21st Century Fox has been holding talks to sell most of the company to Disney

[MsMarvelDuckie]

Why not? If they can digitally de-age Nick Fury (who is arguably older) for Captain Marvel, they can do the same for Logan. And Logan ages slower, so it wouldn't even be a problem. Hugh is still fit and healthy, so it's not like he's a geriatric Wolverine or anything. He COULD still do the part easily, if he wants to.

[Andrew NDB]

Why not? If they can digitally de-age Nick Fury (who is arguably older) for Captain Marvel, they can do the same for Logan. And Logan ages slower, so it wouldn't even be a problem. Hugh is still fit and healthy, so it's not like he's a geriatric Wolverine or anything. He COULD still do the part easily, if he wants to.

It's not up to him and they don't want him. And I'm pretty sure digitally de-aging Jackman in everything ever to come, as he continues to get older and older, is simply not an option.

[MsMarvelDuckie]

If they don't want him, that's one thing. My POINT was that he can still play the role just fine if he and they want that. (And do we even know for certain they don't? His previous contract was with Fox, but just because they haven't offered to renew doesn't mean Disney can't ask him to. Even for cameos, small roles, or as Old Man Logan in future movies.) And they don't have to do it indefinitely, but they CAN. Jackson said in a nagazine interview that they brought him back to the digital "enhancement" chair multiple times to get every possible facial expresion they could, and used footage from older movies to do the de-aging. So they could, according to him, paste his face onto anyone, and keep doing that indefinitely, whether he was there or not! If he can be digitized, so can Jackman....

[snake]

Sure, he can play it now, but Marvel is looking for guys to carry these next ten years of films. Who knows, Hugh Jackman might not want to play the character anymore, or literally can't. Yeah, it's going to be hard to find someone who can "be" Wolverine like he could, but it's necessary for them to do that. They need more younger guys like Holland to be involved in the franchise. Jackman's going to be 60, ten years from now.

[MsMarvelDuckie]

Yeah, I know. I was just pointing out that they could, covnceivably, just do a bunch of mo-cap renders of his face, and plaster it onto some younger guy's body, if they really wanted to. Pretty much what Samuel L. Jackson was saying. He wouldn't even have to physically BE there- just do his lines and pick up his check!

Not saying they will do that, but it's a possibility to consider....

[sdp]

What exactly is the difference between a merger and an acquisition?

It's a complicated answer but here's a quick explanation. An acquisition means a company bought the other whether they wanted or not. A merger means both companies are (usually) ok with it and together they become a new company rather than one absorbing the other. This doesn't mean it's a "real" merger, since one company is clearly in control and the other one is being absorbed.

Without being an entertainment lawyer, I'm quite sure that the amount of job loss, job consolidation, debt and debt management are vastly different for a "merger" vs. an "acquisition".

A lot of the differences are likely semantic but some of them are most likely very specific.

not really, most of those are going to be about the same (i.e. bad for the company that was bought or merged with the bigger entity)

[Andrew NDB]

It's a complicated answer but here's a quick explanation. An acquisition means a company bought the other whether they wanted or not. A merger means both companies are (usually) ok with it and together they become a new company rather than one absorbing the other. This doesn't mean it's a "real" merger, since one company is clearly in control and the other one is being absorbed.

And it's only a partial absorption. Fox News continues being its own thing, untethered to Disney. They've had to release interests in Fox Sports to complete the deal, etc..

[AquaParade]

The only way I can see Hugh Jackman entering the MCU is as Old Man Logan, from another timeline, years after they've introduced us to their new MCU Wolverine, and gotten us comfortable with him. You don't want them being compared right off the bat.

The caveat being that they would have to start casting Wolverine asap, so they have time to build him up while Hugh is still willing. Remember that Hugh did once say he'd be open to playing more Wolverine in the MCU. I believe that was before the finality of Logan, but there are other things to consider, such as money, re-ignited passion, or a script that grabs his attention.

For those that don't know, Kevin Feige worked as an assistant on the set of the original X-Men film, and famously kept trying to prop Logan's hair up higher and higher, to match the comicbook look. It's very possible Kevin would be open to treating that film as taking place in an alternate dimension within the MCU, given his history with the franchise. It could be a very cool route to go, especially on a meta-narrative level, bringing his comicbook film career full circle.

Not saying I'd bet on it, but these are the possibilities in my mind.

[Papenbrook]

March 20th, at 12:02 AM, the deal will be 100% closed:

https://movieweb.com/disney-fox-deal-closing-march/?fbclid=IwAR2VXzqB2YWFkrE_etAURl91kFXnuKzae_HCIE8o JSRp8NV3QFbkT3y2jxE

That's ... so sad.

For so many reasons ...

[Leo656]

I just can't wait for them to finally cast a new Wolverine, so they can do a great job and everybody can finally move on and stop insisting that Hugh Jackman is some irreplaceable God-King.

He did fine, but he's a good foot too tall and way too wiry. He never completely fit the role, and was simply the best part of a very mixed bag of a movie universe. If anybody else had put half the effort into their X-Men roles as he did, instead of everyone standing around looking bored half the time, people wouldn't fawn so much.

Again, he was Perfectly Fine in the end, but I'm over it. Looking forward to seeing who takes over the part; with the existing MCU track record, it's easy to expect that if nothing else they'll bear a closer physical resemblance to the character, and probably, FINALLY get to wear an actual costume.

Only problem is, the best possible choice is already hung up playing Venom. But I'm sure they'll find someone, and I'm sure they'll do fine.

[Andrew NDB]

He needs fake fangs, too. Don't forget the fangs.

[AquaParade]

I have to say, my main concern going forward with the MCU, above everything else, is "how will they handle Wolverine's costume"? It means that much to me. I'm not saying it needs to be 100% replicated, but I am just dying to see something that captures the spirit of the comicbook look. Though I'm truly unsure that is even possible.

I like the Alex Ross Wolverine design, but I imagine them going in a more tech-heavy direction. Sure he can heal quickly, but maybe he still needs some type of armor. Maybe they could justify that.
Otherwise, why is he wearing the costume? He's never been one to hide his identity. How do we feel about that anyway?

I don't know. Maybe it's a silly thing to wish for, and maybe it would look absolutely ridiculous, in any form, up on the big screen. I have a lot of thoughts about it.

Leo, I still hold out a sliver of hope that Tom Hardy would still be willing to play Wolverine, despite the whole Venom gig he has going on. Wolverine seems like a really hard character to cast. Hugh Jackman is did a phenomenal job, but even he wasn't perfect for the role. Tom could probably pull it off wonderfully.

Alex Ross Wolverine design, for reference:
http://img4.imagetitan.com/img4/small/19/19_wolverinerosswizard.jpg (http://img4.imagetitan.com/img.php?image=19_wolverinerosswizard.jpg)

Yeah, this probably wouldn't work in the MCU, on second thought. Sure is cool though.

[Andrew NDB]

I have to say, my main concern going forward with the MCU, above everything else, is "how will they handle Wolverine's costume"? It means that much to me. I'm not saying it needs to be 100% replicated, but I am just dying to see something that captures the spirit of the comicbook look. Though I'm truly unsure that is even possible.


I'd bet the farm we'll see Wolvie in a costume this time. Anyone expecting "more of the same" (i.e. Singerverse Wolvie) in MCU Wolvie is kidding themselves.

We're going to get what that "The Wolverine" deleted scene promised and much more.

That's ... so sad.

For so many reasons ...

https://media.giphy.com/media/3o7TKuzUs0998LtxIc/giphy.gif

https://thumbs.gfycat.com/ImpracticalWearyGosling-size_restricted.gif

https://media.tenor.com/images/1c37915cac522190162ee06e6ab23fd2/tenor.gif

[AquaParade]

I'd bet the farm we'll see Wolvie in a costume this time. Anyone expecting "more of the same" (i.e. Singerverse Wolvie) in MCU Wolvie is kidding themselves.

We're going to get what that "The Wolverine" deleted scene promised and much more.



https://media.giphy.com/media/3o7TKuzUs0998LtxIc/giphy.gif

https://thumbs.gfycat.com/ImpracticalWearyGosling-size_restricted.gif

https://media.tenor.com/images/1c37915cac522190162ee06e6ab23fd2/tenor.gif

I completely believe Kevin Feige wants to do the costume, faithfully. As well as the need to distance themselves from the previous universe.

