David Poland says "Disney might kill Thor."

[TheVileOne]

This came from David Poland on tonight's Attack of the Show on G4. Poland was on to talk about Disney buying Marvel. The picture Poland painted is that Marvel was essentially running out of cash and the benefit of the Disney acquisition is that now there will be more money to pay for the superhero pictures. However, Poland was saying Marvel probably does not have enough cash for Thor even though Iron Man was a great success (he said Hulk was not). And Disney might not be willing to pay for Thor directed by Kenneth Branagh, Cap, or Avengers. He specifically noted that Disney "might kill Thor."

Take for it what you will.

[FaT_tONle]

And so it begins... but who again is Poland may I ask?

[TheVileOne]

Poland is a film critic/reporter.

[yoshimura]

Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

[Chewy]

**** David Poland. The guy hates the genre and is consistently critical of its fans and creators.

Marvel clearly would be looking for funding for the projects they have in development, and funding for Thor/Cap/Avengers was likely high on their list of desires. The Marvel board probably wouldn't have okayed the purchase until Disney had agreed to provide the funding. Disney has been looking to purchase Marvel for a while, they aren't going to kill off its active projects

[TheVileOne]

Well I dunno. He said Marvel went with the acquisition so they would have money from Disney for their projects.

It seems odd for Poland to make such bold accusations, but he put them out there. So I mean I think its worth discussing.

We know, believe, and think these are active projects, but do we also know for sure that Marvel has enough money to fund these movies the way they want to.

[Chewy]

If you think these bold accusations by Poland are odd, read his Incredible Hulk review. He's an elitist douche who hates the genre, its fans, and sees no redeeming value in any of the characters/stories.

Of course Disney would want to kill off these "crap" projects

[TheVileOne]

I thought he liked Spider-man.

[Octoberist]

I think, let's say David is just making bold statements, it does make you think WHY this 'takeover' happened in the first place. Maybe Poland is hyperbolic about it, but I can't shake the idea that maybe that he might be right to a certain degree.

[FaT_tONle]

I doubt Disney's perogative was to buy this out, destroy Marvel's ongoing Avengers plan in the middle of it all, and then turn around to give us a "Here comes the Power Pack" promo a year from now. I say Poland is talking out of his ass. I know nothing about the guy or his history, but I will take Chewy's word on this.

[Webhead2006]

yea i dont think we have to worry about thor why wouldnt they want a potential film in the fantasy genre thats a great pull for boys.

[louiebling$]

This is just one Reporters Opinion.

[TheVileOne]

http://g4tv.com/videos/41060/Understanding-Disneys-Marvel-Purchase/

Here's the whole segment.

[Venom'sDad]

I think, let's say David is just making bold statements, it does make you think WHY this 'takeover' happened in the first place. Maybe Poland is hyperbolic about it, but I can't shake the idea that maybe that he might be right to a certain degree.
I have to agree... I feel the same way. Whelther one like this guy or not; or is talking out the side of his neck... he make some very valid points, and at this point, we really don't know what the fine details are or the rationale behind the deal and future projects.

[He-Man]

Disney is not touching Thor. Its staying with Paramount.

http://www.superherohype.com/news.php?id=8645

UPDATE #3: The deal with Paramount Pictures to distribute five films--"Iron Man 2," "Thor," "Captain America," "The Avengers" and "Iron Man 3"--stays in place as well, but Disney would like to self-distribute down the line. "When the time comes we'll take a closer look at it."

[Antonello Blueberry]

Poland knows nothing, he's not a good critic and he claims to be an expert in movie financing when he's not.

[FaT_tONle]

Disney is not touching Thor. Its staying with Paramount.

http://www.superherohype.com/news.php?id=8645

UPDATE #3: The deal with Paramount Pictures to distribute five films--"Iron Man 2," "Thor," "Captain America," "The Avengers" and "Iron Man 3"--stays in place as well, but Disney would like to self-distribute down the line. "When the time comes we'll take a closer look at it."

That Paramount deal is irrelevant. I agree with Venom that Poland did have valid points. Should Disney not want to bankroll Thor/Cap... send Avengers to Pixar or whatever... they can do that. Paramount can do nothing to prevent them. All they have is the right to distribute the next five films. Those films may very well be Power Pack, or a major animated feature for that matter. I am sure Paramount will try to file some sort of law suit, but I really don't think they'd care enough for movies like Thor/Cap. IM will be distributed at Paramount no matter what and that alone may keep them satisfied.

[He-Man]

That Paramount deal is irrelevant. I agree with Venom that Poland did have valid points. Should Disney not want to bankroll Thor/Cap... send Avengers to Pixar or whatever... they can do that. Paramount can do nothing to prevent them. All they have is the right to distribute the next five films. Those films may very well be Power Pack, or a major animated feature for that matter. I am sure Paramount will try to file some sort of law suit, but I really don't think they'd care enough for movies like Thor/Cap. IM will be distributed at Paramount no matter what and that alone may keep them satisfied.

I get what you're saying. If Disney doesn't foot the bill there will be nothing for paramount to distribute. Hope that doesn't happen.

I think we will get it but if it bombs at the BO it's going to hurt other second-tier characters down the line.

[FaT_tONle]

Here may be another motivation to kill Thor... POTC is scheduled for 2011 as of now. How is Disney going to bankroll Thor, Cap, and Pirates in one summer alongside Cars 2? Before they just to worry about two of those films. Now all four? Someone has to go to 2012... meaning Avengers may get pushed to 2013/2014.

[Evil Twin]

Here may be another motivation to kill Thor... POTC is scheduled for 2011 as of now. How is Disney going to bankroll Thor, Cap, and Pirates in one summer alongside Cars 2? Before they just to worry about two of those films. Now all four? Someone has to go to 2012... meaning Avengers may get pushed to 2013/2014.

I'm sure Disney could afford to finance all those films. Now, whether they want to flood the market like that is another question.

I don't think there's any question that Pirates and Cars are guaranteed hits. I definitely could see them thinking that it might be better to move one of Thor or Cap to a later date and deciding that Thor is less of a guaranteed hit.

[UnionJack]

i would rather see thor and cap over more dull pirates and shiny cars with giant mouths.

disney know comic films have a VERY large audience from young to old.

why kill them for more crappy kids films!?

[Keyser Soze]

Marvel could afford an ambitious film slate before they had the financial might of Disney behind them. Why do we suddenly think they won't be able to afford it now that they do?

[Evil Twin]

i would rather see thor and cap over more dull pirates and shiny cars with giant mouths.

disney know comic films have a VERY large audience from young to old.

why kill them for more crappy kids films!?

Because the pirates and cars films are surer bets to make money?

Not saying that any decision has been made yet, but that would be awfully bold for a studio to finance 4 tentpoles of that size in one Summer.

[FaT_tONle]

Marvel could afford an ambitious film slate before they had the financial might of Disney behind them. Why do we suddenly think they won't be able to afford it now that they do?

If they are just handing out checks and have absolutely zero creative input for any of them, other than POTC, then fine. But just the logistics of it. How do you space out four, five films really if you count SM4 and their small profit from that, over one summer? I don't think you can move out of the summer slots either because of that summer release clause in the Paramount contract.

[Keyser Soze]

If they are just handing out checks and have absolutely zero creative input for any of them, other than POTC, then fine. But just the logistics of it. How do you space out four, five films really if you count SM4 and their small profit from that, over one summer? I don't think you can move out of the summer slots either because of that summer release clause in the Paramount contract.

There really should be no need to move anything. There was already some kind of financial plan in place for these films before Disney came along. Now that Disney have bought Marvel, it's not like all that money has magically evaporated and Disney will have to foot the bill for everything in every film.

I doubt Disney will be thinking about culling some of the movies from the summer slate. If anything, they'll be thinking how good it is that they have some kind of interest (and chance of profit) in the majority of major blockbusters in summer 2011, in one way or another.

And remember, though Disney is the parent company, these are still all their own divisions doing their own thing. Thor is not "in POTC's way" anymore than Up was in the way of Inglourious Basterds this summer.

[TheVileOne]

Marvel could afford an ambitious film slate before they had the financial might of Disney behind them. Why do we suddenly think they won't be able to afford it now that they do?

