|
Post by Mighty Attack Tribble on Dec 9, 2016 19:45:47 GMT -5
I think that a deal will proberly be made...if nothing else Disney does nothing half assed. I can't imagine Fox would turn down a deal. They have the one but Disney has the rest. I expect so too. Regardless of whether it's a lump sum or a percentage of the profits, I figure serious talks won't begin until 2020 arrives. In the meantime I expect Fox will release one more cash-in box set of some sort before that date, maybe even release the untouched originals themselves.
|
|
|
Post by Hit Girl on Dec 10, 2016 5:53:32 GMT -5
If FOX release the unaltered versions, I'm cool with that.
|
|
Bub (BLM)
Patti Mayonnaise
advocates duck on rodent violence
Fed. Up.
Posts: 37,742
|
Post by Bub (BLM) on Dec 10, 2016 6:04:58 GMT -5
Fox own the rights to A New Hope forever, as they co-produced and co-financed it. The rights to the other five movies revert to LucasFilm in May 2020, because Lucas financed and produced those films himself, while Fox merely had the distribution rights. Basically, if Disney will have to pay out some more if they want to do anything with the complete Original Trilogy. I think that a deal will proberly be made...if nothing else Disney does nothing half assed. I can't imagine Fox would turn down a deal. They have the one but Disney has the rest. This is the same Fox that won't cut a deal with Disney for the Fantastic Four rights, despite the fact that they lost a metric ton of money on their last attempt with the property. They're petty AF.
|
|
|
Post by "Cane Dewey" Johnson on Dec 10, 2016 12:40:09 GMT -5
The frustrating thing is that so many of these Marvel and Star Wars movies are going to make money hand over fist regardless of whether they're good, bad, or merely okay, that Disney decides to take some aesthetic risks instead of producing bland, corporate art.
Have Charlie Kaufman write Avengers 4. Get Alejandro Jodorowsky to direct the Inhumans? Hire Terry Gilliam to do concept art for a Disney-Marvel-Pixar MCU movie. Spin off Star Wars into different genres, like a Steampunk Boba Fett movie or some sort of existentialist tragicomedy TV like Waiting for C3P0 starring EV-9D9 and a Gonk droid.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Neglia on Dec 10, 2016 13:31:27 GMT -5
Pretty sure every other comic book publishing company and creator in the country would drag Disney to Washington and argue against a monopoly occurring. The fact that there would be other comic book publishing companies to do so would, in and of itself, prove there was no monopoly.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Neglia on Dec 10, 2016 13:34:32 GMT -5
Yes, because unlike him Disney tends to learn from their mistakes. Five movies existing in the Cars/Planes franchise says otherwise.
|
|
|
Post by TWERKIN' MAGGLE on Dec 10, 2016 13:37:59 GMT -5
I don't know if I believe that when it comes to Joss Whedon...I know his work pretty damn well and alot of AoUs mistakes were Joss trying to Whedonize the Marvelverse. Could be. But I do think his comments he wanted Age of Ultron to be a darker film with bigger consequences showing the real cracks of The Avengers is pretty valid. Like I would be pretty pissed if they scrapped those ideas and used those ideas on the next movie you weren't even involved in. Civil War was pretty much Age of Ultron Part 2 or The Avengers 3. Except Civil War was entertaining and Age of Ultron was easily in league with the worst MCU movies.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 10, 2016 13:41:29 GMT -5
Could be. But I do think his comments he wanted Age of Ultron to be a darker film with bigger consequences showing the real cracks of The Avengers is pretty valid. Like I would be pretty pissed if they scrapped those ideas and used those ideas on the next movie you weren't even involved in. Civil War was pretty much Age of Ultron Part 2 or The Avengers 3. Except Civil War was entertaining and Age of Ultron was easily in league with the worst MCU movies. Everyone knows I'm probably one of the biggest critics of Age of Ultron here. And my comments were reflecting Age of Ultron was the Marvel movie that dealt with the most amount of Studio Meddling which is a big contribution why it's one of the worst entries and they took Joss Whedon's best ideas that were used in the film into Civil War instead.