My only concern is how they will do it. I can't think of a more challenging costume to adapt to the big screen. It looks absolutely stellar in the comics, but we all know film is a different medium. I can't wait to see what they come up with.

[Andrew NDB]

I completely believe Kevin Feige wants to do the costume, faithfully. As well as the need to distance themselves from the previous universe.

My only concern is how they will do it. I can't think of a more challenging costume to adapt to the big screen. It looks absolutely stellar in the comics, but we all know film is a different medium. I can't wait to see what they come up with.

The only oddity is the mask. "The Wolverine" deleted scene seemed to find a way to make it work... they just never bothered to either include the scene in the movie, or to ever actually put it on him.

https://cdn3.movieweb.com/i/article/WNyg9JxMz40A4OyP36nPieDCGYmnlk/798:50/Logan-Movie-Why-No-Yellow-Wolverine-Costume.jpg

[AquaParade]

The only oddity is the mask. "The Wolverine" deleted scene seemed to find a way to make it work... they just never bothered to either include the scene in the movie, or to actually put it on him.

https://cdn3.movieweb.com/i/article/WNyg9JxMz40A4OyP36nPieDCGYmnlk/798:50/Logan-Movie-Why-No-Yellow-Wolverine-Costume.jpg

Right, the mask is the challenging part. Personally, if they did an outstanding job on the rest of the costume, I suppose I could live without the mask. At least the silhouette could still be there, with the hair standing in for the pointy ears.

Because, while the mask does look awesome in that deleted scene, it may have looked goofy as hell if/when they tried putting it on Hugh's face. It may need lenses. And it still sort of needs an in-universe explanation if it's going to be in the MCU. Even Spidey doesn't wear plain old spandex, just because, anymore. You can bet a guy like Logan will need a good reason to put a mask on. Like I said above, they could probably justify it as an identity-issue, or possibly something he wears for protection. Though both would essentially be new wrinkles to the character.
Somehow, we don't question it in the comics, quite as much, but in the MCU we will.


Logan aside, there are still quite a few X-Men characters that I'm surprised Fox never got to on the big screen. I'm dying to see characters like Xorn, Glob, and Fantomex in a movie, so hopefully Marvel gives us a lot of new mutants to go along with the classics.

Another cool idea, if they do shoehorn the mutants in the MCU as "always having been there", by means of Universe-tampering-shenanigans or just a plain ol' retcon, then It'd be very cool to give us the classic "Uncanny X-Men" lineup for modern times, and flashback to the original X-Men lineup, decades back.

All in all, I have a lot of hopes and dreams for the MCU X-Men films. I'd say they are my most anticipated films, but it's sort of hard to at this point, when there is nothing set in stone.

[Papenbrook]

The consequence of job/livelihood loss is never something to celebrate.

As the entertainment industry becomes more oligarchal, there will be even fewer people who'll get to decide what's best for many franchises/ properties. Then, as nepotism/cronyism seeps into the job markets, any many things will start to become single-minded. Prospects will vary less and less, until there is only one option.

This should scare everyone.

[snake]

Hugh Jackman is a multimillionare, you retard.

[Papenbrook]

I'm talking about the acquisition in general, snake.

[snake]

Then you’d be glad to know that it’s an acquisition, and nothing is going to happen to Fox employees. All of their studios and such are still opened and will keep producing content. Disney is just going to own the Fox brand overall.

[Papenbrook]

Um, no.

- Some properties will either lay dormant indefinitely or shut down completely.
- Thousands of individuals will be layed off.
- In turn, a select few will be able to control the direction of various properties.
- The regulations that were set up within each company will become far more unregulated.
- Nepotism/Cronyism will increase without any impunity.
- Media will be contained in one space.
- Finally, Rupert Murdoch will get the controlling share of stock.

I'm sensing a crash of some sort.

[Warhorse]

Hugh Jackman is 50 years old (which surprised me, I thought he was still in his 40's), and by the time Marvel's first X-men movie comes out he'll be anywhere from 52-55. They're not going to have an Old Man Wolverine alongside a rebooted X-men films.

So what if he's fifty. So is Tom Cruise and he shows no signs of slowing down with his Mission Impossible movies.

[Warhorse]

That's ... so sad.

For so many reasons ...

Why? Because you know what is going to be happening to your beloved Carol Danvers when the X-Men get into the picture? :lol:

[Papenbrook]

Why? Because you know what is going to be happening to your beloved Carol Danvers when the X-Men get into the picture? :lol:


Carol Danvers will remain in the MCU, completely all and well. Her film will go on to gross over a billion, while defeating ALL filthy fanboys in the process.

NO ONE can stop that.

[Autbot_Benz]

Carol Danvers will remain in the MUC, completely all and well. Her film will go on to gross over a billion, while defeating ALL filthy fanboys in the process.

NO ONE can stop that.

Rouge gets her powers from stealing them from Captain Marvel so Deal with that. :roll:

Captain Marvel won't gross over a billion dollars. that is an Feminist/SJW's fever dream.

None of the MCU Movies have hit 1 billion yet and I doubt Captain Mehvel will be the one to do it

[Galactus]

Why? Because you know what is going to be happening to your beloved Carol Danvers when the X-Men get into the picture? :lol:

Why do people think that's going to happen?

They've already played the card with Carol Danvers losing her memories.

True, this has happened twice in the comics since some people thought her struggling with amnesia made her compelling I can't see the movies doing it twice.

Even if they were to do it this wouldn't be like the X-Men cartoon were Carol would be in a coma indefinitely. That wouldn't happen especially to a character this profitable.

Rouge gets her powers from stealing them from Captain Marvel so Deal with that. :roll:

She's a mutant, she was born with her powers of absorbing peoples memories and abilities as well as whatever powers they possess.

The extra powers (and sense of heroism) she absorbed from Carol but there's long been a debate whether she is a more compelling character with or without them and has spent much of the 2000s without. The MCU version could easily be done without Carol's powers.

There's also other options. After all in the comics she recently got back the strength and flight abilities by absorbing Wonder Man into her, they don't have to come from Carol.

But if you're that eager to follow the comics you can always have Carol joining the X-Men and becoming an even more powerful hero.

[Andrew NDB]

She's a mutant, she was born with her powers of absorbing peoples memories and abilities as well as whatever powers they possess.

The extra powers (and sense of heroism) she absorbed from Carol but there's long been a debate whether she is a more compelling character with or without them and has spent much of the 2000s without. The MCU version could easily be done without Carol's powers.

People have been wanting to f***ing see Rogue fly in the movies for 20 years. We're gonna get our wish. This is going to be the "un-grounded" X-Men we've been waiting for.

And while Rogue probably will get her powers from Carol, Carol won't lose them at the same time. Like, Rogue will just absorb some of that lightspeed drive juice from her... not all of it. Maybe it'll even serve to balance out Carol's powers, cutting her down a notch with the total omnipotence stuff.

[Redeemer]

Carol Danvers will remain in the MUC, completely all and well. Her film will go on to gross over a billion, while defeating ALL filthy fanboys in the process.

NO ONE can stop that.

You are starting to come off as extremely sexiest :lol:

I agree I don't think they will kill off Carol Danvers anytime soon. It will take a while for them to reboot the x-men franchise and by then Carol Danvers will have a couple movies under her belt and then they can kill her off.

[raph27]

Captain Marvel won't gross over a billion dollars. that is an Feminist/SJW's fever dream.

None of the MCU Movies have hit 1 billion yet and I doubt Captain Mehvel will be the one to do it

Are you talking domestic or worldwide? Because six MCU movies have made over a billion, bud. I don't think it's too unlikely for Captain Marvel to make it.

[snake]

Um, no.

- Some properties will either lay dormant indefinitely or shut down completely.
- Thousands of individuals will be layed off.
- In turn, a select few will be able to control the direction of various properties.
- The regulations that were set up within each company will become far more unregulated.
- Nepotism/Cronyism will increase without any impunity.
- Media will be contained in one space.
- Finally, Rupert Murdoch will get the controlling share of stock.

