Walt Disney Co. To Acquire Marvel Entertainment For $4B

Spider-Man Soon Part Of Disney Family
Walt Disney Co. To Acquire Marvel Entertainment For $4B

LOS ANGELES -- The Walt Disney Co. said on Monday that it is acquiring Marvel Entertainment Inc. for $4 billion in cash and stock, bringing characters like Iron Man and Spider-Man into the family of Mickey Mouse and WALL-E.

Under the deal, Disney will acquire ownership of 5,000 Marvel characters. Many of them, including favorites such as the Fantastic Four and the X-Men, were co-created by the comic book legend Stan Lee.

Disney said Marvel shareholders will receive $30 per share in cash, plus 0.745 Disney shares for every Marvel share they own. That values each Marvel share at $50 based on Friday's closing stock prices.

Marvel shares jumped $10.09, or 26 percent, to $48.74 in trading before the market opened. Disney shares fell 70 cents, or 2.6 percent, to $26.14.

http://www.clickorlando.com/entertainment/20645715/detail.html

FUCK YOU DISNEY. YOU CANIDIFIED VERSION OF SOMEONE ELSE'S DOPED UP SACCHARINE SWEET CHILDHOOD.

What a crock. :(

Can't wait to see all the rides they come up with...

Uncle Ben/Gwendy never died and Peter never felt guilty. He's just a good kid that's all!!!
David Banner just can't stop the Hulk from eating Disney Brand Fruit Pies! Oh how can he stop that wacky monster inside?!?!?!
The mutants are rescued from Genocide by Angela Lansbury singing made up spells on a fucking flying broomstick.
The Punisher learns to smile with a singing/dancing dragon that only he can see.

and SheHulk, Storm, and the Scarlet Witch are now TEH PRINCESSES!!! PUT ON TEH GOWNS CUZ YER SPESHUL!!!

And get her own Marvel Comic.

...oooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!!

Marvel and Disney do not mix.

Nice while it lasted, tho.

Universal Studios, a major Disney competitor, has a huge Spiderman attraction.

Disney actually made some of the best comics ever in their heyday. The comic industry is hurting as a whole. No doubt Disney wants the characters for licensing, I hope they have the deep pockets to keep the comics a float long enough to transition Marvel into a better business format.

and buying up anything they can (e.g. the Muppets) because it competes with their target audience.

Honestly, what was the last time you saw a truly Original Disney movie (Save Wall-E which is Pixtar who have their own problems with the parent company) I cannot.

Comics are doing fine enough. Plenty of competition and even a significant renaissance in the past 20 years.

Since John Lasseter's appeared on the scene, the quality of their work has improved considerably. UP was brilliant.

Although I somewhat liked it she did not. Good...but not brilliant. Once again Pixtar.

Coraline was brilliant.

just like online music sunk into CD sales, online comics have hurt actual paper comics sales. You can illegally download new books as soon as they come out, plus you can basically illegally download any back issue. As the cost of paper generates higher and higher book prices, people have move to buying fewer titles. Comic books were not a high profit industry to begin with. The characters remain very valuable, the books themselves have fallen off their high points 20-30 years ago when DC and Marvel had basically all the industries best talent and you could pick up a title for less than a buck. Neither DC or Marvel are exactly cranking out great comics across the board at this point.

Yeah Disney movies are crap but those Punisher Marvel movies, those were masterpieces.:eyes:

The punisher movies were crap. Ironman was not.

This is death for Marvel.

Death.

Waving to the kiddies.

The look "menacing" and shoot sparklers out of their fingertips. That's how I see Magneto in the Disney Electro-Magnetic parade.

Oh, Marvel...your product is trash, and I'm not going to pay $12 to see a Hulk movie that is a remake of another Hulk movie from 2003... :hi:

The two Hulk movies were extremely different, although neither was very good.

Iron Man, the first two X-Men, the first two Spider-Mans, and the two new Batman films were all excellent. I also thought Watchmen was brilliant, if much too sophisticated for the average action movie goer.

"The two Hulk movies were extremely different, although neither was very good."

And neither one was 1/2 as good as the Lou Ferigno TV version, which was childish and melodramatic in the first place.

Way to think for yourself, Forrest.

BTW, Nobody Cares About Your Opinion of How Post Titles are Capitalized.

You're certainly free to look down on any movie you wish, but unless you've actually SEEN it, your opinion is pretty much worthless, and you come off as little more than a know-nothing blowhard.

is that Marvel was licensing it's characters and stories to other studios. hence the suckage of the Spiderman and Daredevil movies.

they made the Iron Man and Hulk 2.0 movies themselves.

the second hulk was definitely superior to the Ang Lee "Monster Poodle" version. but ultimately, the Hulk is not a character worthy of 1 movie, let alone 2.

bring on the Thor movie, and get Tim Burton to make Dr. Strange.

are so much less compelling than what Jim Henson was doing 30 years ago with puppets. I think it may be the "uncanny valley" effect, but the snippets of "reboot" Hulk (2008) that I caught on HBO were pathetic, with the leading lady delivering lines vacantly into a green screen...

They're generally acknowledged to be among the best superhero movies ever made, Spider-Man 3 notwithstanding. Daredevil, though, was, in fact, a pile of shit.

More interested in the Hulk than I am in Thor, but I have no doubt that Thor will make a better movie, if only because the Hulk sucked so bad. Not sure Tim Burton would do a good job with Dr. Strange: his movies always have a twinge of camp in them. I'd much rather see Guillermo Del Toro take a stab at Strange.

isn't a large category. too much aunt may, not enough webslinging.

agreed on del toro.

too much human interest.

Great. Spiderman will be dropping by the booth on Monday Night Football.

Disney is a company for the young and the young at heart. Unfortunately, it's kinda thin on product for people in the age bracket between the time when they ARE kids and when they HAVE them--the critical 18-25 demographic every marketer craves. They also have no action heroes--a popular category--and they can't create any without also creating a new brand for them to work under since action heroes get into fights and you can't have a "Disney" movie with fighting in it.

Marvel specifically targets the gap in Disney's strategic plan; their books and movies are made so 18-year-old comic book geeks will like them.

Disney's Parks division will also benefit: Marvel by itself couldn't open a Marvelland because they don't know shit about running parks, but Disney could go into a tourist area that isn't already overrun with parks--maybe Dallas?--set up Marvelland and do pretty well.

There's always the danger Disney will dilute Marvel to the point you won't want their product, but I don't think they will--they know Marvel readers don't want to see Disney or Pixar characters interacting with Marvel characters.

it started out as just one of several publishing properties owned by Marvin Goodman. It later was sold to, among others, New World Entertainment. At various points in its history, it purchased an animation studio, a book distributor, Fleer (the trading card company), and a toy company. Marvel managed to land itself in bankruptcy in the mid-1990s and while it pulled itself out, I would imagine that Stan Lee would have less than completely nice things to say about the current management, whom he sued claiming that they were cheating him out of royalties from the Spiderman movies.

Could have been DC.

It's a new channel geared more towards boys between the ages of 11-15. This kind of works to their advantage.

I'm done.

I've got visions in my head of what went on with the game Kingdom Hearts and the pod people video game characters therein. :argh:

let's see how this shakes out...


:shrug: