Episode IV:A NEW MOUSE | DISNEY | IT IS DONE

[grey ghost]

4 hours ago, BK007 said:

 

Who are you targeting with this? 

 

Right now, whether you intend to or not, you're aligning yourself with shills who are most likely the ones also rooting to remove net neutrality.

 

Posting style, unfortunately, is utterly predictable and indicative of what causes these "posters" are aligned with.

 

In any case, what are you doing to help stop it? This is an American problem. Unfettered capitalism brings you here. 

I'm a shill who's aligning myself with Telecom giants because of my posting style?

 

Wtf are you talking about?

[Walt Disney]

8 hours ago, Jandrew said:

Disney has enough content and enough money to make a streaming service. Directv did it, Turner's doing, Discovery's doing it, BET did it. Disney Channel alone has enough content to fuel a platform.

 

Disney is already the clear cut #1 when it comes to IP's. The fact that you seriously think they need more , and that you as a consumer is going to get most of the benefit is just...whatever, this is like the tax bill. Hopefully they'll just buy my house next.

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cnbc.com/amp/2017/12/13/ives-disney-deal-with-fox-would-be-a-home-run.html

[Walt Disney]

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.usatoday.com/amp/940970001

[Walt Disney]

Great article analyzing why this deal is necessary for Disney:

 

https://stratechery.com/2017/disney-and-fox/

[Eric is Quiet]

 

[dudalb]

There has got to be a middle ground between those who mindlessly worship Disney, and those who are over the top in their hate for Disney.

[YM!]

8 minutes ago, dudalb said:

There has got to be a middle ground between those who mindlessly worship Disney, and those who are over the top in their hate for Disney.

Agreed

[AniNate]

1 hour ago, CoolEric258 said:

 

You should have just posted the original tweet and see how people react

[Kvikk Lunsj]

1 hour ago, CoolEric258 said:

 

Disney needs to but these fuckers out and shut them down!!!

[Jandrew]

4 hours ago, Walt Disney said:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cnbc.com/amp/2017/12/13/ives-disney-deal-with-fox-would-be-a-home-run.html

 

Yeah nice try, but that article said nothing about benefits to consumers. It was a “Disney needs more properties” fluff piece. 

 

They even go on about how much Disney will “dominate the box office” like they dont already. Get real.

 

Edited December 13, 2017 by Jandrew

[The Panda]

At this point it's best to just ignore this thread as people are either worshiping the deal or hailing it as the coming of the anti-christ.

[KeepItU25071906]

30 minutes ago, Darth Suburious said:

Disney needs to but these fuckers out and shut them down!!!

[Walt Disney]

38 minutes ago, The Last Panda said:

At this point it's best to just ignore this thread as people are either worshiping the deal or hailing it as the coming of the anti-christ.

The deal will happen or not happen no matter what any of us think. So our opinions are meaningless. But, if you can find something positive about it, then I think it makes sense to focus on that. But that's just me.

 

 

[Harpospoke]

13 hours ago, Barnack said:

You talk has if it could not happen when it already kind of did.

 

Disney new distributed movie by year

 

2000: 44

2001: 39

2002: 46

2003: 38

2004: 33

2005: 31

2006: 28

2007: 21

2008: 21

2009: 23

2010: 16

2011: 14

2012: 13

2013: 10

2014: 13

2015: 11

2016: 13

2017: 8! 

 

The output got to be less than 25% of what it was early 2000's, movie making, movie that cannot be turned into toys and a section in a attraction park , just movies are almost gone of the current Disney model (could be just a phase, but they stopped making or distributing movies pretty much).

 

Going from around 40 movies to 8, is not literally stopping making them, but is a major drop.

 

In the early 2000's the MPAA studios were releasing around 200 movie a year, if they would have followed Disney it would be down to 40 in 2017.

 

When the people making the movies are the same distributing and showing them, the market can steer a bit less toward free competition among people making movies, some having the giant advantage of controlling there distribution over the others, there is a reason people panicked about studio owning movie theater and made it illegal back in the days:

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Paramount_Pictures,_Inc.

 

The studios created the films, had the writers, directors, producers and actors on staff ("under contract" as it was called), owned the film processing and laboratories, created the prints and distributed them through the theaters that they owned

 

Is it illegitimate to feel it is going back to a model looking more to what the old studio system was, to have a completely studio owned from producing to the consumer model by a studio vertically integrated platform ?

 

Now panicking over this is a bit much, not only it is only movies but the studio system movies were not bad, quality will be there like they are at Pixar (the closest to that today), but breaking that model in the 40s is what killed the golden age and brought independent producers and smaller studios, for better and worst.

