Fanboy Wars Thread: Personal Attacks not allowed | With Digital Fur Technology

[WrathOfHan]

4 minutes ago, dudalb said:

And, as Tele could tell you, the film business has always been very unstable, more so then most businesses. It has always had a huge job  turnover rate,goinb back to the silent days. If Job Security is your main concern, choose another area of work.

Yeah, because fuck following your passions and dreams! Everyone goes into the industry knowing it's unstable. This is a poor justification of the merger. 

[JB33]

The lack of blame on Fox for throwing in the towel is astounding. They gave up. They gave up on movies and on all their employees. Disney simply stepped in and took it off their hands.

 

At least someone bought it and it didn't just fold. Either way, a lot of people were going to lose jobs. Lots of people lose jobs every day due to corporate decisions. It sucks, and we can lament the fact for a bit, but let people discuss where things go from here without vilifying them.

Edited July 27, 2018 by JB33

[DMan7]

These youngins in here are going to have a rude awakening when the join the work force. You may have a certain opinion now but I assure you come 10 years from now you'll be chanting something differently. 

[Elessar]

47 minutes ago, ZeeSoh said:

Thats being plain disingenuous. One can both be sad about the loss of job and yet be happy about another aspect of the deal. They are not mutually exclusive. 

 

As I said, this was inevitable. If not Disney, then Comcast would have overtaken. There was nothing that any of us could have done or do to stop it. So in such a scenario I fail to see why some are indignant if someone else finds one part of the merger appealing to them while keeping the bad part of the merger in mind?

I'd have much rather taken Comcast. Maybe it's naive but i don't believe much would have changed under them in terms of movie output, them being primarily a telecommunications company.

 

But Disney? Plenty of their stuff doesn't fit into Disney's "family image". Say goodbye to interesting projects, instead we'll get the umpteenth Toy Story featuring an Alien doll - welcome to the bright new world...

[TalismanRing]

1 minute ago, That One Guy said:

 

I'm still upset about the loss of one of the original studios.  I'm against this from the start, but there are studios that I think would be worse if they were acquired than other studios.  Disney and Comcast are definitely towards the top of the list in terms of least favorable companies to buy Fox.  They're already huge megacorps, which is why them being bought by a powerful studio like Disney stings so much.

 

The current nature of this business is that companies are gong to have to be bigger in order to grow and survive.  Not just making films and TV but streaming services and international markets and content content content.

 

Disney did not want to be swallowed by by Apple or ATT or Comcast or Verizon so they had to expand or eventually face the fate of Fox.  Fox is selling because they crunched the numbers and realized they couldn't expand and compete in the ever expanding content market.  It's why 4 years ago Fox wanted to buy WB and that deal falling through has lead to this.

 

Of the old studios which are still autonomous?    MGM swallowed UA and it's been on life support for decades since it was gutted and it's library sold to Time Warner which was a merged company even before the AT&T deal.  Comcast owns NBC Universal which before that was owned by GE.   Sony bought Columbia which before that was owned by Coca Cola.  Paramount is owned by Viacom.

 

 

 

[TalismanRing]

3 minutes ago, Elessar said:

I'd have much rather taken Comcast. Maybe it's naive but i don't believe much would have changed under them in terms of movie output, them being primarily a telecommunications company.

 

But Disney? Plenty of their stuff doesn't fit into Disney's "family image". Say goodbye to interesting projects, instead we'll get the umpteenth Toy Story featuring an Alien doll - welcome to the bright new world...

Comcast owns Universal.  There would have been a lot of overlap and job loss as well..  Since Universal has Focus  I think Fox Searchlight would have been more danger of being declared redundant.

 

Disney has had several other studio brands (Miramax, Touchstone etc) over the years otherwise we wouldn't have Pulp Fiction or the recent Bridge of Spies.

 

Edited July 27, 2018 by TalismanRing

[Rorschach]

Edited July 27, 2018 by Rorschach

[Barnack]

24 minutes ago, TalismanRing said:

Of the old studios which are still autonomous? 

There is no automonous major movie studio and has been for a long time, Disney studio is part of obviously disney giant conglomerate, some other is Comcast, Fox was owned by Century Fox, Paramount Viacom, Columbia by Sony and so on.

 

Liongates is probably the biggest autonomous ?

25 minutes ago, TalismanRing said:

Comcast owns Universal.  There would have been a lot of overlap and job loss as well..  Since Universal has Focus  I think Fox Searchlight would have been more danger of being declared redundant.

 

Or Focus....

 

Searchlight is very safe at Disney imo, but Fox studio is probably death.

[dudalb]

42 minutes ago, JB33 said:

The lack of blame on Fox for throwing in the towel is astounding. They gave up. They gave up on movies and on all their employees. Disney simply stepped in and took it off their hands.

 

At least someone bought it and it didn't just fold. Either way, a lot of people were going to lose jobs. Lots of people lose jobs every day due to corporate decisions. It sucks, and we can lament the fact for a bit, but let people discuss where things go from here without vilifying them.

As much as I Hate Rupert, I can't blame him if he decided the way forward to Newhouse company is to get out of the entertainment providing business and concentrate on it's core news/cable TV operations.

I think Murdoch probably soured on the Film Industry after his failed attempt to take over Warners a few years ago.

