Ask questions to The Digital Bits team (Bill Hunt, Jeff Kleist et.al.)

[MerrickG]

Originally Posted by SpaceDog

I think both companies did well. I'm surprised Disney didn't want to grab Thor & Cap though.

I don't see how they could considering that the films are pretty much made right now.

The other films haven't even started shooting yet and I doubt there is even close to anything resembling a script for Iron Man 3.

I do wonder what will happen once the rights to Superman revert back to the Siegel estate.

Could they sell the Superman property to Marvel? Wouldn't that be interesting...

Jeff do you have any knowledge of what that will mean for Superman once Warner loses their rights?

[SpaceDog]

Originally Posted by merrick97

I don't see how they could considering that the films are pretty much made right now.

Marvel and by that Disney actually made these films. Paramount is just the distribution team. I can't imagine that prints have been struck yet, so I think it would have still been possible if Disney wanted it badly enough.

Originally Posted by merrick97

I do wonder what will happen once the rights to Superman revert back to the Siegel estate.

Could they sell the Superman property to Marvel? Wouldn't that be interesting...

This will never happen. The Siegel estate rights are murky at best, and the continuous publishing of Superman in DC comics would prohibit them from making that maneuver. I think the worst case scenario for WB would be to have to pay the estate more, but they won't be able to take their ball and go anywhere else.

[Jeff Kleist]

Marvel has been financing the movies since Iron Man and distributing through Paramount.

Paramount needs cash, and $100 million+ to go away isn't a bad deal. That was a big reason why they took the HD DVD money remember. Neither Thor nor Cap are likely do do Iron Man numbers, and since those films are essentially complete or in the can, the machines are already rolling on Paramount's end. Iron Man 3 and Avengers are still pre-natal as far as distribution goes

Disney obviously wants their property all under one roof as fast as possible. Sony won't let go of Spidey unless their reboot tanks (unlikely), they're shooting another Ghost Rider to try again with that one, and I expect that Fox will shoot another Daredevil (sans Affleck sadly) and FF right before their rights expire.

The Superman thing is complex, I don't know exactly how much transfers back to the family. Hypothetically DC could claim right to all elements and Villains not created by Siegel/Shuster (until their creators sue over them), which is a big part about why licensing Superman to Marvel is highly unlikely.

Basically S&S will get a solid percentage of future Superman profits, what that number is is something the lawyers will hash out.

[Doctorossi]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

Sony won't let go of Spidey unless their reboot tanks (unlikely)

I'll bet they'll still want to hold on to it even if it does tank.

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

Fox will shoot another Daredevil (sans Affleck sadly)

I'm not sure what's sad about that. Is it too late to hang a franchise on Guy Pearce?

[MerrickG]

I can't remember a time when an actor got such an unjustifiable amount of hate as Affleck did for playing Matt Murdock/Daredevil. He was a damn good choice I thought and I actually enjoyed that movie.

[Doctorossi]

Originally Posted by merrick97

I can't remember a time when an actor got such an unjustifiable amount of hate as Affleck did for playing Matt Murdock/Daredevil. He was a damn good choice I thought and I actually enjoyed that movie.

I thought he was fine in the role, too. I just don't think he's anything terribly special, in general (and sometimes pretty bad), and I don't see how his absence from a sequel/reboot/whatever is particularly lamentable. That said, same sequel/reboot/whatever doesn't excite me, in the first place, so maybe I'm the wrong guy to ask.

[Nick Graham]

I really wish Disney would throw whatever money was necessary at Fox and Sony to get all their rights back.

[MerrickG]

Originally Posted by Nick Graham

I really wish Disney would throw whatever money was necessary at Fox and Sony to get all their rights back.

Why should you care?

What difference does it make?

The Spiderman films were pretty good (minus HORRIBLE acting from Kirsten Dunst)

The Fantastic Four films werent all that bad, but the Fantastic Four have never been fan favorites, but have been well taken care of because they are STan Lee's baby.

[neo_reloaded]

Originally Posted by merrick97

Why should you care?

What difference does it make?

The Spiderman films were pretty good (minus HORRIBLE acting from Kirsten Dunst)

The Fantastic Four films werent all that bad, but the Fantastic Four have never been fan favorites, but have been well taken care of because they are STan Lee's baby.

Fantastic Four was pretty bad...

But the bigger issue is being able to have all the rights under one roof, so the universes can connect and cameos can be made when appropriate. If Marvel is really looking ahead to Avengers 2 and 3 and such, you'd figure Spider-Man and Fantastic Four would figure into there at some point, and so on.

