 

[quinnmac000]

The "key personnel" clause wouldn't apply to the actors though as they are not technically Marvel employees. The point of the key personnel addition is to insure key member inside Marvel are available while planning attractions.

That is still arguable because essentially all freelance and contracted workers aren't marvel employees either yet if they were asked or essential for a project and Universal asked for them, Marvel would have to provide them access. Comcast could also argue they are key personnel because they are essential to the execution of said project which falls under the definition of key personnel.

 

[Stitch_101]

That is still arguable because essentially all freelance and contracted workers aren't marvel employees either yet if they were asked or essential for a project and Universal asked for them, Marvel would have to provide them access. Comcast could also argue they are key personnel because they are essential to the execution of said project which falls under the definition of key personnel.

Read my edit up above. Because they are basically contract hires, Universal could not force Marvel or Disney to violate that contract. Your argument is flimsy at best. If Universal is going to go after Disney for contract violation, they are going to do so for an issue they know they have 100% certainty they can win. A lose on an issue that is vague within the contract opens things up for Disney to exploit other vague statements within it.

 

[quinnmac000]

Read my edit up above. Because they are basically contract hires, Universal could not force Marvel or Disney to violate that contract. Your argument is flimsy at best. If Universal is going to go after Disney for contract violation, they are going to do so for an issue they know they have 100% certainty they can win. A lose on an issue that is vague within the contract opens things up for Disney to exploit other vague statements within it.

They still have to provide access, which means yes the actors could refuse as seen with Emma Watson for the Hogwarts Express. Marvel/Disney can't say to Universal no you can't talk to Robert Downey, etc for this project. They themselves aka the actors would have to refuse and Marvel would have to let them participate if the actors wanted to.

 

[Stitch_101]

They still have to provide access, which means yes the actors could refuse as seen with Emma Watson for the Hogwarts Express. Marvel/Disney can't say to Universal no you can't talk to Robert Downey, etc for this project. They themselves aka the actors would have to refuse and Marvel would have to let them participate if the actors wanted to.

Oh, that I know. Hense my statement up above that additional negotiations would likely have to take place with the actors if an Avengers attraction were to go forward in the likeness of the MCU.

 

[quinnmac000]

Oh, that I know. Hense my statement up above that additional negotiations would likely have to take place with the actors if an Avengers attraction were to go forward in the likeness of the MCU.

That I doubt more so as I'm sure every actor who signed a contract post Disney's purchase has a clause for theme park attractions (which would be all the avengers characters and GOTG). I know Downey had one when he had to resign hints the Iron Man simulator at HKDL.

 

[Stitch_101]

That I doubt more so as I'm sure every actor who signed a contract post Disney's purchase has a clause for theme park attractions (which would be all the avengers characters and GOTG). I know Downey had one when he had to resign hints the Iron Man simulator at HKDL.

Maybe, maybe not. Contracts are a tricky thing too. How do we know that Disney, knowing that Universal had Marvel rights in Orlando, didn't specify the attractions portion of the contract, making it apply to only Disney properties or even specific Disney parks. If that were the case, Universal would then have to negotiate for their participation in IOA. There is too much that is unknown, therefore it is hard to say with any certainty one way or another.

 

[Mad Dog]

One can dream.

In my head, I'm imagining a mix between Spider-Man and ToT. Plenty of screenz but I don't care. The icing on the cake would be to have a few hotel rooms at the top of the tower. If Disney can add a room in Cinderella Castle, why not here. The views would be incredible. Look down on the Hulk, Hogwarts castle in the distance, Volcano Bay out the opposite windows.

Your concept, and name, made in it to the Marvel thread on WDW Magic.

 

[Mike S]

Your concept, and name, made in it to the Marvel thread on WDW Magic.

Yeah that was me. I liked the idea so I shared it and gave him credit.

 

[Mike S]

New info from @Marni1971 seems to be that Avengers is one of three choices for IoA's next project along with Pets and Mt. Crumpit.