Viacom being pressured to sell Paramount

[TrickOrTreater]

Originally Posted by ProactiveMan

Daredevil wasn't anywhere near as ingrained into pop culture as TMNT, and as much as some don't want to hear it, the OT and the Nick show are what 9 out of 10 people think of when you mention the Turtles.

Man. If only there was some way you could possibly combine aspects and tones from two different versions of the characters effectively and create a compelling story from that.

If only.

Spoiler:

So playing it safe doesn’t mean a softer tone, it means whatever tone the gen pop is expecting.

Hey remember when all anybody knew of Batman for like almost 30 years was this??

Spoiler:

But then some body went ahead and took Batman back to his darker roots and everybody f*cking loved it?

I sure do.

[ProactiveMan]

Yeah I remember Batman. I wouldn't describe it as 'playing it safe' though... which is the entire crux of my argument. Sometimes it's difficult to read comprehensively, but try as hard as you can.

[Zak The Neutrino]

Originally Posted by d_osborn

Honestly, I wouldn't even want a film series to kick it off.

There's pretty much a zero percent chance of this happening, but a Netflix series set in the MCU NYC street-level stuff would be awesome. The new Daredevil trailer brings out The Hand ninja pretty hard, which is pretty much what directly inspired TMNT. Go with that tone and run with it. Have the turtles be the only sci-fi element in place for a season, then run all cosmic with it. Sort of a cross between Daredevil and Guardians.

Didn't Disney AND Marvel try to acquire TMNT very early on? I know Eastman was wanting a Daredevil crossover pretty bad in the 80s.

Yes but they walked away from Marvel because they wouldn't have kept the creative power they wanted. It wouldn't have helped us back then anyways because Marvel sold off the movie rights it's most popular franchises in the 90's when they were almost bankrupt. Hence why we get ****** Xmen movies.

[Aaronardo]

Originally Posted by TrickOrTreater

/snip/

You just made the greatest post I've seen on this forum. And my day.

Originally Posted by ProactiveMan

Yeah I remember Batman. I wouldn't describe it as 'playing it safe' though... which is the entire crux of my argument. Sometimes it's difficult to read comprehensively, but try as hard as you can.

You described "playing it safe" as whatever the gen pop was expecting, in your own words. Everyone was expecting something along the lines of the 60's Batman, since that was the version that was engrained in everyone's heads. They got Tim Burton, Michael Keaton, and a drastic change of tone.

Basically, what I'm trying to say is... you proved his point.

[slingtheory]

If star wars is the example I get the feeling Disney's idea of a safe tmnt movie wouldve been a movie with the same tone as the original with some fred wolfe characters thrown in.

[TrickOrTreater]

Originally Posted by ProactiveMan

Yeah I remember Batman. I wouldn't describe it as 'playing it safe' though... which is the entire crux of my argument. Sometimes it's difficult to read comprehensively, but try as hard as you can.

And we got a sh*tty movie series out of it.

So...congratulations? I guess?

Way to stick up for the no-talent hacks?

"Ninja Turtles aren't anywhere near as ingrained in pop culture as Batman, and as much as you don't want to hear it, the Adam West Batman show was what 9/10 people thought of when you mention Batman, pre-1989."

Until Tim Burton said "No, f*ck you, Batman is a dark character and this is how I'm going to do it and everybody will love it. Don't care what came before."

He had the balls and talent to subvert expectations and "what the people wanted" gave them something awesome.

This is fun. I'm having fun.

[TrickOrTreater]

Originally Posted by Aaronardo

You just made the greatest post I've seen on this forum. And my day.

Hey, much appreciated friend.

You described "playing it safe" as whatever the gen pop was expecting, in your own words. Everyone was expecting something along the lines of the 60's Batman, since that was the version that was engrained in everyone's heads. They got Tim Burton, Michael Keaton, and a drastic change of tone.

Basically, what I'm trying to say is... you proved his point.

