Positive: X-Men and Fantastic Four Could Join the MCU
When Marvel Comics nearly went bankrupt in the ’90s, they stayed afloat by selling the movie rights to their most popular characters: Spider-Man, the X-Men, the Fantastic Four, Daredevil. And since then, that decision has served to bite them in the butt.
The exclusion of X-Men and Fantastic Four from the ever-expanding Marvel Cinematic Universe has been a constant source of frustration for fans who want to see their favorite characters in the comics interact with their favorites in the movies — and of confusion for general audiences who have to deal with multiple versions of Quicksilver. Marvel has to bend over backwards to adapt ambitious crossover storylines like Civil War because they don’t own certain characters. And then there’s the poor Fantastic Four, who have not yet had a good movie — something that could change once Marvel Studios and their stellar track record gets a hold of them. Could this mean that the Fantastic Four and X-Men enter the MCU? Possibly — and with the convoluted X-Men universe at a crossroads after the stunning Logan and the not-so-stunning Apocalypse, perhaps it’s time to start afresh. Besides, don’t you want to see a grumpy Wolverine bicker and try to lead the Avengers? (Hoai-Tran Bui)
Negative: We Could Lose Edgier, More Mature TV Shows
While specific details are still not a hundred percent clear, early reports suggest that television brands like FX and FXX would be transferred over to Disney in the sale as well. Assuming Disney doesn’t let those branches operate independently and completely free of any corporate oversight, that could result in a number of possible things happening: Disney could move executives from current departments into positions of power overseeing those divisions, which may result in those channels producing less of the brazen and edgy TV shows for which those networks are known. I find it hard to believe a family-friendly company like Disney would be okay with something as twisted as American Horror Story on one of its networks. (Ben Pearson)
Negative: Mid-Budget Movies Could Become Even More Endangered
What ever happened to the mid-budget movie? Lower budget independent films are still a reality, but there was a time when even major Hollywood studios would happily finance mid-budget dramas. Those days are over. Instead, the big studios are hell-bent on making films that are as big as humanly possible. Every film is an “event film.” Franchises are king. Disney certainly hasn’t had any interest in financing a mid-budget film in quite some time – and why should they? Their huge tentpole films rake in the cash. Which indicates that when and if Disney absorbs Fox, they’ll have an even bigger line-up of huge spectacle properties to finance.The mid-budget film is barely a reality at this point; when this purchase goes through, I have a feeling it will become completely extinct. In an interview with Flavorwire, filmmaker Susan Seidelman rightfully bemoaned the death of the mid-budget film: “You could make movies in the ten-to-20-million-dollar budget range…They didn’t have to be huge blockbusters. They could be more adult-oriented, they didn’t have to appeal to absolutely everyone in the world, and if it’s good work then the studio was happy with making a good profit, but it was a different model… And I think over the years, what happened is that things have gotten really polarized. To studios now, to make a million dollars isn’t a big deal — you have to make a billion dollars, right? They have to appeal to every demographic in every part of the world, so to make a $20 million movie that makes $60 million, why put their money there?“As a result, smaller, more personal, more adult-oriented fare has gone the way of the dodo, or been relegated to limited platform releases that receive 1/10th of the attention that a superhero film might. This is depressing, and even if you’re a fan of superhero films (and there’s certainly nothing wrong with that), this is troubling. There’s more to movies than just blockbusters, folks. At least, there used to be. (Chris Evangelista)
Negative: What Will Happen to Blue Sky Studios?
Listen, I’m not a fan of Blue Sky Studios or the films they have produced thus far (which mainly consist of the Ice Age and Rio franchises alongside The Peanuts Movie), but what would happen to the Fox-owned animation studio if Disney purchases the company? Would it be run alongside Pixar, Walt Disney Animation Studios, and Disney Toons Studios? Or would it be shut down, leading to many talented animators losing their jobs? The second option feels like a horrifying possibility. (Peter Sciretta)
Positive for Disney: Disney Gets Ownership of Avatar
The acquisition would give Disney the rights to James Cameron’s Avatar, a huge film franchise the company have already incorporated into the Disney parks. Disney has proven itself to be a master of corporate synergy in the past, so actually owning the film rights to their expensive new theme park land, Pandora: The World of Avatar, would be handy. (Peter Sciretta)
Negative for Disney: Disney Gets Ownership of Properties Already in Competing Theme Parks
Speaking of theme parks… While Disney fully owning Avatar in the parks and on the big screen would benefit both divisions, they would also be acquiring the rights to film and TV projects, like the The Simpsons, that already have deals in competitor’s theme parks, like Universal Studios. This would not be a first for Disney, as their acquisition of Marvel excluded the theme park rights to most Marvel superheroes east of the Mississippi. The result is that Universal has a theme park land and costumed characters based on Disney properties and Disney has less control of their ecosystem. (Peter Sciretta)
If Disney Buys Fox: The Pros And Cons Of The Potential Acquisition
By /Film Staff/Dec. 6, 2017 12:30 pm EST
Positive: X-Men and Fantastic Four Could Join the MCU
When Marvel Comics nearly went bankrupt in the ’90s, they stayed afloat by selling the movie rights to their most popular characters: Spider-Man, the X-Men, the Fantastic Four, Daredevil. And since then, that decision has served to bite them in the butt.
