Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 14, 2017 19:14:19 GMT
You can make a point without insulting an entire fanbase, you know. I thought I just did. That was me being complimentary. "Congrats" on... Disney further ruining Hollywood. You just called the entire MCU fanbase clapping seals. And Disney is not ruining Hollywood.
|
|
|
Post by Primemovermithrax Pejorative on Dec 14, 2017 19:15:18 GMT
I don't have to. A forum message and a movie are two different things.
|
|
|
Post by ThatGuy on Dec 14, 2017 19:29:32 GMT
The world isn't falling apart because Fox decided to sell to Disney. That was their choice, nobody held a gun to their head. If the other studios can't generate interest with their content, they need to take a minute for themselves and set some goals. I never said the world was falling apart. I said this could be bad for the state of filmmaking. Variety is important. What does variety have to do with anything? You'll still get those movies... Maybe. I mean, it ain't like Die Hard, Alien and Predator bringing all the masses into theaters as it is.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 14, 2017 19:33:05 GMT
I never said the world was falling apart. I said this could be bad for the state of filmmaking. Variety is important. What does variety have to do with anything? You'll still get those movies... Maybe. I mean, it ain't like Die Hard, Alien and Predator bringing all the masses into theaters as it is. Honestly, all those franchise should have been laid to rest a long time ago, anyway, and I kind of hope Disney comes to that conclusion, too. Die Hard needed to stop with Die Hard 1. Alien needed to end either with Aliens or Alien 3. Predator needed to end with Predator.
|
|
|
Post by ThatGuy on Dec 14, 2017 19:33:25 GMT
I get that people here are happy about Marvel regaining the rights to all their characters (although the Fantastic Four might be a question mark right now: link), but can we consider the implications of this for a moment? Disney now owns Blue Sky Studios, The Simpsons, Family Guy, Die Hard, Bob’s Burgers, Alien, Planet of the Apes, and Avatar. They pretty much own more than half of the big franchises in Hollywood now. Is that really not concerning to anyone? Is getting back the X-Men and maybe the Fantastic Four really worth it if Disney is just going to monopolize all of Hollywood? No, but the seals here are only capable of clapping and barking. That's all they know. Broader contextual and socio-political issues are moot to them because it means they can stuff their faces and watch more shitty drivel -- at increased prices that they'll pay without realizing it was a consequence of this deal. But the movies we have been getting from the franchises that they bought weren't making blockbuster bank anyway. Except for Avatar. And that was boosted by 3D (which has an added $10 to the ticket price). So shitty drivel was already on the menu.
|
|
|
Post by ThatGuy on Dec 14, 2017 19:34:59 GMT
What does variety have to do with anything? You'll still get those movies... Maybe. I mean, it ain't like Die Hard, Alien and Predator bringing all the masses into theaters as it is. Honestly, all those franchise should have been laid to rest a long time ago, anyway, and I kind of hope Disney comes to that conclusion, too. Die Hard needed to stop with Die Hard 1. Alien needed to end either with Aliens or Alien 3. Predator needed to end with Predator. Meh, I liked Die Hard with a Vengeance, but that mostly has to do with Samuel L. Jackson.
|
|
|
Post by ThatGuy on Dec 14, 2017 19:37:26 GMT
Now I'm wondering how Hulu will change. Will Disney just turn that into their streaming service? They own 30% of it. Maybe they'll buy the rest of it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 14, 2017 19:37:59 GMT
Honestly, all those franchise should have been laid to rest a long time ago, anyway, and I kind of hope Disney comes to that conclusion, too. Die Hard needed to stop with Die Hard 1. Alien needed to end either with Aliens or Alien 3. Predator needed to end with Predator. Meh, I liked Die Hard with a Vengeance, but that mostly has to do with Samuel L. Jackson. True, but none of them managed to recapture the magic of the original. Die Hard 2 is okay. With a Vengeance is okay. Even the fourth one was okay, but that's all they are, really. I usually just pretend the original is the only one.
