Disney to Acquire Marvel for $4 Billion (Animation Discussion)

[James Harvey]

Please note there is also discussion for this on The Disney Forum (http://forums.toonzone.net/showthread.php?t=234935) and Comic Book Culture (http://forums.toonzone.net/showthread.php?t=234935). This thread is to discuss the Marvel Animation aspect of this breaking (and absolutely jaw-dropping) story.

The Walt Disney Company has agreed to purchase Marvel Entertainment, Inc. and its portfolio of 5,0000 characters in a stock and cash transaction, the companies announced today.


Building on its strategy of delivering quality branded content to people around the world, The Walt DisneyCompany (DIS) has agreed to acquire Marvel Entertainment, Inc. (MVL) in a stock and cash transaction, the companies announced today.

Under the terms of the agreement and based on the closing price of Disney on August 28, 2009, Marvel shareholders would receive a total of $30 per share in cash plus approximately 0.745 Disney shares for each Marvel share they own. At closing, the amount of cash and stock will be adjusted if necessary so that the total value of the Disney stock issued as merger consideration based on its trading value at that time is not less than 40% of the total merger consideration.

Based on the closing price of Disney stock on Friday, August 28, the transaction value is $50 per Marvel share or approximately $4 billion.

"This transaction combines Marvel's strong global brand and world-renowned library of characters including Iron Man, Spider-Man, X-Men, Captain America, Fantastic Four and Thor with Disney's creative skills, unparalleled global portfolio of entertainment properties, and a business structure that maximizes the value of creative properties across multiple platforms and territories," said Robert A. Iger, President and Chief Executive Officer of The Walt Disney Company. "Ike Perlmutter and his team have done an impressive job of nurturing these properties and have created significant value. We are pleased to bring this talent and these great assets to Disney."

"We believe that adding Marvel to Disney's unique portfolio of brands provides significant opportunities for long-term growth and value creation," Iger said.

"Disney is the perfect home for Marvel's fantastic library of characters given its proven ability to expand content creation and licensing businesses," said Ike Perlmutter, Marvel's Chief Executive Officer. "This is an unparalleled opportunity for Marvel to build upon its vibrant brand and character properties by accessing Disney's tremendous global organization and infrastructure around the world."

Under the deal, Disney will acquire ownership of Marvel including its more than 5,000 Marvel characters. Mr. Perlmutter will oversee the Marvel properties, and will work directly with Disney's global lines of business to build and further integrate Marvel's properties.Source: http://news.toonzone.net/articles/30942/disney-to-acquire-marvel-entertainment-in-4-billion-stock-and-cash-deal

Stay tuned for further details as they develop.

How do you think this will change Marvel Animation and their production slate? How will this affect the Nicktoon series? What about the DVD releases? The Spectacular Spider-Man? Marvel Super Hero Squad? The direct-to-video animated titles?

Comments?

[chdr]

I guess this means that all Marvel series in the future will probably on Disney XD from now on.

Frankly, I'm disappointed. Disney seems like the absolute worst choice for someone to own Marvel, a company targeted mostly towards adults (with the exception of the cartoons).

[creativerealms]

I doubt it will effect the creation of shows/movies but it might effect where they go. Now that Disney owns Marvel they might not want their cartoons on Nicktoons network and cartoon Network, their compatition. While the current shows Nicktoons and Cartoon Network have will probably still air there it now seems far more likely that future Marvel toons will air on Disney XD.

Hopefully this means more Disney comics maybe a rebirth of the Gargoyles comic written by Greg Weisman.

chdr just remember all the for adults companies Disney already owns, all the movie studios they own that release R movies and such. Sure people don't seem to realize just all that Disney Owns. Nothing will change.

[lumpmoose]

This definitely makes me nervous for Spectacular Spider-Man. Disney now owns the property and the US distribution, but not the production. I can't imagine they like that situation. I could see them saying "let's make our OWN Spider-Man cartoon" then dropping it altogether. The ironic thing is the Spectacular Spidey team is full of old Disney guys like Weisman, Cook, Guler, Thomason, etc.

[Matt Hazuda]

This definitely makes me nervous for Spectacular Spider-Man. Disney now owns the property and the US distribution, but not the production. I can't imagine they like that situation. I could see them saying "let's make our OWN Spider-Man cartoon" then dropping it altogether. The ironic thing is the Spectacular Spidey team is full of old Disney guys like Weisman, Cook, Guler, Thomason, etc.The thing is they can't. Sony outright owns Spider-Man for the use in movies and TV for the long-term, so Disney can't just decide to make their own show. They can choose not to renew Spec Spidey, but Sony is free to shop it around at that point or just decide to end it for good.

[Funkatron]

I guess Disney really didn't want to give back the rights to those Marvel animated shows :p

[R-Taco]

This might be the reason for DXD not ordering a third season of SSM yet. It could actually be a good sign; now that they own it, they might care more about its success.

[lumpmoose]

The thing is they can't. Sony outright owns Spider-Man for the use in movies and TV for the long-term, so Disney can't just decide to make their own show. They can choose not to renew Spec Spidey, but Sony is free to shop it around at that point or just decide to end it for good.

Ah thanks. That clears it up.

[stephane dumas]

The thing is they can't. Sony outright owns Spider-Man for the use in movies and TV for the long-term, so Disney can't just decide to make their own show. They can choose not to renew Spec Spidey, but Sony is free to shop it around at that point or just decide to end it for good.

Maybe Disney and Sony could probably do a joint-venture in the case of Spider-man once the deal expired.

Imagine some strange possibilities like "The Little Mermaid 3: Prince Namor to the Rescue" :shame:

[SpaceWay2008]

I'm surprised about this. I hope this means a greater possiblity of renewing TSSM. :shrug:

[judyindisguise]

Spider-Mouse, Spider-Mouse, does whatever a Spider-Mouse does..

Ha! First!!!!

[Anwar]

Eh, being partnered/owned by a a media giant like Warner Bros did DC a lot of good with their animated programs. Now Marvel has even the playing field a bit. This could mean more consistently animated and written Marvel animation, an MAU (Marvel Animated Universe) so to speak.

And if Weisman still has any connections to Disney maybe they can get him to write some of the main comics.

[Zergrinch]

Frankly, I'm disappointed. Disney seems like the absolute worst choice for someone to own Marvel, a company targeted mostly towards adults (with the exception of the cartoons).

Ah, but the flip side of the coin is that there is no overlap. Disney has the young tween demographic sewed up, while its Marvel subsidiary has a stranglehold on boys and young adult (men). This means we can see some synergy going, though as Disney stock have drop a little bit, there are concerns that Disney might be overpaying.

Given how Disney's acquisition of Pixar turned out, I'm cautiously optimistic about the whole thing. Marvel will also finally be financially stable, and with Disney's backing will be able to leverage their 5,000-over character roster for animation projects. Maybe they'll even be able to resurrect that Silver Surfer series, which I thought was pretty good. Even now, the Galactus CG looks much better than those hokey Javelins in JLU...

So, when do you guys merge the Marvel and Disney animation forums :D

[screw on head]

Down the line this could mean interesting things for a more consistant Marvel Animation universe. For now we're still going to be in the same boat as we were before, with rights to characters being owned by other companies and all. Now that Disney owns Marvel, I think Sony will be doubly certain to never let Spider-Man be pried away from its grasp. I think a lot of companies will be holding onto whatever Marvel rights they have a lot tighter and go to great measures to renew and keep those ownerships in bed with them.

Disney's going to be a huge elephant in the room with every and any Marvel business deal now. Having said that, I wonder what the future of Marvel's Lionsgate DTV deal is? Lionsgate did an amazing job going to bat for those DTV's, but with Disney's love of DVD properties I think they'd want to take the reins there and make all the profits into perpetuity.

This makes a possible a venture Marvel has been dragging its feet on for years, which is the CG animated feature film. It's a wonder they haven't dropped their hat in that ring, which Marvel characters would fit into just fine. I think Marvel would be missing out on a huge opportunity not to pursue Pixar about bringing those films to creation.

[Matt Hazuda]

Disney's going to be a huge elephant in the room with every and any Marvel business deal now. Having said that, I wonder what the future of Marvel's Lionsgate DTV deal is? Lionsgate did an amazing job going to bat for those DTV's, but with Disney's love of DVD properties I think they'd want to take the reins there and make all the profits into perpetuityThe thing is, I think the Lions' Gate deal is done. Marvel said at Comic-Con that the deal was only for X amount of movies, and those have all been done or are going to be released, so I just don't think they'll be doing any more with them. I'll be curious to see if Disney is as up to producing some DTVs themselves once the deal closes.

[James Harvey]

After talking to some representatives at both Marvel Animation and Lionsgate Home Entertainment, common consensus is that the full extent of this deal won't likely be known for a few weeks yet at the earliest. Lots of details are being figured out at the moment and information should trickle out accordingly.

[Jeff Harris]

You know what? I really want to see what Pixar will do with the Marvel properties.

Seriously.

Instead of making The Incredibles, a Fantastic Four panache, Pixar could actually make a Fantastic Four movie of their own. My God, that would easily scrape the memories of the live-action movies from my mind with the very first trailer.

[ToonFaithful]

oh yeah pixar and fantastic four omg that would be awesome!

[W.C.Reaf]

I can see this helping Marvel's animation ventures like WB has done great things for DC animation (although most of the greatness was due to having Bruce Timm, Alan Burnett, & co working on nearly all of them) and the current cartoons shouldn't be hindered too much.