The exclusion of X-Men and Fantastic Four from the ever-expanding Marvel Cinematic Universe has been a constant source of frustration for fans who want to see their favorite characters in the comics interact with their favorites in the movies — and of confusion for general audiences who have to deal with multiple versions of Quicksilver. Marvel has to bend over backwards to adapt ambitious crossover storylines like Civil War because they don’t own certain characters. And then there’s the poor Fantastic Four, who have not yet had a good movie — something that could change once Marvel Studios and their stellar track record gets a hold of them. Could this mean that the Fantastic Four and X-Men enter the MCU? Possibly — and with the convoluted X-Men universe at a crossroads after the stunning Logan and the not-so-stunning Apocalypse, perhaps it’s time to start afresh. Besides, don’t you want to see a grumpy Wolverine bicker and try to lead the Avengers? (Hoai-Tran Bui)
The exclusion of X-Men and Fantastic Four from the ever-expanding Marvel Cinematic Universe has been a constant source of frustration for fans who want to see their favorite characters in the comics interact with their favorites in the movies — and of confusion for general audiences who have to deal with multiple versions of Quicksilver. Marvel has to bend over backwards to adapt ambitious crossover storylines like Civil War because they don’t own certain characters. And then there’s the poor Fantastic Four, who have not yet had a good movie — something that could change once Marvel Studios and their stellar track record gets a hold of them.
Could this mean that the Fantastic Four and X-Men enter the MCU? Possibly — and with the convoluted X-Men universe at a crossroads after the stunning Logan and the not-so-stunning Apocalypse, perhaps it’s time to start afresh. Besides, don’t you want to see a grumpy Wolverine bicker and try to lead the Avengers? (Hoai-Tran Bui)
Negative: The R-rated and Audacious Superhero Movie Dies?
Positive: Marvel Can Stop Trying to Make the Inhumans a Thing
The Inhumans push has been underwhelming, to put it lightly. They simply aren’t as interesting as the X-Men and their various series have tended to have uneven launches and vanish before they can find their feet (the recent solo Black Bolt solo series is the exception that proves the rule). It all culminated in that terrible Inhumans TV show no one wants to talk about ever again. The Inhumans aren’t going to happen. They aren’t going to replace the X-Men! (Or the Fantastic Four, who were also shoved to the side in recent years despite being Marvel’s first family.)
With the X-Men movie rights under the same umbrella as the MCU, the need to punish these fictional characters over real world BS comes to an end. The Marvel comic book universe goes back to celebrating all of its characters. And the Inhumans go away for a bit. Comic readers rejoice! (Jacob Hall)
Negative: We Could Lose Edgier, More Mature TV Shows
While specific details are still not a hundred percent clear, early reports suggest that television brands like FX and FXX would be transferred over to Disney in the sale as well. Assuming Disney doesn’t let those branches operate independently and completely free of any corporate oversight, that could result in a number of possible things happening: Disney could move executives from current departments into positions of power overseeing those divisions, which may result in those channels producing less of the brazen and edgy TV shows for which those networks are known. I find it hard to believe a family-friendly company like Disney would be okay with something as twisted as American Horror Story on one of its networks. (Ben Pearson)
Unclear: Disney Would Gain Majority Ownership of Hulu
But with revenues over a billion dollars, does Disney want to pull their content out of the ad and subscription supported service? It’s also possible that Disney would want to keep their latest network shows on Hulu while keeping their older seasons and movies for the more binge-worthy premium service. (Peter Sciretta)
Disney is planning to launch its own subscription streaming service in 2019, and, as we discussed on a recent episode of /Film Daily, audiences may eventually start to grow tired of subscribing to so many services across multiple platforms as studios continue to branch out and compete with Netflix. A live-action Star Wars TV series that can only be watched with a subscription will help convince people that it’s worth paying a monthly fee, but another thing that will give customers more bang for their buck is the potential addition of hundreds of movies and television shows from Fox’s archives. For audiences still unsure about subscribing to the service in its current form, the notion of being able to stream classics like Cleopatra, All About Eve, The Seven Year Itch, Patton, or The Day The Earth Stood Still just might be enough to move the needle. (Ben Pearson)
Negative: Disney Already Has Too Many Movies to Promote
Negative: Mid-Budget Movies Could Become Even More Endangered
