Universal's 3rd theme park (Universal and WB close to a deal)

[Lesverts]

Absolutely. Although I would love to see the Looney Tunes done justice in a theme park

Isn't it allegedly true that the Tolkien estate hates the Jackson movies? Granted I heard that from screamscape but that could be the reason why we never see a LOTR attraction.

After walking away I kept thinking about the original concepts for Toon Lagoon and how they should use the licenses they already have, and that they were going to use. I believe they still do have the rights to the Hanna-Barbera characters as well as the Nicktoons (although it could just be the two characters that are still in the park of there's for all we know). That would be awesome to see! I know that flintstones parade they had planned for when Islands first opened was neat as well as the Nicktoons game they had planned

I think it has more to do with elitism and that selling the film rights was a mistake on JRR's part. The Estate would never allow something like The Wizarding World of Harry Potter, even if done to the same degree of detail.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

This is just me so take it with a grain of salt but I feel like when something like this where two large well known companies are pretty darn close or have already come to an agreement for licensing (or mergers for that matter) I see something on the internet somewhere. I can't say that for sure for all things but I just feel like I usually do.

 

[maltdizzy]

Six Flags has invested billions in DC-themed rides that they promote nationally in the United States. I can't imagine there is a contract hole large enough to allow Universal access to the characters unless Six Flags was willing to let their licenses expire.

With Disney's ownership of Marvel, I could see Universal negotiating to secure the DC/Looney Tunes rights now for after the Six Flags rights expire. If DC succeeds in a cinematic universe, it may be more lucrative to replace Marvel in the future.

 

[mikepizzo]

If DC succeeds in a cinematic universe, it may be more lucrative to replace Marvel in the future.

Completely agree, but I don't see the DCCU having legs. Batman vs Superman: Dawn of Justice made $330+ million in the US and $542+ million overseas ($872+ million worldwide). Comparatively, Captain America: Civil War made $406+ million domestic and $744+ million overseas ($1.15+ billion worldwide).

In my opinion, DCCU is really going to have to step it's game up if it wants to play ball with the MCCU.

 

[maltdizzy]

Completely agree, but I don't see the DCCU having legs. Batman vs Superman: Dawn of Justice made $330+ million in the US and $542+ million overseas ($872+ million worldwide). Comparatively, Captain America: Civil War made $406+ million domestic and $744+ million overseas ($1.15+ billion worldwide).

In my opinion, DCCU is really going to have to step it's game up if it wants to play ball with the MCCU.

That's why I said *IF*. (I hated Man of Steel so much that I refuse to watch BvS or Suicide Squad)

But WB/DC can stumble some and still find direction in the long run.

 

[tjkraz]

Completely agree, but I don't see the DCCU having legs. Batman vs Superman: Dawn of Justice made $330+ million in the US and $542+ million overseas ($872+ million worldwide). Comparatively, Captain America: Civil War made $406+ million domestic and $744+ million overseas ($1.15+ billion worldwide).

In my opinion, DCCU is really going to have to step it's game up if it wants to play ball with the MCCU.

Even if DC film/TV properties surpass Marvel with regard to quality and profitability, it's doubtful that character licensing would ever be more cost effective than that Marvel agreement signed nearly 20 years ago. That agreement was reached when these characters were relegated to comic books and cartoons. In the late 90's, there wasn't any inkling that Captain America, Iron Man and Spider-Man would literally rule the box office.

DC characters may eventually have a wider audience. But it seems foolish to suggest that Universal would ditch a 1990s licensing agreement for (what would have to be) a far more expensive 2016 agreement.

 

[DanBoris]

The Universal contract with Marvel states that Marvel can cancel the contract if Universal does anything to hurt the Marvel brand. I would think Disney would be fight this hard. Opening a third gate with DC characters would muddy the brand especially when they are advertising both brands at their parks.

No, it doesn't. All it says is....

"Once THE MARVEL UNIVERSE opens within the above time period, the term of this agreement shall continue for so long as a THE MARVEL UNIVERSE shall remain open (and operated consistent with the standards of the next paragraph below) at any Universal Theme Park (allowing for temporary closures for force majeure events or refurbishment/maintenance provided they are being diligently pursued), except for termination for material breach (with written notice and a reasonable opportunity to cure).

Each THE MARVEL UNIVERSE shall be operated and maintained in a first class manner consistent with the highest standards of the theme park industry and shall be deemed “open” only when operated in such manner (subject to temporary closures for force majeure events as described in the prior paragraph). "

 

[maltdizzy]

Even if DC film/TV properties surpass Marvel with regard to quality and profitability, it's doubtful that character licensing would ever be more cost effective than that Marvel agreement signed nearly 20 years ago. That agreement was reached when these characters were relegated to comic books and cartoons. In the late 90's, there wasn't any inkling that Captain America, Iron Man and Spider-Man would literally rule the box office.

