[Capt.S.G.Wiseman]

There are several here who think that this merge will "tone down" Marvel. Seriously, I think not.

Remember back in the late 80's and early 90's when Disney was under investigation by the FCC?
In the movie Aladdin alone, there was the word "Sex" spelled in the cloud skies and the minister's "knee" was in fact a boner. That is just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to subliminal innuendos. Snow White, The Little Mermaid, ALL of them had some subliminal imagery going on.

In other words, going Disney does NOT mean going G rated. So if you still like your favorite Marvel girls to wear something Victoria's Secret has yet to invent, I think your interest are safe.

[sabretooth]

kiss any chance of an "R" rated marvel based film or anything else goodbye, look forward to iron mickey, the incredible duck, goof rider, andpluto and the xmen

[Capt.S.G.Wiseman]

sabretooth, on 31 August 2009 - 04:11 PM, said:

kiss any chance of an "R" rated marvel based film or anything else goodbye, look forward to iron mickey, the incredible duck, goof rider, andpluto and the xmen

OK, this is EXACLY what I'm trying to preach to you young guys.

Disney has NO PROBLEM with rated R stuff. Period. Back in 1979, Disney made The Black Hole. They also made TRON. The upcoming sequel to TRON film is supposed to be rated R.

Disney is not stupid, and they know if they try to regulate "G Rated" rules on what ever they possess, then they lose any consumers. Besides, they really do not care about parental ratings anyway.

[Nguyen_Dragon]

Capt.S.G.Wiseman, on 31 August 2009 - 05:08 PM, said:

There are several here who think that this merge will "tone down" Marvel. Seriously, I think not.

Remember back in the late 80's and early 90's when Disney was under investigation by the FCC?
In the movie Aladdin alone, there was the word "Sex" spelled in the cloud skies and the minister's "knee" was in fact a boner. That is just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to subliminal innuendos. Snow White, The Little Mermaid, ALL of them had some subliminal imagery going on.

In other words, going Disney does NOT mean going G rated. So if you still like your favorite Marvel girls to wear something Victoria's Secret has yet to invent, I think your interest are safe.

I think those were isolated cases... Done by the artists because that is what people do when they are bored at work... I do agree with you about Disney not toning everything down... Look at Pirates of the Caribbean... I am fine with PG-13 rating for comic movies...

[belmont13]

Nguyen_Dragon, on 31 August 2009 - 03:42 PM, said:

Capt.S.G.Wiseman, on 31 August 2009 - 05:08 PM, said:

There are several here who think that this merge will "tone down" Marvel. Seriously, I think not.

Remember back in the late 80's and early 90's when Disney was under investigation by the FCC?
In the movie Aladdin alone, there was the word "Sex" spelled in the cloud skies and the minister's "knee" was in fact a boner. That is just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to subliminal innuendos. Snow White, The Little Mermaid, ALL of them had some subliminal imagery going on.

In other words, going Disney does NOT mean going G rated. So if you still like your favorite Marvel girls to wear something Victoria's Secret has yet to invent, I think your interest are safe.

I think those were isolated cases... Done by the artists because that is what people do when they are bored at work... I do agree with you about Disney not toning everything down... Look at Pirates of the Caribbean... I am fine with PG-13 rating for comic movies...

Actually the word "sex" cloud scene was in the Lion King, but I see what you mean I think we're all jumping the gun here as to what will happen or what will come from this merger.

[Zathras]

Donald Duck Vs Howard the Duck

Fight!!!

[Capt.S.G.Wiseman]

belmont13, on 31 August 2009 - 05:41 PM, said:

Nguyen_Dragon, on 31 August 2009 - 03:42 PM, said:

Capt.S.G.Wiseman, on 31 August 2009 - 05:08 PM, said:

There are several here who think that this merge will "tone down" Marvel. Seriously, I think not.

Remember back in the late 80's and early 90's when Disney was under investigation by the FCC?
In the movie Aladdin alone, there was the word "Sex" spelled in the cloud skies and the minister's "knee" was in fact a boner. That is just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to subliminal innuendos. Snow White, The Little Mermaid, ALL of them had some subliminal imagery going on.