Considering SSM is airing on DXD at the moment it might even help the show get a third season.

I would like to see Disney try and make more mainstream Marvel animated films and would be interested to see what they could do with them.

[macattack]

The Disney under Eisner would probably completely uproot Marvel and eventually destroy the company.

Iger's Disney, though, might be willing to let Marvel go its own way when it comes to the majority of its properties. And I'd expect any current deals to stand. Whether the networks will treat their lame-duck properties well, though, is another matter. I can easily see Cartoon Network death-slotting Marvel Superhero Squad early on because there is absolutely no way Cartoon Network is going to make any money besides ratings out of MSS. Getting no money besides ratings murdered Naruto. They'd do it to MSS too.

[judyindisguise]

You know what? I really want to see what Pixar will do with the Marvel properties.

Seriously.

Instead of making The Incredibles, a Fantastic Four panache, Pixar could actually make a Fantastic Four movie of their own.

I think they should make a crossover.

Seriously.

[SSJ Jake]

This should be interesting considering Warner Bros. owns DC. It's even more interesting considering I've seen Marvel being compared to Disney once.

The only thing that really worries me is if Unversal Studios is going to be allowed to keep the Marvel Superhero Island park. It's in a competitor's theme park so I don't think Disney's going to be completely fine with it.

[Nexonius]

You know what this means?


This means that The Walt Disney Company is the owner Marvel Comics, one of the biggest comic book companies on the planet, which includes shows like X-Men Evolution, DIC's Ultraforce, and of course the Marvel Entertainment shows seen on Fox Kids. This also means that Time Warner needs to get off their butts and start pimping out their DC Comics properties again.


I hope Disney doesn't pull a fail move and pair Spider-Man with Hanna Montana or any other Disney Channel stars.

[Fone Bone]

I hope this means animated series like The Tick, Spider-Man TAS and X-Men: Evolution will get proper DVD releases. I'm especially excited about Ed's idea about a series set for The Tick featuring all of the missing episodes. I passed on the first two volumes because I had a feeling they would release a full series set with the missing episodes in the future.

[Jeff Harris]

The only thing that really worries me is if Unversal Studios is going to be allowed to keep the Marvel Superhero Island park. It's in a competitor's theme park so I don't think Disney's going to be completely fine with it.I really don't think it has to come to that. I mean, Hanna-Barbera characters were still at Paramount Parks and Universal Parks at the same time, and Time Warner owned those properties. Nickelodeon properties also were at both parks at the same time, though Viacom owned the Paramount Parks at the time.

Plus, Nickelodeon properties are still at the now-Cedar Fair-owned parks as well as their own separate parks at the Mall of America and soon New Orleans.

Heck, Universal has ride attractions and characters owned by nearly every major studio there, including Fox (The Simpsons), Sony (Ghostbusters), Warner Bros. (Harry Potter, Beetlejuice, and Twister), King Features (Popeye), Dr. Seuss Enterprises (The Cat in the Hat, The Grinch), Viacom (Jimmy Neutron), Dreamworks Animation (Shrek), and Jay Ward (Rocky and Bullwinkle, George of the Jungle).

I hope that Disney doesn't shut down the Marvel section of the Islands of Adventure nor the Men in Black ride.

You DO know that Disney owns Men in Black because that title was a property bought by Marvel when they bought Malibu Comics.

[marvelfan101]

I see some good in this deal and some bad in it we will just have to wait and see how it all plays out :eek:

[satam55]

I'm kinda disappointed. I always wanted 20th Century FOX to buy Marvel Comics.

I don't know if this is good news or bad news.

[Matt Hazuda]

Instead of making The Incredibles, a Fantastic Four panache, Pixar could actually make a Fantastic Four movie of their own. My God, that would easily scrape the memories of the live-action movies from my mind with the very first trailer.You'll be waiting a while since Fox has the rights along with X-Men, and after this deal, you know they'll be near-impossible to pry away since my understanding is as long as they decide to renew their rights, they keep them. Same situation with Sony and Spider-Man. Even though with with F4 and X-Men, Fox only owns the live-action rights I believe, so there may be ways around the deal.


I hope that Disney doesn't shut down the Marvel section of the Islands of Adventure nor the Men in Black ride.Islands of Adventure will eventually lose its Marvel theme. Disney doesn't share properties with the enemy. Especially when it comes to theme parks that are right down the road from each other.


You DO know that Disney owns Men in Black because that title was a property bought by Marvel when they bought Malibu Comics.Considering Marvel had done basically zero with MiB, I'm wondering if the rights they have are just too cost-prohibitive for them to even publish anything relating to the property.

[SSJ Jake]

Heck, Universal has ride attractions and characters owned by nearly every major studio there, including Fox (The Simpsons), Sony (Ghostbusters), Warner Bros. (Harry Potter, Beetlejuice, and Twister), King Features (Popeye), Dr. Seuss Enterprises (The Cat in the Hat, The Grinch), Viacom (Jimmy Neutron), Dreamworks Animation (Shrek), and Jay Ward (Rocky and Bullwinkle, George of the Jungle).

I hope that Disney doesn't shut down the Marvel section of the Islands of Adventure nor the Men in Black ride.

You DO know that Disney owns Men in Black because that title was a property bought by Marvel when they bought Malibu Comics.


Thing is though none of these companies are competing with each other in terms of theme parks. Except Warner Bros. to an extent, as Six Flags does own the right to use their Looney Toons characters and DC Super Heroes, but the companies don't own each other and as you mentioned WB has allowed Universal to use their properties.

And yeah I knew they own Men in Black, but the ride is more based off of the movie than the comic books. Whether that makes any difference I don't know.

[Marvin Tikvah]

Really, I can see the postives to this far-outwiegh the negatives in this situation.

Marvel's print department will most likely be left alone, and the animated projects will have the benefit of much larger budgets and advertising considering how many Disney networks and outlets there are out there.

If anything, this might let Marvel take even more risks with their properties, like showcasing the more obscure heroes of their history.

[Spideyzilla]

So Disney is Marvel's parent company now?

[purewitz]

This is like some bad deja vu. Its like when Disney bought The Muppets. Did anyone see last Fall's DC Studio Almost Live on Disney Channel? They paired The Muppets with the Disney Channel kids :crying:, both specials were like the worst moments and pairings in TV history. Imagine Hanna Montana having a crush on Animal. Gonzo with the those twin boys, forgot their names. And Piggy singing with the Jonas Brothers and saying she was their long lost sister. It was just horrible.:(

I love The Muppets, but The Muppets I knew and loved died the day Disney bought them from The Henson Company. With the exception of last Christmas' made for TV movie: A Muppet Christmas - Letters to Santa, but the movie was made by NBC though. Disney just put their name on it, because they own The Muppets. In general though Disney has killed The Muppets and will do the same to the Marvel Universe.

[CartoonCrazy]

How long has THIS been going on? This took me by surprise... :shrug:

Not only could this be good for Marvel's animated properties, this might also be good for Disney comics. Since there's been some problems with Gemstone, I hope Marvel can publish them when the contract with Boom! Kids ends.

[Trevor]

You'll be waiting a while since Fox has the rights along with X-Men, and after this deal, you know they'll be near-impossible to pry away since my understanding is as long as they decide to renew their rights, they keep them. Same situation with Sony and Spider-Man. Even though with with F4 and X-Men, Fox only owns the live-action rights I believe, so there may be ways around the deal.



Well I know that I read on CTV.ca (they had the Associated Press report on their website) Disney has said that it is going to honor any current contracts with the other studio's, but that once the contracts expire or come up for renewal, then Disney will examine and, most likely, not renew the contract, or they will renew the contracts with limitations (possible like Sony can keep distributing to the home market all the Spider-Man movies, but any new Spider-Man movies will be made by Disney and, maybe, released theatrically by Sony, with home video rights going to Buena Vista Home Video, or a third party distributor, similar to what occurred this past year with the James Bond franchise where MGM and Sony produced and distributed Quantum of Solace in theaters, but 20th Century Fox acquired the home video rights to the movie and all of the past Bond movies).

[Terra Branford]

A summary of today's conference call has me liking this move. (http://www.comicbookresources.com/?page=article&id=22747)

As long as more DTV specials are produced, this decision won't bother me in anyway.

[Blueprint]

Don't expect to see violence in any future series.

[Trevor]

A summary of today's conference call has me liking this move. (http://www.comicbookresources.com/?page=article&id=22747)

As long as more DTV specials are produced, this decision won't bother me in anyway.


Well the Disney/Marvel logo that they are using on that site is really nice.


A summary of today's conference call has me liking this move. (http://www.comicbookresources.com/?page=article&id=22747)

As long as more DTV specials are produced, this decision won't bother me in anyway.

If you notice there Disney has said that over time Disney will become the sole distributor for Marvel, and that there is indeed interest between Pixar and Marvel for producing movies that way between those two companies.

Mod Note: Successive posts merged. Please use the "multi-quote" feature in the future or edit your post accordingly. Thank you.

[Anwar]

Great, now all Disney has to do is hire Greg Weisman on as supervising producer for any marvel animated projects they're doing and make sure to use the same studio and staff for all of them. Then we'll have a Marvel Animated Universe on par with Timm/Burnett/Dini's works.

[Terra Branford]

Don't expect to see violence in any future series.

