Which Property Will Marvel Regain The Film Rights?
- Thread starter Trek4Ever
- Start date
Clearly Kelthaz doesn't understand the difference in topic of:
Market Saturation of a product
vs
Products cost to produce
So when he says they are not separate, when in fact they are, he displays his misunderstanding of the topic at hand. Which makes his arroganteven more funny.
Marketing budget. I said marketing budget.
So you're saying people will get sick of them because 1 marvel movies advertises more than 10 comedies?
If you're thinking of E.T. the movie, then yes.
Alidar is refering to the horrible E.T. video game from Atari (for the 5200?) that was overproduced and flopped so badly that Atari famously dumped thousands of unsold cartridges into a landfill.
Amusingly, someone recently went to the effort of actually digging them up.
Yeah, I love that the story is absolutely real. Although an even better version is this:
Angry Video Game Nerd: The Movie
Angry Video Game Nerd: The Movie
ah ok. To be honest, I think you're over estimating the impact of gaming. Lets say 100 million people saw avengers, how many of those people do you realistically believe will play an avengers game, or be turned off by a crappy avengers game?
The reality is, studio's can piss off hardcore fanboys as much as they want. Because the people that put them over the 1 billion box office plateau are people who rarely, if ever play games, most likely have never read a comic book, and barely know the difference between DC and Marvel.
So in your bubble where possibly you, and a good chunk of your circle of influence get turned off by stuff like this, the general movie going audience won't even be cognizant of the issues that you deem unforgivable.
The reality is, studio's can piss off hardcore fanboys as much as they want. Because the people that put them over the 1 billion box office plateau are people who rarely, if ever play games, most likely have never read a comic book, and barely know the difference between DC and Marvel.
So in your bubble where possibly you, and a good chunk of your circle of influence get turned off by stuff like this, the general movie going audience won't even be cognizant of the issues that you deem unforgivable.
I was talking about bubbles. There was a video game bubble and then there was the Atari game crash. So I don't know how I'm overestimating something that literally happened.
My point was only that too much of something doesn't cause it to fail, too much of something bad causes it to fail.
Regarding budgets, my only point was doing something cheaply can often lead to poor quality. Big budget films can help sustain it because there's at least more spectacle (I don't think it's a substitute for quality, though). But I do think, with something with a big budget, a crash will sting harder.
My point was only that too much of something doesn't cause it to fail, too much of something bad causes it to fail.
Regarding budgets, my only point was doing something cheaply can often lead to poor quality. Big budget films can help sustain it because there's at least more spectacle (I don't think it's a substitute for quality, though). But I do think, with something with a big budget, a crash will sting harder.
Dittoing everyone who feels the X-Men are better off in their own universe. Having the MCU heroes and goings-on AND the X-Gene stuff would just make the universe too complicated. It'd be hard to have the slightly more "mundane" goings-on of the MCU happening AND to have this crazy X-Gene out there that causes random mutations that grant people random awesome, god-like, powers.
Economic Bubble
It's essentially something that is overvalued so it is extremely successful in the short term but will eventually crash taking all those who invested in it down with them.
It's essentially something that is overvalued so it is extremely successful in the short term but will eventually crash taking all those who invested in it down with them.
I don't see it. Value in a movie, or piece of art is not tangible. It's not a commodity. Studio's might pop, but the studio's that own the rights to the comic IP's would need to have a long string of failures in order for them to go bankrupt. And if they did, Comic films would play a very minor role in that.
E.T was just a really shitty video game. I don't see where there's a video game bubble. Nintendo and Sega were wildly successful after the Atari, and Sony/Microsoft taking their places in the 2000's...
It's not like having public investors sink money in to RIM while they stop being progressive. Or banks handing out 100 year mortgages so anyone can buy a house.
E.T was just a really shitty video game. I don't see where there's a video game bubble. Nintendo and Sega were wildly successful after the Atari, and Sony/Microsoft taking their places in the 2000's...
It's not like having public investors sink money in to RIM while they stop being progressive. Or banks handing out 100 year mortgages so anyone can buy a house.
I understand what you mean but bad example. Marvel Studios, before Disney bought them out, were going bankrupt but not due to a long string of failures but due to the exiting aging fan base and the lack of a replenishing fan base.
Another bad example as Sega left the hardware business in 2001.
I'm not even sure if we're disagreeing on the big picture. I'm not saying there's a bubble and I thought the comparison to westerns was apt. The only point I made is a couple legitimate failures for Marvel would bankrupt it because they invest a ton of resources in them. If there were a system-wide release of crappy comicbook movies to the point that everybody hated them, the comicbook movie strategy would fail.
But I have to disagree with the paragraph I quoted. The North American Video Game Crash was a big event for precisely the reasons I described (a whole bunch of shitty games flooded the market). It took about two years to recover, but it wasn't a sure thing. But for the Nintendo Entertainment System, things might look quite different.
Use your deductive reasoning dude...
I wasn't talking about the past. I am talking about the 3 studio's that own rights to marvel characters now. Disney, Sony, Fox.
I don't see how it's a bad example. Sega did well after the crash. The fact they screwed up later on doesn't change the fact they were successful. And yes, they did leave consoles behind, which is why I also mentioned microsoft/sony...
Next you're going to tell me that using Kodak as an example for a successful company in the 70's is a bad example because they were short sighted in the digital age, and refused to change with the times.
You are COMPLETELY missing the context of the discussion topics and focusing on semantics.
I wasn't talking about the past. I am talking about the 3 studio's that own rights to marvel characters now. Disney, Sony, Fox.
I don't see how it's a bad example. Sega did well after the crash. The fact they screwed up later on doesn't change the fact they were successful. And yes, they did leave consoles behind, which is why I also mentioned microsoft/sony...
Next you're going to tell me that using Kodak as an example for a successful company in the 70's is a bad example because they were short sighted in the digital age, and refused to change with the times.
You are COMPLETELY missing the context of the discussion topics and focusing on semantics.
You're correct. But that's true of any genre. Although I'm not even sure if we're actually disagreeing with each other.
Well, the argument was that westerns were made more cheaply so the risk wasn't as high.
My view is that blockbusters are a necessity these days (if you don't go big, go to television). Comic book movies lend themselves well to it, but the massive investment cost will be the same either way. The video game industry (at least for computers) sort of has the same thing going on where it's either an Indie game or a really expensive game with very little in the middle.
My view is that blockbusters are a necessity these days (if you don't go big, go to television). Comic book movies lend themselves well to it, but the massive investment cost will be the same either way. The video game industry (at least for computers) sort of has the same thing going on where it's either an Indie game or a really expensive game with very little in the middle.
Both Amazing Spider-Man films are horrible. I would've preferred seeing Spider-Man 4 in the Tobey Maguire series than the current Andrew Garfield movies. The Spider-Man movies of 10 years ago were a lot better than the Spider-Man movies of today. Batman Begins was a whole lot better than Man Of Steel (i'm not even going to use Superman Returns as a comparison, as its not comparison material, because it was a horrible movie). The X-Men movie series, is in it's own ball park, as it's had a few stumbles, but it's recovered quite nicely.
So hopefully Marvel will regain the movie rights to Spider-Man before Sony does anything worst (Marvel's already regained Spidey's TV rights from Sony, and they've managed to make a show that's a lot better than either of Sony's two garbage Spidey shows).