What is Digg?Sponsored by newegg
Ready. Set. Shop view!
newegg.com - Newegg.com Black Friday Sale starting 11/25 3PM PST. No Lines, No Crowds, Click and Save.
42 Comments
- SamirGupta, on 09/03/2009, -1/+31Damn -- was looking forward to X-Men on Ice...
- inactive, on 09/13/2009, -3/+26I find this hard to believe. I can't wait to see that X-Men - Jonas Brothers Marvel Team-Up.
- bittermang, on 09/03/2009, -0/+22Yeah, just like they ruined ESPN with Mickey Mouse Football!
Wait, that's not a thing that happened.. but Disney owns ESPN... surely they've ***** it up with some cartoon *****? No? Not even a little bit? Scrooge McDuck? Nothing? Huh.
This deal comes down to money. Shocking, I know, that two businesses would make a deal that centered around money, but please try to stay with me here. Comic book movies are big business, and maybe that business cuts in to Disney's movie business. Afterall, they own Pixar, Miramax, Touchstone. By owning Marvel's assets, not only do they get a piece of that action, they get to schedule the releases so they don't have to compete with their other movies. Meaning more money overall.
But don't let facts or logic get in the way of your impotent nerd apocalypse. - stinklez, on 09/03/2009, -0/+11just like Pixar?
- thePuck77, on 09/02/2009, -0/+11LOL...Stan the Man said it will be OK last night, and I am generally a True Believer. If they mess with it too much they will just have wasted the money because the value will go out of the rights.
- rocknog, on 09/03/2009, -0/+8I don't know why everyone's so skeptical given the fact that Disney owns Miramax.
- spookyttws, on 09/03/2009, -0/+5But what about all the rampant, completely baseless speculation that every current and future Marvel project would be completely turned on it's head and put directly under the supervision of Disney producers?!! I was positive those stories we're completely true!!
/s
All beloved Marvel characters will not be wearing mouse ears. All this means is that Marvel is even more financially secure. Hell, we may even see more movies being announced now that they have Disney money behind them.. - Skankingmike, on 09/03/2009, -2/+7Coming June 2012
Blade 4: Goofy's Revenge - dagamer34, on 09/03/2009, -0/+4I'm still trying to figure out what Disney and Marvel gain from this deal... and the only thing I came up with is that Marvel will be able to use Disney as a bank for financing movies and Disney will get increased profits from distributing Marvel's movies in the future. Other than that, if Disney isn't going to start meddling in Marvel's affairs, then I don't see the point.
One I REALLY don't want is to ever see the Disney or Marvel worlds combine, EVER. PERIOD. It should be as if they two companies are still separate. Because once you start down that path, it's only a matter of time until you see Mickey Mouse in a Marvel comic (or even just sly advertising) - BlueScribe, on 09/03/2009, -0/+3What the ***** is that.
- deathandtaverns, on 09/03/2009, -1/+3I remember when they said that about G4 and TechTV
- insanebrain, on 09/03/2009, -0/+2And I was looking forward to . ..
"there's iron man getting pwned by peter pan in neverland while the hulk is banging cinderella. Dr. Doom is playing jumprope with timon & pumbaa and aladdin is bitchslappin' catwoman. " - Whiteknight117, on 09/03/2009, -0/+2I love the my little Tony.
- syntaxgs, on 09/03/2009, -1/+3what Of Corse not becosue disney the lats time wiche I herd are tv then movie becosue the movie not comic comic done at diffrent companye so it ovious they not enter act =P
- superlantern, on 09/03/2009, -0/+1catwoman is with dc
- OaklandNative, on 09/03/2009, -0/+1Leaked letter from Disney to Marvel:
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_rtOXMZlMTkg/SpyObfjpXnI/ ... - regicide, on 09/03/2009, -0/+1That's a relief.... I think?
- fuzzynyanko, on 09/03/2009, -1/+2For now.
- whoreable, on 09/03/2009, -0/+1Just like your dad's confirmation he was going to pull out. And here you are.
- vulcanius, on 09/03/2009, -2/+3Well that's that guys, no need to worry at all...
- lars5, on 09/03/2009, -0/+1as long as marvel doesnt crank out another x-men 3 or spiderman 3 i'll be okay... maybe disney can loan them some miramax guys.
- thePuck77, on 09/03/2009, -0/+1True enough, but I wasn't so much counting on his power as his "being in the know" and not being the kind of guy that lies to the fans.
- djlethal, on 09/03/2009, -0/+1lol, just subscribe to his posts. they're all retarded.
- Destroytoy, on 09/03/2009, -0/+1Yeah, I'll believe that when pigs fly.
