Jump to content

A Marvel Fanboy

The Disney Thread | Happy 90th to Donald Duck!

By A Marvel Fanboy, in Box Office Discussion

Recommended Posts

Recommended

Posted by Cap,

Recommended by The Wild Eric
  • Astonished
  • Haha
  • Thanks

7 reactions

Go to this post
BK007 Box Office Gold

BK007

Posted
Posted

No, it's really not. 

 

When I said more brands/studios you can buy, I obviously meant "name" brands. 

 

Perhaps I'll use a sporting analogy, look at a team like Chelsea/Manchester City/PSG in football.

 

Bought over by oil tycoons and spending unlimited amounts of money on players. So, if you say, "Hey, they've got a good team,"

 

Well, no shit. Do they deserve any accolades for winning anything? Nope. Once you buy up the best players in the world you're expected to win. It's never surprising or amazing because really, it's expected.

 

So, when you unfortunately describe "smaller hit or miss movies" you are insulting creative people. Props to you if you're just another person willing to lap up stale franchises and only brands. Yeah, other studios have put up a lot of dreck, but they are also willing to take creative risks. There's a reason Disney live action has not produced any Oscar nominated films. They used to have Miramax but sold it off, now they have Dreamworks live action, but they themselves do not produce anything. In fact, a lot of their movies are worse than other studios, "Race to Witch Mountain", "Shaggy Dog", "Prom" etc. That's the only kind they produce. You'll never see Disney make a "Gone Girl" or a "Grand Budapest Hotel". So, if you want your diet of CGI, superheroes and Star Wars, be my guest, but there is no credit for a company that is simply rich enough to purchase the studios actually producing the movies. They should be, with all their capital, the ones taking risks but they play it safe, generic and boring.

 

I don't even understand your praise. Do you expect a studio who owns Pixar, WDAS, Lucasfilm and Marvel to not succeed with limited resources? Let's not forget that Pixar was developed outside of Disney, Marvel was helped up by Paramount and Lucasfilm by Fox. It's not like Disney nurtured them from young. If somehow Disney snared rights to Harry Potter, Lord of the Rings, Jurassic Park, DC etc. and only made, or should I say "released" these films, would it be even more impressive? That's inane. Disney have developed a stubborn and arrogant fanbase that defends them to the hilt. 

 

One has to look no further than the uber troll, racist misogynist "Walt Disney" poster on here. But everything will have fans on the fringes of society. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


lilmac Summer Tentpole

lilmac

Posted
Posted (edited)

Walt Disney actually was frozen but he's now been cured, unthawed and is being briefed on what has happened with his company since 1966....

 

Here's how the conversation went down:

 

 

"So where is my Scrooge McDuck money vault?" Walt asked


"Sir?"
"Did I fucking stutter? Scrooge McDuck money vault. Where I can swim in the massive wealth you guys made for me while I was asleep?"
"Ummm. We didn't make it."
Walt spun. He looked around the room. Not a single man in the room had a mustache. "I didn't leave many instructions. I really didn't. But I did leave a few." Walt paused.
"Alright, what did you do?"
"Well, sir.."
"Walt."
"Sir?"
"Call me Walt."
"Well, Walt, we've expanded the parks. We have the RunDisney program up and running. We own Marvel. We own Pixar. We own Star Wars. We own Hasbro. We owned Sonny Bono, before he died. He extended Copyright quite a bit. And now that you're alive again, I think that means Mickey's copyright is back in effect again. You own Oswald again."
"Good. Alright. I have no idea what half that shit is. But, everyone seems to be nodding. So here is what you are going to do." Everyone stared anxiously.
"One, start construction on my fucking Scrooge McDuck money Vault. Two, fill my fucking Scrooge McDuck money Vault. Three, get me a goddamn cigarette. Four, get me a bottle of Scotch. Five, thaw out Marilyn. She's got Number Six."

Edited by lilmac
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


Melvin Frohike Sleeper Hit

Melvin Frohike

Posted
Posted

No, it's really not.

When I said more brands/studios you can buy, I obviously meant "name" brands.

Perhaps I'll use a sporting analogy, look at a team like Chelsea/Manchester City/PSG in football.

 

Bought over by oil tycoons and spending unlimited amounts of money on players. So, if you say, "Hey, they've got a good team,"

 

Well, no shit. Do they deserve any accolades for winning anything? Nope.

We've been over all this before. :rolleyes: First of all, I'm looking at this from a business point of view. In my view Disney died with Walt in 1966, with the exception of a few pieces that remain such as WDAS and the theme parks.

