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

[somebody85]

10 hours ago, Ryan Reynolds said:

Looks like he's for it. A Deadpool/Spider-Man cross over film would be huge.
 

Like someone else said, it would be funny for Deadpool to have to constantly censor himself because Peters still a kid. Think Reynolds and Holland would play well off each other.

[The Panda]

2 hours ago, damnitgeorge08 said:

And again you need to re-read whole conversation. I was agreeing with xo21, who is pro-deal. Your whole comment comment come as assholy, trying to teach me something. Even after I said that I was saying the same thing, you commented this stupidity.

I'm sorry if it came off that way, I'm more on the blunt approach in this thread because there's a lot of doomsday comments that are detached from reality.

 

That being said, I'd like to defend myself against the allegation that I'm commenting stupidity.  I may have misread the context of your comment (as you did mine) but it wasn't stupidity.

 

Best to leave this conversation here and not carry it further.

[Premium George]

13 minutes ago, The Last Panda said:

I'm sorry if it came off that way, I'm more on the blunt approach in this thread because there's a lot of doomsday comments that are detached from reality.

 

That being said, I'd like to defend myself against the allegation that I'm commenting stupidity.  I may have misread the context of your comment (as you did mine) but it wasn't stupidity.

 

Best to leave this conversation here and not carry it further.

Ah, man. Sorry.

[Harpospoke]

6 hours ago, BK007 said:

Why do people keep bringing up ridiculous comparisons?

 

Just because there are other industries that are worse, does not mean that this industry is doing fine.

 

The trend is bad, and that's the focus.

 

If Disney bought over DC, do you think the same number of superhero movies would be made every year?

 

Disney has cut their slate considerably. Fact. Their slate is pretty much only brands. Fact. This was Iger's plan. Fact.

 

Where do you think the new financing for Fox movies is going to come from?

 

6 hours ago, BK007 said:

No one is even remotely suggesting they are taking over Fox to close it. What an inaccurate dismissal.

 

That literally happened in the post directly above yours.

 

Then there was:

4 hours ago, KeepItU25071906 said:

99% guarantee

 

Disney needs PG/PG-13 franchises. That's all what they want.

So yeah, there are people who believe Disney would spend 60 billion just to shut down movies.

Quote

Once again, comparisons are way off. Did anyone understand AIDS back then?

No they did not.   And they made doomsday predictions anyway.   Just like how no one knows what is going to happen here but that of course doesn't stop the doomsday predictions.   When those predictions fail, we'll get the same excuses like you just offered:   "Well...no one knew xxxxx was going to happen back then!   How could we know it was going to result in a major improvement in xxxxx?"

 

That's why doomsayers always fail.   They never take into account the fact of human ingenuity and how the market reacts to changes.

Quote

Climate change is going out of control, just because you don't see it, doesn't mean the process can suddenly be reversed once it passes breaking point. There are millions in poverty and are starving. It's not yet the end, so don't conclude just yet.

I know how those go too.   Big predictions of doom and then excuses later when they fail.    Here is one of the early doom predictions for "climate change" complete with the "point of no return" BS:

Quote

 

"Miami Herald - July 5, 1989 - 2E SCIENCE

GREENHOUSE WARMING NATIONS MAY VANISH, U.N. SAYS    
     A senior U.N. environmental official says entire nations could be wiped off the face of the Earth by rising sea levels if the global warming trend is not reversed by the year 2000. Coastal flooding and crop failures would create an exodus of "eco-refugees," threatening political chaos, said Noel Brown, director of the New York office of the United Nations U.N. Environment Program, or UNEP. He said governments have a 10-year window of opportunity to solve the greenhouse effect before..."

 

http://nl.newsbank.com/nl-search/we/Archives?p_product=MH&s_site=miami&p_multi=MH&p_theme=realcities&p_action=search&p_maxdocs=200&p_topdoc=1&p_text_direct-0=0EB33CF66D507218&p_field_direct-0=document_id&p_perpage=10&p_sort=YMD_date:D&s_trackval=GooglePM

 

But then later excuses are made when we don't see it happen.   Now "Well it's happening even though you can't see it" and "The new point of no return is now in the future instead of the year 2000!"    The "doom" keeps being moved into the future as with all doomsday predictions.    Climate change doomsayers are just doing what other religions have been doing for centuries.   The doom date is always moved into the future when the apocalypse doesn't happen.

