Disney’s acquisition of Marvel Entertainment has given the Internerds a lot to think about today. We have already shared a list of crossover movies we’d like to see, while Twitter users suggested other team-ups and battles to the hashtag meme #disneymarvel and other blogs have speculated that one day we could get a Pixar-produced Marvel movie. Not that we really need one of those after The Incredibles, but it could still be a cool thing to see.

Then there are the seriously curious and worried who wonder what will happen to the Marvel attractions at Universal Studios. Will Wolverine and Spider-Man begin walking around Disneyland alongside the classic Disney characters? And will Northstar only be allowed out during the annual Gay Days? Will the Mouse House do any damage to the Marvel movies already in the works or have any adverse effect on the comic book titles?

It will be a while before we know the answer to any of these questions, but the blogosphere was hot today with speculation, so let’s see what some of them had to say specifically on the subject of movies. Check out the film blog responses to the news after the jump:

• The news was such a secret even Nikki Finke at Deadline Hollywood Daily was surprised:
  

  Wow, was this kept secret. I knew something was up all weekend when a tipster told me that Disney had arranged an unscheduled investors call this AM and the art department at Disney Online went into a “lock-down” to create a logo. But the best guess by some of the experts I contacted was Disney buying Electronic Arts. Marvel seemed outside the realm of possibility. Yet I’ve learned that this was a deal which Bob Iger told intimates he’d been pursuing for a long time!

• Lane Brown at Vulture foresees superhero roles for the Jonas Brothers and Zac Efron and looks forward to Pixar’s inevitable Marvel movie:
  

  Yes, Robert Downey Jr., Hugh Jackman, and Tobey Maguire will likely soon be fired, and the roles of Iron Man, Wolverine, and Spider-Man recast with various Jonas Brothers…If [Pixar] can make our photo-illustration a reality, we promise not to complain when Zac Efron is hired to play Nick Fury.

• Mark at I Watch Stuff also thinks the Jonas Brothers and their future siblings will be starring in all Marvel movies from here on out:
  

  Since hearing the news, Mother Jonas has gotten to work at having over 5000 more children so we’ll have a steady stream of Jonas Brothers to play all the other Marvel characters not already caught up in movie deals.

• Merrick at Ain’t It Cool News shares some immediate curiosities:
  

  I’m really not sure what to say here, except 1) I smell some interesting theme park rides in our future, and 2) I wonder who would win in a fight between Iron Man and Emperor Zurg?

• Keith Phipps at A.V. Club shares another crossover idea:
  

  Will Disney seeks to exploit Marvel characters in ways Marvel itself has not tried? Will we see Namor team up with the Little Mermaid for some violent-but-charming undersea ass-kicking?

• Paul DeBenedetto at Wednesday’s Child features some excellent photoshops of crossovers we may see in the future. The best involves Scrooge socking it to a Nazi-fied Glumgold.
  

  The ramifications of a deal like this could be long-reaching, from licensing to films, and beyond. In fact, Marvel has already churned out their solicitations for upcoming comics. Revamped: Disney style! I don’t know how fanboys will react to this stuff, but I for one think it’s absolutely– ABSOLUTELY!– a step in the right direction.

• Erik Davis at Cinematical is curious about the potential Pixar-produced Marvel movie:
  

  But which Marvel characters lend themselves perfectly to the Pixar format? That’s your call — which superheroes would you like to see in a Pixar movie? Do you think now will be the time to create that Incredibles sequel and include Marvel villains? Perhaps The Incredibles could square off against … The Incredible Hulk!? Oh, the cross-over potential is mouth watering

• Alex Billington at FirstShowing also addresses the idea that Pixar could make a Marvel movie. He prefers the studio continue producing only original works, but here are his flipside thoughts:
  

  …here are some ideas that I think could work for Pixar. First off, I’ve got to state the obvious - I could see them including some Marvel characters in an Incredibles sequel when/if that ever gets made (many years from now). Why not? Additionally, there seems to be some industry buzz (read here) about Ant-Man becoming a potential Pixar property. He is pretty much an A-list character and he’s part of The Avengers, so again, why not? But if Marvel Studios, under the direction of Kevin Feige, wants to eventually include him in a live-action Avengers movie, I don’t know if he’ll end up in a Pixar movie first?

• S.T. VanAirsdale at Movieline has a suggestion for the first crossover merchandising opportunity:
  

  The dynamics of each situation will sound out in the months ahead, as will I presume the burgeoning Marvel theme-park industry. First recommended item of merchandising: Mickey Mouse gloves with Wolverine claws.

• Anne Thompson at Thompson on Hollywood explains why Marvel sold:
  

  Why would Marvel (which started producing its own movies in 2005) sell with profits rolling in? The economy, stupid. Marvel has financing and investors like everyone else; their main backing came from Merrill Lynch. If it was hard for Steven Spielberg to line up financing for DreamWorks, Marvel also faced tough going. In another environment, it would have made sense to remain in charge of their own destiny.

