Disney in talks to buy Fox studio assets..

To be blunt— critical acclaim and more sophisticated audiences, yes— but the not the mainstream, mass market theater goers. It’s mostly a question of marketing.
If the concern is less work, how does appealing to a smaller elite audience help that situation at all?
 
It just pisses me off that films like Reanimator, Bobbi Jo and the Outlaw, and They Saved Hitler's Brain are treated with more respect than original Star Wars. If these films and others can have restored hi res releases and be profitable than so can the OOT.
 
The difference is (to a studio bean counter) that those movies are one of a kind cult classics and aren’t readily available. ANH is readily available technically.
 
Problem is the fans who want this can't even decide which version to remaster. And your feeling about GL aren't shared by the management and employees at Lucasfilm.
I bet you anything if management at Disney KNEW that the blu ray release of the OT would make them a significant amount of money to make a dent in that 4 billion they spent, they wouldnt give a **** what George Lucas thought. Thats only going to last so long. And when GL dies? Oh man. Gloves are going to be off. I cant wait. And how do you know that they arent? At least some what?

- - - Updated - - -

So let's say it could cost $5-$10M to do the work, create the product, market it, etc. And let's say they can sell $20M gross. Sure it's profitable but it's a rounding error on Disney's balance sheet and at what cost? GL's reputation would take a hit and what about all the artists and creators out there who now feel their work is never really their own to have creative control over? It's bad PR to that community and Disney needs them. And this goes beyond KK's tenure.
I bet you Red Tails took a hit to GL's "reputation" more than a 4k Blu Ray release of the OT would.
 
Hey hey. Let's not poop on Reanimator. One thing to consider is that those schlock films (and practically most other films) haven't spawned successful global franchises, which generate innumerable priorities. Specifically, Disney probably prioritizes generating new content from their ownership of Star Wars. These priorities alone could keep them busy for a long time. However, a smaller movie doesn't possess the ability to franchise itself into wildly successful new content, and thus its owners only see one priority: how to re-sell the same movie repeatedly.

It just pisses me off that films like Reanimator, Bobbi Jo and the Outlaw, and They Saved Hitler's Brain are treated with more respect than original Star Wars. If these films and others can have restored hi res releases and be profitable than so can the OOT.
 
Last edited:
You make some some interesting points. However, consider that KatKen may be incentivized to leave her own legacy on Lucasfilms. Establishing your own legacy is generally based on creating your own original work and not altering/ revising/ rehashing an existing work (with some exceptions like Warhol). Presiding over a new movie each year, an existing tv series and other potential new content probably requires more time than KatKen already has. So maybe she'd like to release the original OT, but I'm sure she is much more focused at the moment on building up a legacy first.

Even so, KatKen has stated that she'd like to leave Lucas' intended vision alone. Leaving Lucas out of the creative process for the new movies is a different matter from tampering with his vision of works that have already been created and established. Remember, he appointed her and is good friends with her.

In addition, what if releasing the OT unaltered in HD would generate a billion dollars? Disney would still analyze this amount by comparing it to the amount of future profits generated from new content, which would be multiples higher. Why? Because new content allows Disney to control the demographic of new fans. Generating new fans fuel future Star Wars projects.


I'd love to see 4K versions of the OT without the new material. However, I'm skeptical based on the information that we have on hand. I bet the unaltered version will be released some day. However I believe that it won't be anytime soon.

I bet you anything if management at Disney KNEW that the blu ray release of the OT would make them a significant amount of money to make a dent in that 4 billion they spent, they wouldnt give a **** what George Lucas thought. Thats only going to last so long. And when GL dies? Oh man. Gloves are going to be off. I cant wait. And how do you know that they arent? At least some what?

- - - Updated - - -

I bet you Red Tails took a hit to GL's "reputation" more than a 4k Blu Ray release of the OT would.
 
