D23 Expo 2019 - News & Speculation

[Cup_Of_Coffee]

As someone who watches The Simpsons every Sunday night and typically spends like nearly half a day in the Simpson area when I can, man its weird af seeing The Simpsons be near anything regarding Disney haha.

 

[Scott W.]

If they bring Wakanda anywhere I'd prefer Animal Kingdom, but if they can't call it Wakanda or include Black Panther there is literally no point in doing it.

Simpsons is a weird one as it feels like a brand which is near end of life. They have plenty of other IP's they could use.

It’s a weird one to fit in any where besides DHS just being the dumping ground for anything but I think AK is a better choice than Epcot.

 

[Brian G.]

It’s a weird one to fit in any where besides DHS just being the dumping ground for anything but I think AK is a better choice than Epcot.

Besides the name of the titular character, which they can't use, exactly what does Wakanda have to do with animals, biomes, and conservation? "Because Africa" can be a bit insulting..

 

[Parkscope Joe]

Besides the name of the titular character, which they can't use, exactly what does Wakanda have to do with animals, biomes, and conservation? "Because Africa" can be a bit insulting..

It has nothing to do with animals, even less than Avatar.

 

[Brian G.]

It has nothing to do with animals, even less than Avatar.

At least Avatar has the conservation angle, with the anti-mining practices and whatnot. Not ideal, but at least there was something.

 

[JungleSkip]

Wait so Wakanda is an actual rumor? I...okay. You do you Disney.

 

[Brian G.]

Wait so Wakanda is an actual rumor? I...okay. You do you Disney.

Allegedly...

 

[Bulldog45]

If they can't even use the Black Panther there is absolutely no reason to build Wakanda; ESPECIALLY in the World Showcase.

 

[AlexanderMBush]

With the announcement of The Simpsons@D23, the press release notes something fun..

 

[Scott W.]

Besides the name of the titular character, which they can't use, exactly what does Wakanda have to do with animals, biomes, and conservation? "Because Africa" can be a bit insulting..

Nothing more than Epcot. I think it’s a stupid idea regardless.

Hell, put the Simpsons in AK and rename one of the elephants Stampy.

 

[Mad Dog]

Wakanda has the potential to hit a raw nerve with some people.

 

[Tobias]

So regarding the Wakanda rumor, if that actually does happen, where are they gonna' put it in WS? They're not putting it in the section between China and Germany which was for the planned/defunct pavilion for Africa...right?

Either way, if this is actually announced, I think the most appropriate thing to say would be this...

"Wakanda Sh!t is that?!"

 

[fryoj]

And if we're going to create a pavilion to celebrate African American culture, CHOOSE A REAL LOCATION THEN. Sorry, done ranting.

Yeah, I think that could end up being the real issue. I'll tread lightly, but this could be one of those flash point type deals that sets off protests that have nothing to do with Disney and more about politics.

 

[Nick]

So regarding the Wakanda rumor, if that actually does happen, where are they gonna' put it in WS? They're not putting it in the section between China and Germany which was for the planned/defunct pavilion for Africa...right?

Either way, if this is actually announced, I think the most appropriate thing to say would be this...

"Wakanda Sh!t is that?!"

It will either be between Germany and Italy or China and Germany.

Should it happen of course.

 

[rcoasterdude]

I just don’t see why Universal and Disney can’t just come up with an agreement that Disney can make attractions, lands and characters based on the MCU versions of the characters and what not, while Universal can only use the Comic Book versions of the characters, but can’t add any new Marvel attractions, only refurbish them. I think it’s the best of both worlds as MCU and Marvel Comics feel very different

 

[Scott W.]

I just don’t see why Universal and Disney can’t just come up with an agreement that Disney can make attractions, lands and characters based on the MCU versions of the characters and what not, while Universal can only use the Comic Book versions of the characters, but can’t add any new Marvel attractions, only refurbish them. I think it’s the best of both worlds as MCU and Marvel Comics feel very different

What do Universal have to gain from that? Universal can add new attractions.

Besides that, it would be confusing for Joe Public.

Edit: This should be discussed here:
That Darn Marvel Contract – What Rights Does Universal and Disney Own | Page 17 | Inside Universal Forums

 

[UniversalRBLX]

I just don’t see why Universal and Disney can’t just come up with an agreement that Disney can make attractions, lands and characters based on the MCU versions of the characters and what not, while Universal can only use the Comic Book versions of the characters, but can’t add any new Marvel attractions, only refurbish them. I think it’s the best of both worlds as MCU and Marvel Comics feel very different

Because Universal doesn't want to give Disney anything.

 

[fryoj]

I just don’t see why Universal and Disney can’t just come up with an agreement that Disney can make attractions, lands and characters based on the MCU versions of the characters and what not, while Universal can only use the Comic Book versions of the characters, but can’t add any new Marvel attractions, only refurbish them. I think it’s the best of both worlds as MCU and Marvel Comics feel very different

Because the check that Disney would have to write to get that done wouldn't be able to fit enough 0's on it.

 

[RevFreako]

Wakanda has the potential to hit a raw nerve with some people.

What nerve, can I ask

 

[Mad Dog]

What nerve, can I ask

Not something that I would care to elaborate on. Kind of the same reasons there's no longer a political thread on this site. Some people, groups etc. are very thin skinned in this day and age.