|
|
|
Post by thisguy4000 on Dec 14, 2017 19:39:52 GMT
I never said anything was Disney’s fault. I said the possibility of them becoming a monopoly rubs me the wrong way. That doesn’t even have to do with the talent the other studios have. It has to do with the amount of resources Disney has, and how insanely powerful they’re becoming as a result of said resources. There comes a point where you can’t blame potential monopolies on “Oh well, the other companies should’ve done better!” Business doesn’t work that way. And yes, you did insult me. You told me to “fuck off”, which is a hostile remark that had no basis behind it. I didn’t say anything to you that would’ve justified such an emotional response, so you’re definitely the one to blame for this argument bogeying so heated. All I said was that Disney isn’t really a studio of originality. I don’t care about there being nothing new under the sun, that doesn’t mean Disney isn’t at a severe advantage with their yearly Star Wars movies, among other things. Seriously, I have consistently tried to be respectful with you, but it’s clear that you’re too much of an emotional brat to deserve anyone’s respect. I didn’t make this thread to be bias or to troll, I made it because I felt like expressing my two cents on just how insanely powerful Disney is becoming as a corporation, and how unsettling that is from a capitalistic point of view. If you can’t argue with someone without getting emotional, then you have no business arguing with anyone. Why did you even comment on this thread to begin with? On the first paragraph: fair enough. But I will always maintain that the other companies could have stepped up their game. I said "fuck off" because your comment about Disney not coming up with ideas was bullshit to the extreme. And none of the companies are a studio of originality, either. I have no idea why you even started arguing about originality when I never said anything about the topic to begin with. I was never trying to say any of them were original. You got the idea that I was on your own. Like I care if I have your respect. I never claimed the other companies had originality. My point was that Disney is naturally at an unfair advantage on the count of the strength of their IPs. Star Wars along is the biggest franchise on the planet, and they’re releasing those annually. I never even said anything about quality regarding other studios. I was merely pointing out that a single studio owning so many IPs is troubling. I’m not asking you to care if you have my respect, but maybe don’t turn every single debate we have into a flame war? The moment you decided to tell me to “fuck off” was the moment you decided to drop any semblance of a civil debate.
|
|
|
Post by thisguy4000 on Dec 14, 2017 19:42:51 GMT
I never said the world was falling apart. I said this could be bad for the state of filmmaking. Variety is important. What does variety have to do with anything? You'll still get those movies... Maybe. I mean, it ain't like Die Hard, Alien and Predator bringing all the masses into theaters as it is. Like it or not, Disney doesn’t have the most diverse slate of films these days. Virtually everything they release nowadays is an expensive tentpole film. I’m not saying this to bash Disney, but the truth is, they generally play things pretty safe nowadays. Before you decide to tell me to “fuck off”, keep in mind that once again, I’m not saying Disney releases bad movies, or that people are wrong for liking them. I’m just pointing out that their output of films aren’t particularly risky or diverse.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 14, 2017 19:44:46 GMT
On the first paragraph: fair enough. But I will always maintain that the other companies could have stepped up their game. I said "fuck off" because your comment about Disney not coming up with ideas was bullshit to the extreme. And none of the companies are a studio of originality, either. I have no idea why you even started arguing about originality when I never said anything about the topic to begin with. I was never trying to say any of them were original. You got the idea that I was on your own. Like I care if I have your respect. I never claimed the other companies had originality. My point was that Disney is naturally at an unfair advantage on the count of the strength of their IPs. Star Wars along is the biggest franchise on the planet, and they’re releasing those annually. I never even said anything about quality regarding other studios. I was merely pointing out that a single studio owning so many IPs is troubling. I’m not asking you to care if you have my respect, but maybe don’t turn every single debate we have into a flame war? The moment you decided to tell me to “fuck off” was the moment you decided to drop any semblance of a civil debate. Fair enough on the first point. Of course, I doubt they're actually going to act on having ALL of them. I don't see them making Alien or Predator films. You're right, I did lose my temper. The discussion of originality tends to be a big trigger for me, so I apologize.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 14, 2017 19:48:35 GMT
What does variety have to do with anything? You'll still get those movies... Maybe. I mean, it ain't like Die Hard, Alien and Predator bringing all the masses into theaters as it is. Like it or not, Disney doesn’t have the most diverse slate of films these days. Virtually everything they release nowadays is an expensive tentpole film. I’m not saying this to bash Disney, but the truth is, they generally play things pretty safe nowadays. Before you decide to tell me to “fuck off”, keep in mind that once again, I’m not saying Disney releases bad movies, or that people are wrong for liking them. I’m just pointing out that their output of films aren’t particularly risky or diverse. Current lineup of new animated films are pretty varied with Tangled and Frozen being the two exceptions. Wreck-It Ralph is pretty much the first ever good video game movie, Big Hero 6 was a completely untested property, Zootopia actually tackled some very unusual topics for them, Moana is one of the only films to ever utilize Polynesian mythology, and Coco is based around the only slightly more represented Hispanic culture and mythology.
|
|
|
Post by Hauntedknight87 on Dec 14, 2017 19:48:47 GMT
I'll start to worry if Disney buys Sony pictures.
Until then, I'll let Jason have some fun.
