http://comicbook.com/2016/03/15/what-does-indiana-jones-5-announcement-mean-for-marvels-inhumans/
>>Disney today announced a new Indiana Jones movie, the fifth in the series. Harrison Ford is returning to star in the movie, the first since Disney purchased Lucasfilm, with Steven Spielberg returning to direct.
>>They also announced the release date: July 19, 2019. For those who keep up with movie release schedules, that's exactly one week after the previously announced date for Marvel Studios' Inhumans, a movie announced as part of their large extended slate, but rarely talked about since. Marvel Studios is also owned by Disney.
So what does the Indiana Jones 5 announcement mean for Inhumans? It means the latter movie probably isn't coming out on July 12, 2019, if at all. Since the initial announcement, Inhumans - the concept and relatively minor characters from the pages of Marvel Comics - have appeared on the TV show Marvel's Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. That contributed to rumors last fall that Inhumans - the Marvel Studios film - had been removed from their movie slate. Conflicting reports said that it's still on, and will feature the Inhumans royal family - Black Bolt, Medusa, and other characters from the franchise.
>>While Disney has an incredibly busy film slate in 2019 - Captain Marvel, an Untitled Walt Disney Animation Studios Movie, Avengers: Infinity War Part II, Star Wars: Episode IX, The Incredibles 2, Indiana Jones 5, and another Live-Action Fairy-Tale remake are all on the docket - it's unthinkable for them to put out two movies in back-to-back weeks, especially two tent pole releases. Canibalizing their own business is bad business - you'll see releases coming as frequently as three weeks apart, but never less than that.
Dead film!
>>80793240
I'd rather watch inhumans tbqh
>>80793698
New franchise over keeping one on life support.
>>80793240
>implying Inhumans is going to actually happen
It's going to be replaced by Iron Man 12.
>>80793870
It really seems like Inhumans and Captain Marvel are the odd movies out in terms of Phase 3. Every other film at least has their lead roles in place, while those two keep getting postpone by newly added films.
I guess it'll be a slog after each film is put out that they eventually get made.
Harrison Ford is seventy-three years old. The only way I'm interested in a new Indiana Jones is if they recast the character with a younger actor. And good luck with that.
>>80794039
I really wonder if they should even bother with new Indiana Jones. The time period of the trilogy is what made them so great. It was a time when the world felt like it could still be explored.
disney will move it
they own both properties
they moved pirates of the carribbean from guardians 2, they own both properties there too.
they will not cannibalize their own properties, this is a moot point
>>80794192
>they moved pirates of the carribbean from guardians 2,
Hold on, they are making another Pirates film?
>>80794105
>Indiana Jones and the Crypts of R'leah
Are new IPs really that undesirable because this shit is just getting sad.
>>80794320
We're in an era where people would rather watch these remakes and sequels instead of risking watching something new.
>>80794320
you need the nigh guaranteed cash from milking existing franchises to afford to produce new IP's
>>80794192
>pirates of the carribbean
Speaking of franchises that need to laid to rest.
>>80794431
>>80794238
depp is still HUGE internationally and pirates films print money
but yes. they will move jones
>>80794407
How much security does Disney need? I mean, Star Wars made 2 billion, Age of Ultron made a billion, Zootopia is already a hit...it just seems insane how these companies seem to get so much money. What are they gonna do with all of it?!
>>80794535
welcome to capitalism, where shareholders are insatiable beasts
>>80793240
Huh
Marvel trying to carry on with Inhumans after infinity war is anti climactic enough but Indie could actually kill it. It's like Jurassic Park in that even with a bad film it's still a big enough name to bring people in
Marvels going to move the film
>>80794535
>What are they gonna do with all of it?!
sink billions into marketing and A-list actor bidding wars
>>80794492
They will move inhumans if it's in a more desirable slot than Jones. You think normies wont start calling the Inhumans budget X-Men ?
>>80794535
Buy the world, piece by piece.
>>80794634
don't underestimate the marvel machine anon
ANTS made over 500 million
inhumans is going to be coming off infinity war part 2 boost, it'll make more than jones easily
>>80794729
I'm not underestimating it. You're underestimating Indiana Jones. Crystal Skull made almost 800 mil and it was shit
>>80794729
Ants came out after the AoU boom and it did worse than every Indian Jones film (Accounting for inflation)
>>80793240
>disney props harrison ford up on a dolly and just wheels him around and pulls his arms up with string for him to punch nazis
Fuck, I'd watch it for the trainwreck value alone
>>80794192
>>80794238
>>80794431
Pirates 5: Dead Men Tell No Tales
After the shitheap that was On Stranger Tides, they realized they need to get Orlando Bloom back into the mix and half the plot is Jack helping Will's estranged and now teenaged son reunite with him and then they go fight some undead pirate trying to steal Poseidon's trident to control the seas.
>>80795393
Weekend at Bernies style with Le Boofo the Live Arts clown.
>>80794535
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2015/12/28/disney-has-a-money-problem-that-even-star-wars-cant-fix/
But investors haven't exactly rewarded the media titan: Disney's stock has tumbled more than 6 percent since that premiere, and even analysts impressed with perhaps the biggest film franchise on earth say it's not enough to shield the Big Mouse from its greatest challenge.
Disney's real threat, analysts say, is in cable TV: particularly, in the heavy long-term costs it pays to air sports on its struggling juggernaut ESPN. As more viewers opt to pay less for cable — or cut the cord altogether — Disney's heaping of stunningly pricey sports-TV contracts looks riskier every year.
ESPN is Disney's biggest single business and its most profitable cable channel, and the Big Mouse once regarded it as a virtually unstoppable media force. The traditional cable bundle, in which channels are offered only in bulk, made it an especially sweet deal: The largest chunk of the cable bill goes to ESPN — about $7 a month — whether a subscriber watches it or not.
About 45 percent of Disney's operating profit last year came from cable TV, and that income is expected to flatten in the next year due to the shrinking TV business. Meanwhile, ESPN has shown no signs of ending its TV-rights spending spree. Disney last year signed a deal with the NBA costing $1.4 billion every year for nine years — three times as expensive as Disney's previous TV deal with the league — even though ESPN's basketball viewership last season fell 10 percent to 1.5 million viewers, the network's lowest since 2008.
>>80794790
That's because Jones was highly anticipated and everybody wanted it since the last crusade in the 80s
But now we know it's shit and will have less hype
