Well, he hasn't really done anything good besides being Jon Snow, so it's hard to tell. He was funny on SNL, so that's good I guess?
Marvel Cinematic Universe
- Thread starter Triggermv
- Start date
https://comicbook.com/movies/2019/08/26/disney-confirms-disney-plus-no-r-rated-content/
Disney has confirmed that there will be nothing higher than PG-13 available on their Disney+ streaming service. I love how the journalist then says "I wonder if this will be their weakness that other streaming services can exploit" No, to me this isn't a big deal since this is a big reason for both Disney's purchase of Hulu, as well as offering the bundling option with Hulu. Its called brand management, and even bundled with Hulu, Disney is offering a lower price point than Netflix. I'm not surprised in the least Disney chose to go this route.
Disney has confirmed that there will be nothing higher than PG-13 available on their Disney+ streaming service. I love how the journalist then says "I wonder if this will be their weakness that other streaming services can exploit" No, to me this isn't a big deal since this is a big reason for both Disney's purchase of Hulu, as well as offering the bundling option with Hulu. Its called brand management, and even bundled with Hulu, Disney is offering a lower price point than Netflix. I'm not surprised in the least Disney chose to go this route.
CycloneErik
Well-Known Member
I'd choose Spider-Man twice a day and four times on Sunday.
I suppose I am a bit of a Scrooge. When I was young, my oldest brother collected comic books, my second oldest brother collected baseball cards, I collected some of both, and then when my mother was giving away these things, both these brothers got all the baseball cards and the comic books, and I got nothing. It is enough to make you a bitter old man.
Another issue going forward as far as mass market appeal for their products: these movie companies are moving all their inventory under their own roof. Disney is planning on pulling Marvel films off of basic cable and Netflix so that they can host them on their own pay service. That is going to dramatically affect the amount of interest generated by the casual viewer who develops an interest by catching the older films of a continuing series when they see them on TNT or whatever, and enjoys them enough to catch themselves up in order to buy an in-theater experience when it is available.
This streaming thing is not going to be all it's cracked up to be. It's great if you have reliable, marketable IP, but in terms of generating more going forward I can see it becoming a problem.
This streaming thing is not going to be all it's cracked up to be. It's great if you have reliable, marketable IP, but in terms of generating more going forward I can see it becoming a problem.
Last edited:
I see where you are coming from, but while Disney is planning on eventually pulling all their content from other streaming services, I haven't heard about them pulling their content from cable companies. I don't think that is the case, at least for now. At the same time, eyeballs on traditional cable are dropping exponentially by the day. Disney is clearly making a play for the future by making some sacrifices in the near-term to be a major player in the long term. This can be seen with their price point they are coming in with as well, which by the way, won't stay down there for long. Ultimately, Disney isn't playing to be a little bit visible everywhere, but rather to become a top two streaming service with monthly dues, in a future world that is likely led by 4-5 top-level streaming services. Also, nobody owns IP and content like Disney and Disney owns over half the box office anymore. With that, they are banking on people coming to them, and with the purchase of Fox, Hulu, and their ownership of ESPN, they own pretty much every quadrant now of what people want.
Mark my words, Disney will be at least #2 on the streaming pecking order in the future, and maybe even surpass Netflix to be #1. Netflix is pretty vulnerable right now with studios pulling their IP off them like hot cakes. Unlike a Disney or Warner Bros, Netflix doesn't have 100 years worth of IP and content, but rather more like 10 years at best. In fact, when all of this ends up shaking out, I'm predicting in 10 years, Netflix will drop to #3 on the list behind both Disney and Warner Bros streaming service (combined with HBO). Warner Bros just needs to also roll their DC streaming service in with their main one, which I think they eventually will. Content is king right now and those two studios own the vast vast majority of it. To me, Netflix needs to buy one of these studios with existing IP like Sony to keep up.
Last edited:
Looks like Disney is test-screening New Mutants. Perhaps getting it ready to launch on Disney+ in November?
https://mcucosmic.com/2019/08/27/marvel-has-plans-for-miss-america-in-the-future/
According to this report, Marvel has future plans to introduce Miss America in some type of future installment. Personally, I know nothing about this character and with all these announcements for new future Marvel superheroes (Ms Marvel, She-Hulk, Moon Knight, Blade, The Eternals, Shang-Chi... etc.), I'm starting to become slightly concerned about them going too crazy on new characters, knowing fully well that both Fantastic Four and X-Men are in the pipeline. I get it that Marvel Studios is intentionally trying to diversify themselves away from having a majority white dudes lineup, but there is also plenty of diversity to be found both in Fantastic Four and the X-Men. For instance, if I had the option for Marvel Studios to focus more on a solo Miss America versus a solo Sue Storm story, give me a solo Sue Storm every day of the week. The roster for X-Men is diverse and deep. Lets also not step too much over our latest round of new characters like Doctor Strange, Captain Marvel, Wasp, and Black Panther just to add as many new ones as possible either. I really want all of them to have their due as well.
