Disney to buy Marvel: How will this effect the movies?

[topdog1]

This news is nowhere near as terrifying as most people on here are making it out to be. It is big, big news, but personally I'm looking forward to seeing how this all pans out.

Just look at what Disney let Pixar become - they didn't interfere, they just let a bunch of talented people make the movies they wanted to make and...I seem to remember hearing they've all done quite well for themselves.

Disney know they're onto a winner here if they let Marvel take of business and do what they do best - craft some kick ass superhero stories.

I was going to post "Nuff Said" but then marvelrobbins brought up a good point that scared me again.

People are forgetting Disney abanded the narnia franchise after the second film underperformed

Back to being anxious.

 

[kedrell]

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=incrediblehulk.htm

Apparently it made $263 mil world wide with a $150 mil budget. Even if Marvel stayed independent, there was never going to be another Hulk film.

DVD $ counts as well towards profitability. TIH's gross factoring that as well as TV deals push it way over $300M. Close on to $350M, I'd say.

 

[FaT_tONle]

Back to being anxious.

Going back to Narnia for a minute here, I mean that film did gross over 400 million WW. Why let it go that soon? I get that there were extenuating circumstances with the re-negotiated deal they had with independent producers of the property, but it's a cause for concern. Disney has made a push for more violent live action films in recent years. I am sure Prince of Persia will be PG-13. I wonder if they will continue to do films like that along side live action Avenger films. Certainly favoritisms of particular characters will develop (see Iron Man) while other characters potentially "holding the genre back" will be pushed aside as we have seen at WB/DC. Maybe other franchise like POTC, Narnia, Perisa will continue to be players in favor of riskier, high budget live action Marvel movies. That's obvious. One point that no has talked about, which I will bring up shortly in the Thor thread, what happens to POTC 4? They haven't announced a release date, but it is slated for 2011. That may potentially clash with Thor.

 

[FlawlessVictory]

One point that no has talked about, which I will bring up shortly in the Thor thread, what happens to POTC 4? They haven't announced a release date, but it is slated for 2011. That may potentially clash with Thor.

I was just about to bring this up! It's a good question. I was wondering if any of the established release dates for IM2, Thor, Cap, and The Avengers were competing with Disney movies on that date or the week before or after those movies.

Edit: Just browsed BOM for release dates and there doesn't seem to be any conflicts. Prince of Persia comes out the same month as IM2 but there is about 3 weeks separation between the two.

 

[FaT_tONle]

I penciled POTC 4 a week after Thor. That date made the most sense IMO. Plus Cars 2 is late June I believe, I'll double check that. So POTC really can't go there. It can go early July but obviously HP8 is not too far ahead. Disney really going to bankroll all four films in 2011? Makes no sense.

 

[BATZARRO WWD]

Personally, I think it's too early in the game to rattle up points. There are probably some bad and good things coming out of this, but we won't know until at least half of next year.

 

[Dr. Evil]

I penciled POTC 4 a week after Thor. That date made the most sense IMO. Plus Cars 2 is late June I believe, I'll double check that. So POTC really can't go there. It can go early July but obviously HP8 is not too far ahead. Disney really going to bankroll all four films in 2011? Makes no sense.

They are making a Cars 2? That's sure to make at least $150 million by the time it's box office run ends.

 

[Vis]

It can't be any worse than what Marvel has done to their own characters. Well, not their characters now.

 

[TheVileOne]

DVD $ counts as well towards profitability. TIH's gross factoring that as well as TV deals push it way over $300M. Close on to $350M, I'd say.

Yeah but that's still not money that 100% goes back to Marvel. A chunk of that goes to exhibitors. Another chunk goes to Universal. So I mean, its not as simple as you want to believe.

 

[Evil Twin]

Taking another angle, I'd think Disney would be a natural to make and promote Runaways. It wouldn't surprise me if that ends up being the first live action feature from Marvel to come out solely under the Disney slate.