I'm sensing a crash of some sort.

And you know all of this for certain how?

[Andrew NDB]

And you know all of this for certain how?

Well... she isn't necessarily wrong.

https://www.ibtimes.com/disney-fox-layoffs-10000-may-lose-jobs-after-merger-2760642

[snake]

Holy sh*t, that’s terrible. They’re literally presenting lay-offs as a positive for investors. Jesus christ, these people are f*cked in the head, and the world would literally be a better place without Disney.

[Andrew NDB]

It's true... for every Simon Kinberg being shown the door, there are 10 good people being shown out, too. I suspect most will land on their feet, though.

Though consider... had Fox been knocking it out of the park with blockbuster hits the past few years... they wouldn't be in this situation.

Edit: and guaranteed, as part of the big negotiations you can be damn sure they assured anyone laid off as a result of this merger will receive the mothers of all severance packages. More than you or I would ever see working some crummy job.

[Leo656]

These things are always messy. I was a huge WCW fan back when the AOL/Time Warner merger went down, so I was paying close attention to it since I knew it would affect WCW significantly, and holy sh*t was THAT a disaster for literally everyone involved. Except AOL, I guess. But the entire Turner organization from top to bottom was turned inside-out, and literally overnight Ted Turner went from being one of the most powerful men in the media industry to "A Very Rich Nobody With No Power Whatsoever".

On paper, it looked like a huge win/win for everyone, but really, AOL just went in and gutted all the Time Warner companies and left everything a wreck. Pretty much everyone involved in the deal was regretting it within two years,. Fast forward 20 years and none of the companies involved have ever really recovered (and WCW, which was one of the biggest Turner/Time Warner companies, was shut down and sold off by AOL in about one or two years after the merger).

The WCW shutdown was very ironic, because for over a year leading up to the merger, everyone from Turner was publicly frothing and jubilant about being welcomed into the largest multimedia corporation in the world. The thinking was, with a huge corporation like AOL and a ton more money behind them, they'd grow to be bigger than ever before. But they underestimated AOL's "bottom line" business culture, and instead AOL sh*tcanned the company the second it stopped turning a profit. After all that hype, it was like the company had booked its own suicide. "Hooray for AOL! Wait... what do you mean we're all out of a job?!" Nobody expected it, but in hindsight, everyone agrees that they should have seen it coming.

Really, the only people who "win" when these things happen are the guys at the very top of the food chain. Everyone else gets a hot poker in the ass and a shove out the door.

[Prowler]

These things are always messy. I was a huge WCW fan back when the AOL/Time Warner merger went down, so I was paying close attention to it since I knew it would affect WCW significantly, and holy sh*t was THAT a disaster for literally everyone involved. Except AOL, I guess. But the entire Turner organization from top to bottom was turned inside-out, and literally overnight Ted Turner went from being one of the most powerful men in the media industry to "A Very Rich Nobody With No Power Whatsoever".

On paper, it looked like a huge win/win for everyone, but really, AOL just went in and gutted all the Time Warner companies and left everything a wreck. Pretty much everyone involved in the deal was regretting it within two years,. Fast forward 20 years and none of the companies involved have ever really recovered (and WCW, which was one of the biggest Turner/Time Warner companies, was shut down and sold off by AOL in about one or two years after the merger).

The WCW shutdown was very ironic, because for over a year leading up to the merger, everyone from Turner was publicly frothing and jubilant about being welcomed into the largest multimedia corporation in the world. The thinking was, with a huge corporation like AOL and a ton more money behind them, they'd grow to be bigger than ever before. But they underestimated AOL's "bottom line" business culture, and instead AOL sh*tcanned the company the second it stopped turning a profit. After all that hype, it was like the company had booked its own suicide. "Hooray for AOL! Wait... what do you mean we're all out of a job?!" Nobody expected it, but in hindsight, everyone agrees that they should have seen it coming.

Really, the only people who "win" when these things happen are the guys at the very top of the food chain. Everyone else gets a hot poker in the ass and a shove out the door.
How did Ted Turner allow them to screw him over, though? Was he not part of their clique or plans or whatever and thus had to take the fall?

[sdp]

A merger is just another way of saying acquisition really, there are many differences but at the end of the day you have one company who controls the other and of course there's going to be tons of lay-offs, Fox as you know it is dead, the company is not going to be allowed to be "itself" no matter how much you think that. Fox has and will never be in the same level as Disney for this to have ever happened even when Fox was at its most worth and Disney at its least worth.

As far as Rogue, I do think she's more interesting without Miss Marvel's powers, but come on, you have both characters set up, we already had classic Rogue for all this time, it's time to do something different with the characters. Bring 90s Rogue back, full southern 'tude, and all.

[Leo656]

How did Ted Turner allow them to screw him over, though? Was he not part of their clique or plans or whatever and thus had to take the fall?

He was outgunned, basically. He THOUGHT he was buying himself a seat at the "Big Kids' Table", but instead he went from being a big fish in a medium-sized pond to a tiny little minnow.

I'd have to look it up in one of the books I have that goes into detail about the whole ordeal, but as one person who was there put it, "Within a week of AOL coming in, they moved Ted's office to a smaller one down the hall, and overnight, his phone stopped ringing." He went from being The Boss to just another peon. He almost killed himself, the entire debacle was so devastating. He built this huge multimedia empire and figured he was graduating to the top of the upper crust, but got fast-talked and swindled by the AOL guys.

One of Ted's problems was, he had a big heart, and regularly allowed several of his businesses to operate at a huge loss, just to keep people employed. Like WCW. He openly proclaimed that he never made a dime on wrestling - WCW only ever turned a profit in four out of the dozen or so years it was Turner-owned and operated; it generally lost tens of millions per year - but he literally built his cable TV empire by running Crockett's NWA broadcasts on TBS in the 80s, so he kept the company running out of loyalty more than interest. He was a very hands-off boss, by all accounts; he hardly got involved with the companies he ran, and as long as CNN and the Atlanta Braves kept making money for the corporation as a whole, he never cared if a few companies were bleeding out. He'd always come out way ahead, he figured.

AOL didn't play like that. They went in and gutted EVERY single AOL/Turner/Time Warner company that had any red ink, and they didn't even consult him about it. Ted Turner found out about WCW being sold to Vince McMahon when he read about it in the newspaper; to this day, he insists that if he had his way, he'd still be running it. But nobody asked and he wasn't informed. That's how far he fell down the ladder, that fast.

He tried to punch way above his weight class and got manhandled, is essentially what happened. Eventually a bunch of stuff got un-merged from AOL anyway, so it's not like anyone actually came out a winner in that particular debacle. A bunch of money got pushed around, a ton of people lost their jobs, and in the end, everyone involved came out a big loser. But it sounded like a great deal at the time!

Everyone on both sides of the AOL/Time Warner merger came to regret it, years later. We can only wait and see how this Disney/Fox situation plays out. But in the end, it really doesn't benefit anyone except the ones in the ivory towers. We're one step closer to a Disney monopoly (and they already own controlling interest in almost everything important), and a bunch of people are going to be looking for work.

Sure, the MCU will be a little cleaner and neater, but... that's a very shiny carrot to distract everyone from the mugging happening Just Over There that they don't want you to notice.

[sdp]

AOL Time Warner is a whole different beast than this and not comparable, there you had a company that should've been an acquisition but instead they decided to take the name right before the .com crash. Ted Turner doesn't have that big of a role in that story as you make it out to be. Disney / Fox is nothing like it and won't see any changes to how Disney is run but you will indeed see differences in the Fox related brands as they rebrand. They won't kill Fox but they'll want to spin it into their own "adult" Disney brand and keep it separate enough like ESPN for example.

[Prowler]

He was outgunned, basically. He THOUGHT he was buying himself a seat at the "Big Kids' Table", but instead he went from being a big fish in a medium-sized pond to a tiny little minnow.

