Page 24 of 49 FirstFirst ... 1420212223242526272834 ... LastLast
Results 346 to 360 of 725
  1. #346
    Amazing Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Posts
    60

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by XPac View Post
    I'm honestly fine with marvel studios having all the MARVEL content. Other studios can generate competition and cinematic creativity by liscencing other comic book franchises out there. If anything I think other studios doing non-marvel stuff allows for GREATER cinematic creativity because they're not going to be have this built in expectation directly competing with or conforming with the MCU. Let marvel do marvels stuff... they do it better than anyone else. For them it's not just a money grab... these characters are legitimately near and dear to the company. Sony and Paramount can go off and use Image or Milestone or whatever else is out there.
    First off there are not alot of other comic book properties outside of Marvel and DC because both had a stronghold on the comic book industry for so long that they acquired anyone trying to compete (mostly DC) or patented so many things that it created barriers to entry (ex. Only marvel and DC can use the term superhero in their content) so this isn't a really feasible option, heck even my hero academia has to call their "superheroes" pro heroes.

    Second, to clarify there is a difference between Marvel Studios having control and Disney having control. If Marvel Studios was still it's own entity that didn't fall under a parent organization like Disney, they would be free to make movies with various studios which would create a healthy market full of competition across various studios, however since ultimately Disney owns Marvel that is the problem because then they are bound to a single studio and pretty much monopolize the market.

    So to be clear there is not a problem with Marvel owning the content it's a problem with Disney owning it. To add an additional point Fox created very mature marvel stories that have a different tone (which I think most can appreciate from a creative standpoint) whereas most if not all of the films under Disney have the same consistent tone. While it's not necessarily a bad thing to have a consistent tone but it doesn't allow a film to truly separate itself among the rest and stand on its own. The Harry Potter series is a perfect example of a series of films where each film can stand on its own and be memorable. Most like Marvel because they have done a good job of creating 22 sequels for the most part however most of their films are forgettable (except Iron Man) and will most likely be seen as a generational fad to future generations. The first spiderman series, first x-men, and Logan are memorable and don't make you feel like you're watching the same thing. Unfortunately with Marvel being under Disney they have inherited the Disney brand which means that if they try to take their characters in different directions that threaten that brand best believe that daddy will slap their hand and tell them NO. This is unfortunate because we have seen that under other studios that Marvel has worked with that they are willing and capable of taking their characters and storylines into different directions.

    For true fans of superhero content most want the cinematic versions to truly encompass and represent the characters that they liked in the comics and sometimes that doesn't fit into Disney's cookie cut brand. Let's not forget that characters were drinking, doing drugs, and having sex in the marvel comics and I doubt we'll be seeing those representations anytime soon
    Last edited by ComicJunkie21; 08-24-2019 at 02:40 AM.

  2. #347
    Ultimate Member JKtheMac's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Bedford UK
    Posts
    10,112

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jokerz79 View Post
    Disney got the Merchandising money so I'm sure they're happy and even made more than Sony.
    Even if they didn’t, they got to control the brand, which was their biggest issue with F4 and X-Men, where they couldn’t control what was being made and decided to control the merchandising by veto.

    Clearly a company like Disney places a very high value on brand coherence and leveraging their inherent values and image in licensing deals. When a global media portrayal of their characters is outside of their control it clearly makes them very nervous.

    Another reason that Disney are probably operating from a point of weakness here. It is more important to them that they maintain some kind of say over how Spider-Man is portrayed than it is to Sony, and clearly it’s important to Sony.

    Quote Originally Posted by titanfan View Post
    The issue (for Disney) is that they could have spend time and effort producing their *own* <whatever> movie and making a lot more for it, than producing Spider-Man for Sony.
    Actually, the issue for Disney is maintaining and having some control over one of their highly valuable brands.
    Last edited by JKtheMac; 08-24-2019 at 02:57 AM.
    “And I urge you to please notice when you are happy, and exclaim or murmur or think at some point, 'If this isn't nice, I don't know what is.” ― Kurt Vonnegut Jr.

  3. #348
    Ultimate Member JKtheMac's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Bedford UK
    Posts
    10,112

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BeastieRunner View Post
    This deal helps both companies out.
    So much so, it isn’t feasible to me that some kind of deal won’t be struck. But the news cycle is getting out of hand. No new information (Disney actively saying they can’t comment), the original information was misleading, and yet the whole world seems to believe there has been a divorce.

    I can’t help thinking they should release a joint statement to say they are still open to negotiations, but it’s all too share price sensitive right now. They have got themselves in a mess by not getting ahead of this.