Hasn't Disney, not under the Disney name, released R rated movies before? I think it was No Country for Old Men but I'm not sure.

[Blackstar]

Hasn't Disney, not under the Disney name, released R rated movies before?

Yes, they have. Disney has released "adult" movies for some time now. For the more mature content, Disney uses one of it's pseudonyms, like Touchtone or Hollywood Pictures.

[creativerealms]

Don't expect to see violence in any future series.

Hahahahahahaha. So Disney has never done anything violent ever? That's what you are saying right? Man people can jump to such dumb conclusions. I'm not calling you dumb just what you said, your probably very smart.

[W.C.Reaf]

Don't expect to see violence in any future series.

And all future animated series will be like Gargoyles and Darkwing Duck.






Hey now that doesn't sound too bad. ;)

[Rick Jones]

This is so weird. As a kid, I used to imagine Disney one day making animated features based on Marvel characters but I never thought I'd see this day. I'm pretty happy about what possibilities may come animation wise but it feels pretty weird trusting Disney after all of the dvd mayhem of the past decade. What I'd wish for would be that the comics and Marvel Studios movies won't be tampered with, that the Marvel Animated Features line will be able to continue, and that current series will be allowed to run their course though if this means bigger animation budgets or maybe some dtv spinoffs, as in Spectacular Spider-Man's case, then that's awesome. I'd love to see lot's of spanking new collector's sets of old series too. This is all just wishful thinking right but it really feels as though a lot of good things will come out of this partnership. How crazy would it be to see Marvel comics promoted on Disney XD ? I think Marvel will operate as well they have been for the past few years but things will be that much crazier now with Disney backing them up.

Hahahahahahaha. So Disney has never done anything violent ever? That's what you are saying right? Man people can jump to such dumb conclusions. I'm not calling you dumb just what you said, your probably very smart.

Heck, ABC, ABC Family, Touchstone Pictures, Miramax and even ESPN are proof that not everything owned by Disney has to be as sanitized and kid oriented.

[Trevor]

Heck, ABC, ABC Family, Touchstone Pictures, Miramax and even ESPN are proof that not everything owned by Disney has to be as sanitized and kid oriented.


You know I was just watching a few of the old Disney cartoons that have been released in the Walt Disney Treasures line over the past 10 years, and some of those cartoons are pretty violent, and going by today's standard's, pretty risque.

But one thing that Disney seems to like doing in its cartoons, whether the general audience agrees with it or not, is to be "politically correct" with the times. So if the "politically correct" thing is to not show animated violence in cartoon, then they don't show the violence, unless they can change it to where, if a character fires a gun, instead of smoke or a bullet coming out of the gun, it is something like a banana cream pie or some sort of gas (whether bodily or laughing) that gets ejected.


But, you know, now that Disney owns Marvel, that might clear up issues with some of Disney's own cartoons. There is one Darkwing Duck episode that is a parody/satirical take on Spider-Man; specifically six-armed Spider-Man. (It's been years since I saw the episode, but I think the producers called Darkwing Duck "Spider-Duck" in that episode, and they had Darkwing grow 4 additional arms, and dress in a red and black uniform, similar to the red and blue Spider-Man uniform.)

[spyke]

I've always said that Disney should buy Marvel (I think I even made the suggestion on these boards), so I'm happy as hell that this has happened.

Here's a list of Pixar/Marvel movies that I would like to see get made.

POWER PACK
SLAPSTICK
DAMAGE CONTROL
WEIRD WORLD
MORT THE DEAD TEENAGER

[lumpmoose]

Disney/Marvel now owns the rights to Spider-Man on TV (http://www.s8.org/gargoyles/askgreg/search.php?rid=836):



Okay, in the period of just a few days, I have been rocked by two incredible pieces of news.
1. Last Thursday (8/27/09), Vic Cook and I were informed that in exchange for some concession vis-a-vis the live action Spider-Man features, Sony returned the television rights (including the animated television rights) for Spider-Man to Marvel. This took place the day before ComicCon, I'm told. But I was only informed of it this past week.
2. Today (8/31/09) comes the news that Disney has purchased Marvel outright.
NOW, before you ask -- before you post a thousand duplicate and/or overlapping questions to ASK GREG -- let me be clear: I have NO IDEA what this means for either Gargoyles or The Spectacular Spider-Man. Neither of these developments are by definition good news or bad news. Shocking news, sure. But how it will play out for either or both properties is a complete mystery to me. As soon as I have ANY information on either property, I will post it here at ASK GREG. Until then, don't ask. Seriously. Just don't. There's just no point in bogging down the queue with questions I have no answer to. Thank you for your cooperation.Sony presumably still owns Spectacular Spider-Man so who knows how this affects season 3.

[Trevor]

Disney/Marvel now owns the rights to Spider-Man on TV (http://www.s8.org/gargoyles/askgreg/search.php?rid=836):

Sony presumably still owns Spectacular Spider-Man so who knows how this affects season 3.


So it sounds like Sony is maybe in the same position on Spectacular Spider-Man as they are with the 1940's Batman serials: they own the footage and broadcast/home video rights for what has been produced, but they don't have the rights to produce anything new on that character (except that with Spider-Man, Sony, apparently, still has the live-action movie rights in order to produce more Spider-Man movies).

[cartoonscartoons]

. Disney exercises some executive control and makes Marvel actually have their superheroes act like superheroes, rather than having them be the default protagonists solely because they're not quite as bad as the supervillains.


that is from someone else's post on a different thread.

Buit in reply to this I think it is more entertaining to read about Shuper-Heroes with flaws and problems rather than read half of The Justic League's books because almost all their heroes are perrfect and I have a feeling that Disney is going to make Marvel's heroes also perfect so they can draw in little kids...

[Rick Jones]

If they know what they're doing, I don't see them making any moves to hurt the formula. Heroes with flaws has been Marvel's bread and butter since '61.

[JeffBreakdown]

the first thing that came to mind when i heard was something weird...

"well, there goes powers." (which volume 3 is supposed to come out starting in november)

i thought this because of what happened with the boys. a wildstorm book, owned by dc, owned by wb...cancelled after the first 6 AMAZING issues.

[W.C.Reaf]

the first thing that came to mind when i heard was something weird...

"well, there goes powers." (which volume 3 is supposed to come out starting in november)

i thought this because of what happened with the boys. a wildstorm book, owned by dc, owned by wb...cancelled after the first 6 AMAZING issues.

Umm it wasn't cancelled because of WB. From what I can find it was because "DC were uneasy with the anti-superhero tone of the work" not that WB didn't like it.

[AlgeaX]

Disney/Marvel now owns the rights to Spider-Man on TV (http://www.s8.org/gargoyles/askgreg/search.php?rid=836):

Sony presumably still owns Spectacular Spider-Man so who knows how this affects season 3.

Darn it, I assumed this wouldn't mess with Spectacular Spider-Man since Sony still held the rights but now everythings up in the air.

[JeffBreakdown]

Umm it wasn't cancelled because of WB. From what I can find it was because "DC were uneasy with the anti-superhero tone of the work" not that WB didn't like it.

nice wiki quote...now explain why dc likes watchmen more?

[W.C.Reaf]

nice wiki quote...now explain why dc likes watchmen more?

Watchmen makes them more money, higher critical acclaim, got awards only won by novels, was written by Alan Moore. Personally I like Watchmen more and couldn't get into The Boys.

But this has nothing to do with the fact that WB didn't stop it DC did.

[Anwar]

Maybe this means that SSM will get a better budget if Disney approves S3?

[JeffBreakdown]

Watchmen makes them more money, higher critical acclaim, got awards only won by novels, was written by Alan Moore. Personally I like Watchmen more and couldn't get into The Boys.

But this has nothing to do with the fact that WB didn't stop it DC did.

well there you have it, all that "anti-superhero" talk was all bogus.
either way, this acquisition is probably going to suck.

[W.C.Reaf]

either way, this acquisition is probably going to suck.

How is it going to suck? All you've been complaining about is an internal matter that happens often, not anything to do with an outside owner.

How is Disney owning Marvel suddenly going to make things "suck"?

[spyke]

2. Disney exercises some executive control and makes Marvel actually have their superheroes act like superheroes, rather than having them be the default protagonists solely because they're not quite as bad as the supervillains.


that is from someone else's post on a different thread.

Buit in reply to this I think it is more entertaining to read about Shuper-Heroes with flaws and problems rather than read half of The Justic League's books because almost all their heroes are perrfect and I have a feeling that Disney is going to make Marvel's heroes also perfect so they can draw in little kids...

Superheroes can still have flaws and problems without being turned into unheroic and unlikable b*****d's. It's one thing to have characters with some excusable and easily forgivable flaws and problems. It's a whole other thing to have superheroes beating and attempting to murder their wives (Ultimate Hank Pym),eating people (Ultimate Hulk),killing innocent people (again, Ultimate Hulk),causing the accidental death of women and children as a result of being reckless (the out of character portrayal of the New Warriors in CIVIL WAR),sleeping with a married woman (Green Arrow),killing the bad guys because they played on your emotions (the out of character portrayal of Hawkeye in SECRET INVASION),putting together a special team made up of heroes with claws to kill the bad guys (the OOC portrayal of Cyclops in X-FORCE),and making a deal with the devil to save your dying aunt (Spider-Man).

And I don't know what JLA books you've been reading, but most of the JLA are far from "perfect". They all have flaws. IMO, some of them are a bit "to flawed".

