DVDizzy Forum

Well, this came out of the blue. I hope the deal doesn't go through. Fox doesn't fit with Disney's brand and image.

21st Century Fox has been holding talks to sell most of the company to Disney
https://www.cnbc.com/2017/11/06/21st-ce ... urces.html

If this means Anastasia can be a Disney Princess, I'm all for it. I think the main reason they're thinking of buying Fox though is so they can get the rights for the original Star Wars film. This and so that Marvel can get their hands on the X-Men and the Fantastic Four, as well as auxiliary characters like Doctor Doom, the Silver Surfer, and Galactus.

Well, we spoke too soon.

Disney Is Said to Explore Buying Fox Assets; Talks Now Dead
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... -cnbc-says

Ugh, that's a pity. I realized that if Disney had gone through with this deal, they would have gotten Avatar as well. I never realized that Fox owns so many properties that are associated with Disney (and arguably should be owned by them) like the original Star Wars, the X-Men, the Fantastic Four, Avatar, and even Anastasia.

Ha ha, I was about to post- they must really want those X-men!

I would have been glad as that would meant no more stupid X-Men/F4 embargo, but at the same time I dont think it would be such a good thing to have Disney owning even more properties.

After reading the article, I don't think it's necessarily completely set in stone yet. Maybe Disney-Fox didn't want reports of talks being let out so early so they're claiming this now. Also, I imagine a deal of this magnitude will take some time, so one or both sides might still be thinking it over.

unprincess wrote:Ha ha, I was about to post- they must really want those X-men!

I would have been glad as that would meant no more stupid X-Men/F4 embargo, but at the same time I dont think it would be such a good thing to have Disney owning even more properties.

Maybe Disney will just acquire the X-Men (and the original 1977 Star Wars).

willard wrote:

unprincess wrote:Ha ha, I was about to post- they must really want those X-men!

I would have been glad as that would meant no more stupid X-Men/F4 embargo, but at the same time I dont think it would be such a good thing to have Disney owning even more properties.

Maybe Disney will just acquire the X-Men (and the original 1977 Star Wars).

Those are two of Fox's biggest properties, if not the biggest. I don't think Fox would give those up unless they were completely bought by Disney.

Now I wonder if this was what Stan Lee was talking about some time back. He made a comment that Marvel was doing everything possible to get their hands on all their IPs again and at the time, he was mostly dismissed, but there might have been truth in it after all.

But Newscorp seems to want to get rid of all their entertainment property so maybe they'll sell X-Men and 77 Star Wars to Disney and their other properties to another company.

JeanGreyForever wrote:Ugh, that's a pity. I realized that if Disney had gone through with this deal, they would have gotten Avatar as well. I never realized that Fox owns so many properties that are associated with Disney (and arguably should be owned by them) like the original Star Wars, the X-Men, the Fantastic Four, Avatar, and even Anastasia.

A pity, are you kidding?! It's a blessing! I hope these talks are left alone. Disney is far too big as it is, but them buying up all or most of one of the other media giants should shake every free person to their core. What happens to things like free speech when only one or two power houses own all the speech? It's scary!

Also, this wasn't just about Marvel and Star Wars stuff Fox owns. Disney apparently was really interested in their studio lot in West LA. And then you start thinking about major IPs that Fox holds like Simpsons, Family Guy, Alien, Terminator, Diary of a Wimpy Kid, Ice Age, Planet of the Apes, Night at the Museum, etc. I don't personally see an up side to them owning all of that. Honestly, I wish they'd get rid of some of the stuff they control now. I would love to see them let go of things like Eek The Cat or The Muppets. It's not good for the industry if so many IP's are under one roof.

Sotiris wrote:Well, we spoke too soon.

Disney Is Said to Explore Buying Fox Assets; Talks Now Dead
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... -cnbc-says

I was pretty nervous for a while. I hope Disney doesn't acquire EVERYTHING Fox-owned, just maybe "Star Wars" and Marvel.

Thank God.

I'm glad nothing came out of the talks. Studios should be themselves for the most part.

I can't believe The Simpsons predicted this too! (season 10, episode 5)

But apparently Disney wants to expand their film library for that new streaming service they are staring. If they want to do that. I'd rather they buy the MGM/UA catalog, given the association they have had in the past.

JeanGreyForever wrote:If this means Anastasia can be a Disney Princess, I'm all for it.

Exactly! I was thinking about the same thing!

Despite that Disney did (fortunately) eventually stray away from making every of their heroines a Princess during the late nineties (heck, even Megara from Hercules was changed to a commoner, despite being an actual Princess in the myths), it would've been fair to state that the Princess trope would've been a reason for Disney to make Anastasia a couple of years ago. And yes, she would've definitively been included in the Princess lineup back then!

Now that being said, though Disney didn't rely on the fairy tale trope at the late nineties, it's remarkable that some of the Disney clones were actually built on stories that featured Princesses. What if Disney purchased the rights to Richard Rich's The Swan Princess?

Isn't one Anastasia enough?

DisneyFan09 wrote:

JeanGreyForever wrote:If this means Anastasia can be a Disney Princess, I'm all for it.

Exactly! I was thinking about the same thing!

Despite that Disney did (fortunately) eventually stray away from making every of their heroines a Princess during the late nineties (heck, even Megara from Hercules was changed to a commoner, despite being an actual Princess in the myths), it would've been fair to state that the Princess trope would've been a reason for Disney to make Anastasia a couple of years ago. And yes, she would've definitively been included in the Princess lineup back then!