    Maybe they should say something like ‘we are still working together as per our historic deals but while the contract is currently being revisited as scheduled we are unable to comment on future details of our continued cooperation.
    Last edited by JKtheMac; 08-24-2019 at 03:01 AM.
    “And I urge you to please notice when you are happy, and exclaim or murmur or think at some point, 'If this isn't nice, I don't know what is.” ― Kurt Vonnegut Jr.

  4. #349
    Amazing Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Posts
    60

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JKtheMac View Post
    Even if they didn’t, they got to control the brand, which was their biggest issue with F4 and X-Men, where they couldn’t control what was being made and decided to control the mechanising by veto.

    Clearly a company like Disney places a very high value on brand coherence and leveraging their inherent values and image in licensing deals. When a global media portrayal of their characters is outside of their control it clearly makes them very nervous.

    Another reason that Disney are probably operating from a point of weakness here. It is more important to them that they maintain some kind of say over how Spider-Man is portrayed than it is to Sony, and clearly it’s important to Sony.



    Actually, the issue for Disney is maintaining and having some control over one of their highly valuable brands.
    Pretty much agree with this. For Disney it's more about control to ensure Sony can't take spiderman into a direction that is opposite of the Disney image. People should realize that spiderman not being under Disney is a good thing. Personally, while the new spiderman films aren't bad they don't feel like spiderman films that actually encompass the character, they feel like iron man jr films.

  5. #350
    Ultimate Member JKtheMac's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Bedford UK
    Posts
    10,112

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ComicJunkie21 View Post
    Pretty much agree with this. For Disney it's more about control to ensure Sony can't take spiderman into a direction that is opposite of the Disney image. People should realize that spiderman not being under Disney is a good thing. Personally, while the new spiderman films aren't bad they don't feel like spiderman films that actually encompass the character, they feel like iron man jr films.
    To you and a vocal number of others. To me and and everyone I know who has seen them this wasn’t a problem at all.
    “And I urge you to please notice when you are happy, and exclaim or murmur or think at some point, 'If this isn't nice, I don't know what is.” ― Kurt Vonnegut Jr.

  6. #351
    Amazing Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Posts
    60

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JKtheMac View Post
    So much so, it isn’t feasible to me that some kind of deal won’t be struck. But the news cycle is getting out of hand. No new information (Disney actively saying they can’t comment), the original information was misleading, and yet the whole world seems to believe there has been a divorce.

    I can’t help thinking they should release a joint statement to say they are still open to negotiations, but it’s all too share price sensitive right now. They have got themselves in a mess by not getting ahead of this.

    Maybe they should say something like ‘we are still working together as per our historic deals but while the contract is currently being revisited as scheduled we are unable to comment on future details of our continued cooperation.
    I don't think a deal will be reached as for both sides there isn't a lot of benefit. If Disney gets 50/50 then Sony's control and profits take a hit. If the deal stays the same then it's not worth it to Disney to continue business. From the beginning this was never going to end well. Also if 50/50 happens that would be awful as there would be so much fighting on creative directions and decisions that a spiderman film probably would not get made again because it would be stuck in development hell.

  7. #352
    Ultimate Member JKtheMac's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Bedford UK
    Posts
    10,112

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ComicJunkie21 View Post
    I don't think a deal will be reached as for both sides there isn't a lot of benefit. If Disney gets 50/50 then Sony's control and profits take a hit. If the deal stays the same then it's not worth it to Disney to continue business. From the beginning this was never going to end well. Also if 50/50 happens that would be awful as there would be so much fighting on creative directions and decisions that a spiderman film probably would not get made again because it would be stuck in development hell.
    What planet are you on? We just saw a hugely successful and profitable deal for both sides survive five cinematic appearances and only serve to grow what was described before the deal as a 4 Billion Dollar franchise by the Marvel press release. Pushing Spider-Man into markets it would otherwise have little traction in, like China.

    If this deal is not put together in some form Disney will loose and Sony will loose. Neither wish to loose, nor can afford to at this juncture.
    “And I urge you to please notice when you are happy, and exclaim or murmur or think at some point, 'If this isn't nice, I don't know what is.” ― Kurt Vonnegut Jr.

  8. #353
    Amazing Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Posts
    60

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JKtheMac View Post
    What planet are you on? We just saw a hugely successful and profitable deal for both sides survive five cinematic appearances and only serve to grow what was described before the deal as a 4 Billion Dollar franchise by the Marvel press release. Pushing Spider-Man into markets it would otherwise have little traction in, like China.