[Blackstar]

Man, so much over racting and paranoia on the forums about this.

Folks, this purchase was an inside deal, the likes of which go on all of the time. Outwardly, very little, if anything, will be different. Disney will still be Disney, and perhaps more importantly, Marvel will still be the Marvel that we know and love.

[Webbed-Wonder]

I think this sounds great for Marvel. As long as Marvel Superhero Island at Islands of Adventure is left alone, I'll be happy for the most part.

And finally, Marvel's got the rights back for Spidey's television appearances. It's been bothering me lately that he couldn't appear even in a show like Marvel Super Hero Squad; with pretty much every major super hero and super villain in it. So hopefully if that show gets renewed for a second season, we will probably see Spidey in it.

This could also be excellent news for TSSM, or a terrible setback. Since they plan on getting every other upcoming Marvel animated series in the foreseeable future I hope that they will renew TSSM as it is already on Disney XD.

[Light Lucario]

I was really surprised to hear about this news when I logged in today. Though, the fact that this purchase was approved by the heads at both Disney and Marvel makes me think that it was a smooth inside deal. From what I understand, I think that this is more good than bad, or at least can be if the situation works out well enough. More of Marvel's series, such as Spider-Man and X-Men: Evolutions might have better DVD releases, Marvel might be able to do more DTVs and the current on-running series could have more promotion because of Disney. Of course, that's just what I'm thinking could happen since I generally prefer looking on the bright/hopeful side to a situation.

Besides that, I thought that Marvel was struggling for awhile, mainly with its comic book sales, but I could be mistaken since I only heard that while watching a comic book documentary a few months ago and I don't know how recent it was either. Still, I think that it could help Marvel out in the long run.

[AlgeaX]

Superheroes can still have flaws and problems without being turned into unheroic and unlikable b*****d's. It's one thing to have characters with some excusable and easily forgivable flaws and problems. It's a whole other thing to have superheroes beating and attempting to murder their wives (Ultimate Hank Pym),eating people (Ultimate Hulk),killing innocent people (again, Ultimate Hulk).

But the whole point of the Ultimate Universe is that they can do crazy stuff like that without it affecting the classic versions of those characters. Yeah if 616 Hank and Hulk were doing that sort of thing I'd be pissed off too, but is the Ultimate Universe really any diffrent then all those alternate timelines where Beast works for Apocalypse or Mary Jane's a lesbian?

Anyway it's a bit of a moot point since the Ultimate Universe seems to be on its last legs regardless.

[FlawedCoil82]

I just hope that this move will not result in the X-Men dvds no longer coming out (though I cannot see any logical reason why that would happen).
Jack

[JeffBreakdown]

I just hope that this move will not result in the X-Men dvds no longer coming out (though I cannot see any logical reason why that would happen).
Jack

didnt disney put out the first 2 anyway? i remember disney previews on the first dvd

[Spanish Megatron]

I did not see this coming. I wonder what will happen after the outside contracts expire. Could the Disney channel see more Marvel shows? Needless to say this is something to keep an eye on.

[Webbed-Wonder]

I did not see this coming. I wonder what will happen after the outside contracts expire. Could the Disney channel see more Marvel shows? Needless to say this is something to keep an eye on.
They've pretty much confirmed we'll see every forthcoming Marvel cartoon head to Disney XD. We already have 10 Marvel cartoons on Disney XD and about 20 hours of Marvel programming a week.

[lumpmoose]

They've pretty much confirmed we'll see every forthcoming Marvel cartoon head to Disney XD. We already have 10 Marvel cartoons on Disney XD and about 20 hours of Marvel programming a week.

Actually that reminds me: at the Spectacular Spider-Man production panel at the Gathering of the Gargoyles, Greg Weisman complained that they air the 90s Spider-Man cartoon so much on Disney XD that it's causing brand confusion. If you turn on Disney XD, there's a good chance you'll see an old Spidey rather than their brand new show. And now TSS-M will be languishing in repeats until October. I wonder if Disney's strategy will change now or if the scheduling pasta IS their strategy

[chator]

I just hope that this move will not result in the X-Men dvds no longer coming out (though I cannot see any logical reason why that would happen).
Jack

There's no way they'd spend billions purchasing Marvel without the intention of further developing Marvel-based projects. I think this is good news unless Marvel doesn't need Disney and Disney's exclusive holding of Marvel could jeopardize the flexibility with which Marvel interacts with various companies and undertakes various projects. Anyone know?

[Ultraman]

Great. That means Disney is gonna make Marvel (any shows) animation to have a LESS VIOLENCE, KIDDY and FAMILY-FRIENDLY. Fantastic! :shrug:

[chator]

Great. That means Disney is gonna make Marvel (any shows) animation to have a LESS VIOLENCE, KIDDY and FAMILY-FRIENDLY. Fantastic! :shrug:

Yeah, that's one good possibility, how about a Marvel based theme park? Or a PIxar animated Marvel feature. The possibilities are endless. They just opened a can of worms.

[TMC1982]

I did not see this coming. I wonder what will happen after the outside contracts expire. Could the Disney channel see more Marvel shows? Needless to say this is something to keep an eye on.

Disney XD seems to be a more logical choice for the Marvel shows. It seems like Disney Channel is enternally stuck in the live-action tween sitcom mentality at the moment. Other than Phineas and Ferb, I don't think that a lot of animation taken as a serious focal point on DC right now.

[Love4ever]

Can I ask why specifically is Disney doing this:confused::eek:?? Do they need to take over the whole world more so then they already have?? I mean this is so weird to me!!! I hope it wasn't because Marvel needed to be bailed out financially by being bought out by Disney, like GM motors being bought out by the goverment. Don't get me wrong I like disney, more so of there older animated:) films then they're [edit] computer animated ones but something isn't right here. I could be wrong but Disney and Marvel don't go together AT ALL:mad:.

[ShadowDemon]

The thing is, I think the Lions' Gate deal is done. Marvel said at Comic-Con that the deal was only for X amount of movies, and those have all been done or are going to be released, so I just don't think they'll be doing any more with them. I'll be curious to see if Disney is as up to producing some DTVs themselves once the deal closes.

Which is a darn shame, because 4 of the 6 I've seen were really really GOOD DTDVDs...

I cringe at the thought of a Pixar style animated Marvel project. Full feature cell animation, or at least keep the frakking CG in the supporting role (Titan AE, Green Lantern: First Flight, etc) is how superhero movies SHOULD be done.

The other bad news, if no one has mentioned it yet, is that Marvel is keeping hands off the creative end...which means Joey is still free to trash the animation side like he did the comics side content wise...


I'm kinda disappointed. I always wanted 20th Century FOX to buy Marvel Comics.

I don't know if this is good news or bad news.

Considering Fox's well-documented ability to screw up genre pieces and it's "if it ain't a hit in 6 eps, kill it" mentality that would be the WORST bunch of neandertals to get their hands on Marvel...


Really, I can see the postives to this far-outwiegh the negatives in this situation.

Marvel's print department will most likely be left alone, and the animated projects will have the benefit of much larger budgets and advertising considering how many Disney networks and outlets there are out there.

If anything, this might let Marvel take even more risks with their properties, like showcasing the more obscure heroes of their history.

Don't count on it...listen to what this man has to say about how Disney does publishing:



Dan Vado of SLG Publishing, home of Disney properties “Haunted Mansion,” “Tron,” and “Gargoyles,” among others

NOTE: Despite being a Disney licensee, Vado wishes it to be known that he has no inside knowledge of the Marvel acquisition, and that his remarks should be taken strictly as his own opinions based on news reports.

“Marvel is the big winner here. My opinion, Disney overpaid (and Disney never over pays for anything) so it is obvious that Disney sees a huge licensing bonanza from the characters well down the line. Marvel books will, at some point, gain a stronger bookstore distribution partner should they decide to have their books sold through Harper.

“However it is worth pointing out that Disney does very little actual publishing of its own and has made most of its money by licensing characters out to third parties. It could be, again strictly conjecture here, that Marvel will end up being reduced to a licensing company and that its publishing will be scaled back dramatically as emphasis is put on content like movies and video games (http://comicbookresources.com/?page=article&id=22765#) and less emphasis on things like publishing. Disney published its own line of comics years ago and pulled out. More recently they cut ‘Disney Adventures’ magazine, a publication with sales in the hundreds of thousands. So, seriously, publishing is not a big part of the equation here. I would expect publishing to scale back somewhat.”

Vado continued, “Big loser here are Disney licensees who created original content for their books and the creators who created that content. As is standard with any licensing deal, Disney owns the material that is created under the license and can, if they choose, republish the content once those deals expire without compensating either the companies who paid for the content or the creators who created the original material. Again, this is not a Disney thing, it is fairly standard of all licensing deals. SLG published collections of the Marvel Comics’ ‘Bill & Ted’ comics and did not compensate them for the artwork.

“While I am certain that the licensing deals which are in place will continue to their conclusion I have to wonder how some of the people who have jumped into the Disney Comics business will feel about creating new content for the company knowing that it all could become property of Disney/Marvel Comics at some point. Likewise, all Disney comic book licensees now get to feel dumb knowing that the money they are giving Disney is now also going to their biggest competitor in the field. As I said above, though, publishing is not a big part of the core Disney business so it is possible that even more licensing opportunities might open up.

“I am not certain how much creator-owned material Marvel produces, but those deals will more than likely become a thing of the past.”

