A Franchise On Life Support-Time For A Buyout

[SiL]

Yeah, remember when people were socially ostracized for liking something? Bring back the good old days! f**k Disney!

Thats not what he said. Imagine if Marvel under Disney began making Blade films. You can say goodbye to the awesome, eerie grittiness of the first two films in favor of mainstream formulas.

Marvel already decided they were going for broad appeal crowd pleasers before they got bought by Disney. The MCU was never going to produce a Blade or Punisher movie with a damn because they wouldn't make $800+ million on it.

[PierreVW]

I really doubt FOX is going to sell the ALIEN Franchise.

FOX never sells anything. For example: their 2 FANSTASTIC FOUR movies were bombs. DISNEY want those rights and still FOX said to them: F U!.

The ALIEN Franchise is more successful than those FANTASTIC FOUR franchise and the WAR APES which just bombed with its recent and final entry.

[Paranoid Android]

The ALIEN Franchise is more successful than those FANTASTIC FOUR franchise and the WAR APES which just bombed with its recent and final entry.

War for the Planet of the Apes didn't bomb; It made $346,317,943. Alien:Covenant made $232,712,755.

[PierreVW]

The ALIEN Franchise is more successful than those FANTASTIC FOUR franchise and the WAR APES which just bombed with its recent and final entry.

War for the Planet of the Apes didn't bomb; It made $346,317,943. Alien:Covenant made $232,712,755.

No. WAR costed 180 million. COVENANT only 97.

[Paranoid Android]

No. WAR costed 180 million. COVENANT only 97.

War cost 150 million.
http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=planetoftheapes16.htm

[PierreVW]

No. WAR costed 180 million. COVENANT only 97.

War cost 150 million.
http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=planetoftheapes16.htm

Plus 100-150 for P&A. WAR had a lot more of ads than COVENANT.

[Paranoid Android]

Plus 100-150 for P&A. WAR had a lot more of ads than COVENANT.

1. This is based on what?
2. Even with 150 added to War's budget, it still didn't bomb.

[PierreVW]

Plus 100-150 for P&A. WAR had a lot more of ads than COVENANT.

1. This is based on what?
2. Even with 150 added to War's budget, it still didn't bomb.

It costed the double than COVENANT. So, it needed the double in the box office.

[Paranoid Android]

1. It did not cost double than Covenant. Double than Covenant is 194 million. War cost 150 million.
2. 150+150=300. War made 346 million. It did not bomb.

[SM]

Unusual for our Pierre to indulge in such hyperbole.

(Apparently Covenant didn't have any marketing costs)

[Alionic]

This conversation makes me want to see an Ape get facehugged and chestbursted.

[SM]

grrr

[PierreVW]

They could fuse 2 dying Franchises: ALIEN with APES.

[Hamster1066]

The series is at its healthiest now for over a decade.

-Windebieste.

I thought so too.

[BigDaddyJohn]

Yes. I mean why wouldn't they make good Alien films. It'd be like a Marvel situation. Disney buys Marvel, but let's them do their thing in their corner. Disney just distributes.

Literally any franchise ever would be lucky to have Disney.

Because Disney is a family oriented studio. They don't really do R rated stuff, which is what the Alien franchise is all about. You won't see R rated Marvel films under Disney (for example: Deadpool and Logan came out under 20th Century Fox).

Strange how it's always the third film in the series, that struggles to match the quality of the first two.

Can't really agree with this. Third installments are often quite good. Here are some examples:

1. The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King
2. Back to the Future 3
3. Toy Story 3
4. Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade
5. The Good, The Bad And The Ugly
6. Day of the Dead
7. Die Hard: With A Vengeance
8. Mission: Impossible 3
9. Goldmember
10. The Bourne Ultimatum

I'd say DAY OF THE DEAD (1985) is the weakest of the original DEAD trilogy. Imo.

For me, it's Back to the future 3