OK well let's look at that. of the non-Sony/Fox/Lionsgate movies, they did Hulk and Iron Man in 2008. So that was two movies last year.

This year there was only Wolverine from Fox.

Next year is only Iron Man 2 as Thor got delayed again. So tentatively, Thor and Cap are being positioned for 2011 with Avengers in 2012. That could all still change.

Keyser Soze, the question is, why they haven't been able to line up an ambitious film slate again without Disney? And why they want or need the backing of Disney in the first place?

Keyser Soze, its also the worry, that if Marvel in fact does NOT have the finances to fully fund Thor, Cap, and Avengers themselves in the coming years . . . will Disney really be willing to foot the bill?

[FaT_tONle]

There really should be no need to move anything. There was already some kind of financial plan in place for these films before Disney came along. Now that Disney have bought Marvel, it's not like all that money has magically evaporated and Disney will have to foot the bill for everything in every film.

I doubt Disney will be thinking about culling some of the movies from the summer slate. If anything, they'll be thinking how good it is that they have some kind of interest (and chance of profit) in the majority of major blockbusters in summer 2011, in one way or another.

And remember, though Disney is the parent company, these are still all their own divisions doing their own thing. Thor is not "in POTC's way" anymore than Up was in the way of Inglourious Basterds this summer.

You are talking about a three month gap for two completely different genres. This isn't a Touchstone or Mirimax small budget feature we are talking about either. As of now you got:

SM4 May 6 2011
Thor May 20th 2011
Cars 2 June 24th 2011
Cap July 22nd 2011

Now there is time to release POTC4 somewhere between all of that, but then it's going to conflict with the other big tentpoles that summer, most notably GL, Potter, KF Panda 2, etc. I don't see how that's a good business move unless you move Cap out of 2011.

[TheComicbookKid]

The scheduling conflict does sound plausible. Now that Disney is in charge, they'll pay Marvel's Merrill Lynch loan in full so Marvel doesn't have to worry about releasing a certain movie in a certain summer. POTC is a proven franchise and would take precedent over Cap, Thor, or the Avengers.

The only thing forcing them to release stuff in the summer is the Paramount contract.

[TheCorpulent1]

I'll worry about Thor getting canned if there's an actual announcement about it. Some random film critic who's not directly connected to the movie doesn't hold much sway with me.

[FaT_tONle]

Whatever the case may be, Thor fan's better pray Depp's schedule over the next couple of years is so tight that they won't be able to shoot Pirates in time for a 2011 release. Better yet, he signs onto a Dr. Strange movie first.

[smooth3006]

if they do drop this flick, i can't wait to see the reaction on here...same with captain and the avengers! :wow:

[TheVileOne]

I think what we just want to know is, does Marvel have the finances now to go forward with Thor and Cap without funding (*interference*) from Disney.

Now here's the other thing. If Disney does oblige and fund the rest of these projects, will they REALLY keep their hands off approach.

I mean Marvel has a good track record guys but its NOT a Pixar track record. Just about everything Pixar does makes over $200 million domestic as of late. The Incredible Hulk sort of puts a blemish on the Marvel track record and makes me hard pressed to believe that Disney will uphold their "hands off" mantra.

[smooth3006]

i think what we just want to know is, does marvel have the finances now to go forward with thor and cap without funding (*interference*) from disney.

Now here's the other thing. If disney does oblige and fund the rest of these projects, will they really keep their hands off approach.

I mean marvel has a good track record guys but its not a pixar track record. Just about everything pixar does makes over $200 million domestic as of late. The incredible hulk sort of puts a blemish on the marvel track record and makes me hard pressed to believe that disney will uphold their "hands off" mantra.


+1000

[Keyser Soze]

You are talking about a three month gap for two completely different genres. This isn't a Touchstone or Mirimax small budget feature we are talking about either. As of now you got:

SM4 May 6 2011
Thor May 20th 2011
Cars 2 June 24th 2011
Cap July 22nd 2011

Now there is time to release POTC4 somewhere between all of that, but then it's going to conflict with the other big tentpoles that summer, most notably GL, Potter, KF Panda 2, etc. I don't see how that's a good business move unless you move Cap out of 2011.

This is really all worst case scenario conjecture. "Summer 2011 is gonna be really busy" is hardly news, and people have been devising up elaborate scenarios for how Thor/Green Lantern/Captain America/all of the above are in fact never going to get made for months now. Cars 2 is still a Pixar film. Spider-Man 4 is still a Sony Pictures film. and Thor and Captain America are still Marvel Studios films. It's just now they're all, to varying degrees, under the Disney umbrella. But I think Disney will be too blinded by the dollar signs in their eyes at all the increased revenue headed their way to cook up Machiavellian schemes to sabotage films they now hold influence over in order to serve up a cushier spot for Pirates 4.

I think we should be careful with discussion like this, because if you say "what if" and "maybe" in a scary voice enough times people start taking it as fact and panicking. Just look at the healthcare debate.

If anything's going to kill Thor, it's going to be everyone coming to the groundless assumption that it's already dead, like some kind of self-fulfilling prophecy.

[FaT_tONle]

if they do drop this flick, i can't wait to see the reaction on here...same with captain and the avengers! :wow:

I'll walk from Marvel movies other than Spiderman... for now... after ranting a little of course... :cwink:

I think what we just want to know is, does Marvel have the finances now to go forward with Thor and Cap without funding (*interference*) from Disney.

Now here's the other thing. If Disney does oblige and fund the rest of these projects, will they REALLY keep their hands off approach.

I mean Marvel has a good track record guys but its NOT a Pixar track record. Just about everything Pixar does makes over $200 million domestic as of late. The Incredible Hulk sort of puts a blemish on the Marvel track record and makes me hard pressed to believe that Disney will uphold their "hands off" mantra.

I think it is obvious that Marvel could not fund those two films as it stands right now without putting themselves in more debt.

This is really all worst case scenario conjecture. "Summer 2011 is gonna be really busy" is hardly news, and people have been devising up elaborate scenarios for how Thor/Green Lantern/Captain America/all of the above are in fact never going to get made for months now. Cars 2 is still a Pixar film. Spider-Man 4 is still a Sony Pictures film. and Thor and Captain America are still Marvel Studios films. It's just now they're all, to varying degrees, under the Disney umbrella. But I think Disney will be too blinded by the dollar signs in their eyes at all the increased revenue headed their way to cook up Machiavellian schemes to sabotage films they now hold influence over in order to serve up a cushier spot for Pirates 4.

I think we should be careful with discussion like this, because if you say "what if" and "maybe" in a scary voice enough times people start taking it as fact and panicking. Just look at the healthcare debate.

If anything's going to kill Thor, it's going to be everyone coming to the groundless assumption that it's already dead, like some kind of self-fulfilling prophecy.

I just think it's incredibly short sighted not giving yourself 3-4 week gaps between 150 million dollar tentpole films, regardless of whether they operate as independent subsidiaries. It's all under the same house. Cap can use the extra year without a doubt. Obviously delaying Avengers another year(s) probably means everything from TIH will be lost (particularly Norton), but we expected that anyways. I am not against delaying the slate if there is no way Marvel can make it work.

[Webhead2006]

Yup to their is news from marvel, disney, paramount, and thor/cap directors about the whole thing we are in. I dont see why anything is going to change. Plus yea like everyone else said before the whole disney merger 2011 was going to be a busy year for comic/fantasy pics as it is. I dont see any probably for the sony/paramount marvel movies, any wb movies, or the disney films we know about all cant be out in the year. Their is plently of space through may-aug to give each 2-3 weeks between each other and still make a good money for all studios if each film is a hit.

[Evil Twin]

I think it is obvious that Marvel could not fund those two films as it stands right now without putting themselves in more debt.



Well, I don't think the debt was the issue, as much as how much debt Marvel could get into at once.

I don't know what the budget is for IM2, but something around $200 million sounds probable to me. Toss in another $150 million apiece for Thor and Captain America, if they want to get shooting early to maintain a realistic 2011 schedule, and Marvel could have outstanding loans of $500 million with no money coming in until May 2010. I'm sure the interest would not be insignificant on that amount. The interest might have been so significant that there was little chance Marvel would make any money except on the most massive of hits.