Vado continued, “Another big loser could be Diamond and the Direct Market. It's now possible that Disney/Marvel will scale back on production, possibly focusing on cutting the line down to what it can actually manage to put out on time and just doing enough publishing to keep the characters in the public eye. It is also possible that Disney/Marvel might do all of their own distribution. In this regard the deal can be a huge game changer for everyone. Seriously, anything can happen at this point.

“At minimum I would expect that Diamond Book Distribution will lose Marvel from its catalog as they will no doubt move to Harper.”

http://comicbookresources.com/?page=article&id=22765



As for diversity of characters...everyone knows they'll continue to flog Spidey, Avengers, X-Men.

They'll also continue to ignore New Warriors (and the individual heroes), Darkhawk, Cloak & Dagger so on and so forth...they just aren't considered worth the time...


And all future animated series will be like Gargoyles and Darkwing Duck.






Hey now that doesn't sound too bad. ;)

Well, there was a bit of a problem with Disney re-editing the 90s Spider-Man and X-Men when they broadcast them under their aegis a few years ago...


Superheroes can still have flaws and problems without being turned into unheroic and unlikable [people]. It's one thing to have characters with some excusable and easily forgivable flaws and problems. It's a whole other thing to have superheroes beating and attempting to murder their wives (Ultimate Hank Pym),eating people (Ultimate Hulk),killing innocent people (again, Ultimate Hulk),causing the accidental death of women and children as a result of being reckless (the out of character portrayal of the New Warriors in CIVIL WAR),sleeping with a married woman (Green Arrow),killing the bad guys because they played on your emotions (the out of character portrayal of Hawkeye in SECRET INVASION),putting together a special team made up of heroes with claws to kill the bad guys (the OOC portrayal of Cyclops in X-FORCE),and making a deal with the devil to save your dying aunt (Spider-Man).

This!


Man, so much over racting and paranoia on the forums about this.

Folks, this purchase was an inside deal, the likes of which go on all of the time. Outwardly, very little, if anything, will be different. Disney will still be Disney, and perhaps more importantly, Marvel will still be the Marvel that we know and love.

Marvel hasn't been THAT for almost a decade now...


But the whole point of the Ultimate Universe is that they can do crazy stuff like that without it affecting the classic versions of those characters. Yeah if 616 Hank and Hulk were doing that sort of thing I'd be pissed off too, but is the Ultimate Universe really any diffrent then all those alternate timelines where Beast works for Apocalypse or Mary Jane's a lesbian?

Anyway it's a bit of a moot point since the Ultimate Universe seems to be on its last legs regardless.

Except that it bled over into 616 with Decimation, Civil War, et al...and Joey is now in charge of the animation division as well...and Disney has indicated it has no plans to interfere creatively with Marvel...

Mod Note: FIVE posts merged together. Please use the multi-quote function in the future or you will be disciplined accordingly. Thank you.

[Rick Jones]

Besides that, I thought that Marvel was struggling for awhile, mainly with its comic book sales, but I could be mistaken since I only heard that while watching a comic book documentary a few months ago and I don't know how recent it was either. Still, I think that it could help Marvel out in the long run.

Back in the 90's, the company went bankrupt but for most of this decade it's felt as though the company was doing really good.

[Trevor]

I just hope that this move will not result in the X-Men dvds no longer coming out (though I cannot see any logical reason why that would happen).
Jack


Well, considering that Volumes 3 & 4 are only a two weeks away and Disney hasn't issued any warnings saying that the discs are being delayed or cancelled, I think we can expect to see, quite possible, Volume 5 closer to Christmas.

I was just thinking: does anyone know if Marvel was or has been able to buy back any of the three TV series that Waner Brothers owns thanks to Warner's acquisition of Turner Entertainment in the 90's, that had earlier bough Hanna-Barberra?

Or is Disney and Marvel going to leave those shows over a Warner Brothers for the time being?

[marvelfan101]

I was just thinking: does anyone know if Marvel was or has been able to buy back any of the three TV series that Waner Brothers owns thanks to Warner's acquisition of Turner Entertainment in the 90's, that had earlier bough Hanna-Barberra?

Or is Disney and Marvel going to leave those shows over a Warner Brothers for the time being?

well for X-men Evolution I think Marvel may have bought back the rights to it as they have put all four season on Itunes instead of Warner

[spyke]

Great. That means Disney is gonna make Marvel (any shows) animation to have a LESS VIOLENCE, KIDDY and FAMILY-FRIENDLY. Fantastic! :shrug:

Apparently you haven't watched episodes of GARGOYLES,WITCH,or SUPER ROBOT MONKEY TEAM HYPER FORCE GO. If you had, you would know that Disney is very liberal when it comes to depicting action violence in their animated action/adventure series.

[ifthismeansevos]

So does this means that Disney also has gained the right over Marvel DVDs?

[marvelfan101]

So does this means that Disney also has gained the right over Marvel DVDs?

most of them yes newer stuff like X-men evolution SSM Wolverine and the X-men that new Fantastic Four show and Iron Man Armored Adventures I would say no

[Trevor]

well for X-men Evolution I think Marvel may have bought back the rights to it as they have put all four season on Itunes instead of Warner

Well, considering that Warner Brothers only had a distribution deal with Marvel and Film Roman, then it is very likely that, because Warner Brothers hasn't issued a DVD in over 3 years, the distribution contract has most likely lapsed, and the show belongs solely to Marvel and now Disney.

[The Overlord]

I wonder if means the end of the Marvel PG-13 DTVs?

[Anwar]

Doubtful.

[W.C.Reaf]

I wonder if means the end of the Marvel PG-13 DTVs?

Why would it?

[Golgo-13]

Why would it?

'Cause The Disney name brand is known world wide to be 'kiddy friendly'. That's their key audience and their bulk reveue. When you hear the word 'Disney' to you think of 'edgy'? 'Violence'? Any of those things that a PG-13 Marvel DTV would incorporate?

I don't think so. I agree, i think we've seen the last of these PG-13 DTV Marvel animated movies.:(

[W.C.Reaf]

'Cause The Disney name brand is known world wide to be 'kiddy friendly'. That's their key audience and their bulk reveue. When you hear the word 'Disney' to you think of 'edgy'? 'Violence'? Any of those things that a PG-13 Marvel DTV would incorporate? I don't think so. I agree, i think we've seen the last of these PG-13 DTV Marvel animated movies.:(

But Disney isn't going to be making the DTV movies as Marvel's contract with Lionsgate is still in place. Disney said they weren’t going to touch the contracts.

Marvel is just a subsidiary to Disney like Miramax is and Miramax made Pulp Fiction, Kill Bill, Trainspotting, No Country for Old Men and many more after it was bought by Disney.

When the contract is up we'll see what happens but until then Planet Hulk and the others will still be in glorious PG-13.

Also when I think DC I don't think of Warner Brothers, bur when I think of WB I think Loony Toons. When I watch Superman Doomsday, Wonder Woman, New Frontier, Gotham Knight, Green Lantern First Flight, I don't see Loony Toons. I see PG-13 DTV masterpieces.

People need to stop overacting to this news. Nothing is going to change and the sky is not falling. Take a deep breath and relax.

[creativerealms]

Thats just it the "Disney" name is kid friendly but many Disney owned companies release PG 13 and R rated material. There really is no reason to believe that Marvel will be unable to do that just because it's now owned by Disney.

I don't know what's going to happen with the Lionsgate contract if it's over now thanks to the deal but more Marvel DTVs could be released by Miramax and still have the same content the Lionsgate movies have.

Jumping to conclusions is wrong.

[suss2it]

'Cause The Disney name brand is known world wide to be 'kiddy friendly'. That's their key audience and their bulk reveue. When you hear the word 'Disney' to you think of 'edgy'? 'Violence'? Any of those things that a PG-13 Marvel DTV would incorporate? Have you ever seen Kill Bill or Pulp Fiction?

[creativerealms]

Have you ever seen Kill Bill or Pulp Fiction?

Just Miramax in general really. I mean these people released many of Kevin Smith's movies including the religous parody Dogma.

[Itchy]

This makes me wonder if we might see a Donald Duck and Howard the duck crossover at some point.

[AlgeaX]

Thats just it the "Disney" name is kid friendly but many Disney owned companies release PG 13 and R rated material. There really is no reason to believe that Marvel will be unable to do that just because it's now owned by Disney.

I don't know what's going to happen with the Lionsgate contract if it's over now thanks to the deal but more Marvel DTVs could be released by Miramax and still have the same content the Lionsgate movies have.

Jumping to conclusions is wrong.

I think the main problem here is that people are confusing Disney the brand with Disney the corporate conglomerate.

The Disney Brand is basically all the classic Disney characters and animated properties like Mickey Mouse, Darkwing Duck & Simba. And yes all that is pretty much designed to appeal to kids and family audiences, particularly young girls.

But the Disney Brand is just one aspect of the overall Disney Conglomerate, a vast and diverse multimedia empire that includes ABC which produces shows like Lost, Desperate Housewives and Criminal Minds.*

The Disney Conglomerate also owns Miramax, which folks like Creativerealms have had to point out repeatedly, is partly responsible for a good chunk of Kevin Smith's and Quentin Tarintino’s filmographies.

People need to stop panicking, this isn't the end of Marvel comics as we know them, Punisher isn't going to trade in his guns for a cute animal sidekick, the Young Avengers aren't going to start wearing purity rings and Emma Frost isn't going to become a Disney Princess.