I'd have to look it up in one of the books I have that goes into detail about the whole ordeal, but as one person who was there put it, "Within a week of AOL coming in, they moved Ted's office to a smaller one down the hall, and overnight, his phone stopped ringing." He went from being The Boss to just another peon. He almost killed himself, the entire debacle was so devastating. He built this huge multimedia empire and figured he was graduating to the top of the upper crust, but got fast-talked and swindled by the AOL guys.

One of Ted's problems was, he had a big heart, and regularly allowed several of his businesses to operate at a huge loss, just to keep people employed. Like WCW. He openly proclaimed that he never made a dime on wrestling - WCW only ever turned a profit in four out of the dozen or so years it was Turner-owned and operated; it generally lost tens of millions per year - but he literally built his cable TV empire by running Crockett's NWA broadcasts on TBS in the 80s, so he kept the company running out of loyalty more than interest. He was a very hands-off boss, by all accounts; he hardly got involved with the companies he ran, and as long as CNN and the Atlanta Braves kept making money for the corporation as a whole, he never cared if a few companies were bleeding out. He'd always come out way ahead, he figured.

AOL didn't play like that. They went in and gutted EVERY single AOL/Turner/Time Warner company that had any red ink, and they didn't even consult him about it. Ted Turner found out about WCW being sold to Vince McMahon when he read about it in the newspaper; to this day, he insists that if he had his way, he'd still be running it. But nobody asked and he wasn't informed. That's how far he fell down the ladder, that fast.

He tried to punch way above his weight class and got manhandled, is essentially what happened. Eventually a bunch of stuff got un-merged from AOL anyway, so it's not like anyone actually came out a winner in that particular debacle. A bunch of money got pushed around, a ton of people lost their jobs, and in the end, everyone involved came out a big loser. But it sounded like a great deal at the time!

Everyone on both sides of the AOL/Time Warner merger came to regret it, years later. We can only wait and see how this Disney/Fox situation plays out. But in the end, it really doesn't benefit anyone except the ones in the ivory towers. We're one step closer to a Disney monopoly (and they already own controlling interest in almost everything important), and a bunch of people are going to be looking for work.

Sure, the MCU will be a little cleaner and neater, but... that's a very shiny carrot to distract everyone from the mugging happening Just Over There that they don't want you to notice.
Sounds like he was too nice for a billionaire and not ruthless enough. Also, apparently he didn't even take offence to those stupid Billionaire Ted skits Vince aired on Raw back in like 1996 for a bit. Or at least I recall reading that somewhere. Could just be another internet rumor. Surprised Vince risked getting a lawsuit by doing that.

Yeah, WCW was a huge money sinker. A lot of guys complained about working there, but at least they were making good money there.

[Andrew NDB]

As far as Rogue, I do think she's more interesting without Miss Marvel's powers, but come on, you have both characters set up, we already had classic Rogue for all this time, it's time to do something different with the characters. Bring 90s Rogue back, full southern 'tude, and all.

She'll have a southern 'tude for sure. But we should probably brace for the possibility that she'll be African American, or mixed, or of Latin descent (not upbringing).

[Leo656]

Ted Turner doesn't have that big of a role in that story as you make it out to be.

He wasn't the star of the story, no, but his angle is the one I'm most intimately familiar with; I paid less attention to the rest of it at the time as it didn't affect me. The AOL/Time Warner merger only affected me as a WCW fan and someone who watched a lot of Turner programming on cable. Likewise, the books I own and have read about it mostly deal with wrestling, and therefore only discuss the specifics of the merger as pertains to how it affected the Turner organization directly. They really don't go into how companies like WB studios or Time Life were affected by it, because they'd have no reason to. So I can't really speak to those things.

I just know that everyone on either side ended up with a bad case of heartburn and wished the deal hadn't gone through. You're right, Disney won't be negatively affected too much by all of this - "Too big to fail" describes them perfectly at this point - but I wager Fox is jolly well f*cked.

I'm supremely concerned about the fate of Family Guy. On one hand, Disney might notice that it's the only thing on Fox anyone watches, and decide to leave well enough alone. On the other hand... literally everything about the show. So I'm nervous.

[Prowler]

He wasn't the star of the story, no, but his angle is the one I'm most intimately familiar with; I paid less attention to the rest of it at the time as it didn't affect me. The AOL/Time Warner merger only affected me as a WCW fan and someone who watched a lot of Turner programming on cable. Likewise, the books I own and have read about it mostly deal with wrestling, and therefore only discuss the specifics of the merger as pertains to how it affected the Turner organization directly. They really don't go into how companies like WB studios or Time Life were affected by it, because they'd have no reason to. So I can't really speak to those things.

I just know that everyone on either side ended up with a bad case of heartburn and wished the deal hadn't gone through. You're right, Disney won't be negatively affected too much by all of this - "Too big to fail" describes them perfectly at this point - but I wager Fox is jolly well f*cked.

I'm supremely concerned about the fate of Family Guy. On one hand, Disney might notice that it's the only thing on Fox anyone watches, and decide to leave well enough alone. On the other hand... literally everything about the show. So I'm nervous.
Family Guy will have to end at some point. I'm not a huge fan of the show anyway.

I liked Family Guy better when I was a teenager. Dunno if it's necessarily because I was more into that type of humour or if it's because Family Guy only began airing in my country around 2006-2007, so by the time its first seasons were airing here I was already 16 years old. The show seems to have changed a bit throughout history. Stewie and Brian were slighly different characters in the earlier seasons, for instance.

[Leo656]

I only find "humor" funny if it's extremely mean-spirited and distasteful. So I really don't want to live in a world without Family Guy ever again.

[Prowler]

I only find "humor" funny if it's extremely mean-spirited and distasteful. So I really don't want to live in a world without Family Guy ever again.

Humour is a tough art and everyone has their preferences. Family Guy can be a bit too over the top and in your face to me at times, but then again I like Archer :lol:. Also, I love Seinfeld and Curb Your Enthusiasm, even if the characters in those shows are assholes :lol:

I think Family Guy is fine in small doses. But maybe its gag formula/format just isn't really my type. I find it a lot easier to remember full episodes from The Simpsons and South Park than Family Guy. I'm better at remembering FG gags, but often have trouble placing them in time and place, since a ton of those gags aren't related to the plot of the episode.

[Leo656]

Yeah, I agree with that. I can quote the show quite easily but I'd have a hard time placing where the bits came from.

I don't take points off for that, though. It's a "gag-a-minute" show, not a "plot" show. The plot is only there to facilitate the shock humor. The point of the show isn't to tell stories, the point is to trick people into laughing at things they'd be scared to ever say out loud but are probably thinking anyway. Sometimes the stories are also good but they don't really have to be. It's more like Aqua Teen than Simpsons. I'm okay with that.

[Prowler]

Yeah, I agree with that. I can quote the show quite easily but I'd have a hard time placing where the bits came from.

I don't take points off for that, though. It's a "gag-a-minute" show, not a "plot" show. The plot is only there to facilitate the shock humor. The point of the show isn't to tell stories, the point is to trick people into laughing at things they'd be scared to ever say out loud but are probably thinking anyway. Sometimes the stories are also good but they don't really have to be. It's more like Aqua Teen than Simpsons. I'm okay with that.
Fair enough.

Anyway, I remember back in the day some Simpsons fans online arguing that Family Guy was a ripoff of The Simpsons. I've never thought that. Other than both shows being made by Fox and the main character being a stupid fat guy with a wife and 3 kids, I don't see any other similarities between both shows.

[Leo656]

Well, the cross-over episode went ahead and made a big deal out of it, while also pointing out that they're both pretty much a rip-off of The Flintstones. :lol: So I don't think they're shy about being influenced. Everything's derivative of something else to some degree, it's not a huge deal.

[Prowler]

Well, the cross-over episode went ahead and made a big deal out of it, while also pointing out that they're both pretty much a rip-off of The Flintstones. :lol: So I don't think they're shy about being influenced. Everything's derivative of something else to some degree, it's not a huge deal.
I was reading such arguments back in 2007 already, though. Way before that episode came out. Also, ripoff of The Flinstones? wat

Well, they're both Fox shows, so it's not that strange that there's a few core similarities. And it makes sense for The Simpsons to be a very influential cartoon sitcom. But the interactions and the format of both shows is quite different. Both of them have shows their own identity and offer the viewer a different experience.

