The Rebooted "Keep Hope Alive" (that the rights can revert back to Marvel) Thread - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Part 24

Status
Not open for further replies.
Johnny Storm a popular instagram model/internet personality
Ben Grimm a famous air force pilot turned astronaut
Sue Storm a successful doctor and surgeon
Reed Richards famous inventor and possibly the smartest man alive

Idk, that feels pretty contrived, imo
I could see Johnny and Reed being famous for being hot and smart, respectively, but I don't see Ben or Sue being the fame-seeking types. They also need to come up with a better, more natural reason for why an instagram model would be on a space mission with a bunch of scientists and astronauts.
 
Idk, that feels pretty contrived, imo
I could see Johnny and Reed being famous for being hot and smart, respectively, but I don't see Ben or Sue being the fame-seeking types. They also need to come up with a better, more natural reason for why an instagram model would be on a space mission with a bunch of scientists and astronauts.
Maybe the reason is because he (and Sue) are the ones funding the proyect, and he insists on being there.
 
Maybe the reason is because he (and Sue) are the ones funding the proyect, and he insists on being there.

That's how a Japanese Businessman will be on the first private trip around the Moon, but he's bringing a bunch of artists with him. Their only reason for being there is that... they're artists. Oh, and Elon Musk might go along for the ride because he can.

Will Elon Musk Fly on SpaceX's Private Moon Flight in 2023 with Japanese Billionaire?

That's not comic book fantasy. That's reality in 2018. People don't need 'reasons' to go into space anymore. They can just do it because they can do it and they want to do it.

If Reed Richards wants to put his new space-craft through its paces and he wants to bring his girlfriend and her brother along, what's wrong with that? In the context of the Space-X moon mission, it's certainly not unrealistic.
 
I'm a big advocate of MCU Sue being a medical doctor. It's a good fit for her role as team mom. Using the Star Trek Model....

Ben - Helmsman, Security Chief
Reed - Captain, Chief Science Officer
Johnny - Chief Engineer
Sue - Chief Medical Officer
 
That's how a Japanese Businessman will be on the first private trip around the Moon, but he's bringing a bunch of artists with him. Their only reason for being there is that... they're artists. Oh, and Elon Musk might go along for the ride because he can.

Will Elon Musk Fly on SpaceX's Private Moon Flight in 2023 with Japanese Billionaire?

That's not comic book fantasy. That's reality in 2018. People don't need 'reasons' to go into space anymore. They can just do it because they can do it and they want to do it.

If Reed Richards wants to put his new space-craft through its paces and he wants to bring his girlfriend and her brother along, what's wrong with that? In the context of the Space-X moon mission, it's certainly not unrealistic.

I think Johnny should be the only one who's a guest on the expedition (especially if he's going to be around Peter's age). Sue should have a role beyond just being Reed's girlfriend, for me it's preferably the teams medic.
 
I think Johnny should be the only one who's a guest on the expedition (especially if he's going to be around Peter's age). Sue should have a role beyond just being Reed's girlfriend, for me it's preferably the teams medic.

Star Trek TNG came out 30 years ago, back when Dr. Crusher was seen as a great character and role model for women. I think Sue Storm should be more progressive and be a scientist herself.
 
Star Trek TNG came out 30 years ago, back when Dr. Crusher was seen as a great character and role model for women. I think Sue Storm should be more progressive and be a scientist herself.

I don't think she should be a scientist. Part of what makes Reed and Sue's relationship interesting is the conflict. He gets lost in his love for science and it hurts their marriage. If she is a scientist herself, it dumbs down the conflict. Why would she be mad at Reed for pursuing the mysteries of the universe when that is her passion as well? There needs to be a separation in that regard. Being into medicine or something like that would be different enough, but them both being scientists basically makes them the Pyms.
 
Star Trek TNG came out 30 years ago, back when Dr. Crusher was seen as a great character and role model for women. I think Sue Storm should be more progressive and be a scientist herself.