In other words, going Disney does NOT mean going G rated. So if you still like your favorite Marvel girls to wear something Victoria's Secret has yet to invent, I think your interest are safe.

I think those were isolated cases... Done by the artists because that is what people do when they are bored at work... I do agree with you about Disney not toning everything down... Look at Pirates of the Caribbean... I am fine with PG-13 rating for comic movies...

Actually the word "sex" cloud scene was in the Lion King, but I see what you mean I think we're all jumping the gun here as to what will happen or what will come from this merger.

The Lion King. Thanks. I knew it was one of those. Like I said, Disney is not out to turn everything Marvel into G rated Mickey Mouse.

....Well, maybe in some exclusive toys like "Spidey Mickey" or "Mickey Wolverine", but not the mainstream movies.

[I AM SCI-FI]

CAPTAIN DISNEY
Secret Identity: Mickey G. Donald

POSSIBLE CROSSOVERS
Bambi vs Wolverine
Goofy vs Deadpool
CHERNABOG (giant demon from Fantasia) vs MEPHISTO
Captain Jack Sparrow vs Pirate Deadpool
Captain Jack Sparrow vs Drunk Iron Man
Gambit steals a magic lamp, discovers Genie (from Aladdin), and becomes the King of Thieves
Apocalypse vs Jafar
Darkwing Duck vs Howard the Duck
Donald Duck vs Howard the Duck
The Incredibles vs The Fantastic Four
Darkwing Duck and the Justice Ducks vs the Avengers
Wall-E vs H.E.R.B.I.E.
Herbie, the Love Bug vs H.E.R.B.I.E.
Underdog and Bolt vs Rocket Raccoon
The Sorcerer's Apprentice vs the Sorcerer Supreme
TRON vs Arcade
Condorman vs Falcon
Alien Kids from Witch Mountain vs Marvels Aliens
Herbie, the Love Bug meets Spider-Man
Pete's Dragon vs Fin Fang Foom
Flubber vs Doop
Make Mine Music vs Make Mine Marvel

MOVIE TITLES
Honey, I Shrunk the Superheroes
The Shaggy Superhero
Race to Scarlet Witch Mountain (Quicksilver wins)

AMALGAM CHARACTERS
Spider-Mouse
The Incredible GOOF
Duckverine

The Muppets are owned by Disney, too.
Kermit the Frog vs Toad

[Dragon66]

Also remember that Disney distibuted Mirramax in the 90's, which gave us some great adult themed films such as "Pulp Fiction". Without Disney, we would not even know Quentin Tarrintino is for the most part. I feel that this is akin to the DC/Warner merger and will keep the company relevent.

[TMNTFAN85]

http://shibamura-pri...urnal/26933525/ <--- this guy is wise in his words since i cant think up what to say--- well this guy pretty much hits the nail-- in other wise quit bitching its no big deal.

[Jmacq1]

Capt.S.G.Wiseman, on 31 August 2009 - 04:23 PM, said:

OK, this is EXACLY what I'm trying to preach to you young guys.

Disney has NO PROBLEM with rated R stuff. Period. Back in 1979, Disney made The Black Hole. They also made TRON. The upcoming sequel to TRON film is supposed to be rated R.

Disney is not stupid, and they know if they try to regulate "G Rated" rules on what ever they possess, then they lose any consumers. Besides, they really do not care about parental ratings anyway.

To be fair, Marvel had already said that they weren't doing any more "R" rated movies after Punisher: War Zone bombed. So nobody's missing anything on that score because of Disney.

I completely agree with you, S.G. that Disney is almost certainly going to be almost completely hands-off where Marvel's comic output is concerned. However, Tron and the Black Hole were PG-rated. And if Tron 2 ends up Rated R, I will eat my shoe. I've heard or seen absolutely nothing that indicates that movie is supposed to be rated R. A PG-13 is almost a certainty. There's no -reason- for it to be rated R.