[neatoman]

Anybody thinking Spider-Man FFH could get some hasty reshoots to include X-Men characters?

[Leo656]

Nah, but I wouldn't be shocked if they cobbled something together for Endgame.

While part of the MCU, the Spider-Man movie is gonna be more self-contained, so if they wanted to do something to shout, "X-Men are Coming!", they'd more likely do it in the "Big MCU Movie". It would just fit better and make more sense.

Any Spider-Man stingers are most likely going to set up the next Spider-Man movie rather than the next arc in the MCU. That's what I think.

[Andrew NDB]

Any Spider-Man stingers are most likely going to set up the next Spider-Man movie rather than the next arc in the MCU. That's what I think.

Or the Sony spinoff stuff, like Sinister Six and Morbius and all that. In fact yeah, good odds there will be a Jared Leto as Morbius cameo at the end, since that's filming and all.

[AquaParade]

Or the Sony spinoff stuff, like Sinister Six and Morbius and all that. In fact yeah, good odds there will be a Jared Leto as Morbius cameo at the end, since that's filming and all.

At the end of Far From Home?
Not a chance. Marvel wouldn’t want any confusion regarding which universe Far From Home is set in.

Excuse me if I’m misinterpreting your post.

[snake]

Far From Home isn't set in the MCU, but the splinter universe where Venom is set.

[AquaParade]

Far From Home isn't set in the MCU, but the splinter universe where Venom is set.

Far From Home is set in the MCU. Just like Homecoming was.

[snake]

What proof have you?

[Galactus]

What proof have you?

The aftermath of the battle of New York.

Seeing the battle Leipzig from Captain America: Civil War from Peter's perspective.

Happy Hogan, Pepper Potts and Tony Stark/Iron Man are supporting characters.

Captain America cameos several times in the movie.

References to Hulk, Black Widow and Thor as existing in the Spider-Man universe.

Nick Fury is in the sequel.

[snake]

Of course, Homecoming is in the MCU. There's no proof that FFH is. Nick Fury in the Venom-verse just might happen to look the same as the MCU one.

I'm sort of taking the piss here. Don't feed into it.

[Andrew NDB]

At the end of Far From Home?
Not a chance. Marvel wouldn’t want any confusion regarding which universe Far From Home is set in.

I don't think you're understanding who owns Spider-Man in film, and on whose good graces he's allowed to appear in MCU movies at all.

[AquaParade]

I don't think you're understanding who owns Spider-Man in film, and on whose good graces he's allowed to appear in MCU movies at all.

No, I have a good understanding of that. Fact is, these are separate universes and Marvel would bake that type of understanding into the deal. They don’t want the confusion.

Discussions between Marvel and Sony would outline all sorts of matters relating to this sort of thing, before anything was signed off on. Yes, Sony still owns the character, but that doesn’t make Marvel their bitch.

Bottom line is, there are all sorts of stipulations involved on both sides of the Sony x Marvel deal, that we aren’t privy to. I don’t see this getting passed Marvel Studios in the contract phase.

[Redeemer]

I don't think you're understanding who owns Spider-Man in film, and on whose good graces he's allowed to appear in MCU movies at all.

I don't think you understand that its a contractual obligation :lol:

Aquaparade is correct.

[oldmanwinters]

From the Horse's Mouth:
The Walt Disney Company’s (“Disney”) acquisition of 21CF will become effective at 12:02 a.m. Eastern Time tomorrow, March 20, 2019.

https://www.21cf.com/news/21st-century-fox/2019/21st-century-fox-announces-completion-of-distribution-in-connection-with-disney-acquisition/

[Autbot_Benz]

its done

https://twitter.com/CBR/status/1108021121201463296

21st Century Fox Announces Disney's Acquisition Is Complete https://buff.ly/2FmZat1

[TigerClaw]

These are exciting times. The X-Men are finally coming home. Welcome to the MCU! :)

[Andrew NDB]

UhVjp48U2Oc

[neatoman]

UhVjp48U2Oc

I don't notice any changes...

[Andrew NDB]

I don't notice any changes...

Oh, I was just posting that to post that. There wouldn't even be anything to change in it yet... it's not like they'd stick Fox-Men footage in there.

[Leo656]

These are exciting times. The X-Men are finally coming home. Welcome to the MCU! :)

Yes. Hooray. Now all we need to do is wait ten years or so for Vince McMahon to die before Disney buys WWE and becomes Sole Proprietary Owner Of Everyone's Childhood.

Woo-hoo for monopolies. Freedom of choice isn't good for you anyway.

[oldmanwinters]

Dear Disney, give us X-Men like this!
2rSw4Xl5qfs

[Autbot_Benz]

https://i.imgur.com/Xd5rINi.jpg

[Andrew NDB]

It's OFFICIALLY official now. As of 12:02 AM EST... which was 4 hours ago.

Here we are. Get ready for big stuff.

[Cure]

This is ****ing ******.

[AquaParade]

This is crazy. Five years ago, who would have guessed the MCU could possilby have both the X-Men and Spider-Man included? Madness. It's such a big day for die-hard fans of these characters and worlds.

I don't want to be ignorant to the other aspects of the deal. I know there is more to it than fictional stories, but I'm excited nonetheless.

I do wonder if we will see a lot of content slowly, excruciatingly, funneled out, or if new initiatives like the MCU-Disney+ shows are indeed a big factor in the internal discussion regarding how to keep the content rolling with these characters, despite just how many there are to manage now.

[ZariusTwo]

It really says a lot about the long-term ramifications of this merger when all people give a s*it about is the quip-fest that is the MCU making more cheesy capes*it movies. What happens when people finally tire of that stuff?

[Andrew NDB]

It really says a lot about the long-term ramifications of this merger when all people give a s*it about is the quip-fest that is the MCU making more cheesy capes*it movies. What happens when people finally tire of that stuff?

You mean the "There will be superhero movie fatigue! Soon! Any day now!" kind of stuff? There are no signs of that, despite what a lot of people insist.

[AquaParade]

It really says a lot about the long-term ramifications of this merger when all people give a s*it about is the quip-fest that is the MCU making more cheesy capes*it movies. What happens when people finally tire of that stuff?

I'm not really sure what your point is. People are arguably most excited for the ramifications to the MCU, sure. But what are you saying? That once the public gets over the MCU, the whole thing will be revealed to be a huge mistake?...Because...Why?

I guess I'm just not seeing the overall picture here. They obtained lots of other valuable properties as well. Who knows, maybe they can even turn The Simpsons around, with the right creative team.

[neatoman]

How far is Disney from being able to do a serious adaptation of the Ultimate Showdown of Ultimate Destiny?
4WgT9gy4zQA

[sdp]

You mean the "There will be superhero movie fatigue! Soon! Any day now!" kind of stuff? There are no signs of that, despite what a lot of people insist.

You genuinely believe that superhero movies will continue to be as relevant as they´ve been?

[Andrew NDB]

You genuinely believe that superhero movies will continue to be as relevant as they´ve been?

Nothing will ever match the "boom" between, like, Iron Man 1 and Avengers 1. But will they stay about as relevant as they are right now? Sure.

You really think when Marvel announces their first X-Men movie or X-Men vs. Avengers or something, people will just go "meh!"?

[AquaParade]

Nothing will ever match the "boom" between, like, Iron Man 1 and Avengers 1. But will they stay about as relevant as they are right now? Sure.

You really think when Marvel announces their first X-Men movie or X-Men vs. Avengers or something, people will just go "meh!"?

Don't you think it could be argued that we are still going through the "boom"? Avengers: Infinity War making more money than any other comicbook film is a pretty big deal. They are coming out more rapidly than ever, and many are breaking records.

My prediction is that comicbook films are here to stay for a long, long time. The popularity will inevitably dip, in time, but as with any other popular genre, it can still exist and cater to a large fan base.

[Andrew NDB]

Don't you think it could be argued that we are still going through the "boom"? Avengers: Infinity War making more money than any other comicbook film is a pretty big deal. They are coming out more rapidly than ever, and many are breaking records.