- palanthos, on 09/03/2009, -0/+1I wish they had. Maybe they'd move DC's best writers back to Batman instead of pumping out ***** Dark Knight comics while Birds of Prey and Nightwing (which not nearly as many people read) continue to get awesome storylines.
- BRod1, on 09/03/2009, -1/+2And Activision and Blizzard...
- roazena, on 09/03/2009, -0/+1It's pretty much the financing, because Sony and Fox own the Spider-Man/mutant franchises respectively. Fox's license for the X-Men includes the phrase "in perpetuity" which means Disney is going to have to bribe the ***** out of Fox to regain movie rights.
And as far as Marvel printing Disney comics? At the same exact time Disney was negotiating with Marvel, they were signing off on an exclusive contract with Boom Studios comics. Boom is reprinting Don Rosa's "Life and Times of Scrooge McDuck" and creating new comics based on Pixar properties; this license is crucial to such a tiny start-up as Boom and it's unlikely Boom will agree to break their contract with Disney. It's even less likely that Boom would be interested in selling itself to Disney and watching itself become a Marvel imprint.
I don't have the numbers in front of me, but TimeWarner could not have spent anywhere near $4B to purchase DC and the moment they did, there was no impediment to media synergy between the companies. I'm not saying Disney ***** up, but they're going to have to wait at least five years before they can actually leverage any synergy between themselves and Marvel -- with the possible exception of foreign properties Disney itself licenses/distributes (W.I.T.C.H., Miyazaki anime). - roazena, on 09/03/2009, -0/+1^ lol
As it turns out, TImeWarner never acquired DC, it was more like the other way around. TW started out as a parking lot ocmpany which acquired DC as its first media asset back in 1972, followed later by Warner Bros (which was not terribly successful at the time) and only at the beginning of the 1980s did it start to grow substantially as a media empire.
News from earlier this year suggests that Disney's main motivation for acquiring Marvel was a one-time $9B surplus at TW which fueled speculation TW would buy out Marvel. If I were a betting man, I'd say Marvel management panicked and started quietly shopping itself to Disney to avoid this from happening (despite the fact that TW shareholders were going to go ***** if TW bought one more thing instead of increasing its stock price). - superlantern, on 09/03/2009, -1/+1dude it was a joke
- superlantern, on 09/03/2009, -1/+1I give it a year before disney goes back on their promise not to interfere. and, they will start by saying " you know wolverine looks too mean and unhappy, how about giving him a cheerful outfit and and instead of claws give him retractable flowers, and, lets work on a comic series with him and Mickey Mouse taking a road trip"
- rocknog, on 09/03/2009, -1/+1Based on... what, exactly? God, I love comics, but I can't stand mouth-breathing comic nerds who have no ***** clue what they're talking about.
- Yage2006, on 09/03/2009, -1/+1Damnz.
I was hoping to see some singing in the next Spiderman.
/s - Spacejack, on 09/03/2009, -0/+0The whole reason awesome storylines happen in comics is that they appear in books that not that many people read. They're worth less as properties and can change and devote their resources more to the book itself and worry less about ancillary product. It happens over and over again, particularly at DC... the third and fourth-stringers almost always have the best books.
- Spacejack, on 09/03/2009, -0/+0I don't know the future, but bear in mind that Stan Lee has had very little decision-making power at Marvel for at least two decades. He is primarily a mascot.
- Spacejack, on 09/03/2009, -0/+0More like they now have the same relationship with Disney that DC has with Warner--total dependence on the choices made by the parent company. Disney will not want to license characters out to other studios, in order to avoid competition with their own Marvel-based product. So we will get only Disney-approved Marvel movie entries. Which isn't to say Iron Man in mouse ears... but there will be restrictions.
I worry more about the effects on comics distribution, though. - inactive, on 09/03/2009, -0/+0"the same way that Miramax did under the Weinstein Brothers."
With the exception of Kevin Smith's Dogma. - ryanonfire, on 09/03/2009, -2/+1Or in other words why fix something that's not broken.
- mariuzi, on 09/03/2009, -2/+1Disney is evil. They make children believe that people are good and that all their dreams can come true and that life is worth it and all that garbage. They're disgusting.
- inactive, on 09/13/2009, -4/+2Disney is really going to have to win us over.
- inactive, on 09/03/2009, -4/+2That was the Eisner Disney.
The Iger Disney so far is only responsible for Apple owning Disney and Disney owning Marvel. Therefore Apple owns Marvel.
The Jonas Brothers were in the queue before Iger took over. - Nephlabobo, on 09/03/2009, -3/+1*****.
***** Diznazi. - withoutamartyr, on 09/03/2009, -6/+1They say this NOW... but it starts with minor changes. Then, soon, Iron Man has a Mickey suit.
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is 