The Spirited Sixth Sense ...

lazyboy97o

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
the.dreamfinder said:
And there's also the question of what multiplier on the acquisition price Marvel needs to hit to please the BoD and Iger. Is it double or triple the purchase price? What was the Pixar acquisition's multiplier? Is there a specific date range for Marvel to hit that goal?
Click to expand...
That is a really good question. Disney is the sort of company where a film projected to bring in $100.5 million on opening weekend is considered a flop if it only does $100.4 million. I doubt Marvel generating $4,000,000,001 for The Walt Disney Company would be a sufficient benchmark for celebration.
 
P

pheneix

Well-Known Member
Cesar R M

Cesar R M

Well-Known Member
lazyboy97o said:
That is a really good question. Disney is the sort of company where a film projected to bring in $100.5 million on opening weekend is considered a flop if it only does $100.4 million. I doubt Marvel generating $4,000,000,001 for The Walt Disney Company would be a sufficient benchmark for celebration.
Click to expand...
pretty sure all investors and top dogs will be "good money.. raise the stakes.. we want more!"
 
I

Ignohippo

Well-Known Member
doctornick said:
Certainly. Interestingly, Disney made a deal with Sony where Sony gets the film rights for Spider-man and related characters indefinitely but Disney keeps all the merchandising rights. Which is a nice deal for both sides.
Click to expand...


Much like the theme park rights, that was the deal already in place before Disney bought Marvel. Disney would love to get Spider-Man back in the Avengers fold. Disney would not allow Sony to keep the rights under any circumstance if there was any way they could get them back. There are quite a few properties that cannot be reacquired unless the other film studios allow the rights to lapse.

The Fantastic Four and Spider-Man are perfect examples. They have had to re-boot those properties and get new movies out before their windows expire or the rights will revert back to Marvel/Disney. They have the movies in perpetuity, but they have to produce the movies within a specified time frame – they can't just sit on the rights.
 
I

Ignohippo

Well-Known Member
the.dreamfinder said:
And there's also the question of what multiplier on the acquisition price Marvel needs to hit to please the BoD and Iger. Is it double or triple the purchase price? What was the Pixar acquisition's multiplier? Is there a specific date range for Marvel to hit that goal?
Click to expand...


I seriously doubt, even under the best of circumstances, that they could have projected Marvel continuing to be the massive hit it has been.

Pixar on the other hand, especially with it missing this year's release, may be lagging a bit behind projections. I'm sure the insane recent success of WDA makes up for it though.
 
D

doctornick

Well-Known Member
Ignohippo said:
Much like the theme park rights, that was the deal already in place before Disney bought Marvel. Disney would love to get Spider-Man back in the Avengers fold. Disney would not allow Sony to keep the rights under any circumstance if there was any way they could get them back. There are quite a few properties that cannot be reacquired unless the other film studios allow the rights to lapse.

The Fantastic Four and Spider-Man are perfect examples. They have had to re-boot those properties and get new movies out before their windows expire or the rights will revert back to Marvel/Disney. They have the movies in perpetuity, but they have to produce the movies within a specified time frame – they can't just sit on the rights.
Click to expand...

No, that's the point. Disney and Sony made a new deal recently (in the past year or 2) where sony got the movie rights to Spider-Man in perpetuity but Disney retained all the merchandising rights, even ones specifically related to the movies. I'm sure it's more nuanced than that, but that's the gist. Basically, Disney was willing to let Sony have the rights in order to prevent them from rushing out subpar films just to maintain the rights but in return Disney got a potentially large revenue stream by locking down the merchandise. The merchandise was an area of confusion anyway as it was tough to determine what was "movie" merchandise versus stuff just from the comics/TV cartoons/etc. so this made it more streamlined and defined.
 
lazyboy97o

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
Ignohippo said:
Much like the theme park rights, that was the deal already in place before Disney bought Marvel. Disney would love to get Spider-Man back in the Avengers fold. Disney would not allow Sony to keep the rights under any circumstance if there was any way they could get them back. There are quite a few properties that cannot be reacquired unless the other film studios allow the rights to lapse.

