Star Wars: The Complete Saga (1977-2005)

[mredman]

noway in hell i am gonna pay 90 dollars for digital copies of anything. digital is a freaking sham its a cloud of uncertainty. Its a mind trick to fool people they own something when in reality they don't own anything.

[seannyd]

Originally Posted by Ernest Rister

I...didn't even realize this was a thing. Huh. Where is that even from?

[Merlinpants]

Originally Posted by Stinky-Dinkins

Hi!

Yes, I did read it, and what you said made no sense whatsoever so it wasn't even worth acknowledging.

The reason Disney doesn't own the things you mentioned is because when Disney purchased Marvel, Marvel themselves didn't own those properties. They never did (different studios do, like Columbia with the original Spiderman films, Fox with the original X Men, etc.) Marvel never had control over those original film properties, suddenly being purchased by Disney wouldn't magically give them control over them. They bought EVERYTHING Marvel owned, just like the bought the full rights to the Star Wars franchise in terms of what Lucas owned.

So Disney has in fact bought a property that they do not have full control of particularly for future projects (which you added in the edit). Makes no sense whatsoever. Thank you for pointing that out.

What the Star Wars purchase gave them, only George and Bob will know, anything else is pure speculation.

[balthazar_bee]

This might sound counter-intuitive, but I hope the rumour about the restoration of Han shooting first is false.

To explain: If Disney fixes this one (admittedly egregious) problem with the special editions, it might take a lot of the UOT pressure off. Some people have already posted that they'd be "all right" with the new versions if they took care of this, and maybe one or two other distractions (Christensen, Jedi Rocks, utterly terrible neo-Boba Fett line readings, etc.).

Personally, I'm not looking for half-measures; the closer we can get to the original theatrical versions on blu-ray, the better.

[Stinky-Dinkins]

Originally Posted by Merlinpants

So Disney has in fact bought something that they do not have full control of particularly for future projects. Makes no sense whatsoever. Thank you for pointing that out.

What the Hell are you rambling about??

Disney has no say in the matter in terms of the Marvel acquisition. When they purchased Marvel, they were purchasing Marvel 100%. They bought Marvel. They bought full control of EVERYTHING Marvel had the rights to. At the time, Marvel did not own those properties, so Disney could not possibly acquire them by acquiring Marvel. Marvel could not possibly have offered Disney rights to those franchises as part of the deal, as they did not own them. That would be like me owning a car in 1999, selling it to my neighbor in 2000... and then you buying my house and all of my cars in 2001 and asking me if you now owned the car I used to own before I sold it to my neighbor because it was once my property. See how asinine that is? I can't possibly sell you a car I don't own.

Disney purchased Lucasfilm, as in full control of EVERYTHING Lucasfilm owns at the point of sale, just as they assumed full control of all Marvel properties at the point of that acquisition.

[Merlinpants]

Originally Posted by Stinky-Dinkins

You don't make any sense. Disney acquired EVERYTHING that Marvel owned, Marvel could not sell Disney the rights to certain franchises (as in, all the ones you cited) because they DID NOT OWN THEM. Disney purchased all of Marvel's properties, just like they purchased all Lucasfilm properties.

You are struggling with this a bit. Yes, they bought marvel knowing the film franchises had been contracted out, hence they paid billions for something they did not have total control over. Do you know for example they cannot use any xmen characters in Florida without universals permission? Great business for the Disney theme parks that. Did you know they cannot place any reference to spiderman anywhere on the east coast because of the deal with universal theme parks? Great idea for the busiest and most profitable theme parks in the world to not be able to use their most iconic character from a company they OWN.

They have been desperate to get spiderman into the avengers films, and because Sony fluffed it up, the chance has now come.

They literally paid billions and do not have TOTAL control of the asset they purchased., the asset being the whole range of marvel characters and associated merchandising and products. They cannot do what they want with quite a few marvel characters, and they happen to be the most popular ones.you never know, they might have paid billions for lucasfilm and not have total control of the property.

Do you honestly think Disney is happy with the current marvel situation. Do you think they believe they have total control of the asset as you keep banging on about?

It is all speculation, end.

[DetroitSportsFan]

Originally Posted by seannyd

I...didn't even realize this was a thing. Huh. Where is that even from?