 

We are currently feeding more people on LESS LAND than at any time in human history.   We are setting records for grain production worldwide and less people are starving than ever before.   The only reason anyone starves today is because we can't get the food to them.   That is the problem we should solve.

 

Paul Ehrlich got it all started in the late 60s with his doomsday predictions about over population:

1969: “By 1985 enough millions will have died to reduce the earth’s population to some acceptable level, like 1.5 billion people” and “By 1980 the United States would see life expectancy drop to 42 years because of pesticides, and by 1999 its population would plummet to 22.6 million”.

1970: “In ten years all important animal life in the sea will be extinct. Large areas of coastline will have to be evacuated because of the stench of dead fish” and “Sometime in the next 15 years, the end will come. And by the end I mean an utter breakdown of the capacity of the planet to support humanity”.

1971: “By the year 2000 the United Kingdom will be simply a small group of impoverished islands, inhabited by some 70 million hungry people. If I were a gambler, I would take even money that England will not exist in the year 2000.”

 

He of course was wrong about everything he said and so were all the doomsayers who copied him afterward.   The funny thing is that Ehrlich is still at it and pretending he was right all along.

 

Here is where we are today thanks to human innovation:

World grains production will break records again this year. Although usage also is expected to rise, ending stocks will be higher and export availabilities will be ample.

 

http://www.world-grain.com/articles/news_home/Features/2016/11/Another_record-breaking_harves.aspx?ID={F66FAB2B-AE1E-40B6-95F7-A7F92CD9B379}&cck=1

 

Quote

Once again, no one is saying that ingenious movies can't happen. However, it's going to be even harder. As, is what happens when corporations are allowed to get bigger and bigger. I would like to blame all of this on the Western world's pandering to them during the Reagan era and we are suffering the consequences, and it will get worse yet. Money corrupts all, but obviously politicians are first and without backbone in much of the Congress. Pity. Look at DAJK's post on Star Wars/Disney, and tell me that nothing will happen.

More claims of knowing what will happen.   Naturally it's bad.   The claim has always been "things will get worse"....and yet the OPPOSITE happened.    Things have improved in almost every way over the years but that never stops doomsayers.

Quote

You bring up YouTube, but as YouTube has got bigger, it too has started censoring, starving content creators of funds, all kinds of dictatorial shit. There are hints of where a company is heading. Look at Amazon and home video pricing. They used to be a leader, now after years of having the best deals, they only price match. Once the competition is out, they get to do whatever they want.

I bought up Youtube as an example of something that happens that no one can predict.  I did not go any further and offer up a prediction.   Innovation always makes predictions impossible.

 

One example no one predicted was the cell phone.   Phone companies used to charge customers for "long distance".  ...Long after there was no need to do that.   That created a market for something like the cell phone and now the old phone companies are hurting.   Amazon can do what they want but there will be market consequences if they try to exploit customers.   Someone else will fill a need if they create one.   Ebay is already a great alternative to Amazon for me.   I never shop with Amazon.

Quote

There are more important things than the X-Men. Fact. Just because someone cares more about superheroes doesn't actually mean that those are the most important actual consequences.

According to you.   Naturally the movies you like are "more important".

4 hours ago, That One Guy said:

I actually wasn’t referring to Searchlight movies here and more the larger implications of two huge companies merging like this, but hey you do you

It's "larger implications" when it's movies you like...naturally.

4 hours ago, YourMother the Edgelord said:

Yep. X-Men are the most important thing their future is secured, sure the Searchlight division and the other franchise Fox owns have a rocky future, the financial and monopilial implications, the thousand of people who’ll lose jobs and the small theaters will hurt, but they’re all minor issues. X-Men will be “good” again.

 

(I’m happy to see F4 and XM in the MCU but there is bigger issues to worry about since that future for F4 and XM will likely be the easiest path and most secure compared to everything else in the deal)

More doomsday predictions.   Based on the idea that Disney would spend 60 billion to shut down movies.

 

If we want to talk about jobs, how about those end credits for Marvel movies?   A lot more people get work on them than Fox employed for Deadpool or Logan.   So "jobs" are only "important" when it's convenient?   