Talent and spine and artistic integrity sure do go a long way.

[ProactiveMan]

Originally Posted by Aaronardo

You described "playing it safe" as whatever the gen pop was expecting, in your own words. Everyone was expecting something along the lines of the 60's Batman, since that was the version that was engrained in everyone's heads. They got Tim Burton, Michael Keaton, and a drastic change of tone.

Basically, what I'm trying to say is... you proved his point.

What the hell are you talking about? I was saying exactly the opposite. The Tim Burton movie was not 'Playing it safe' in my opinion.

Keep up the doodling fellas - It will all make sense one day.

[John Pannozzi]

Here's a new article on the situation.

[d_osborn]

Originally Posted by Zak The Neutrino

Yes but they walked away from Marvel because they wouldn't have kept the creative power they wanted. It wouldn't have helped us back then anyways because Marvel sold off the movie rights it's most popular franchises in the 90's when they were almost bankrupt. Hence why we get ****** Xmen movies.

Marvel actually sold off the rights much earlier. There were low-budget Spider-Man, Captain America, and X-Men movies in development from around 1985. Still, interesting to think about.

[John Pannozzi]

Originally Posted by d_osborn

Marvel actually sold off the rights much earlier. There were low-budget Spider-Man, Captain America, and X-Men movies in development from around 1985. Still, interesting to think about.

Though the movie rights to Spider-Man reverted to Marvel around 1999, at which point they made their deal with Sony.

Anyway, it seems that Sumner Redstone doesn't want to sell Paramount.

[d_osborn]

Originally Posted by John Pannozzi

Though the movie rights to Spider-Man reverted to Marvel around 1999, at which point they made their deal with Sony.

Selling the movie rights in the 80s was actually something that kept Marvel open. They were pretty close to closing up shop. It's pretty interesting to read about-- especially with the legal drama between Cannon, Carolco/Lightstorm, and Sony/Columbia in the 90's. It was a huge mess.

[John Pannozzi]

News update:

http://variety.com/2016/biz/news/via...nt-1201762619/

[neatoman]

Originally Posted by John Pannozzi

News update:

http://variety.com/2016/biz/news/via...nt-1201762619/

So what the hell does any of that mean? Are they just selling part of the company?

[ToTheNines]

Basically they're just looking for an investor. Viacom/Paramount will remain largely unchanged. Doubt this will affect TMNT at all.

[Andrew NDB]

Even if Paramount were sold en masse, it's entirely meaningless to TMNT. Viacom would just find a different distributor and Platinum Dunes wouldn't be effected. Different logo when the lights go out in the theater (if you're foolish enough to watch these "films" at all), that's all.

[NinjaPug]

Viacom, the media company that owns cable networks and movie production businesses, is in talks to sell a 49% stake in its film studio, Paramount Pictures, to China’s Dalian Wanda Group, The Wall Street Journal reported Wednesday.

Earlier this year, Viacom announced its plans to sell a significant minority stake of the struggling movie studio to raise cash that can be used to pay its debt and fund other operations. Wanda, a huge conglomerate in China with subsidiaries in construction, hospitality and entertainment, has been beefing up its movie business in recent months and is widely speculated as a possible buyer of the stake.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/...anda/87051720/

[ToTheNines]

Oh, ****...

[Andrew NDB]

Originally Posted by TrickOrTreater

"Ninja Turtles aren't anywhere near as ingrained in pop culture as Batman, and as much as you don't want to hear it, the Adam West Batman show was what 9/10 people thought of when you mention Batman, pre-1989."

Until Tim Burton said "No, f*ck you, Batman is a dark character and this is how I'm going to do it and everybody will love it. Don't care what came before."

He had the balls and talent to subvert expectations and "what the people wanted" gave them something awesome.

Yes, correct.

[CyberCubed]

So what does Viacom selling Paramount imply? I think that's bigger issues for other franchises like Star Trek than our own.