What ever happened to the mid-budget movie? Lower budget independent films are still a reality, but there was a time when even major Hollywood studios would happily finance mid-budget dramas. Those days are over. Instead, the big studios are hell-bent on making films that are as big as humanly possible. Every film is an “event film.” Franchises are king. Disney certainly hasn’t had any interest in financing a mid-budget film in quite some time – and why should they? Their huge tentpole films rake in the cash. Which indicates that when and if Disney absorbs Fox, they’ll have an even bigger line-up of huge spectacle properties to finance.The mid-budget film is barely a reality at this point; when this purchase goes through, I have a feeling it will become completely extinct. In an interview with Flavorwire, filmmaker Susan Seidelman rightfully bemoaned the death of the mid-budget film: “You could make movies in the ten-to-20-million-dollar budget range…They didn’t have to be huge blockbusters. They could be more adult-oriented, they didn’t have to appeal to absolutely everyone in the world, and if it’s good work then the studio was happy with making a good profit, but it was a different model… And I think over the years, what happened is that things have gotten really polarized. To studios now, to make a million dollars isn’t a big deal — you have to make a billion dollars, right? They have to appeal to every demographic in every part of the world, so to make a $20 million movie that makes $60 million, why put their money there?“As a result, smaller, more personal, more adult-oriented fare has gone the way of the dodo, or been relegated to limited platform releases that receive 1/10th of the attention that a superhero film might. This is depressing, and even if you’re a fan of superhero films (and there’s certainly nothing wrong with that), this is troubling. There’s more to movies than just blockbusters, folks. At least, there used to be. (Chris Evangelista)
Positive: Disney Would Finally Own Full Rights to A New Hope
Negative: What Will Happen to Blue Sky Studios?
Listen, I’m not a fan of Blue Sky Studios or the films they have produced thus far (which mainly consist of the Ice Age and Rio franchises alongside The Peanuts Movie), but what would happen to the Fox-owned animation studio if Disney purchases the company? Would it be run alongside Pixar, Walt Disney Animation Studios, and Disney Toons Studios? Or would it be shut down, leading to many talented animators losing their jobs? The second option feels like a horrifying possibility. (Peter Sciretta)
Positive for Disney: Disney Gets Ownership of Avatar
The acquisition would give Disney the rights to James Cameron’s Avatar, a huge film franchise the company have already incorporated into the Disney parks. Disney has proven itself to be a master of corporate synergy in the past, so actually owning the film rights to their expensive new theme park land, Pandora: The World of Avatar, would be handy. (Peter Sciretta)
Negative for Disney: Disney Gets Ownership of Properties Already in Competing Theme Parks
Speaking of theme parks… While Disney fully owning Avatar in the parks and on the big screen would benefit both divisions, they would also be acquiring the rights to film and TV projects, like the The Simpsons, that already have deals in competitor’s theme parks, like Universal Studios. This would not be a first for Disney, as their acquisition of Marvel excluded the theme park rights to most Marvel superheroes east of the Mississippi. The result is that Universal has a theme park land and costumed characters based on Disney properties and Disney has less control of their ecosystem. (Peter Sciretta)
While Disney fully owning Avatar in the parks and on the big screen would benefit both divisions, they would also be acquiring the rights to film and TV projects, like the The Simpsons, that already have deals in competitor’s theme parks, like Universal Studios. This would not be a first for Disney, as their acquisition of Marvel excluded the theme park rights to most Marvel superheroes east of the Mississippi. The result is that Universal has a theme park land and costumed characters based on Disney properties and Disney has less control of their ecosystem. (Peter Sciretta)
Negative: A piece of Hollywood History Gets Swallowed and Possibly Spit Out in A Corporate Merger
Disney could let it all stand as is. It could continue operating as business-as-usual. But it wouldn’t be the same. Even before we get to the business ramifications, the nostalgic in me, the person who loves diving into sordid tales of film industry history, would be sad to see an institution like this get all-but-shuttered. (Jacob Hall)
Positive: Disney’s Recent Trend Toward Diversity Gets More Powerful
Negative:Disney is One Step Closer to a Movie Monopoly
Monopolies are never a good idea, and a monopoly in the movie industry not only has unsettling implications for Disney’s heavy focus on big-budget films (if you thought mid-budget movies were dead now…), but also for how Disney will wield that power. Disney attacked the LA Times for the publication’s investigation into the company’s business dealings in its Anaheim, Calif. theme parks, blacklisting LA Times critics out from all screenings of Disney films. John Lasseter thrived for years in a system that aided his sexual harassment of female employees. Disney strong-armed theaters into giving the company 65% of ticket sales for surefire blockbuster hit Star Wars: The Last Jedi — a higher percentage than studios have ever demanded. Severe backlash to these power moves caused Disney to walk back, but once the conglomerate has a monopoly over one third of the movie industry, what else could the company be capable of? (Hoai-Tran Bui)