And the consequences of one of their films flopping would be astronomical.

I'd say that the Disney buyout represents a massive safety net. In the long run they probably will sacrifice some independence. And the schedule probably won't be as aggressive. But, there's also about 0% probability of the whole thing crashing and burning as well.

[TheVileOne]

This is really all worst case scenario conjecture. "Summer 2011 is gonna be really busy" is hardly news, and people have been devising up elaborate scenarios for how Thor/Green Lantern/Captain America/all of the above are in fact never going to get made for months now. Cars 2 is still a Pixar film. Spider-Man 4 is still a Sony Pictures film. and Thor and Captain America are still Marvel Studios films. It's just now they're all, to varying degrees, under the Disney umbrella. But I think Disney will be too blinded by the dollar signs in their eyes at all the increased revenue headed their way to cook up Machiavellian schemes to sabotage films they now hold influence over in order to serve up a cushier spot for Pirates 4.

I think we should be careful with discussion like this, because if you say "what if" and "maybe" in a scary voice enough times people start taking it as fact and panicking. Just look at the healthcare debate.

If anything's going to kill Thor, it's going to be everyone coming to the groundless assumption that it's already dead, like some kind of self-fulfilling prophecy.
OK Keyser, but is the money there for Thor right now?

[Keyser Soze]

OK Keyser, but is the money there for Thor right now?

I of course am not in a position to say that for sure, but from what little I know about the process of film production, I'd imagine that extensive pre-production, writing the script, bringing a name director onboard, and hiring several actors in key roles tend to come after "Do we have any money to make this film?"

[Chewy]

Even if the money isn't there, Vile, why are you buying into Poland's BS that Disney isn't planning on providing it? What is it about Thor that leads you to believe they want to pull the plug? What makes it any different than Cap, or Iron Man (pre the first movie), or any of these other properties that are being adapted?

I think all of this comes back to people not necessarily believing that the property can be adapted into a successful film, a belief that obviously Marvel disagrees with. And people had the same belief regarding IM just a few years ago

[TheComicbookKid]

If anything's going to kill Thor, it's going to be everyone coming to the groundless assumption that it's already dead, like some kind of self-fulfilling prophecy.

Well I wouldn't go that far.

But I agree. There' s no way Thor isn't going to happen. When is a question in my mind.

[Evil Twin]

I think there's still the question of whether Thor's budget can be brought down to a reasonable level as opposed to whether Marvel/Disney can afford to finance it. A $300 million Thor is likely a Thor that loses money, probably a lot. As is a $250 million Thor. A $200 million Thor is probably risky as well. Is a $150 million Thor doable?

I do think that Disney does have more options. I've no doubt that Cars 2 would play well in winter, although it's obvious why Disney would want a Christmas DVD release of a Pixar movie.

[Chewy]

I don't think they would have moved forward with Branagh's version of the film unless he was able to get the budget around $150M. They wouldn't move forward with Vaughn's version of it because he couldn't get the budget that low

[TheCorpulent1]

$150 million is no small change. I think they should be able to make a good Thor movie with that.

[Evil Twin]

I don't think they would have moved forward with Branagh's version of the film unless he was able to get the budget around $150M. They wouldn't move forward with Vaughn's version of it because he couldn't get the budget that low

Yeah, but it's a process. The goal may be to keep it around $150M, but it may be easier said than done. We don't know what the current cost estimates are coming back at and whether more cuts are needed to meet that goal or not.

They haven't moved forward to filming yet. It's still likely, but it's not written in stone either.

[Chewy]

Yeah, but they wouldn't even move forward to casting on Vaughn's version unless he got the budget down to $150M, which he wouldn't/couldn't do.

Of course it is easier said than done, and budgets are constantly in flux during a film's pre-pro stage (and throughout production), but I think they probably have the budget on their minds constantly given their over-spending/under-earning on Incredible Hulk.

[TheVileOne]

I of course am not in a position to say that for sure, but from what little I know about the process of film production, I'd imagine that extensive pre-production, writing the script, bringing a name director onboard, and hiring several actors in key roles tend to come after "Do we have any money to make this film?"
Yeah its not that simple. Have you not seen how much money has been burned before in the pre-production stages of movies that never made it to the screen?

[Keyser Soze]

Yeah its not that simple. Have you not seen how much money has been burned before in the pre-production stages of movies that never made it to the screen?

Sure, but there's been nothing whatsoever to suggest that Thor will be such a film. Yes, a film's release isn't certain until cameras start rolling, and even then it can be up in the air, but nothing whatsoever has pointed to this being a film on the brink, or a film that can't be financed. The only inkling of budget troubles was when Matthew Vaughn left because he couldn't do the film on-budget, but as others have said I think it's a safe assumption that the director who replaced him could.

[Evil Twin]

Just to stop with the gloom and doom, I do think it's fair to file Dave Poland's comment under "unconfirmed rumor" for now.

It wouldn't be particularly surprising given the history if the budget is still giving them problems, but it's certainly not something any of us are going to know at this stage.

[Keyser Soze]

Just to stop with the gloom and doom, I do think it's fair to file Dave Poland's comment under "unconfirmed rumor" for now.

It wouldn't be particularly surprising given the history if the budget is still giving them problems, but it's certainly not something any of us are going to know at this stage.

It's not even "unconfirmed rumor". It's not a "rumor" anymore than me going on the Captain America casting thread and saying Philip Seymour Hoffman should play Cap makes that a rumor. Like I said, "worst case scenario conjecture" sounds more appropriate.

[Chewy]

Disney might kill the Thor movie. And cancel his ongoing comic. And stop development on his animated series.

Or they might, you know, not

[Marvin]

$150 million is no small change. I think they should be able to make a good Thor movie with that.

I'm inclined to think that depends on weather they're making a epic gritty film(ala 13th Warrior) or a cgi laden fantasy

that being said, I'm sure they could pull this off for even less
7rnTpR4M1ZI

this is disney after all
still can't believe that's vincent D

[Evil Twin]

It's not even "unconfirmed rumor". It's not a "rumor" anymore than me going on the Captain America casting thread and saying Philip Seymour Hoffman should play Cap makes that a rumor. Like I said, "worst case scenario conjecture" sounds more appropriate.

Dave Poland has some credibility as a reporter. That makes it more relevant than a random post on a message board. Although reading through his website, I do think it's fair to say that it's more conjecture than rumor in this specific instance, it wouldn't exactly be surprising if he's heard something specific that raised that conjecture in the first place.

[Keyser Soze]

Dave Poland has some credibility as a reporter. That makes it more relevant than a random post on a message board. Although reading through his website, I do think it's fair to say that it's more conjecture than rumor in this specific instance, it wouldn't exactly be surprising if he's heard something specific that raised that conjecture in the first place.

Going by Chewy's report on the guy, it's probably based on him gleefully rubbing his hands together at the thought of the superhero bubble bursting more than anything else.

[Chewy]

If you haven't encountered Poland before, here's his Incredible Hulk review. A fun read if you understand going into it how much this guy HATES comic book fans.


As I sat through the amazingly indulged mediocrity that it The Incredible Hulk - and no, it's not like Iron Man where I was looking at the same ingredients and expressing different taste... this film is not even close to the quality of that other overrated summer Marvel - what suddenly struck me was...

Irwin Allen.

Producer of Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea, Lost In Space, Land of The Giants, The Poseidon Adventure, and The Towering Inferno and inspiration for spectacular crap from Earthquake to Rollercoaster.

What struck me is that I need to buy some Marvel stock, because they are, indeed, about to go on a 2 or 3 year run of producing mediocre crap that appeals to a certain audience in much the same way Irwin Allen's stuff appealed to me. It was junk... but it was my junk. And really, there is nothing wrong with that, so long as you don't try to tell me that it's actually skilled work or remotely interesting in any way deeper than the first millionth of an inch of Giant Dill Pickle Man's skin.

The Incredible Hulk suddenly lit me up with the long line of how we got here… horrible movie after horrible movie doing over $100 million… from Daredevil to Fantastic Four to Ghost Rider to Iron Man to this… bad directors, talent having fallen from grace, lots of fake looking CG, and a solid core of ticket buyers.