 

[FlawlessVictory]

Why Disney Must Wait For Marvel Synergy


According to Rich Greenfield at Pali Research, here are the deals which Marvel currently has, prompting this savvy media analyst to ask this morning, "While we do not doubt the acquisition will ultimately prove successful, it appears that Disney investors may have to wait quite awhile to see the bulk of the synergies that the Marvel acquisition may ultimately yield." Here's why:

"Across film, theme parks, video games and toys, Marvel has already committed to many long-term deals, leaving only Disney’s ability to boost Marvel’s international consumer products business and to leverage Marvel characters on the Disney XD network, as the more significant nearer term initiatives (in terms of synergies, above and beyond Marvel’s organic earnings power). In terms of Marvel’s various licensing agreements, [Pali Research was] able to pull together some of the more notable examples, as shown below:

Film
Marvel’s current distribution deal with Paramount (Viacom-owned) covers the next five Marvel pictures including Iron Man 2 (2010), Thor (2011), Captain America (2011), The Avengers (2012) and Iron Man 3 (2012/2013). Paramount confirmed the films to be produced under their Marvel agreement. These films would all flow thru to Paramount’s new pay TV network EPIX, however, all new properties beyond these would likely flow through Disney’s output partner (currently Starz).
X-Men property has been licensed to 20th Century Fox (News Corp. owned) while Spider-Man has been licensed to Sony, which seems to have plans for the next three installments. [NF: While the Spider-Man film is only licensed to Sony, Sony is actually half owner of the company that handles all the Spider-Man merchandise. It was put together with Marvel in 2000.]

Theme Parks
It appears that Universal Studios maintains geographical rights to Marvel IP for as long as they have Marvel-related rides/attractions at the park (unclear if this also includes merchandise that exists within its parks today). In other words, Walt Disney World in Orlando is unlikely to see a Spiderman/Hulk themed attraction for the foreseeable future. The following excerpt comes from Universal City Development Partners’ (owner of Universal Studios Orlando) 10-K: “We have geographical exclusivity east of the Mississippi River with regard to the specific Marvel characters we utilize. The license for the Marvel properties does not prohibit its assignment and is for the duration of our use of attractions themed around Marvel characters.”

Video Games
THQ: Multi-year deal signed in May 2008 for Marvel Super Hero Squad.
Activision: Deal signed Nov 2005 and goes through 2017 for Spider Man and X-Men
Sega: Multi-year deal signed in April 2007 for Captain America, Hulk, Thor and Iron Man

Toys
Hasbro 10K: “Subsequent to December 28, 2008, the Company entered into an agreement with Marvel that resulted in the extension of the current agreement from the end of 2011 through the end of 2017.”
​

http://www.deadlinehollywooddaily.com/why-disney-has-to-wait-for-marvel-synergy/

 

[FlawlessVictory]

Universal vs Disney Over Marvel Characters


EXCLUSIVE: With help from a number of key sources inside and outside Universal studios and Universal theme parks, I've put together the latest info about which Marvel characters and which deal points Universal and Disney might fight over in coming months and years. And, trust me, there will be blood as pitbull lawyers on all sides tear apart the language of each and every contract clause. (This is exactly the sort of Big Media mortal combat that Disney and GE in-house attorneys, and their outside counsel -- oooh, those billable hours -- thrive on.) And yet Disney's Bob Iger and Universal's Ron Meyer are longtime pals. It remains to be seen if that relationship can withstand this confrontation.

For starters, here's the main list of licensed characters at Marvel Island inside Universal Orlando's Islands Of Adventure (provided me by Universal): Spider-Man (also attraction), Dr. Doom (also attraction), Hulk (also attraction), Storm (also attraction), Captain America, Cyclops, Green Goblin, Rogue, Storm, Wolverine, "and lots more if you include stores and dining," a Uni exec tells me.

Paramount tells me Iron Man and Thor also are included.
According to other sources, here are the characters by Attractions, Walk Around, and Shop:

Attractions (Characters licensed for the attraction use, but not necessarily for walk-around. Some in the attractions list are also licensed for walk-around, but not all.): Spider-Man, Doc Oc, Scream, Electro, Hydro-Man, Hobgoblin, J. Jonah Jameson, Hulk/Bruce Banner, Dr. Doom, Fantastic Four (as a group, not individually), Storm, Magneto, Professor X.
Walk around and/or Shop: Green Goblin, Cyclops, Rogue, Wolverine, Fantastic 4 (restaurant / walk around), Captain America (restaurant / walk around), Kingpin (shop / walk around), Merch (shop)

Complicating everything are several shows as well, both impromptu outdoor shows put on by Entertainment, and larger shows that were put on in conjunction with Universal Creative/Marvel. No one is sure what the status would be regarding those characters/properties. Regardless, informed sources tell me that if Universal wanted to reuse the characters, they'd only be able to use the characters in a similar way -- ie, the same show, or a similar show.