I think "Infinity War" and "Endgame" together represent a culmination of what the boom began... but aren't symptomatic of the boom itself. And I doubt it can be repeated. "X-Men vs. Avengers" will maybe come close, but we're talking years down the line after Marvel grows the new X-Men from the poopy-scented ashes of the Singerverse.

We are no longer going, "WOW! I can't believe we're getting relatively faithful comic book movies and they're pretty cool!" anymore. We're past that. That was Iron Man 1 - Avengers 1. We're still buying tickets but we're not enamored in that way anymore.

[sdp]

Yeah, I don't see that. Let´s wait a couple of years and see who is right. The big story arc is finished, some big actors will be replaced, people who grew up with these movies are now older, new kids don't see the relevance of these heroes their parents like. Nothing lasts forever, I think the superhero movie boom would´ve finished if not for Avengers, people forget the solo movies besides iron man did fine but it wasnt until after avengers that they became huge hits and to keep excitement theyve been doing the same things the comic industry has with event after event but that will eventually lose its punch as well. The Fox deal and going galactic will keep excitement for the post Thanos saga but I also think itll begin to alienate fans. Sure X-men is back but so was spider-man in the MCU and as big as it was, the general audience still saw xmen and spiderman movies recently so its not as big of a deal. the core audience doesnt care that they are comic book accurate either.

[CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy]

We are no longer going, "WOW! I can't believe we're getting relatively faithful comic book movies and they're pretty cool!" anymore. We're past that. That was Iron Man 1 - Avengers 1. We're still buying tickets but we're not enamored in that way anymore.

I think at the moment we're in the "I can't believe we're getting a friggin' AQUAMAN movie or WONDER WOMAN movie or CAPTAIN MARVEL movie or BLACK WIDOW movie."

We're now shocked and excited about getting films based on second- and third-tier characters and teams.

And, of course, the Infinity War conclusion stuff. Once THAT dies down, it will be interesting to see where we go...

[Andrew NDB]

I think at the moment we're in the "I can't believe we're getting a friggin' AQUAMAN movie or WONDER WOMAN movie or CAPTAIN MARVEL movie or BLACK WIDOW movie."

We're now shocked and excited about getting films based on second- and third-tier characters and teams.

Well, they're never really going to ever run out of those. And now they have X-Men and all the various X-Men teams they can play with.

What will be interesting to see is what Marvel intends to do with their core characters as the actors age out. Like, if the MCU is still going in 10 years... are we really going to have a 60 year-old actor playing Hulk? Like, do they simply recast... or just retire the character at that point? I'm really not sure.

[CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy]

Well, they're never really going to ever run out of those. And now they have X-Men and all the various X-Men teams they can play with.

What will be interesting to see is what Marvel intends to do with their core characters as the actors age out. Like, if the MCU is still going in 10 years... are we really going to have a 60 year-old actor playing Hulk? Like, do they simply recast... or just retire the character at that point? I'm really not sure.

My guess would be they move on to new characters and eventually recast a FEW of core characters. Who needs Tony Stark when you have, say, Reed Richards and Charles Xavier?

But Hulk is a bad example; they could just go 100% Hulk and mocap, no need for Ruffalo. :tlol:

[AquaParade]

My hope is that they keep the universe they've built going. When an actor leaves, that character leaves. Carry on with new characters or legacy characters.

There are enough new elements to bring in to carry the franchise another decade, at the least. Then, eventually, create an "Ultimate" universe, where we can see new actors and interpretations of the classic Marvel characters we have been missing, such as Iron Man, Captain America, etc.

[neatoman]

Hmm...

Alien Vs. Predator Vs. X-Men Vs. Star Wars Vs. The Orville Vs. Guardians of the Galaxy?

Anyway, I just realised something. Dark Phoenix won't just be the last X-Men movie set in the old continuity, it'll also be the first distributed by Disney. Kind of messes with my head a bit.

[Papenbrook]

Hmm...

Alien Vs. Predator Vs. X-Men Vs. Star Wars Vs. The Orville Vs. Guardians of the Galaxy?




Ohhh my ...

[neatoman]

You know what, let's tentatively throw in Venom as well. It's kind of unclear to what extent Disney is allowed to use Venom (in terms of TV shows they can) but they do have partial rights to the character.

[Andrew NDB]

You know what, let's tentatively throw in Venom as well. It's kind of unclear to what extent Disney is allowed to use Venom (in terms of TV shows they can) but they do have partial rights to the character.

It's pretty clear. Disney doesn't have any film rights to Spider-Man and Spider-Man characters... and that certainly includes Venom.

That said, I'm sure Sony would be tickled pink if Marvel wanted to use Venom in MCU movies. They don't, at this time.

[snake]

The biggest glut of comic book movies was 2014-2016 in my opinion. A lot of sh*t was released in that small span of time.

[Papenbrook]

Personally, I'm just worried about the workers.

There will be SO many layoffs in the months ahead. :(

[Redeemer]

"X-Men vs. Avengers"

Go on...... :nod:

[oldmanwinters]

Personally, I'm just worried about the workers.

There will be SO many layoffs in the months ahead. :(

That's a sad but necessary part of the business.

It's pretty clear. Disney doesn't have any film rights to Spider-Man and Spider-Man characters... and that certainly includes Venom.

That said, I'm sure Sony would be tickled pink if Marvel wanted to use Venom in MCU movies. They don't, at this time.

Is Kingpin officially a rogue of Daredevil or Spider-man?

[MsMarvelDuckie]

Both, actually. He has played huge parts in the history of both heroes, up to and including hiring the assassin who hit Peter's Aunt May while attempting to kill HIM. Peter then went on a spree of hunting down the responsible party(s), which culminated not only in the start of the infamous One More Day arc, but also with him confronting Fisk IN PRISON in front of dozens of other inmates, and threatening to fill his throat with webbing if he ever so much as LOOKED at his family again. Needless to say, Kingpin got the message.

And of course, there was the Daredevil unmasking in the poolhall story with him beating Fisk half to death. So, yeah, both heroes have plenty of beef with him.

[CyberCubed]

Everyone is going on about Marvel characters yet to me the fact that The Simpsons are now Disney characters is blowing my mind. And Futurama, and Family Guy, etc.

Simpsons is going to last forever now.

[snake]

They're really not. Those characters are still "Fox" characters and most likely won't be appearing in the parks or crossover media like that.

[Wildcat]

^ How do you know that? I don’t know exactly who owns the Simpsons, I’m guessing Matt Groening, but if he agrees what’s stopping it?

I know Universal has their own park attractions. I guess they’ll be there until whenever that agreement ends or Disney wants to move them.

In general I’ve always thought this whole thing was cool. I know a lot of people complain about monopolies saying it’s bad for consumers but I think it’s fun.

Disney has the power to back so much. More movies and series, potential crossovers and park attractions. Fans should be happy about this from an entertainment standpoint.

Edit: Everything I’ve read says The Simpsons is a Disney property now. I’m curious about what would happen if Matt Groening wanted to end it. Would Disney just reboot it with a new team or would Matt have to agree to “sell” the franchise?

[Andrew NDB]

Pretty sure Simpsons was a 100% "work for hire" kind of thing for Groening. Yeah, Disney would just get new people if anyone made a stink. But I really don't see them rocking the boat, contrary to what most people think.

And yeah. Disney has Star Wars rides now in their parks, and even Avatar rides... and that was even before the acquisition. I could totally see them doing Simpsons stuff. I mean, hell, I'd get on a Simpsons ride.

[Wildcat]

But Matt Groening is still the creator. His name is on everything. It’s certainly the most successful thing he’s done.

I don’t know how long Universal has the Simpsons for but Itchy and Scratchy walking around Disneyland with Mickey and friends would be awesome. :lol:

Krustyland in Disneyland?! An official parody of themselves :o

[Andrew NDB]

But Matt Groening is still the creator. His name is on everything. It’s certainly the most successful thing he’s done.

And it'll always be there. But Disney won't lay down in the mud if he doesn't want to play ball... they will continue on until ratings aren't sustainable. Whenever that happens.

[Wildcat]

I know it’ll continue. I just wasn’t sure if it was like TMNT and Nick. Matt still owns rights to it doesn’t he? Even when it was Fox. It’s not like he sold it off.

