Weinsteins Want Miramax Name Back 
'Saw 3D' vs 'Paranormal Activity 2' Battle … 
TV TUG OF WAR: It's Ellen vs Simon, And … 
Robert De Niro Returns To CAA From WME; Jane … 
Fox Wins Studio War For Robert Rodriguez' … 
Weinstein Co Gets "New Lease On Life"? 
Nicole Kidman Hires Angelina's Manager 
So What Are The Hot Films At Sundance? 
Huge $70M Settlement In TV Writers Age … 
TOLDJA! Momoa Chosen 'Conan' Barbarian 
Oscar Campaign Badmouthing Has Begun! 
According to Rich Greenfield at Pali Research, here are the deals which Marvel currently has, prompting this savvy media analyst to ask this morning, "While we do not doubt the acquisition will ultimately prove successful, it appears that Disney investors may have to wait quite awhile to see the bulk of the synergies that the Marvel acquisition may ultimately yield." Here's why:
"Across film, theme parks, video games and toys, Marvel has already committed to many long-term deals, leaving only Disney’s ability to boost Marvel’s international consumer products business and to leverage Marvel characters on the Disney XD network, as the more significant nearer term initiatives (in terms of synergies, above and beyond Marvel’s organic earnings power). In terms of Marvel’s various licensing agreements, [Pali Research was] able to pull together some of the more notable examples, as shown below:
Film
Marvel’s current distribution deal with Paramount (Viacom-owned) covers the next five Marvel pictures including Iron Man 2 (2010), Thor (2011), Captain America (2011), The Avengers (2012) and Iron Man 3 (2012/2013). Paramount confirmed the films to be produced under their Marvel agreement. These films would all flow thru to Paramount’s new pay TV network EPIX, however, all new properties beyond these would likely flow through Disney’s output partner (currently Starz).X-Men property has been licensed to 20th Century Fox (News Corp. owned) while Spider-Man has been licensed to Sony, which seems to have plans for the next three installments. [NF: While the Spider-Man film is only licensed to Sony, Sony is actually half owner of the company that handles all the Spider-Man merchandise. It was put together with Marvel in 2000.]
Theme Parks
It appears that Universal Studios maintains geographical rights to Marvel IP for as long as they have Marvel-related rides/attractions at the park (unclear if this also includes merchandise that exists within its parks today). In other words, Walt Disney World in Orlando is unlikely to see a Spiderman/Hulk themed attraction for the foreseeable future. The following excerpt comes from Universal City Development Partners’ (owner of Universal Studios Orlando) 10-K: “We have geographical exclusivity east of the Mississippi River with regard to the specific Marvel characters we utilize. The license for the Marvel properties does not prohibit its assignment and is for the duration of our use of attractions themed around Marvel characters.”Video Games
THQ: Multi-year deal signed in May 2008 for Marvel Super Hero Squad.
Activision: Deal signed Nov 2005 and goes through 2017 for Spider Man and X-Men
Sega: Multi-year deal signed in April 2007 for Captain America, Hulk, Thor and Iron ManToys
Hasbro 10K: “Subsequent to December 28, 2008, the Company entered into an agreement with Marvel that resulted in the extension of the current agreement from the end of 2011 through the end of 2017.”
Loading ...
This is kind of like buying a great building in a great location but having to wait until all the tenants leases expire so you can move in and renovate the whole thing to your liking.
Seems to me only two outcomes happen here:
Either
1. Disney stock falls once Wall Street figures out that Disney has not purchased NEARLY as much as one would have thought this time yesterday
or
2. Disney puts out more money and settles with the other studios (at least Universal) for a large amount of money to get this brand more under their control. Universal is chest thumping just to show how strong their negotiating position is.
They WILL negotiate, however. They’re not so heavily invested that it would make sense to hold on to these characters when they could be so liquidated in a profitable manner.
GE will negotiate. It’s not like they have much choice in their P/L. After all it is Disney that made a play for Marvel while Universal outright rejected it…And is now trapped by the House of Mouse.
I wouldn’t be surprised if Disney starts pressuring Marvel to develop some of their currently-lesser-known characters into major players and play down some of their “stars” for awhile.
Which actor starred as The Incredible Hulk?
a) Bill Bixby
b) Eric Bana
c) both
Answer: Bixby, who plays both David Banner, M.D. and
The Incredible Hulk in a dual role on the 1979-1982
CBS sci-fi psychological thriller of the same title, produced by Universal Media Studios.
d) Neither. Bill Bixby played David Bruce Banner, while Lou Ferigno played The Hulk. Eric Bana simply played “The Hulk” in C.G. form, with no prefix. Ed Norton was “Incredible” in C.G.I. form. ‘Nuff said!
Actually it’s not ’nuff said, as Ang Lee used himself, and not Eric Bana, for the mocapping in (the stinker that is) ‘Hulk’. He is uncredited for this in the IMDB, but there is plenty of material about the making of it, including video of him discussing and performing it.
That’s one thing.
Another is that you incompletely corrected him on Dr. Banner’s name. In the 70-80’s TV series he is known as Dr. David Bruce Banner (though he was generally only referred to as Dr. David Banner), yet in both modern live action feature films, he is simply known as Dr. Bruce Banner.
Which conveniently brings me to the correct answer; that it was Max Ferguson who played The Incredible Hulk, and Paul Soles who played Dr. Bruce Banner, in the 60’s animated TV series, Hulk. I’ve not seen this series BTW, but if the Spider-Man cartoon from the same period is anything to go by, I can believe it when others call this one a stinker. Those who’ve seen both generally say that the 80’s cartoon ‘The Incredible Hulk’ is far better.
So remember folks, Hulk bad, Incredible Hulk good.
Disney will never really benefit from this arrangement, as any comic book fan will tell you, that if Fox really gets strict about the X-Men property – Disney has nothing. As nearly any Marvel Character worth its weight in gold was an X-Man. Additionally, Paramount can claim something similar with the Avengers, as the rest of the cool characters were Avengers. So really, what did Disney buy? Looks like smoke and mirrors.
A lot of you still seem to be missing the fact that even if these other companies continue to control rights to things, Disney is still getting the Marvel share of those profits and they don’t have to invest future capital in making them happen. It’s in the other studios’ best interests for the properties to do well while they’re working with them so Disney is just sitting back and making the cash… Sure, they could make a lot more if they could fully capitalize on everything in the way that only Disney can but it isn’t like they’re being cheated out of anything. The money will still roll in, even if they actively did nothing for the next half decade.