Last edited:
It just pisses me off that films like Reanimator, Bobbi Jo and the Outlaw, and They Saved Hitler's Brain are treated with more respect than original Star Wars. If these films and others can have restored hi res releases and be profitable than so can the OOT.

WOAH WOAH WOAH, Reanimator is a masterpiece! (I own the BR myself!)
 
You make some some interesting points. However, consider that KatKen may be incentivized to leave her own legacy on Lucasfilms. Establishing your own legacy is generally based on creating your own original work and not altering/ revising/ rehashing an existing work (with some exceptions like Warhol). Presiding over a new movie each year, an existing tv series and other potential new content probably requires more time than KatKen already has. So maybe she'd like to release the original OT, but I'm sure she is much more focused at the moment on building up a legacy first.

Even so, KatKen has stated that she'd like to leave Lucas' intended vision alone. Leaving Lucas out of the creative process for the new movies is a different matter from tampering with his vision of works that have already been created and established. Remember, he appointed her and is good friends with her.

In addition, what if releasing the OT unaltered in HD would generate a billion dollars? Disney would still analyze this amount by comparing it to the amount of future profits generated from new content, which would be multiples higher. Why? Because new content allows Disney to control the demographic of new fans. Generating new fans fuel future Star Wars projects.


I'd love to see 4K versions of the OT without the new material. However, I'm skeptical based on the information that we have on hand. I bet the unaltered version will be released some day. However I believe that it won't be anytime soon.
While I totally agree with you regarding the new content/creative control, the OT is already made, and done. All they have to do is make the scans available in 4k. Seems like a win win to me, but I understand what youre saying. But like I mentioned, when GL kicks the bucket, who knows what they will do.
 
It's considered slow and quaint, but old movies still sell, and sell fairly well in some cases. I hear you, but I simply can't believe there's no market. Go on blu-ray.com and check out the old stuff that gets the high def treatment week after week. I KNOW in many minds the OT IS available, but I teach high school and I can tell you plenty young nerds are aware Han shot first.

I have to believe this lol.

I AM concerned about the "respecting Lucas' wishes" though. That seems like a bigger potential issue.

Except Han didn't shoot first.

Han was the only one who shot ;)
 
Yeah, I agree with you that when George Lucas passes on someday, releasing the unaltered OT is fair game.

While I totally agree with you regarding the new content/creative control, the OT is already made, and done. All they have to do is make the scans available in 4k. Seems like a win win to me, but I understand what youre saying. But like I mentioned, when GL kicks the bucket, who knows what they will do.
 
I've seen a LOT of really obscure crap on bluray. Disney absolutely would be able to profit from the OOT. They can charge boutique prices and get away with it too.

I know that's not Disney's main concern in this purchase, but it's the only issue I care about.

I mean, yeah, they could profit, sort of, but you have to also consider their operations as a question of scale. I'm guessing here, but I'd bet that Disney either owns or has deals in place with disc manufacturers. If they have requirements of doing disc runs of a particular size or range, then doing a "boutique" version might be more trouble than it's worth. I mean, I want it to happen, but there are other considerations at play here. In some cases, the big producer doesn't actually turn a profit by doing a small run, if that makes sense.

LOL-- I said I didn't want to go back to this argument. I'd change my tune if I could see some market research numbers, but at this point in Star Wars history both the OR ANH and the SE version have existed for 20 years. The SE is the more current version, and long since considered "official" by Lucasfilm, Fox and Disney. If you go the looking, the ONLY people who want an unaltered release are old Star Wars fans like us. They are focused on making new content, not doing what Lucas did which was repackage the OT every few years. They've put their money into the future of the franchise, not the past. Until I see some real polls or market research done OUTSIDE of fandom, I just don't see the numbers as there.

And yeah, the point about them honoring Lucas' wishes, is a pretty big one as long as Kathy is in control.