I hate Rupert Murdoch with a passion, but I can't dispute his right to make what he feels is the best decision for the Newhouse corporation as a whole.

[dudalb]

15 minutes ago, Barnack said:

There is no automonous major movie studio and has been for a long time, Disney studio is part of obviously disney giant conglomerate, some other is Comcast, Fox was owned by Century Fox, Paramount Viacom, Columbia by Sony and so on.

 

Liongates is probably the biggest autonomous ?

Or Focus....

 

Searchlight is very safe at Disney imo, but Fox studio is probably death.

They might well keep the Fox Label around to release films with a R rating or other films they don't think fits the Disney Label.

People forget that Disney had a number of Companies like Miramax or Touchstone to release more adult ,less family oriented films. I suspect there will be return to this.

Things change in the film industry very fast. A decade ago it seemed good sense to put the other lables into storage and release all films under the Disney release label. Now it seems good to get back into the more adult film business and have separate labels.

For the past couple of years there have been noises that Iger wanted to get back into the films for more mature audience market. He surely must have seen hos lucrative low budget horror films have been.

Edited July 27, 2018 by dudalb

[IronJimbo]

1 hour ago, That One Guy said:

 

As Tele has told me in the Telegram chat, he thinks the deal is horrible and says people supporting it is one of the main reasons he left.

tell Tele Jimbo misses him

[That One Girl]

10 minutes ago, IronJimbo said:

tell Tele Jimbo misses him

 

you can always join the telegram chat!  btw:

 

[IronJimbo]

9 minutes ago, That One Guy said:

 

you can always join the telegram chat!  btw:

 

His too kind i dont deserve a kiss

[Barnack]

38 minutes ago, dudalb said:

They might well keep the Fox Label around to release films with a R rating or other films they don't think fits the Disney Label.

People forget that Disney had a number of Companies like Miramax or Touchstone to release more adult ,less family oriented films. I suspect there will be return to this.

Maybe, but turning it into a empty Label (like Touchstone was, touchstone had no employee, office space, etc.. really like you said a label) is obviously killing it, really playing with semantic.

[AndyK]

3 minutes ago, IronJimbo said:

His too kind i dont deserve a kiss

Thats true

[That One Girl]

8 minutes ago, IronJimbo said:

His too kind i dont deserve a kiss

 

joinnn

 

https://t.me/joinchat/BDsV7UdKGNubhYgn1MfD5A

[AndyK]

6 minutes ago, That One Guy said:

 

joinnn

 

https://t.me/joinchat/BDsV7UdKGNubhYgn1MfD5A

Whats the advantage of this chat group over using the forums?

[dudalb]

1 hour ago, TalismanRing said:

 

The current nature of this business is that companies are gong to have to be bigger in order to grow and survive.  Not just making films and TV but streaming services and international markets and content content content.

 

Disney did not want to be swallowed by by Apple or ATT or Comcast or Verizon so they had to expand or eventually face the fate of Fox.  Fox is selling because they crunched the numbers and realized they couldn't expand and compete in the ever expanding content market.  It's why 4 years ago Fox wanted to buy WB and that deal falling through has lead to this.

 

Of the old studios which are still autonomous?    MGM swallowed UA and it's been on life support for decades since it was gutted and it's library sold to Time Warner which was a merged company even before the AT&T deal.  Comcast owns NBC Universal which before that was owned by GE.   Sony bought Columbia which before that was owned by Coca Cola.  Paramount is owned by Viacom.

 

 

 

With MGM and UA, it a question of who swallowed who, since MGM was probably in worse shape in 1980 then UA; MGM had ever recovred from it's near death in the early 70's MGM can as close to being totally bankrupt and it's assets sold off to other companes as a business can go and still survive. It stopped film production in late 1971 and until 1976, the studio was closed down except for it's TV operations;in fact it's biggest source of income was the MGM Grand Casino in Las Vegas. The only threatircal film it released in those years was "That's Entertainment" which cost next to nothing to make (90% of which was film clips from the classic MGM musicals the other 10% were stars from that period introducing the clips while walking around the seeon to be torn down MGM backlot). MGM resumed production in 1976, but with mixed results. By 1980 it was in trouble again.

UA was actually in better shape,it had a couple of valuable franchises ..James Bond and Rocky...and the decision of Transamerica to propose a merger of UA with MGM might have been a panic measure because UA did have bad year in 1980.climaxing with the Heaven Gates fiasco, which created a cash flow problem and convinced Transamerica it was time to get out of the movie business . They "sold" UA to MGM in exchange for MGM stock. It was probably a case of addition by subtraction;they just wanted out of the movie business.

[dudalb]

Despite all the protests to the contrary, I still think most of the hostility to his deal is pretty much based on a "DISNEY IS EVIL" mentality.

And, BTW I have had some real arguments with our biggest "Disney is wonderful and everything they do is wonderful" fanboy here. I got mad when he/she dismissed concerns over what would happen with FOx Searchlite with "oh, I don't care about that;all I want is for Dsiney to go onmaking cartoons and Musicals" .

[dudalb]

Up in Hollywood Heaven, I can see Walt going over to Zanuck and needlng him a bit;

Back in 1937, just before "Snow White" opened, Darryl Zanuck told a reporter that he thought there was no audience for a feature length Animated film, and Walt Disney has made a big mistake making it.