I'm wondering, this doesn't mean the "fox" name is going to be removed from old films and TV shows now and replaced with a modern Fox-less logo? I always hate it when old logos are updated or removed (the former of which Fox have been doing a lot down the years, on TV shows at least, very rare to see the pre-CGI 20th Century Fox Television logos these days).
I'm wondering, this doesn't mean the "fox" name is going to be removed from old films and TV shows now and replaced with a modern Fox-less logo? I always hate it when old logos are updated or removed (the former of which Fox have been doing a lot down the years, on TV shows at least, very rare to see the pre-CGI 20th Century Fox Television logos these days).
For some reason I'm not totally sure of, a lot of the film companies are reluctant to change the logos on the front of their films even years down the line, so they're nice little time capsules of the evolution of the Universal globe or the Tristar horse or whatever. Some films adapted the fox fanfare into their own style and those will be harder to replace.
I don't think Disney even change their own frontcaps for their own films (you can still see some old style "Distributed by Buena Vista" captions floating around), although in a lot of cases particularly from the 1960s and 1970s they just used "Walt Disney Presents" in the text style of the film so there isn't anything to replace.
Quite a few modern releases of Disney filmes from the 80s, 90s and early 00s have the old blue "Walt Disney" castle logo replaced with the modern CGI one.
I'm wondering, this doesn't mean the "fox" name is going to be removed from old films and TV shows now and replaced with a modern Fox-less logo? I always hate it when old logos are updated or removed (the former of which Fox have been doing a lot down the years, on TV shows at least, very rare to see the pre-CGI 20th Century Fox Television logos these days).
For some reason I'm not totally sure of, a lot of the film companies are reluctant to change the logos on the front of their films even years down the line, so they're nice little time capsules of the evolution of the Universal globe or the Tristar horse or whatever. Some films adapted the fox fanfare into their own style and those will be harder to replace.
I don't think Disney even change their own frontcaps for their own films (you can still see some old style "Distributed by Buena Vista" captions floating around), although in a lot of cases particularly from the 1960s and 1970s they just used "Walt Disney Presents" in the text style of the film so there isn't anything to replace.
Universal actually had an ident that showcased the old logos.
The pricing of 'Mulan' will raise eyebrows. Paying the cost of a standard BluRay (£12.99 - £16.99) for substitute streaming cinema launches has been common and reluctantly accepted. For Disney to set £19.99 for Disney Plus Premier Access for the title does seem excessive.
The pricing of 'Mulan' will raise eyebrows. Paying the cost of a standard BluRay (£12.99 - £16.99) for substitute streaming cinema launches has been common and reluctantly accepted. For Disney to set £19.99 for Disney Plus Premier Access for the title does seem excessive.
I agree. Considering early adopters only paid £49.99 for an entire years' subscription, to charge 40% of the yearly fee for three months early access to one film seems a bit excessive.
The film becomes "free" in December anyway and just another normal Disney+ offering, so if you can wait, that's good.
It could be argued though its no different to going to the cinema, you have to pay for that, by slapping the premium on Disney+ for it you're just skipping the entire "going" part. May be comparable to a regular cinema trip out price once you've emptied your wallet at the refreshment counter in addition to the tickets.
On second thoughts I’m more annoyed at the pricing point due to the facility fee of the subscription. Other films that have been offered on a cinema substitute have not attracted this.