*For those of you who aren't familiar with it, Criminal Minds is a show that follows the adventures of a team of profilers from the FBI's Behavioral Analysis Unit. I've only watched a few eps, but of the top of my head they've included a serial child rapist, a cannibal and a mass murdering racist cult. Seriously, some of the villains on that show make Cletus Kassidy look like Dr Hamsterville by comparison.

[AlgeaX]

Sorry for the double post but I just found some neat articles with more detailed info on the deal...

http://www.deadlinehollywooddaily.co...buying-marvel/ (http://www.deadlinehollywooddaily.com/shocker-disney-buying-marvel/)

[The Overlord]

Hmmm, I wonder if Disney would put any cash into these PG-13 DTVs, I think the DTVs could use a bit of an animation upgrade. They are ok, but only Hulk vs. wolverine really impressed me, animation wise.

The DC ones are better animation wise, because warner makes it themsleves.

[Hypestyle]

http://tinyurl.com/kwjows (http://tinyurl.com/kwjows)

Hopefully Disney animation will aggressively pursue developing various new animated series based on marvel characters, that we haven't seen in animation yet (or only seen in a cameo).. Power Man & Iron Fist, Daredevil, New Mutants, Cloak & Dagger, Runaways, Strikeforce Morituri.. Imagine Pixar getting involved with Silver Surfer.. Original DTV's should come out more frequently, like one every quarter..

I would especially welcome a Power Pack film by Pixar, and then a 'toon series, done high quality.... Spider-Ham would be fine for kids, too-- though I wonder how would this square with Sony's licensing of all things Spidey.. uh-oh.. the other Star comics stuff would be nice, too, I guess.. web-animation shorts, etc.

Say.. anybody know much about Marvel's 'funny animal' comics series going back to the 40's - 50's?

In live action, with so many characters already farmed out to other studios, I wonder how aggressive Disney/Marvel will be in trying to get them back? will they seek to end those contracts? Seek a co-financing deal along with back-end revenue for dvds/licensing, etc.? Hmm.. Especially with Spider-Man, as lucrative as it is, it could be a legal nightmare all over again..

on the home-video front, I want Disney to stop sitting on all the older Marvel animated shows still languishing.. the 1960's and 1980's Spider-Man stuff in particular.. the Hanna-Barbera produced Fantastic Four show.. and as primitive as they are, the GrantRay-Lawrence shows of Cap, Thor, Subby, Iron Man and Hulk need a boxed set.. I remember being sent a nice rejection letter after sending Disney Video a letter about Spider-Man & His Amazing Friends.. :p

anybody know who we can contact at Disney for feedback?

[marvelfan101]

I think people are making to much out of this deal its good for Marvel and great for Disney and all good for us Marvel fans :eek:

[babykhris]

What properties does Marvel/Disney have the rights to now?

All the current Marvel stuff and the past Marvel cartoons (except the old Fantastic Four that Hanna Barbera did)?

[Trevor]

What properties does Marvel/Disney have the rights to now?

All the current Marvel stuff and the past Marvel cartoons (except the old Fantastic Four that Hanna Barbera did)?


From what we know, aside from the couple of show's that Hanna-Barbera did (1967 Fantastic Four & 1978 The Thing; those are under control of Time-Warner due to Time-Warner's purchase of Turner Entertainment in the 1990's, and Warner Brothers has the rights) all of the pre-2000 shows were bought by Saban when Marvel was in bankruptcy, and then transferred to Disney when Disney bought the Fox Family Channel in the early 2000's. So with Disney's acquisition of Marvel those pre-2000 shows are now back under the Marvel "umbrella".

As for the shows from 2000 onward it is known that Marvel has the controlling rights to all shows related to the X-Men, Spider-Man, the Hulk and Fantastic Four. It is also likely that Marvel still has the TV rights to the Daredevil characters. As for distribtution rights, those are somewhat confusing and obscure. For example because of Marvel.com it is assumed the X-Men Evolution's distribution rights are no longer at Warner Brothers and that Disney now controls the distribution rights. This is assumed because the episodes that appear on marvel.com only contain the "new" Marvel Animation logo, and do not contain the "Distributed by Warner Brothers" credit at the end of the episode, like they did when they were broadcast and the 3 seasons contained on the DVD's.

Sony has since returned the TV rights to the Spider-Man franchise to Marvel, and now Disney, so Spectacular Spider-Man and most likely the 2003 CGI Spider-Man are now under Disney's control, although the distribution rights to the series may still be held by Sony, but while the producers of SSM have confirmed that Sony is no longer in control of the Spider-Man TV property and can no longer authorize any new episodes, it is unknown if Sony returned the Distribution to either series.

As for all the DTV's that were released by Lionsgate, Lionsgate only had the distribution rights to the videos, and the videos were and are still owned by Marvel. So, whenever those distribution rights expire, that is most likely when Disney will take over distribution of those DTV's.

Also Iron Man Armoured Adventures is self-produced by Marvel, with only a distribtuion deal with Genius Entertainment.

[Zen Man]

What about the current movie deals held by the various film studios;does Disney get a cut of the profits now?

[marvelfan101]

What about the current movie deals held by the various film studios;does Disney get a cut of the profits now?

I'm guessing they would

[Trevor]

What about the current movie deals held by the various film studios;does Disney get a cut of the profits now?

As far as we know Disney is keeping those deals with the various movie studios for as long as they last, and of course Disney would get a cut, considering that Marvel is now a Disney company. The only big difference would be that when you hear about the quarterly and yearly results of the different business aspects. If you listen to the business reports on TV, alot of time the anchor person doing the business will say that "Disney issued a press release stating that they had done XXXX amount of dollars in the past quarter/year, with Pixar bringing in XXX percent of that and Marvel bringing in another XXX percent". We won't hear Marvel issuing its own quarterly and yearly updates any more because Disney owns all the Marvel stocks, so Marvel just has to report their income to Disney inorder for Disney to include it in their financial reports.

[Dudley]

Also Iron Man Armoured Adventures is self-produced by Marvel, with only a distribtuion deal with Genius Entertainment.

Is that the same with Wolverine and the X-Men except with a different distributor?

And when are all these cartoons going to move to Disney XD?

[Rick Jones]

That would suck for NickToons.

[Trevor]

Is that the same with Wolverine and the X-Men except with a different distributor?

Right now that is fairly obvious with WATX, since if you look at all the other Marvel properties Marvel has kept the American and Canadian rights together, but with WATX Marvel has split the North American rights between Lionsgate (US) and Liberation, because while Marvel has the final say in anything about WATX, Liberation also has a producing credit on the show, which makes me believe that one of the fine lines that Liberation made clear when they signed their production contract with Marvel was that they got the broadcasting/home video distribution rights for the series in Canada and all the Region 2 territories. As for Lionsgate, considering that Lionsgate holds the distribution rights for all Marvel DTV, then it is most likely that when Lionsgate signed the contract with Marvel they also made a similar deal where anything that came from Marvel Studio's was to be exclusively distributed by them in the US, with the Canada option being left to only the DTV's and not any TV shows.




And when are all these cartoons going to move to Disney XD?

Most likely when the new seasons of all the shows debut.

[joltman]

But wasn't it announced that NickToons already 'ordered' a second season of WatXM? (And no, I'm not talking about when a second season was actually ordered, I'm talking about a month or so after NickToons started airing the show)

[Trevor]

But wasn't it announced that NickToons already 'ordered' a second season of WatXM? (And no, I'm not talking about when a second season was actually ordered, I'm talking about a month or so after NickToons started airing the show)


The second season was ordered in November 2008 which was months before the show hit Nicktoons. The second season was ordered by Marvel based on its strength in the international market.

[Rick Jones]

I think he's asking if NTN didn't already get the rights to the second season

I sort of feel like they did

[marvelfan101]

this could get interesting if Wolverine movies to Disney XD big loss for Nick same with Iron man and Fantastic four

[Trevor]

this could get interesting if Wolverine movies to Disney XD big loss for Nick same with Iron man and Fantastic four


Well considering that Nickolodeon is owned by Viacom and subsequently Paramount Pictures, it would make sense for Disney to transfer their properties from a competitor's channel to their own channel.

Of course I wonder if that would mean that up here in Canada would YTV (and Corus Entertainment) and Teletoon lose the rights to any further seasons of WATX, and Family Channel would pick up the series?

[Dudley]

Of course I wonder if that would mean that up here in Canada would YTV (and Corus Entertainment) and Teletoon lose the rights to any further seasons of WATX, and Family Channel would pick up the series?

Since Disney doesn't own Family Channel, probably not.

[joltman]

The second season was ordered in November 2008 which months before the show hit Nicktoons. The second season was ordered by Marvel based on its strength in the international market.
I wasn't talking about the show's second season being ordered by Marvel, I meant NickToons officially 'ordering' the second season to air. And I found the story that I was referring to (http://news.toonzone.net/articles/29720/nicktoons-renews-wolverine-and-the-x-men-new-s1-eps-resume-may-22-2009). I was wrong about it being a month after it started airing, it was actually 4 months after it started airing on Nicktoons.

[Trevor]

I wasn't talking about the show's second season being ordered by Marvel, I meant NickToons officially 'ordering' the second season to air. And I found the story that I was referring to (http://news.toonzone.net/articles/29720/nicktoons-renews-wolverine-and-the-x-men-new-s1-eps-resume-may-22-2009). I was wrong about it being a month after it started airing, it was actually 4 months after it started airing on Nicktoons.