Here’s another part of the phenomenon… the bigger suit.

Since Marvel took over their own productions, we are now 2-for-2 with first stories that include the hallmark of the first sequel… The Bigger Suit. Iron Man fought one. Hulk fights one. I sense a theme in development.

And this idea of stringing all the characters together, bit by bit. Genius.

Warner Bros has to step away from the bank vault and come to understand… no one in this demo much cares about whether the movie is actually good. Stop spending $200 million chasing ghosts of past successes. They want the pieces of film they are waiting for - the insider nods, the big fight, the overblown score - and they will not only come, but they will claim the work is GREAT.

The truth is, for all its flaws, there is not a single frame of The Incredible Hulk that contains a fragment of the artistry that Ang Lee brought to Hulk. Of course, the film was too long and the psychodrama too thick for most people. But there was true aesthetic beauty.

None here.

I hate to even pull this one out of the backpack, but Speed Racer? Genius in comparison. Every frame.

And Hellboy II is on the way. Can you imagine? Even if, somehow, there is a story problem, the magic of del Toro’s work… the f-ing trailer is more powerful than the entirety of TIH, squared.

And from the early look at Wall-E… neither Marvel entry even begins to aspire to a sliver of the magic that Pixar is chasing there.

Still, if the audience wants it, how can we be angry at it being handed to them? They wanted a Hulk movie where Hulk smashed and spoke words and destroyed two college campuses and New York City. Woo hoo!!!

It’s crap! I tell you. It’s crap!

But if you love crap – and I certainly have in my life – it’s what you might well want as you wait for the better movies of this summer to come.

And in a few years, Marvel will make the equivalent of The Swarm and this trend will be over. In the meanwhile, the stock price will soar!

So… how far can we be from Sensaround coming back?EDIT: wrong link, sorry
http://www.mcnblogs.com/thehotblog/archives/2008/06/marvel_at_a_new.html

[FaT_tONle]

I don't have any problems with that review. Not in terms of agreeing with all of it, but if he wants to take that stance let him take that stance. In the interview on G4 he is pretty objective. Disney does have the option of killing all of this. He does poke fun at the fans but who doesn't? It's nothing new for fanboys. But I agree with the premise, that a select few films bring a certain art form to the table, whereas Marvel has just failed to do so. I honestly believe that. I hope Branagh changes that. Joe Johnston's Cap? Wouldn't bet a dime on it. But anyhow, back on topic.

[RachelDawes]

It's not even "unconfirmed rumor". It's not a "rumor" anymore than me going on the Captain America casting thread and saying Philip Seymour Hoffman should play Cap makes that a rumor. Like I said, "worst case scenario conjecture" sounds more appropriate.

I believe this is true and that's a relief. I really want to see Thor happen.

$150 million is no small change. I think they should be able to make a good Thor movie with that.

Who's that in your avatar?

[Timstuff]

Disney is actually very enthusiastic about the Thor franchise. In fact, they even put together a trailer for a new Thor TV series that will be airing on ABC Family Channel next fall (2010):

_6OCbAnI51g

[Canis Sapiens]

:woot: Awesome. And that soundtrack is hilarious.

[topdog1]

Well, I don't think the debt was the issue, as much as how much debt Marvel could get into at once.

I don't know what the budget is for IM2, but something around $200 million sounds probable to me. Toss in another $150 million apiece for Thor and Captain America, if they want to get shooting early to maintain a realistic 2011 schedule, and Marvel could have outstanding loans of $500 million with no money coming in until May 2010. I'm sure the interest would not be insignificant on that amount. The interest might have been so significant that there was little chance Marvel would make any money except on the most massive of hits.

And the consequences of one of their films flopping would be astronomical.

I'd say that the Disney buyout represents a massive safety net. In the long run they probably will sacrifice some independence. And the schedule probably won't be as aggressive. But, there's also about 0% probability of the whole thing crashing and burning as well.

Merging with Disney does represent a massive safety net.

What I want to know is if the Merrill Lynch financing will stay in place? Will Marvel operate separately and use the established battle plan anyway? Paying the percentage on the loans seems dumb given Disney's deep pockets but the POTC question is a valid one. It's a unique situation because Marvel has their own studio complex and personal in place. Disney may just want to be overlord but not actively involved. Make the film and then turn over profits to the parent company. Make the film using the existing Merrill Lynch funds and business model.

This is all so confusing.

One thing is for sure, David Poland is an uniformed putz.

Only MVL is required to divest assets, if necessary and with DIS permission, to gain regulatory approval. So, we may all get a look at Marvel's true financial books when they file for regulatory approval.

[FaT_tONle]

If the loan was around 500 million per say, IM was 160, more like 180. Hulk was 150. IM2 was 200. That money is gone. Marvel probably covered most of it anyhow with their profits on IM/TIH. Disney will probably cover the rest. So I doubt Disney has been a huge financial player thus far besides the complete buyout of course.

[Webhead2006]

Yup that guy does seem like a big ASS i dont see anything to worry about from thor/cap/etc.... films left in marvel studios paramount deal. I do want to hear what the marvel comics heads have to say, what thor/cap/ironman directors have to say, and then kevin F has to say about the whole disney thing.

[yoshimura]

I says "Thor might kill David Poland."

[TheCorpulent1]

Who's that in your avatar?
Ethan Marr, a character in the game Heavy Rain.

[Venom'sDad]

If the loan was around 500 million per say, IM was 160, more like 180. Hulk was 150. IM2 was 200. That money is gone. Marvel probably covered most of it anyhow with their profits on IM/TIH. Disney will probably cover the rest. So I doubt Disney has been a huge financial player thus far besides the complete buyout of course.

I get what you are saying; but that's not all the money they have made. Fast-food tie-ins, school supplies and clothing, DVD/BluRay sales, toys, etc.

[Chewy]

Here's what Poland wrote on his blog. This makes it clear that, as suspected, he's merely speculating.

I'm also not clear on why he thinks Disney would be willing to spend $200M on IM3 and would not be willing to spend $200M on Avengers, given that Avengers could be sold as essentially an IM3 to general audiences. But that's David Poland for you
This is not that complicated.

Disney will now own Marvel, which in spite of what some have spun, have so far been the hands-on manager of just one franchise-level hit (Iron Man). The idea that Disney will treat it with the respect it treats Pixar’s relentless money/genius machine is absurd on its face.

A big part of the Marvel deal is that they have been funding their movies under current management. Iron Man, The Incredible Hulk, and Thor… which is still 5 or 6 months from production.

Let’s assume that Iron Man 2 makes good money. Great. But if Thor, an untested character, performs like The Incredible Hulk, it will lose money, like The Incredible Hulk lost money.

It’s hard to do any of these movies for $125 million, much less under that figure.

Could Thor, in pre-production, be a turnaround waiting to happen? Probably not.

But what does Disney do, regardless of whether Paramount has a distribution deal for - after the presumed next two releases - three more Marvel movies if Thor is a money loser?

Well… one film will be Iron Man 3. Easy enough.

Do I smell a mostly live-action Nick Fury film with Sam Jackson and an $80 million budget?

Or is that Jerry Bruckheimer doing a $180 million Nick Fury, trying to stabilize the potential for Avengers with something more than Robert Downey, Jr.’s smirk?

What I don’t smell so much, unless Thor gets made and makes $400 million worldwide or more or Disney gives it all to Bruckheimer, who is the only producer other than Pixar they have allowed these kinds of budgets without a partner (see: Anschutz), is a $200 million-plus Avengers movie.
Hell, I’m still choking on G-Force being made for what is apparently over $150 million. WHAT?!?!!? Bruckheimer… that’s what.

I’m not saying that the fanboys have to go nutso crazy and start petition drives right now. But you have to expect that a business that wasn’t working well enough to stand on its own – at least not with a $4 billion valuation – to be set loose to spend hundreds of millions (production only) on a couple of films a year. That’s not going to happen.SOURCE (http://www.mcnblogs.com/thehotblog/archives/2009/08/how_the_disney.html)

[RachelDawes]

Ethan Marr, a character in the game Heavy Rain.

Thank you.

