|
|
Post by Shiryu on Aug 31, 2009 10:12:40 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by freedomfighter on Aug 31, 2009 10:23:37 GMT -5
Potentially. Disney is simply too image conscious. All it will take is one parent screaming about something under the Disney banner not being child friendly and it will be a ripple effect (look at the Disney Channel's Zoey 101 with Britney's little sis going off the air when she became pregnant. Now if Marvel is essentially run like a separate entity with no real branding of Disney, then perhaps nothing overwhelming will change.
But if you ever see Mickey in a Marvel cornerbox, then expect change. The image of Mickey is just too valuable to Disney for anything controversial.
|
|
|
|
Post by humanbelly on Aug 31, 2009 12:49:13 GMT -5
Man, it's just such an awkward, unworkable pairing. Well, not a pairing, really. Even given the high visibility and current profitability of Marvel Entertainment, Disney is still an unbelievable behemoth in comparison.
I would have trouble believing that Disney even took the current state of the Marvel Comics Universe into consideration at all. Like, do they have even an inkling of what's being produced right now? Cannibalism? Zombies? Disney has fingers in LOTS of pies, but do any of them even remotely approach the darkness of the Ultimate Universe?
Of course, Disney has a loooooong reputation of enforcing artistic discipline and responsibility. Could be good for the current state of affairs.
Of course, Disney is also known for putting the dollar first and foremost. Profitablity is a tremendously high priority.
Of course, (as pointed out) Disney has been known to go to absurd lengths to protect what it perceives as its image.
Ahhhhhh, they could do anything. "Hands off"-- as long as sales improve or the comics end remains profitable. Or, geeze, they could slam down a mandate to "family friendly-ize" the whole line.
And yet, I find myself almost relieved that SOME sort of shake-up may be in the near future. Just so unhappy with the current state of affairs. . .
(This is all stream of conscious-- so I haven't put a lot of thought in, here. Depth will probably come later. . . )
HB
|
|
|
|
Post by Shiryu on Aug 31, 2009 13:32:41 GMT -5
I too think that not much will change at editorial level, but there could be a return to the comic code (it still exists, right?) for some mainstream titles, which wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing after all. Other than that, I'd be surprised if something more than perhaps one or two special one shots take place. It's certainly going to be huge from a distribution point of view. Disney exists in so many countries and is associated to a very child-friendly image that could prompt parents to let young children read the more children-oriented books (and prompt Marvel to produce more of those). But the side I'm most curious for is animation movies. We could now have Pixar producing movies with Marvel heroes  |
|
|
|
Post by spiderwasp on Aug 31, 2009 17:49:37 GMT -5
If this had happened a few years back, I might have been worried about possible implications. Although I doubt we'll see much change, at this point any change would be welcome.
|
|
|
|
Post by scottharris on Aug 31, 2009 22:30:08 GMT -5
I just wrote what amounts to a dissertation about this over on my blog, but for those who don't have that much time to kill, my short reaction is that i think this is a good move and potentially could be fantastic. It is possible that it could lead to some changes on the creative side, but I don't mind that if the resulting stories are good. The potential positives here far outweigh the possible negatives in my mind.
|
|
|
|
Post by betaraybill on Aug 31, 2009 22:54:56 GMT -5
I'm so ready for this! This is great news (timestamp that assessment: 11:45pm EST August 31, 2009)(Ask me what I think in January... then June... then October, etc as "assessment" may change).
In terms of content, the only thing I see that Disney could push for would be a VERTIGO-esque seperation for titles that lean to the Parental Advisory side of things.
Disney owns, among other things, ABC... which airs everything from America's Funniest Home Videos to Desperate Housewives. They also make movies rated from G to R. I think there'll still be sex, violence and zombies in Marvel comics to reasonable degrees (Moon Knight ripping off Taskmaster's face... literally, not-so-much maybe?).
I just think that, to have a "backer" with so much money and influence can only mean good things (Oprah excluded).
My vote is that things won't change much within the pages of our favorite comics.
|
|
|
|
Post by Shiryu on Sept 1, 2009 4:26:58 GMT -5
I was just looking around the web, and it seems that most American forums have reacted positively, whereas most European ones are negative about the whole thing. Different perceptions I suppose.
One thing for certain, the news has spread very quickly. Yesterday evening even the main Italian evening news, which I doubt knows even how to spell "Marvel", has reported it.
|
|
Doctor Bong
West Coast Avenger
Master of Belly Dancing (no, really...)!