Like Seth must still own Family Guy.

[oldmanwinters]

The brass at Netflix must be frantically discussing their survival options.

In his memo about the merger CEO Bob Iger said: “We are rapidly transforming our company to take full advantage of evolving consumer trends and emerging technology in order to thrive in this new and exciting time.”
https://www.fatherly.com/play/disney-fox-acquisition-kids-programming-parents/

[AquaParade]

Aside from Marvel, I'm most excited about seeing what Disney can do with The Simpsons.

As someone who absolutely adores the first nine seasons of the show, yet lost interest in new episodes a long time ago, there's nowhere to go but up. If the show gets completely destroyed in an attempt to improve it, I won't consider it a big loss.

[Andrew NDB]

Aside from Marvel, I'm most excited about seeing what Disney can do with The Simpsons.

My guess is absolutely nothing. They probably figure ratings are still solid so everyone gets left alone.

[AquaParade]

My guess is absolutely nothing. They probably figure ratings are still solid so everyone gets left alone.

Quite possibly.

I can imagine them wanting to inject some quality into it though. It has bad word-of-mouth and that isn't good, long-term.

Though you're right...they've managed to survive for years in these conditions.

[Andrew NDB]

Quite possibly.

I can imagine them wanting to inject some quality into it though. It has bad word-of-mouth and that isn't good, long-term.

Though you're right...they've managed to survive for years in these conditions.

Also, they're probably very aware that everyone and their mom is going, "Oh no! Disney is going to completely change Simpsons and Family Guy!"

So they will likely make it a point to... not do that, and stoke those fires.

[neatoman]

Pretty sure Simpsons was a 100% "work for hire" kind of thing for Groening.

He literally created the characters and concept a few minutes before he had the actual pitch meeting, just so he wouldn't feel bummed about signing off the rights to something he cared about. So yes, he probably only ever held the rights to the characters for an hour or so.

[Redeemer]

That's a sad but necessary part of the business.



Is Kingpin officially a rogue of Daredevil or Spider-man?

I think he is a product of the Spider-man universe. He had his first appearance in the Spiderman universe, but was only a minor character. He became big time and a mainstay within the Daredevil universe as the main antagonist to Daredevil.

Both, actually. He has played huge parts in the history of both heroes, up to and including hiring the assassin who hit Peter's Aunt May while attempting to kill HIM. Peter then went on a spree of hunting down the responsible party(s), which culminated not only in the start of the infamous One More Day arc, but also with him confronting Fisk IN PRISON in front of dozens of other inmates, and threatening to fill his throat with webbing if he ever so much as LOOKED at his family again. Needless to say, Kingpin got the message.

And of course, there was the Daredevil unmasking in the poolhall story with him beating Fisk half to death. So, yeah, both heroes have plenty of beef with him.

Yes he has definitely been prominent in both universes for both characters.

[oldmanwinters]

Netflix is doomed.
https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/disney-remove-movies-netflix-launches-160541834.html

[Vegita-San]

Netflix is doomed.
https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/disney-remove-movies-netflix-launches-160541834.html

and this is how you kill legitimate streaming.

there is no reason to look up shows on YT anymore. Between Netflix, and Amazon Video, anything new is updated pretty darn quickly...or once the season is over.

Now with all these other companies coming in so late in the game, and people so entrenched in netflix already, they won't want to cherry pick one service over another just for one show that MIGHT be worth getting.

[ZariusTwo]

Simpsons is going to last forever now.

Don't be too sure.

When Disney bought Power Rangers in the 2000s, their first idea was to cancel it and profit off a decade's worth of seasons for syndication. They had to be persuaded to keep it on the air, hence the decision was made to move production over to New Zealand to save money, however they grew bored with it by the end of the decade.

It's more than likely Disney will want to save money and not pay the show's voice talent the kind of fees FOX were willing to give them, and thus the show will be axed given it doesn't tend to replace the VAs for characters when they depart (usually by passing away)

[CyberCubed]

Since Simpsons was just recently renewed through Season 32, do you think that could be it? I think Disney will try to keep it around in good faith for awhile, unless one of the main actors dies in the next few years. After they wrote out Bart's teacher because her VA died, and Apu was written out for controversy, it wouldn't put it past them if say Homer or Lisa or Marge's VA's kick the bucket, that they just quickly wrap up whatever season that is and finish.

[Andrew NDB]

Netflix is doomed.
https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/disney-remove-movies-netflix-launches-160541834.html

Nah, they'll be fine. Truthfully I would get Netflix even just for their original content... which is becoming consistently great and expansive.

[Prowler]

Would it really be that hard to find new VAs for them, though? The Simpsons have some of the easiest voices to impersonate in animation history. I can impersonate Apu and Dr. Nick Riviera and several people I know can impersonate a few Simpsons voices as well. Now, I'm not saying I could do it for a living, but rarely do I see people claiming to be able to impersonate cartoon character's voices easily as they do for The Simpsons, so surely it can't be too hard to find a VA good enough to voice Simpsons characters?

[CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy]

Nah, they'll be fine. Truthfully I would get Netflix even just for their original content... which is becoming consistently great and expansive.

Hell yeah. Stranger Things, Altered Carbon, Love Death and Robots, Umbrella Academy, Orange is the New Black...

So much good stuff on there.

[Andrew NDB]

Hell yeah. Stranger Things, Altered Carbon, Love Death and Robots, Umbrella Academy, Orange is the New Black...

So much good stuff on there.

Black Mirror... Sabrina... Lost in Space. Yeah, list goes on and on. I tend to really dig most of their original movies, too, and they're making more of them than ever before.

[neatoman]

Would it really be that hard to find new VAs for them, though? The Simpsons have some of the easiest voices to impersonate in animation history. I can impersonate Apu and Dr. Nick Riviera and several people I know can impersonate a few Simpsons voices as well. Now, I'm not saying I could do it for a living, but rarely do I see people claiming to be able to impersonate cartoon character's voices easily as they do for The Simpsons, so surely it can't be too hard to find a VA good enough to voice Simpsons characters?

First off, don't toot your own horn unless you're willing to give us a recording of those impersonations.

Secondly, in this case it isn't about how well the voices can be done. Several characters have been barred from the show simply because their actors have died, including Troy McClure, Lionel Hutz, the Lunch Lady and Edna Krabappel. Maude was killed off simply because Maggie Roswell left the show, that's why Marcia Gaven's take on the character didn't last long, she was just a fill in to produce the episodes they had already written.

[CyberCubed]

Yeah even if they are able to find a 100% sound-alike that people couldn't tell the difference, if any one of the big 4 die (Homer/Bart/Lisa/Marge), it's best to finally just end the show. If there are still episodes ordered that aren't finished, just have a sound-a-like finish off the last remaining eps but don't order another season.

[TigerClaw]

Now that Disney owns 21st Century Fox. They are now shutting down one of the Studios. Fox 2000 Pictures.
https://deadline.com/2019/03/elizabeth-gabler-fox-2000-to-shutter-as-disney-takes-over-1202580356

[CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy]

Black Mirror... Sabrina... Lost in Space. Yeah, list goes on and on. I tend to really dig most of their original movies, too, and they're making more of them than ever before.

I couldn't get into Lost in Space, which was a bummer for me. :tsad:

[Papenbrook]

Now that Disney owns 21st Century Fox. They are now shutting down one of the Studios. Fox 2000 Pictures.
https://deadline.com/2019/03/elizabeth-gabler-fox-2000-to-shutter-as-disney-takes-over-1202580356


... and, here come the layoffs.

[neatoman]

Now that Disney owns 21st Century Fox. They are now shutting down one of the Studios. Fox 2000 Pictures.
https://deadline.com/2019/03/elizabeth-gabler-fox-2000-to-shutter-as-disney-takes-over-1202580356

Oh that's just great.

[Andrew NDB]

https://thumbs.gfycat.com/GregariousEasyCirriped-max-1mb.gif

https://media.giphy.com/media/DG4GzCsAca8Ja/giphy.gif

[Andrew NDB]

Does anyone else find it interesting that Kevin Feige has been on total and complete radio silence since the deal was finalized?