|
|
|
Post by thisguy4000 on Dec 14, 2017 19:48:50 GMT
I never claimed the other companies had originality. My point was that Disney is naturally at an unfair advantage on the count of the strength of their IPs. Star Wars along is the biggest franchise on the planet, and they’re releasing those annually. I never even said anything about quality regarding other studios. I was merely pointing out that a single studio owning so many IPs is troubling. I’m not asking you to care if you have my respect, but maybe don’t turn every single debate we have into a flame war? The moment you decided to tell me to “fuck off” was the moment you decided to drop any semblance of a civil debate. Fair enough on the first point. Of course, I doubt they're actually going to act on having ALL of them. I don't see them making Alien or Predator films. You're right, I did lose my temper. The discussion of originality tends to be a big trigger for me, so I apologize. I suppose I should also apologize if what I said was taken the wrong way. It wasn’t my intention to make it seem like I was bashing Disney, or claim that they’re being run by talentless hacks (which we all know is far from the truth).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 14, 2017 19:55:00 GMT
Fair enough on the first point. Of course, I doubt they're actually going to act on having ALL of them. I don't see them making Alien or Predator films. You're right, I did lose my temper. The discussion of originality tends to be a big trigger for me, so I apologize. I suppose I should also apologize if what I said was taken the wrong way. It wasn’t my intention to make it seem like I was bashing Disney, or claim that they’re being run by talentless hacks (which we all know is far from the truth). It was, and I was being stubborn, anyway. I don't have an answer for whether the buyout will be a good thing or not. I'm not going to worry about it, because the cinematic atmosphere goes in cycles. It will change and Disney won't always have this much of the market stock. Right now, the current cinematic atmosphere favors franchising, which Disney is currently the most proficient in. But five years from now, maybe ten, or fifteen, or more, the business will eventually favor something else. It might swing more in favor of stand-alone films again for a while, and then after a time of a decade, maybe more, it might favor franchising more again and God only knows who'll be on top by then.
|
|
|
Post by ThatGuy on Dec 14, 2017 20:05:37 GMT
What does variety have to do with anything? You'll still get those movies... Maybe. I mean, it ain't like Die Hard, Alien and Predator bringing all the masses into theaters as it is. Like it or not, Disney doesn’t have the most diverse slate of films these days. Virtually everything they release nowadays is an expensive tentpole film. I’m not saying this to bash Disney, but the truth is, they generally play things pretty safe nowadays. Before you decide to tell me to “fuck off”, keep in mind that once again, I’m not saying Disney releases bad movies, or that people are wrong for liking them. I’m just pointing out that their output of films aren’t particularly risky or diverse. But, really, are any of the others? WB putting out Justice League is a risk. Putting out a low budget movie to test the waters isn't risky. Jumping feet first into the movie is risky. If Fox made New Mutants as big as an X-men movie then you can say they made a risky and diverse movie. What they are doing is hoping and playing the odds. People like X-men so let's give them a small spin-off and maybe we can make a whole lot of money off it. But then here comes Disney going balls deep.
|
|
|
Post by Lord Death Man on Dec 14, 2017 20:05:50 GMT
I suppose I should also apologize if what I said was taken the wrong way. It wasn’t my intention to make it seem like I was bashing Disney, or claim that they’re being run by talentless hacks (which we all know is far from the truth). It was, and I was being stubborn, anyway. I don't have an answer for whether the buyout will be a good thing or not. I'm not going to worry about it, because the cinematic atmosphere goes in cycles. It will change and Disney won't always have this much of the market stock. Right now, the current cinematic atmosphere favors franchising, which Disney is currently the most proficient in. But five years from now, maybe ten, or fifteen, or more, the business will eventually favor something else. It might swing more in favor of stand-alone films again for a while, and then after a time of a decade, maybe more, it might favor franchising more again and God only knows who'll be on top by then. And, if I may interject, the death of Net Neutrality would seem to be something worthy of mourning as opposed to one corporation swallowing another.
|
|
|
Post by ArArArchStanton on Dec 14, 2017 20:17:41 GMT
I'm pretty sure other movies get made
Also pretty sure new franchises come about
Also pretty sure they don't make endless films in every franchise
So tell me, apart from Get Out, how many of the big films released this year weren’t already part of a pre-existing franchise? You realize those franchises had a starting point right? And that new franchises can be made.
I remember a day when there weren't Pirates of the Caribbean movies.
|
|
|
Post by ThatGuy on Dec 14, 2017 20:17:47 GMT
What does variety have to do with anything? You'll still get those movies... Maybe. I mean, it ain't like Die Hard, Alien and Predator bringing all the masses into theaters as it is. Like it or not, Disney doesn’t have the most diverse slate of films these days. Virtually everything they release nowadays is an expensive tentpole film. I’m not saying this to bash Disney, but the truth is, they generally play things pretty safe nowadays. Before you decide to tell me to “fuck off”, keep in mind that once again, I’m not saying Disney releases bad movies, or that people are wrong for liking them. I’m just pointing out that their output of films aren’t particularly risky or diverse. I just realized something. Why are you acting like these Fox movies will be made by Disney. Yes, Disney is ultimately in charge, but they aren't actively making the movies. They are just getting their cut off the top. The Crow, Pulp Fiction, Cop Land (James Mangold movie), Jackie Brown, Trainspotting, Kate and Leopold (James Mangold movie), Kill Bill... Movies made by Miramax in the time Disney owned them. Notice the 2 James Mangold movies... The same guy crying about Disney owning Fox worked under Disney when they owned another studio he worked for...
|
|
|
Post by ArArArchStanton on Dec 14, 2017 20:19:08 GMT
Disney monopolizing the entertainment industry is a big one. How about Disney forcing everybody else to step up their game?
You might actually wind up with better products everywhere. Have you considered that?
|
|