Disney in talks to buy Fox: X-Men Homecoming? - Part 3

[Dark Raven]

If the Inhumans TV show hadn't been made, there could still have been the possibility of using them in the future, maybe in an FF movie.

Now they may never show up again in the MCU. The Inhumans in AOS have also kind of stolen the mutants' thunder and storyline. If they had been mutants instead of Inhumans, or even if they were just enhanced humans or some other name instead of Inhumans and hadn't gained their powers via terrigenesis, it would've been very easy to retroactively make them mutants. They could simply say that they've been reclassed as mutants because research has revealed more about them.

Then it wouldn't seem like mutants have just popped out of nowhere.

 

[psylockolussus]

They really wasted the Inhumans but X-Men and Fantastic Four have such a huge amount of characters, they won't run of characters to showcase in the films.


Though Crystal, Medusa and Black Bolt could have been crossing over to Avengers/Ff/Gotg/Shiar after their film.

 

[UltimatePyro9]

As I’ve mentioned, they could just forget the show exists like I’m sure most fans will. Introduce them properly in a ‘real’ movie and write off the show as a show-within-a-show in-universe. Best suggestion I’ve got.

 

[Willie Lumpkin]

As I’ve mentioned, they could just forget the show exists like I’m sure most fans will. Introduce them properly in a ‘real’ movie and write off the show as a show-within-a-show in-universe. Best suggestion I’ve got.

This is the best part of it being such a disaster. They should be able to just brush it aside and ignore it.

I was afraid for a while that it would be just good enough to get renewed while still not being worth watching, but it seems very unlikely they'll renew that mess.

 

[Big Bang]

The congress can drop the sports networks from this deal along with Fx, Blue Sky and Nat Geo as well. But the film rights to X-Men and Fantastic Four should be sold to Disney.

Well, not congress. The DOJ can offer to Disney (for example) to drop the RSN's from the deal in exchange for approval of the rest. Disney can also offer to accept long term scrutiny/regulation.

Congress can convene all kinds of committees and subcommittees, and so on, but at the end of the day the DOJ is the one who has to enforce anything. If Disney agrees to concessions in any form the DOJ would take those back to the committees.

You can be sure that there is lobbying going on here. Disney's competitors are very likely lobbying members in the hopes that they block the deal, or get them to come to the table with some of the assets for divestment. I wouldn't be surprised if Universal or even WB were involved in shenanigans here, because the political arena is just another extension of business.

 

[Dark Raven]

Maybe Disney and Fox have already planned for a "door in the face" method of negotiation with the DOJ. Perhaps they've added more assets in the deal, knowing that these will be shot down and probably won't get through (but if they do, then that's all good).

After certain ones are rejected, or Disney and Fox make certain concessions to fall more in line so as to avoid anti-trust, then these might be the real ones they actually wanted to get through or would've been happy with.

So maybe they're asking for more, but already have in mind an idea of what they would actually settle for.

 

[Big Bang]

Maybe Disney and Fox have already planned for a "door in the face" method of negotiation with the DOJ. Perhaps they've added more assets in the deal, knowing that these will be shot down and probably won't get through (but if they do, then that's all good).

After certain ones are rejected, or Disney and Fox make certain concessions to fall more in line so as to avoid anti-trust, then these might be the real ones they actually wanted to get through or would've been happy with.

So maybe they're asking for more, but already have in mind an idea of what they would actually settle for.

Well, you can only play so much hardball before the DOJ sues to block the deal in entirety. In theory, the AT&T/Time Warner deal should have been easy, had AT&T not rejected all form of concession. They were also citing the Comcast/NBCUniversal deal as precedence for approval. The problem there is the stance taken by the DOJ under the Obama administration for that deal was a complete departure from how deals are typically scrutinized under previous administrations. (concessions vs. post approval behavior oversight).

I expect Disney lawyers as well as those from Fox to figure out what they need to do to get the bulk of the deal of the deal approved.

