Disney to Acquire Marvel Entertainment

I'm going to sit back and enjoy the pandemonium over all your favorite characters being ruined.

I'm also kind of fascinated by the move. But mostly just schadenfreude.
 
[quote name='Sc4rfac3']Does this mean Spiderman in the next Kingdom Hearts?[/QUOTE]

I know this was probably meant as a joke, but honestly it wouldn't surprise me too much.

I'm very curious to see how this affects the video games industry, since Marvel licenses are currently spread all over the place.
 
[quote name='JolietJake']Well i guess there could be a good side to this, maybe we'll see Wolverine ripping out Mickey's heart.[/QUOTE]

Or Mickey ripping out Wolverine's heart
 
Oh, bother.

29zpm4j.jpg
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='coolsteel']Or Mickey ripping out Wolverine's heart[/QUOTE]

in Disney 3-D!

(Disney Comics FTW?)
 
There is nothing good that can come out of this. Marvel finally got on its own feet and was making movies the way they wanted and it was looking good... sucks for them to sell out like that... to disney of all companies...
 
[quote name='Eskya']This news, it's making me sad[/QUOTE]

pretty much agreed. how the fuck did this even happen and how is it even legal? were they really doing that bad?
 
maybe we'll start getting some nice marvel based rides at disney parks... (which is strange since marvel rides are usually universal)
 
[quote name='kilm']I would've expected DC comics, but Marvel? Hm......[/QUOTE]

Warner Brothers already owns DC. I'd imagine that had at least something to do with Disney wanting to buy Marvel.

Sure you can look at this negatively but I'm thinking a little bit more optimistically about the resources Marvel will have access to now.
 
This really isn't bad news, most likely, and you people all about "oh no they're going to ruin spiderman and make Goofy meets the Xmen ugh" are dumb and need to think a little more.

Disney is too fucking smart to not let Marvel remain fairly autonomous, creatively and production-wise. The movies will be fine, Marvel MAX isn't going anywhere, Tigger won't be joining the Avengers, and the games will probably get better, eventually (seriously, Activision and Sega have put out, what, 3 or 4 decent Marvel games between them in the last 5 years?).

Marvel has historically had some pretty shitty management, and over the past few decades has already been bought and sold back and forth between some companies with far less legitimate interest in Marvel and their creative well-being than Disney surely has.

Keep in mind, people, that Disney also owns the movie studios that put out Pulp Fiction, Clerks, and No Country for Old Men, and the TV studios that make Lost and Monk. Disney owns a TON of shit, and they don't go forcing Mickey Mouse and Winnie the Pooh into every property they have under their umbrella, and they don't go forcing top-down creative control over all their subsidiaries.

Chill out. This almost certainly is nothing to be alarmed about, for Marvel fans. For crying out loud, Warner Bros owns DC, and I don't see Batman teaming up with Bugs fucking Bunny. We have nothing to worry about, unless the idea of a financially and managerially stable Marvel scares you.


[quote name='lokizz']how the fuck did this even happen and how is it even legal? were they really doing that bad?[/QUOTE]
Marvel is a publicly traded company. Did you take basic economics? It's perfectly legal. And it cost Disney 4 bil, so, no, they weren't doing that bad.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
This is really just about the worst news in the history of the world. I can't even imagine all the ways they are going to fuck everything up, and I can imagine a lot. Just when Marvel had goteen its head out of its ass and was making some good comics (can't say the same for the movies...), they go and do this. Gah, this sucks in SOOOOOO many ways. Disney is a plague, right up there with McDonald's and Wal-Mart.
 
[quote name='mietha']This is really just about the worst news in the history of the world. I can't even imagine all the ways they are going to fuck everything up, and I can imagine a lot. Just when Marvel had goteen its head out of its ass and was making some good comics (can't say the same for the movies...), they go and do this. Gah, this sucks in SOOOOOO many ways. Disney is a plague, right up there with McDonald's and Wal-Mart.[/QUOTE]

Read the above post.
 
[quote name='CoffeeEdge']

Keep in mind, people, that Disney also owns the movie studios that put out Pulp Fiction, Clerks, and O Brother, Where Art Thou?, and the TV studios that make Lost and Monk. Disney owns a TON of shit, and they don't go forcing Mickey Mouse and Winnie the Pooh into every property they have under their umbrella, and they don't go forcing top-down creative control over all their subsidiaries.

[/QUOTE]

But they also own they own Hollywood Records, who edited out entire SONGS off of ICP's rerelease of Carnival of Carnage, among MANY other things like that. Disney has an image to protect, which they will do by destroying anything at Marvel worth a shit. Bye Bye Icon, Foolkiller, real Punisher, hell, probably even gay characters. Anybody who doesn't think they will fuck shit up is a fucking moron and doesn't know Disney's history. Disney has 2 interests: money and appearing to be kid friendly. Artistic integrity doesn't exist in their world view. And yes, they own Miramax, but movies are held to a different standard, and aren't subject to the dumb-fuck biases that comics and games are, so they don't care are much, as long as they make money. And Lost and Monk, while decent shows, aren't exactly pushing the content barriers. And even if they don't fuck with Max (which is mostly gone anyway) and Icon, they will CERTAINLY pull back the mainstream stuff. For the record, using the fact that Warners owns DC isn't exactly the best example. Exactly how many DC titles are worth reading currently? Hell, I don't even think Vertigo is currently producing anything worth a shit. And let's talk subscription rates. DC titles are about $25 a year where as Marvels are about $19 a year. You think Disney isn't going to try for that extra cash? Yeah right. Yeah, $6 doesn't seem like much, but I subscribe to about 20 titles. And they can't kill the Spider-Man franchise. Toby McGuire did that all on his own from the start. He was surprisingly good in Sin City, however, so apparently he CAN act. Sadly it might be Raimi's fault, I just don't want to admit it.

On the one and only positive note, however, Disney isn't HUGE on product placement, so hopefully, if they make a third movie, the fucking fantasticar won't be a motherfucking DODGE. Single worst product placement EVER in any medium, and that includes products that basically are product placements. Eureka season 3 episode 1 is a pretty close runner-up though.
 
[quote name='chakan']First thing I thought of.[/QUOTE]

"Sora , Donald , Goofy spiderman will save you from the evil of the heartless."
 
[quote name='mietha']But they also own they own Hollywood Records, who edited out entire SONGS off of ICP's rerelease of Carnival of Carnage, among MANY other things like that.[/quote]
Oh no, Hollywood Records edited ICP, 12 fucking years ago. Marvel is surely doomed. :roll:

Disney has an image to protect, which they will do by destroying anything at Marvel worth a shit. Bye Bye Icon, Foolkiller, real Punisher, hell, probably even gay characters. Anybody who doesn't think they will fuck shit up is a fucking moron and doesn't know Disney's history. Disney has 2 interests: money and appearing to be kid friendly. Artistic integrity doesn't exist in their world view. And yes, they own Miramax, but movies are held to a different standard, and aren't subject to the dumb-fuck biases that comics and games are, so they don't care are much, as long as they make money. And Lost and Monk, while decent shows, aren't exactly pushing the content barriers. And even if they don't fuck with Max (which is mostly gone anyway) and Icon, they will CERTAINLY pull back the mainstream stuff.
Click to expand...
You don't know what the fuck you're talking about, and you're overreacting like a fucking baby.

No shit Disney is interested in money, which is exactly why they aren't stupid enough to content-restrict or creatively over-manage Marvel.

Disney has no delusion that they need to force their "family-friendly" image into their subsidiaries. That is exactly why the subsidiaries exist: so that Disney can enter into other demographics and markets under different names, while still keeping the core "Disney" name-brand mostly family-friendly.

Toby McGuire did that all on his own from the start. He was surprisingly good in Sin City, however, so apparently he CAN act. Sadly it might be Raimi's fault, I just don't want to admit it.
Click to expand...
Tobey Maguire wasn't in Sin City (perhaps you're thinking of Elijah Wood?). Go sit in the corner.

For the record, using the fact that Warners owns DC isn't exactly the best example. Exactly how many DC titles are worth reading currently? Hell, I don't even think Vertigo is currently producing anything worth a shit.
Click to expand...
Warner has owned DC since 1969. You don't think they've made anything reading since then?
 
Wonder what's going to happen to the Marvel Animated Series currently under Nickelodeon: Wolverine & The X-Men, and Iron-Man Adventures.
 
"Oh no, they edited ICP. Marvel is surely doomed. :rolleyes:"

You are missing the point. They lured them with a big paycheck, claiming they wouldn't do EXACTLY what they immediately did.

"You don't know what the fuck you're talking about, and you're overreacting like a fucking baby."

Oh, I'm sorry, didn't know you owned Disney. Otherwise, your opinion is no more right than mine.

"No shit Disney is interested in money, which is exactly why they aren't stupid enough to content-restrict or creatively over-manage Marvel."

Again, opinion, we'll wait and see. As pointed out, they CERTAINLY have done it in the past.

"Disney has no delusion that they need to force their "family-friendly" image into their subsidiaries. That is exactly why the subsidiaries exist: so that Disney can get into other demographics and markets, while still keeping the "Disney" name-brand fairly family-friendly."

Which would work, if we were talking about Miramax. They aren't any Pulp Fiction rides at Disney world. They will not renew the contract with Universal (no clue when that runs out) and there WILL be Marvel content and rides at Disney parks, which will make it part of the Disney image, and they will PG the content. I'm pretty sure they don't have any other 4 billion dollar subsidiaries. They would be stupid NOT to closely monitor the product after spending that kind of dough.


"Tobey Maguire wasn't in Sin City (perhaps you're thinking of Elijah Wood?). Go sit in the corner."

Hum, makes more sense then. Guess I can blame it on him after all then. :)

"Warner has owned DC since 1969. You don't think they've made anything reading since then?"

Of course they have. They revolutionized the industry in the late 80s. For about 10 years they produced the best stuff on the market. And then a focus shift in the PARENT company all but destroyed it. The point was that before, when Marvel sucked (and they certainly have at times) it was at least their fault. Now every time there is a management change at Disney, you'll have to wonder what they are going to do this time.
 
[quote name='LinkinPrime']Wonder what's going to happen to the Marvel Animated Series currently under Nickelodeon: Wolverine & The X-Men, and Iron-Man Adventures.[/QUOTE]

I would guess nothing. Marvel animated series' never last very long anyway. If they are profitable, I'm assuming they'll just let them run. Obviously they can't do anything for the term of the contract at least.
 
Okay, mietha, first off: lrn2quote.

[quote name='mietha']You are missing the point. They lured them with a big paycheck, claiming they wouldn't do EXACTLY what they immediately did.[/quote]
Again, that was 12 years ago. Disney has changed a lot since 1997.

Again, opinion, we'll wait and see. As pointed out, they CERTAINLY have done it in the past.
Click to expand...
There are more examples of Disney not creatively interfering in their subsidiaries, then them doing so.

Which would work, if we were talking about Miramax. They aren't any Pulp Fiction rides at Disney world. They will not renew the contract with Universal (no clue when that runs out) and there WILL be Marvel content and rides at Disney parks, which will make it part of the Disney image, and they will PG the content. I'm pretty sure they don't have any other 4 billion dollar subsidiaries. They would be stupid NOT to closely monitor the product after spending that kind of dough.
Click to expand...
Ah, so now you're in Disney management, I see.
 
[quote name='CoffeeEdge']
Ah, so now you're in Disney management, I see.[/QUOTE]

:) Nope, but it would be rather stupid for them not to do it. Marvel adventure island is, to my understanding, rather successful. It would be pretty silly for them to allow Universal to keep making that dough, with them getting a small cut, instead of just making it all themselves. Not to mention the competition aspect. Marvel is the main draw (at least from my perspective) of Universal in Florida. Why would Disney want to risk costing themselves immediate business? Even if they don't add Marvel to the parks, which I think is almost assured, they will certainly terminate the deal with Universal ASAP. I just think it's too much money spent to not actually use it.
 
I'd edit ICP too.

Disney's also notorious for not letting questionably offensive bands play the Anaheim HOB solely based on the fact that the building lies on Disney property. Still, I don't think they'll do much to hurt Marvel.
 
Wow this is big news considering I spend 80% of my comic book subscription on Marvel comics. (I know I'm a whore) Hopefully coffeeedge is right and they don't interfere with Marvel's creative process.
 
[quote name='mietha']And Lost and Monk, while decent shows, aren't exactly pushing the content barriers.[/QUOTE]

I think you misunderstood the point I was making. I wasn't using those as examples of "pushing the content barrier." I was using them as examples of Disney-owned properties, that don't have any clear influence from the "traditional Disney image," and exist as more autonomous creative entities.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top