Edited December 7, 2017 by Harpospoke

[Harpospoke]

39 minutes ago, somebody85 said:

Looks like he's for it. A Deadpool/Spider-Man cross over film would be huge.
 

Like someone else said, it would be funny for Deadpool to have to constantly censor himself because Peters still a kid. Think Reynolds and Holland would play well off each other.

I somehow hear Cap going crazy with "Language!" with DP in the room.

[That One Girl]

2 minutes ago, Harpospoke said:

It's "larger implications" when it's movies you like...naturally.

 

I'd be saying the same of any other large company merger.

[MCKillswitch123]

Not a fan of monopolies, so this is kinda shitty.

 

Yeah, it has its benefits (Fantastic Four in the MCU, original Star Wars blu-rays), but still, can't not feel like this is just another step closer to Disney dominating the world. Fox's approach to the market through mature mainstream options as of late was one that I applauded, and now that alternative is gone. And it's bizarre to live in a world where The Simpsons, Family Guy and Deadpool are all Disney properties.

[Hatebox]

Wow, this thread is... intense. I'll never quite understand Disney fanboys who are basically hyped about a gigantic holding company at this point, but whatever floats your boat.

 

 

Edited December 7, 2017 by Hatebox

[That One Girl]

we need a full Tele take on this @Lor San Tele

[Harpospoke]

3 minutes ago, MCKillswitch123 said:

Not a fan of monopolies, so this is kinda shitty.

 

Yeah, it has its benefits (Fantastic Four in the MCU, original Star Wars blu-rays), but still, can't not feel like this is just another step closer to Disney dominating the world. Fox's approach to the market through mature mainstream options as of late was one that I applauded, and now that alternative is gone. And it's bizarre to live in a world where The Simpsons, Family Guy and Deadpool are all Disney properties.

That's all just perception.   Disney won't own the world.   "Disney" sounds like it doesn't fit with DP and the Simpsons just like all the R rated movies they've made.

[somebody85]

12 minutes ago, MCKillswitch123 said:

Not a fan of monopolies, so this is kinda shitty.

 

Yeah, it has its benefits (Fantastic Four in the MCU, original Star Wars blu-rays), but still, can't not feel like this is just another step closer to Disney dominating the world. Fox's approach to the market through mature mainstream options as of late was one that I applauded, and now that alternative is gone. And it's bizarre to live in a world where The Simpsons, Family Guy and Deadpool are all Disney properties.

That would be Amazon.

[PPG]

Now , from 1 to 10. How much chance does this deal really happening?

[That One Girl]

1 minute ago, PPG said:

Now , from 1 to 10. How much chance does this deal really happening?

 

9

[somebody85]

2 minutes ago, PPG said:

Now , from 1 to 10. How much chance does this deal really happening?

With the trades talking, seems like a 9.5. But we saw what happened when a certain candidate was predicted to win in huge numbers by the same media outlets. So this is all speculation until it actually happens.

IMO I'd say the chances are increasingly likely by the day though.

[somebody85]

http://www.businessinsider.com/a-disney-fox-deal-is-not-just-about-netflix-it-also-has-major-ad-sales-ramifications-2017-12

[KeepItU25071906]

33 minutes ago, Harpospoke said:

 

So yeah, there are people who believe Disney would spend 60 billion just to shut down movies.

They spent for Fantastic Four,  X-Men, Avatar, etc. Not r-rated movies and Searchlight.

 

You're welcome.

 

[Premium George]

49 minutes ago, Harpospoke said:

 

 

That literally happened in the post directly above yours.

 

Then there was:

So yeah, there are people who believe Disney would spend 60 billion just to shut down movies.

No they did not.   And they made doomsday predictions anyway.   Just like how no one knows what is going to happen here but that of course doesn't stop the doomsday predictions.   When those predictions fail, we'll get the same excuses like you just offered:   "Well...no one knew xxxxx was going to happen back then!   How could we know it was going to result in a major improvement in xxxxx?"

 

That's why doomsayers always fail.   They never take into account the fact of human ingenuity and how the market reacts to changes.