|
|
|
Post by TWERKIN' MAGGLE on Dec 10, 2016 13:45:46 GMT -5
Except Civil War was entertaining and Age of Ultron was easily in league with the worst MCU movies. Everyone knows I'm probably one of the biggest critics of Age of Ultron here. And my comments were reflecting Age of Ultron was the Marvel movie that dealt with the most amount of Studio Meddling which is a big contribution why it's one of the worst entries and they took Joss Whedon's best ideas that were used in the film into Civil War instead. That doesn't really make up for the fact that the ideas that they left in AoU are straight garbage. No one wants to watch creepy old Banner and Black Widow. The entire movie never stops with the quipping long enough for actual dialogue. He killed a potential longer lasting character because, "Dunno, I want to. Think of the swerve bro." Keep Whedon away from things he didn't create himself.
|
|
|
Post by Hit Girl on Dec 10, 2016 13:46:03 GMT -5
I want them to buy Barbie, and quickly, before Sony can make that film with Amy Schumer in it.
|
|
|
Post by Clash, Never a Meter Maid on Dec 10, 2016 13:52:38 GMT -5
The frustrating thing is that so many of these Marvel and Star Wars movies are going to make money hand over fist regardless of whether they're good, bad, or merely okay, that Disney decides to take some aesthetic risks instead of producing bland, corporate art. Have Charlie Kaufman write Avengers 4. Get Alejandro Jodorowsky to direct the Inhumans? Hire Terry Gilliam to do concept art for a Disney-Marvel-Pixar MCU movie. Spin off Star Wars into different genres, like a Steampunk Boba Fett movie or some sort of existentialist tragicomedy TV like Waiting for C3P0 starring EV-9D9 and a Gonk droid. There are ways to take interesting risks with Star Wars, but Kaufman? Nah. I hated Synecdoche, New York. And normally I enjoy Philip Seymour Hoffman films, but that was boring and stupid. As for Whedon, the one thing I didn't like is that he wrote Black Widow a little wimpy in Age of Ultron. I know he was going for making her more vulnerable, I think she lost a bit of her edge. Aside from that I think it's "pretty good" at worse. Ultron's a pretty fun villain, and I like how the Avengers are essentially trying to fix a problem they accidently caused. But they still remain sympathetic figures, and their dynamic and friendship was still enjoyable. It's not a perfect film, but I wouldn't describe it as "bland and corporate".
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 10, 2016 13:56:23 GMT -5
Everyone knows I'm probably one of the biggest critics of Age of Ultron here. And my comments were reflecting Age of Ultron was the Marvel movie that dealt with the most amount of Studio Meddling which is a big contribution why it's one of the worst entries and they took Joss Whedon's best ideas that were used in the film into Civil War instead. That doesn't really make up for the fact that the ideas that they left in AoU are straight garbage. No one wants to watch creepy old Banner and Black Widow. The entire movie never stops with the quipping long enough for actual dialogue. He killed a potential longer lasting character because, "Dunno, I want to. Think of the swerve bro." Keep Whedon away from things he didn't create himself. If you read the rest of the thread or dig up past Age of Ultron threads and I agreed with all of that. I'm not even a Joss Whedon fan. All I'm just saying is both Whedon and Marvel both deserve blame for Age of Ultron. Otherwise we're just talking around in circles. But that brings up another point, you can even blame Marvel even more if they cherry pick Whedon's good ideas to be put in the next film and leave in the bad ones. Like even Jim Cornette didn't blame Russo (a man who motivated him to live healthier on the sole purpose of out living him to piss on his grave) for Brawl for All but Vince being the promoter on approving the idea.
|
|
Sephiroth
Wade Wilson
Surviving
Posts: 28,961
Member is Online
|
Post by Sephiroth on Dec 10, 2016 14:11:48 GMT -5
They will own WWE eventually. I'm sure of it.
|
|
|
Post by wildojinx on Dec 10, 2016 14:40:51 GMT -5
I want them to buy Barbie, and quickly, before Sony can make that film with Amy Schumer in it. That would require them buying Mattel, and Disney have said that they're not interested in owning a toy company (though Disney having the rights to He-Man would be interesting).