• Elisabeth Rappe at Cinematical is concerned about how much Disney will influence the Marvel movie output and merchandising:
  

  What is it going to mean for the films when a behemoth like Disney takes control? Family friendly, mythology-be-damned, direct-to-DVD offerings? Or will it just mean a lot more Slurpee cups and action figures? Time will tell, but something tells me the future of the Marvel cinematic universe might have become a little less bright.

• Jeff Wells at Hollywood Elsewhere wonders if some recent Marvel movies would have been so good with Disney running things:
  

  The only angle of any interest is whether or not this will serve to bland down the Marvel brand and take things in a kind of corporate Mickey Mouse direction. Wouldn’t this give Disney the force to veto any edge-pushing content from future Marvel character and creations? What’s the last genuinely cool and edgy film to come out of Disney culture? Would Iron Man have been the same film if Disney had been pulling the strings?

• Devin Faraci at CHUD.com thinks this sucks for Paramount in the long run:
  

  What does this mean? Fuck if I know. It probably means that Marvel’s movie financing plan just got bigger. A bunch bigger. I assume that the current distribution deal that Marvel has with Paramount stays intact, but once that’s over, Marvel movies will likely be distributed by Disney. That’s gotta sting Paramount - first they lost Dreamworks to Disney and now Marvel.

• Later, after listening to the investor’s conference call, Faraci still had worries about the ultimate output of Marvel movies:
  

  But movies? This is where I get worried. And not for content. I think Disney will let Marvel Studios make their movies their way. But the big problem for DC characters at Warner Bros is that the studio will only distribute so many DC movies a year. The way that Marvel was set up before the deal, they could strike distribution deals with different studios, ensuring a large stream of film content. Will Disney be happy to put out three or more Marvel movies a year? Kevin Feige is definitely thinking about releasing a Marvel movie a quarter in the near future - and maybe even more than that - but will Disney get behind that? This is my biggest question.

• Helen O’Hara at Empire reminds us that autonomy has allowed for Marvel’s great output of movie titles over the past few years:
  

  DC, of course, has long been owned by Warner Bros., so this potentially gives Marvel a similar studio partnership…The current deals with multiple studios has allowed Marvel to plan several movies a year over the last couple of years, which might not have been possible had the whole library been based at one studio (given how much big comic-book franchises cost to make).

• Paul Young at ScreenRant is worried about a possible glut in product as a result of this deal. Also, according to a ScreenRant poll, more readers think this is bad news than good:
  

  Con - We could find ourselves over-saturated with watered down superheroes, quickly written scripts and under produced adaptation that are Disney is just looking to make a quick buck with. They are, after all, trying to re-coup $4 billion dollars of investment. It is distinctly possible that quality could suffer.  Hopefully that won’t be the case, because whether Disney knows it or not, they are now under intense scrutiny from one of these largest, if not the largest, fan base in the world.

• Craig Kennedy at Living in Cinema worries that Disney will use Marvel until it’s no good anymore:
  

  Now that Marvel will just be one more piece of the Disney corporate branded machine, I don’t believe that energy will survive. They’ll milk the shit out of Marvel and they might even make a few bucks before dumping it in the gutter like a used up hooker, but I’ll be surprised if the projects coming after Iron Man 2 will have the same snap or hold the same promise. I could be wrong and probably am, but that’s all this news means to me.

• TK at Pajiba is so nervous about Marvel’s future that he might barf. With an analogy like this, it’s easy to see why:
  

  Disney, like Galactus, devours everything in its path and will likely never die. It’s just too big and too powerful (and potentially too evil). I don’t think this is the death knell for our favorite superhero franchises — Disney acquired Pixar, and continues to produce stellar films through them. However, one can’t help but wonder what the lasting effects of a Disney-owned superhero franchise will be.

• Krystal Clark at ScreenCrave believes the deal will cause Marvel films to be more family friendly and unable to compete with darker movies from Warner Bros./DC:
  

  • If you ever had hopes of a darker Wolverine film, you need to get over it. I don’t think that’s going to happen.

  • While you’re at it, get real comfortable with those two R-rated Punisher movies that came out recently, because you won’t see the House of Mouse put their stamp on that bloodbath!

• David Poland at The Hot Blog contemplates the possibility that the Avengers movie might never happen now:
  

  Do I smell a mostly live-action Nick Fury film with Sam Jackson and an $80 million budget?

  Or is that Jerry Bruckheimer doing a $180 million Nick Fury, trying to stabilize the potential for Avengers with something more than Robert Downey, Jr.’s smirk?

  What I don’t smell so much, unless Thor gets made and makes $400 million worldwide or more or Disney gives it all to Bruckheimer, who is the only producer other than Pixar they have allowed these kinds of budgets without a partner (see: Anschutz), is a $200 million-plus Avengers movie.