That story was just letting people know that Nicktoons renewed their broadcast contract with Marvel so that they could air the second season. Even in the story it is mentioned that WATX Season 2 had been greenlit before Nicktoons even aired Season 1.

[Rick Jones]

Not that I would mind a Pixar version, at all, but I was actually anticipating whether or not the Edgar Wright version would get made and how good it would be.

[chator]

http://tinyurl.com/kwjows (http://tinyurl.com/kwjows)

Hopefully Disney animation will aggressively pursue developing various new animated series based on marvel characters, that we haven't seen in animation yet (or only seen in a cameo).. Power Man & Iron Fist, Daredevil, New Mutants, Cloak & Dagger, Runaways, Strikeforce Morituri.. Imagine Pixar getting involved with Silver Surfer.. Original DTV's should come out more frequently, like one every quarter..

I would especially welcome a Power Pack film by Pixar, and then a 'toon series, done high quality.... Spider-Ham would be fine for kids, too-- though I wonder how would this square with Sony's licensing of all things Spidey.. uh-oh.. the other Star comics stuff would be nice, too, I guess.. web-animation shorts, etc.



It looks like its going to happen, check this out: http://www.comicbookmovie.com/ant-man/news/?a=9800

[Silverstar]

:^: Sorry, but that's not proof of anything. A link to some article on another board saying that Pixar has "expressed interest" in making an Ant-Man movie isn't a confirmation that it's definitely going to happen. "It's something we'd be interested in" is a far cry from "We're making this".

Unless there's an official press release made from Disney/Pixar announcing this project as a go, we shouldn't assume anything.

[joltman]

That especially seems fishy since Edgar Wright has been attached to a live-action Ant-Man film for a while now.

[creativerealms]

We have to wait and see for WatXM season two. Nicktoons will probably finish at least a full run on the three Marvel shows they have and then who knows.

Since Nicktoons is XD's main compatition the last thing Disney would want is to supply that channel it's most popular shows, which is just what it's doing right now. Yet breaking a contract is not easy. And Nicktoons probably won't want to give up the Marvel shows that easily.

It is kind of sad when you look at how well Nicktoons is treating these marvel shows. They are treating all three like they are something special. Advertising them not just on their channel not other viacon networks, the large ammount of hype they are even giving a hand me down like World's greatest heroes. It would be sad to see these shows leave Nicktoons and I hope they stay a while.

But hey that's all speculation.

[suss2it]

I thought Nicktoons only had Wolverine and the X-Men & Armored Adventures, what's the the third?

[Matt Hazuda]

I thought Nicktoons only had Wolverine and the X-Men & Armored Adventures, what's the the third?Fantastic Four: World's Greatest Heroes.

[macattack]

I actually foresee a new Hulk cartoon on the horizon as Hulk is the biggest property available that isn't owned by another company or have TV rights purchased by a different channel. Does anyone think that a new Hulk cartoon makes sense?

[suss2it]

Fantastic Four: World's Greatest Heroes.

Thanks.


I actually foresee a new Hulk cartoon on the horizon as Hulk is the biggest property available that isn't owned by another company or have TV rights purchased by a different channel. Does anyone think that a new Hulk cartoon makes sense?

Yea, that's defintely possible. He already made guest appearances in the last 3 Marvel shows and he was in most of their DTVs, so it appears Marvel really likes the Hulk.

[Stu]

A new Hulk cartoon was planned - it didn't go into production because the movie didn't draw well enough at the box office apprantly.

The series was apprantly reworked into the upcoming Avengers cartoon, which will feature Hulk prominantly.

[Hypestyle]

A new Hulk cartoon was planned - it didn't go into production because the movie didn't draw well enough at the box office apprantly.

The series was apprantly reworked into the upcoming Avengers cartoon, which will feature Hulk prominantly.

ah.. hopefully this show will be a success and get lots of promotion and merchandise tie-ins.. disney, take notice..

[Webbed-Wonder]

ah.. hopefully this show will be a success and get lots of promotion and merchandise tie-ins.. disney, take notice..
I remember seeing a poster of the show from a convention posted on these boards last year.

[Matt Hazuda]

I remember seeing a poster of the show from a convention posted on these boards last year.You can check it out here (http://marvel.toonzone.net/news.php?action=fullnews&id=120).

Just click on the image in the article to blow it up.

[suss2it]

I remember Marvel accidently put the trailer for the show on YT, and from what I remember it looks like Iron Man will be the leader.

[cartoonscartoons]

They already created a new hero :(:(:(:(:(:(:(

[Matt Hazuda]

They already created a new hero.Yeah, new is a terrible and horrible thing. Everything must be frozen in time forever :yawn:

[Silverstar]

They already created a new hero :(:(:(:(:(:(:(

Could you possibly elaborate on this? Source? Link? Article? Anything besides just a vague statement? BTW, who's "they"?

And yeah, "new" isn't necessarily a bad word.

[ABrown]

Marvel and Disney eh. Hmmm, how can I best put this..... HAHA!!!

[AlgeaX]

Could you possibly elaborate on this? Source? Link? Article? Anything besides just a vague statement? BTW, who's "they"?

And yeah, "new" isn't necessarily a bad word.

I think he means this guy...

http://i.newsarama.com/preview_images/marvelnew/oct09/65_marvel_super_hero_squad_2.jpg

From what I've heard his name is Raptor and he's somekind of dinosaur themed shapeshifter. Which when ya think about it is a kickass idea for a superhero.

[Silverstar]

A humanoid dinosaur shapeshifter, eh? Kind of sounds like Fin Fang Foom. (And yes, I know that FFF is technically a dragon.)

I'm not feeling the blue-and-green costume or the funky chicken feet, but the concept does sound kind of cool.

[screw on head]

Joe Quesada discusses the Disney Acquisition in painfully limited detail (http://www.comicbookresources.com/?page=article&id=22872) in the latest Cup O' Joe at CBR.

Here's Quesada's cloudy-answers regarding Marvel Animation, namely Pixar:

Kiel Phegley: Bob Iger has cited the Disney/Pixar merger from a few years back as a strong point of reference for how the Marvel/Disney relationship will work. And Iger and the other bigwigs on the investor conference call said that some of the Marvel crew had met with Pixar's John Lasseter during the ramp up to this. Did you meet with Lasseter at all? What kind of things did he have to say to y'all about how a deal like this ultimately works for a company known for its independent success like Pixar and now Marvel?

Joe Quesada: Yes, we actually met with Lasseter twice. We had dinner and breakfast with John, and again, he’s just a dynamite guy. It was wonderful to see how similar Pixar and Marvel were with respect to the act of creation, how we view story and how we believe in quality. I had read several things in the past about how Pixar went about doing their business and always thought that the similarities were great, but hearing John talk about Pixar as a company and family made it that much clearer to all of us.

What had us all feeling sky-high was John telling us about Pixar’s working relationship with Disney and his relationship with Iger. It seemed ideal and from my point of view, something that would benefit us tremendously. Heck, to be honest, I was getting jealous (laughs). There was a level of autonomy that they are given, while at the same time using the leverage that a big company like Disney can provide when it comes to the ancillary aspects of what they do for a living.

Also, as a guy who comes to work in T-shirt and jeans, I can certainly appreciate John’s ability to rock the Hawaiian shirts.

Kiel Phegley: I think the most repeated bit of "What If?" chatter on the boards around all that was the possibility of a Marvel/Pixar collaboration? Any comment on that? Any discussion of those kinds of ideas with Lasseter?

Joe Quesada: While many things were discussed, these are the things that I can’t go into in detail. But even if I could, these are exactly the kinds of things that we never discuss openly at Marvel until we’re ready to spring them on our unsuspecting public.

On Spectacular Spider-Man:

Kiel Phegley: The one piece of the deal more frequently discussed in all this that is tied to your job is the animation side of things. Disney seems very pleased with how Marvel shows from the '90s and the new episodes of "Spectacular Spider-Man" have done anchoring their rebranded Disney XD cable channel (though as of Wednesday, the fate of the latter seems to be in doubt). Moving forward, do you anticipate some more Marvel shows to be created for Disney's networks from the cable players on through even ABC?

Joe Quesada: In all honesty, Kiel, if this has been discussed, it’s a discussion I have not been involved with at this moment, so I honestly don’t know. Holy smokes, look over there, it’s Jeff Bridges!There's a beastly amount of legalese at the end of the interview which reminds one of the legal might of Disney lawyers. On the whole this interview was quite the non-interview, shedding light on not much of anything. Can't wait until real questions and answers can be found when the Marvel and Disney's legal deal is all said and done.

Thoughts?

[W.C.Reaf]

I think he means this guy...

From what I've heard his name is Raptor and he's somekind of dinosaur themed shapeshifter. Which when ya think about it is a kickass idea for a superhero.

If he does mean Raptor then that has nothing to do with the Disney deal since he would've been created while the series was in pre-production ages before the Disney deal.

[AlgeaX]

If he does mean Raptor then that has nothing to do with the Disney deal since he would've been created while the series was in pre-production ages before the Disney deal.

Of course from here on in, everytime some Marvel hero gets a new costume or Chuck Austen writes an issue of anything, people are going to blame it on the Evil Disney Corporation and their dasterdly scheme to retroactively ruin all our childhoods.

