ANT-MAN & THE WASP QUANTUMANIA directed by Peyton Reed (2023) 11 11

[Bosco685]

On 3/9/2023 at 2:26 PM, media_junkie said:

Ok, but that is exactly what this is.  When you change the name of a book (comic or otherwise), or movie, or brand when it has used that same name for over 60 years, for no other reason than to be "open to all" you are straight up appeasing groups.

Seriously you can't see that?

That was not the compliance standards video played at the last Disney Social Marketing Meeting. This was.

"Funny that people call it 'The X-Men'. There's a lot of female superheroes in that X-Men group. So I think it's outdated!"

[jaybuck43]

On 3/9/2023 at 2:34 PM, drotto said:

Just like they are trying to change the works of Roald Dalh, the Goosebumps books, James Bond, etc.  People must realize are a part of history and a product of their time. To change them is violating what the author wanted.  Dalh in particular is on record and was vehemently against it.  Stein has apparently also come out against the changes. It is wrong and smacks of 1984.  If you change history, the only purpose is to erase it and control people's thoughts and views.  It limits creativity, and limits thought.  These people also must realize that by setting the president to change or erase things, that means it can happen to them, as society shifts.

 

I view this as the exact same thing if you change x-Men.

Would be awesome if people understood the real reason why companies are doing this.  New versions mean new copyright.  Which means that the publication has another 95 years of protection before it enters public domain.  2060 is only 37 years away.  The descendants of Mr. Dahl want to keep cashing checks.  So you put out a new edition that is then sold in stores and sold to schools.  THAT edition is now safe for another 95 years, and the cash keeps rolling in.  

[drotto]

On 3/9/2023 at 2:43 PM, jaybuck43 said:

Would be awesome if people understood the real reason why companies are doing this.  New versions mean new copyright.  Which means that the publication has another 95 years of protection before it enters public domain.  2060 is only 37 years away.  The descendants of Mr. Dahl want to keep cashing checks.  So you put out a new edition that is then sold in stores and sold to schools.  THAT edition is now safe for another 95 years, and the cash keeps rolling in.  

But public domain laws have a remakable almost uncanny knack of getting changed around the time a certain round ear Disney mascot is about to hit public use. It is the likeness, not the works developed around the character that in this case are public domain. The likeness and characteristics in theory can be used after that time, even if the original owner is still producing content.

 

I am not sure changing language in books counts as renewal of clock for public domain.  It may center more around the characters and ideas as opposed to specific words.  For example, you can still be guilty of plagiarism if it has been demonstrated you lifted a large portion of ideas and thoughts, even if you change some of the language. Also, it looks like many of the previous walk around, and extensions may be ending, and there is little political push to change them again.

 

 

Edited March 9, 2023 by drotto

[jaybuck43]

On 3/9/2023 at 3:05 PM, drotto said:

But public domain laws have a remakable almost uncanny knack of getting changed around the time a certain round ear Disney mascot is about to hit public use. It is the likeness, not the works developed around the character that in this case are public domain. The likeness and characteristics in theory can be used after that time, even if the original owner is still producing content.

 

I am not sure changing language in books counts as renewal of clock for public domain.  It may center more around the characters and ideas as opposed to specific words.  For example, you can still be guilty of plagiarism if it has been demonstrated you lifted a large portion of ideas and thoughts, even if you change some of the language.

 

 

The extension for MM won't happen.  He drops into public domain on January 1.  No-one has even proposed a bill, let alone is there enough time to get it passed.  But... it's ONLY Steamboat Willie version of mickey.  The version of mickey we mostly associate with is good for another 30 years or so.  The books however will get re-cast for restarting the clock, since there have been changes.  Since Scholastic or Puffin are ONLY selling those versions, those are the only version of the book you'll be able to get at Barnes and Noble.  Therefore the schools will have to buy that version.  When Charlie and the chocolate factory goes public domain, you COULD get a free use copy... but it won't match the version that scholastic sells... that comes with handy teaching guides, activities, etc.  

[drotto]

On 3/9/2023 at 3:10 PM, jaybuck43 said:

The extension for MM won't happen.  He drops into public domain on January 1.  No-one has even proposed a bill, let alone is there enough time to get it passed.  But... it's ONLY Steamboat Willie version of mickey.  The version of mickey we mostly associate with is good for another 30 years or so.  The books however will get re-cast for restarting the clock, since there have been changes.  Since Scholastic or Puffin are ONLY selling those versions, those are the only version of the book you'll be able to get at Barnes and Noble.  Therefore the schools will have to buy that version.  When Charlie and the chocolate factory goes public domain, you COULD get a free use copy... but it won't match the version that scholastic sells... that comes with handy teaching guides, activities, etc.  