 

A Netflix type platform would buy from anyone yes they put they<re own product bigger and more frequent icons on your interface but that was mostly it, Disney platform will almost certainly heavily favorise their own stuff if not be 100% exclusive to them.

I get the sense that English is your 2nd language so may have slightly misread what I said.   (kudos to you for doing much better with English than I would with a 2nd language)

 

You really supported my point very well.   As you can see, Disney making less movies did not stop movies from being made.    We didn't even notice.    The marketplace determines how many movies are made.   If the public wants more movies, they will cause more movies to be made by supporting more movies.   If Disney acts in a way that is counter to what the public wants...Disney will lose that battle and some other studio will win it.

 

Is it true that the public is not going to the movies as much in recent years?   Well that's not Disney making them stay home.    That's a changing marketplace.   If the public is less interested in going to the movies, then the marketplace will have to change.  We still like movies, but are less fond of loading up the family to drive to a theater and pay $50 for some popcorn, candy, and soda.   I could definitely see a future where movies are released to streaming services instead of theaters.  

 

And as you can see, great movies were made before that 1948 panic and after that 1948 panic.   Much ado about nothing as usual.   If we need to act in response to something we do that.   That's exactly what happened.    Another great example of what I'm talking about.

 

Doom predictions never account for ingenuity.   No one knows what will change.   Theaters used to be a single screen that showed one movie for several days at a time.   Some bemoaned the loss of the mom and pop theaters in favor of the megaplexes.   ...Not me.   What we have now is BETTER.    Admittedly there is a certain romance and nostalgia to the old theaters, but if we went back to that the "good old days" would smack us right in the face and we would realize it sucked.

 

Then we got home video.   No one saw that coming.   More mom and pop video stores.  Blockbuster took over and again there were calls of "doom".   Blockbuster had their day and then along came Netflix.    Anyone want to go back to the mom and pop video stores and give up streaming?  I certainly don't.

 

Back in the day there were 3 networks.   Then Fox came along and upset the apple cart a bit.   The other 3 laughed at Fox at first.   They had their "rules" about certain things.  You just didn't broadcast first run shows in summer for instance.   That was for re-runs.   Fox did it different and it worked.   

 

No one saw Fox coming.

 

Cable TV!   Another one that no one predicted.   Then there was satellite TV and now we have "cord cutting".    Wasn't Disney previously supposed to take over the world with ESPN or something?    I guess judgement day got cancelled.   Now ESPN is hurting and frankly not that relevant any more.   Disney is of course trying to adapt to a changing marketplace.  (doom!)

 

Netflix was awesome and original.   That's what happens in a marketplace.   They put the entertainment world on notice that the future is coming.   But it has been irritating me lately.   Just type in a movie you'd like to see in their search bar and see what happens.  Netflix is obviously going to the original content route and their price is going up.   If Hulu becomes a more attractive option I'm going that way.  (I'm not going to subscribe to 5 streaming services)   If Disney makes Hulu better I have no problem with that.    It won't be the end of the world just like it wasn't the end of the world when Netflix took over originally.

 

Streaming entertainment is the future as much as it's possible to predict the future (it really isn't possible).   We are probably going to get that and it's going to be awesome.  (that's where all the jobs are going to be too)  The only thing to be determined is how we get there.   Disney wants to be a part of that.   If they provide a good service, I'm in just like with Netlfix.   If not, I'll leave them behind just like I've done before.   We are the customers and we have the true power.    Like...if Disney kept up that ridiculous "vault" thing where they didn't show their old movies on a streaming service.   That's the kind of thing that will lose you customers and will give your competitors an edge.

4 hours ago, Walt Disney said:

Great article analyzing why this deal is necessary for Disney:

 

https://stratechery.com/2017/disney-and-fox/

Makes sense.    The world is changing and if Disney doesn't change with it, they will be the next Blockbuster Video.

 

------------

 

Funny thing in this thread.   Hard core left wingers carping about "Trump" and claiming capitalism will doom us are actually painting a studio owned by Rupert freaking Murdoch as some kind of champion of film making.     That "Disney" word is powerful indeed to cause something like that!

 

It would make more sense if the angle was "Screw Rupert Murdoch!   He wants this to happen so it must be bad!"....but the fact that Fox is the genesis of all this is rarely brought up at all.    It's been about "Disney" from the very beginning no matter who else was involved.

 

But even then I don't remember it being this big a deal when Disney bought Marvel, Pixar or Star Wars.   There was a tiny murmur about Disney "ruining" those properties...but of course that didn't happen either.    This seems to have been rooted mostly in Marvel getting their own characters back.   Then over time the other "concerns" started popping up to support the original opposition.   I would be curious to see the demographic of the "anti" crowd.    A high percentage of Marvel haters I'll bet.