[Jeff Kleist]

I would not be suprised if Disney was negotiating crossover rights

I was really dissapointed when Spidey 3 and FF2 came out, I was really hoping there could be some Spidey/Torch action as is traditional

[MerrickG]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

I would not be suprised if Disney was negotiating crossover rights

I was really dissapointed when Spidey 3 and FF2 came out, I was really hoping there could be some Spidey/Torch action as is traditional

I still dont get why so many people were disappointed with Spiderman 3. I enjoyed it, I did feel that there were too many villians though.

[Objectivity]

Originally Posted by neo_reloaded

Fantastic Four was pretty bad...

But the bigger issue is being able to have all the rights under one roof, so the universes can connect and cameos can be made when appropriate. If Marvel is really looking ahead to Avengers 2 and 3 and such, you'd figure Spider-Man and Fantastic Four would figure into there at some point, and so on.

As Fantastic Four movies, they were pretty bad. As movies about people who call themselves the Fantastic Four with little connection to the comics, they were split. The first one was decent and I would watch it again. The second, I blind bought because I love the Fantastic Four, even though I don't read the comics that much, and the movie was awful. At this point in time can we outlaw the evil military general who hates the protagonists "just 'cause?"

[AnimeOnBlu]

Jeff,
In case you missed it, it seems the UK "Battle Royale" will be region free. Still wondering how Arrow managed that one.

[Jeff Kleist]

No, I haven't missed it. If it's not region locked I will be SHOCKED, since it's not out in Japan yet. If it isn't locked, then I'd expect it to be recalled and replaced with a locked version as soon as Toei finds out about it. Also expect it to be laden with DNR, pretty much all new HD masters are total smoothies out of Japan of Japanese films. There are people trying to educate on proper mastering for HD, but like everything in Japan, it's like turning an aircraft carrier with the engines on 10%

I've been commenting in the thread on it in the region B area

I STRONGLY recommend against pre-ordering it unless you're region free.

[Doctorossi]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

I STRONGLY recommend against pre-ordering it unless you're region free.

Wouldn't it be better to get in with a pre-order while you can and cancel if necessary?

[Jeff Kleist]

UK shipping is expensive, that's $10 down the drain here, and $10 back since most places won't do free international returns

[Doctorossi]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

UK shipping is expensive, that's $10 down the drain here, and $10 back since most places won't do free international returns

Have you tried pre-ordering? Mine cost $25, shipped. Being a limited pressing, if I end up unable to play it, I have a hard time imagining I won't be able to find someone who will cover at least the bulk of my investment for it. Meanwhile, if the now-confirmed region-freeness does change before release, the chances are pretty strong that I'll find out in time to cancel my pre-order, anyway. Seems pretty dang low-risk to me, but I guess everyone draws their line in a different place.

[MerrickG]

Originally Posted by Doctorossi

Have you tried pre-ordering? Mine cost $25, shipped. Being a limited pressing, if I end up unable to play it, I have a hard time imagining I won't be able to find someone who will cover at least the bulk of my investment for it. Meanwhile, if the now-confirmed region-freeness does change before release, the chances are pretty strong that I'll find out in time to cancel my pre-order, anyway. Seems pretty dang low-risk to me, but I guess everyone draws their line in a different place.

Dude, its your call and your money.

[Jeff Kleist]

Virtually no one in the US has a region free player, and if it does end up being locked the market will be flooded with copies

But hey, if you want to take the risk go for it. The DNR issue is unlikely to change no matter who puts it out, because everyone is sourcing from the Toei masters. They would have probably slapped it down extra well for the 3D conversion they're doing

[Doctorossi]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

Virtually no one in the US has a region free player, and if it does end up being locked the market will be flooded with copies

1. I would bet that the 'region-free Blu-ray player owners' - 'Battle Royale fans' Venn diagram is pretty close to round.

2. They're only making 5000 copies to begin with.

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

But hey, if you want to take the risk go for it.

Since there's almost none, I did.

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

The DNR issue is unlikely to change no matter who puts it out, because everyone is sourcing from the Toei masters.

Right. So the question becomes, "Do you want a possibly-compromised BD or to stick with your existing DVD indefinitely?" Again, this seems to me a no-brainer. I can understand your advising something like "import at your own risk", but I'm surprised you're taking such a hard line against. It looks like very minimal risk and a lot of potential reward to me.