The Fantastic Four and Spider-Man are perfect examples. They have had to re-boot those properties and get new movies out before their windows expire or the rights will revert back to Marvel/Disney. They have the movies in perpetuity, but they have to produce the movies within a specified time frame – they can't just sit on the rights.
Click to expand...
Not quite. The current arrangement with Sony is one brokered by Disney. At the time of the acquisition Sony, much like Fox remains, was under an obligation to produce films in order to retain the rights. Now Sony will keep Spider-Man without having to make a new film every few years, but Disney gets the merchandise rights to those films. Fox must keep making films and holds the merchandise rights.
 
raymusiccity

raymusiccity

Well-Known Member
Sped2424 said:
They are going to most likely tank the entire ship with batman vs superman which they are loading with so many characters all at once the film is going the route of a free for all. If they are trying to play catch up they are doing it all wrong, and this is coming from a huge DC fanboy. I just can't help but think the direction they are going in reeks of trouble and desperation.
Click to expand...

I think that casting Ben Affleck as Batman will be the final torpedo sinking the DC ship. Ben is so miscast that George Cloony looks like Sir Lawrence Olivier in comparison!
 
truecoat

truecoat

Well-Known Member
Captain Neo said:
Well it sure as heck isn't going to be Marvel. WB has been screwing up their comic properties left and right while Disney has been very careful in fine tuning and producing quality movies one after the other Pixar style.

Honestly, Man of Steel was a massive disappointment right there with the last attempt (Superman Returns) and the last Batman movie wasn't exactly great either. I would have been excited about a Batman Vs. Superman movie ten years ago but not now after seeing MOS and reading about the production of BvS.
Click to expand...

Disney was very lucky in that Kevin Feige was made Marvel Studio President back in 2007. He is the real reason for Marvel's movie success.

I'm just glad that Disney isn't meddling too much with what they are doing. I think Cap 2 is proof of this with it's edgier tone.
 
Cesar R M

Cesar R M

Well-Known Member
Ignohippo said:
I seriously doubt, even under the best of circumstances, that they could have projected Marvel continuing to be the massive hit it has been.

Pixar on the other hand, especially with it missing this year's release, may be lagging a bit behind projections. I'm sure the insane recent success of WDA makes up for it though.
Click to expand...
You could blame Lesseter for being overloaded with work.
as he is being asked to work in a lot of fronts at same time.
 
I

Ignohippo

Well-Known Member
Cesar R M said:
You could blame Lesseter for being overloaded with work.
as he is being asked to work in a lot of fronts at same time.
Click to expand...


Correct, but more I blame the idea that Pixar has to "earn" the money Disney paid for them and their current reliance on sequels. Add to that the constant pressure of having to constantly have bonified successes and I think Pixar is terrified of having a misstep.

The sequels have their place and I wouldn't want to lose them, but I've truly missed original content from Pixar in the past couple of years. Inside Out can't come soon enough.
 
D

doctornick

Well-Known Member
Ignohippo said:
Correct, but more I blame the idea that Pixar has to "earn" the money Disney paid for them and their current reliance on sequels. Add to that the constant pressure of having to constantly have bonified successes and I think Pixar is terrified of having a misstep.

The sequels have their place and I wouldn't want to lose them, but I've truly missed original content from Pixar in the past couple of years. Inside Out can't come soon enough.
Click to expand...

Especially since Brave was, y'know, kinda bad.
 
I

Ignohippo

Well-Known Member
truecoat said:
Disney was very lucky in that Kevin Feige was made Marvel Studio President back in 2007. He is the real reason for Marvel's movie success.

I'm just glad that Disney isn't meddling too much with what they are doing. I think Cap 2 is proof of this with it's edgier tone.
Click to expand...


Very true on all points. Kevin Feige is to Marvel what Lasseter is to Pixar. He's done an absolutely amazing job.

One question, is Marvel just as involved with the non-Disney distributed movies (Spider-Man, Ghost Rider, Fantastic Four, etc.) or do they only approve them? There is a huge difference in the quality of the Disney and non-Disney Marvel movies.

The newest incarnation of Spider-Man is fine (kinda on par with DC's latest Superman) but it's hardly of the same calibre as Iron Man, Thor and Cap.
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom