Welcome to the main discussion thread for the Marvel Cinematic Universe! This pinned post is here to establish some basic guidelines. All of the Media Forum rules
still apply.
- This thread is for talking about the live-action films, TV shows, animated works, and related content that use the Marvel brand, currently owned by Disney.
- While mild digressions are okay, discussion of the comic books should go in this thread
. Extended digressions may be thumped as off-topic.
- Spoilers for new releases should not be discussed without spoiler tagging for at least two weeks. Rather, each title should have a dedicated thread where that sort of conversation is held. We can mention new releases in a general sense, but please be courteous to people who don't want to be spoiled.
If you're posting tagged spoilers, make sure that the film or series is clearly identified outside the spoiler tagging. People need to know what will be spoiled before they choose to read the post.
Edited by Mrph1 on Jul 29th 2024 at 3:09:00 PM
Disney and Fox are allegedly ironing out the fine print regarding the merging deal.
The deal is now estimated to be worth $74 billion and we should hear a final decision by Christmas.
Is anyone ready for this?
edited 8th Dec '17 2:25:14 PM by TargetmasterJoe
My knowledge of how this stuff works isn't nearly good enough to give an educated opinion but from everything I've read about it, this isn't inherently a good or a bad thing until we hear the details.
This song needs more love.I am excited of getting my hands on a list of what is part of the deal and what isn't. Less because of the Marvel properties, they are good for a nice little "what could happen in phase 4" article. But everything else. After all, in order to get what they want, Disney is most likely also paying for a lot of stuff they don't want...here a list of what I want to know:
Is Blue Skys part of the deal and if it is, will Disney keep it or pass it on to either Sony or Paramount?
Supposedly Sky Germany is part of the deal...for those who don't know, that is a pay TV channel originally named Premiere which Murdoch bought and then renamed (but as far as I can tell it is still pretty much independent from the British Sky media, to which Murdoch used to own a huge share but then gave it up and then wanted it back but wasn't allowed to...yeah, complicated). Anyway, the German version is a money grave. The German audience never really got all that used to pay TV and the only true selling point Sky ever had was airing football. I am actually pretty sure that Disney don't want this particular lodestone of an asset and it will have a hard time to either offload it or make it profitable.
Speaking of TV channels, what about the National Geographic channel? Fox could unload that one without running into problems and they certainly have no use for it when they don't own the content shown on it.
What happens to Touchstone? So far Disney has used it as distributor for their not quite as family friendly material, so will it now be responsible for distributing the whole Fox output, too?
And, maybe the most important, what will happen to the name? Renaming 20th century Fox would be a shame, but then, Disney might have no choice if it wants to avoid the company being constantly associated with Fox news. So what, 20th century Studio?
The alternative would have been either Time Warner or Comcast buying this stuff. Disney at the very least will just grow the their size, presenting a third big player on the market. It's the best of the various alternatives.
edited 8th Dec '17 3:09:31 PM by Swanpride
And I know that people are really happy about the rights reverting...but the Fantastic Four rights probably would have reverted anyway and the X-men franchise really is being used in some interesting ways right now. (Not the main movies, the spinoffs and TV shows.)
And Disney increasing their market share like that isn’t good. They’re already bullying theatres with the Last Jedi. Imagine how bad it will be when half the movies coming out are from one company. And Disney already has a ridiculous advantage in terms of cash flow. The theme parks. They seriously rake in enough money that every single movie released this year could have bombed and the overall company would have still made a massive profit. Universal has that to a degree, but it’s not nearly as extreme, mostly because Universal has less of them.
Right now, Disney is riding on a high of extremely successful and popular movies, but they have significant periods of dreck, or periods where nothing really stands out from the crowd. (The 80s was like that for Disney in general. Very few genuine successes.) If they slide back into a period like that, their market share will still be so huge that it won’t matter, and that’s really bad for film in general.
They’ll probably keep the Fox logo around for properties associated heavily with it. They’ll certainly stick it on the beginning of future Star Wars movies so the iconic fanfare will work again. And they’ll probably keep the Fox Searchlight Pictures thing around for the more artsy stuff.
edited 8th Dec '17 3:11:57 PM by Zendervai
Disney being able to bully theatre owners has nothing to do with their size but the popularity of this specific movie. It is therefore an unrelated issue. If Disney insist on a share too big, the theatre owners can always show them the middle finger and show something else. The ones in Germany have started to do this years ago, if there is a good alternative, they pick that one. And usually there is one.
So if something is REALLY coming out of this, how much do you guys want to wager that Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3 will wind up becoming an extremely loose take on the Annihilation stories with Ultron and a certain F4 villain named ANNIHILUS?
If the Internet exploded when Captain Marvel's villains turned out to be the Skrulls, what'll happen when they see a live-action version of a popular F4 villain who ISN'T Doctor Doom?
No, they wouldn't. Keeping the rights from reverting is literally the reason why Fant4stic exists.
My Tumblr. Currently side-by-side liveblogging Digimon Adventure, sub vs dub.Guardians of the Galaxy 3, but with a Zune instead of a Volume 3, because there wasn't a third awesome mixtape and Peter got a Zune at the end of Vol 2
My various fanfics.Guardians of the Galaxy and Zun 3 is the combining of Zune and the number 3.
Guardians of the Galaxy 3 but with zune and a three standing in for the e
Forever liveblogging the AvengersNo, the theatre owners don't loose money or business. In fact, the German independent theatres did excellent by playing the third part of a popular German franchise instead of Thor Ragnarok - which then went and beat out Thor in the German box office. The US theatre owners just need to man up and run an alternative program. Just like the critics manned up and refused to go to Disney's critic screening.
And again, nothing to do with Disney's size. The theatre owners want their movie because they know it will be a sure money maker (as long as the deal is still worth it), not because there is no other movie around they are able to play instead. Hell, Disney only releases something between 10 and 20 movies each year, that is way less than for example Warner Bros. releases
Fack ju Göhte 3. Got a Platin Bogey (meaning it had an audience of more than 5 million within 50 days). To put this in context, The Avengers and Civil war only have a bronze one (one million within 10 days). The Franchise is for the German market on one level with the Harry Potter movies and has been from movie one.
Eh...not easy to explain what is about though....it is a comedy which takes apart the weaknesses of the German school system. Comedies about schools have a long tradition in Germany, though they used to be about pupils playing tricks on the teacher and now they are about teacher playing tricks on their pupils to push them on the right path in an unconventional manner.
Anyway, the point is that Disney isn't the only game in town. Not by a long shot. The theatre owners can decide if they want to run a movie with a lot of visitors from which revenue they only get a small percentage or a movie with not quite as many visitors but hey, they get more of the money.

I'm excited for Kilgrave's presumably hallucinatory return because of how creepy and real he was. Jessica Jones is an amazing series because of its willingness to tackle the uncomfortable realities surrounding rape culture, and having Kilgrave's influence remain with Jessica after his death is a perfect continuation of that theme. Even when they're gone, victimizers leave a lasting impression on their victims; just because he's dead doesn't mean he doesn't still have power over her.
Her abuser is gone, he can never come back, but she's still afraid anyway. A lot of people can relate to that.
My Tumblr. Currently side-by-side liveblogging Digimon Adventure, sub vs dub.