[Canis Sapiens]

Now here's an interesting read about the Disney/Marvel deal. Not exclusively Thor related, but very interesting... the first and last sentences in the article made me feel very optimistic.

EXCLUSIVE: The first thing you should know is that Bob Iger has comic books in his blood. And the second thing you should know is that his ties to Marvel go back two generations. His late great-uncle (his grandfather's brother) was illustrator/cartoonist Jerry Iger, who partnered with illustrator/cartoonist Will Eisner back in the 1930s to create -- you guessed it -- the comic book packager Eisner & Iger Studios. I couldn't make up this stuff if I tried... (Blackthorne Publishing has released three compilations of Jerry Iger-related comics: The Iger Comics Kingdom, Jerry Iger's Classic Jumbo Comics, Jerry Iger's Classic National Comics, and Jerry Iger's Golden Features. Will Eisner is no relation to Michael Eisner.) iger 2mouse smallAnd their first hire was Jack Kirby, who as you know later became the co-creator of many of Marvel's best known characters with Stan Lee. So Bob Iger had an unusually rich appreciation for the comic book biz dating back to his childhood when his great-uncle would draw for him. Fast forward to Monday's Disney-Marvel deal, which I've learned was 10 years in conception, and three months in negotiation between Iger and Ike Perlmutter for the 7,000 Marvel characters -- that's right, 7,000, not the 5,000 number every media outlet keeps reporting including me.

I'm told that, back in the 1990s, when Michael Eisner ran Disney and Bob Iger was his No. 2 (a teaming I liked to call FrankenEisner and Igor back then), the moguls had on-again, off-again coversations about acquiring Marvel. But there was never any attempt at a negotiation because "the brand didn't seem Disney," as a source tells me. Once Iger took over Disney as CEO, and recently embarked on its stock buyback, the Big Media company found itself sitting on excess cash even after investing in Pixar and everything else. That's when the troika of Iger, Tom Staggs, Sr EVP/CFO, and Kevin Mayer, EVP of Corporate Strategy, Business Development and Technology Group, stepped up their look for growth opportunities. And Marvel came up again, this time much more seriously. Iger even discussed this directly with his division heads. It's a testament to Disney's limitless penchant for secrecy that even though about a dozen people knew Disney had decided to go after Marvel, there was no leak.

In June, Iger flew to New York to meet with CEO Ike Perlmutter in his Marvel office. In a show of transparency, Iger had already let the wily but no-nonsense Israeli (who'd beaten back two billionaires, Ron Perelman and Carl Icahn, for control of Marvel) know that Disney was interested in buying Marvel and wanted to start negotiating. ("It would have been manipulative if I'd approached it any other way," Iger told a pal. "You know how that goes. Someone invites you for dinner. And, after a glass of wine, he tells you he wants to buy you. And the wine never tastes quite as good after that.")

But Perlmutter expressed little interest in a deal, even though he liked Disney and all that the name, company, branding, implied. "I've heard good things about Disney. But I don't need to sell. I don't want to sell," Perlmutter told Iger, according to my insiders. But, eventually, Iger got to the heart of Perlmutter's objection: Ike didn't want to retire. He wanted to continue to work because Marvel was what he loved.

As due diligence went on, Disney saw nothing in Marvel's books that indicated Marvel was under financial pressure or Perlmutter had any need to sell. So the price had to be right. From June to Sunday night, both sides eventually became "more comfortable" with the $4 billion valuation, according to my insiders. A little math shows that Perlmutter, who owns 37% of his public company, stands to reap $1.5 billion in cash and stock. Sources tell me that this sell-out has been Perlmutter's strategy all along. "This was always an acquisition play for Ike," one insider explains to me. "This deal with Disney just ups his game and creates shareholder value and lets him walk away a billionaire."

Content-wise, the two moguls agreed that Marvel would continue to operate independently of the notoriously micro-managing Disney in the same way that Miramax did under the Weinstein Brothers. Though that probably won't make even hardcore fanboys feel better about the deal they're pissing on all over the Internet yesterday and today. (Given what Iger likes to refer to as the "combustion of digital word of mouth" that operates these days, Iger and Perlmutter have their work cut out for them trying to get skeptical fanboys to believe that Disney has no intention of altering the creative approach which Marvel takes to its comic books and movies. Of course, it helps the corporate confluence between the two companies that Marvel's movie fare has been and will be "PG-13".)

Every subsequent meeting between Iger and Perlmutter took place in NY. Finally, it was late Sunday night, very late, that the deal was done. There was no celebration. Both moguls went back to their respective homes to get ready for Monday's early morning announcement.

One more thing you should know: I've learned that, for the past 2 months, Iger has been reading the new Marvel Encyclopedia to soak up the backstories of all the Marvel characters and comics.


Source: http://www.deadlinehollywooddaily.com/behind-the-scenes-of-disney-marvel-deal/

[yoshimura]

Wow, David poland is an idiot.

[FaT_tONle]

Wow, David poland is an idiot.

I really don't think it's that far off saying if Thor does TIH numbers the Avengers movie could be in jeapordy. They are already going to have to scamper their asses off to meet that 2012 release date, but say there are delays and they postpone Avengers until after IM3 or just any problems with the production, maybe they will hold off on Avengers until the numbers for Thor come in. Now there is a possibility that if IM2 does a 450/400 split, Avengers is fast tracked no matter what. We'll see.

[KangConquers]

I'm really worried about Thor. Thor and Cap are the two movies that most interest me on Marvel's slate.:csad:

[TheVileOne]

Iger having a relative that worked in comics doesn't necessarily make me trust Iger more.

[KangConquers]

I really don't think it's that far off saying if Thor does TIH numbers the Avengers movie could be in jeapordy. They are already going to have to scamper their asses off to meet that 2012 release date, but say there are delays and they postpone Avengers until after IM3 or any problems with the production, maybe they will hold off on Avengers until the numbers for Thor come in. Now there is a possibility that if IM2 does a 450/400 split, Avengers is fast tracked no matter what. We'll see.

Just curious, what are your predicted box office figures for Cap and Thor?

[Chewy]

I wouldn't be too concerned about Thor. Disney funded a live-action Prince of Persia, Thor isn't too far off or any riskier of a prospect. And unlike Iron Man, whose forseeable sequels (IM2, IM3, Avengers) all come with paychecks to Paramount attached, if the Thor movie hits and hits big Disney could have their very own superhero franchise all to themselves. Which was obviously one of the goals of the purchase in the first place.

[TheCorpulent1]

Iger having a relative that worked in comics doesn't necessarily make me trust Iger more.
I don't trust anyone in business, really, since I don't pretend to actually know any of them. But it is nice to hear that the new owner of Marvel is taking an interest in the characters.

[yoshimura]

Thor's gonna make reh-dik-ulouz amounts of money. My only concern is that by 2011 we'll be in a depression and living in a police state. Other than that, Thor & Cap are laughing all the way to golden coinage.

[Keyser Soze]

I really hope the box office pie in Summer 2011 is big enough for Green Lantern, Captain America AND Thor to get a generous slice.

[TheCorpulent1]

I wouldn't count on any comic book movies being automatic successes anymore. They've been around for long enough now that they're becoming commonplace. Big, special-effects-laden shoot-'em-ups were guaranteed to turn big profits once upon a time, but now they come and go with barely a whimper often enough.

[Chewy]

Summer 2011 is really turning into quite the cluster****

Thor
Green Lantern
Captain America
Spider-Man 4
Harry Potter 8
Pirates of the Caribbean 4
Cowboys and Aliens
Kung Fu Panda 2
The Hangover 2
Cars 2
Star Trek 2
The Expendables
and now potentially Lobo

I mean, Jesus

[TheCorpulent1]

They've actually got a sequel to The Hangover moving forward with a general release target? Yeesh, I thought Conan and, like, every star of the first movie were just making jokes about that.

[Chewy]

Yeah, they gave it a very firm date - one week after Thor

[yoshimura]

Isn't Green Lantern being pushed back 5 months?

[TheVileOne]

Green Hornet was delayed.

[yoshimura]

OOOOooh. oh.

thanks

[FaT_tONle]

Just curious, what are your predicted box office figures for Cap and Thor?