According to this report, Marvel has future plans to introduce Miss America in some type of future installment. Personally, I know nothing about this character and with all these announcements for new future Marvel superheroes (Ms Marvel, She-Hulk, Moon Knight, Blade, The Eternals, Shang-Chi... etc.), I'm starting to become slightly concerned about them going too crazy on new characters, knowing fully well that both Fantastic Four and X-Men are in the pipeline. I get it that Marvel Studios is intentionally trying to diversify themselves away from having a majority white dudes lineup, but there is also plenty of diversity to be found both in Fantastic Four and the X-Men. For instance, if I had the option for Marvel Studios to focus more on a solo Miss America versus a solo Sue Storm story, give me a solo Sue Storm every day of the week. The roster for X-Men is diverse and deep. Lets also not step too much over our latest round of new characters like Doctor Strange, Captain Marvel, Wasp, and Black Panther just to add as many new ones as possible either. I really want all of them to have their due as well.
I've seen him in a few other things and he was not good. It was likely a combination of script, dialogue and him.
He should be able to pull off the medieval Black Knight vibe ok since it's in his wheelhouse, but I'm not a huge fan of his dialogue delivery. He was never really asked to do much besides brood and fight in GOT. He can be funny in the right scenario, but he's not going to wow you with his acting ability.
Kevin Feige also announced that the first LGBTQ marvel hero will be introduced in The Eternals. Tessa Thompson's Valkyrie is technically the first LGBTQ hero, but that relationship won't be explored until Thor: Love and Thunder. Feige said "he" when discussing this hero in the Eternals, so it could be Richard Madden, Kit Harrington (I missed that casting announcement), Brian Tyree Henry, Ma-Dong Seok, or Kumail Nanjiani.
https://io9.gizmodo.com/valkyrie-wont-be-the-first-lgbtq-character-in-the-marve-1837595363
https://io9.gizmodo.com/valkyrie-wont-be-the-first-lgbtq-character-in-the-marve-1837595363
https://lifehacker.com/how-to-preorder-disney-plus-for-less-than-4-a-month-1837621368
Here is a crazy good deal to lock in Disney+ to anyone interested for 3 years at only $3.94/month
($140.97 total). This was a deal on Disney+ originally offered only for people who attended the D23 event in Anaheim this past week. Now, for a very short limited time, it is offered to anyone who signs up for any D23 account, even the free one. I did it and already and it worked well, but you've got to sign up for your D23 account by September 1st to have access to the deal, so you need to move fast. There was so much interest in this deal when it first launched that it crashed the D23 servers for a day almost.
Here is a crazy good deal to lock in Disney+ to anyone interested for 3 years at only $3.94/month
($140.97 total). This was a deal on Disney+ originally offered only for people who attended the D23 event in Anaheim this past week. Now, for a very short limited time, it is offered to anyone who signs up for any D23 account, even the free one. I did it and already and it worked well, but you've got to sign up for your D23 account by September 1st to have access to the deal, so you need to move fast. There was so much interest in this deal when it first launched that it crashed the D23 servers for a day almost.
Having the next Black Panther, Guardians, and Captain Marvel movies be 3 plus years down the road seems stupid.
There I said it.
There I said it.
CycloneErik
Well-Known Member
I agree. I expected the bubble to pop, but the movies they announced might deflate it through some apathy.
Signed up for D23 account around this time yesterday. Haven’t gotten the email yet - Lifehacker says it may take up to 36 hours to get the email. I’ll definitely sign up, assuming I can in time.
Edit: Nevermind, glad I signed in again. I was able to go through the steps and sign-up. I don't know if I'm really going to save much $ over time, as I already subscribe to Hulu and plan on getting ESPN+ once they start playing ISU content next year. That bundle is priced at $12.99/mo which is better pricing than this offer is. But oh well, too late now.
Last edited:
I can't remember when I got the email, but I signed up the minute mine showed up on my account. However, it wasn't until the next day that it showed up. You should check as it showed as an offer available on my account before I got the email on it.
Yeah, I see where you are coming from. For me, this 3-year offer is the way to go as both Hulu and ESPN+ are seasonal services for me where there is only a need to jump in for a month or two here and there each year. For ESPN+, with the 3rd-tier upcoming Big 12 changes, I see it shimmying into Cyclone.tvs place on a non-conference basketball season jump-in, jump-out basis. You also need to keep in mind that the bundle pricing you are referring to is only offered to included Hulu with ads, not Hulu without ads. From everything I've seen, I don't think there will be a Hulu without ads bundling option.
Yes. Check your account. I signed up yesterday, have not gotten an email about it yet but the offer is in my account.