    If this deal is not put together in some form Disney will loose and Sony will loose. Neither wish to loose, nor can afford to at this juncture.
    As a fan it's easy to want to see the current success of the new spiderman films as being more than what they are from a business perspective. Like it or not it would make zero sense for Sony to give up 50 or even 25 percent stake of the spiderman franchise. Without Disney their first series grossed over $2.5 billion dollars and in their second series each film made over $700 million at a time when we weren't in the superhero craze. Once you adjust for inflation considering those series are old, the box office numbers get ALOT closer to what the new spiderman films just hit. Neither Disney nor Sony truly loses from not doing a deal only invested fans do.

  9. #354
    Ultimate Member JKtheMac's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Bedford UK
    Posts
    10,112

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ComicJunkie21 View Post
    As a fan it's easy to want to see the current success of the new spiderman films as being more than what they are from a business perspective. Like it or not it would make zero sense for Sony to give up 50 or even 25 percent stake of the spiderman franchise. Without Disney their first series grossed over $2.5 billion dollars and in their second series each film made over $700 million at a time when we weren't in the superhero craze. Once you adjust for inflation considering those series are old, the box office numbers get ALOT closer to what the new spiderman films just hit. Neither Disney nor Sony truly loses from not doing a deal only invested fans do.
    I don’t think they will strike a large percentage deal. The current deal has no percentage takings and may or may not include a bonus payment, so even 15 percent would be better for Marvel. But to think the future of the largest superhero brand in the world isn’t hugely important to Disney is to deny the point of Disney buying Marvel in the first place.

    Spider-Man is worth more than three movies probably more like eight to ten.

    Every year since about 2012, Spider-Man licences have brought in between 1.2. & 1.5 Billion dollars. A movie that grosses 1 Billion does not generate anywhere near that kind of revenue.

    For Disney that is money they can’t afford to see reduced by choices made by a competitor.
    Last edited by JKtheMac; 08-24-2019 at 05:04 AM.
    “And I urge you to please notice when you are happy, and exclaim or murmur or think at some point, 'If this isn't nice, I don't know what is.” ― Kurt Vonnegut Jr.

  10. #355
    Astonishing Member Derek Metaltron's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Nottingham, England
    Posts
    4,767

    Default

    I think we will get an announcement in the next day or so that something has been agreed upon. Probably with Disney getting 30%, though maybe Sony might have whittled it down to 25%, I doubt Marvel will go any lower. That’s assuming Sony doesn’t wanna stay outa things for their own reasons.

  11. #356
    Ultimate Member JKtheMac's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Bedford UK
    Posts
    10,112

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Derek Metaltron View Post
    I think we will get an announcement in the next day or so that something has been agreed upon. Probably with Disney getting 30%, though maybe Sony might have whittled it down to 25%, I doubt Marvel will go any lower. That’s assuming Sony doesn’t wanna stay outa things for their own reasons.
    Even according to the revised details on Deadline, Sony did put forward counter offers that were larger than the default 5% takings that everything would revert to if the deal fell apart (not the current deal with has no percentage component). So both sides seem to be looking for a deal.
    Last edited by JKtheMac; 08-24-2019 at 05:11 AM.
    “And I urge you to please notice when you are happy, and exclaim or murmur or think at some point, 'If this isn't nice, I don't know what is.” ― Kurt Vonnegut Jr.

  12. #357
    Ultimate Member JKtheMac's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Bedford UK
    Posts
    10,112

    Default

    Deadline are behaving like internet trolls.

    This is true! (With provably untrue facts and a misleading headline.)

    No what Sony say isn’t true, this is true! But not quite what we said earlier and we will backtrack slightly what we said earlier by editing our article without making the edit obvious as well as add to it in a contradictory manner in an update, all the while maintaining some provably untrue facts.

    We have more info about the director that makes it sound like the companies are in a bidding war even though it’s natural for a successful director to be in demand and by the way what we said was true earlier.

    It’s like they got caught massaging the truth and the whole world believed them so they are hoping no one will notice they got lots of facts wrong and the headline itself was misleading.
    Last edited by JKtheMac; 08-24-2019 at 05:29 AM.
    “And I urge you to please notice when you are happy, and exclaim or murmur or think at some point, 'If this isn't nice, I don't know what is.” ― Kurt Vonnegut Jr.