I'm told that this is because the Universal-Marvel licensing contract is extremely narrow: Universal has to follow it to the letter, or they risk losing the characters altogether. Universal's parks group structures contracts so that there's a master licensing agreement for the Marvel name, and then individual sections for the properties. It's not a catch-all, you-have-a-blanket-license-to-use-any-Marvel-character-as-you-see-fit-in-your-parks, because Marvel's not stupid. And because Marvel owns high-profile characters (it's like this for most non-owned properties), Universal must get approval for any additional/future use of Marvel's characters so Universal doesn't use the characters in a way Marvel doesn't like. For that reason alone, Marvel has a big ol' out in their contract with regards to future use.

The existing deals are in place, but if Universal had planned to use a Marvel character they hadn't used yet, they would obviously have to run it by Marvel for approvals. The way it works is a new addendum would then be drafted for that use/use of that character, and added to the master license agreement. The characters that are already used can continue to be used as they have been since they're part of the initial deal. But I'm told not to expect any new major characters introduced into the park, or existing ones expanded for use, though.

Universal's current attractions are safe, as are the themed eateries/shops. Any Marvel characters not used presently by Universal will most certainly not be used from here on. The walk-around characters that are not connected to an attraction or eatery could be in danger, as that clause is more easily manipulated. The use of the characters for walk-around is usually a separate contract than the rides/overall naming rights, and is usually much more flexible. So these could be the first to go in the years to come. (Which is why that "we believe" may have been in Universal's initial statement to me...)

As if this isn't complex enough, Universal Studios Hollywood actually had Marvel characters doing "streetmosphere" until January 2008, when they didn't renew the license. In fact, Marvel wanted an expansion of the brand into the park and pushed for an attraction to be built using their characters, like Islands Of Adventure. But Universal didn't want to spend the money. Also Marvel wanted more moolah for the licensing agreement renewal, which Universal wanted to cut back. In the end, Universal severed ties with Marvel for the West Coast park, while maintaining an amicable relationship for the Orlando park.

Also, further entangling everyone and everything is the fact that Marvel is building their own Super Heroes park down the road from Universal's new park in the massive (and very delayed) Dubai-land project in the Middle East. The question here is whether Disney will now try to turn it into a Disney park or leave it as a Marvel park, or both, or neither.
So what does the future hold?

Obviously, Universal lawyers right now are scrutinizing their theme park licensing and merchandising contracts with Marvel. Universal at first issued to me this statement to me about the future of their theme park licensing pact with Marvel: "Marvel Super Hero Island at Universal’s Islands of Adventure and the Marvel characters are a beloved and important part of the Universal Orlando experience. They will remain so. Our guests are going to get to meet Spider-Man and all our other Marvel characters. We believe our agreement with Marvel stands and that the Disney/Marvel deal will have no impact on our guest experience."

Hmm, interesting how there was a "we believe" in there. Sounded unsure. Then Universal updated its earlier statement to me to say this much more assuredly, "Marvel Super Hero Island at Universal’s Islands of Adventure and the Marvel characters are an important part of the Universal Orlando experience. They will remain so. Our agreement with Marvel stands for as long as we follow the terms of our existing contract and for as long as we want there to be a Marvel Super Hero Island."

Privately, Universal execs told me they've got the Marvel characters "until the end of time if we want them" and used phrases like "in perpetuity". But here's the rub: a Universal insider tells me the theme parks only retain the existing characters it's already made use of. Sure there are Spider-Man and Hulk attractions, but what about the bulk of the 5,000 Marvel characters? Are those Disney's now?

Those character rights revert to Marvel, so, Disney can start incorporating those Marvel characters immediately into Disney’s theme parks in California, Paris and Hong Kong. But it's important to note that the Disney/Marvel deal statement yesterday did not mention Marvel in connection with Disney theme parks. In fact, Disney may not be able to use the best known of the 5,000 Marvel characters to freshen its theme parks for some time. Because Universal theme parks have a long-term licensing deal with Marvel that gives Universal exclusive rights for Marvel characters east of the Mississippi for theme park use. Still, this leaves open options for Marvel characters at the California Disney parks, although some sources doubt the Mouse House would do that immediately, as it could contribute to brand confusion by having Marvel characters at Universal on one coast (in Orlando) and Disney on the other (in Anaheim).

For specific characters/properties (i.e., ones where Universal has invested a huge amount of money, like the Spider-Man ride), the Universal/Marvel licenses are virtually in perpetuity and will outlast the rides themselves. My insiders predict that Disney will try to buy those characters out in the distant future -- probably when the rides are changed/closed or the entire Marvel Island is changed/closed.

