The Disney owns Fox thread

[Lencho01]

The Walt Disney Company

Regardless of the ramifications of all this, there's something pretty amusing to have Deadpool and Donald Glover's Earn from Atlanta on their homepage.

 

[TheVileOne]

Right now Disney basically is the sole reason to go to a movie theatre considering the properties they own. And maybe WB on occasion.

Media is changing. It's unfortunate, but change is painful.

 

[DarkKnight88]

Right now Disney basically is the sole reason to go to a movie theatre considering the properties they own. And maybe WB on occasion.

No. There’s plenty of great movies to see on the big screen that’s not just comic book movies

Expand your film horizon beyond that.

 

[terry78]

Lucasfilm, Pixar, the entire Fox library, their live action remakes of their old cartoons, their original cartoon films. By that I mean that is all the stuff Joe Average Suburbia is willing to go see in droves.

 

[Leo Zelinsky]

No. There’s plenty of great movies to see on the big screen that’s not just comic book movies

Expand your film horizon beyond that.

Meh most of this stuff in theaters is a wait for home release.

 

[DACrowe]

I'll just add Disney more than any studio (although they're all guilty) is conditioning moviegoers to think films need to be "events." And with higher ticket prices average moviegoers are more and more only going to see "the events," which is literally how Disney presents each release, even the shameless, soulless remakes, but WB does it, Fox did it, most recently with the failed attempt to make Alita an "event."

But this tells moviegoers I NEED to see those movies and everything else doesn't really matter. Which is a shame, as Fox and Fox Searchlight's The Favourite and Widows, for example, were better movies than any of the blockbusters last year except maybe Into the Spider-Verse or Mission: Impossible. I know that they, more so Favourite, will never make major money, but the fewer opportunities of truly great movies like that that recede from wide release and become strictly the territory of streaming, the more easy it is for moviegoers to think that theatrical experiences should only be for franchises or live-action remakes.

But yeah, I don't see much hope in stopping the cycle as it's self-perpetuating on the part of the studios chasing bottom lines and audiences in turn going along with it and saving anything challenging for streaming (which is itself such a fractionalized market, it is difficult for anything to actually have a major impact).

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

I'll just add Disney more than any studio (although they're all guilty) is conditioning moviegoers to think films need to be "events." And with higher ticket prices average moviegoers are more and more only going to see "the events," which is literally how Disney presents each release, even the shameless, soulless remakes, but WB does it, Fox did it, most recently with the failed attempt to make Alita an "event."

But this tells moviegoers I NEED to see those movies and everything else doesn't really matter. Which is a shame, as Fox and Fox Searchlight's The Favourite and Widows, for example, were better movies than any of the blockbusters last year except maybe Into the Spider-Verse or Mission: Impossible. I know that they, more so Favourite, will never make major money, but the fewer opportunities of truly great movies like that that recede from wide release and become strictly the territory of streaming, the more easy it is for moviegoers to think that theatrical experiences should only be for franchises or live-action remakes.

But yeah, I don't see much hope in stopping the cycle as it's self-perpetuating on the part of the studios chasing bottom lines and audiences in turn going along with it and saving anything challenging for streaming (which is itself such a fractionalized market, it is difficult for anything to actually have a major impact).

I'm not going to deny that this is what is happening, but you appear to have the reasoning completely backwards. The last 10-15 years has seen a tremendous shift in how media is consumed. Between easy access to streaming and giant HD and 4K home theater systems the ease of access to quality film and television has exploded.

The studios aren't driving this change. Technology is driving it. The traditional studios are being forced to adjust or go extinct.

Quite frankly, the theater experience is terrible. People don't like to spend $100 or more for the family to go leave the house and go to the cinema only to have it ruined by a bunch of noisy teenagers playing on their smart phones the whole film and the parents that thought it would be a good idea to bring their screaming baby with them. Especially not when they can watch it in peace in the comfort of their own home 6 months later on a streaming service they already are paying for.

It isn't that Disney and other studios are conditioning moviegoers to only care about "event" films, as much as acknowledging that that is what it takes to get people to the theater these days.

Television is seeing something similar. Everything used to get sky high ratings and have a much greater cultural impact because there were three channels and people had to either watch it or watch nothing, whether it truly appealed to them or not. Now with a gazillion other entertainment options out there it is incredibly easy to watch something that caters specifically to their own interest, often avoiding those annoying commercials in the process. You can make the best television show ever made, and it would get a tiny fraction of people watching it today than what it would have 20 years ago.

 

[terry78]

I mean I consider anything lucasfilm or marvel or dc to be an event film, something I need to see with a crowd of nerds opening night. I admit I drank the Kool aid.

 

[psylockolussus]

I'll just add Disney more than any studio (although they're all guilty) is conditioning moviegoers to think films need to be "events." And with higher ticket prices average moviegoers are more and more only going to see "the events," which is literally how Disney presents each release, even the shameless, soulless remakes, but WB does it, Fox did it, most recently with the failed attempt to make Alita an "event."

But this tells moviegoers I NEED to see those movies and everything else doesn't really matter. Which is a shame, as Fox and Fox Searchlight's The Favourite and Widows, for example, were better movies than any of the blockbusters last year except maybe Into the Spider-Verse or Mission: Impossible. I know that they, more so Favourite, will never make major money, but the fewer opportunities of truly great movies like that that recede from wide release and become strictly the territory of streaming, the more easy it is for moviegoers to think that theatrical experiences should only be for franchises or live-action remakes.

But yeah, I don't see much hope in stopping the cycle as it's self-perpetuating on the part of the studios chasing bottom lines and audiences in turn going along with it and saving anything challenging for streaming (which is itself such a fractionalized market, it is difficult for anything to actually have a major impact).

Sounds like Fox was just your favourite studio.

 

[DACrowe]

Sounds like Fox was just your favourite studio.

I didn't really have one. I guess Fox Searchlight might be a contender or A24? But really only fanboys think in such terms. "My brand is better than your brand." This is about the actual future of movies and and moviegoing as a market and art form.

For example, I will be just as concerned if something like this happens to Paramount tomorrow whereas some around here might not give a fig at all since Paramount has no superhero licenses in its offices.

 

[DACrowe]

I'm not going to deny that this is what is happening, but you appear to have the reasoning completely backwards. The last 10-15 years has seen a tremendous shift in how media is consumed. Between easy access to streaming and giant HD and 4K home theater systems the ease of access to quality film and television has exploded.

The studios aren't driving this change. Technology is driving it. The traditional studios are being forced to adjust or go extinct.

Quite frankly, the theater experience is terrible. People don't like to spend $100 or more for the family to go leave the house and go to the cinema only to have it ruined by a bunch of noisy teenagers playing on their smart phones the whole film and the parents that thought it would be a good idea to bring their screaming baby with them. Especially not when they can watch it in peace in the comfort of their own home 6 months later on a streaming service they already are paying for.

It isn't that Disney and other studios are conditioning moviegoers to only care about "event" films, as much as acknowledging that that is what it takes to get people to the theater these days.

Television is seeing something similar. Everything used to get sky high ratings and have a much greater cultural impact because there were three channels and people had to either watch it or watch nothing, whether it truly appealed to them or not. Now with a gazillion other entertainment options out there it is incredibly easy to watch something that caters specifically to their own interest, often avoiding those annoying commercials in the process. You can make the best television show ever made, and it would get a tiny fraction of people watching it today than what it would have 20 years ago.

This is a fair counter. But we've seen the "threat" of technology before when television first came on the scene, at least in a major competitive way, in the 1950s and '60s. Studios responded with great innovations (cinemascope, VistaVision... 3D, sigh), but the bigger the movies got, the more unsustainable it was. Eventually that logic led to calamity, but also a sort of renaissance in the '70s with American studios betting big on young auteurs. I guess we can always hopes history repeats itself, because I think the industry's reaction to internet and television having a new golden age has been to seek the lowest common denominator, which in turn leads to moviegoers to only view theaters as the lowest common denominator, if that makes sense?

In any event, I can't help you on prices, but I will give you one recommendation to make your moviegoing experience blessedly nicer:

 

[Blitzkrieg]

Fox Film Team Faces Rocky Disney Future; Paul Feig Moves Label To Universal

Particularly since the output of films is expected to be low. For instance 20th, which has been making a full-size slate of pictures since The Depression, might only be able to make four theatrical films and four streaming films per year, if the rumors I am hearing are true.

How Disney Could Shake Up Fox Film Slate, Starting With Brad Pitt’s ‘Ad Astra’ - WrapPRO

The Burbank-based studio plans to release all of Fox’s films, an individual with knowledge of the slate tells TheWrap, but some of the 13 Fox films slated for release in the next 12 months will be moved around in the coming weeks to avoid competing against Disney’s own 2019 slate.

 

[metaphysician]

For all Disney's faults, they may be the last major entertainment company still committed to theatrical releases. AT&T and Comcast, companies whose primary revenue stream comes from selling access to their pipes, are not so surprisingly looking to contract the theatrical release window. And the FAANGs investing heavily in content would prefer you send them a monthly credit card payment rather than sit in front of a communal screen with a bag of popcorn.
Studios Expected to Push for Early Home Release in 2019 (EXCLUSIVE)

It's hard to make the case that niche theatrical product is an attractive business when Disney has dominated the BO by ignoring it. I think Horn and his team will continue to invest in Spotlight for the near future, but it's imperative for those who want to see small scale movies on the big screen to vote with their wallets.

So, time for an awkward question:

Why is it important that small scale movies receive theatrical releases?

 

[Blitzkrieg]

I think it has a lot to do with choice.

I mean for those who are interested, they would prefer to have the option to watch those small scale joints in theaters.

 

[DACrowe]

So, time for an awkward question:

Why is it important that small scale movies receive theatrical releases?

Because adults might like more than just sequels, remakes, reboots, cartoons, cartoon adaptations, and a steady diet of comic books as their only options at the movie theater? Just spitballing here.

(P.S. Everything is better on a big screen. It would be a shame if that cinematic experience becomes relegated solely to theme park amusements.)