I know how those go too.   Big predictions of doom and then excuses later when they fail.    Here is one of the early doom predictions for "climate change" complete with the "point of no return" BS:

http://nl.newsbank.com/nl-search/we/Archives?p_product=MH&s_site=miami&p_multi=MH&p_theme=realcities&p_action=search&p_maxdocs=200&p_topdoc=1&p_text_direct-0=0EB33CF66D507218&p_field_direct-0=document_id&p_perpage=10&p_sort=YMD_date:D&s_trackval=GooglePM

 

But then later excuses are made when we don't see it happen.   Now "Well it's happening even though you can't see it" and "The new point of no return is now in the future instead of the year 2000!"    The "doom" keeps being moved into the future as with all doomsday predictions.    Climate change doomsayers are just doing what other religions have been doing for centuries.   The doom date is always moved into the future when the apocalypse doesn't happen.

 

We are currently feeding more people on LESS LAND than at any time in human history.   We are setting records for grain production worldwide and less people are starving than ever before.   The only reason anyone starves today is because we can't get the food to them.   That is the problem we should solve.

 

Paul Ehrlich got it all started in the late 60s with his doomsday predictions about over population:

1969: “By 1985 enough millions will have died to reduce the earth’s population to some acceptable level, like 1.5 billion people” and “By 1980 the United States would see life expectancy drop to 42 years because of pesticides, and by 1999 its population would plummet to 22.6 million”.

1970: “In ten years all important animal life in the sea will be extinct. Large areas of coastline will have to be evacuated because of the stench of dead fish” and “Sometime in the next 15 years, the end will come. And by the end I mean an utter breakdown of the capacity of the planet to support humanity”.

1971: “By the year 2000 the United Kingdom will be simply a small group of impoverished islands, inhabited by some 70 million hungry people. If I were a gambler, I would take even money that England will not exist in the year 2000.”

 

He of course was wrong about everything he said and so were all the doomsayers who copied him afterward.   The funny thing is that Ehrlich is still at it and pretending he was right all along.

 

Here is where we are today thanks to human innovation:

World grains production will break records again this year. Although usage also is expected to rise, ending stocks will be higher and export availabilities will be ample.

 

http://www.world-grain.com/articles/news_home/Features/2016/11/Another_record-breaking_harves.aspx?ID={F66FAB2B-AE1E-40B6-95F7-A7F92CD9B379}&cck=1

 

More claims of knowing what will happen.   Naturally it's bad.   The claim has always been "things will get worse"....and yet the OPPOSITE happened.    Things have improved in almost every way over the years but that never stops doomsayers.

I bought up Youtube as an example of something that happens that no one can predict.  I did not go any further and offer up a prediction.   Innovation always makes predictions impossible.

 

One example no one predicted was the cell phone.   Phone companies used to charge customers for "long distance".  ...Long after there was no need to do that.   That created a market for something like the cell phone and now the old phone companies are hurting.   Amazon can do what they want but there will be market consequences if they try to exploit customers.   Someone else will fill a need if they create one.   Ebay is already a great alternative to Amazon for me.   I never shop with Amazon.

According to you.   Naturally the movies you like are "more important".

It's "larger implications" when it's movies you like...naturally.

More doomsday predictions.   Based on the idea that Disney would spend 60 billion to shut down movies.

 

If we want to talk about jobs, how about those end credits for Marvel movies?   A lot more people get work on them than Fox employed for Deadpool or Logan.   So "jobs" are only "important" when it's convenient?   

I just wanted to talk about global warming. Your whole comment was if it's not happening to me it is not happening. There's a great Leonardo di'caprio's documentary about it, I highly recommend it. Also why are you not talking about doom and gloom prediction that came true. Mortage crisis, middle east, airlines, internet providers, vietnam, trump.

[PPG]

22 minutes ago, KeepItU25071906 said:

They spent for Fantastic Four,  X-Men, Avatar, etc. Not r-rated movies and Searchlight.

 

UM

[PPG]

35 minutes ago, somebody85 said:

With the trades talking, seems like a 9.5. But we saw what happened when a certain candidate was predicted to win in huge numbers by the same media outlets. So this is all speculation until it actually happens.

IMO I'd say the chances are increasingly likely by the day though.

I want other company rich enough to stop that. 

Do It Apple!

[YM!]

42 minutes ago, KeepItU25071906 said:

They spent for Fantastic Four,  X-Men, Avatar, etc. Not r-rated movies and Searchlight.

 

You're welcome.

 

I believe Disney bought Fox to increase its library for its streaming service. If they want the first two they could’ve made a deal.