Does anyone think that the DISNEY? FOX deal may cause more HARM than good ?

[XPac]

Disney is getting into streaming services in 2019. I have heard somewhere that the primary reason for purchasing the film division of Fox was to get content for their streaming services. Its not like they need X-Men or Fantastic Four. Its like a part of the deal which is made because they need content for streaming. If tomorrow they decide to not make X-Men films but make X-Men shows for streaming i won't be surprised. Its unlikely though. Though some X-Men stuff on their streaming service is something one can safely bet. After the deal they have a larger number of properties for streaming. They needed that to compete with Netflix which for one rare case is the Goliath here.

I am not so concerned about competition here. Disney maybe the biggest but it still has a lot of competitors. WB, Paramount, Sony and other big studios. Lesser size studios like Blumhouse are there. There is enough competition for Disney. Only one big player has left. I don't think its something to worry about.

What is not good about this is for a comic book movie fan personally. When Fox had those rights it was getting out two to three superhero films a year. Next year three are coming out. Marvel may try to get some more but one can make only so many films at the same time. X-Men films may come out once a year perhaps even less. It is just one more superhero property for them. Fox has been doing excellent since last few years. Since X-Men First Class they have been making some high quality films. After Logan my previous opinion had changed. They were experimenting with different kinds of films. I doubt that kind of experimentation would be done by Disney. Though they can make some good films. Maybe other characters can get their chance to shine. A silver lining for X-Men. I am perfectly happy with Fantastic Four. That should have gone to them years ago.

Fox is sort of hit and miss with their super hero stuff. They do legitimately have some hits. Deadpool knocked it out of the ball park for example. But Age of Apocalyse was so-so, and Fantastic Four was just terrible. What marvel has which Fox and DC lack is consistency.

So there is the trade off. We'll get less super hero movies, but the ones we do get will probably have a more consitant level of quality.

[GozertheGozarian]

Fox wasn't going to be making any more movies with the characters, and I'd rather have Marvel do them than Comcast.

[Carabas]

It may. I'm watching closely to what will happen with the Alien, Predator and Planet Of The Apes franchises.

Hopefully they'll take it away from Ridley Scott.

[Pinsir]

These sorts of deals aren't done with cash. Not a penny will change hands. There'll be some stock shifting and and executive positions to be had. Board seats traded. No actual money though. Disney can afford what this will actually cost. Actual debt doesn't factor into this.

I based my assessment from other corporate acquisitions I've read about and yes, the entire package doesn't always involve the acquisition of currency and can include liquid and other assets, they almost always involve incurring debt nonetheless.

[JKtheMac]

There are all sorts of ins and outs in this, especially in the TV and sports streaming market, but sticking to films this isn’t as bad as it seems for Marvel properties. Currently the way the licence deals were written favours Fox, and when the companies merge those deals can effectively be torn up. That means it is feasible for new sensible licences to be sold to Sony or anyone else. Disney will be able to dictate the terms and insist upon distribution. All this may take a while to work out but there is a distinct possibility that just as many superhero movies will be made.

Indeed the promise of X-Men or other properties not being used by Marvel may tempt Sony to rewrite their contracts for Spidy, so we could end up with a more unified MCU being made by a number of studios but with Spider-Man style creative input.

[AnakinFlair]

So Disney announced that Fox will be changed to New Fox, which unfortunately only makes me think of New Coke and how THAT turned out.

[DrNewGod]

So Disney announced that Fox will be changed to New Fox, which unfortunately only makes me think of New Coke and how THAT turned out.

We really need a "Like" button around here.

[Madam-Shogun-Assassin]

Hopefully they'll take it away from Ridley Scott.

Hopefully they'll reboot AvP...According to Paul Anderson Fox never really cared about either franchise.

[Emperor-of-Dragons]

So Disney announced that Fox will be changed to New Fox, which unfortunately only makes me think of New Coke and how THAT turned out.

I'm ctfu

We really need a "Like" button around here.

and better emojis

Hopefully they'll reboot AvP...According to Paul Anderson Fox never really cared about either franchise.

The Darkhorse comics are really good. Even the games are good.

[Deadxman]

Talk to me when Sony is bought

[mburns]

I based my assessment from other corporate acquisitions I've read about and yes, the entire package doesn't always involve the acquisition of currency and can include liquid and other assets, they almost always involve incurring debt nonetheless.

The deal is a stock swap where Rupert Murdoch will end up as Disney's largest shareholder and other Fox shareholders will end up with Disney stock. I doubt there will be that much debt incurred. Also for a large movie studio Disney actually produces very few movies per year all PG-13 or below. They released less than 10 this year while most of the major studios release anywhere from 15-20. They purchased Fox so they could have more content when they start to compete with Netflix as a streaming service. I assume they also want the more varied content Fox produces including the adult content when they compete with Netflix which has far more varied programming than the PG-13 and below Disney currently produces. I doubt they can have a successful streaming service without providing content for all demographics.

[RikWriter]

The MCU and Star Wars brands will be dead in a few years

Yeah, no they won't.

[Coin Biter]

Hopefully they'll take it away from Ridley Scott.

Best that they would let it die than give to someone else. Alien was a magnificent and beautiful film, Aliens an exciting action film, and Alien 3 was an interesting curiosity.

Let's have one franchise that is preserved from any more reboots, prequels and sequels. We're not talking Star Wars here; the first film was a masterpiece.

[Coin Biter]

To answer the question in the thread, though, a situation in which Rupert Murdoch ends up as Disney's largest shareholder does indeed cause more harm than good. God knows, Ike Perlmutter being a major shareholder is bad enough.

[RikWriter]

Best that they would let it die than give to someone else. Alien was a magnificent and beautiful film, Aliens an exciting action film, and Alien 3 was an interesting curiosity.

No, Alien 3 was a monstrosity.