 

[terry78]

Some would argue that's what Netflix is for if the film is that personal and grounded lol.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

This is a fair counter. But we've seen the "threat" of technology before when television first came on the scene, at least in a major competitive way, in the 1950s and '60s. Studios responded with great innovations (cinemascope, VistaVision... 3D, sigh), but the bigger the movies got, the more unsustainable it was. Eventually that logic led to calamity, but also a sort of renaissance in the '70s with American studios betting big on young auteurs. I guess we can always hopes history repeats itself, because I think the industry's reaction to internet and television having a new golden age has been to seek the lowest common denominator, which in turn leads to moviegoers to only view theaters as the lowest common denominator, if that makes sense?

In any event, I can't help you on prices, but I will give you one recommendation to make your moviegoing experience blessedly nicer:

I checked the website and the closest one that is currently open is 18 hours away in Corpus Cristi. So not an option, and there is still the price like you say.

Fact is that cinema is dying. Not because of the studios, but because audiences can find a much easier and cheaper alternative at home. Streaming is the rapidly approaching future.

 

[Teelie]

A bit of a bump for this concerning some of the big R-Rated franchises Fox has and Disney's plans for them.

Appearing as part of Disney’s CinemaCon presentation, 21st Century Fox exec Emma Watts talked a bit about the future of the former studio’s franchises now that they’ve been absorbed into the Mouse House.

Disney showed off a sizzle reel of big franchises they now own which included footage of “Alien: Covenant” and “Predator” while Watts stated quite clearly that there are plans to deliver new chapters in these franchises and name-checked “Alien,” “Kingsman,” “Avatar” and “Planet of the Apes” as getting new entries.

Watts also said the upcoming “Dark Phoenix” will be the “perfect sendoff for our X-Men team” which confirms it is indeed the last one before the series gets rebooted. Disney Chairman Alan Horn confirmed that more “Deadpool” will be coming, while a reel of upcoming theatrical product by the studio seems to confirm that “The New Mutants” is still planning to go to cinemas and remains slated for an August 2nd release.

Dark Horizons

 

[-JKR-]

So, time for an awkward question:

Why is it important that small scale movies receive theatrical releases?

Because I wanna experience small scale movies on the big screen, as well, and do not only care about huge blockbusters. And fortunately I am not alone, even though I'm aware that we're on SuperHeroHype! here.

 

[DarkKnight88]

Because having an immersive film experience has nothing to do with budget. Your film could cost $500 but be a cinematic experience.

Why do you think horror films do so well on the big screen. They’re cheap to make, but is such a communal experience. Same with comedy.

 

[Spider-Fan]

I checked the website and the closest one that is currently open is 18 hours away in Corpus Cristi. So not an option, and there is still the price like you say.

Fact is that cinema is dying. Not because of the studios, but because audiences can find a much easier and cheaper alternative at home. Streaming is the rapidly approaching future.

This saddens me as I greatly prefer going to the cinema and being in a distraction free environment. There are too many distractions when watching a movie on TV or in your house.

 

[Dark Raven]

This saddens me as I greatly prefer going to the cinema and being in a distraction free environment. There are too many distractions when watching a movie on TV or in your house.

There are distractions in a cinema too - eg if people are talking, or they keep getting up to go to the toilet, or someone smells. I find it less distracting at home.

 

[terry78]

I can't really watch a movie at home because sometimes family pops up outta nowhere when I'm invested. I took a weekday night to watch the Last Jedi and all of a sudden I get a text from my dad saying he and mom are out this way and are gonna drop by. And I couldn't bull**** my way out because they were literally in the parking lot when he did this.

 

[Spider-Fan]

There are distractions in a cinema too - eg if people are talking, or they keep getting up to go to the toilet, or someone smells. I find it less distracting at home.

I don't. People at home will just start conversations regardless if you're watching the movie and care to pay attention. Plus people will call/text you, if you have pets they will seek attention or want to go outside, maybe a pizza guy comes, etc. Then there is pausing the movie and taking you out of the immersion, etc. If people are talking in the theater, that is annoying. But I can ask them to shut up or ignore it. At home, it just is not the same. Too many potential interruptions.

 

[Dark Raven]

I don't. People at home will just start conversations regardless if you're watching the movie and care to pay attention. Plus people will call/text you, if you have pets they will seek attention or want to go outside, maybe a pizza guy comes, etc. Then there is pausing the movie and taking you out of the immersion, etc. If people are talking in the theater, that is annoying. But I can ask them to shut up or ignore it. At home, it just is not the same. Too many potential interruptions.

None of that ever happens for me, because I watch movies late at night and no-one else is around or would be awake at that hour to disturb me. And a pizza guy can only show up if I've ordered a pizza, and not randomly.

Also, if you are in the theatre and need to pee, that can be distracting too, because you can feel uncomfortable and you either have to hold it or duck out to the toilet and you start thinking about that. Therefore I never drink when I go to the cinema, especially with the air conditioning that can make you feel colder as well. That's why so many people are using the toilet all the time (even several times in the same film) because they drink so much and then they feel the breeze of the AC blowing on them.

And if someone smells in the theatre, you can't exactly spray them with deodorant, or hold your breath for two hours.