Actually with Dahl, they have already announced they will continue to sell the originals in a classic line as a separate printing.  So both will be in print and available for now. However, I would be shocked if Scholastic and schools only carry the new version.

 

I agree it looks like the extension will fail for Mickey this time, but historically this was not the case. It also means however that the likenesses and basic story for things like Dalh will hit public domain in that 95 year window, even if a specific printed version is technically off limits. But if this is the reason, you are going to see and endless cycle of these changes.  Which means, even if they are doing it for inclusion reasons now, that new version is now on the clock, and will be changed in the future.  Again the president that they are setting up is a world where nothing is permanent.  Again, that is dangerous in my mind.

[paperheart]

 

Taylor Hill/WireImage

Disney CEO Bob Iger says the company still is being “very careful” with developing Star Wars feature films in the wake of Solo‘s soft box office, while Marvel is also getting a rethink in terms of how many sequels characters get.

In an appearance at the Morgan Stanley Technology, Media and Telecom Conference, Iger was asked an open-ended question about the health of tentpole brands Lucasfilm, Marvel and Pixar, along with the main Disney brand. The exec, who returned to the corner office in November, built his reputation on engineering the acquisitions of those outside companies during his previous stint as CEO.

Bob Iger Says Succession “At The Top Of The List” Of Things He’s Focused On At Disney

With Marvel, he said, “there are 7,000 characters, there are a lot more stories to tell. What we have to look at at Marvel is not necessarily the volume of Marvel stories we’re telling but how many times we go back to the well on certain characters. Sequels typically work well for us. Do you need a third and a fourth, for instance, or is it time to turn to other characters?”

RELATED: Disney Chief Bob Iger Says It Is “Very Tricky” To Assess Hulu’s Long-Term Value As Decision Point With Comcast Approaches

Iger didn’t get specific, but his comments came less than three weeks after the release of Marvel Cinematic Universe entry Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania. The third Ant-Man film has grossed more than $600 million globally but drew tepid response from critics and posted a 69% second-weekend drop in the U.S., the steepest by any MCU title to date.

“There’s nothing in any way inherently off in terms of the Marvel brand,” Iger stressed. “I think we just have to look at what characters and stories we’re mining. If you look at the trajectory of Marvel in the next five years, there will be a lot of newness. We’re going to turn back to the Avengers franchise with a whole new set of Avengers, for example.”

[drotto]

On 3/9/2023 at 3:50 PM, paperheart said:

 

Taylor Hill/WireImage

Disney CEO Bob Iger says the company still is being “very careful” with developing Star Wars feature films in the wake of Solo‘s soft box office, while Marvel is also getting a rethink in terms of how many sequels characters get.

In an appearance at the Morgan Stanley Technology, Media and Telecom Conference, Iger was asked an open-ended question about the health of tentpole brands Lucasfilm, Marvel and Pixar, along with the main Disney brand. The exec, who returned to the corner office in November, built his reputation on engineering the acquisitions of those outside companies during his previous stint as CEO.

Bob Iger Says Succession “At The Top Of The List” Of Things He’s Focused On At Disney

With Marvel, he said, “there are 7,000 characters, there are a lot more stories to tell. What we have to look at at Marvel is not necessarily the volume of Marvel stories we’re telling but how many times we go back to the well on certain characters. Sequels typically work well for us. Do you need a third and a fourth, for instance, or is it time to turn to other characters?”

RELATED: Disney Chief Bob Iger Says It Is “Very Tricky” To Assess Hulu’s Long-Term Value As Decision Point With Comcast Approaches

Iger didn’t get specific, but his comments came less than three weeks after the release of Marvel Cinematic Universe entry Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania. The third Ant-Man film has grossed more than $600 million globally but drew tepid response from critics and posted a 69% second-weekend drop in the U.S., the steepest by any MCU title to date.

“There’s nothing in any way inherently off in terms of the Marvel brand,” Iger stressed. “I think we just have to look at what characters and stories we’re mining. If you look at the trajectory of Marvel in the next five years, there will be a lot of newness. We’re going to turn back to the Avengers franchise with a whole new set of Avengers, for example.”

The third Ant Man film is only at around $425 million. What the hell sources are they using.

[paperheart]

On 3/9/2023 at 1:11 PM, drotto said:

The third Ant Man film is only at around $425 million. What the hell sources are they using.

silvermane

[Bosco685]

 

[paperheart]

On 3/9/2023 at 2:34 PM, Bosco685 said:

 

but the BOM int'l # is wrong. $59M Italy? also implies it did $32M so far this week given that it was at $233M after Sunday.