Too early to say, but I'd go 130/200 for Thor. Anywhere from 180-250 domestic for Cap with 150-200 WW. Around 350-400 WW for both, which I would think will be acceptable for them. I don't see an outright flop. I'll be shocked if Avengers doesn't happen, but until another character not named Iron Man performs, the doubts will linger.

[Venom'sDad]

I don't see Cap doing that well over seas; mainly because of what he represent, and the sentiments towards America. Needs more time and info before putting a figure to it.

[Webhead2006]

Yup there is nothing we fans can do about things. As for thor and cap i see no issues with them right now. To something is said by paramount, marvel, and their respected directors i think everything is still a go. And i am sure now with marvel with disney things can be marketed/promoted alot which disney is good at. Plus yea if disney is doing that persia film i would not see any problems with thor since they are in a simular genre type films, just like pirates was too for disney.

[FaT_tONle]

Summer 2011 is really turning into quite the cluster****

Thor
Green Lantern
Captain America
Spider-Man 4
Harry Potter 8
Pirates of the Caribbean 4
Cowboys and Aliens
Kung Fu Panda 2
The Hangover 2
Cars 2
Star Trek 2
The Expendables
and now potentially Lobo

I mean, Jesus

Expendables is April 2010 I believe. I haven't heard anything on Stark Trek 2, but if you had that AND POTC 4 with the rest of those films, I think the bubble will finally burst on the summer box office. So much money to go around that the studios will probably end up misplacing profits and lose money.

[zeptron]

Expendables got pushed to August 2010.

[Kurosawa]

While Thor is a comic book movie, it compares more to LOTR than anything else...and Disney wants a franchise like that badly.

[Evil Twin]

Nothing compares to LotR as far as general awareness. That's one of the best selling book series of the 20th century. Thor just as easily compares to Conan, Dragonslayer, and Beowulf. New Line wanted the next Harry Potter, but The Golden Compass wasn't it.

I'm sure Marvel has done some marketing studies, but I think at first blush the assumption would be that Thor is less popular than Wolverine. And that's where you set your budget with the hopes that it blows up big at the box office, ala Iron Man. But, Iron Man is likely to be the exception, not the rule.

[Venom'sDad]

Nothing compares to LotR as far as general awareness. That's one of the best selling book series of the 20th century. Thor just as easily compares to Conan, Dragonslayer, and Beowulf. New Line wanted the next Harry Potter, but The Golden Compass wasn't it.

I'm sure Marvel has done some marketing studies, but I think at first blush the assumption would be that Thor is less popular than Wolverine. And that's where you set your budget with the hopes that it blows up big at the box office, ala Iron Man. But, Iron Man is likely to be the exception, not the rule.
Exactly, I totally agree. Great post and overall point. :up:

I think that's what Poland was trying to get across. I'm no fan of the man, just saying; he did bring up some valid concerns for Disney, in todays economy.

[Webhead2006]

Stupid economy being a darn huge factor in everything in life these days. I hope our US economy can and does get back on track and in a better place sooner rather then later.

[Hypestyle]

Disney better not kill Thor, they'll have fan revolt on their hands.. Thor could be the Lord of the Rings franchise for the studio.. get with it.. publish more Thor comics, aggressively push more TPBs.. keep momentum on the animated projects.. thor probably isn't at the Universal Marvel island (is he?) so might as well start hiring blonde guys to walk around Orlando in the costume..

[Sawyer]

Are people actually taking this hack seriously? He sounds like he's full of **** to me...

[Texas]

Here may be another motivation to kill Thor... POTC is scheduled for 2011 as of now. How is Disney going to bankroll Thor, Cap, and Pirates in one summer alongside Cars 2? Before they just to worry about two of those films. Now all four? Someone has to go to 2012... meaning Avengers may get pushed to 2013/2014.

Here's the thing, "How is Marvel going to bankroll these movies" ? Has everyone forgotten that Marvel obtained financing a few years ago to produce their own movies. So, unless Disney wants to change that Marvel already has the financing as well as the profit made from the 1st Iron Man movie.:cwink:

[Webhead2006]

Yea i wont take this guys words as true to marvel/disney/ and thor director come out and say its capoots for now. This type of films is the market disney wants to get boy/teen males and all that. Plus droping the narina films and not really having any other fantasy type films like a lotr this is a potential frachise they would want to get up and going.

[spider-neil]

Summer 2011 is really turning into quite the cluster****

Thor
Green Lantern
Captain America
Spider-Man 4
Harry Potter 8
Pirates of the Caribbean 4
Cowboys and Aliens
Kung Fu Panda 2
The Hangover 2
Cars 2
Star Trek 2
The Expendables
and now potentially Lobo

I mean, Jesus

potentially TDK2 will be 2011 as well.

[Keyser Soze]

potentially TDK2 will be 2011 as well.

No it won't. Or at least, it's HIGHLY unlikely. If its coming in 2011 its waaaay behind schedule, as at this stage last time round (2 years before the release of TDK), the film's title and release date confirmed, the cast and director were officially announced as back on board, and Heath Ledger had been cast as The Joker. So I'd say it looks like Batman 3 will be 2012 at the very earliest.

[FaT_tONle]

Here's the thing, "How is Marvel going to bankroll these movies" ? Has everyone forgotten that Marvel obtained financing a few years ago to produce their own movies. So, unless Disney wants to change that Marvel already has the financing as well as the profit made from the 1st Iron Man movie.:cwink:

This was already brought up extensively in another thread. Marvel's financing deal, at least originally, was probably not enough to cover them completely for every film on the slate. Someone else said they had 150 million to spend on each film but I really doubt that was the case. Plus you are looking at a 200 million plus budget for most of these movie.

[Ash Talon]

Marvel's initial loan was for $500 million.

(in millions)
Iron Man cost: $140
Incredible Hulk cost: $150

Iron Man advertising: $100 (guess)
Incredible Hulk advertising: $100 (guess)

Iron Man box office: $585
Incredible Hulk box office: $263

which leaves $358. Paramount and Universal get a cut, but they may have also helped on advertising. Obviously, theater chains get a cut as well. Add in DVD/Blu-Ray revenue. And all the merchandising revenue which is actually probably at least another hundered million. And Marvel clearly made a profit off the two movies.

Do they have enough left over to finance another movie? Well, they have 2 movies in pre-production which takes some money. And of course are shooting IM2 as well. Therefore, their original loan has probably run out.

However, didn't they get another loan? I'm pretty sure there was a story about them getting another line of financing. At the very least, they had a revolving line of credit at Merril Lynch. So basically they'd be fine with funding other projects.

But it all comes down to this....why would Disney pay to acquire the Marvel brand and then kill the next Marvel films which are already in the pipeline? It makes no sense. So, Disney isn't going to kill Thor or Captain America.

[Webhead2006]

Yea and we know they did this deal for one of the reasons to gain the boy/teen/young adult male audience they lost in the last few years.

[Antonello Blueberry]

Marvel's initial loan was for $500 million.

(in millions)
Iron Man cost: $140
Incredible Hulk cost: $150

Iron Man advertising: $100 (guess)
Incredible Hulk advertising: $100 (guess)

Iron Man box office: $585
Incredible Hulk box office: $263

which leaves $358. Paramount and Universal get a cut, but they may have also helped on advertising. Obviously, theater chains get a cut as well. Add in DVD/Blu-Ray revenue. And all the merchandising revenue which is actually probably at least another hundered million. And Marvel clearly made a profit off the two movies.

Why waste time in speculations and first grade math when there's a yearly report ?
http://marvel.com/company/pdfs/2008_annual_report.pdf

[FaT_tONle]

Our 2008 net sales rose 39% to $676 million, driving a 47% increase in net income to $206 million, or $2.61 per diluted share.


So where does that 47% increase fit in? They sold 676 million in the green last year, and that was an increase of 206 million from last year or am I not reading that correctly?

[Chewy]

Net sales were $676M. Net Income was $206M. The percentages are the change from the previous year's Net sales/net income

[Webhead2006]

I myself dont get the whole money talk stuff, its something i dont really follow or understand.

[FaT_tONle]

Net sales were $676M. Net Income was $206M. The percentages are the change from the previous year's Net sales/net income

Ahh, I assumed sales were basically 100% income. 206 million in income for 2008 seems pretty light though no?