I don't think she should be a scientist. Part of what makes Reed and Sue's relationship interesting is the conflict. He gets lost in his love for science and it hurts their marriage. If she is a scientist herself, it dumbs down the conflict. Why would she be mad at Reed for pursuing the mysteries of the universe when that is her passion as well? There needs to be a separation in that regard. Being into medicine or something like that would be different enough, but them both being scientists basically makes them the Pyms.

I agree with Spider-Fan. Making Sue a scientist is a step too far and lose a part of the dynamic she has with Reed. Plus she'll never be as good of a scientist as Reed because he is meant to be the smartest man on the planet and always the smartest in the room, it would be a mistake to have her in the same field as him. The 2005 and 2007 films highlight the problem as Jessica Alba was meant to be a great scientist in her own right but you could hardly tell. She ended doing nothing and being redundant with Reed around.

A doctor is a happy medium, it gives her role that isn't overshadowed by Reed and it's also a profession that suits the character. She would still have the conflict with Reed shutting himself out from the world and Reed still gets to explain complex sciencey stuff as that's not her field of expertise. It's a win win
 
The russo's have been spotted on the far from home set in NYC possibly for an Avengers 4 post credit scene remember how they did the captain marvel scene after infinity war wrapped back in Feb.
 
I don't think she should be a scientist. Part of what makes Reed and Sue's relationship interesting is the conflict. He gets lost in his love for science and it hurts their marriage. If she is a scientist herself, it dumbs down the conflict. Why would she be mad at Reed for pursuing the mysteries of the universe when that is her passion as well? There needs to be a separation in that regard. Being into medicine or something like that would be different enough, but them both being scientists basically makes them the Pyms.

I never really thought about it, but what you are saying makes sense.
 
Will China Try to Block the Disney-Fox Deal?
As Disney's blockbuster acquisition of 21st Century Fox assets enters the home stretch, one lingering risk to the deal has some industry watchers holding their breath: pending regulatory clearance from China. With President Trump escalating his trade war against China by the week, Beijing has been scrambling to retaliate. Multiple U.S. investors are on edge over the prospect that China could resort to weaponizing its antitrust approval process to stymie the ambitions of America's corporate giants.

By far the most high-profile such deal under review by Chinese market regulators is the $71.3 billion Disney-Fox merger, which has a deadline of Oct. 19. "The talk is that China will consider all available options to respond to Trump's tariffs, including using Chinese antitrust laws to target deals that are perceived to have a strong U.S. tie," says Adams Lee, an attorney at the law firm Harris Bricken in Beijing. "So it is a very real possibility that Disney-Fox could be viewed by Chinese authorities as a potential candidate to target."

Although already given a green light by shareholders and the U.S. Department of Justice, the Disney-Fox deal requires antitrust approval from a number of national regulators around the world. And the growth of China's massive marketplace gives Beijing's voice, in particular, considerable sway. American chipmaker Qualcomm, for example, saw its $44 billion acquisition of a Dutch semiconductor company go bust in July when China declined to rule on the transaction.

China’s antimonopoly agency, the State Administration for Market Regulation, never commented publicly on the proposed transaction. Instead, it simply let the clock run out without extending approval. The action — or lack thereof — was widely interpreted as a response to Trump's trade war.

China parried Trump's initial $50 billion round of tariffs dollar-for-dollar. But when the White House slapped a 10 percent tax on another $200 billion in Chinese goods last month, Beijing was forced to entertain more creative tactics — simply because it doesn't import nearly enough goods from the U.S. to match the levies.

Undercutting the Disney-Fox pact would mark a considerable escalation from the Chinese side, however. And it could cause a range of repercussions thanks to the deal's high degree of visibility.

"Such a Chinese decision would undermine all of their arguments to persuade Americans that a trade war is misguided and one-sided, with all the blame on Trump," notes Stanley Rosen, a professor at USC who specializes in China's culture industries.

China also has worked to make the case to the world that it is a staunch supporter of globalization, in contrast to Trump’s "America First" policy. Rosen explains: "But if they oppose this deal they will send a message that would rattle not just American, but European and other multinational corporations, which would very likely have an effect on investors and those companies doing or planning to do business in China."

Bloomberg has estimated that less than 2 percent of Fox's overall revenue is generated in China. But Beijing regulators are likely to focus mainly on the one area where the two companies' combined strength could be problematic: the theatrical film market. U.S. studio films accounted for more than 40 percent of overall box office in China in 2017, with Disney leading the pack.

China raising antitrust objections within the scope of first-run theatrical films in English "doesn't seem completely implausible," argues Thomas Brown, an antitrust attorney at law firm Paul Hastings. "That's the game that gets played with antitrust authorities around the world: regulators want to define a narrower market; the lawyers defending the deal try to define a broader market. Then you argue about efficiencies and whether there are sufficient competitors to discipline price statistically."

Brown notes that China's big challenge would be to "argue that there isn't still a sufficient number of U.S. competitors [to Disney and Fox], as well as new entrants," in the Chinese theatrical market.

However, given that Beijing is known to get more exercised over the influence of foreign media and content companies than nearly any other issue, apart from state security, opposition to the Disney-Fox deal can't be ruled out.

Disney's last known public comment on the topic came during the company's Aug. 7 earnings call, when Iger, responding to an analyst's question about the regulatory process in China, said: "We have no updates regarding the regulatory filings." He reiterated the company's June statement, which said that Disney anticipated getting the necessary regulatory filings from global markets within six to 12 months, and added: "We don't intend to update that at all.”

Earlier this week, Disney offered unspecified concessions to the European Commission in an effort to forestall potential antitrust concerns from the block. Were China to attempt to waylay the deal, Disney's only good option would be to attempt to negotiate; whether Beijing would be receptive to concessions, given the geopolitical backdrop, is far from clear.

It's also difficult to see what concessions Disney could conceivably offer that would satisfy Beijing, given that objections will likely be limited to film imports into China.

"What could they seek for Disney...unless they were to say, 'Don't acquire the Fox library and let us limit the number of English-language films you produce for import?'" asks Stephen Saltzman, an attorney at Paul Hastings who has represented Chinese state-owned entities in dealings with Hollywood. "It's really a stretch to see what could actually be relevant to the antitrust concerns of the Chinese marketplace that isn't somewhat ludicrous."

The personal relationships and politics at play in China's Disney-Fox calculus betray a similarly tangled mix of priorities. Disney and CEO Bob Iger have done more to cultivate ties with China than any other international media company, notably the two decades' worth of courtship that culminated in the launch of the Shanghai Disney Resort in 2016.

Around that time Chinese President Xi Jinping even welcomed Iger for a meeting inside China's Great Hall of the People, the ceremonial seat of the country's legislature — an exceedingly rare honor for a non-head of state.

The Chinese no doubt are aware that the Disney chairman's staunch Democratic leanings make him far from one of Trump's favorite business figures. Yet, they also know that Fox executive co-chairman Rupert Murdoch is precisely that — a close confidant and frequent late-night Trump interlocutor by telephone. Murdoch even received a congratulatory ring from the president as soon as the Disney deal was unveiled last December, with White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders later saying that Trump viewed the acquisition as a "great thing for jobs."

Breaking up Murdoch's deal of a lifetime would thus be viewed "almost as a direct attack on Trump," Rosen says. The action would also strengthen the position of the China hawks within the administration — advisers Peter Navarro, Robert Lighthizer and Stephen Miller — who have argued for a structural delinking of the U.S. and China, and who remain on the lookout for any evidence of “interference in American affairs.”

Whether China is ready to go that far remains to be seen. Just this week, the White House again upped the stakes, though, announcing Wednesday that it would begin more aggressively policing foreign investment in the U.S. to prevent China from gaining access to American technology.

Adds Lee: "Beijing appears to be evaluating all possible options and waiting to see what is an appropriate way to respond if and when the next Trump trade action aimed at China arrives."
 
I don't think this statement is true:

"the Disney-Fox deal requires antitrust approval from a number of national regulators around the world"

Those approvals aren't required for the deal to go through. They're just required for the new entity to do business in the particular jurisdiction, and that gives Disney some leverage. Disney wants to do business in China and China wants their product, but Disney doesn't NEED the Chinese business.