Finally, yesterday a Universal spokesperson told me that the studio has built in Marvel attractions not just at theme parks in Orlando and Osaka but also into future theme park plans. But an informed outside source tells me this isn't true and that Universal has no new attractions on the boards right now based on Marvel characters for Dubai or Singapore or even Orlando's Islands Of Adventure/Marvel Island. Instead, Universal is consumed with getting its new "Wizarding World Of Harry Potter" attraction with Warner Bros up and running.

http://www.deadlinehollywooddaily.com/universal-vs-disney-over-marvel-characters/

 

[FaT_tONle]

Nothing on Namor in the Universal tidbit. I guess it's probably back at Marvel by now.

 

[TheVileOne]

Guys if Marvel Island closes, I'm going to throw a fit.

That's like the ****ing greatest theme park of all time. The Spider-man 3D ride is ****ing awesome.

 

[smooth3006]

yeah i saw this posted on another site. this buy out is a huge mistake on marvels part, they must of been in trouble and kept a pretty tight lid on it. 4 bill is a rip off IMO. this has disaster written all over it and i fear for our future marvel films including captain and the avengers. they say no changes will happen but i call there bluff! ill say this one more time....R.I.P. marvel!

 

[Webhead2006]

well i glad when i went to universal in orlando like 7 years back i got to go on those rides lol. As for the disney/marvel synery details and the universal details those are good finds guys. So with that we see disney cant really muck around with sony/fox owned properties, and marvel/disney gets ironman/hulk/thor/cap characters once the paramount 5 movie deal ends. So right now we dont have anything to worry i think about those films or any future spiderman/fox stuff. Though i do hope marvel can get back some of the fox stuff. Really with the news yesterday of fox wanting to reboot ff is their way to try and keep that property for a little bit longer. Though i bet ff/dd/ghost rider will end up back at marvel sooner then xmen properties.

As for what i was asking last night about bob iger since he became head of disney has he been truthful and not go back on things he said? I am trying to gauge how trusty/honest the guy is. I dont know much on the man, and from the clips of him i saw yesterday he seemed to be an alright guy.

 

[smooth3006]

Taking another angle, I'd think Disney would be a natural to make and promote Runaways. It wouldn't surprise me if that ends up being the first live action feature from Marvel to come out solely under the Disney slate.

piax can do some great cgi and animation, it could really help films such as the hulk but i still fear for marvel...disney is pure evil and i despise everything about them. nothing but teenie bopper flicks and shows aimed at kids! what the hell was marvel thinking?

 

[smooth3006]

to whom ever said there won't be another hulk flick...you fail at life and better learn to do some research. not only will he be in the avengers, there will be another sequel planned afterwords. unless by then disney totally screws us over and we get a hannah montana vs the black widow movie!

 

[Vis]

I need to create some creator-own characters and license my own work. If the creator of It's Happy Bunny can do it, so can I.

 

[Webhead2006]

I think alot of folks are missing the point with disney, disney isnt just the jonas brothers, or hannah stupid teen stuff. That is just one aspect of disney compared to the whole empire disney has like espn, abc, etc...... and they do own hollywood pictures and miramax films that do more adult/mature things, and then they also have touchstone pictures to put other things say maybe a luck cage or a black phanter film. I really think when the name disney comes up folks just think of the stupid tween stuff and not at the wholeness of disney. Plus as of right now they have stated they are not disney-fy'ing marvel. We can look at this like dc has been owned for past 40 yrs by wb and dc still its own thing.

 

[FlawlessVictory]

Behind-The-Scenes Of Disney-Marvel Deal

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 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.)

And 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 Skaggs, 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.

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

 

[KBX]

"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".)"

Saying all the right things, and if they don't want to upset fanboys just keep it at PG-13. Shouldn't be a problem.

 

[Sawyer]

They are making a Cars 2? That's sure to make at least $150 million by the time it's box office run ends.

Unfortunately. Cars was my least favorite of all the Pixar films and I doubt a sequel will be any different.

 

[Mrs. Sawyer]

Unfortunately. Cars was my least favorite of all the Pixar films and I doubt a sequel will be any different.

It's practically everyone's least favorite film and yet we don't get a sequel to the Incredibles.



Still, I honestly believe that everyone is overreacting. I like the deal. Disney's going leave Marvel alone and let them do their thing. What I like is that down the line maybe within the next 10 years is that Disney could finally help Marvel unite all the licenses they sold under one roof. I think Disney's gonna show patience with Marvel and they won't hold Marvel back.

 

[WillardNation]

good find, Flawless. That all makes me feel a lot better.