[Wheeljack35]

As some you know I don't post in this forum since i'm more a DC fan

but I had to add my 2 cents from what I know

My friend who works at the Magic Kingdom told me Disney wanted to open a new theme park in the Disney World complex which right now has:

The Magic Kingdom
Epcot
Disney Hollywood Studios
Disney Animal Park
A few water parks
Downtown Disney and the hotels


A theme park based on the Marvel Universe might be a good idea

I wonder what this does right now to Universal Island of adventure which allready uses Marvel characters

[ARROW]

Quote

I wonder what this does right now to Universal Island of adventure which allready uses Marvel characters

The rights to use those characters will remain until the agreement lapses, or until Disney buys out the stake in it.
The press-release suggests that stuff like the Universal theme park will not be affected for a while, but MIGHT be affected in some way at a future point in time IF Disney decides it wants to exercise its control over the characters.

Many of the rides at Universal use Marvel characters in only cosmetic ways, with the rides able to be re-fitted for other characters if need be. It could be a simple matter of changing a sign and taking down some statues in some cases.

[MasterJailer]

While this probably won't mean much in the short term, the clock has started ticking for Marvel Comics.

Please do not be so naive as to believe that Disney wanted to get into the comic book publishing business. Disney had its own comic book publishing arm and it shut it down. Disney has a much higher standard in terms of profitability than Marvel's previous owners. If comic book sales continue to deteriorate as they have been, Disney will shut down Marvel as a publisher of new comic books. Marvel's true value to Disney lay in its properties, X-Men, Spider-Man, etc. Disney will continue milking these characters for toys, movies, cartoons, and probably reprint their old comics material. In terms of new comics though, there just isn't the kind of money in it that will satisfy Disney stockholders.

It probably won't happen soon. I give it five to ten years before we start hearing about Disney building a coffin for Marvel's publishing branch.

In the interim, I doubt we'll see much if any intervention on Disney's part in Marvel's editorial policies.

[RC_rika]

All I know is that this should prove interesting! I'll wait before deciding how so...

[Lady Jaye]

I was worried about my childhood heroes and heroines how they would fare under the House of Mouse. But looking over, hopefully everything will stay the same. I hope it just means that our favorite Superheroes will be be out there more!! And that isn't a bad thing!!!

[supertoyhero]

IT'S OFFICAL WE'RE ALL GOING TO HELL AND MICKEY MOUSE IS LEADING THE PARADE!!!!

[CLAM]

I don't think it really means anything in terms of the comics or toys or movies.

Anything Marvel is doing will stay the same.


I see Disney doing more stuff with Marvel like they do with StarWars right now. Like maybe some Marvel rides or themes at their parks, mickey ears with Spiderman's web pattern, a stuffed Mickey as Spiderman toy, etc etc.

I highly doubt you will anything different in the comics whatsoever.



I think this is just a win win for us. Everything we like about Marvel, plus more other things

[Jmacq1]

MasterJailer, on 31 August 2009 - 09:13 PM, said:

While this probably won't mean much in the short term, the clock has started ticking for Marvel Comics.

Please do not be so naive as to believe that Disney wanted to get into the comic book publishing business. Disney had its own comic book publishing arm and it shut it down. Disney has a much higher standard in terms of profitability than Marvel's previous owners. If comic book sales continue to deteriorate as they have been, Disney will shut down Marvel as a publisher of new comic books. Marvel's true value to Disney lay in its properties, X-Men, Spider-Man, etc. Disney will continue milking these characters for toys, movies, cartoons, and probably reprint their old comics material. In terms of new comics though, there just isn't the kind of money in it that will satisfy Disney stockholders.

It probably won't happen soon. I give it five to ten years before we start hearing about Disney building a coffin for Marvel's publishing branch.

In the interim, I doubt we'll see much if any intervention on Disney's part in Marvel's editorial policies.

Fortunately for Marvel, their publishing arm has been consistently profitable for the last several years, and TPB/Collected Edition sales have continued to grow year-by-year.

That's the unspoken bit that a lot of folks don't realize: Monthly comic sales may have declined, but TPB sales have gone WAY up over the years. Marvel makes way, WAY more money on TPBs than monthly comics. There are still lots of people out there reading comics, they just wait for the trades. Cheaper, easier, and you don't have to wait six to twelve months to find out how the story ends.