Now that being said, though Disney didn't rely on the fairy tale trope at the late nineties, it's remarkable that some of the Disney clones were actually built on stories that featured Princesses. What if Disney purchased the rights to Richard Rich's The Swan Princess?

I always thought it was odd that they didn't try and label all the 90s girls as princesses in the movies. They didn't bother calling Pocahontas a princess until her sequel, although I know in promotion for the first film, she was always referred to as Disney's newest or most independent princess yet, as well as an Indian princess. Even Esmeralda in past Hunchback film adaptations was sometimes brought to a noble event by Phoebus and introduced as a Princess of the Gyptians. Not to mention, she was often made the adopted daughter of Clopin, King of the Gypsies, so it's strange that they didn't try and push that role for Esmeralda in the movie. Maybe they would have, if the film had been based on her rather than Quasimodo. And as you pointed out, Megara was an actual princess in mythology and even concept art shows her with what looks like a tiara/headdress in one image. I think they were afraid that with Hercules' many similarities to Aladdin already, making Megara a reluctant princess whose hand is offered to Hercules for saving Thebes from the many monsters plaguing it, would make her too much like Jasmine.

Anastasia will always be a Disney Princess for me. It certainly helps that all the 90s merchandise for her paralleled with what Snow White, Cinderella, Sleeping Beauty, Ariel, Belle, Jasmine, Pocahontas, and Esmeralda were getting at the time between dolls, costumes, figurines, music boxes, and even the Polly Pocket lockets and playsets.

I know Swan Lake was a potential project for Musker and Clements after The Little Mermaid and Aladdin, but they choose Hercules instead because they wanted to make a comic book style film which was the closest to their dream project of Treasure Planet. I don't know the exact timeline of when Richard Rich left Disney, but it's possible that this spurred him on to make the film himself. I don't think The Swan Princess film (nor its sequels) have the same quality as Disney's films (and Anastasia) but I was a big fan of the series when I was younger so I would have liked for Odette to be a Disney Princess back then. Now, I'd much rather Disney make a Swan Lake film with the original ballet music like they did with Sleeping Beauty and like how Barbie made their Swan Lake film.

I agree with milojthatch. I find the idea of Disney eating more and more companies disturbing more than anything else.

As far as Anastasia, I'm personally glad it's not a part of Disney. I like TSP more than that film, but I don't think it would fit alongside Disney's animated films either.

Elladorine wrote:Isn't one Anastasia enough?:milkbuds:

Hahahahaha! Funny I remember when I first heard about Anastasia, a friend of mine (who usually was always ahead of me with Disney's upcoming movies, since she had Internet at the time) told me that it was going to be Disney's next feature. So my thoughts were of course to Cinderella's stepsister, but at the time I didn't knew that the name was Russian. Of course that same friend told me afterwards that it was Don Bluth and 20th Century Fox who were behind it, but since Anastasia were one of the Disney clones, it's not strange that it was mistaken for a Disney feature, which James Berardinelli cites in his review for the film; http://www.reelviews.net/reelviews/anastasia). Even the big sister of a friend of mine were surprised when I told her that it wasn't Disney.

I always thought it was odd that they didn't try and label all the 90s girls as princesses in the movies.

I thought it was a breath of fresh air, hahahaha. I did in fact like Princesses and such as a kid, but I did find it satisfying that Disney didn't try to make every Disney heroine an actual Princess. Mainly because of the monotony of sticking to the mold. Certainly since I was a younger teen in the late nineties, I certainly appreciated it.

They didn't bother calling Pocahontas a princess until her sequel, although I know in promotion for the first film, she was always referred to as Disney's newest or most independent princess yet, as well as an Indian princess.

Really?

Even Esmeralda in past Hunchback film adaptations was sometimes brought to a noble event by Phoebus and introduced as a Princess of the Gyptians. Not to mention, she was often made the adopted daughter of Clopin, King of the Gypsies, so it's strange that they didn't try and push that role for Esmeralda in the movie. Maybe they would have, if the film had been based on her rather than Quasimodo. And as you pointed out, Megara was an actual princess in mythology and even concept art shows her with what looks like a tiara/headdress in one image. I think they were afraid that with Hercules' many similarities to Aladdin already, making Megara a reluctant princess whose hand is offered to Hercules for saving Thebes from the many monsters plaguing it, would make her too much like Jasmine.

The thing with Meg is that they made her too much of an anti-Princess; A snarky, cynical babe from screwball comedies. And she was a part of the modern, Americanized version with shortening her name to Meg.

I know Swan Lake was a potential project for Musker and Clements after The Little Mermaid and Aladdin, but they choose Hercules instead because they wanted to make a comic book style film which was the closest to their dream project of Treasure Planet. I don't know the exact timeline of when Richard Rich left Disney, but it's possible that this spurred him on to make the film himself. I don't think The Swan Princess film (nor its sequels) have the same quality as Disney's films (and Anastasia) but I was a big fan of the series when I was younger so I would have liked for Odette to be a Disney Princess back then. Now, I'd much rather Disney make a Swan Lake film with the original ballet music like they did with Sleeping Beauty and like how Barbie made their Swan Lake film.

I actually happen to like The Swan Princess even more as an adult and I actually consider it to be as good as Disney's best. And yes, I even prefer it to Anastasia, but I've ranted about this many times priorly. Swan Princess appeals to me just more and though it's far from perfect, I find the movie more compelling as a whole than Anastasia.