[Barnack]

44 minutes ago, Harpospoke said:

As you can see, Disney making less movies did not stop movies from being made.    We didn't even notice.

I will read the rest, but studio movies went from over 200 to around 135-140 (just 114 in 2013), less than 100 if we remove the studio subsidiaries and we certainly noticed it. It is all over the place in the 2010, if you google the disparition of the mid budget movies you will get thousands of results:

 

http://flavorwire.com/492985/how-the-death-of-mid-budget-cinema-left-a-generation-of-iconic-filmmakers-mia

http://www.indiewire.com/2014/12/daily-reads-the-disappearance-of-mid-budget-movies-the-most-exciting-working-cinematographers-and-more-125294/

http://www.newser.com/story/199954/how-hollywood-killed-the-mid-budget-movie.html

https://www.gq.com/story/the-day-the-movies-died-mark-harris

https://www.flickeringmyth.com/2015/04/the-callow-way-the-death-of-the-mid-budget-film/

https://stephenfollows.com/disappearing-mid-budget-drama-movies/

 

With some more positive uptick but still talking about how it got rare in the 2000s:

http://www.denofgeek.com/us/movies/mid-budget-movies/260443/the-quiet-return-of-the-mid-budget-movie

 

People saw the disparation of the 100m comedy/rom-com that happened and how the mid budgets drama (the 50 to 120m one), the type of movies Denzel/Russel Crow were doing not so long ago pretty much disappeared, watching something like Deepwater horizon in theater felt almost strange to see that type of movie getting that production design.

 

 

44 minutes ago, Harpospoke said:

Doom predictions never account for ingenuity.

But the prediction are not "doom" or you will need to define what you mean by there, the predictions are:

 

The decline of the number studio movies will continue (and having "5" of them instead of 6 will be a step toward that, with the merger being to the studio that reduced the most is output of them all), the numbers of very small movies will maybe augment (netflix, amazon) without nice theatrical distribution and the gab between the 2 will continue to get larger (adaptive ticket price will maybe make this larger, International being more and more important), maiking the industry even more and more event/franchise heavy.

 

You can disagree with that, but making a strawmen that people making that prediction and not being happy with it are talking about doom ? The doom of what ?

 

Do you disagree with that prediction ?

 

44 minutes ago, Harpospoke said:

It would make more sense if the angle was "Screw Rupert Murdoch!   He wants this to happen so it must be bad!"....but the fact that Fox is the genesis of all this is rarely brought up at all.    It's been about "Disney" from the very beginning no matter who else was involved.

There is a bit of this, Murdoch getting all that money and focus with Fox News is bad to some, but that is dangerous and easy to be influenced by irrelevant political taste about that aspect, and it is more of something not less.

 

It would be like if someone would be influenced by liking Disney recent output to cloak is judgement about that news, as if it had any relevance with how the art output will look like in 2035..... Murdoch is 86 year's old, how much relevance he as a person can have in this conversation... he will not be working (and not alive) quite soon.

 

 

44 minutes ago, Harpospoke said:

 I would be curious to see the demographic of the "anti" crowd.    A high percentage of Marvel haters I'll bet.

Come-on now, I feel there is some link with people having no issue or even loving it being Marvel-Star wars fans, but is Marvel haters a real thing ? The percentage of the population that care even just a little bit one way or the other about that SH feud must be pretty small and we are talking about a 60-70b transaction here of an nearly 100 year's old studio, with the next 50-100 year's in mind of a 80b a year economy sector, not sure what it mean for the next 5 year's about 4 or 5 movies have much weight for anyone that care about movies.

 

If it was not the studio that reduced the most is output of movies over the year that would buy, maybe some of the worries would be different (or not there) that is true, but it is not hating or not Disney, it is simply the factual cutted 75% of is production in the last 15 year's.

Edited December 13, 2017 by Barnack

[Jiriki]

This is entirely about an evolving media space where content and pipes (broadband connections) will hold the power. The more must have content you have the greater your power vis-a-vis consumers and the pipes.

[DAR]

If I had my druthers I would have preferred that it didn't happen.  But I'll live

[Boxx93]

Damn, I just realized... Anastasia will become a Disney princess if the deal goes through.

 

What an irony for Don Bluth.

[RRA]

1 hour ago, Boxx93 said:

Damn, I just realized... Anastasia will become a Disney princess if the deal goes through.

 

What an irony for Don Bluth.

I guess Ferngully pops up in the next Kingdom of Hearts game?

[eddyxx]

So on the subject of less films being made each year....don't we complain every year how the blockbusters are cannibalizing each other and need to spread out...but now we think there aren't enough films being made??? Huh?

Edited December 14, 2017 by eddyxx