Hardware Wars

[Stinky-Dinkins]

Originally Posted by Merlinpants

You are struggling with this a bit. Yes, they bought marvel knowing the film franchises had been contracted out, hence they paid billions for something they did not have total control over. Do you know for example they cannot use any xmen characters in Florida without universals permission? Great business for the Disney the,e parks that. Did you know they cannot place any reference to spiderman anywhere on the east coast because of the deal with universal theme parks? Great idea for the busiest and most profitable theme parks in the world.

They literally paid billions and do not have TOTAL control of the asset they purchased. They cannot do what they want with quite a few marvel characters, and they happen to be the most popular ones.

Jesus man, what are you not getting? The purchased of all Marvel. ALL OF IT. They assumed full control of ALL Marvel properties. What happened years before the purchase is out of Disney's hands, all of the things you listed were no longer Marvel properties, they were the properties of OTHER COMPANIES. The reason Disney has "no control" over those properties is because those were not Marvel properties at the time of the Marvel acquisition. This is not the case with Lucasfilms.

They bought all of Lucasfilms. They now have full control over all of Lucasfilms properties. They literally own the company, the head of Lucasfilms now reports to the head of Disney.

[Ernest Rister]

Originally Posted by seannyd

I...didn't even realize this was a thing. Huh. Where is that even from?

Hardware Wars! It's a classic.

[klauswhereareyou]

Originally Posted by Stinky-Dinkins

Jesus man, what are you not getting? The purchased of all Marvel. ALL OF IT. They assumed full control of ALL Marvel properties. What happened years before the purchase is out of Disney's hands, all of the things you listed were no longer Marvel properties, they were the properties of OTHER COMPANIES. The reason Disney has "no control" over those properties is because those were not Marvel properties at the time of the Marvel acquisition. This is not the case with Lucasfilms.

They bought all of Lucasfilms. They now have full control over all of Lucasfilms properties. They literally own the company, the head of Lucasfilms now reports to the head of Disney.

But with Marvel it's just the film rights. They still own the characters, just not for making their own movies without Fox (X-Men, FF) or Sony (Spider-Man).

[Merlinpants]

Originally Posted by Stinky-Dinkins

Not a chance in Hell Disney would pay literally billions for a property they weren't given full control over. That makes no sense whatsoever.

Just read the quote you made and I was replying to. Does Disney have full control over every marvel asset, the way it is used and more importantly, the films it is put in. Are you able to answer yes? No, didn't think so, hence they paid for an asset/property where they do not have total control of everything within the marvel stable.

Disney can still do anything it likes with xmen, spiderman, fantastic four in comic book form, but in film, in theme parks, it can't. It paid for property it does not have total control over, and as you point out, may never have control over in certain medium. They still bought it though didn't they?

It might be simpler if you ask yourself does marvel own spiderman, xmen and fantastic four? If you answer yes, do they have control over what they do in movies, no they don't? Do Disney own marvel, yes they do? Does Disney therefore own spiderman, xmen and fantastic four, yes? Can they stop movies about them being made, no they can't? Do they therefore have total control, no they don't. Did they pay billions for something they do not have total control of, yes? Does this make no sense whatsoever, to you, yes?

Can they use any marvel character in theme parks on the east coast of America? No they can't if universal has associated something in their parks already. Do Disney therefore have control of the marvel property in theme parks? No they do not. Can we stop now?

Sigh.

[Jumpman]

It ain't true. Devin's updating his story. Continue with the previous conversation from the last decade or so...

[Merlinpants]

Originally Posted by klauswhereareyou

But with Marvel it's just the film rights. They still own the characters, just not for making their own movies without Fox (X-Men, FF) or Sony (Spider-Man).

At least someone else understands. Thought I was going mad for a moment.

[Falaskan]

If there was some clause in the sale that said "you can't release the UOT," (doubtful) all they would have to do in the case of the Greedo scene, is remove the few frames where Greedo shoots, to return the scene to it's original glory. If that's the only change they make, it would make most fans happy, and they wouldn't have to go back to the original negatives to do it.

[Stinky-Dinkins]

Originally Posted by Merlinpants

Just read the quote you made and I was replying to. Does Disney have full control over every marvel asset, the way it is used and more importantly, the films it is put in. Are you able to answer yes? No, didn't think so, hence they paid for an asset/property where they do not have total control of everything within the marvel stable.

Disney can still do anything it likes with xmen, spiderman, fantastic four in comic book form, but in film, in theme parks, it can't. It paid for property it does not have total control over, and as you point out, may never have control over in certain medium. They still bought it though didn't they?