 

[Willie Lumpkin]

Congress can convene all kinds of committees and subcommittees,

And that's exactly what we're seeing here. It's just some people in congress jumping on the fact that this is big news that will allow them to get their face on TV talking about something their voters have heard about and may be concerned with.

But that dog and pony show won't affect real policy, and no likely modifications to the deal will affect Marvel getting control of the licenses they actually own back.

It's probably good that people are talking about it now, because that will help get things moving.

And when it gets right down to it, people are going to have to recognize that if the concern is a monopoly, Netflix has a near monopoly now. And the key to this deal is it will help Disney compete with Netflix and provide a lower-cost premium-content service that will put a huge amount of competitive pressure on Netflix and prevent them from ruling the world in 5 years.

And some of the arguments I'm hearing about Disney getting too large of a share of box-office are BS. They're not making those huge BO numbers because they have no competition. They're making those numbers because, in stark contrast to things like Fox and Fant4stic, they're giving consumers a quality product that consumers want.

Warner Brothers has DC and Harry Potter. Universal has Frankenstein, The Mummy etc. Paramount has Mission Impossible. Several studios are currently bidding on James Bond etc. etc. etc.

Disney doesn't have any kind of monopoly on key properties and nobody can prevent anybody else from buying the hot new book or video game rights or simply coming up with a great idea and executing it well.

Disney can take something like Pirates of the Caribbean or Guardians of the Galaxy and make a multi billion dollar franchise out of nothing.

Meanwhile, Warner Brothers can take something like King Arthur and make complete crap.

Anti-trust policy should be about providing a level-playing field, not preventing the better team from winning once they get on that field.

 

[Big Bang]

And that's exactly what we're seeing here. It's just some people in congress jumping on the fact that this is big news that will allow them to get their face on TV talking about something their voters have heard about and may be concerned with.

But that dog and pony show won't affect real policy, and no likely modifications to the deal will affect Marvel getting control of the licenses they actually own back.

Yep, what we are seeing in this example is the wonderful world of lobbying on display. It's all about putting up roadblocks by certain parties in order to exact some form of compensation in one form or another.

And some of the arguments I'm hearing about Disney getting too large of a share of box-office are BS. They're not making those huge BO numbers because they have no competition. They're making those numbers because, in stark contrast to things like Fox and Fant4stic, they're giving consumers a quality product that consumers want.

That's something I don't get either. People not realizing that scale =/= quality. WB used to (maybe still does) put out the most films per year, and that wasn't a monopoly either.

Warner Brothers has DC and Harry Potter.

I'm sort of surprised that they haven't pulled up to J.K. Rowling's door step with another dumptruck of cash to let them develop a story set in the US within the Wizarding World. There is a lot of potential that wouldn't interfere with what she created with the original stories. Surely she has to see the potential for expanding the world she created.

Universal has Frankenstein, The Mummy etc.

The original shared film universe too. To which they completely blew it on capitalizing on with The Mummy. If it were me, I'd retrofit some past films such as the Brendan Fraiser Mummy films, and used Imhotep. Universal just tried way too hard.

Disney doesn't have any kind of monopoly on key properties and nobody can prevent anybody else from buying the hot new book or video game rights or simply coming up with a great idea and executing it well.

Disney also has a bigger problem on its hands that those who talk about a monopoly aren't recognizing. The tech industry, whose players outright dwarf Disney, are getting more and more into the industry. Amazon, Apple, and Google (via YouTube) are encroaching more and more. Disney has plenty of future competition to contend with.

 

[Big Bang]

And when it gets right down to it, people are going to have to recognize that if the concern is a monopoly, Netflix has a near monopoly now. And the key to this deal is it will help Disney compete with Netflix and provide a lower-cost premium-content service that will put a huge amount of competitive pressure on Netflix and prevent them from ruling the world in 5 years.