Posts: 49
|
Post by Doctor Bong on Sept 1, 2009 4:40:58 GMT -5
A Howard/Donald crossover, anyone...?  |
|
|
|
Post by Bored Yesterday on Sept 1, 2009 17:00:06 GMT -5
I agree it's going to be mainly good, but haven't seen any discussion yet that mirrors what I think will happen.
1. Disney's lawyers are notoriously hardnosed about copyright. I would expect most the Marvel cartoons to disappear from Youtube and what-have-you, and maybe even see crackdowns on fan communities who post large portions of copyrighted work. That's a bummer, but we'll see.
2. Maybe Howard the Duck wil lbe allowed to look like himself in the next movie!!!! Very cool. I want a Pixar 3-D Howard the Duck movie by 2013!
|
|
|
|
Post by spiderwasp on Sept 1, 2009 19:53:54 GMT -5
A Howard/Donald crossover, anyone...? Or better yet; Donald, Mickey, Goofy, Pluto, Daisy, Minnie, Bambi, Robin Hood, and Nemo VS. Lockjaw and the Pet Avengers! |
|
|
|
Post by humanbelly on Sept 1, 2009 20:25:00 GMT -5
[quote author=boredyesterday board=general thread=2663 post=31721
1. Disney's lawyers are notoriously hardnosed about copyright. I would expect most the Marvel cartoons to disappear from Youtube and what-have-you, and maybe even see crackdowns on fan communities who post large portions of copyrighted work. That's a bummer, but we'll see.
[/quote]
You make a very good point. Something that it would be a terrible shame to lose would be the absolutely brilliant (and hilarious) "I'm a Marvel/I'm a DC" action figure video shorts by RandomGuy & RandomGal. It strikes me as exactly the kind of thing their corporate/legal departments would go after.
There's a short comic essay by a fellow named Arthur Hoppe- probably written in the mid-60's- called "Mickey Saves the World" ; done as a history/news report, it describes a distopian future where the Disney Corp has gradually taken control of. . . well. . . the world. Ohhhhh, who's laughing now?
HB
|
|
|
|
Post by Bored Yesterday on Sept 1, 2009 20:41:19 GMT -5
They've definately taken over my world.
|
|
|
|
Post by dlw66 on Sept 10, 2009 8:25:38 GMT -5
I saw this on Joe Sinnott's website (www.joesinnott.com) and thought you'd all get a kick out of it!  |
|
|
|
Post by Shiryu on Sept 12, 2009 16:37:23 GMT -5
I fixed the pic PS you'd all get a kick out of it! you've definitely been reading Stan Lee recently  |
|
|
|
Post by goldenfist on Sept 20, 2009 21:47:16 GMT -5
Here's what the Kirby Heirs had to say
Heirs to comic book legend Jack Kirby sent 45 notices of copyright termination to Marvel Entertainment, prospective Marvel buyer Disney, Sony Pictures, Universal Pictures, 20th Century Fox, Paramount Pictures, and others studios that that hold licensed media rights to Marvel characters, this according to a Sunday afternoon report published on the New York Times website.
The Times reports the legal notices expressed an intent to regain copyrights to some Kirby co-creations as early as 2014, this according to a statement from Toberoff & Associates, a Los Angeles firm that helped win a court ruling last year returning a share of the copyright in Superman to heirs of the character’s co-creator, Jerry Siegel.
Mr. Toberoff declined to elaborate on the statement reached for comments Sunday by the Times. According to the newspaper, a Marvel spokesperson had no comment, but Disney replied in a statement, “The notices involved are an attempt to terminate rights seven to 10 years from now, and involve claims that were fully considered in the acquisition.” Fox, Sony, Paramount and Universal reportedly had no comment.
As the Times reports points out, Disney's acquisition of Marvel is far from a done deal and must still be approved by Marvel shareholders. Wall Street is apparently already speculating that due to a complicated array of various rights agreements, shareholders may worry that Disney will face difficulty immediately exploiting Marvel's most valuable intellectual property.
Cited in the story is the fact that Sony holds the film rights to Spider-Man in perpetuity.
The proposed Disney deal could give creators or their heirs new reason to exploit United States copyright law to stake a claim.
Under U.S. law, an author or his or her heirs can begin a process to regain copyrights a certain period of years after the original grant. While the report did not cite what characters were cited in the termination notices, if Kirby’s family were to gain the copyright to a co-created character like the Fantastic Four or the Incredible Hulk, they could become entitled to a share of profits from films or other properties featuring the character, or obtain the rights to sell characters independently of Marvel, Disney, or the various studios that have licensed the Marvel characters.
Developing...
I got it from newsarama.com
|
|
!!!
