20th Century No Longer A Fox (1 Viewer)

[Gary16]

 

[MatthewA]

This song doesn't make sense anymore!

 

[Mark Booth]

I got rid of both Fox and 20th Century a long long time ago....

https://www.thephotobooth.net/Booth-Bijou/Bbintros/n-NSt9S/i-j2vcXVn/A



Mark

 

[Greg.K]

Except that in this case, it's an actual person's name: William Fox, the founder of Fox Film Corporation, a Hungarian-Jewish immigrant who anglicized it from Vilmos Fuchs.

Maybe they can change it to "20th Century Fuchs".

C: All that branding you associate with 20th Century Fox? That's from 20th Century Pictures. ALL OF IT.

I like the way the logo looks as 20th Century Pictures. Either that or Studios would be fine I think.

 

[Lord Dalek]

Maybe they can change it to "20th Century Fuchs".

 

[Garysb]

20th Century Fox ended when it was sold to Disney. I believe the studio offices and sound stages remained with Rupert Murdoch. Disney I think will rent them for a while. If executives from Disney are calling the shots at 20th is it still 20th? If someone comes to Disney to make a film does Disney decide under which of its studios the film will be made whether its Disney, 20th, Marvel. Pixar etc. Are films branded as 20th the films that would have been Touchstone or Hollywood Pictures a few years ago? Will 20th no longer make R rated movies? Here is the trailer for the first film to drop the Fox name. It still says 20th Century Fox so perhaps the trailer will become a collector's item. Will the FX Networks sold with 20th be rebranded such as FX, FXM, and FXX. They all reference Fox.

 

[DVBRD]

 

[Sam Favate]

If they're intent on keeping "20th Century" in the name they could do worse than the alliterative "20th Century Cinema."

 

[Josh Steinberg]

There will likely still be R rated movies from 20th Century (Fox). Disney has historically had a subsidiary or two that handled R rated releases and right now they don’t. Having 20th allows them to service an R rated audience without diluting the family appeal of the Disney label. Ultimately having a subsidiary that can release movies to an audience that Disney avoids now will help them make more money, not less, which they’ll like.

 

[Adam Lenhardt]

If I had to guess, I would say that after Disney gets through the slate of films it inherited, the 20th Century branding will only be used for existing 20th Century Fox franchises that Disney wants to continue.

 

[jcroy]

If I had to guess, I would say that after Disney gets through the slate of films it inherited, the 20th Century branding will only be used for existing 20th Century Fox franchises that Disney wants to continue.

As to specifics, I would guess stuff like the Alien, Predator, Taken, Planet of the Apes, Kingsman, etc ... type franchises would go onto the 20th Century side?

Most likely I can see stuff like Avatar, superhero, etc .... and various animated stuff going to appropriate Disney divisions.

 

[MatthewA]

There's actually several decent historical reasons to scrub Fox out of the name

A: Daryl Zanuck founded 20th Century Pictures. He did not found Fox Film.

B: William Fox was already long gone from Fox Film before they merged (which was more or less a leveraged buy out because Fox Film was bankrupt in 1935).

C: All that branding you associate with 20th Century Fox? That's from 20th Century Pictures. ALL OF IT.



D. The studio that has existed since 1935 has been for all intent and purposes 20th Century Pictures. We just call it Fox because it rolls off the tongue.

Zanuck could have taken Fox’s name off the studio at any time. He didn’t.

Marvin Davis could have done the same. He didn’t, either.

Rupert Murdoch could have removed it as well. Nope.

 

[Adam Lenhardt]

Zanuck could have taken Fox’s name off the studio at any time. He didn’t.

Marvin Davis could have done the same. He didn’t, either.

Rupert Murdoch could have removed it as well. Nope.

Because during their tenures, all of the Fox-branded assets were consolidated under a single ownership. That is no longer the case.

 

[Edwin-S]

It takes a really creative, monlithic, corporation to come up with the mind-blowing name like "20th Century Studios" as a replacement for 75 year old brand name "20th Century Fox". You would think the management geniuses at Disney would have told Murdoch, "You know, for 71.5 billion dollars, we want the name along with the property. You can rebrand your news network if you want."

Frankly, who is going to confuse the name "Fox News" with "20th Century Fox" anyways? Murdoch has dropped any reference to a century in rebranding his news corp. It is now just called Fox Corporation.

 

[Robert Crawford]

It takes a really creative, monlithic, corporation to come up with the mind-blowing name like "20th Century Studios" as a replacement for 75 year old brand name "20th Century Fox". You would think the management geniuses at Disney would have told Murdoch, "You know, for 71.5 billion dollars, we want the name along with the property. You can rebrand your news network if you want."

Frankly, who is going to confuse the name "Fox News" with "20th Century Fox" anyways? Murdoch has dropped any reference to a century in rebranding his news corp. It is now just called Fox Corporation.

You would be surprise as it will take years before many people realize that Murdoch sold Fox films to Disney.

 

[The Obsolete Man]

You would be surprise as it will take years before many people realize that Murdoch sold Fox films to Disney.

Actually, what I've seen out elsewhere on the 'net is that the majority of people think Disney now owns Fox Network/News as well as the studios.

So, in answer to the question you also answered, who will confuse Fox News with 20th? Pretty much everybody but a handful of people like us, it looks like, because it was all named "Fox" and that's all the average person sees. And Murdoch's tender ministrations have tainted that name to the point that it's better for Disney to just drop it.

 

[Edwin-S]

I just find it incredible that Disney failed to insist on the trademark name being transferred to them as part of a 71.4 billion dollar deal. That is probably the best evidence that the long range plan will be to drop the "20th Century xxxxx" brand name as chunks of that company become subsumed by other divisions of Disney.

 

[Sam Favate]

I just find it incredible that Disney failed to insist on the trademark name being transferred to them as part of a 71.4 billion dollar deal. That is probably the best evidence that the long range plan will be to drop the "20th Century xxxxx" brand name as chunks of that company become subsumed by other divisions of Disney.

They probably didn't want it, for reasons that have been mentioned in this thread. Also, Murdoch was never going to give up the brand for his other networks.

I see no problem changing it. As was pointed out before, 20th Century Fox was called something else before, and will be called something else in the near future. It's evolution.

 

[John*Wells]

I am sad to see this Whatever the reason may be .. I still have my Star wars (Pre Disney)and a few other films that have the fanfare and I am glad to have them

 

[MatthewA]

"Fox" is not just a news channel. It's a broadcast channel and a sports channel as well. There's also FX and FXX, both faux-edgy variations on the name. There is also Fox Movie Channel, which I can guess is all but history at this point. But how are they going to survive while deprived of the studio that helped them create a lot of the content?

Not that 20th Century Fox produced every show on Fox: their first big hit was Married With Children, produced by Embassy Communications and later Columbia Pictures Television. It was less than three years from the sale of Embassy by Norman Lear to Coca-Cola before Coke found a way to dissolve it altogether. Now, it seems like TCF, an even larger studio than Embassy ever was under Lear, Joe Levine, or Avco Financial Studios, is fast-tracked to meet the same fate.