• Ian Chant at PopMatters doesn’t think Disney is stupid enough to mess with Marvel too much:
  

  Something, certainly, but it’s hard to say what at this point. The fanboy screeds showing up this morning warning of a world in which Donald Duck battles evil alongside Captain America are ill considered and baseless, as fanboy screeds of course tend to be. The people who run Disney aren’t stupid, and there’s no reason to think they’ll muck around with something that’s been working as well as Marvel has over the last few years as fat checks have continued to roll in courtesy of blockbuster movies.

• Stephen Johnson at The Feed also believes Disney will be respectful to Marvel’s brand:
  

  Disney has always been incredibly good at keeping their brands from being watered down: They seem to know exactly when it’s appropriate to invoke corporate synergy, and when it would be lame. It’s part of the Disney culture that goes back to when Walt himself was in charge. So it’s cool. If anything, I think Disney will mostly just do a better job of distributing Marvel entertainment to an even bigger audience.

• The Playlist reminds us of another brand Disney bought and barely altered:
  

  Don’t expect things to change much. Disney also owned a company called Miramax, with guys called the Weinstein Brothers and though they butted heads a lot, Harvey & Bob generally we able to do what they wanted. Don’t expect Marvel to Disney-fy their characters.

• Neil Miller at Film School Rejects lists some things you should know about the deal, especially the following one that should calm the fanboys down:
  

  1. Disney has an “If it ain’t broke…” viewpoint toward Marvel Studios. Walt Disney President Bob Iger said specifically that Disney will have an “if it ain’t broke…” attitude when it comes to the future of Marvel films. All of the creative control — including use of 3D, which characters will get movies, etc — will remain in the hands of the people who know the Marvel Universe best: the people at Marvel. Sure, this might change down the road, but the initial sentiment is that Disney does not intend to come in and take control of Marvel’s creative world.

• Miller also says it’s too soon to get all excited, positively or negatively:
  

  Of course, the only real film news here is going to be all speculative, as it’s impossible to say what level of control Daddy Disney will have with the Marvel brands, if any at all…So for film fans, this announcement shouldn’t mean much. That is, unless you’re a film fan who owns Marvel stock — then you might have just made yourself a shitload of money.

• Katey Rich at Cinema Blend lists five reasons fanboys shouldn’t freak out. Here’s one of them:
  

  4. Disney really wants boys to pay attention. This may be the biggest reason of all to hold your horses. With the exception of Cars, Disney hasn’t really been able to tap into a young boy market, and they really have no cachet among teens. There’s no way they would scare off Marvel’s core fanbase of teen boys by cleaning up Tony Stark or toning down the action in Spider-Man. Not that those two characters will be under Disney any time soon– Paramount and Sony are still hanging on to their respective deals– but I guarantee they’ll be using that model going forward with whichever Marvel character is up at the plate next. Clearly this is a studio well aware that you, the fanboy, are their golden calf, and you will not be sacrificed.

• Steven Zeitchik at Risky Biz Blog contrasts that point with speculation that Disney may have reverse gender plans:
  

  Bring on the ladies? As the New York Times and others point out, Disney is solid with girl audiences, but needs help with boys. Properties like “Iron Man” and “Thor” do the trick, But there’s another side to the coin: getting women to like superhero movies. (If Brad Pitt could get women to watch a violent Tarantino flick…) As much as Marvel likes crossing characters between movies, don’t expect Hannah Montana to show up as an Avenger. But Disney is expert at attracting young women to titles they may not normally be interested in (see under, Johnny Depp making the ultimate young-boy fantasy, a pirate-adventure, popular with girls). For all the talk about Marvel continuing to run independently, don’t be surprised if the studio accesses Disney’s stable of talent to make some pics more girl-friendly.

• Raymond Padilla at The Feed quotes some Marvel staff via their Twitters. Here’s a sample:
  

  Frank Tieri: (Punisher Noir, Wolverine): Yeah, Disney’s gonna love me.

  Warren Ellis: (Thunderbolts, G.I. Joe: Resolute): Why is everyone at Marvel making quacking noises today? It’s horrible.

  Warren Ellis: so I got this phone call from Joe Quesada and it was just the sound of him rubbing himself with money and now I am confused

• Linda Holmes at npr’s Monkey See relates this news to inter-clique mingling in the school cafeteria. Maybe there can be another Can’t Buy Me Love remake that’s also a Disney-Marvel crossover:
  

  Put simply, Marvel has a cool factor and Disney doesn’t. People who love Spider-Man do not necessarily see themselves as close cousins of people who love Donald Duck just because there’s drawing involved…Spider-Man will indeed be sitting down at the company picnic with Goofy. Will hanging with Goofy ruin Spider-Man’s reputation, or will Spider-Man make Goofy seem cooler?