This is my point. Sadly. I think the average consumer -- who far outnumbers us fans -- doesn't care. OOT? SE? Whatever. they just want Star Wars. And they already have it on blu-ray, and possibly in their basement on DVD and VHS. And Disney is more concerned about promoting the new stuff to reach new audiences. In a way, the window for the OT is closing because, after this new trilogy is done, after the few "origin" stories come out (e.g. "Solo" "Kenobi" "Whomever"), there's going to be less connection in the franchise to the OT. The less of a connection there is, the less people will view "OT = Star Wars." Even now, a lot of kids believe "PT = Star Wars." I've actually had discussions with people who believe that the PT/Clone Wars is the real Star Wars, and that the OT era is just a pale comparison. They cite the wide range of technology, the scope of the war, etc. Most of them grew up on the Clone Wars cartoon and the prequels all being "current." The OT was 20+ years old at that point.

Look, the OT has some great films, guys, but kids don't watch old movies these days. That's just not a thing they do. So, the OT is losing its connection to Star Wars other than as sort of an afterthought for a lot of fans. The kids who are growing up with TFA and such, for them, Star Wars is going to be this massive, sprawling universe, full of stories. And sure, it has its origin in the OT, but...eh, whatever. They like [insert movie here] better. Disney knows this. That's why there's a limited period where the OT is going to really be at its most profitable, and that window closes a little more each day.

So let's say it could cost $5-$10M to do the work, create the product, market it, etc. And let's say they can sell $20M gross. Sure it's profitable but it's a rounding error on Disney's balance sheet and at what cost? GL's reputation would take a hit and what about all the artists and creators out there who now feel their work is never really their own to have creative control over? It's bad PR to that community and Disney needs them. And this goes beyond KK's tenure.

I think there's a way to do this that could work, but it's still tricky. Basically, they release an "archival" version of it. Kind of like the "bonus" discs with the 2006 repackaging. The Lucas remix from 2012 is still the "official" one, but the "archival" version is made available, too. That could still respect Lucas' legacy, while making the product available. The one other way to do it...is get Lucas' buy-in. Basically have him officially "endorse" this version as an archival view of his earlier vision, maybe include it alongside the '97 and '04 editions for comparison, and put the whole thing out for those who dig film history. Restore what you can to do it, put it all out there, and have Lucas put his stamp of approval on it. Again all under the aegis of preserving film history. 2012 is still the "official" version for canon purposes, but the rest are available to study/view. I would bet that if Kennedy got Lucas' blessing, she'd be fine with it.

Once you sell your work and it's rights, it's no longer yours to control. Not sure how his reputation takes a hit, either. No one is removing his tweaked versions, they're just offering the original version in a much better format than it is currently available in. Plus, If it survived the prequels, this is a barely a drop in the bucket.

You also have George's own statements about preserving films as they were as well.

The difference is (to a studio bean counter) that those movies are one of a kind cult classics and aren’t readily available. ANH is readily available technically.

Right. Everyone who wants a copy already has one. Everyone who didn't want one, either doesn't...or they have a fan edit.

Yeah, I agree with you that when George Lucas passes on someday, releasing the unaltered OT is fair game.

I don't think that'd happen. I mean, not if the reluctance is "We don't want to besmirch his legacy and we want to preserve his vision."
 
I really dont think the reluctance has anything to do with George Lucas at all. If anything, they already "besmirched his vision" by making TFA and TLJ. You could say at least.
 
I have no idea what you’re asking.
You made an issue with this merger meaning less work. When presented with the solution of Netflix/Amazon you made an issue with the lack of critical recognition. Critics and "sophisticates" form a small audience. Money comes from the mainstream, which watches Netflix and Amazon, etc.

It seems to me that trying to appeal to a limited audience, instead of the mainstream, compounds the problem of content creation due to a smaller level of support from the smaller audience.
 
You made an issue with this merger meaning less work. When presented with the solution of Netflix/Amazon you made an issue with the lack of critical recognition. Critics and "sophisticates" form a small audience. Money comes from the mainstream, which watches Netflix and Amazon, etc.