Your notion of "deserve" and "accolades" in the sense of devoted sports fandom don't apply to my argument because I'm talking about the box office and making money. If I wanted to talk about movies and accolades and such, I'll discuss the individual production studios that Disney owns instead.

 

Once you buy up the best players in the world you're expected to win. It's never surprising or amazing because really, it's expected.

It's more complex than your sports analogy because so many more people are involved--each individual production studio here is not guaranteed to do well because so many things, including a fickle audience, are involved. In my view, living on a near-100% diet of high-budget tentpole movies is risky business, but somehow they've been pulling it off, which is quite a feat (even if it involves luck, like most every successful enterprise does). I think about this every time I wonder whether I should be selling my Disney stock before it drops and I can decide whether to buy it back again anytime soon (not selling yet).

 

So, when you unfortunately describe "smaller hit or miss movies" you are insulting creative people.

Not at all because I'm not talking about that, I'm talking about box office performance here. It's impressive that Pixar, for example, has been able to be so consistent--and occasionally huge--at the box office, releasing only one movie a year or so. And it's also impressive that Disney can survive (speaking only of the movie business), let alone thrive, on a scaled-up version of this model (including Pixar itself, of course). Quantity provides a level of safety that they don't have, and have chosen not to have. I'm not saying that this is necessarily a good idea at all (if you assumed that, then we're not seeing eye-to-eye at all), but so far it has worked. These things are impressive regardless of the artistic aspects, which I have no problem separating out.

I don't think that each studio is comparable to an individual athlete at all--your analogy only works at the most abstract level and from a certain point of view regarding how respect is earned and how brands are perceived. Well, there are different ways of looking at this, such as the perspective that I'm currently using and the way that the public at large, as a whole, views this.

 

Props to you if you're just another person willing to lap up stale franchises and only brands.

I'm looking at this from a box office perspective, which seems to be a problem around here lately. :huh:

 

Yeah, other studios have put up a lot of dreck, but they are also willing to take creative risks. There's a reason Disney live action has not produced any Oscar nominated films.

So what? And in our previous discussion on this, I stated outright that with only a couple of exceptions, I'm not even a fan of Marvel's movies, for example. In addition, I consider their two most successful movies (at the box office) among their worst. But it's still impressive what they've been able to do--at the box office--with the lesser properties that they hadn't sold off. Disney took a big gamble on Marvel based on the surprising success of Iron Man, and it sure has paid off, but there was never any guarantee of this.

And I have no idea whether Lucasfilm will produce more dreck like their last three Star Wars movies. Those were all successful, though, so this acquisition is probably less of a risk, except for what many said at the time, which was that Disney overpaid for an old, used-up brand. Their first movie will be the main franchise's seventh, after all. We'll see in about a year.

 

So, if you want your diet of CGI, superheroes and Star Wars, be my guest, but there is no credit for a company that is simply rich enough to purchase the studios actually producing the movies. They should be, with all their capital, the ones taking risks but they play it safe, generic and boring.

And every studio is made of a group of people that changes over time, so I don't tend to put much emphasis, in the big picture and in the long term, on a sense of identity besides the brand names. For the time being, "Disney" has been doing well with the production studios and brands they have acquired, as well as their original studios which have been doing comparably well per tentpole, and I for one didn't think there was any guarantee of success over such a long period of time. They've also put their studios in a good position to succeed and maximize the value of what they create, which is always impressive.

 

I don't even understand your praise.

I think that your idealized concept of "praise" is different from what I'm saying. I'm not bestowing the kind of praise that I would on an individual who has committed an heroic deed, for example. And it's not a matter of "deserving" praise in the same way, either.

 

Do you expect a studio who owns Pixar, WDAS, Lucasfilm and Marvel to not succeed with limited resources?

Earlier this century WDAS was crap, Pixar could turn to crap at any time because they similarly produce few movies and struggled with developing each one, Star Wars is old and while the prequels made a lot of money they pissed off the fanbase who were none-too-pleased with Disney's acquisition on top of that, and Marvel had already sold the movie rights to their most popular properties to other studios, so I did not think, as all of this was being put together at the time, that Disney would necessarily be firing on all cylinders for the past several years. Yes, I did bet on them with my own money, but that was because their stock was so cheap at the time (for a reason), and I still wondered whether I would actually lose money on this investment if Disney kept screwing up as they had been for some time.

 

Let's not forget that Pixar was developed outside of Disney, Marvel was helped up by Paramount and Lucasfilm by Fox. It's not like Disney nurtured them from young.

So what? OK, if you care so much about studios as entities, then Disney (WDAS) "nurtured" John Lasseter and a number of other Pixar principals by educating them at CalArts and then hiring and training them at the studio. Or does that somehow not count, in this way of viewing things?