The comics will never go away completely. They might shift to digital output instead of monthly books, but Disney and Marvel will want to keep them around as the proving ground for the IPs. A place where new characters, concepts, and storylines can be tested before potentially getting made into a movie or animated series.

Comics survived Frederic Wertham. They'll survive the digital age too. Maybe in a different form than we're used to, but they'll still be around.

[MemberX]

 disney.jpg (162.3K)
Number of downloads: 5



can you say face palm! Dude I will miss the hell out of the universal park cause there were NO lines and now what will we get? its a spiderman world after all!

[MasterJailer]

Jmacq1, on 01 September 2009 - 08:01 AM, said:

Fortunately for Marvel, their publishing arm has been consistently profitable for the last several years, and TPB/Collected Edition sales have continued to grow year-by-year.

Is it profitable enough by Disney standards? The average ADEQUATELY selling comic book sells about thirty thousand copies a month. In this age of diminished expectations that number may have been enough to spare a title from cancellation, but will Disney be satisfied with that kind of return? Will they see it worth the administrative and production cost of maintaining Marvel as an active entity? Gemstone was doing well ...granted not doing as well as Marvel but still holding its own... and Disney smashed it to pieces.

As for the TPB market, Disney will keep Marvel active in that one but it will be all reprint material. There's just not enough of a return in collections of new material or even recently collected material. They'll most likely continue to publish the classics... Dark Phoenix Saga, Miller's Daredevil, the Lee-Ditko Spider-Man run, etc. Even recent "big event" stories like House of M and Secret Invasion don't sell as well compared to "the classics." There just aren't enough current comic readers to warrant it.

Jmacq1, on 01 September 2009 - 08:01 AM, said:

There are still lots of people out there reading comics, they just wait for the trades.

There aren't many people reading comics at all. It is true that of the people out there who still are reading comics, many more are reading trades, but this is hardly a significant market. There's a reason why comics are a declining market. We really have to look at the big picture outside of the comic shop. Sometimes we can become insulated by our own hobby. We look around and see everyone in the comic shop reading Blackest Night and we think, "Wow! EVERYONE is reading this!" but step outside of the comic shop and you'll realize you're only looking at a tiny niche market.

Disney isn't going to care about the tiny, irrelevant returns comics might bubble up with on occasion. They bought the library of characters. THAT'S the true vaue of this aquisition.

[Gundam Prime]

I await the release of the Marvel Legends Disney wave and Kingdom Hearts 3 where Sora explores the Marvel world

[MemberX]

Gundam Prime, on 01 September 2009 - 11:11 AM, said:

I await the release of the Marvel Legends Disney wave and Kingdom Hearts 3 where Sora explores the Marvel world

OH GOD NO! NO NO NO NO! man screw that!

[Sentinel Prime]

I just can't believe they will leave Marvel alone entirely. Things like X Force? Come on. You seriously can't believe they will let books that gory exist.

Let's say some guy at a Disney park goes on a killing spree...then some person in the media points out Disney produces violent books like X Force. I know it's a stretch, but you see what I mean...it's only a matter of time before something like this happens....

And say goodbye to Logan smoking....again. They just ditched the archaic comic code not that long ago, and I'm sure Disney will want something like that back.

Mark my words. Marvel is too high profile with a "younger" audience for Disney to let them keep up adult style books. They wouldn't want to be represented like that.

And I echo the fact that almost no one reads comics these days, I ran a shop in the height of the 90s comic explosion, and now it's a mere fraction of that at best.

[MasterJailer]

Sentinel Prime, on 01 September 2009 - 11:35 AM, said:

Marvel is too high profile with a "younger" audience for Disney to let them keep up adult style books. They wouldn't want to be represented like that.

You've got to keep that "high profile" in perspective.

Disney probably doesn't even know anything called "X-Factor" even exists much less be concerned with what's in it. The bright side ...I guess... of comics being such a narrow niche market is that they'll probably be left alone. Disney isn't into micromanaging editorial. They'll look at the big strokes. I still say that Disney will most likely see how comic sales go for the next couple of years. If sales don't dramatically improve, Disney isn't going to want to bother publishing something that sells twenty or thirty thousand copies and they'll shut the comics producing end of things down. They can keep the characters alive in trades, movies, cartoons, etc.