[Chewy]

Not really when you take into account the huge loan they had to repay and their assorted costs

[FaT_tONle]

Yeah but I don't think they had to pay that off in year one... or did they? Again if these loans work perpetually then I'd assume Marvel would have to pay them off on a year by year basis, but going from almost 700 in sales to 200 in income is a pretty wide margin. Obviously those sales numbers won't be nearly as high in 2009 and they probably needed a huge chunk of money to get these other films moving forward.

[TheComicbookKid]

Didn't Merrill Lynch get bought out by Bank of America? Maybe Marvel wanted to get out from under the loan ASAP.

[Octoberist]

potentially TDK2 will be 2011 as well.

TDK 2 sounds so weird. I prefer 'untitled Batman film 3'.

[TheCorpulent1]

Technically, untitled Batman film 7, when you get right down to it.

[Spider-Vader]

I don't believe this douche for a second.
Why would Disney cancel this movie when they're looking for an epic LOTR style series. Thor's right up their alley & it could be a potentially big hit. A mix between Iron Man & LOTR would sound pretty appealing to some people.

[Timstuff]

Marvel's initial loan was for $500 million.

(in millions)
Iron Man cost: $140
Incredible Hulk cost: $150

Iron Man advertising: $100 (guess)
Incredible Hulk advertising: $100 (guess)

Iron Man box office: $585
Incredible Hulk box office: $263

which leaves $358. Paramount and Universal get a cut, but they may have also helped on advertising. Obviously, theater chains get a cut as well. Add in DVD/Blu-Ray revenue. And all the merchandising revenue which is actually probably at least another hundered million. And Marvel clearly made a profit off the two movies.

Do they have enough left over to finance another movie? Well, they have 2 movies in pre-production which takes some money. And of course are shooting IM2 as well. Therefore, their original loan has probably run out.

However, didn't they get another loan? I'm pretty sure there was a story about them getting another line of financing. At the very least, they had a revolving line of credit at Merril Lynch. So basically they'd be fine with funding other projects.

But it all comes down to this....why would Disney pay to acquire the Marvel brand and then kill the next Marvel films which are already in the pipeline? It makes no sense. So, Disney isn't going to kill Thor or Captain America.

Your guesses for advertising are way off. No movie has ever had an advertising budget of 100 million or more. I'm pretty sure the most expensive on record is 50 or 60 million. Also, Iron Man's production budget was 183 million, not 140 million.

[FaT_tONle]

I assume the distributors cover much of the marketing fees.

[Antonello Blueberry]

I assume the distributors cover much of the marketing fees.
And you're right...

[Microchip]

But it all comes down to this....why would Disney pay to acquire the Marvel brand and then kill the next Marvel films which are already in the pipeline? It makes no sense. So, Disney isn't going to kill Thor or Captain America.
Exaaaaactly. Disney already has a youth following and people who know how to cater to them. They aren't going to make Marvel all kiddy just to bolster an already successful fanbase.

They've got Marvel for hitting the teen and young adult demographic, somewhere they have trouble with. They're not going to shut down Thor or Captain America. They want to see what their new assets can do.

[irishjosh]

Sorry but f**k that I'll be pissed if they do that

[The Ace of Knaves]

Marvel short on cash? The comic book industry is booming. High sales, high prices. Big profits from the likes or Iron Man.

Disney didn't take over because Marvel needed cash. Disney took over because THEY wanted a big piece of the comic book pie. Which is very lucrative at the moment. End of story.

And anyway, this guy is a film critic? What the **** does he know about the takeover of business in general? He's a film critic. He can't be taken seriously when talking about business things, that hasn't got anything to do with him.

It would be like a chef making bold and supposed factual statements about government wetwork operations.

[I SEE SPIDEY]

I agree, I don't understand what the big deal is? David Poland is a critic that I don't listen to, nothing more.

Anything can happen with movies in early development so I'm not saying it won't be cancelled but I don't think David Poland knows anything.

[Evil Twin]

Marvel short on cash? The comic book industry is booming. High sales, high prices. Big profits from the likes or Iron Man.

There's nothing "high" about comic book sales on a historical basis. Quite the opposite actually. It's better than it was in the post-crash 90s, but far, far from the peak days.

Disney didn't buy Marvel because of their comic book sales.

[The Ace of Knaves]

No not comic book sales. For the comic book market in general. Books, movies, merchandise etc. The whole shebang.

[Evil Twin]

No not comic book sales. For the comic book market in general. Books, movies, merchandise etc. The whole shebang.

Sure, there's large interest at the moment. That doesn't mean that everything is going to be a mega-hit and there's no restraint on resources spent on a property. Or that Marvel isn't paying substantial interest on their borrowing.

Neither Disney or Marvel are going to move forward on a Thor project without budget being a consideration. While I doubt that Thor is on the verge of being killed, projects of this kind have a way of having budgets start to expand. I'm sure they're having a lot of very hard discussions on how to get the most bang for their buck.

[The Ace of Knaves]

Yea but that isn't really new...news. That happens for anything this day and age.

[Brian2887]

People are taking this Disney acquisition too seriously. I don't think day-to-day life at Marvel is going to change all that much. Disney owns a lot of movie studios and television channels that operate pretty autonomously.

[Webhead2006]

That is what i and others have been saying about this. To their is news of things getting creatively forced in the comics or onto current film directors/producers i dont think we have much to worry about. Plus having disney does give them more money, bigger budgets to work with, then the whole marketing arm of disney which is very good at its job, and possible even use disney studio space if needed.

[Spider-Vader]

I think Disney is going to take chances with characters like Thor, unlike WB. They saw how Iron Man came out of nowhere & was a huge hit, so why not try a couple more times? There might be a couple slip-ups (I don't imagine Strange or Namor being huge hits) but the successes could make up for that.

[KangConquers]

I think Disney is going to take chances with characters like Thor, unlike WB. They saw how Iron Man came out of nowhere & was a huge hit, so why not try a couple more times? There might be a couple slip-ups (I don't imagine Strange or Namor being huge hits) but the successes could make up for that.

I imagine Disney is going to let Marvel have it's current slot; if films like Thor satisfy than they will continue to let them have full reign. If Thor, Cap, and Avengers all bomb, I think they will start to take over.

[Webhead2006]

hopefully that will never be the case.

[Venom'sDad]

I imagine Disney is going to let Marvel have it's current slot; if films like Thor satisfy than they will continue to let them have full reign. If Thor, Cap, and Avengers all bomb, I think they will start to take over.
I don't think they will take over even if those films bomb. I think they will give Marvel the room to do what they do. However, I do feel that Disney will begin to tighten the purse a little if that happens.

[Eldarion]

Believe me Thor, Captain America and The Avengers will be huge hits, no way they could disappoint. As for the anti-american sentiment in the world wich would result in low boxoffice for Captain America, i don't take it. Europe loves America like a child. Japan will watch as well. All those 3 big regions will watch. Maybe the film won't perform so good in Russia and China, but those don't have big influence on the profit. NABO, Europe and Japan always account for 80-90% of Worldwide Boxoffice.

[The Ace of Knaves]

Europe loves America like a child? Errr...no.

Cap will do well ONLY in America. It will make money overseas, but nothing special.

[R_Hythlodeus]

Europe loves America like a child. Like a retarded child that loves to torture puppies and kittens...

Just kidding, Americans can be alright.:woot:

[FaT_tONle]

Looks like POTC 4 is confirmed with a summer 2011 release

http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=59033 (http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=59033)

Gotto wonder how Disney will juggle these release dates. I truly believe there is an over 50% chance Thor will get pushed to June or even August so POTC can take the May 20th slot. Either that or Cap moves out of that summer.

[Webhead2006]

who knows we will probably know more once both cap and thor start filming to see how things are going and if things are ready to go earlier or later.