 

Disney have developed a stubborn and arrogant fanbase that defends them to the hilt.

They're not the only ones who are arrogant.

Is that what you think when I said, a while back in a previous discussion, that Disney has been dead for nearly 50 years? They're nothing more than a remnant of a brand and a global media conglomerate, but nevertheless what they've done from a business and box office standpoint has been most impressive. I reject the argument that any of this was guaranteed from the start, when many people felt that all they would do is screw up the studios and brands that they were acquiring. For that matter, there was never any guarantee of any of the individual studios succeeding.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


Sir Tiki Indie Sensation

Sir Tiki

Posted
Posted (edited)

Have they announced anything related to Spider-Man yet? His next solo movie is 2017.

 

(And I know it's Sony, but they were plugging Paramount's Iron Man 2 at the shareholders meet five years ago)

Edited by Sir Tiki
Link to comment
Share on other sites


kayumanggi Cinematic Universe

kayumanggi

Posted
Posted

03.17 BEAUTY AND THE BEAST

04.14 GHOST IN THE SHELL

05.05 GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY II

05.26 STAR WARS VIII

06.16 TOY STORY IV

07.07 PIRATES OF THE CARIBBEAN: DEAD MEN TELL NO TALES

11.03 THOR: RAGNAROK

11.22 UNTITLED PIXAR

 

Meh. lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites


terrestrial Global Phenomenon

terrestrial

Posted
Posted

Have they announced anything related to Spider-Man yet? His next solo movie is 2017.

 

(And I know it's Sony, but they were plugging Paramount's Iron Man 2 at the shareholders meet five years ago)

 

Not sure if you already read it, but Disney's boss listed Spider-Man as one of the upcomming productions at their re-election of the bosses / share-holder thingie meet

Without even mentioning Sony

 

 

 

BUENA VISTA

FUTURE RELEASES

Movie Title (click to view) Studio Release Date
Monkey Kingdom Buena Vista 4/17/15
Avengers: Age of Ultron Buena Vista 5/1/15
Tomorrowland Buena Vista 5/22/15
Inside Out Buena Vista 6/19/15
Ant-Man Buena Vista 7/17/15
The Finest Hours Buena Vista 10/9/15
Untitled Cold War Spy Thriller Buena Vista 10/16/15
The Good Dinosaur Buena Vista 11/25/15
Star Wars: The Force Awakens Buena Vista 12/18/15
Zootopia Buena Vista 3/4/16
The Jungle Book (2016) Buena Vista 4/15/16
Captain America: Civil War Buena Vista 5/6/16
Alice in Wonderland: Through the Looking Glass Buena Vista 5/27/16
Finding Dory Buena Vista 6/17/16
The BFG Buena Vista 7/1/16
Pete's Dragon Buena Vista 8/12/16
Doctor Strange Buena Vista 11/4/16
Moana Buena Vista 11/23/16
Rogue One Buena Vista 12/16/16
Beauty and the Beast (2017) Buena Vista 3/17/17
Ghost in the Shell (2017) Buena Vista 4/14/17
Guardians of the Galaxy 2 Buena Vista 5/5/17
Star Wars: Episode VIII Buena Vista 5/26/17
Toy Story 4 Buena Vista 6/16/17
Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Men Tell No Tales Buena Vista 7/7/17

 

Spider-Man Sony-Disney reboot

 

Thor: Ragnarok

 

Sony

 

Buena Vista

 

7/28/17

 

11/3/17
Untitled Pixar Animation (Nov. 2017) Buena Vista 11/22/17
Untitled Disney Animation (2018) Buena Vista 3/9/18
Avengers: Infinity War Part I Buena Vista 5/4/18
Untitled Pixar Animation (2018) Buena Vista 6/15/18
Black Panther Buena Vista 7/6/18
Captain Marvel Buena Vista 11/2/18
Untitled Disney Animation (Nov. 2018) Buena Vista 11/21/18
Avengers: Infinity War Part II Buena Vista 5/3/19
Inhumans Buena Vista 7/12/19
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


Sir Tiki Indie Sensation

Sir Tiki

Posted
Posted (edited)

In 4Q14, JAT Capital sold its position in the Walt Disney Company (DIS). The fund had held 1 million shares of DIS, which had accounted for 1.5% of the fund’s 3Q14 portfolio.

 

http://marketrealist.com/2015/03/jat-capital-sells-remaining-stake-in-the-walt-disney-company/

 

That would be about $106 million worth of stock.

Edited by Sir Tiki
Link to comment
Share on other sites
















Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Guidelines. Feel free to read our Privacy Policy as well.

  I accept