[Anwar]

Yeah, I call it the Rick Berman Effect. Everytime there's something we don't enjoy about our particular show/franchise, rather than investigate the real cause we have one figure/generalized group to blame it on.

[Arjun]

This may be a good thing for us fans here. Disney airs two channels in India, Disney Movie (with a few hours of Hannah Montana, Wizards of Waverly and an Indian show, mostly live-action) and Jetix (all the toons come here). Jetix, in particular, shows Spiderman Unlimited (for the sixth straight run), some new Disney-made cartoons, four different Power Rangers series and- believe it or not- eight hours of infomercials. With this new deal with Marvel, I hope we see at least one hour of Marvel a day here.

We also get Nick, but we have yet to catch Iron Man, X-Men or FF:WGH.

[Master Toon]

A humanoid dinosaur shapeshifter, eh? Kind of sounds like Fin Fang Foom. (And yes, I know that FFF is technically a dragon.)

I'm not feeling the blue-and-green costume or the funky chicken feet, but the concept does sound kind of cool.

Those are dinosaur feet. Chicken feet are flat. :sweat:


Of course from here on in, everytime some Marvel hero gets a new costume or Chuck Austen writes an issue of anything, people are going to blame it on the Evil Disney Corporation and their dasterdly scheme to retroactively ruin all our childhoods.

It's quite sad isn't it? It took the Official Marvel Boards 90+ pages before everyone calmed down. I know because I was there trying to educate them about Disney's other non-kiddie properties.

[Rick Jones]

It's quite sad isn't it? It took the Official Marvel Boards 90+ pages before everyone calmed down. I know because I was there trying to educate them about Disney's other non-kiddie properties.

The Marvel boards really aren't the sanest place to hang around but that's just IMVHO.


I'm still waiting patiently for the first big announcement we'll get since the news of the acquisition broke.

[Golgo-13]

Could this further delay the release of Disney/Marvel owned dvds....
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Jack Kirby Estate Goes After Marvel and Studios
Source:Bleeding Cool, The New York Times September 20, 2009

Bleeding Cool reports that the estate of Jack Kirby, co-creator of Captain America, The Fantastic Four, X-Men, The Avengers, Iron Man, Hulk, The Silver Surfer and Thor has sent notices terminating copyright to publishers Marvel and Disney, as well as Sony, Universal, 20th Century Fox and Paramount Pictures, which have made movies and TV shows based on characters he created or co-created:

Just as the Jerry Siegel estate has done so with rights to Superman, so Kirby’s estate is looking to regain his share of copyright in the characters and their use in comics and other media. the estate is using the same lawyers as the Siegels, Toberoff & Associates, who have been fairly successful in their case against DC/Warner so far.

Such claims, if found valid, would begin from 2014 and, as always, its worth noting that Marvel/Disney will still own the trademarks of the characters in comics, and the studios in movies. The likelihood is that, if successful, the Kirby estate would enter into negotiation with Marvel over terms to continue publishing comics based on his work.

You can read more on this here. The New York Times also had more on the matter:

Heirs to the comic book artist Jack Kirby, a creator of characters and stories behind Marvel mainstays like “X-Men” and “Fantastic Four,” last week sent 45 notices of copyright termination to Marvel and Disney, as well as Paramount Pictures, Sony Pictures, 20th Century Fox, Universal Pictures, and other companies that have been using the characters.

The notices expressed an intent to regain copyrights to some of Mr. Kirby’s creations as early as 2014, according to a statement disclosed on Sunday by Toberoff & Associates, a law firm in Los Angeles that helped win a court ruling last year returning a share of the copyright in Superman to heirs of one of the character’s creators, Jerome Siegel.

Disney said in a statement, “the notices involved are an attempt to terminate rights 7 to 10 years from now, and involve claims that were fully considered in the acquisition.”
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
:(

[Zen Man]

Could this further delay the release of Disney/Marvel owned dvds....
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Jack Kirby Estate Goes After Marvel and Studios
Source:Bleeding Cool, The New York Times September 20, 2009

Bleeding Cool reports that the estate of Jack Kirby, co-creator of Captain America, The Fantastic Four, X-Men, The Avengers, Iron Man, Hulk, The Silver Surfer and Thor has sent notices terminating copyright to publishers Marvel and Disney, as well as Sony, Universal, 20th Century Fox and Paramount Pictures, which have made movies and TV shows based on characters he created or co-created:

Just as the Jerry Siegel estate has done so with rights to Superman, so Kirby’s estate is looking to regain his share of copyright in the characters and their use in comics and other media. the estate is using the same lawyers as the Siegels, Toberoff & Associates, who have been fairly successful in their case against DC/Warner so far.

Such claims, if found valid, would begin from 2014 and, as always, its worth noting that Marvel/Disney will still own the trademarks of the characters in comics, and the studios in movies. The likelihood is that, if successful, the Kirby estate would enter into negotiation with Marvel over terms to continue publishing comics based on his work.

You can read more on this here. The New York Times also had more on the matter:

Heirs to the comic book artist Jack Kirby, a creator of characters and stories behind Marvel mainstays like “X-Men” and “Fantastic Four,” last week sent 45 notices of copyright termination to Marvel and Disney, as well as Paramount Pictures, Sony Pictures, 20th Century Fox, Universal Pictures, and other companies that have been using the characters.

The notices expressed an intent to regain copyrights to some of Mr. Kirby’s creations as early as 2014, according to a statement disclosed on Sunday by Toberoff & Associates, a law firm in Los Angeles that helped win a court ruling last year returning a share of the copyright in Superman to heirs of one of the character’s creators, Jerome Siegel.

Disney said in a statement, “the notices involved are an attempt to terminate rights 7 to 10 years from now, and involve claims that were fully considered in the acquisition.”
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
:(

Man everybody wants to get paid nowadays. :(

I think they'll reach some sort of settlement though.

[screw on head]

Man everybody wants to get paid nowadays. :(I'd recommend reading up on Marvel's treatment over Jack Kirby and how vital he is to Marvel's history and prosperity. Read about the man he was and why this case is important for moral reasons. This court case is a good thing. Marvel Comics wouldn't be what it is today if it wasn't for Jack Kirby working in the trenches for all those years.

[The Overlord]

I'd recommend reading up on Marvel's treatment over Jack Kirby and how vital he is to Marvel's history and prosperity. Read about the man he was and why this case is important for moral reasons. This court case is a good thing. Marvel Comics wouldn't be what it is today if it wasn't for Jack Kirby working in the trenches for all those years.

Yeah but that's Jack, not his family, his family did nothing, they are ones suing.

The family didn't create anything so I don't sympathize with them.

[marvelfan101]

if Marvel has been treating Jacks work bad then they got a right to sue

[The Overlord]

if Marvel has been treating Jacks work bad then they got a right to sue

They are suing over the rights to Spider-Man, despite the fact that Jack had very little to do with Spidey. They seem like a bunch of lazy, greedy, jackals to me.

[Trevor]

Well, I must say that this sounds absolutely ridiculous on Kirby's family's part since Kirby has been dead for 15 years. So why are they only going after the rights now? Why didn't they go after the rights right after Kirby passed-away in 1994?

[Golgo-13]

Well i've heard over the years that Kirby didn't like the fact that Stan Lee gets the credits, for the most part, for Spider-Mans creation, and that the way the character was REALLY created was quite different to how Stan has told the story for so many years.

Who know why they're doing it now. It takes years to get these case together, and gather all the legal info needed. Maybe this was in his will to have done by his family? Who knows, but the man and his estate should be compensated, every penny, for the works he help create...


..it's just sad that this MAY keep Marvel and Disney in yet another legal loophole for many years to come, and that may affect the way Disney deals with Marvels dvds,etc...sucks for us fans.

[Jeff Harris]

The Kirby lawsuit wouldn't affect any future release of any DVDs, so don't worry about it. It's more far-reaching than many people think, plus, it's for copyright termination five years from now. That's . . . that's the period between Spider-Man and Spider-Man 3. Things will get straightened out before then. Marvel will still own the trademarks over the characters, but they'd have to share copyrights around 2014 if the Kirby house is successful.

[AlgeaX]

The Kirby lawsuit wouldn't affect any future release of any DVDs, so don't worry about it. It's more far-reaching than many people think, plus, it's for copyright termination five years from now. That's . . . that's the period between Spider-Man and Spider-Man 3. Things will get straightened out before then. Marvel will still own the trademarks over the characters, but they'd have to share copyrights around 2014 if the Kirby house is successful.

Then they should have really filed this thing a lot earlier. Disney's been lobbying for extended copyright laws for a while now. Mainly to keep Mickey and Donald from passing into public domain.

[cartoonscartoons]

I think he means this guy...

http://i.newsarama.com/preview_images/marvelnew/oct09/65_marvel_super_hero_squad_2.jpg

From what I've heard his name is Raptor and he's somekind of dinosaur themed shapeshifter. Which when ya think about it is a kickass idea for a superhero.


No I was talking about this designer guy.
I read an article about it.

[AlgeaX]

No I was talking about this designer guy.
I read an article about it.

Okay now I have no clue what you're talking about. Do you still have a link to this article?

[Rho]

I've realized a good thing that could come out of this (and yes, I realize several others probably thought of it): Marvel worlds/summons in Kingdom Hearts 3.

[Rick Jones]

http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20091231-706942.html

Now that the deal's done, I hope it's clear sailing from here on out.