|
Post by lukelovesfilm34 on Nov 8, 2017 4:51:31 GMT
Monopolizing business is WRONG. I don't care who buys what.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Nov 8, 2017 5:06:35 GMT
Monopolizing business is WRONG. I don't care who buys what. If Fox took over other Marvel Properties, you woudn't be saying that.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 8, 2017 5:11:10 GMT
I hope the buyout happens if for no other reason than to watch luke's mental meltdown.
|
|
|
Post by lukelovesfilm34 on Nov 8, 2017 5:21:07 GMT
I'm sorry that my lips aren't stuck on the cocks of every man working at Disney and Marvel today like you pathetic losers. I'm fighting for creative freedom. Not just ONE studio.
|
|
|
Post by ThatGuy on Nov 8, 2017 15:13:39 GMT
Competition for what? The only thing they'd really get out of it is X-men and F4 and the OT Star Wars. They've never had to compete with Fox when it comes to CBMs. Remember, Marvel makes money from the Marvel movies that Fox makes. If anything they want all the characters to work out of one place so they can do any kind of story they want. Also, Fox is selling their movie side anyway. If Paramount buys Fox and get X-men then they'll have Michael Bay making X-men movies. Think about that. Would you rather have Michael Bay making X-men movies. 'splosions son! 'splosions! Competition in the film industry. If one major studio buys out another, that means less competition. Also, if Disney were to buy Fox, they would also get Avatar, Alien, Blue Sky, and Planet of the Apes. Actually, there would be less "competition" anyway. This isn't a buy out. Fox is actually downsizing. They are concentrating on the tv side (news, sports, general broadcasting). So someone else would get the movie side of Fox anyway.
|
|
|
Post by ThatGuy on Nov 8, 2017 15:15:20 GMT
I'm sorry that my lips aren't stuck on the cocks of every man working at Disney and Marvel today like you pathetic losers. I'm fighting for creative freedom. Not just ONE studio. So you are saying that WB should sell half of DC? Or sell off the stuff outside of DC like Wildstorm and Milestone?
|
|
|
Post by thisguy4000 on Nov 8, 2017 16:12:00 GMT
Competition in the film industry. If one major studio buys out another, that means less competition. Also, if Disney were to buy Fox, they would also get Avatar, Alien, Blue Sky, and Planet of the Apes. Actually, there would be less "competition" anyway. This isn't a buy out. Fox is actually downsizing. They are concentrating on the tv side (news, sports, general broadcasting). So someone else would get the movie side of Fox anyway. 20th Century Fox is a major film studio. If they sold their entire film division to Disney, it would mean one less film studio in the industry. Again, that would mean less competition, and probably less diversity as well, given that Fox also owns Fox Searchlight, which produces the kinds of films that Disney just doesn't make anymore. Pretty much everything released under the Disney banner these days is part of a major franchise, or an animated film that becomes a franchise. That's not a particularly diverse slate.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Nov 8, 2017 16:24:29 GMT
Actually, there would be less "competition" anyway. This isn't a buy out. Fox is actually downsizing. They are concentrating on the tv side (news, sports, general broadcasting). So someone else would get the movie side of Fox anyway. 20th Century Fox is a major film studio. If they sold their entire film division to Disney, it would mean one less film studio in the industry. Again, that would mean less competition, and probably less diversity as well, given that Fox also owns Fox Searchlight, which produces the kinds of films that Disney just doesn't make anymore. You do know that Touchstone and Miramax and stuff are Disney Subsidiaries right?
|
|
|
Post by thisguy4000 on Nov 8, 2017 16:26:45 GMT
20th Century Fox is a major film studio. If they sold their entire film division to Disney, it would mean one less film studio in the industry. Again, that would mean less competition, and probably less diversity as well, given that Fox also owns Fox Searchlight, which produces the kinds of films that Disney just doesn't make anymore. You do know that Touchstone and Miramax and stuff are Disney Subsidiaries right? And how many films under those labels still get released? Keep in mind, I specifically said anymore.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Nov 8, 2017 16:32:26 GMT
You do know that Touchstone and Miramax and stuff are Disney Subsidiaries right? And how many films under those labels still get released? Keep in mind, I specifically said anymore. Touchstone in 2017? None, but they've been putting out movies consistently up til 2016. Their next one will be out in 2019. Miramax has been consistent as well, but odds are due to it being founded by the Weinsteins they'll be having trouble from now on.
|
|
|
Post by thisguy4000 on Nov 8, 2017 16:36:34 GMT
And how many films under those labels still get released? Keep in mind, I specifically said anymore. For 2017? None, but they've been putting out movies consistently up til 2016. Their next one will be out in 2019. Miramax has been consistent as well, but odds are due to it being founded by the Weinsteins they'll be having trouble from now on. Miramax is pretty much dead, and has been dead well before the Harvey Weinstein scandals became public. Disney as a whole have made it clear that their almost exclusive priority these days is with franchise tentpoles.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Nov 8, 2017 16:46:06 GMT
For 2017? None, but they've been putting out movies consistently up til 2016. Their next one will be out in 2019. Miramax has been consistent as well, but odds are due to it being founded by the Weinsteins they'll be having trouble from now on. Miramax is pretty much dead, and has been dead well before the Harvey Weinstein scandals became public. Disney as a whole have made it clear that their almost exclusive priority these days is with franchise tentpoles. Miramax had 4 films in 2016 and two films that were to be released this year. Not exactly hurting...until now.
|
|
|
Post by thisguy4000 on Nov 8, 2017 16:51:19 GMT
Miramax is pretty much dead, and has been dead well before the Harvey Weinstein scandals became public. Disney as a whole have made it clear that their almost exclusive priority these days is with franchise tentpoles. Miramax had 4 films in 2016 and two films that were to be released this year. Not exactly hurting...until now. Most of those films weren't successful and at least three of them weren't even distributed by Miramax. In fact, one of them was distributed by Universal, not Disney.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Nov 8, 2017 17:06:23 GMT
Miramax had 4 films in 2016 and two films that were to be released this year. Not exactly hurting...until now. Most of those films weren't successful and at least three of them weren't even distributed by Miramax. In fact, one of them was distributed by Universal, not Disney. Yeah, but the point is that they ARE still making movies with those studios.
|
|
|
Post by thisguy4000 on Nov 8, 2017 17:09:58 GMT
Most of those films weren't successful and at least three of them weren't even distributed by Miramax. In fact, one of them was distributed by Universal, not Disney. Yeah, but the point is that they ARE still making movies with those studios. Not with Disney anymore.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Nov 8, 2017 17:35:07 GMT
Yeah, but the point is that they ARE still making movies with those studios. Not with Disney anymore. Since they're subsidiaries, aren't technically all their movies "Disney" movies one way or another?
|
|
|
Post by thisguy4000 on Nov 8, 2017 18:46:55 GMT
Since they're subsidiaries, aren't technically all their movies "Disney" movies one way or another? Didn't Disney sell Miramax back in 2010?
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Nov 8, 2017 18:52:55 GMT
Since they're subsidiaries, aren't technically all their movies "Disney" movies one way or another? Didn't Disney sell Miramax back in 2010? Yes, you're right.
|
|