[daderade]

Paramount: 'Thor,' 'Iron Man 2' still coming despite Marvel sale (http://news-briefs.ew.com/2009/08/31/paramount-thor-iron-man-2-still-coming-despit-marvel-sale/)

by Alynda Wheat (http://news-briefs.ew.com/author/alyndaw/)
Categories: Movie Biz (http://news-briefs.ew.com/category/movie-biz/), News (http://news-briefs.ew.com/category/news/)
Paramount Pictures issued a statement today in the wake of Marvel Studios’ sale to Disney, reported earlier (http://news-briefs.ew.com/2009/08/31/disney-buying-marvel-for-4-billion/). The $4 billion deal won’t affect Paramount’s distribution arrangement for five upcoming films, the studio announced, including the highly anticipated Iron Man 2 and Thor. “Paramount Pictures has enjoyed a productive and fruitful relationship with Marvel Studios from the start of our distribution agreement in 2005,” the statement began. “So much so, we announced a five-picture slate distribution deal last year which includes worldwide distribution rights for upcoming films: Iron Man 2, Thor, Captain America, Avengers, and Iron Man 3. This distribution deal will be unaffected by today’s transaction. We look forward to continuing to work with Marvel and, with today’s announcement, to working with Disney to replicate the incredible success of Iron Man on all our future collaborative projects.”

[TheCorpulent1]

Good to hear it officially. :up:

[Webhead2006]

well that news was pretty much stated on the day of the deal, but good to see another place talking about it.

[TheVileOne]

That doesn't really tell us anything we don't already know. It was already announced that Paramount's distribution deal with that current group of films would continue.

[Triad]

It is a good sign when we hear the official statement above from Paramount.
Poland may or may not had some valid points, but you can argue whether they "might" be true ones. The only way for us fans to help assure the production of a Thor movie (likewise, Captain America and Avengers) is to continue to buy the comic titles, support future animated DVDs if any are released and of course, turn out in droves for Iron Man 2. If it shows that it will make money, it will be made.

[Hmarrs]

Europe loves America like a child? Errr...no.

Cap will do well ONLY in America. It will make money overseas, but nothing special.
Too bad Cap didn't come out around 9-11.
There was such a unity in America and around the world.
We were very patrotic at the time.

Also I noticed I'm commenting on your post that posted on 9-11.

[Spider-Vader]

Cap would of made Spider-Man level money if it came out around 9/11.

[TheVileOne]

Here we go now. Man if only we had Captain America during 9/11 then maybe we wouldn't be so worried about things right now :rolleyes: .

Do you guys realize how petty and disturbing that sounds?

[DarknessFalls]

Marvel is still Marvel Disney not buying them to break them up. They can just exploit the character to their fullest. The more money the bring in from other avenues the more will go into these films...and now Mickey Mouse will not be in Iron Man 3.

[DACMAN]

Why would Disney spend 4 billion dollars just to stop Marvel from making money, and thus them money? Doesn't make sense.

[RachelDawes]

Since they're still casting, it looks like Disney hasn't killed Thor. :woot:

[Triad]

Since they're still casting, it looks like Disney hasn't killed Thor. :woot:
AMEN 2 that!

[The Ace of Knaves]

Here we go now. Man if only we had Captain America during 9/11 then maybe we wouldn't be so worried about things right now :rolleyes: .

Do you guys realize how petty and disturbing that sounds?

Worried about what things? What are you talking about?

[Antonello Blueberry]

Really, who trusts this moron?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TNpk5xKRw1U

[Keyser Soze]

Really, who trusts this moron?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TNpk5xKRw1U

What a pretentious waffler.

[TheCorpulent1]

Well, at least he put it right in the title that he'd ramble. I closed the window right around the point he started explaining the concept of individual opinions. :dry:

[DACMAN]

Really, who trusts this moron?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TNpk5xKRw1U

Wow. I didn't know people like that actually existed.

[TheVileOne]

What a pretentious waffler.
I actually thought it was funny and a good riff on that movie.

[Hmarrs]

Here we go now. Man if only we had Captain America during 9/11 then maybe we wouldn't be so worried about things right now :rolleyes: .

Do you guys realize how petty and disturbing that sounds?
It's not petty or disturbing.It's called marketing.The right movie for the right time.During 911 America was pro America their were Flags everywhere and who knows the Captain America movie at that time if done right would have given alot of Americans hope and inspiration.This happened before During WWII
all they did was have movies like this based on America and Patriotism.Right now America is angry with the Government because of the recession and alot of Americans are against the War right now.
So you have to do it when the window of oppurtunity opens up!In the movie Iron Man he was somewhere in the middle east instead of Vietnam>Why the middle east because that's where the troops are right now so it worked.Movie have to reflect the times we live in.When the X-men comics came it one of the reasons it was such a hit was because it came during the time of Civil Rights so the comics relected the times of being accepted even if you are different.Malcom X =Magneto Martin Luther King = Prf.X.I'm not Malcom X was evil but his belief system was different form Martin Luther King.He believed some had to be taken by force and Martin Luther King believed that pasive resistence was the way.Look at those old stotries in that time and you will see why those comics were so successful.Marvel had a character from Africa named BLACK PANTHER need I say more.Marvel Had a Black Character Name POWER MAN during the time when Black Power was being shouted across America.C'mon dude.History imitates art then art imitates history.

[DACMAN]

Art imitates life, then life imitates art. You have it backwards.

[Hmarrs]

Art imitates life, then life imitates art. You have it backwards.

I don't have it backwards.I have it wrong.Why did I say History?I meant to say that History has proven that Art imitates Life then Life imitates Art.Sorry about that.

[SpiderByte]

He DOES realize Thor is a GOD, right?

God's arent that easy to kill, last i checked.

[SpiderByte]

$20 says their really going to kill him because he infringes religious beliefs, or some crap.

[TheCorpulent1]

That seems unlikely.

[The Ace of Knaves]

Heh, I'll raise your 20 to 20,000...pounds. :dpf:

Thor won't get canned. It's a film that will appeal to a wide demographic, more so than the likes of Captain America.

I mean, it could be the Marvel LOTR or whatever.

[SpiderByte]

:thor:

I just found that.

THORRRRRRR!!!!

[Webhead2006]

Plus if the film was going to get canned now we would have more actors getting signed onboard. Plus the whole disney deal isnt official just yet i belive. I think it still needs to go to the board members/stockholder and all that.

[TheCorpulent1]

:thor:

I just found that.

THORRRRRRR!!!!
Yeah, they added it in our last big smiley update. 'Bout time. :)

[Agent 194]

I would hope that of all the creative minds in the world....the Disney people would be the kind to keep Thor alive. Or find a way to do it.

[SpiderByte]

His beard will prevent him from dying. It was given to him by Chuck Norris.

:hehe:

[DACMAN]

$20 says their really going to kill him because he infringes religious beliefs, or some crap.

You do know Disney made Hercules right?

[SpiderByte]

You do know Disney made Hercules right?


Good point.

[Hmarrs]

Good point.
You think wait until they make both Hercules fight!!!!

http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:EWYNbeolxCgzBM:http://userserve-ak.last.fm/serve/252/3490454.gif (http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://userserve-ak.last.fm/serve/252/3490454.gif&imgrefurl=http://www.last.fm/music/Disney%27s%2BHercules&usg=__7BltVMaz-EqgDhu2wES4ji06s4c=&h=243&w=252&sz=57&hl=en&start=6&um=1&tbnid=EWYNbeolxCgzBM:&tbnh=107&tbnw=111&prev=/images%3Fq%3Ddisney%2Bhercules%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DN% 26um%3D1) http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:SB8i3__dc3_nYM:http://i.livescience.com/images/HERC126_cov.jpg (http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://i.livescience.com/images/HERC126_cov.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.newsarama.com/comics/120829-Hercules-Van-Lente.html&usg=__WYylz8nxzyKvE5wp43m3REGQ-X4=&h=910&w=600&sz=69&hl=en&start=6&um=1&tbnid=SB8i3__dc3_nYM:&tbnh=147&tbnw=97&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dmarvel%2Bhercules%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DG% 26um%3D1)
HA!!HA!!!HA!!!

[TheCorpulent1]

Pff, Marvel's Herc would kick that nancy-boy's ass. And then insult his mother. :oldrazz:

[The Ace of Knaves]

Disneys Hercules is one of my favourite Disney films though. James Woods as Hades is genius :up:

[TheCorpulent1]

Yeah, it was a fun movie. I liked Pegasus a lot. :)