MIKE GOLD: Disney Does Marvel
As is well-known, the Walt Disney Company purchased Marvel Comics a little over two years ago. Marvel joined the Muppets, Pixar, ABC and ESPN as tentacles of that great evil media empire that has done so much to homogenize the American culture. After all the jokes died down, some people wondered why the Mouse wanted the House that Jack Built in the first place.
Disney is a movie company, and Marvel’s shiniest family jewels – Spider-Man and The X-Men – were in the hands of competing studios (Columbia Pictures and 20th Century Fox, respectively) and aren’t likely to revert any time soon. The sundry Avengers characters were in the hands of Paramount Pictures, although Disney was able to purchase a nice reversion deal here. But, still, the motion picture revenue picture was severely compromised by the Spidey and X deals, and made all the more expensive by the Paramount buy-back. So, the question “why” certainly is valid.
Nobody that big buys a publishing venture – certainly not a comic book publishing venture – for the profits it will generate on its own. The phrase “fart in a blizzard” comes to mind. Merchandising and licensing revenues can be fairly attractive and Disney/Marvel/Muppets are a good fit. But… still… why?
I think we’re beginning to see the real reason. Disney owns ABC, which includes ABC Family, the Disney Channel, Disney XD (which already carries many of the Marvel animated shows), Playhouse Disney, Disney Cinemagic, Hungama, Jetix, Radio Disney, SoapNet, WABC-TV New York, KABC-TV Los Angeles, WLS-TV Chicago, WPVI-TV Philadelphia, KGO-TV San Francisco, KTRK-TV Houston, WTVD-TV Raleigh-Durham, and KFSN-TV Fresno, and as the various ESPN channels – possibly excluding “El Ocho.” Plus all kinda stuff overseas.
One can argue that teevee in general doesn’t have much of a future, and I might agree. But teevee programming has one hell of a great future no matter what platform we’ll be enjoying in the future: cable, satellite, computers, tablets, integrated teevee/computer systems, visors, brain implants, whatever. And that’s where the Mighty Marvel Money Machine will become the Mouse’s cash cow, true believer.
Disney already has The Hulk, Cloak and Dagger and Alias in development. Of course “Alias” has to be renamed – it’s working under the title “a.k.a. Jessica Jones” right now, and the show includes both Luke Cage and Carol Danvers. Mockingbird is also in development as a Miley Cyrus style kids show, possibly as fodder for the ABC Family network.
Step back a pace and take a look at what’s going on here.
Most of these shows are built around female superheroes. As headliners, such characters are anathema to motion picture studios. But Disney is betting heavy, heavy bucks that the distaff side will draw a sufficient audience to warrant the investment.
That’s pretty cool – and very risky. Women heroes haven’t fared much better on the small screen: Nikita was renewed by the skin of her teeth, The Bionic Woman revival flamed out, as did Charlie’s Angels redux. David E. Kelley’s Wonder Woman didn’t make it past the pilot stage. Yet Disney is developing no less than three Marvel shows built around women.
So no matter what I might feel about Disney’s predatory influence on our culture, they are showing a great deal of courage here – courage they developed by purchasing Marvel.
Interesting.
THURSDAY: Dennis O’Neil
I hadn't thought about this angle on what Disney's doing. It's interesting to think that Disney would take this kind of a risk. As long as we get something better developed than Dark Angel or Birds of Prey I'll be a happy viewer.
Dakota North?
Marvel JUST cancelled their last solo female hero tire, X-23. They've been canceling books better than one per week.
Interesting that Disney is pushing more of the female characters to the forefront (and good for them) while the publishers (not just Marvel) continue to marginalize and fetishize them.
"courage they developed by purchasing Marvel."
cart – horse
Or are you suggeting Disney didn't have this plan in mind until after they purchased Marvel?
Sometimes it's somebody else's cart that's before the horse. Somebody at Disney might have had all kinds of ideas they wanted to implement as the deal was going down, and somebody at Marvel might have had all kinds of ideas to offer waiting for the deal to go down.
It's an odd commentary you have here, Mike.
I think Disney saw Marvel as an ancillary cash cow from the start — not a publishing company. It's been no secret for quite some time that comics aren't big money-earners; it's the licenses — from movies to backpacks — which bring in the dough.
That said, I don't think creating properties for women was the plan so much as that they are simply exploiting particular properties to an audience that is currently responding to them as a company.
To wit, consider the several years of success they've had from female-driven shows on Disney, ABC Family, as well as on ABC itself with Desperate Housewives, (surprisingly), Revenge, Once Upon A Time, not to mention the interest in — if not outright success of — Pan Am, and even most of their Wed. night sitcoms. All of these are all very popular, sure, but mostly, and especially, among female audiences.
Perhaps what they're trying to do is draw in MALE viewers to join their already strong female viewership by creating female-driven ACTION series (as opposed to dramas).
As for the shows you reference; it's very clear — and it must be to executives at this point (and perhaps was from the start) — that those shows did not succeed NOT because of the audience they were after but because they were inferior products. Charlie's Angels has a pretty simple formula: Sexy, smart women dress up in costumes, beat up bad guys and win the day. And, in no way, is that what we got. But when you've got Drew Barrymore and other big-name film writers/directors creating a series for you, even if the pilot is garbage, sometimes you give it a small order and put it on the air. Bionic Woman at least tried, but it just never found its groove — and it didn't help the series was hampered by licensing ("Cyborg"/"Bionic Man") issues.
You might very well have it all backwards.