|
|
|
Post by Fade is a CodyCryBaby on Dec 10, 2016 15:47:42 GMT -5
They will own WWE eventually. I'm sure of it. That almost seems inevitable. Considering how bad their films were doing for a few years Post-Tarzan...Id say Disney came back in a big way. Even if it was mainly utilizing Pixar/Star Wars/Marvel. But for the record, Zootopia and Tangled were pretty good.
|
|
MolotovMocktail
Grimlock
Home of the 5-time, 5-time, 5-time, 5-time 5-time Super Bowl Champion 49ers-and Wrestlemania 31
Posts: 13,975
|
Post by MolotovMocktail on Dec 10, 2016 15:50:58 GMT -5
They will own WWE eventually. I'm sure of it. I was going to say this. Vince won't sell, dunno about Steph, maybe once Aurora takes over. I do see them trying though. If not, they will launch their own promotion to compete.
|
|
Shai
Hank Scorpio
Posts: 6,507
|
Post by Shai on Dec 10, 2016 15:51:40 GMT -5
They will own WWE eventually. I'm sure of it. That almost seems inevitable. Considering how bad their films were doing for a few years Post-Tarzan...Id say Disney came back in a big way. Even if it was mainly utilizing Pixar/Star Wars/Marvel. But for the record, Zootopia and Tangled were pretty good. Moana is amazing...
|
|
Sephiroth
Wade Wilson
Surviving
Posts: 28,961
Member is Online
|
Post by Sephiroth on Dec 10, 2016 15:53:36 GMT -5
They will own WWE eventually. I'm sure of it. I was going to say this. Vince won't sell, dunno about Steph, maybe once Aurora takes over. I do see them trying though. If not, they will launch their own promotion to compete. When Vince goes, they will at least make an offer. Whether it will be taken is anyone'a guess.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Neglia on Dec 10, 2016 19:58:53 GMT -5
No one wants to watch creepy old Banner and Black Widow. According to all the fanart porn I keep seeing, I'd say quite a few do. They're, like, right behind Cap and Bucky in that regard. That's really, really, really not why Quicksilver was killed. Like, at all. They will own WWE eventually. I'm sure of it. Doubtful. There's nothing there for them to want. The footage? Disney has literally millions of hours worth of footage of all types via its own brand, ABC, etc that it doesn't need footage just to have it, and we already see that a network for it isn't really setting profit records. The intellectual properties? They'd own a bunch of trademarks and little else; they wouldn't own likenesses for "characters" not currently signed to the company and frankly, the legal hassle to straighten it all out wouldn't be worth it (and I guarantee that if Disney owned the footage and not WWE, there'd be a LOT more royalties lawsuits than what we're seeing now). That would require them buying Mattel, and Disney have said that they're not interested in owning a toy company (though Disney having the rights to He-Man would be interesting). They weren't interested in owning a comic company before Boom and Marvel either, being content to license their properties out to Dell, Gemstone, etc. They have to say things like that because when they do go in to buy something, they want it to be sudden and done with. If people have an inkling Disney smells blood, asking prices go up. Way up. I personally don't think they'd target Mattel in that sort of situation though - really, outside of a handful of trendy properties that come and go every few years, all Mattel really has is Barbie and Hot Wheels. MOTU, yeah, but as a huge MOTU fan, even I have to admit it was a flash-in-the-pan phenomenon that lasted a grand total of 5 years (1982-1987) before crashing and burning; every attempt to revive it has been completely niche and has not done very well (the Classics toy line lasted 8 years but as a limited quantities deal buried on a website kept separate from the rest of Mattel's operations). Honestly, when/if they target a toy company - and they will, one day - it's going to be either Lego or more likely, Hasbro. I'm convinced the "rumor" of them buying Hasbro shortly after the Star Wars purchase had some merit to it, and it just didn't go through.
|
|
|
Post by wildojinx on Dec 10, 2016 20:21:22 GMT -5
I can see Hasbro making a deal with Disney, if just to get a better home for their animated properties (the most recent Transformers series was buried at 6:30 on Saturday mornings on Cartoon Network, and MLP is stuck on a network that's not on most (basic) cable packages, though it is available on Netflix at least).
|
|