[Bosco685]

On 3/9/2023 at 5:41 PM, paperheart said:

but the BOM int'l # is wrong. $59M Italy? also implies it did $32M so far this week given that it was at $233M after Sunday.

[Hulksdaddy1]

On 3/9/2023 at 2:41 PM, Bosco685 said:

That was not the compliance standards video played at the last Disney Social Marketing Meeting. This was.

"Funny that people call it 'The X-Men'. There's a lot of female superheroes in that X-Men group. So I think it's outdated!"

 

[TupennyConan]

On 3/9/2023 at 3:50 PM, paperheart said:

 

 

 

a whole new set of Avengers

 

[@therealsilvermane]

On 3/9/2023 at 5:55 PM, Hulksdaddy1 said:

 

Help is available.

[Gatsby77]

So what are we thinking for this weekend?

I think it drops to 4th, behind Scream, Creed, and either Cocaine Bear or 65.

Yeah - 65 looks like it will bomb, but it only needs to do $8 mill. to surpass Quantumania.

[media_junkie]

On 3/10/2023 at 7:20 AM, Gatsby77 said:

So what are we thinking for this weekend?

I think it drops to 4th, behind Scream, Creed, and either Cocaine Bear or 65.

Yeah - 65 looks like it will bomb, but it only needs to do $8 mill. to surpass Quantumania.

I'm not expecting a huge turn out for 65, at least not in my area, there has been zero build-up/advertising for it where I live.  When I see a situation like that I immediatly think the studio knows it has a turkey on it's hand so doesn't want to waste any more money on ads.

[@therealsilvermane]

On 3/9/2023 at 2:26 PM, media_junkie said:

Ok, but that is exactly what this is.  When you change the name of a book (comic or otherwise), or movie, or brand when it has used that same name for over 60 years, for no other reason than to be "open to all" you are straight up appeasing groups.

Seriously you can't see that?

 

Except Marvel Comics hasn’t just used “X-Men” when referring to groups of mutants over the years. They’ve also used X-Factor, X-Force, X-Terminators, X-Statix, X-Cellent, House of X, Powers of X, Destiny of X, Legion of X, Knights of X, Way of X, Generation X, Excalibur, Exiles, and the New Mutants, among others. 

Look, we get it. When you say “mankind”, you’re referring to men and women together. But those “rules” of language and diction were established hundreds of years ago when men dic*tated everything, from who got to fight to what gender god is. That’s no longer the case. And women aren’t a “group”, they’re literally half of all human beings. 

I think it’s a sticky situation. It’s not just Victoria Alonso, either. Kevin Feige has never used the word X-Men except referring to the animated show. He’s called them mutants. I think Marvel Studios doesn’t want to use the X-Men name, but also understands the dilemma with older fans. I think Marvel kicks the mutant issue can way down the road as they focus on current storylines and getting the Fantastic Four cinematically right, which is another problem itself. I think in the end, Marvel Studios will not use the X-Men title, and will  go with House of X or something. But that won’t be for a long time. I think.

[Bosco685]

On 3/10/2023 at 8:13 AM, @therealsilvermane said:

Except Marvel Comics hasn’t just used “X-Men” when referring to groups of mutants over the years. They’ve also used X-Factor, X-Force, X-Terminators, X-Statix, X-Cellent, House of X, Powers of X, Destiny of X, Legion of X, Knights of X, Way of X, Generation X, Excalibur, Exiles, and the New Mutants, among others. 

Look, we get it. When you say “mankind”, you’re referring to men and women together. But those “rules” of language and diction were established hundreds of years ago when men dic*tated everything, from who got to fight to what gender god is. That’s no longer the case. And women aren’t a “group”, they’re literally half of all human beings. 

I think it’s a sticky situation. It’s not just Victoria Alonso, either. Kevin Feige has never used the word X-Men except referring to the animated show. He’s called them mutants. I think Marvel Studios doesn’t want to use the X-Men name, but also understands the dilemma with older fans. I think Marvel kicks the mutant issue can way down the road as they focus on current storylines and getting the Fantastic Four cinematically right, which is another problem itself. I think in the end, Marvel Studios will not use the X-Men title, and will  go with House of X or something. But that won’t be for a long time. I think.

Who's we? Imaginary friends that serve as echo chamber acceptable standards.

[theCapraAegagrus]

He's pretending that it's "older fans" that want to preserve the X-Men. name.

[Bosco685]

On 3/10/2023 at 8:22 AM, theCapraAegagrus said:

He's pretending that it's "older fans" that want to preserve the X-Men. name.

Yes. Those that have celebrated 'X-Men' female and male characters for decades are not true fans. Only those that know Marvel Comics via MCU films. They're the true fans.