It might be simpler if you ask yourself does marvel own spiderman, xmen and fantastic four? If you answer yes, do they have control over what they do in movies, no they don't. Do Disney own marvel, yes they do. Does Disney therefore own spiderman, xmen and fantastic four, yes? Can they stop movies about them being made, no they can't? Do they therefore have total control, no they don't. Did they pay billions for something they do not have total control of, yes. Does this make no sense whatsoever, to you, yes.

Can they use any marvel character in theme parks on the east coast of America? No they can't if universal has associated something in their parks already. Do Disney therefore have control of the marvel property in theme parks? No they do not. Can we stop now?

Sigh.

Ugh, Jesus. Yes, it controls every Marvel asset. At the time of sale those were no longer Marvel assets. Marvel NO LONGER OWNED THEM, Marvel no longer had any control over them. They were sold properties, owned by other companies. Every single one of those film and character properties you mentioned were not Marvel assets at the point when Disney purchased Marvel, as Marvel had sold away the rights to them previously. How is it possible that you don't understand this? It is such a blindingly simple concept.

They now own every Lucasfilm asset, they purchased Lucasfilms. Everything Lucasfilms (as in George) owned, Disney now owns - because they fully purchased Lucasfilms and all of its properties outright.

[Merlinpants]

Originally Posted by Jumpman

It ain't true. Devin's updating his story. Continue with the previous conversation from the last decade or so...

Lol, and his site gets a larger slice of advertising revenue next month for his click rate. Amazing how he had multiple sources telling him the same thing, he must visit these forums to get that level of stupidity.

[Merlinpants]

Originally Posted by Stinky-Dinkins

Ugh, Jesus. Yes, it controls every Marvel asset. At the time of sale those were no longer Marvel assets. Marvel NO LONGER OWNED THEM, Marvel no longer had any control over them. They were sold properties, owned by other companies. How is it possible that you don't understand this? It is such a blindingly simple concept.

They now own every Lucasfilm asset, they purchased Lucasfilms. Everything Lucasfilms (as in George) owned, Disney now owns - because they fully purchased Lucasfilms and all of its properties outright.

So you now think that fox owns xmen and fantastic four and Sony/Columbia owns spiderman. Marvel has never sold any of its characters to anyone, movie rights yes. That really sums up this conversation with you.

Try to understand, they bought something they don't have total control over. They have been trying to buy the assets back, and by that I mean the movie right, but they can't. In answer to your original statement, Disney really has paid billions for a property they don't have total control over., they cannot do certain things with certain characters that they own, aka not having total control. It isn't hard to understand.

With regards Star Wars, unless you were sat at the meeting or are the lawyer that handled the contracts, you know as much as anyone else. Squat.

Stop taking the lords name in vain too, bad things will happen.

[chip75]

Originally Posted by Merlinpants

Can they stop movies about them being made, no they can't?

MARVEL can actually put the brakes on the movies, they have to sign-off on everything that's been produced, if they think it will damage their property's reputation or brand then they can at least ask for changes. It would have to be pretty extreme though, a shitty story or bad casting wouldn't even make them bat an eye ...

[Ernest Rister]

Australia fans just got their downloads...the films are the same as the recent blu-ray release. So, yeah. Devin and his "sources" wrong again.

[popeflick]

Originally Posted by Merlinpants

You are struggling with this a bit. Yes, they bought marvel knowing the film franchises had been contracted out, hence they paid billions for something they did not have total control over. Do you know for example they cannot use any xmen characters in Florida without universals permission? Great business for the Disney theme parks that. Did you know they cannot place any reference to spiderman anywhere on the east coast because of the deal with universal theme parks? Great idea for the busiest and most profitable theme parks in the world to not be able to use their most iconic character from a company they OWN.

They have been desperate to get spiderman into the avengers films, and because Sony fluffed it up, the chance has now come.

They literally paid billions and do not have TOTAL control of the asset they purchased., the asset being the whole range of marvel characters and associated merchandising and products. They cannot do what they want with quite a few marvel characters, and they happen to be the most popular ones.you never know, they might have paid billions for lucasfilm and not have total control of the property.

Do you honestly think Disney is happy with the current marvel situation. Do you think they believe they have total control of the asset as you keep banging on about?

It is all speculation, end.

Youre being specious, intentionally obtuse or both: they knew exactly what they were buying. They ran numbers and agreed on a price they thought was commensurate with the purchase. It was also 4 billion. They've done quite well this far and in the long run will mad quite the profit. Believe me I doubt they are regretting it at all. They're printing money. You act like they were unaware of these issues until after the fact. That's ridiculous.