Unless he's said something and I've missed it.

[Leo656]

He's probably scrambling trying to get the pieces in place for an X-Men tease for the "Avengers" end-credits stinger. :trazz:

Or a Dr. Doom teaser, I guess. But let's be honest, nobody cares about the Fantastic 4.

[snake]

Are you kidding? Casuals cream themselves for Doom now that they’ve been introduced to him through clickbait articles about the “NEXT BIG VILLAIN??!????!?”

[ProactiveMan]

I don't know if I want to see an MCU version of Doctor Doom any more... sitting there all non-threatening and evenly lit.

[MsMarvelDuckie]

I still do. I'd LOVE to finally see some him done right, though I feel like there were PARTS of both previous versions that were ALMOST right. Mix the powers of both with the general character of the first two FF movies, with a bit of background with Latvaria, and you would mostly have it.

[Leo656]

I think the first one is honestly as close to "Getting It Right" as they can possibly do (Although WHAT was Jessica Alba doing there?!), and honestly... it's just not a very good movie.

They did their sincere best, and I recognize that. Problem is, their best was... that. And it was so underwhelming that someone actually thought Fant4stic was an improvement and charged people money to watch it.

I think if "The Incredibles" had never come out and done essentially the exact same thing, maaaaybe Fantastic 4 could work as a movie. But for one thing, "Second Place is the First Loser" in the court of public opinion, so that doesn't help them any, and secondly, it's just excessively corny material that doesn't exactly play well in live action.

Stretchy Guy, Invisible Broad, Rock Monster-Man and Guy Who's Lucky He's Not Called "Captain Flamer". This is not the foundation for the "World's Greatest Super-Team". These are characters who the Legion of Super-Heroes would have rejected for being "Too Silly", and because their "Useless Super-Powers Quota" was already filled on account of Bouncing Boy and Matter-Eater Lad. Human Torch is objectively pretty cool, but he's infinitely LESS cool because he's forced to slum it with a bunch of chuckleheads who couldn't out-fight a herd of stubborn deer. BUT, he's still the only one on the team who's worth more than a buck-fitty. He really needs to make better friends. He has great powers and is an awesome visual, all by himself. Chained to those D-Listers, though... geez, I'd set myself on fire on purpose if the Cosmic Rays hadn't already taken care of it.

On the same subject, Dr. Doom needs better people to fight than those clowns, because he's actually a pretty good villain. But he's never gonna make the A-List when his arch-rival is, "The Third-Most Interesting Stretchy-Guy In Comics, With None Of Plastic Man's Imagination Or Ralph Dibney's Charm, But It's Okay Because He Never Stops Telling People What A Genius He Is, So He Must Be Cool, I Guess." Doom must get laughed out of every single Super-Villain Meeting. "Your nemesis is a pretentious and less-entertaining version of Plastic Man? Dude, go home and figure your life out. Call us when you wanna pick a fight with, I'unno, Spider-Man or something."

I dunno, man. Chiklis was perfect as Thing. After that, I got nothin'.

[MsMarvelDuckie]

*sigh*

I get that they can seem a bit silly on the surface, but there is a strong family dynamic there, (Fant4stic notwithstanding, because- ugh, WTF was THAT??!!) of not only a literal family but the misfits bonding, much like TMNT. But it CAN work, and be very serious/deep, IF DONE RIGHT.

For one thing, we have an elemental dynamic, with each of the Four being a representation of one of the four classical elements- earth, air, fire, and water. (A bit of a "stretch", perhaps, with Sue and Reed, but still there.) They even made an allusion to that in the FF 1602 elseworlds mini series. They are a team based on balance of powers, each interacting in their own unique ways, which actually sort of ties into their "elemental" natures. Reed is like water- calm, flowing, but able to adapt to any conditions. Sue is like air- emotional, easily overlooked, but can be very powerful when needed. Thing, obviously, is the earth. Steady, firm, and unyielding. Strong, but also able to shake things up. Johnny.... Fire is more than an element with him. It's who he is- changeable, passionate, full of energy. He's not even the first to be called the Human Torch- there was another waaay before the FF, as a member of a team back in the 40's, iirc. Stan created that one, too, if memory serves, though he was a different character.

What frustrates me is that as a team, they are portrayed in film a bit too on the nose, with no real understsnding of who they are as characters. Is Reed arrogant? Sure, but so is Tony Stark- but guess which one gets taken more seriously, even though Reed is arguably the smarter of the two. It was his idea to create Marvel's Illuminati, a think-tank of the world's most influential and powerful (not neccessarily in superpower terms) heroes. And it ended up breaking down over ideologies. But his adaptability and flexibility is not just physical. He can come up with solutions to nearly any problem, including global overpopulation and dwindling resources.

Sue gets overlooked as the glue of the team, the nurturing and compassionate one. She's the one who is often the voice of reason, steering them on the right course. And in later issues, the literal mother hen of the group, after she and Reed had kids. Her powers are no less useful than any of the others, they are just more subtle.

Thing is the brawler. Easy enough to understand. Strong enough to go toe to toe with Hulk or Thor, a tough one to knock down by any standard. He's also loyal to a fault, and very protective of his "family". Sound familiar? Yeah, He's their Raph. But without the anger issues. Not to say he can't get incredibly pissed if pushed or threatened, but he's very stable otherwise.

And of course, Johnny is fire incarnate. He's a player, an extrovert, a mechanical wiz, and hates being still. He's active and lively, with a bright and cheerful outlook, like a campfire. Just don't cross him, or you get burned.

Nothing in any of these characters is inately "silly", it's just that they haven't been taken seriously enough in films to be done right. Heck, their best film incarnation was an animated series! (Highly underrared, I might add.)

[Leo656]

I think they screwed the pooch in live-action by ignoring Herbie The Robot.

[MsMarvelDuckie]

Nah, Herbie is really more of a Roomba with arms than a real character. It has AI and talks, sure, but really is only good for the occasional gag or MAAAAYBE helping save the Baxtee Building from invasions once in a great while. And I say this as a FF fan. Never cared much about Herbie.

[ranger_scout]

The Sandlot is getting a sequel TV series on Disney+. Even though they purchased Fox, it's ironic how they now doing a show based on a film that called Bambi "that wimpy deer".

‘The Sandlot’ Series In Early Development At Disney+ (https://deadline.com/2019/04/the-sandlot-series-in-development-at-disney-1202594353/)

Iconic Fox titles like The Sound of Music and Malcolm in the Middle will be available for streaming on Disney+ as well.

Disney+ Full List Of Programming: Streaming Service’s Series, Movies, Specials & More (https://deadline.com/2019/04/disney-plus-programs-movies-full-list-marvel-star-wars-pixar-simpsons-streaming-service-1202594496/)

All 30 seasons of The Simpsons can also be watched on Disney+. The beloved family recently spoke about this.

Watch The Simpsons reluctantly join Disney+ (https://ew.com/tv/2019/04/11/the-simpsons-join-disney-plus-video/)

[Wildcat]

I loved that clip. Now they can use characters like Dumbo...I’m guessing as long as it’s not disrespectful.

I’ve been wanting to see the Disney Copyright logo during credits but I realized seasons are made in advance so it probably won’t appear until next season.

It would be awesome if they did an episode where they take over Itchy and Scratchy/KrustyLand and turn it into a Disneyland. :lol:

[ZariusTwo]

Disney are rebranding 20th Century Fox and Fox Searchlight as 20th Century Films and Searchlight Pictures

https://variety.com/2020/film/news/disney-dropping-fox-20th-century-studios-1203470349/

[Andrew NDB]

Disney are rebranding 20th Century Fox and Fox Searchlight as 20th Century Films and Searchlight Pictures

https://variety.com/2020/film/news/disney-dropping-fox-20th-century-studios-1203470349/

Seems sound.

All 30 seasons of The Simpsons can also be watched on Disney+.

Minus one episode. Because someone made a documentary and nothing was ever proven.

[neatoman]

I guess Rupert Murdoch still has a trademark on FOX then? Wonder if old movies will have their logo credits replaced if they can't use the name FOX legally?

[TigerClaw]

It truly is the end of an Era.