DC characters may eventually have a wider audience. But it seems foolish to suggest that Universal would ditch a 1990s licensing agreement for (what would have to be) a far more expensive 2016 agreement.

It really only matters if it brings people *into* the park. I don't think there is anything about Universal's Marvel properties that actually bring people in US. The Marvel Cinematic Universe is a license to print money (is all Disney wants to promote)...the print versions Universal controls is less so; the general (ticket-buying) public could care less about '90's stylized print versions. The Hulk Coaster will be successful under any theme.

Everyone is scrambling to secure license for future competition. Hoping to either create something as successful as WWHP or prevent competitors from doing so. That was a big reason Disney spent $$$$ on Avatar before they bought Marvel and Lucasfilm.

 

[tjkraz]

It really only matters if it brings people *into* the park.

Not if the higher licensing fees more than offset the additional traffic generated.

 

[PuppyJonathan]

Completely agree, but I don't see the DCCU having legs. Batman vs Superman: Dawn of Justice made $330+ million in the US.

Not to mention with legs, half of that was made opening weekend

 

[jaxonp]

Universal really needs a totally different park concept.. otherwise their just repeating more of the same... whats the point after awhile? I can't imagine them going the animal or sea life route as thats been done but movie park, adventure park... what's next? This is so left field, but maybe they'll attempt a park that could be very festival friendly like Epcot. Just throwing it out there.

 

[PuppyJonathan]

Universal really needs a totally different park concept.. otherwise their just repeating more of the same... whats the point after awhile? I can't imagine them going the animal or sea life route as thats been done but movie park, adventure park... what's next? This is so left field, but maybe they'll attempt a park that could be very festival friendly like Epcot. Just throwing it out there.

Considering the similarities in the only rides they build now a days it wouldn't surprise me if they did another adventure or movie park

 

[Planogirl]

It really only matters if it brings people *into* the park. I don't think there is anything about Universal's Marvel properties that actually bring people in US. The Marvel Cinematic Universe is a license to print money (is all Disney wants to promote)...the print versions Universal controls is less so; the general (ticket-buying) public could care less about '90's stylized print versions. The Hulk Coaster will be successful under any theme.

Everyone is scrambling to secure license for future competition. Hoping to either create something as successful as WWHP or prevent competitors from doing so. That was a big reason Disney spent $$$$ on Avatar before they bought Marvel and Lucasfilm.

I don't agree. I think that the Hulk and Spiderman rides are quite popular and certainly draw people. And kids just see Spiderman and don't compare how he's "drawn".

 

[Douglas Dubh]

I'd love to see Universal add a Star Trek area. I really enjoyed the Star Trek Experience in Las Vegas.

 

[Lee Matthews]

I would love Universal to add a star trek area based on the new films. Wont have a patch on Star Wars land but it's something id like to see regardless

 

[boscfan]

I'm hearing that Shrek will be replaced by Secret Life of Pets at Studio. This makes sense because they want to have a new attraction and area for him in the new park.

 

[Reckoner]

Secret Life of Pets has a couple different spots it might go. I would look more at IOA, as Studio still has Fallon and F&F going.

The rest of these rumors are....pretty unbelievable.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

I'm hearing that Shrek will be replaced by Secret Life of Pets at Studio. This makes sense because they want to have a new attraction and area for him in the new park.

I wonder though if that would still be the case given that Shrek 5 is coming out in 2019..maybe they would update their attraction with new Shrek material.

I'm not saying they still wouldn't replace Shrek with Secret Life of Pets but given that DreamWorks just announced a sequel for an attraction already existing it would kinda be a little silly at least in my mind. They appearantly still care enough about Shrek to have another sequel.

 

[jaxonp]

Well Shrek 4d right now is a terrible attraction. Those seats though... I wonder how popular shrek is in comparison to Despicable Me... Obviously Me is more popular but it has horrible capacity. Does anyone know the capacity of the two rides.. and Doesn't Shrek have two theaters or am I dreaming?

 

[anthony2k7]

Well Shrek 4d right now is a terrible attraction. Those seats though... I wonder how popular shrek is in comparison to Despicable Me... Obviously Me is more popular but it has horrible capacity. Does anyone know the capacity of the two rides.. and Doesn't Shrek have two theaters or am I dreaming?

We have a fairly local to us 4D cinema now in the UK. It has fairly comfortable and near silent seats. Its time theme parks caught up with what is going outside their gates.