Guardians of the Galaxy Disney Attraction?

[Mad Dog]

*ahem* Guys..... Topic.

We can stay on topic with the lordship thing. That could be Disney's solution to spending money for Twilight Zone IP rights or fighting a legal battle with Universal over Guardians. A cheap IP, "Lord Iger's Tower of Terror" attraction. Cheap & effective.

 

[Somebody Else]

We can stay on topic with the lordship thing. That could be Disney's solution to spending money for Twilight Zone IP rights or fighting a legal battle with Universal over Guardians. A cheap IP, "Lord Iger's Tower of Terror" attraction. Cheap & effective.

That wouldn't be cheap at all. Greedy jerk would likely charge the company half his usual salary for the use of his name.

 

[Scott W.]

 

[rhino4evr]

I don't want to listen to that...can you just tell me what Mr. Hill basically says?

 

[IzzyB]

I don't want to listen to that...can you just tell me what Mr. Hill basically says?

Agreed, I don't have 25 minutes Even a time point in the video that is important would be good.

 

[Brian G.]

I don't want to listen to that...can you just tell me what Mr. Hill basically says?

In a nutshell, Guardians can't be used in Florida. Even if there was some loophole that allowed them to be used; by 2018-19 they will fall under the Avengers family officially.

Per Jim, rumor has a grain of truth though. Idea comes from future Marvel plans for DCA where the expansion will be located near their Tower. Their ToT isn't as beloved as ours so thought was fix it with this overlay. Since people complained they don't get things like Hyperspace Mt or Small World Holiday in WDW, thought process was to share it as a "We do care about both coasts".

 

[Stitch_101]

I don't want to listen to that...can you just tell me what Mr. Hill basically says?

He basically said any chance of GotG overlay coming to DHS is pretty much gone after the backlash it got, in his opinion anyways, but to still expect it to come to DL.

It's interesting what he says about the rights issues, and made me realize some stuff about the development of the GotG movies. As soon as GotG appear along side the Avengers in the ultimate Infinity Wars, then any debate about the rights is over and they are clearly Universal's. This has got to be some very clever planning on Disney's part. During the filming of GotG, Gunn made it clear that the Guardians would be operating separate from the rest of the MCU until such time that it necessary (so pretty much Infinity Wars). This makes me think this was a decision made deliberately by Disney to try and keep the rights in question and not give Universal an open/close easy case on the matter. It makes sense then that the only cross over we have seen from characters in GotG and the rest of the MCU have been made by those character whose rights are pretty much certain to be Universal's. Very clever Disney.

It also makes me wonder if I was on to something with my speculation of a deal being struck between Universal and Disney concerning the GotG rights. Disney clearly wants the GotG rights for Orlando. If they have been trying to postpone the inevitable, and with Infinity Wars looming in the near future, it makes sense for them to pursue the full rights before its release... And Universal isn't going to give them up for nothing. Likewise, I'm sure Universal would kill for the chance to upgrade MSHI to match the enormously popular films, and Disney isn't giving that up for nothing...

On another note, I wonder why he didn't bring up the issues with Guardian's characters who already have big ties to characters already used in MCU pre-Guardians, as that is most certainly another issue to take into account in the very complicated saga of the GotG rights.

 

[Brian G.]

On another note, I wonder why he didn't bring up the issues with Guardian's characters who already have big ties to characters already used in MCU pre-Guardians, as that is most certainly another issue to take into account in the very complicated saga of the GotG rights.

He did at one point single out Starlord rights, but wasn't very clear.

 

[Stitch_101]

He did at one point single out Starlord rights, but wasn't very clear.

Yeah, he touched on it in such a way that made it difficult to understand, at least in the context of what he was talking about.

 

[Brian G.]

Yeah, he touched on it in such a way that made it difficult to understand, at least in the context of what he was talking about.

Maybe he just generalized the rights for the sake of the audience not being confused.

 

[Stitch_101]

Maybe he just generalized the rights for the sake of the audience not being confused.

Fair enough. It is a complicated mess for even those with more knowledge of the issue. No need to overly confuse people with its complexities

 

[Parkscope Joe]

TL;DR

WDW no DLR yes. Based on getting movie ride in park a la Hyperspace Mountain. More an idea than in development.

 

[IzzyB]

Thanks everyone. It sounds like all of this is going in the right direction which is ToT won't be overlayed in WDW. But they may be able to negotiate something that could benefit both Uni and WDW and allow a future better ride involving GoTG. I would think this would be much better as a phase 3 type thing that is nowhere near ToT

 

[Parkscope Joe]

Thanks everyone. It sounds like all of this is going in the right direction which is ToT won't be overlayed in WDW. But they may be able to negotiate something that could benefit both Uni and WDW and allow a future better ride involving GoTG. I would think this would be much better as a phase 3 type thing that is nowhere near ToT

I've been told universal has no interest in renegotiating the contract in regards to east of the Mississippi and GotG is covered. Also this lines up with what I heard that this whole project is far away from being for certain or a guarantee.

 

[Brian G.]

Fair enough. It is a complicated mess for even those with more knowledge of the issue. No need to overly confuse people with its complexities

Tell me about it. I've been going through it for the past few days and it still gives me a headache.

 

[Stitch_101]

I've been told universal has no interest in renegotiating the contract in regards to east of the Mississippi and GotG is covered. Also this lines up with what I heard that this whole project is far away from being for certain or a guarantee.

I'm inclined to agree, but the only reason I have pause for thought is the MSHI/MCU rumor. If this is fact a solid possibility, some sort of renegotiation would have to take place wouldn't it?

 

[IzzyB]

I've been told universal has no interest in renegotiating the contract in regards to east of the Mississippi and GotG is covered. Also this lines up with what I heard that this whole project is far away from being for certain or a guarantee.

I think I would be OK either way. If they do negotiate then Uni will get an update they want. If they don't, then we have status quo which I am also ok with. The only thing I was not OK with was the whole ToT mess

 

[Stitch_101]

I just realized a big hole in Hill's claim that GotG appearing in the Inifinty Wars would cement Universal rights of them, even post contract. If such a thing is true for the movies, it would then also have to be true for the comics wouldn't it?
...
And GotG already crossed over and appeared in a story arc of The Avengers comics in 2012 for 5 or more issues. So by his own reasoning, Universal would already have a iron tight claim to GotG.

Man, this whole thing is giving me a headache. I wish it wasn't such a fascinating topic! Lol

 

[Parkscope Joe]

And GotG already crossed over and appeared in a story arc of The Avengers comics in 2012 for 5 or more issues. So by his own reasoning, Universal would already have a iron tight claim to GotG.

Bingo

 

[Brian G.]

I just realized a big hole in Hill's claim that GotG appearing in the Inifinty Wars would cement Universal rights of them, even post contract. If such a thing is true for the movies, it would then also have to be true for the comics wouldn't it?
...
And GotG already crossed over and appeared in a story arc of The Avengers comics in 2012 for 5 or more issues. So by his own reasoning, Universal would already have a iron tight claim to GotG.

Man, this whole thing is giving me a headache. I wish it wasn't such a fascinating topic! Lol

My rationale is that the appearance doesn't make them part of the family that's laid out in the contract. So where as Gamora, Drax, Rocket and Groot did appear or originate in Avenger comics and the like, Starlord did not and that's the loophole for the use of the "Guardians" in the park. Contract also states that advertising does not fall victim to this unless it's considered a ride (Which is why they were able to show the movie in the theater without effects.) or the basis of the attraction (Ending of GMR does not advertise that clip as being from Marvel or that it's Guardians; plus it's GMR not Marvel's GMR).