It seems to me that trying to appeal to a limited audience, instead of the mainstream, compounds the problem of content creation due to a smaller level of support from the smaller audience.

Gotcha--

Here's a little more clarity.

You're seeing it as a one to one sort of equation. Lose Fox, but Netflix and Amazon are gaining strength. But that comparison is apples and oranges.

First, the way most big studios are arranged is that they rely on smaller production companies and big name producers to bring them content to produce. Fox proper has made very few films within the auspices of their own development. Off the top of my head, I can think of Singer's Bad Hat Harry, Kinberg's Genre, and New Regency all being there on the lot-- along with at least a dozen other production companies and a handful of big time producers (like Mike De Luca). Some on the lot, some not-- but all have either first-look or overall deals with Fox. They bring content to Fox, and Fox will produce it if the package looks good.

In some cases, like with Genre and Bad Hat Harry, the ProCo's rep and track record is good enough that the studio will hand over some of their IP-- as in the case of both of those two companies working on the X-Men franchise, for example.

Now, say you're a writer pitching a spec script. You go out and take meetings and try to get a production company to option, buy, and/or package your script. On your journey you could go to the Fox lot half a dozen times and meet with completely different entities all working with a deal with Fox. These companies operate independently, and the Fox board above them lets them know if any competing projects come up.

For example, say Kinberg's Genre and New Regency both have interest in picking up scripts about a giant meteor headed for Earth. Fox's development VPs can say to one of the companies, "No, we've got one of those in the works" if one project is further along than the other. Say you are writing that script-- New Regency comes back to you and says there's already a similar property in development at Fox. When they say "At Fox" the mean "with a production companies Fox has a deal with."

As a screenwriter, you can still take that script out to any other production company you like-- but now you know no one with a Fox deal will touch it. But you could find a home for it with another ProCo that decides they like your script so much they are going to push it through quick to beat the other one to market. You still have a chance with your script-- just not back at Fox. Once one studio can no longer do the project, you've actually cutting out many individual potential buyers for your script. Not ONE, but MANY.

I don't claim to know the details of the Disney/Fox deal-- but when you are shopping a script, you have tens upon tens of potential options. When I say Fox and Disney becoming one means less opportunity for original content, I'm referring to this process. I don't know off hand how many production companies have overall or first look deals with Fox, but it's a lot. Disney does the exact same thing-- all studios do. So if there can now be no competing projects between Fox and Disney, and all of their subsidiaries, and individual deals with producers, you're killing off a very large chunk of potential homes for new content. (I don't know if this is for sure happening, hopefully I am wrong).

And keep in mind a "competing project" could be two movies that are completely different, but both of them have a magic pocket watch. A studio head will say, "We don't need two magic pocket watch movies" even if one is a Victorian Mystery and the other is an outer space adventure.

Losing Fox doesn't mean losing just one studio as a content developer-- it means losing several dozen.

Netflix and Amazon are all in one shops, mini studios with their own distribution platform. They don't do what studios do and have deals with multiple sources. They do one of two things: acquire finished products, or producer their own from the ground up. No one has overall deals with these companies. They either buy or fund/produce concepts on a per project basis.

And what I meant about them in the feature space is that while they make features, they are predominantly known for TV style content. They are both pushing, and gaining some traction, but their features do not have the same level of success their shows do, outside of critically acclaimed / high brow entertainment.

Their numbers certainly can compete with TV numbers, but not with theatrical box office takes... not yet. It will shift, but they aren't there yet.
 
This thread is more than 5 years old.

Your message may be considered spam for the following reasons:

  1. This thread hasn't been active in some time. A new post in this thread might not contribute constructively to this discussion after so long.
If you wish to reply despite these issues, check the box below before replying.
Be aware that malicious compliance may result in more severe penalties.
Back
Top