I fully expect that Disney would stop doing business in China before they allowed China to scuttle the deal or dictate unreasonable terms (or Disney would at least threaten to do so with the knowledge China won't let it come to that).

If China is intent on trying to damage Disney as a pawn in a larger conflict, that may not be the type of environment Disney wants to do business in anyway.

Unlike other businesses that require inexpensive components made in China, Disney isn't dependent on China in that way. They just want money from Chinese consumers, and because of the limits the government already has in place, those dollars aren't enough to make Disney give up. They could sacrifice those dollars, at least for a short time, until China becomes more reasonable.
 
Ok. But no blame to the one who's imposing the tariffs on China right? I don't blame China on this one.

Oh no, f*** that piece of s*** so, SO much more
I just didn't want to go down the rabbit hole of ranting about the orange s**tstain in the white house

I get that China's a growing market, but with all their weird censorship and whatnot, I am just vehemently against Hollywood catering to them
 
Oh no, f*** that piece of s*** so, SO much more
I just didn't want to go down the rabbit hole of ranting about the orange s**tstain in the white house

I get that China's a growing market, but with all their weird censorship and whatnot, I am just vehemently against Hollywood catering to them

I get you now. This is actually a fair take.
 
I'm not too worried about the whole China thing. Especially considering the point that Willie made. Either way, we'll have a much better understanding of where things are at on Friday.
 
I don't think this statement is true:

"the Disney-Fox deal requires antitrust approval from a number of national regulators around the world"

Those approvals aren't required for the deal to go through. They're just required for the new entity to do business in the particular jurisdiction, and that gives Disney some leverage. Disney wants to do business in China and China wants their product, but Disney doesn't NEED the Chinese business.

I fully expect that Disney would stop doing business in China before they allowed China to scuttle the deal or dictate unreasonable terms (or Disney would at least threaten to do so with the knowledge China won't let it come to that).

If China is intent on trying to damage Disney as a pawn in a larger conflict, that may not be the type of environment Disney wants to do business in anyway.

Unlike other businesses that require inexpensive components made in China, Disney isn't dependent on China in that way. They just want money from Chinese consumers, and because of the limits the government already has in place, those dollars aren't enough to make Disney give up. They could sacrifice those dollars, at least for a short time, until China becomes more reasonable.

I dunno. The Chinese market makes up a sizable chunk of the Mouse's (and every other studio's) box office. And Iger can't board up the two parks in Hong Kong and Shanghai. I don't think China will squelch the deal - Iger will announce a billion or so in additional theme park investments before it comes to that - but Disney is in far too deep in the Middle Kingdom to pull their business.
 
I dunno. The Chinese market makes up a sizable chunk of the Mouse's (and every other studio's) box office. And Iger can't board up the two parks in Hong Kong and Shanghai. I don't think China will squelch the deal - Iger will announce a billion or so in additional theme park investments before it comes to that - but Disney is in far too deep in the Middle Kingdom to pull their business.

Sure Disney wants to keep the business, but they better be willing to walk away if China asks too much.

If they aren’t prepared to give it up, they’ll be in the position of somebody who just paid off an extortionist - the extortionist is just going to continue to ask for more.
 
I really hope they stay away from this.
 
So China's decision must be coming soon then for THR to put that article out. Would be odd but nice if China approved it before the EU.
 
I'm not too worried about the whole China thing. Especially considering the point that Willie made. Either way, we'll have a much better understanding of where things are at on Friday.

Pretty sure the EU deadline got pushed to November 11 didn't it? Due to the concessions Disney offered. The EU have to re-evaluate.

From Variety.

The European regulator has also extended its deadline for reviewing the merger from Oct. 19 to Nov. 11. The commission is expected to consult with customers and media competitors before deciding whether to accept Disney’s proposed concessions.

Disney Offers Concessions to Secure E.U. Approval of Fox Deal
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Staff online

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
200,548
Messages
21,758,551
Members
45,594
Latest member
Jeremija
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"