|
Post by rexrumbler on Mar 11, 2012 12:33:32 GMT -5
ok, most of us agree that tremors should never be made by universal and that stampede should have just kept the sieries. but what if stampede had sold it to disney? would it be better or worse?
|
|
|
Post by project412 on Mar 12, 2012 14:01:30 GMT -5
Tremors is made by Stampede. Its just distributed and funded by Universal. So basically, Universal determines whether there can or can't be a movie, and then Stampede makes it.
Had Tremors been made under Disney rather than Universal, it probably would have been the same as it is now. Disney has affiliate companies that they use to release move violent films. Tremors probably just would have been distributed under one of those studios rather than under the Disney brand, and would still have been made by Stampede Entertainment.
|
|
|
Post by buckmana on Feb 24, 2013 2:21:50 GMT -5
I'd say no.
It's a long and involved story, but generally, everything Disney touches turns to ashes.
I'm of the opinion the only reason they're surviving as a corporate entity is the royalties from Pixar Films. And well, now Star Wars as well, since they acquired that franchise.
|
|
|
Post by project412 on Feb 24, 2013 9:36:19 GMT -5
It's a long and involved story, but generally, everything Disney touches turns to ashes. Not true at all. Marvel (Iron Man, Hulk, Thor, Captain America, Avengers) is also owned by Disney, and they've been doing very well by them. Disney, financially, is not in any trouble at all. They own Marvel, Lucasfilm, Pixar, and the Muppets, and on top of that they have all of their own in-house films, TV stations, merchandise, and everything else under the sun.
|
|
|
Post by buckmana on Feb 24, 2013 17:13:24 GMT -5
Not true at all. Marvel (Iron Man, Hulk, Thor, Captain America, Avengers) is also owned by Disney, and they've been doing very well by them. Disney, financially, is not in any trouble at all. I don't know about Hulk, Thor, Captain America or the Avengers, since I gave up on the Marvel movies after seeing Iron Man 2. But being a moderate Iron Man expert, I know how well they butchered the franchise. I won't list all the ways they got it wrong, but suffice it to say, it was pretty messed up. Which was when I lost any hope in Marvel having good movies! And yes, finanicially, Disney is pretty well off, but their product quality is declining. I haven't watched a Disney cartoon series since the late 90s/early 2000. And every decent movie they put out so far is either officially or unofficially a Pixar production. The last one I saw wasn't officially identified as a Pixar movie, but when it got to the end, I recognized the names of several of the Pixar Braintrust (the founders of Pixar) in senior positions. Hence why I'm thinking Pixar is pretty much supporting Disney now.
|
|
|
Post by project412 on Feb 24, 2013 20:12:29 GMT -5
I'd say check the Marvel movies out; they are obviously not 100% accurate to the movies, but they don't have to be. Comic Books and Movies are entirely different forms of media; what works in one does not always work in the other.
But Disney has had plenty of well received movies lately outside of Marvel and Pixar. I just saw Wreck-It Ralph recently and thought it was excellent. Yes, its a 'kid's movie', but it had a lot of heart and was well written. Tron Legacy was another one that I really liked.
|
|
|
Post by buckmana on Feb 25, 2013 5:12:24 GMT -5
Yes. that is true, they were not 100% accurate.
However, something clearly changed recently.
The earlier movies (aroundabouts the 90s) I could believe that they were in keeping with the spirit of the comics.
However, some of the more recent ones, I don't feel that same sense of immersion.
It's like they're doing whatever the heck they want just because they want to.
I'm not an expert, but to me, that's not a good way to make a movie.
And Wreck-It Ralph was the "unofficial Pixar production" I referred to in my earlier post. That was quite a good movie. So it makes my point for me, it's technically a Pixar movie.
|
|