Just found something to your point as well.

https://www.pwc.com/us/en/advisory-services/publications/consumer-intelligence-series/video-i-stream-you-stream.html

Traditional cable continues to shrink and is literally now neck and neck with alternatives, such as Netflix. The world (in the entertainment industry) as we knew it before is changing forever right before our eyes.

Pay particular attention to how "cord friendly" live sports is currently. Then consider Disney's buy of Fox's regional sports network and how it could apply to ESPN's streaming service.

 

[Dark Raven]

The rights to the Harry Potter characters need to be divided up among different studios in case of too much of a monopoly. Expect a Hermione cinematic universe in future to milk the only character they have.

 

[Willie Lumpkin]

Just found something to your point as well.

https://www.pwc.com/us/en/advisory-services/publications/consumer-intelligence-series/video-i-stream-you-stream.html

Traditional cable continues to shrink and is literally now neck and neck with alternatives, such as Netflix. The world (in the entertainment industry) as we knew it before is changing forever right before our eyes.

Pay particular attention to how "cord friendly" live sports is currently. Then consider Disney's buy of Fox's regional sports network and how it could apply to ESPN's streaming service.

It is definitely a changing world, and Disney is clearly trying to make themselves a leader in that new reality.

And it's not just how we're getting our in-home content, but how and when we go out of the home as well. I think the classic film structure will be changing as people prefer to stay home and watch films on HDTV's and 'binge' other content. That's where I thought Disney was brilliant in, apparently recognizing that high quality series, such as Game of Thrones would be a big part of the future and, again I thought, Disney was going to start forging a new path with a high-quality, high-cost Inhumans network series. But either they chose not to go the way I thought they would... or they were as surprised as we were with the low quality product that actually came out.

 

[Willie Lumpkin]

The rights to the Harry Potter characters need to be divided up among different studios in case of too much of a monopoly. Expect a Hermione cinematic universe in future to milk the only character they have.

 

[Big Bang]

It is definitely a changing world, and Disney is clearly trying to make themselves a leader in that new reality.

And it's not just how we're getting our in-home content, but how and when we go out of the home as well. I think the classic film structure will be changing as people prefer to stay home and watch films on HDTV's and 'binge' other content. That's where I thought Disney was brilliant in, apparently recognizing that high quality series, such as Game of Thrones would be a big part of the future and, again I thought, Disney was going to start forging a new path with a high-quality, high-cost Inhumans network series. But either they chose not to go the way I thought they would... or they were as surprised as we were with the low quality product that actually came out.

Maybe they'll start going that path with the mutants now.

Personally I thought the book "Ready Player One" would have been absolutely perfect in the vein of GOT in terms of production value. While it would not have been as long as that series, the sheer amount of intrigue and deference paid to 70's and 80's pop culture, films, video games, and so on would pulled in a dedicated audience. The way the book is structured would have been perfect for a series.

 

[ADollarADay]

I'm sort of surprised that they haven't pulled up to J.K. Rowling's door step with another dumptruck of cash to let them develop a story set in the US within the Wizarding World. There is a lot of potential that wouldn't interfere with what she created with the original stories. Surely she has to see the potential for expanding the world she created.

She has all the money in the world and still makes a lot more just on HP royalties alone. If she writes a new book, that's more money in the bank. There's nothing WB can offer her to let go off her iron clad grip on the franchise. Wizarding World theme park rides were supposed to go to WDW using the book as the source (as opposed to the movie) until Disney started shunning JK and she took it to Universal instead. JK, before selling the movie rights to WB, was adamant that they use actors from the UK. That was one of her conditions.

She is okay with people, indies creating new stories and whatnot, but she is going to control what goes in other media (i.e. movies/tv shows/theme parks) until she dies.

 

[TheVileOne]

And that's exactly what we're seeing here. It's just some people in congress jumping on the fact that this is big news that will allow them to get their face on TV talking about something their voters have heard about and may be concerned with.

But that dog and pony show won't affect real policy, and no likely modifications to the deal will affect Marvel getting control of the licenses they actually own back.

It's probably good that people are talking about it now, because that will help get things moving.

And when it gets right down to it, people are going to have to recognize that if the concern is a monopoly, Netflix has a near monopoly now. And the key to this deal is it will help Disney compete with Netflix and provide a lower-cost premium-content service that will put a huge amount of competitive pressure on Netflix and prevent them from ruling the world in 5 years.

And some of the arguments I'm hearing about Disney getting too large of a share of box-office are BS. They're not making those huge BO numbers because they have no competition. They're making those numbers because, in stark contrast to things like Fox and Fant4stic, they're giving consumers a quality product that consumers want.

Warner Brothers has DC and Harry Potter. Universal has Frankenstein, The Mummy etc. Paramount has Mission Impossible. Several studios are currently bidding on James Bond etc. etc. etc.

Disney doesn't have any kind of monopoly on key properties and nobody can prevent anybody else from buying the hot new book or video game rights or simply coming up with a great idea and executing it well.

Disney can take something like Pirates of the Caribbean or Guardians of the Galaxy and make a multi billion dollar franchise out of nothing.

Meanwhile, Warner Brothers can take something like King Arthur and make complete crap.

Anti-trust policy should be about providing a level-playing field, not preventing the better team from winning once they get on that field.

You would've been better off citing Jurassic Park and the Fast Franchise for Universal there Willie Lumpkin. The monsters are pretty much irrelevant at this point

 

[Iceman]

This is the best part of it being such a disaster. They should be able to just brush it aside and ignore it.

I was afraid for a while that it would be just good enough to get renewed while still not being worth watching, but it seems very unlikely they'll renew that mess.

Yep hardly any of the GA has seen it which is a plus for moving forward (without it).

 

[UltimatePyro9]

Yep hardly any of the GA has seen it which is a plus for moving forward (without it).

Its a shame though. I think the Inhumans could've made their mark in pop culture media in the same way that Iron Man, Captain America, GOTG, etc have because of the MCU. Instead the show was just a rush job made just so the Inhuman royal family can exist in the MCU without the same care that was used with the movies.

 

[InCali]

I didn't know someone made an Inhumans movie or series or something.

How was it?

 

[SPO2 Dalisay]

I didn't know someone made an Inhumans movie or series or something.

How was it?

It is 8 hours pending a possible tie in with Agents of SHIELD Quake and Yo-yo story, only watch it if you are a MCU completest. They may have had some Inhuman powers but there was little heroism present.

 

[Iceman]

Its a shame though. I think the Inhumans could've made their mark in pop culture media in the same way that Iron Man, Captain America, GOTG, etc have because of the MCU. Instead the show was just a rush job made just so the Inhuman royal family can exist in the MCU without the same care that was used with the movies.

Marvel dropped the ball reemploying Scott Buck. Yes it’s always a shame when characters are short-changed like this.

 

[InCali]

It is 8 hours pending a possible tie in with Agents of SHIELD Quake and Yo-yo story, only watch it if you are a MCU completest. They may have had some Inhuman powers but there was little heroism present.

Sorry. Who is it that has the signature that says something like "I have GOT to start using tags"?

I have the original FF/Inhumans comic books and have been dreaming of seeing something like that onscreen. I haven't seen the 2015 version of FF or Inhumans only because it became clear to me that doing so would have caused me to throw my head through my TV; which the Surgeon General has said is detrimental to your health.

FYI, I think AoS has been uneven; some good and some not so good. Not in the DD or JJ league, but serviceable. Still, I haven't watched AoS for awhile, so I guess I fall out of the category of completest. I'm watching JJ though......youza.....

 

[Dark Raven]

I didn't know someone made an Inhumans movie or series or something.

How was it?

It missed its opportunity for a Hawaii Five-0 crossover.

 

[InCali]

It missed its opportunity for a Hawaii Five-0 crossover.

Kononak?

 

[Endeavor]

I didn't know someone made an Inhumans movie or series or something.

How was it?

Total Excrement.

Forget you even heard of it.