  13. #358
    Amazing Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Posts
    60

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JKtheMac View Post
    I don’t think they will strike a large percentage deal. The current deal has no percentage takings and may or may not include a bonus payment, so even 15 percent would be better for Marvel. But to think the future of the largest superhero brand in the world isn’t hugely important to Disney is to deny the point of Disney buying Marvel in the first place.

    Spider-Man is worth more than three movies probably more like eight to ten.

    Every year since about 2012, Spider-Man licences have brought in between 1.2. & 1.5 Billion dollars. A movie that grosses 1 Billion does not generate anywhere near that kind of revenue.

    For Disney that is money they can’t afford to see reduced by choices made by a competitor.
    I understand what you're saying and it's about Disney having control over a property that makes a lot of money. Disney wanting more control is understanable because licensing and profitability however any deal would need to be more than 20 percent for them to be able to have the kind of control they are wanting, which is too much for Sony to justify with a proven property. I also want to point out we don't know what other non-monetary provisions were on the table that also could have affected the breakdown of this deal.

  14. #359
    Incredible Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    610

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ComicJunkie21 View Post
    For true fans of superhero content most want the cinematic versions to truly encompass and represent the characters that they liked in the comics and sometimes that doesn't fit into Disney's cookie cut brand. Let's not forget that characters were drinking, doing drugs, and having sex in the marvel comics and I doubt we'll be seeing those representations anytime soon
    There seemed to be plenty of that in the Netflix shows.

  15. #360
    Invincible Member XPac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    27,859

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ComicJunkie21 View Post
    First off there are not alot of other comic book properties outside of Marvel and DC because both had a stronghold on the comic book industry for so long that they acquired anyone trying to compete (mostly DC) or patented so many things that it created barriers to entry (ex. Only marvel and DC can use the term superhero in their content) so this isn't a really feasible option, heck even my hero academia has to call their "superheroes" pro heroes.

    Second, to clarify there is a difference between Marvel Studios having control and Disney having control. If Marvel Studios was still it's own entity that didn't fall under a parent organization like Disney, they would be free to make movies with various studios which would create a healthy market full of competition across various studios, however since ultimately Disney owns Marvel that is the problem because then they are bound to a single studio and pretty much monopolize the market.

    So to be clear there is not a problem with Marvel owning the content it's a problem with Disney owning it. To add an additional point Fox created very mature marvel stories that have a different tone (which I think most can appreciate from a creative standpoint) whereas most if not all of the films under Disney have the same consistent tone. While it's not necessarily a bad thing to have a consistent tone but it doesn't allow a film to truly separate itself among the rest and stand on its own. The Harry Potter series is a perfect example of a series of films where each film can stand on its own and be memorable. Most like Marvel because they have done a good job of creating 22 sequels for the most part however most of their films are forgettable (except Iron Man) and will most likely be seen as a generational fad to future generations. The first spiderman series, first x-men, and Logan are memorable and don't make you feel like you're watching the same thing. Unfortunately with Marvel being under Disney they have inherited the Disney brand which means that if they try to take their characters in different directions that threaten that brand best believe that daddy will slap their hand and tell them NO. This is unfortunate because we have seen that under other studios that Marvel has worked with that they are willing and capable of taking their characters and storylines into different directions.

    For true fans of superhero content most want the cinematic versions to truly encompass and represent the characters that they liked in the comics and sometimes that doesn't fit into Disney's cookie cut brand. Let's not forget that characters were drinking, doing drugs, and having sex in the marvel comics and I doubt we'll be seeing those representations anytime soon
    I've seen the marvel movies BEFORE Disney bought marvel and I've seen them after... and I'm at least very very glad Disney got control of everything. Outside of marvel, everything is pretty much hit and miss. Fox and Sony can maybe get 2 out of 3 movies right before taking the franchise, but the MCU is 2 dozen movies strong. No real weak links in the chain yet. If anything the MCU movies are actually doing BETTER. Competition may be good in theory... in practice to Sony and Fox these are just money grabs. And it shows after a certain point.

    As far as other comic book properites outside of marvel and DC... they exist. They're not as high profile and won't necessarily get you a billion dollars, but they are out there. And hopefully they get to see the light of day too. Not that I blame Sony or Fox for wanting to use Marvel characters over something from Image or whatever... just saying what I would prefer seeing. Marvel does a better job with their characters than anyone else... so let them use their characters. Other studios can bring to life other comic book IP's, which deserve it too.

    As far as characters drinking, doing drugs, having sex, etc.. got a bit of the less cookie cutter stuff on things like Net Flicks. The MCU isn't JUST the movies... we can get the best of both worlds due to the different options we now have.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •