The Official "Get Marvel's Rights Back!" Thread

[kaijunexus]

I didn't see any threads in here specifically pertaining to discussion on when, how, and if Marvel can get the rights to Spider-Man, X-Men, Daredevil, Fantastic Four, and Ghost Rider back from Fox and Sony. So, I figured we should probably have one as the topic does seem to pop up relatively often in other threads.

[babykhris]

Don't worry the rights are coming how. After Ghost Rider drops there's no way SONY will make a 3rd film. There's been no movement from FOX on Daredevil & Fantastic Four, so there's a good chance Disney gets them back.

I'm ok with Fox keeping X-Men right now and Sony keeping Spidey because if we had those franchises alot of the characters Marvel are pushing wouldn't get a shot.

[bubbadoom]

Design work has been done on the digital Thing, and I am sure WETA has done a test, so once APES is done I suspect Fox will be making a decision on the FF. They still have a good 5 or 6 months to pull the trigger to make the 2012 dead line, so I would not write off an FF sequel or what ever just yet.

[some_dude728]

from what I've seen jumping around from site to site...it sounds like Daredevil is almost a lock to come back to Marvel/Disney.

[Silvermoth]

I think Fox and Sony might be too big to let something get away. Maybe when comic book movies have lost their sheen they might consider selling them off.

I just hope Marvel hasn't spent years trying to make films their own way only to have Disney tell them what to do.

[venom892]

I'm pretty sure Disney is going to be hands off just like they are with Pixar.

[kaijunexus]

So if Elektra was made in 2005, and Marvel still hasn't gotten the Daredevil rights back, then the contract agreement with Fox has to stipulate a movie must be made at least every 6 years (possibly more), since the right haven't reverted yet and it's 2011.

We could also assume that the Fantastic Four contract would probably be the same, then. So, since FF:RotSS was released in 2007, that would give Fox until 2013 (or later) to make another picture, right?

[Excelsior.]

They will never get those rights back.

[kaijunexus]

They will never get those rights back.

Um...really?

Select quotes from wikipedia's Marvel Studios and MCU pages...

In November 2005, Marvel gained the film rights to Iron Man (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_Man) from New Line Cinema (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Line_Cinema). Marvel revealed that it has regained the film rights to The Incredible Hulk (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Incredible_Hulk_%28film%29) in 2006. April 2006 Paramount Pictures acquired the rights to Thor (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thor_%28Marvel_Comics%29) from Sony. That year the film was announced to be a Marvel Studios production. Lions Gate Entertainment (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lions_Gate_Entertainment) subsequently dropped the Black Widow (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Widow_%28Natalia_Romanova%29) motion picture (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Film) project it had since 2004 giving the rights back to Marvel.In July 2010, at the San Diego Comic-Con International (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Diego_Comic-Con_International), company head Kevin Feige revealed that another Punisher (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punisher) reboot is in the works. Feige said that the rights to the character have reverted back to Marvel Studios (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marvel_Studios), and they want to take their own shot at it. He also said that he's aiming for a "Frank Castle" movie rather than a Punisher film.
Marvel has already gotten MANY of their character's film rights back. You, sir, are nothing more than a troll.

[Nimibro]

They will never get those rights back.

Marvel has already gotten MANY of their character's film rights back. You, sir, are nothing more than a troll.

i think what's Nuffsaid's trying to say is that Marvel won't get these particular rights back. Fox theatened to produce ashcan copies of the franchises just to keep the rights for a longer time, a thing they already did with Fantastic Four back in '94. Fox are probably getting more aggresive now that Marvel Studios gets more and more acclaim and gets more rights to it's original characters like in the cases you referenced, but Fox has a hold on some household names (remember Iron Man was lesser known out of fanbase and people who were new o comic-book movies at the time, not saying he was a complete nobody, of course not, but he had less popularity at the time) and Hulk was kind of a dissapointment for Universal, so it was kind of easy to get the rights back.

[kaijunexus]

I'd heard that the current Marvel contracts contained clauses to prevent anyone from retaining the rights to characters if they attempt to produce poor-quality, low-budget garbage just for the sake of retaining the rights. I think only theatrically released films count towards renewing the contracts, also. They can't just keep churning out direct-to-video stuff.

As for the 94 FF film, I don't think Fox was necessarily involved in that. Could be wrong, though. It was, however, definitely produced to retain the rights for the company making it at the time.

[Willie Lumpkin]

Constantin held the original rights to the FF and they hired Corman to make the throwaway film so that they could hold onto them and they then made the deal with Fox.

[SuperFerret]

Yeah, they should get them back. I'm tired of seeing more than two superhero films each year.

[kaijunexus]

Yeah, they should get them back. I'm tired of seeing more than two superhero films each year.

If you're trying to be sarcastic, the fact is that Feige said Marvel was eventually going to be releasing 4 films a year. Couple that with anything coming out of DC and any independent comic-movies and I don't think you have to worry about a shortage of superhero movies.

[SuperFerret]

Oh, sorry. Hang on, let me get my surprised and excited face on.

O.O FOUR!? REALLY!? AWESOMESAUCE ON AN AWESOME PIZZA!

That way, instead of having characters like Captain America, Thor, Iron Man and even lesser known characters in movies, we'll have to push them aside for Spider-Man, the X-Men and the Fantastic Four in most years! This is the best thing ever!

[kaijunexus]

http://files.sharenator.com/trolling_trolling_troll_internet_likes_to_fight_fa il_jerk_pu_demotivational_poster_1239308887_RE_The _Meme_Team-s640x512-97875.jpg

[SuperFerret]

I think you mean trawling. Also, I am offering some real insight, you just seem to be unable to process differing opinions.

[Blader5489]

Oh, sorry. Hang on, let me get my surprised and excited face on.

O.O FOUR!? REALLY!? AWESOMESAUCE ON AN AWESOME PIZZA!

That way, instead of having characters like Captain America, Thor, Iron Man and even lesser known characters in movies, we'll have to push them aside for Spider-Man, the X-Men and the Fantastic Four in most years! This is the best thing ever!

What a hard life you live, being forced to watch every single one of these movies.

[SuperFerret]

Jeez, some people can't take sarcastic arguments.

[Sam Fisher]

Yes, more than two superhero movies a year must be bad, even if those movies are good:awesome:

[Silvermoth]

I'd heard that the current Marvel contracts contained clauses to prevent anyone from retaining the rights to characters if they attempt to produce poor-quality, low-budget garbage just for the sake of retaining the rights. I think only theatrically released films count towards renewing the contracts, also. They can't just keep churning out direct-to-video stuff.

http://oi53.tinypic.com/11l762w.jpg

[spideyboy_1111]

http://oi53.tinypic.com/11l762w.jpg

..... ? not all contracts are the same... lol. marvels contracts do say that they have enough say in the films that the studios can not create the film without some approvals from marvel.

if films utterly flop and are not what marvel wanted in there character treatment they can fight the contract.



Fox and Sony though probably will not give up there spidey and X franchises.... they're giant cash cows... and Disney will probably have to pay a really large fee to buy them back.

[bubbadoom]

Sure Dragonball: Evolution was bad - but it did play in theaters...

[BatsDC]

I would like to see Marvel get the Fantastic Four, Daredevil, Ghost Rider etc rights back.

However, I like the X-Men franchise and think the upcoming Spiderman reboot looks good...
Can't Marvel just pay a certain amount to tie in those characters to the Marvel Cinematic Universe, and have them appear in some of those films? So if any characters tied to those licenses are needed, they could appear?

[Willie Lumpkin]

I would like to see Marvel get the Fantastic Four, Daredevil, Ghost Rider etc rights back.

However, I like the X-Men franchise and think the upcoming Spiderman reboot looks good...
Can't Marvel just pay a certain amount to tie in those characters to the Marvel Cinematic Universe, and have them appear in some of those films? So if any characters tied to those licenses are needed, they could appear?

I'd expect that the contracts, as written, give exclusive rights to the studio currently using the character. Marvel could always, for example, offer $10 million to Sony for the rights to have Spidey make an appearance in an Avenger's film, but I highly doubt that would happen.

From Sony's point of view, they don't want to 'water down the character' and Spider-man appearing in other films would reduce the value of their stand-alone films. Marvel, on the other hand, probably doesn't want to promote a character that they only have limited rights to. Instead of using Spider-man, they could bring in a character like Nova and then spin him off into his own film if they so choose.

It's an interesting idea, but I don't think it's likely to happen.

I think Fox may hang onto X-Men and Sony certainly seems interested in Spider-man, but I have a feeling the other characters will trickle back to Marvel until those are the only ones Marvel doesn't control.

[Shawkur]

Anyone know about the rights to Blade?

[Gabe99]

From Variety Fri., Nov. 21, 2008:
'X-Men' spawns family of sequels (http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117996319.html?categoryId=1350&cs=1)


"X-MEN FIRST CLASS:"
Josh Schwartz, who created the teen-friendly TV shows "Gossip Girl" and "The O.C.," is penning a script, based around the conceit of the 2006 comic of the same name, that focuses on the young mutants enrolled at the Xavier Institute for Higher Learning. Books revolved around the Cyclops, Jean Grey, Angel Iceman and Beast characters, which already have been featured in the three previous "X-Men" films.

"MAGNETO":
"Batman Begins" co-scribe David S. Goyer is attached to direct the origins story of the "X-Men" arch-villain (played by Ian McKellen in the previous pics) and his relationship with Charles Xavier (Patrick Stewart). Both characters would be played by younger actors, given the earlier timeline in which the plot takes place.

And "Deadpool," which would revolve around the sarcastic mercenary played by Ryan Reynolds in "Wolverine," should the character in that pic prove popular with auds.

Rights to "X-Men" revert back to Marvel in 2012 if pics aren't in active development.

The future of the franchise essentially has been put into the hands of producer Lauren Shuler Donner, who has overseen all three "X-Men" pics to date and is shepherding "Wolverine,""First Class," (together with "Mr. and Mrs. Smith"-scribe Simon Kinberg), and "Magneto."

She's been influential in hiring indie directors not used to helming action or dealing with extensive special effects sequences. "I like taking someone out of the indie world and bringing someone into the action world because it grounds the movie," she says. "It gives it a reality. It gives it an emotional core, and then you can have as much fun and action in it as you want."

[R_Hythlodeus]

sadly, pics are in development :(

[Silvermoth]

I wonder how Marvel would go with getting individual character contracts back. Like maybe if Fox isn't willing to give 'X-men' back they could get Wanda Maximoff. Or maybe Marvel could well and truly buy the Silver Surfer franchise as long as it doesn't mention the FF.

[spideyboy_1111]

I wonder how Marvel would go with getting individual character contracts back. Like maybe if Fox isn't willing to give 'X-men' back they could get Wanda Maximoff. Or maybe Marvel could well and truly buy the Silver Surfer franchise as long as it doesn't mention the FF.

we currently know nothing about the status of the Maximoff twins... Which i also guarantee you is why they've yet to be in a film.

[bubbadoom]

the Surfer is not part of the FF deal with Fox, they owned the rights to him long before they got the FF, so I would think they are treated as two different properties...

[Timstuff]

The Marvel Movie-verse is crowded enough without bringing the X-Men into it, and vise-a-verse. Besides, I love the X-Men movies (well, except for Wolverine, but that's effectively getting retconned out anyway) and I think they work well being in their own universe. Yeah, they're not 100% accurate to the source material, but then again the comics aren't either so it doesn't really bug me.

It's a shame about Spider-Man, though. I thought Raimi's Spider-Man could have fit easily in the same universe as Iron Man (and they originally planned on alluding to this in a dropped scene in IM, but they had to drop it due to rights issues), and I don't really like how the reboot is shaping up. I don't really care what happens to Spider-man right now since the version I liked is over and done with.

Maybe Marvel will get the rights to F4 and Daredevil back. I think that could work out well, because I want Marvel to be able to use Dr. Doom, Galactus, and Kingpin in the MMU. Marvel could do awesome stuff with them, but not if Fox still holds onto them.

[WildcatNC]

I think Marvel will get Daredevil and Ghost Rider back fairly soon. Possibly FF as well, though a new one is being looked at.

X-Men, Spiderman are NEVER leaving their respective companies unless they go bankrupt or Disney were to offer a ridiculous amount of money.

[Gabe99]

From Variety Mon, August 31, 2009:
Fox Re-Boots Marvel's Fantastic Four (http://weblogs.variety.com/bfdealmemo/2009/08/fox-reboots-marvels-fantastic-four.html)

Some have questioned whether Disney overpaid when it bought Marvel Entertainment for $4 billion. After all, its best known Marvel Comics superhero franchises are parked at other studios, and Universal's Islands of Adventure is as dominated by Marvel attractions as it is Dr. Seuss.

But one thing to remember about Marvel assets is, they don't seem to wear out. We're about to see the second example where successful Marvel movie franchises are going to be reinvented.

20th Century Fox is the latest studio to start the process of overhauling one of its big Marvel Entertainment franchises, “Fantastic Four,” which has already hatched two films. The studio has hired Akiva Goldsman to oversee the re-boot as producer.

New script will be written by Michael Green, the “Heroes” co-executive producer who co-wrote “Green Lantern,” the Martin Campbell-directed Warner Bros. film that will star Ryan Reynolds.

Fox would not comment on its plans, and neither would Columbia Pictures when BFD revealed a couple weeks its plan to potentially re-boot the studio's most valuable franchise, "Spider-Man."

With “Spider-Man 4” moving toward an early 2010 production start, the studio recently hired James Vanderbilt to write a fifth and sixth installment of the web-slinger franchise, with the understanding that one or both could give that franchise a makeover with a new director and cast (Daily Variety, Aug. 16, 2009). Whether director Sam Raimi and Tobey Maguire return or not, Sony smartly has given itself the chance to shorten the gap between its superhero installments.

And with state-of-the-art visual effects on superhero franchises pushing these pictures toward the $250 million-$300 million range, reshuffling the creative cast gives the studio a chance to save money, since actors and directors usually have a pre-negotiated option or two before the studio is held over a barrell by talent and their reps.

Marvel Studios has eliminated that problem by making talent sign as many as nine options, which was the case with the supporting cast of "Iron Man 2."

The 2005 “Fantastic Four” and 2007 sequel “Rise of the Silver Surfer” were directed by Tim Story, and starred Ioan Gruffud, Jessica Alba, Chris Evans and Michael Chiklis. Since the deals are just getting made, it is unclear at present if any of them will return.

Though Marvel Entertainment owns and finances properties like “Iron Man” and “Thor,” Fox controls “Fantastic Four” in perpetuity—as long as it continues making the films. Fox has the same arrangement on Marvel Comics properties “X-Men,” “Daredevil,” and “Silver Surfer” --which, despite an appearance in the "Fantastic Four" sequel, is still a Fox priority for a solo film.

Marvel is a producer and financial participant through a licensing agreement signed before Marvel franchises had the drawing power they have now. In fact, the original deal was made back when Marvel was struggling to pull itself out of bankruptcy in 1997.

Fox has been extraordarily effective in mining its Marvel franchises. The studio made three “X-Men” films, and then a hit summer spinoff in “Wolverine.” Fox is working on a sequel to that film, and has scripts for “X-Men Origins: Magneto," and “X-Men Origins: First Class," the latter of which could bring original "X-Men" helmer Bryan Singer back to the fold. Potential spinoffs for the Gambit and Deadpool characters seen in "Wolverine" have also been discussed.

As producer, Goldsman is involved with several DC Comics transfers, including “Jonah Hex,” “The Losers” and “Teen Titans.” He was also producer on the Will Smith-Charlize Theron-superhero film “Hancock,” a film that has a sequel in development.

[Timstuff]

I think Marvel will get Daredevil and Ghost Rider back fairly soon. Possibly FF as well, though a new one is being looked at.

X-Men, Spiderman are NEVER leaving their respective companies unless they go bankrupt or Disney were to offer a ridiculous amount of money.

Sony will probably hold on to Ghost Rider for a while since they are currently filming GR2. If it flops Marvel might get GR back sooner, but if it makes money similar to the first then Sony will definitely make a third one, which would push back Sony's re-acquisition of the rights even further. Not that it disappoints me that Marvel can't use Mephisto in the movies-- he's essentially Marvel's Superboy Punch.

[S. Grundy]

Sony will probably hold on to Ghost Rider for a while since they are currently filming GR2. If it flops Marvel might get GR back sooner, but if it makes money similar to the first then Sony will definitely make a third one, which would push back Sony's re-acquisition of the rights even further. Not that it disappoints me that Marvel can't use Mephisto in the movies-- he's essentially Marvel's Superboy Punch.

Yeah, if Ghost Rider flops there might be a Punisher: War Zone situation where Marvel may get the rights back within a year.

[WildcatNC]

Yeah, if Ghost Rider flops there might be a Punisher: War Zone situation where Marvel may get the rights back within a year.

Thats what I was thinking. I am expecting it to flop.


I could only hope that FF underperforms badly enough that they do the same.

[Timstuff]

Marvel might already be re-acquiring F4 and Daredevil for all we know. No progress has been made on the alleged reboots of them, which makes me suspect that Fox doens't have the time or funds handy to make them.

I don't know what to expect from the Ghost Rider sequel. I only saw the first one once, and for what it was it was an enjoyable, albiet not particularly intelligent action movie. The sequel might flop, and it might not. It's had to guess when it comes to movies like this, where they're entertaining but not particularly memorable. Similar to X-men, though, I actually feel like of like we're better off if the Ghost Rider universe is kept separate from the Marvel Movie-verse. I really don't want them to get into the whole making deals with the devil junk in other Marvel films, and if Sony owning the rights to Mephisto and the rest is the only thing stopping it, I'm not in a rush to see those rights go back to Marvel.

[R_Hythlodeus]

you're not thinking this through. if a movie bombs, the GA doesn't care which studio produced it and which studio produces the sequel/reboot. it's the same franchise for them.
the last thing I want is a reaction à la: "Not ANOTHER Spider-Man/FF/DD/GR/X-Men movie!"

[Gabe99]

IESB Exclusive: Disney Targets Sony and Fox Franchises (http://iesb.net/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=10238:iesb-exclusive-disney-targeting-sony-and-20th-century-fox-marvel-franchises&catid=41:news&Itemid=71)
Tuesday, 19 October 2010 00:13

Today, Marvel confirmed what IESB reported back in February of this year, it was here on IESB the news first broke that Disney had plans to completely re-negotiate the standing deal between Marvel and Paramount. At the time, it was denied, but as the news today confirms, we were right. Now the IESB can break the news on what Disney is hoping to do next to continue building upon their Marvel Empire.

There are four Marvel franchises that Disney does not control and word is they want them back. Three are controlled by 20th Century Fox and one by Sony.

Let's start with the Fox controlled Marvel properties.

DAREDEVIL - The movie wasn't received well by critics or fans for that matter, but, it did make its money back in box office receipts, DVD sales and TV broadcasting rights - it made close to $180 million at the worldwide box office alone with a budget of approx $78 million. And while Daredevil isn't considered a first tier character, the Mouse House wants Matt Murdoch and his alter ego Daredevil back under the control of Marvel Entertainment.

Of course it's not just Daredevil under Fox's thumb, Elektra, Bullseye and Kingpin were also part of the deal. And it's entirely possible that under said rights deal, Fox may have a handful of other characters that haven't appeared yet that could possibly be brought to the big screen as well.

As it was reported here first on IESB and regurgitated on several other outlets, 20th Century Fox is currently in development on a reboot of Daredevil.

FANTASTIC FOUR - It's by far one of the most beloved comic book series of all time. Fox has released two Fantastic Four films, both have done extremely well at the box office ($620 million) plus DVD sales and TV broadcast rights. Perhaps not so well with critics and fans.

The budget for both films were around $230 million combined, $100 million for the first and $130 for the second.

Insiders are telling IESB Disney would love to get Fantastic Four back under their control and that this series, above all, fits the Disney mold the best being the first superhero family.

Fox is currently moving forward with its Fan Four/Silver Surfer reboot as its was first reported here on the IESB.

X-MEN - This one, by far, is the biggie, the X-Men franchise and the entire X-Men Universe. The four X-Men films have brought in a staggering $1.54 billion dollars plus what is believed to be close to another $500 million in DVD sales and TV broadcast rights. That's approximately 2 billion dollars...a lot of money to say the least. All four films had a combined budget cost of approx $500 million dollars.

The X-Men franchise is huge, there are 100's of characters in this universe and 20th Century Fox has a solid lock on this property. Besides the known characters of the films i.e. Wolverine, Cyclops, Jean Grey, Storm, Rogue, Professor Xavier, Magneto, Sabretooth, Mystique plus the countless other heroes and villains that have appeared in the Fox feature films, besides those, there are so many other characters in the X-Men universe that they haven't used prominently...yet.

These include, just to name a few, fan favorites Bishop, Cable, Banshee, Blink, Havok, Quicksilver, Psylocke and Deadpool (whose spinoff is hopefully coming soon with Ryan Reynolds reprising the role). The X-Men universe is probably one of the largest hero/villain heavy universes out there, it's literally immense when you start to think about all of the inhabitants. Any of these names can easily be the core of a new X-Men team or spinoff.

20th Century Fox is moving full steam ahead with X-Men: First Class, X-Men Origins: Wolverine 2, Deadpool and other spinoffs currently in the works.

Disney will never and I mean never, ever, not in a 100 years, get this property back under the control of Marvel Entertainment, just not going to happen. Fox owns all of these properties for perpetuity, in other words, for-ev-ver....for-ev-ver...

Moving on to TV. If the feature films angle doesn't work, can Disney/Marvel possibly move forward with live action TV series based on the Daredevil, X-Men or Fantastic Four characters? Simply put "NO."

Fox has sued Marvel once before regarding the "Mutant X" fiasco. In those court documents a few interesting tidbits of the original rights deal are revealed.

They mean business -

In October 1993, Marvel and Fox signed an agreement (the "1993 Agreement") pursuant to which Marvel licensed to Fox all the rights that Fox may require in order to produce, distribute, exploit, advertise, promote, and publicize theatrical motion pictures based on the "X-Men" comic book series. The "X-Men" comic book series, referred to in the Agreement as the "Property," includes the X-Men Characters, specifically the "core" Characters and the Characters of the "X-Universe";  their origin stories;  storylines from individual comic books;  and "all other elements relating to the Property and the Characters."   The rights granted to Fox included "the right to use the title (or subtitle or portion of the title) of the Property or any component of the Property as the title of any Picture or related exploitation."   The Agreement reserved all television rights to Marvel, subject to a proviso, critical to Fox's pending contract claim, that Marvel would not "produce, distribute or exploit or authorize the production, distribution or exploitation of any live-action motion picture" without Fox's consent (the "Freeze").

From what we've been told, the lawyers at Disney have poured over the "Mutant X" case to find some wiggle room, but, due to the settlement between Fox and Marvel, it looks like Disney is **** out of luck. Their only hope is if Fox is willing to hand over rights to characters Disney would like to use. But, word on the street is Fox has made it very clear that they will not let go of any of the properties under their control for any live action medium.

Unlike Sony, we've been told by Fox Co-Chairman Tom Rothman and other Fox execs in the past, that they own the rights to their Marvel properties for perpetuity. But, we've also been told that if it ever came to the point where they were going to lose any property they own because of failing to have a movie in production, they would simply produce a low budget, straight-to-DVD feature and "four wall it," which basically means, stick it in any theater to fulfill their theatrical release clause.

So even though those Mickey Mouse lawyers have spent plenty of hours going over those Fox contracts it appears that they are rock solid.

So what about Sony's Spider-Man franchise? Same thing as the Fox deal, the contracts protect the studio 100% but they do have to continue to make movies with the Marvel characters on a regular basis. Spider-Man is not going anywhere, that also includes Venom.

Bottom line, the Sony and Fox contracts are rock solid. They will both keep their respective properties under their control. But you can be sure because they have plenty of money to spend, Disney will still have those Mickey Mouse lawyers looking for a loop hole....and to that I say, good luck!

[Timstuff]

The characters I want to go back to Marvel are primarily the villains between Daredevil and Fantastic 4. Dr. Doom, Kingpin, and Galactus would all be much better off in the Marvel Movie-verse than where they're at now, but I guess there's not much that can be done about that. I am not happy with the direction the Spider-Man franchise is currently going in, but I'm not sure how much better of we'd be if Marvel got their hands on it again. Chances are we'd get yet ANOTHER reboot, and the fact that Sony is rebooting is precisely the reason I'm unhappy with its current home in the first place. I've pretty much accepted that no-one is going to do what I want them to do with Spider-Man, and enjoy the complete series that I already have. It may sound harsh, but for now the Spider-Man movie franchise is pretty much dead to me.

I'm fine with Fox keeping X-men, though. I think they've done a decent enough job so far (except for XMOW, which I hated), and I think there's great things in store for it at Fox. I'm actually glad that Marvel can't use any X-men characters in the Marvel Movie universe, because that place is going to get crowded enough as it is without bringing millions of superpowered mutants into the mix. The X-Men universe is too darned big to fit inside of the Marvel Movie universe without making a spectacular mess out of everything, not to mention that the "Reed Richards is Useless" trope will become pretty much impossible to avoid.

You can get away with stuff like that in the comics where the consistency and believability are pretty much accepted from the outset, but movie audiences are much less forgiving about these sorts of things. And like I said, the absence of any mutants or Mephisto forces Marvel to be more creative than they have been in the comics, because there's less room for narrative ass-pulls. Marvel not being able to show people making deals with the devil, or inventing mutants for the sole purpose of solving narrative issues means that Marvel will have to either make sound choices or live with their mistakes. I certainly would not be very eager to see the concept of "comic book universe continuity" introduced to movies if it means we also have to put up with all the BS retcons and handwaving that comic editors love to resort to when they need to undo their own terrible ideas.

[Gunga Diner]

How many years does Fox have to reboot Fantastic Four before the rights go back to Marvel?

X-Men and Spider-Man belong in their own universes, cinematically. But Fantastic Four belong in the same 'verse as the avengers.

[Timstuff]

I could have seen Spider-Man being in the Avengers-verse comfortably, but whatever. Captain America, Iron Man, Thor, and Hulk have pretty much always been the cornerstones of The Avengers, and there's plenty of starpower there even without Spider-Man (who is only sometimes with the Avengers in the comics, anyway)

[kaijunexus]

How many years does Fox have to reboot Fantastic Four before the rights go back to Marvel?

X-Men and Spider-Man belong in their own universes, cinematically. But Fantastic Four belong in the same 'verse as the avengers.

How do you figure? Just because we're used to them being in their own stand-alone film franchises?

Spider-Man and the X-Men have always crossed over into other books and vice-versa. In fact, it's been beyond "cross-overs" really. Every single Marvel book is like a window into a particular character or group's story within the larger Marvel Universe.

Why should it be any different for the films?

...except for these rights issues holding it back...

[Timstuff]

It's not like the X-men being in the marvel mainstream continuity hasn't caused it's fair share of problems regarding continuity and writing consistency, and it's something Marvel has struggled with for years. Joe Quesada decided that the easiest way to deal with it was to reduce the mutant population to only a few hundred. As much as I hate Quesada, and as much as I recognize that that was probably overkill, it was pretty obvious that the X-men universe was getting too big to exist inside of the mainstream Marvel universe.

Eventually you get to the point where it's like "Enough is enough, I can't write a good Iron Man story with all these mutant characters around because they cause too many plot holes." I very much like the X-Men movies being in their own continuity, because it leaves them free to explore the X-men mythology without tripping over the other superheroes' toes, and vise-a-verse.

Part of the problem is that the story path in X-Men isn't necessarily going to be compatible with what is happening with the other characters. X-men is about human evolution, and how as more and more mutants appear eventually there will not be any "normal" people left. That is a very big concept, and I think it's one that is best explored in its own series. The superheroes in the MMU are "super" because they are limited in number. If you suddenly drop a population of millions of mutants in there, then you're going to end up with the same dilemma that ultimately caused Quesada to decide to drop a nuke on the X-men 616 continuity.

At least with the movies, the X-men already have their own world to explore and grow into, and the Marvel Superheros are free to roam the MMU without getting wrapped up in the X-men storyline. I know that the comic fans want to see the X-men in the same world as the rest of Marvel's heroes, but the fact of the matter is that this concept barely even worked in the comic books, and if they tried to pull it off in the movies it could be a potential disaster for the MMU.

[Willie Lumpkin]

With where things currently stand, I think Fox would be fools to say: "We're not really interested in making any more of these films." and Marvel would be fools to say: "We really, really really want to get them back."

It's just like someone walking into a car dealership. You're not going to tell the Salesman how long you've been dreaming of that shiny new Audi and the salesman isn't going to tell you that A4's been sitting around for forever.

As for Fox making a crap film just to retain the rights, I think that's where we'll see the Disney lawyers jump into action. And while Fox may claim they'd do something like that, they'd have to think twice about actually following through - with or without the Disney lawyers breathing down their necks.

If they produce a crap film and release it to theaters, they'd be greatly devaluing the property and what's the point of hanging onto a property like grim death when your own idiotic actions have made that property worthless?

[Slushy]

and they originally planned on alluding to this in a dropped scene in IM, but they had to drop it due to rights issues


First I've heard of this. What happened in the scene? I did get a kick out of Cyclops chasing Spider-Man in the deleted scene from the first X-Men movie though.

[TheVileOne]

The thing is, it's been 8 years since Daredevil. It's been six years for Elektra. Fox obviously has no legitimate or immediate plans in making new movies for these characters. So now its just all about saving face. They don't want someone else to make money on a property they used to or in this case currently had. Look what happened with the Watchmen fiasco.

[A Necessary Evil]

First I've heard of this. What happened in the scene? I did get a kick out of Cyclops chasing Spider-Man in the deleted scene from the first X-Men movie though.

IIRC, it was something referencing octavious.

[Timstuff]

They were going to reveal that Doc Ock's mechanical arms were made using Stark tech. I would have dug the nod, and it's too bad that they couldn't come to an agreement with Sony about it.

[Gabe99]

From Variety:
Fox puts superheroes on parade - Studio banks on tentpole reboots (http://www.variety.com/article/VR1118037977)

Outside of Disney, no studio can boast more superhero properties based on Marvel's comicbook characters than 20th Century Fox. But this week's release of "X-Men: First Class" signals just how the studio plans to breathe new life not just into the franchise's mutants, but its entire lineup of crimefighters.

It's not as if Fox's "X-Men" franchise had run out of steam. Although Brett Ratner's treatment of the series' beloved characters received some drubbing from fanboys, the third installment, "X-Men: The Last Stand," earned an impressive $459 million at the worldwide box office in 2006, the franchise's biggest haul to date.

A fourth and fifth installment are in development. But until then, Fox has a potential new franchise featuring a younger set of mutants to play with on the bigscreen.

While the film -- budgeted at $135 million after rebates -- could easily be considered a reboot for a property which hasn't had a new sequel in five years, it would be more accurately described as a prequel.

That's because "X-Men: First Class" goes back to the beginning, introducing how Charles Xavier becomes Professor X, recruits a young group of mutants and establishes a friendship with his future foe Erik Lehnsherr, better known as the metal-manipulating villain Magneto, while making clever references to future occurrences that appeared in the previous pics.

Under the helm of Matthew Vaughn, the pic anchors the film around the Cuban Missile Crisis in the groovy 1960s with James Bond-style flair, and easily sets the stage for sequels to take place during historical hotspots in other decades.

"First Class" marks a return to "X-Men" for Vaughn ("Kick-Ass"), who had been tapped to direct "Last Stand" but had to leave the project for family reasons.

The wait seems to have been worth it. His take has elicited raves from reviewers and fans and generated the kind of tracking that should pave the road for a sequel.

Fox is hoping that kind of reaction will rub off on its other superhero films.

It's already apparent that studio execs there are taking notes from the development of "First Class."

Most of the Marvel fare Fox has in development are being treated as reboots.

The projects include:



• "X-Men: First Class" sequels that could take place in the '70s and '80s, according to Vaughn and producer Bryan Singer (who launched the "X-Men" franchise in 2000), given that first pic is set in 1962. Vaughn has said he'd like Magneto to be behind the assassination of John F. Kennedy, for example, using his powers to manipulate the meandering bullet.

• A fourth and fifth "X-Men," based around the older characters introduced in the 2000 film, are in "active development," according to Lauren Shuler Donner, with Fox recently getting a treatment for the next installment that introduces a storyline that would lead into additional sequels.

• "Fantastic Four": Michael Green ("Green Lantern") was set to script a new take on the series Fox launched in 2005 that had Tim Story helming a lighter action comedy, but the studio is currently looking to bring on a new writer. Akiva Goldsman is producing the pic, which has a working title of "Fantastic Four Reborn."

• "The Wolverine": Christopher McQuarrie's script stays true to the Japanese saga from the comicbooks, and is said to boast more action than previous "X-Men" installments, according to Shuler Donner. Studio is considering a new helmer after Darren Aronofsky left the project. Film is said to serve as a standalone actioner and isn't necessarily tied to "X-Men Origins: Wolverine," which earned $375 million worldwide in 2009.

• "Deadpool": Ryan Reynolds, who also dons a super suit for DC Comics in "Green Lantern," is starring in the first film featuring the Merc with a Mouth and the thesp is working closely with writers Rhett Reese and Paul Wernick ("Zombieland") to develop the script as a dark comedy. Film won't be based on Reynolds' version of the character from "X-Men Origins: Wolverine," but relaunches the hero entirely. Tim Miller is attached as director.

• "Daredevil": David Slade ("Twilight: Eclipse") is helming a new take on the 2003 film that starred Ben Affleck and the 2005 spinoff, "Elektra," that David Scarpa ("The Day the Earth Stood Still") and Brad Kane are writing. Peter Chernin is producing with Dylan Clark through his Fox-based shingle Chernin Entertainment.

• "Magneto": David S. Goyer had been attached to direct an origins tale from a script by Sheldon Turner, but much of that project was folded into "First Class," essentially ending the chance for a standalone pic for the character anytime soon.



Like any studio with rights to a Marvel character, Fox needs to prove that its comicbook properties are in active development to prevent those films from reverting back to Marvel and its new parent, Disney.

Under its previous deal with Marvel, Fox retains the rights to all the X-Men characters, as well as those in the Fantastic Four universe, including the Silver Surfer, who the studio had planned to spin off into his own franchise at one time.

Sony similarly controls Spider-Man and related characters, as well as Ghost Rider, which is also getting a reboot.

The Mouse House, of course, would love to exploit those characters, after spending $4 billion to buy Marvel in 2009.

But after Warner Bros. successfully rebooted its Batman franchise, earning more money than previous caped crusades, and Marvel launched the "Iron Man" franchise and now "Thor," as well, rival studios are taking a similar fresh-take approach with their own projects, believing that move will guarantee sequels for years with a younger, and more affordable cast.

It's a similar strategy to Sony's with "Spider-Man" after the trilogy played itself out. It will start a new tale with Andrew Garfield as the nerdy web slinger next summer, with the cast and footage set to bow at Comic-Con.

[Alientraveller]

Interesting article. I've got fingers crossed Vaughn directs more X-Men films. I wouldn't mind a Magneto film (a prequel to a prequel) but it'd lack a satisfactory ending so I'd prefer flashbacks to how Erik's relationship with Magda broke apart because of his vengeful streak in Second Class.

If Fox keeps the good faith going after FC then I wouldn't mind them hanging onto X-Men and Daredevil, but I really Fantastic Four is a major part of the Marvel Avengers universe unlike the X-Men and ought to go back to Disney/Marvel.

[Raiden]

From Variety:
Fox puts superheroes on parade - Studio banks on tentpole reboots (http://www.variety.com/article/VR1118037977)

Looks like Fox has "fulfill" its contract obligation by putting both DD and FF in some kind of pre-production, so any chance of them reverting back to Marvel/Disney is slim to none right now. I just wonder if they have to actually make a movie and release it in theatre before the deadline, or can they keep these movies in perpetual pre-production instead. If they make a low-budget movie and "four-wall" it, so to speak, I think Disney's lawyers will enter the fray.

[kedrell]

Well that explains how they can go so long w/o fully making a new movie.

[kaijunexus]

Considering it's been over a year since I started this thread, and we have yet to hear of any substantial news pertaining to new Daredevil or Fantastic Four films from Fox, I think it's time to bring this discussion back to the forefront!

Given how much time has past since we've heard a whisper about any reboots from Fox for those two properties, do you think Fox has given up, or are they going to wait until the very last second to get these films out just to retain the rights?

Can Fox retain the rights simply by keeping these films in pre-production? If so, for how long?

And finally, if Fox does loose the rights to Daredevil and Fantastic Four within the next few years, how would you like to see them incorporated into the MCU?

[metaphysician]

Daredevil can really just be its own thing. Some references to the larger world like newspapers or such, but he's a street level crimefighter working a bad neighborhood. There's really no good reason for his path to cross with the Avengers or SHIELD.

Fantastic Four, OTOH. . . is very, very dependent on how they are rebooted. That said, if Tony Stark doesn't know Reed Richards, its a loss. And you'd *need* to write and portray Reed in a way that doesn't make him look like a crappy genius next to Tony.

[The Watcher]

Has Fantastic Four even had any news since that article? Was Fox actually thinking of Josh Trank, or was that just a rumour started up by someone? If it was just a rumour, then I'd expect the F4 rights to revert back this year.

I know there's been news on the Daredevil front, though, with David Slade putting up some announcements via his Twitter.

Incorporating the F4 into the MCU could be one of Marvel's best moves. In regards to any connections - I'm pretty sure Reed would decline any offer from SHIELD to become 'SHIELD scientists/agents or a SHIELD funded and operated team (much like The Avengers Initiative)'. I'm sure an explanation could be thought of to explain the F4's whereabouts during Loki's invasion, too. References/cameos by Tony Stark and Hank Pym primarily are a big must in my opinion.

The way I see it - the Fantastic Four shouldn't be overcrowded with connections and references.

[metaphysician]

I'm thinking the Fantastic Four should actually have their origin post-Avengers. It helps deal with potential issues like that. And yeah, I would want the FF independent. They might occasionally talk to a SHIELD liason, but that's about it.

[MarvelKnight]

I've always been of the thought that if Marvel gets F4 back they should stay in their own universe. But as stated above..if they are in the MCU but they stay in their own little niche with their own adventures, that would be cool.

[djKiDDvIcIOUs]

Ya marvel should get the FF and DD rights back and do em up proper

[bubbadoom]

I'm thinking the Fantastic Four should actually have their origin post-Avengers. It helps deal with potential issues like that. And yeah, I would want the FF independent. They might occasionally talk to a SHIELD liason, but that's about it.

IF Marvel gets the FF back, they must share the same universe as the Avengers for the much anticipated Hulk/Thing smack down!

Nuff Said!

[R_Hythlodeus]

IF Marvel gets the FF back, they must share the same universe as the Avengers for the much anticipated Hulk/Thing smack down!

Nuff Said!

I agree

[ZeroCorpse]

So here's what I don't get:

We know that Marvel Studios will never get Spider-Man or the X-Men back. It's just not going to happen, because they're too lucrative for Sony/Fox to let them go.

So if Marvel knows this, then why don't they just create characters for the Marvel Movie Universe that are similar to Spider-Man or the X-Men?

I mean, if the world can have Batman and Daredevil both exist in movies without any legal issues (rich guy with horned cowl and grappling tool fights villains in dark city) then why not make a character like DC's Black Spider, who is an obvious copy of Spider-Man?

Does Sony own the Scarlet Spider? If they do, then come up with another name. Make the character Ben Reilly, or some new character-- Hell, do a Miles Morales version but cut out all references to a previous Spider-Man.

Same goes for the X-Men. You don't need to name your healing, hairy, clawed character "Wolverine"... You could make someone named "Badger" or "Wildclaw" or something.

My point is that the Marvel Movie Universe is a whole other universe, and doesn't need to stick to the rules of the 616 or Ultimate. It could have wholly original characters that are just kind of similar to others. As long as they make enough tweaks and don't use the names that are owned by Sony or Fox, they should be able to make a wall-crawling superhero who cracks wise and shoots silk from his hands, or a team of super-powered mutations that have eye-beams, weather powers, and claws.

They could also just use teams and heroes they DO still own, and tweak them to fill the roles of the X-Men, Fantastic Four and Spider-Man.

For example: Marvel doesn't own the film rights to the Fantastic Four. However, they do own the film rights to Power Pack. So here's an idea:

Make a Power Pack movie, but make it so that Power Pack in the Marvel Movie Universe is a team of young adults instead of kids. Make Alex Power a genius. Alter their powers a little bit; Maybe Mass Master becomes "Mass" and is now a bulky, huge tank character? Maybe they live in a building in New York, and got their powers by going into space, having a crisis, and being granted abilities by a dying alien? Maybe Alex and Julie aren't siblings, but a married couple?

With some tweaks to the story, you could replace the Fantastic Four with a team that resembles them in many ways, but stays clear of the legal boondoggle.

Heck... Replace the X-Men with the New Warriors. Just expand their group a bit to include a bunch of the lesser-known Marvel characters. Swap the hatred for mutants with a hatred for extraterrestrials, and make the majority of the team aliens.

There are ways around this that will allow Marvel to develop some great franchises, and mix them in with the rest of their universe to create that full, detailed world we love so much.

These are all just examples. Some of them suck. But they give an idea how Marvel could replace important characters like Spider-Man, the X-Men and the FF. Writers and producers could do even better, I'm sure.

Oh, hey-- Here's an idea: Replace Spider-Man with Speedball. His powers aren't that similar (but he's still acrobatic) but he has the wit, the right age, and the general "feel" of Spider-Man. Just make him a little more like Parker, and set him loose.

[metaphysician]

Because it would take a lot of effort to do, with dubious benefit?

[TheVileOne]

I guess in terms of brand you'd rather have something like Fantastic Four to start with instead of making Power Pack your new Fantastic Four.

[craigdbfan]

I was watching the short lived (but years ahead of its time) Silver Surfer animated series and it made me realize that I'm the one property I really wish was back at Marvel is Silver Surfer and Galactus.

Having these two characters could make for an incredible Avengers 3 or an individual movie dedicated towards the SS/Norrin Radd and his encounter with Galactus. Sure it'd be changing some of the canon but the MCU is going down a different direction anyway. Getting the F4 would be a plus but I'd be happy with just SS and Galactus along with their own individual mythos (minus the F4 aspects) going back to Marvel.

Although if that ever does happen it'll probably have to include the F4.

[hippie_hunter]

According to Kevin Feige, both Marvel and Fox have the rights to Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch.

[TheVileOne]

Not sure how that makes sense or would work but whatever.

[craigdbfan]

I think they're just both allowed to use them but I guess they'd have to omit parts of their history that belong to the other studio.

I agree that it'd be convoluted as heck. The only franchise I really want back in the hands of Marvel/Disney is the F4 just so they can have Silver Surfer and Galactus back. Not sure who the other heralds are under honestly but I'm guessing with Fox?

[marvelrobbins]

Quicksilver and the scarlet witch are same as skrulls eather marvel or Fox could use them.Whoever uses them first In a film would be able to use them In their film universe.
Although Fox defently has the rights straight up to super skrull.

[TheVileOne]

I'm not holding my breath to see Scarlett Witch or Quicksilver on film anytime soon.

[venom892]

I think Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch are best avoided for now. There are a bunch of other Avengers that can be used.

[TheVileOne]

Yeah exactly. Their backstories would be too confusing and convoluted. They wouldn't be mutants anymore and likely not Magneto's kids. Just hold off on all that for now.

We need to see originals like Hank Pym and Janet Van Dyne first.

[Midnyte_Sun]

So here's what I don't get:

We know that Marvel Studios will never get Spider-Man or the X-Men back. It's just not going to happen, because they're too lucrative for Sony/Fox to let them go.

So if Marvel knows this, then why don't they just create characters for the Marvel Movie Universe that are similar to Spider-Man or the X-Men?

I mean, if the world can have Batman and Daredevil both exist in movies without any legal issues (rich guy with horned cowl and grappling tool fights villains in dark city) then why not make a character like DC's Black Spider, who is an obvious copy of Spider-Man?

Does Sony own the Scarlet Spider? If they do, then come up with another name. Make the character Ben Reilly, or some new character-- Hell, do a Miles Morales version but cut out all references to a previous Spider-Man.

Same goes for the X-Men. You don't need to name your healing, hairy, clawed character "Wolverine"... You could make someone named "Badger" or "Wildclaw" or something.

My point is that the Marvel Movie Universe is a whole other universe, and doesn't need to stick to the rules of the 616 or Ultimate. It could have wholly original characters that are just kind of similar to others. As long as they make enough tweaks and don't use the names that are owned by Sony or Fox, they should be able to make a wall-crawling superhero who cracks wise and shoots silk from his hands, or a team of super-powered mutations that have eye-beams, weather powers, and claws.

They could also just use teams and heroes they DO still own, and tweak them to fill the roles of the X-Men, Fantastic Four and Spider-Man.

For example: Marvel doesn't own the film rights to the Fantastic Four. However, they do own the film rights to Power Pack. So here's an idea:

Make a Power Pack movie, but make it so that Power Pack in the Marvel Movie Universe is a team of young adults instead of kids. Make Alex Power a genius. Alter their powers a little bit; Maybe Mass Master becomes "Mass" and is now a bulky, huge tank character? Maybe they live in a building in New York, and got their powers by going into space, having a crisis, and being granted abilities by a dying alien? Maybe Alex and Julie aren't siblings, but a married couple?

With some tweaks to the story, you could replace the Fantastic Four with a team that resembles them in many ways, but stays clear of the legal boondoggle.

Heck... Replace the X-Men with the New Warriors. Just expand their group a bit to include a bunch of the lesser-known Marvel characters. Swap the hatred for mutants with a hatred for extraterrestrials, and make the majority of the team aliens.

There are ways around this that will allow Marvel to develop some great franchises, and mix them in with the rest of their universe to create that full, detailed world we love so much.

These are all just examples. Some of them suck. But they give an idea how Marvel could replace important characters like Spider-Man, the X-Men and the FF. Writers and producers could do even better, I'm sure.

Oh, hey-- Here's an idea: Replace Spider-Man with Speedball. His powers aren't that similar (but he's still acrobatic) but he has the wit, the right age, and the general "feel" of Spider-Man. Just make him a little more like Parker, and set him loose.

I said the same thing about Ghost Rider. Dan Ketch can be used by Marvel to introduce him into any Marvel studio series. They can also use the Phantom rider, Vengeance, and a whole slew of characters that Sony never bothered to use.

[BatsDC]

The way I see it, I think we can almost guarentee that Ghost Rider, Daredevil and Fantastic Four will be back at Marvel soon. Spidey will depend on Sony's financial situation. X-Men I'd say is unlikley, unless Disney and Marvel pull out a LOT of money and buy them back.

[psylockolussus]

I don't mind if Marvel gets all the rights back but not X-MEN! I love FOX for bringing us the X-Men movies and Marvel Studios already has a lot of movie projects in their hands and for them to have X-Men too would just feel too much for me I guess.

[hegemony]

Fox wants to do New Mutants in addition to First Class 2, Wolverine, and X-men 4-5.
http://collider.com/new-mutants-movie-tom-rothman/162192/

[bullets]

X-Men aren't going back to Marvel but at least Daredevil and Fantastic Four should be. I haven't heard anything in awhile about either of those two.

[R_Hythlodeus]

with a movie as big and good as TA in their back, MS should grow some balls and demand the rights for DD and FF back

[bubbadoom]

with a movie as big and good as TA in their back, MS should grow some balls and demand the rights for DD and FF back

It's not a question of "balls" but of honoring the terms of the deals [good or bad] that were made when Fox took the risk and optioned these unproven properties.

Funny, "balls" can used on this site but apparently not "*****ing"...wtf?

[R_Hythlodeus]

It's not a question of "balls" but of honoring the terms of the deals [good or bad] that were made when Fox took the risk and optioned these unproven properties.

Funny, "balls" can used on this site but apparently not "*****ing"...wtf?

maybe because balls is usually a term used to describe round objects mostly used in sports, whereas *****ing is not?

[Whiskey Tango]

Fox wants to do New Mutants in addition to First Class 2, Wolverine, and X-men 4-5.
http://collider.com/new-mutants-movie-tom-rothman/162192/

yes, why not **** up New Mutants as well? Ugh.

[craigdbfan]

X-Men aren't going back to Marvel but at least Daredevil and Fantastic Four should be. I haven't heard anything in awhile about either of those two.Speak of the devil.

http://splashpage.mtv.com/2012/04/27/x-men-fantastic-four-tom-rothman/

On the positive side Trank is a good director and Fox seems to have turned a new leaf. So I don't think he'll really be artistically castrated.

The negative side is that Silver Surfer and Galactus are still over at Fox and they would work incredibly well in the MCU. :(

Oh well.

[kaijunexus]

I don't know. FF rumors have been so up and down over the past several years, and now Rothman is "hopeful". Thankfully, I don't think it really bodes well for that franchise at Fox.

It is frustrating though, not knowing when these contracts actually expire. There was a recent interview with Feige and Ruffulol in which Feige stated that the contracts with other studios deal in "years and decades". That "decades" part made me a little queasy... lol

[roach]

Speak of the devil.

http://splashpage.mtv.com/2012/04/27/x-men-fantastic-four-tom-rothman/

On the positive side Trank is a good director and Fox seems to have turned a new leaf. So I don't think he'll really be artistically castrated.

The negative side is that Silver Surfer and Galactus are still over at Fox and they would work incredibly well in the MCU. :(

Oh well.

i'd actually like to see what they can do with a FF reboot

just because the rights revert back to Marvel doesn't mean we'll see the movies anytime soon....Blade or Punisher anyone???

with the rights being spread across a few studios it means we get more superhero movies....if any of the other properties reverted they wouldn't start work on them until 2017 or beyond

[kaijunexus]

i'd actually like to see what they can do with a FF reboot

just because the rights revert back to Marvel doesn't mean we'll see the movies anytime soon....Blade or Punisher anyone???

with the rights being spread across a few studios it means we get more superhero movies....if any of the other properties reverted they wouldn't start work on them until 2017 or beyond

I'm okay with waiting, as long as we know these characters will be integrated into the greater Marvel Cinematic Universe.

Quite frankly, I don't care about non-MCU movies featuring Marvel characters anymore. I did when there was nothing else, but now that we have a Marvel-controlled movie universe, why look back?

I can't help but see Sony and Fox's Marvel films as "inauthentic" now that we have an official MCU. To me, they are independant interpretations of the characters, while those in the MCU are official canon.

Even if a Sony or Fox movie is great, I still don't have the interest for it that I would for an MCU film. For instance, X-Men: First Class was awesome! I loved it! But it still felt like a cool independent superhero film to me than an "X-MEN" film, as it would if it were done by Marvel Studios.

Anyone else feel this way?

[roach]

I support superhero movies regardless of who puts them out

[ЯɘvlveR]

even if they don't get the rights, i don't see how the studios can't work together. i mean, those characters are still marvel property right? so why not have spidey or wolverine have cameos in avengers films?

[Captain Marvel]

The film versions of those characters aren't Marvel property.

[kaijunexus]

even if they don't get the rights, i don't see how the studios can't work together. i mean, those characters are still marvel property right? so why not have spidey or wolverine have cameos in avengers films?

Even though it's all Marvel properties, and any superhero movie doing well is good for the genre as a whole....these studios are still in competition, and they would probably see featuring or hinting at another studio's characters as free advertising for their competitors.

[roach]

because of money and lawyers

[bubbadoom]

maybe because balls is usually a term used to describe round objects mostly used in sports, whereas *****ing is not?

I guess I pay more attention to context -

A "*****" is just a female dog, where's the harm in using a word like that? How I was using it was just another term for griping, much less "offensive" than a term for testicles - but what ever...

[roach]

just found out in the DD thread that Fox just renewed the rights and they have a writer

[kaijunexus]

just found out in the DD thread that Fox just renewed the rights and they have a writer

As angry and frustrated I am by this turn of events, it does enlighten us to the fact that these contracts can apparently be renewed by simply paying for the option.

Previously, I believe it was assumed by everyone that the rights would automatically revert if a film wasn't produced in set amount of years. But unfortunately, it's now apparent that these companies can simply throw some cash at Marvel and retain the rights indefinitely...

http://www.reactiongifs.com/wp-content/gallery/no/puppet_facepalm.gif

[Duke]

Speak of the devil.

http://splashpage.mtv.com/2012/04/27/x-men-fantastic-four-tom-rothman/

On the positive side Trank is a good director and Fox seems to have turned a new leaf. So I don't think he'll really be artistically castrated.

The negative side is that Silver Surfer and Galactus are still over at Fox and they would work incredibly well in the MCU. :(

Oh well.

I wish Marvel had some sort of power to veto upcoming ideas from hack studios such as Fox.

[Project862006]

marvel cant even give us a 1st black panther,doctor strange,iron fist,ant man,etc.

i say focus on those before they even try for reboots for rights they wont get back lol

[craigdbfan]

Well I said this a while back but Marvel actually has a pretty good relationship with both Fox and Sony. They feel somewhat indebted to them seeing as they basically bailed them out from having to declare bankruptcy in the 90's.

That's why they haven't really aggressively pursued a lot of these franchises back into their grip. However as Disney's influence spreads over Marvel those ties will soon become a thing of the past.

[roach]

I wish Marvel had some sort of power to veto upcoming ideas from hack studios such as Fox.

um...they do. They are part of the process

[roach]

Well I said this a while back but Marvel actually has a pretty good relationship with both Fox and Sony. They feel somewhat indebted to them seeing as they basically bailed them out from having to declare bankruptcy in the 90's.

That's why they haven't really aggressively pursued a lot of these franchises back into their grip. However as Disney's influence spreads over Marvel those ties will soon become a thing of the past.

i don't know why people think Marvel and Fox are enemies

[bubbadoom]

Well I said this a while back but Marvel actually has a pretty good relationship with both Fox and Sony. They feel somewhat indebted to them seeing as they basically bailed them out from having to declare bankruptcy in the 90's.

That's why they haven't really aggressively pursued a lot of these franchises back into their grip. However as Disney's influence spreads over Marvel those ties will soon become a thing of the past.

I thought Toy Biz bought Marvel at this time, and that's what got them out of the bankruptcy thing...and gave Avi control of these characters...

[roach]

I thought Toy Biz bought Marvel at this time, and that's what got them out of the bankruptcy thing...and gave Avi control of these characters...

that an selling the characters off

[Saitou Hajime]

All this sudden news coming out of Fox tells me that The Avengers juggernaut has them pissing in their pants. Unfortunately that also means they're going try even harder to hold on to what they got instead of just treading water like they normally do. :cmad:

[craigdbfan]

Right and Toy Biz & Avi Arad licensed out the filming rights to Fox, Sony, & Universal. Despite all the crap Arad gets he is the one that organized these multimedia expansions to prevent Marvel from going into bankruptcy.

Even when the initial buying out of MEG happened they still faced some serious financial problems internally.

[roach]

All this sudden news coming out of Fox tells me that The Avengers juggernaut has them pissing in their pants. Unfortunately that also means they're going try even harder to hold on to what they got instead of just treading water like they normally do. :cmad:

sigh...why would Avengers have Fox pissing in their pants?
This makes no sense.
The reason we are hearing news now is because there is news now.

[Nokio]

sigh...why would Avengers have Fox pissing in their pants?
This makes no sense.
The reason we are hearing news now is because there is news now.

I don't get that either. Maybe they are worried about the time frame to get out a movie, I don't know.

[roach]

or maybe after so many months and years they finally have something to report

[Saitou Hajime]

sigh...why would Avengers have Fox pissing in their pants?
This makes no sense.


Maybe because their failure with DD and F4 is going to be all the more apparent if they let the rights on those properties expire and they end up back up in Marvel Studios, who then turn said properties into successes?


The reason we are hearing news now is because there is news now.


Right... so the director of DD goes on record that there no new updates on the movie and goes so far as to direct a TV pilot because of the snail-paced development, then just as The Avengers' slaughter on the box office commences, suddenly we have new writers and Fox is renewing their option.

[roach]

Maybe because their failure with DD and F4 is going to be all the more apparent if they let the rights on those properties expire and they end up back up in Marvel Studios, who then turn said properties into successes?



Right... so the director of DD goes on record that there no new updates on the movie and goes so far as to direct a TV pilot because of the snail-paced development, then just as The Avengers' slaughter on the box office commences, suddenly we have new writers and Fox is renewing their option.

i suggest you go into the DD reboot thread. Thats how movies are. One day there is no news and one day a ton of news.

[Saitou Hajime]

i suggest you go into the DD reboot thread. Thats how movies are. One day there is no news and one day a ton of news.

There's "news" because Fox got spurred to make news. This is reminiscent of when they suddenly announced they were rebooting F4 just as news of Disney buying Marvel broke out. Or WB forming a DCE a week after that.

[Project862006]

http://images.sodahead.com/polls/000171028/polls_its_a_conspiracy_5653_43343_answer_2_xlarge. jpeg

[Midnyte_Sun]

The way I see it, I think we can almost guarentee that Ghost Rider, Daredevil and Fantastic Four will be back at Marvel soon. Spidey will depend on Sony's financial situation. X-Men I'd say is unlikley, unless Disney and Marvel pull out a LOT of money and buy them back.

The sooner the better for all of them. Although, I know that GR deserves an R rating and Marvel said they won't make any R movies...they need to get rid of this policy. Action Horror can be profitable.

[Saitou Hajime]

http://images.sodahead.com/polls/000171028/polls_its_a_conspiracy_5653_43343_answer_2_xlarge. jpeg

http://www.wwebulls.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/r-truth2.jpg

THE TRUTH SHALL SET YOU FREE.

[roach]

The sooner the better for all of them. Although, I know that GR deserves an R rating and Marvel said they won't make any R movies...they need to get rid of this policy. Action Horror can be profitable.

DD and FF aren't going anywhere anytime soon

[SoNicRaDiATioN]

And I sure as hell hope the X-Men and Spider-Man don't either. I'm more the happy with where they are.

[Bruce Malone]

Regardless of Marvel disney can't be happy that most of the real heavy hitters of marvel are owned by rival companies.

Yes the avengers will do massive and a sequel should do fine but aside from iron-man independently these films: thor, cap etc. haven't put up the big numbers that a spider-man or the original x-men trillogy have for fox or sony.

Disney isn't dumb they bought marvel for a reason and i'm sure they want marvel's top attractions not the b or c guys. Am I wrong?


also 1000 posts.

[Project862006]

^ to be fair x men 3 the highest grosses x men film only made 10 million more than Thor

spiderman is the one they need thats the heavy hitter since spiderman 3 made 890 million WW

[Bruce Malone]

I was thinking more in terms of domestic gross. Where clearing 200 million is usually seen as the mark of a true blockbuster.

Comic book films have traditionally been more domestic box office driven than other blockbuster type movies.

[metaphysician]

I don't think Fox is scared of Avengers, I think Fox is just thinking 'Wow, maybe these Marvel properties are profitable after all.' So they'll double down their efforts to exploit them, and make some of that Marvel comic book movie money.

And then be confused when most of them only achieve tepid results, because its not the characters or universe that have made the MCU so successful, its the quality of the work. The GA won't be any more interested in a crappy FF reboot now then they were previously.

[psylockolussus]

And I sure as hell hope the X-Men and Spider-Man don't either. I'm more the happy with where they are.
I agree!

[Whiskey Tango]

Well I'm not happy with it at all. MS has shown they can make a buck without making a mockery of the properties. With Fox it's all about the money.

Dismal news. :down

[Bren]

I support quality superhero movies regardless of who puts them out

Fixed :)

[kaijunexus]

I think everyone's biggest fear is that we wouldn't be getting as many movies based on Marvel characters if Marvel Studios got the rights back to all their characters.

This is completely untrue.

No one wants to over-saturate the market right now. For the past several years, there's been 1 DC movie and about 3 Marvel movies produced annually. Generally, 1 or 2 of those Marvel movies is produced by a company other than Marvel Studios.

Does anyone honestly think MS is only producing 1 or 2 movies a year due to financial reasons anymore? They now have the backing of one the largest media corporations in the world. If they knew that Fox or Sony wouldn't be producing a Spider-Man or X-Men movie every year, MS would happily be pumping out 3 films a year.

I think that's what people who support these properties at other studios need to understand. Marvel getting these rights back does not mean they tuck them away for a decade, whereas Fox or Sony would have been giving you Daredevil and Fantastic Four movies for years. Marvel would fill in the void left by the other studios.

[roach]

I think everyone's biggest fear is that we wouldn't be getting as many movies based on Marvel characters if Marvel Studios got the rights back to all their characters.

This is completely untrue.

No one wants to over-saturate the market right now. For the past several years, there's been 1 DC movie and about 3 Marvel movies produced annually. Generally, 1 or 2 of those Marvel movies is produced by a company other than Marvel Studios.

Does anyone honestly think MS is only producing 1 or 2 movies a year due to financial reasons anymore? They now have the backing of one the largest media corporations in the world. If they knew that Fox or Sony wouldn't be producing a Spider-Man or X-Men movie every year, MS would happily be pumping out 3 films a year.

I think that's what people who support these properties at other studios need to understand. Marvel getting these rights back does not mean they tuck them away for a decade, whereas Fox or Sony would have been giving you Daredevil and Fantastic Four movies for years. Marvel would fill in the void left by the other studios.

movies have to be budgeted for and planned for. Just getting the rights backs doesn't mean we'll see movies immediately. Right now MS schedule is planned out to 2018...with sequels and new up comings. Any of those films wouldn't see the light of day til 2020...maybe.
I'll deal with a Fox DD or FF or Sony Spider-man...because nothing about the characters to me says they need to pop up in an Avengers movie. Do we really need a Reed cameo when we can have Pym or Banner be the resident egg head????

[kaijunexus]

movies have to be budgeted for and planned for. Just getting the rights backs doesn't mean we'll see movies immediately. Right now MS schedule is planned out to 2018...with sequels and new up comings. Any of those films wouldn't see the light of day til 2020...maybe.
I'll deal with a Fox DD or FF or Sony Spider-man...because nothing about the characters to me says they need to pop up in an Avengers movie. Do we really need a Reed cameo when we can have Pym or Banner be the resident egg head????

Firstly, I've never heard anyone say that Marvel has a set production schedule into 2018. If you have evidence to the contrary, please produce it...

Of course they have films in development, but there is never a certainty of them even being greenlit for production at all. These decisions are made as they assess the success of particular characters and franchises as they are released.

So, to assert that we would never see a film produced using the reverted rights to the Fox and Sony Marvel properties until 2020 is absurd. And that's not to even mention the fact that Marvel Studios would most likely be producing more films per year to fill the void left by the other studios, as I already explained.


Secondly, the argument of "we don't need these characters in the MCU anyway" always read to me as an attempt to cope with the idea of Marvel never getting the rights back.

Do you actually think fans would be complaining if Marvel got Spider-Man and X-Men back? Of course not. So, why even bother with the "Well, they're probably better off at the other studios anyway" line of reasoning? Nobody believes that. Not even you.

[craigdbfan]

Firstly, I've never heard anyone say that Marvel has a set production schedule into 2018. If you have evidence to the contrary, please produce it...

Of course they have films in development, but there is never a certainty of them even being greenlit for production at all. These decisions are made as they assess the success of particular characters and franchises as they are released.

So, to assert that we would never see a film produced using the reverted rights to the Fox and Sony Marvel properties until 2020 is absurd. And that's not to even mention the fact that Marvel Studios would most likely be producing more films per year to fill the void left by the other studios, as I already explained.


Secondly, the argument of "we don't need these characters in the MCU anyway" always read to me as an attempt to cope with the idea of Marvel never getting the rights back.

Do you actually think fans would be complaining if Marvel got Spider-Man and X-Men back? Of course not. So, why even bother with the "Well, they're probably better off at the other studios anyway" line of reasoning? Nobody believes that. Not even you.Well said. :up:

[SoNicRaDiATioN]

I think everyone's biggest fear is that we wouldn't be getting as many movies based on Marvel characters if Marvel Studios got the rights back to all their characters.

This is completely untrue.

No one wants to over-saturate the market right now. For the past several years, there's been 1 DC movie and about 3 Marvel movies produced annually. Generally, 1 or 2 of those Marvel movies is produced by a company other than Marvel Studios.

Does anyone honestly think MS is only producing 1 or 2 movies a year due to financial reasons anymore? They now have the backing of one the largest media corporations in the world. If they knew that Fox or Sony wouldn't be producing a Spider-Man or X-Men movie every year, MS would happily be pumping out 3 films a year.

I think that's what people who support these properties at other studios need to understand. Marvel getting these rights back does not mean they tuck them away for a decade, whereas Fox or Sony would have been giving you Daredevil and Fantastic Four movies for years. Marvel would fill in the void left by the other studios.

My reasoning for not wanting to see Spider-Man and X-Men leave Sony and Fox has nothing to do with fear of getting less movies. It's more to do with MS's growing pains over the last five years. The Avenger's may be the next phase in the evolution, but I'll need more evidence with future films. And I've liked all of Marvel Studio's films. Despite it's flaws, I've watched Thor numerous times and never get tired of it. I love the performances and heart of that film.

But Sony and Fox have valuable franchises in Spider-Man and X-Men. So in order to keep them valuable they will have to raise the bar on productions moving forward. Not a bad thing. Fox made mistakes which I think they have learned from. First Class was better then any Marvel Studio's film thus far and TASM looks great as well. Vic Armstrong made a comment about a $220 m dollar budget for TASM. And two of the other three Spidey films at Sony have been above the $220 million mark. Would Marvel Studio's invest this kind of coin in a solo character? I'm not sure. With Disney's envolvement moving forward perhaps they would, but we have to see it. Let's see what they invest in the Cap and Thor sequels.

[kaijunexus]

My reasoning for not wanting to see Spider-Man and X-Men leave Sony and Fox has nothing to do with fear of getting less movies. It's more to do with MS's growing pains over the last five years. The Avenger's may be the next phase in the evolution, but I'll need more evidence with future films. And I've liked all of Marvel Studio's films. Despite it's flaws, I've watched Thor numerous times and never get tired of it. I love the performances and heart of that film.

But Sony and Fox have valuable franchises in Spider-Man and X-Men. So in order to keep them valuable they will have to raise the bar on productions moving forward. Not a bad thing. Fox made mistakes which I think they have learned from. First Class was better then any Marvel Studio's film thus far and TASM looks great as well. Vic Armstrong made a comment about a $220 m dollar budget for TASM. And two of the other three Spidey films at Sony have been above the $220 million mark. Would Marvel Studio's invest this kind of coin in a solo character? I'm not sure. With Disney's envolvement moving forward perhaps they would, but we have to see it. Let's see what they invest in the Cap and Thor sequels.

I was going to make a statement about budgets not necessarily reflecting the quality of a film, but I think you almost illustrated that point in your post.

Marvel's films have been significantly cheaper than Fox and Sony's, yet they arguably have a better quality over all.

Spider-Man 3 had a budget of $258 million.

X-Men: Last Stand's budget was $210 million.

Iron Man, however, had a budget of $140 million.

Two of these films were critically panned and generally loathed by fans, the other is revered as one of the best comic book movies of all time.

[SoNicRaDiATioN]

I don't think budget = quality. What does is talent, vision and everyone being on the same page. As well as a little luck.

Those films you mentioned had bigger problems then budget size.

And I wouldn't argue that Marvel Studio's films may have better quality overall. Sony and Fox's best beats MS's best. The Avenger's may change the game though.

[kaijunexus]

I don't think budget = quality. What does is talent, vision and everyone being on the same page. As well as a little luck.

Those films you mentioned had bigger problems then budget size.

And I wouldn't argue that Marvel Studio's films may have better quality overall. Sony an Fox's best beats MS's best.

I'm not so sure about that. Spider-Man 2 is Sony's highest ranking film on RottenTomatoes (not the best judge of movie quality, but it will suffice) at 93%. Fox's highest ranking film on RT is X2: X-Men United at 88%.

Iron Man sits at 95%. (btw, Avengers now sits at 96%)

Meanwhile, Sony's worst outing is Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance with an RT rating of 17%. Fox's worst is Fantastic Four with 27%.

Marvel's worst is Incredible Hulk with 66%. According to RT, they've never made a "rotten" film. With that kind of track record, how can you not trust them to do Spider-Man or X-Men justice?!

[SoNicRaDiATioN]

Well I agree, I don't put much stock in RT. So many of the reviewers they let stand on that site write poor reviews. And SM2 was at 95% at one point and held strong. Then at 94% for a long time. Now 93%. As long as they keep letting reviews come in after the initial release, then these numbers will fluctuate. Same will happen with IM. SM2 has a better metacritic rating then IM (83- 79) and I put more stock in that site then RT.

I agree about Ghost Rider being terrible. But that probably wouldn't even be made at Disney/Marvel. I don't see how giving the worst of each respective studio is really relevant. Ghost Rider aside, I'd rather have a studio swing for the fences then fit everything into more of a company mold and play it safer in general. Fox's mistakes have been well documented, but again, I think they learned from past mistakes. First Class is a great start.

[kaijunexus]

Well I agree, I don't put much stock in RT. So many of the reviewers they let stand on that site write poor reviews. And SM2 was at 95% at one point and held strong. Then at 94% for a long time. Now 93%. As long as they keep letting reviews come in after the initial release, then these numbers will fluctuate. Same will happen with IM. SM2 has a better metacritic rating then IM (83- 79) and I put more stock in that site then RT.

I agree about Ghost Rider being terrible. But that probably wouldn't even be made at Disney/Marvel. I don't see how giving the worst of each respective studio is really relevant. Ghost Rider aside, I'd rather have a studio swing for the fences then fit everything into more of a company mold and play it safer in general. Fox's mistakes have been well documented, but again, I think they learned and First Class is a great start.

I don't mean to run this conversation to eternity, but I just can't help but write a rebuttal. :woot:

RottenTomatoes is most definitely not the best judge of film, but I feel that it does a fair job of determining general movie quality.

Besides that, I just have two things...

First, I think pointing out the worst that's come out of those studios is highly relevant in illustrating what they're capable on the other end of the spectrum. You stated that you trust those studios with these properties based on the BEST movies they've produced. Yet, you can't make that judgement without also acknowledging their WORST. Their best is comparable to Marvel's best...but their worst is far worse.

Secondly, how can you not have faith in a studio that has produced 6 films ranging from good to amazing, and yet be so forgiving of one that has bungled 5 movies out of 8 just because they got it right on the most recent one??

[SoNicRaDiATioN]

I don't mean to run this conversation to eternity, but I just can't help but write a rebuttal. :woot:

RottenTomatoes is most definitely not the best judge of film, but I feel that it does a fair job of determining general movie quality.

Besides that, I just have two things...

First, I think pointing out the worst that's come out of those studios is highly relevant in illustrating what they're capable on the other end of the spectrum. You stated that you trust those studios with these properties based on the BEST movies they've produced. Yet, you can't make that judgement without also acknowledging their WORST. Their best is comparable to Marvel's best...but their worst is far worse.

Secondly, how can you not have faith in a studio that has produced 6 films ranging from good to amazing, and yet be so forgiving of one that has bungled 5 movies out of 8 just because they got it right on the most recent one??

I can promise you this. Marvel Studio's will make a BAD film in the future. Law of averages.

And I have faith in MS.:yay: I've already said I liked past films (except IM2). I just don't think they have done anything truly great. Nothing on the level of X2 or SM2. Iron man is borderline great to me. I think the Avengers may be the game changer. But let's wait and see what happens next. What MS's are willing to spend moving forward is a definite unknown for me. Not the case with Sony in particular.

Sony is two for three on Spidey and looks to be three for four if my expectations for TASM become realized. SM3 was a disappointment, but not because of a lack of ambition, but a lack of some of the elements I mentioned in an earlier post. Too many cooks in the kitchen.

X1 and X2 are great films, particularily X2. X3 and Wolverine were disasters but they recovered nicely with First Class. And with Singer back on board as a producer/consultant moving forward, I am more optimistic about that then I would be about Feige in the producer's chair.

[kaijunexus]

I can promise you this. Marvel Studio's will make a BAD film in the future. Law of averages.

And I have faith in MS.:yay: I've already said I liked past films (except IM2). I just don't think they have done anything truly great. Nothing on the level of X2 or SM2. Iron man is borderline great to me. I think the Avengers may be the game changer. But let's wait and see to what happens next. What MS's are willing to spend moving forward is a definite unknown for me. Not the case with Sony in particular.

Sony is two for three on Spidey and looks to be three for four if my expectations for TASM become realized. SM3 was a disappointment, but not because of a lack of ambition, but a lack of some of the elements I mentioned in an earlier post. Too many cooks in the kitchen.

X1 and X2 are great films, particularily X2. X3 and Wolverine were disasters but they recovered nicely with First Class. And with Singer back on board as a producer/consultant moving forward, I am more optimistic about that then I would be about Feige in the producer's chair.

I believe we've both made equally valid points. I have enjoyed our discussion and declare us both winners!

http://i.imgur.com/UzdPE.gif



:oldrazz:

[SoNicRaDiATioN]

Been a pleasure. :)

[metaphysician]

I think it'd be for the best if any rights reversion happened gradually. If everything suddenly landed back in Marvel's hands, that would produce a temptation to do something stupid. If they got only one license at a time, however, it'd both give more time for MS to establish a track record, and more time to reincorporate each one.

[Whiskey Tango]

I believe we've both made equally valid points. I have enjoyed our discussion and declare us both winners!

Been a pleasure. :)

The hell? This is the internet people, the only possible conclusion is CAGE FIGHT TO THE DEATH!!!

[SoNicRaDiATioN]

Yes, the internet brings out the worst in people at times. If things begin to head in an ugly direction, I usually hit the ejector button on my DB5. :)

Once May 4th hits I'm in the wind till the fall. I can just imagine the back and forth between different fan factions over the course of the summer. Not for me. I'll just wait for the dust to settle lol.

[spideyboy_1111]

i have a horrible feeling FOX is going to wedge in Wanda and Quicksilver to XMFC2 (so marvel can't use them) and I really wouldn't be shocked if the FF reboot involves the skrulls....

[Project862006]

^yeah god forbid we get magneto's kids in an x men film lol

you know a film they are fitted for more than avengers

[spideyboy_1111]

Pietro yes, Wanda hell no. she's had very little XMEN contact compared to avengers. Not to mention they went over a decade without any family connection to magneto

[spideyboy_1111]

Stop trying to compare XMEN history and popularity with "XMEN evolution"

[roach]

Pietro yes, Wanda hell no. she's had very little XMEN contact compared to avengers. Not to mention they went over a decade without any family connection to magneto

exactly its not like Hawkeye and Black Widow were part of the first team of Avengers or Peter being bitten by a genetically enhanced spider or Thor not being Donald Blake or Tony Starks father helped in creating Captain America or ..........the movies aren't the comics and the comics aren't the movies


but say if they wanted to be like the comics they could have Xavier's X-men go up against Magneto's Brotherhood of Mutants...who were members of the original team again??????

[spideyboy_1111]

exactly its not like Hawkeye and Black Widow were part of the first team of Avengers or Peter being bitten by a genetically enhanced spider or Thor not being Donald Blake or Tony Starks father helped in creating Captain America or ..........the movies aren't the comics and the comics aren't the movies


but say if they wanted to be like the comics they could have Xavier's X-men go up against Magneto's Brotherhood of Mutants...who were members of the original team again??????

It would all be redundant. If Wanda and Puerto we're in an xfilm the storyline should focus quite alot on them. not to mention Wanda is considered a hero, not a villain, she was only on the brotherhood for a very short time

[roach]

how would having Wanda and Pietro in an X-film be redundant????

[Project862006]

^because it is'nt marvel studios i guess lol

[Dr Tactics]

how would having Wanda and Pietro in an X-film be redundant????

Well they should be used in X4 instead of XMFC2 so Erik is old enough to have grown @#$ kids to recruit in his evil brotherhood.. And i believe X4 isn't in the current thought process. I could be wrong

[spideyboy_1111]

how would having Wanda and Pietro in an X-film be redundant????

The brotherhood vs XMEN again would be the redundant part. Not Pietro and Wanda. X1,x3,fc was all about that. Three films is a bit redundant. Considering the hellfire club was pretty much the prequel to the brotherhood.

[spideyboy_1111]

Well they should be used in X4 instead of XMFC2 so Erik is old enough to have grown @#$ kids to recruit in his evil brotherhood.. And i believe X4 isn't in the current thought process. I could be wrong

This is true as well.... If Wanda and Pietro are used in fc2 they'd have to be at the very least children, unless they're given the normal mutant movie treatment and nearly all of there comic history aside from there powers are removed (ala iceman, colossus, rogue, havok, Cyclops, deadpool, gambit, etc....)

[LindseyNH]

*sigh* i kinda liked the dragonball movie....not as a dragonball fan, but as a fan of crappy movies....

[Whiskey Tango]

re Wanda and Pietro

SHH: What about the future of "The Avengers?" I don't know if you want to bring in new characters or just keep the core team. Characters like the Scarlet Witch and Quicksilver, are they part of Fox's deal or are they characters you could use?
Feige: We both have them. There's a specific arrangement with those two characters that would allow us to use them with "Avengers," but not discuss or reference their mutant or Magneto-related lineage. They can use them as mutants and as Magneto's relatives, but cannot have anything to do with "The Avengers."

SHH: So whichever universe uses them first basically gets to keep them.
Feige: Yeah. Contracts are always complicated. (chuckles)

http://www.superherohype.com/features/articles/170425-exclusive-interview-with-marvel-studios-prez-kevin-feige

[spideyboy_1111]

...expect them in fc2

[kaijunexus]

...expect them in fc2

Probably.

But I don't know if I'd want them in the MCU yet if they can't be done faithfully (ie mutant heritage, Magento-connection, etc.).

Let's save QS and SW for when/if Marvel gets the X-Men rights back. No point including them if they're only going to be shadows of their actual comic counterparts...

[roach]

Probably.

But I don't know if I'd want them in the MCU yet if they can't be done faithfully (ie mutant heritage, Magento-connection, etc.).

Let's save QS and SW for when/if Marvel gets the X-Men rights back. No point including them if they're only going to be shadows of their actual comic counterparts...

i agree with this

[spideyboy_1111]

id agree with it if it weren't for the fact that they had over a decade of characterization without having any family connection to Magneto (and did just fine) In a sense they were just like hawkeye... former villains turned heroes (up until the family tie to magneto). And if Hawkeye isn't a former villain in the movies... then i don't see why wanda and pietro need it.

[Whiskey Tango]

There are more important Avengers to introduce in the meantime anyway (the Pym's, Vision)

[kaijunexus]

It really is a shame that Fox's contract actually includes "mutants" rather than just individual characters. What a terrible deal.

Marvel Studios can't even have normal people developing abilities based on mutated genetics because they'd infringe on the contract!

[roach]

yeah a terrible deal that kept Marvel out of bankruptcy

[kaijunexus]

yeah a terrible deal that kept Marvel out of bankruptcy

I'm entirely aware of it's benefits. That doesn't make it a good deal.

The fact is, I'm sure if Marvel had better lawyers work on these contracts at the time, Sony and Fox would have still purchased the rights without such overarching statutes.

Fox and Sony knew they were getting amazing deals for these properties for what were probably relatively low prices. Marvel was desperate and more concerned with escaping bankruptcy than signing fair contracts. That's completely understandable...

still doesn't make it a good deal for them.

[Whiskey Tango]

yeah a terrible deal that kept Marvel out of bankruptcy

If they hadn't been mismanaged and reduced to desperation in the first place they might have gotten a much more lucrative one.

[metaphysician]

Is there any reason to believe Marvel Studios can't use "naturally occurring genetic superhumans" at all? Because note, you can totally have those without *calling* them "mutants" specifically.

[spideyboy_1111]

Heh,, marvel should just let Wanda have mystical powers ala strange and have her loose control and "curse" random humans with powers. Think decimation, but in reverse. lol

[Raiden]

At least Marvel has the rights of Namor, who is also classified as mutant in the comics.

[TheFantasticJoe]

This is kind of a stupid question, but I was just wondering: who owns the rights to Jessica Drew? It would make sense for Sony to own her due to the Spider-Woman name, but I wouldn't be surprised if it were a split contract deal like Scarlet Witch/Quicksilver. I could imagine that if Marvel Studios wanted to use her in an Avengers movie, they could, as long as they don't use the Spider-Woman name. Her powers and costume aren't specifically connected to Spider-Man, so it's possible. I'm just taking a shot in the dark though. What do you think?

[kaijunexus]

This is kind of a stupid question, but I was just wondering: who owns the rights to Jessica Drew? It would make sense for Sony to own her due to the Spider-Woman name, but I wouldn't be surprised if it were a split contract deal like Scarlet Witch/Quicksilver. I could imagine that if Marvel Studios wanted to use her in an Avengers movie, they could, as long as they don't use the Spider-Woman name. Her powers and costume aren't specifically connected to Spider-Man, so it's possible. I'm just taking a shot in the dark though. What do you think?

Marvel most definitely owns the full right to Spider-Woman. She is not a "Spider-Man" character, and she has literally nothing in common with Spidey apart from a similar name.

[babykhris]

If I was Marvel I'd work out a deal with SONY to get Ghost Rider and while they at it tell them to throw in Silver Sable while they are at it.

[Creo]

If I was Marvel I'd work out a deal with SONY to get Ghost Rider and while they at it tell them to throw in Silver Sable while they are at it.

I was under the impression that Marvel regained the rights to Ghost Rider.

[bigscore]

I would really like to see DD done over with a more "mature" theme in the same feel as TDK or The Watchmen....

[slimshady247]

If TASM bombs, will MS get back the rights to Spidey?

[TheFantasticJoe]

If TASM bombs, will MS get back the rights to Spidey?

Nope. Even if it only makes one dollar, Sony will rush out more and more Spidey films to keep the rights. I don't forsee them getting the rights back within this decade.

[Silvermoth]

If TASM bombs, will MS get back the rights to Spidey?

It won't bomb. It's too well known a brand.

That's okay. It would be cool to see Spiderman meet up with The Avengers but it's also nice to let the Avengers be themselves for a while without Spiderman.

[slimshady247]

Considering the pretty tame reception it got at my showing of Avengers along with ambivalence over a reboot so soon after the last franchise film, I'd say it bombing is possible.

[Captain Marvel]

If I was Marvel I'd work out a deal with SONY to get Ghost Rider and while they at it tell them to throw in Silver Sable while they are at it.

Hold up a second. They own Silver Sable, too?!?

I was under the impression that Marvel regained the rights to Ghost Rider.

I don't see how. Sony put out a Ghost Rider movie only a few months ago.

[AvengeME]

I think a distribution deal is more profitable for Fox at this point. They make money and have nothing to lose. Have Disney do the marketing but Fox puts its name on it and rakes in 5% for any major FF character used in film. If that is too much, maybe make it 10% for Fantastic Four stand alone films and less that 5% for characters in cross overs and spinoffs. It would actually add up. Say SS appears in a Guardian of the Galaxy or Defenders movie that makes 6-700 WW. That's a good 20 million just for using SS in a movie.

[Creo]

Hold up a second.
I don't see how. Sony put out a Ghost Rider movie only a few months ago.

Yea, I was mixing up Ghost Rider with Punisher/Blade. I don't really care though, I'm not a huge fan of GR or his movies.

[babykhris]

Hold up a second. They own Silver Sable, too?!?



I don't see how. Sony put out a Ghost Rider movie only a few months ago.

Silver Sable appeared in the Spectacular Spider-Man cartoon and it's been stated that only characters under the Spidey umbrella were on that show.
Ie Venom, Black Cat, Silver Sable.

[spider-neil]

marvel were INSANE not to put an expirey date on the film rights.
all long as fox and sony keep making movies its possible marvel may NEVER get their characters back.

you may never see
spidey team up with wolverine
spidey team up with daredevil
hulk vs the thing
an x-men/FF/avengers infinity guantlet crossover

and that's a crime

however you could see a
xmen/FF cross over

[Avenger]

I agree, but they didn't really have much of a choice at the time. Marvel was desperate. At least they never sold their rights to the Avengers.

[spider-neil]

I agree, but they didn't really have much of a choice at the time. Marvel was desperate. At least they never sold their rights to the Avengers.


to be fair;

best of the genre
SM2 - sony
X2 - fox
X:FC - fox

excellent
spider-man 1 - sony
blade 1 and 2 - new line

[metaphysician]

I disagree, in that I think Iron Man and Avengers are better than any of those. However, they are all certainly excellent movies. Its not like Sony and Fox did *nothing* good with the licenses.

( plug: I'd really put the Jane Punisher in the same category. Its a really under appreciated movie. )

[Calavera]

if they got the rights back to x-men they could do x-men vs the avengers.

it could use the ultimate war storyline with magneto getting his powers back and commiting a terrorist attack and sheild sending the avengers to take him down, with the x-men in the middle of the fight

would it work if they built it up even?

[psylockolussus]

FYI for the FOX/Sony haters, people still consider X-Men 2 and Spider-Man 2 as two of the greatest Marvel movies ever made.

People are just whining because they want to see Wolverine and Spider-Man in the Avengers movie.

[spideyboy_1111]

FYI for the FOX/Sony haters, people still consider X-Men 2 and Spider-Man 2 as two of the greatest Marvel movies ever made.

People are just whining because they want to see Wolverine and Spider-Man in the Avengers movie.

or we actually want all our marvel properties to have as much care, and trueness to the books as the MCU films have had.. While X1/X2/XFC were all good films...any fan can see how they totally botched and screwed up not only several great stories, but many of the characterizations as well.

[Whiskey Tango]

FYI for the FOX/Sony haters, people still consider X-Men 2 and Spider-Man 2 as two of the greatest Marvel movies ever made.

People are just whining because they want to see Wolverine and Spider-Man in the Avengers movie.

Stuff that nonsense. Not everybody who feels differently than you is a ****ing whiner. Maybe they just don't want to see another X-Men Origins: Wolverine or Spider-Man 3. Or maybe...

or we actually want all our marvel properties to have as much care, and trueness to the books as the MCU films have had.. While X1/X2/XFC were all good films...any fan can see how they totally botched and screwed up not only several great stories, but many of the characterizations as well.

...yeah. :up:

[venom892]

I agree that while XM/XM2/XFC are great there are few botches as far as characters go. Cyclops was completely screwed in that franchise and Emma Frost was a complete bust in First Class.

[Beikoku Taichou]

Also, X3 left the series in such a mess but they are afraid to make a fourth one, and are continuing to do prequels instead.

After seeing Avengers, I REALLY want to see an X-Men movie made by Marvel. I liked X1, X2, and first class, but in light of Avengers I feel like the X movies could have been more over the top. They missed several opportunities to introduce Sentinels, for example.

[spideyboy_1111]

I agree that while XM/XM2/XFC are great there are few botches as far as characters go. Cyclops was completely screwed in that franchise and Emma Frost was a complete bust in First Class.

As was rogue, colossus, iceman, storm, Phoenix, havok, banshee, deadpool, gambit, angel, psylocke , juggernaut, and jubilee

[STR1]

I don't think budget = quality. What does is talent, vision and everyone being on the same page. As well as a little luck.

Those films you mentioned had bigger problems then budget size.

And I wouldn't argue that Marvel Studio's films may have better quality overall. Sony and Fox's best beats MS's best. The Avenger's may change the game though.

The Avengers is changing the game big time! Best movie from MS that I don't see Fox and Sony topping easily.

[spideyboy_1111]

The Avengers is changing the game big time! Best movie from MS that I don't see Fox and Sony topping easily.

Yeah. The avengers proved if taken great respect and care, superhero films do not need to be dark, "realistic", and full of leather costumes. They can be translated as is with very few minor changes

[SoNicRaDiATioN]

The Avengers is changing the game big time! Best movie from MS that I don't see Fox and Sony topping easily.

I agree. But it will give them great incentive to try.

[SoNicRaDiATioN]

Yeah. The avengers proved if taken great respect and care, superhero films do not need to be dark, "realistic", and full of leather costumes. They can be translated as is with very few minor changes

Also proves that you need a talented writer/director to make it happen. Whedon knows the characters. Lightning in a bottle as much as careful planning. Just wanting to do it isn't a guarantee..

[spideyboy_1111]

Also proves that you need a talented writer/director to make it happen. Whedon knows the characters. Lightning in a bottle as much as careful planning. Just wanting to do it isn't a guarantee..

Well whedon had alot of help, he didn't do it alone, let's not forget favreau, branagh, Fiege, and Johnston. They all started the dream. It was a massive collaborative effort

[SoNicRaDiATioN]

Well whedon had alot of help, he didn't do it alone, let's not forget favreau, branagh, Fiege, and Johnston. They all started the dream. It was a massive collaborative effort

True, but I don't know if any of those guys could have done to the Avengers what Whedon did. His unique and distinctive voice has taken every one of these characters to another level. This isn't a good, well made Avengers movie, it's a great movie.

[spideyboy_1111]

Indeed

[mightiest_mortal]

FYI for the FOX/Sony haters, people still consider X-Men 2 and Spider-Man 2 as two of the greatest Marvel movies ever made.

People are just whining because they want to see Wolverine and Spider-Man in the Avengers movie.

I've got to agree with this.


Yeah. The avengers proved if taken great respect and care, superhero films do not need to be dark, "realistic", and full of leather costumes. They can be translated as is with very few minor changes

Avengers works.. because that's the more outlandish team of Marvels teams, so Cap can be in bright spandex and it can work within the film... but even then, it was mostly limited to him. Even Hawkeye was nothing like his comic counterpart in origin and history.. and they would never have given him his classic costume on screen like they could cap.

Wolverine could NEVER have worn his yellow spandex suit in a film. No matter what the explanation, it would have looked ridiculous. I don't get how people still don't see this? IT makes no sense in the comics why they wear the suits, but that's what you do in comics. In a movie it couldn't work.

X1 + X2 did a bangup job with the X-Men. X-Men first class was a great film too... and felt more X-Meny than the X-Men Comics have in a long time.

Like wise Spider-Man 1 + 2 were great films.


I think we should all wait and see what Avengers 3 is like before we give Marvel all their properties back,

[marvelrobbins]

I don't get this obsession with wanting Wolverine and SPider-Man In The Avengers.I mean for decades neather one had anything to do with the Avengers.

X-Men and X2 are great films.first Class did great job too.Fox Isn't going to let go of X-Men anytime soon.As a X-Men 616 fan I worry about marvel wanting to use too much
ultimate elements.Plus considering how Marvel can't get any non avengers projects off the ground.Even Avengers related projects like Ant-Man and Black Panther haven't made much progress.If Marvel got X-Men back It could be many years till they actully did anything with the X-Men.

I had Issues witht he Rami SPider-Man tirlogy but compared to latest trailer of the Amazing SPider-Man SPider-Man 1 and 2 are great adaptans of 616 Spider-Man.
Rami's take Is probally the best 616 Spider-Man will ever get.

[spideyboy_1111]

I've got to agree with this.




Avengers works.. because that's the more outlandish team of Marvels teams, so Cap can be in bright spandex and it can work within the film... but even then, it was mostly limited to him. Even Hawkeye was nothing like his comic counterpart in origin and history.. and they would never have given him his classic costume on screen like they could cap.

Wolverine could NEVER have worn his yellow spandex suit in a film. No matter what the explanation, it would have looked ridiculous. I don't get how people still don't see this? IT makes no sense in the comics why they wear the suits, but that's what you do in comics. In a movie it couldn't work.

,

this is hogwash.. sorry. but it is. If the first class costumes, avengers costumes, spider-man, and fantastic four spandex worked on film there's no reason the X-men's could not. No.. Wolverines 90s look would never translate on screen, nor would his cowl... But the modern (especially Astonishing) costume would work just fine (maskless, he really doesn't need a mask anyway). As would most of the modern X-men costumes. Hell if they're that worried about blue and yellow.. then give him a brown version of his astonishing to die down the flashy.

There's absolutely no reason an X-men film can't be as epic as an avengers film, bringing together a team of heroes. The x-men have constantly failed at truly showing a "team". First Class and the end of X3 are really about all we've seen and neither have been as successful at doing a proper team fight as the avengers just accomplished in NYC. No where even close.

point in case.. much like the stories and characterizations... the costumes can resemble and keep with the "feel" of the spirit of the characters without it being a full on 100% direct translation. Truly, so far the only direct translation in costume to a near perfect accuracy has been Iron Man's armor But again, they went with a modern look, not his 60s,70s,80s,90s etc.. armors. Why? because today they're drawn more realistic.

[spideyboy_1111]

I don't get this obsession with wanting Wolverine and SPider-Man In The Avengers.I mean for decades neather one had anything to do with the Avengers.

X-Men and X2 are great films.first Class did great job too.Fox Isn't going to let go of X-Men anytime soon.As a X-Men 616 fan I worry about marvel wanting to use too much
ultimate elements.Plus considering how Marvel can't get any non avengers projects off the ground.Even Avengers related projects like Ant-Man and Black Panther haven't made much progress.If Marvel got X-Men back It could be many years till they actully did anything with the X-Men.

I had Issues witht he Rami SPider-Man tirlogy but compared to latest trailer of the Amazing SPider-Man SPider-Man 1 and 2 are great adaptans of 616 Spider-Man.
Rami's take Is probally the best 616 Spider-Man will ever get.

? wth are you talking about?

just because films arn't out yet doesn't mean they haven't gotten them off the ground... They've announced several times the plan was to get the Avengers off the ground FIRST both Antman and Runaways (as well as all other projects, aside from script writing were all put on hold). They also until recently have stated only 2 movies a year... and each of the current avengers films have sequels. (they'd be foolish not to make them). Antman and Dr. Strange are both entering the final phases of pre-production. Antman is now just waiting on the scheduling of Wright and Marvel, and Strange is polishing off the script. Runaways however could be shelved.. though i hope not because they began audition process which was put on hold for avengers...

2014 will see 1 cap... and it's highly speculated we will see Antman, Dr. Strange, or another newbie that year as well..

[Whiskey Tango]

Are we back to the old "Wolverine would look silly in yellow spandex" argument? Cuz yah, he would. Good thing nobody uses spandex, eh?

Now take a material like Cap's suit, or whatever the First Class outfits were made of, and fashion a Wolverine costume that looks good and doesn't feel like cheap cosplay and you've got something.

[spideyboy_1111]

Are we back to the old "Wolverine would look silly in yellow spandex" argument? Cuz yah, he would. Good thing nobody uses spandex, eh?

Now take a material like Cap's suit, or whatever the First Class outfits were made of, and fashion a Wolverine costume that looks good and doesn't feel like cheap cosplay and you've got something.

exactly. (which is also why i favor the Astonishing look)

people for some reason have a reallllllly hard time using any capacity of their imaginations...

[marvelrobbins]

? wth are you talking about?

just because films arn't out yet doesn't mean they haven't gotten them off the ground... They've announced several times the plan was to get the Avengers off the ground FIRST both Antman and Runaways (as well as all other projects, aside from script writing were all put on hold). They also until recently have stated only 2 movies a year... and each of the current avengers films have sequels. (they'd be foolish not to make them). Antman and Dr. Strange are both entering the final phases of pre-production. Antman is now just waiting on the scheduling of Wright and Marvel, and Strange is polishing off the script. Runaways however could be shelved.. though i hope not because they began audition process which was put on hold for avengers...

2014 will see 1 cap... and it's highly speculated we will see Antman, Dr. Strange, or another newbie that year as well..

I am not holding my breath for Ant-Man.How many years has Edgar Wright been attached to Ant-Man.I will be surprised If Marvel has more than 2 films In 2014(Not counting sony's The Amazing Spider-Man 2 and fox's First Class sequel) and you forget there are no plans for Incredible Hulk sequel.The planned ABC show doesn't count as sequel.Now I am betting on ant-man or Dr Strange as second marvel 2014 film.

[venom892]

As was rogue, colossus, iceman, storm, Phoenix, havok, banshee, deadpool, gambit, angel, psylocke , juggernaut, and jubilee I don't know about Jubilee and Psylocke counting seeing as they hardly even speak or are even acknowledged in the films. Honestly you could debut them in a new film and no one bat an eye or reference their previous "appearances". I agree with the rest of your list though. Rouge was basically a Kitty Pryde/Jubilee hybrid, Iceman wasn't a jokester at all, Gambit was simply a plot device, Angel basically had no story arc, Phoenix was a mental disorder, Colossus was just there, Juggernaut and Deadpool are so far away from what they really are it was awful.

[Dr Tactics]

Its not about Avengers may change the game.. After breaking a record and probably half or more will see it again or for the first time next weekend, THe Avengers already have.. So what should we have learned (Studios,Producers, Fans, and Debaters)

1. To re quote spideyboy_1111
Yeah. The avengers proved if taken great respect and care, superhero films do not need to be dark, "realistic", and full of leather costumes. They can be translated as is with very few minor changes
remember after TDK every studio wanted to make every comic book theme film like that cause it made all this money and awards? So now Avengers owns the record and is on pace to be the most profitable comic book movie ever (and I don't see the DKR beating Avengers IMO) they'll want to copy them too? Well if history is any indication

2.http://www.bdnews24.com/details.php?id=224069&cid=15 Paramount already collected $57.5 million in April, when the film was released internationally. And it stands to collect 8 percent of the millions that the film will earn in theaters, on DVD, and when it is watched on the Internet, according to two people with knowledge of the deal.

Paramount is caking off buy sitting on their @$$ and letting Marvel/Disney do their thing with the properties that were licensed to them. PARAMOUNT RISKED NOTHING and gained everything. Cross studio production as far a Marvel properties is concerned is a WIN-WIN-WIN. Tom Rothman, from a financial standpoint, would be a idiot to allow the rights to revert back to Marvel and would be BIGGER idiot to not allow FF and DD (More FF then DD) not to be part of the MCU and get Marvel/Disney to produce the film. The Jury's still out on whether ASM is part of the MCU (NOT AVENGERS) and it would do them/Sony very well from a financial stand point.

Its gonna be a interesting summer

[spideyboy_1111]

I am not holding my breath for Ant-Man.How many years has Edgar Wright been attached to Ant-Man.I will be surprised If Marvel has more than 2 films In 2014(Not counting sony's The Amazing Spider-Man 2 and fox's First Class sequel) and you forget there are no plans for Incredible Hulk sequel.The planned ABC show doesn't count as sequel.Now I am betting on ant-man or Dr Strange as second marvel 2014 film.

Well u won't hold very long. He just tweeted a small teaser image today, and Fiege also announce that some minor rest footage would begin this summer.....

[Dr Tactics]

FYI for the FOX/Sony haters, people still consider X-Men 2 and Spider-Man 2 as two of the greatest Marvel movies ever made.

People are just whining because they want to see Wolverine and Spider-Man in the Avengers movie.

To be honest ,IMO, I don't even thing fans give a rats @$$ who owns the characters just as long as they're treated properly and can have the opportunity to exist in the same universe. FF/Avengers and or DD/ASM. Their history in the comics are blended (stories, villains,etc) so this studio separations are making fans angry.

[spideyboy_1111]

To be honest ,IMO, I don't even thing fans give a rats @$$ who owns the characters just as long as they're treated properly and can have the opportunity to exist in the same universe. FF/Avengers and or DD/ASM. Their history in the comics are blended (stories, villains,etc) so this studio separations are making fans angry. are you talking fanboys or general audience? Because id much prefer them all cohabitating.. If not characters, than detail. Kingpin, Latveria, the bugle, stark tower, oscorp,,, shield,Baxter building, mutants, pym particles etc...

[spideyboy_1111]

Edit. NVM

I think most fans could careless if spidey and Wolvie teamup. I think there's far more important conversions

[Gabe99]

Despite 'John Carter,' Disney Beats Quarterly Earnings Expectations (http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/disney-quarterly-earnings-expectations-321661)
In its earnings release, CEO Robert Iger expressed confidence for the current quarter, partially because Marvel Entertainment's The Avengers "shattered domestic box-office records with a $207.1 million opening weekend for a global performance of more than $702 million to date."

On a conference call with analysts, Iger called Avengers "a great illustration of why we like Marvel so much." Then -- as if there were any doubts -- the CEO announced that a sequel to the blockbuster film is in the works with a release date "to be determined."

Multiple analysts asked about the licensed-product opportunities surrounding Avengers. Iger said there is stronger demand for Hulk toys since the release of the film last week, and added that there are "multiple opportunities to mine these great characters."

Iger said there are plans, for example, to add Avenger-based attractions to theme parks where existing deals with competitors make that possible.

Iger shot down the possibility of purchasing the film rights to other Marvel characters -- Fox's rights to X-Men, for example -- on the basis that there are so many in the Marvel stable to begin with that isn't the need for more.

[BatsDC]

I wouldn't be very surprised if they bought Fantastic Four and Daredevil back anyway, and just announce at ComicCon they got the rights back. With the amount of money The Avengers is making, it should definatley be somethig they at least think about. Feige was always quick to shoot down any questions about buying back rights.

[spideyboy_1111]

I wouldn't be very surprised if they bought Fantastic Four and Daredevil back anyway, and just announce at ComicCon they got the rights back. With the amount of money The Avengers is making, it should definatley be somethig they at least think about. Feige was always quick to shoot down any questions about buying back rights.

Yeah. I think marvel should attempt at the very least, to try to get all the marvel knights back. They have the logo and market it as a joint entity, so why not do something with it? The avengers universe is a big epic one, but why not build up the darker, grittier, R rated universe that is marvel knights? I wouldn't oppose a future blade/ghostrider/Dr.strange teamup. I really think and hope mk's become a marvel studios substation.

As for the F4.. They're just a given that they need to be included in the avengers world. So many villains, locations, heroes, and science discoveries are interconnected between the fan4

[AvengeME]

Paramount is caking off buy sitting on their @$$ and letting Marvel/Disney do their thing with the properties that were licensed to them. PARAMOUNT RISKED NOTHING and gained everything. Cross studio production as far a Marvel properties is concerned is a WIN-WIN-WIN. Tom Rothman, from a financial standpoint, would be a idiot to allow the rights to revert back to Marvel and would be BIGGER idiot to not allow FF and DD (More FF then DD) not to be part of the MCU and get Marvel/Disney to produce the film. The Jury's still out on whether ASM is part of the MCU (NOT AVENGERS) and it would do them/Sony very well from a financial stand point.

Its gonna be a interesting summer

Co-produce the reboots and sequels. Give the ASM sequels Avenger type tid bits and Easter Eggs, like mentioning Stark Industries or the SHIELD with the intent of enhancing the Spiderman movie. If it does not improve marketability for the film it is not worth it for Sony. But there is no reason for it not to. The Spidery universe needs to be expanded beyond high school.

I think Fox and Marvel can co-produce a FF reboot. Too many opportunities to cross pollinate. Give Marvel creative control, let Fox handle marketing. But take more than 8% commission if you are Fox.

[spideyboy_1111]

Paramount made bank for nothing. If fox was smart they'd do the same with both FF and DD dead franchises.

Hell the DD reboot just slipped even further with Slade now directing another film first.

[AvengeME]

Not even Marvel can fit FF into their slate. What is the point of another super team when you already have the Avengers? Do you redo the origin? Where would they fit in the time line? The FF aren't just some minor superheroes. They are every bit the celebrities that Tony Stark is.

I think phase III Marvel is a good spot for their debut. Go with an Avengers Disassembled story line for Avengers 2. Break up the Avengers after some crazy threat, but save Thanos for a later time.

Then do a FF movie without rehashing the origin. Tell the origin in pieces, like flashbacks, brief scenes in the middle of the film, like Batman Begins. Show how they go from rejects to celebrity superheroes. I think the first two movies got that angle right but they did not expand on it.

Avengers 3 would bring back the Avengers and make them a staple once again, but you would have to explain the absence of the Fantastic Four which would be near impossible. If you include them you run the risk of being overloaded with characters. Not good.

If you wait until after Avengers 3, you introduce the FF too late in the timeline. Doesn't make sense.

[roach]

I think everyone missed the part where they said they aren't purchasing back the rights to anymore characters

[Whiskey Tango]

Well u won't hold very long. He just tweeted a small teaser image today,

what's this about?

[spideyboy_1111]

Not even Marvel can fit FF into their slate. What is the point of another super team when you already have the Avengers? Do you redo the origin? Where would they fit in the time line? The FF aren't just some minor superheroes. They are every bit the celebrities that Tony Stark is.

I think phase III Marvel is a good spot for their debut. Go with an Avengers Disassembled story line for Avengers 2. Break up the Avengers after some crazy threat, but save Thanos for a later time.

Then do a FF movie without rehashing the origin. Tell the origin in pieces, like flashbacks, brief scenes in the middle of the film, like Batman Begins. Show how they go from rejects to celebrity superheroes. I think the first two movies got that angle right but they did not expand on it.

Avengers 3 would bring back the Avengers and make them a staple once again, but you would have to explain the absence of the Fantastic Four which would be near impossible. If you include them you run the risk of being overloaded with characters. Not good.

If you wait until after Avengers 3, you introduce the FF too late in the timeline. Doesn't make sense.

marvel has already announced that they wont oppose 3 movies a year now.. their slate can expand. It would have to anyway if you ever want new properties.

[Whiskey Tango]

I think everyone missed the part where they said they aren't purchasing back the rights to anymore characters

Did we miss the part where they probably won't turn them down if they naturally revert back ala Hulk or Punisher?

[roach]

Did we miss the part where they probably won't turn them down if they naturally revert back ala Hulk or Punisher?

but since we know some work is being done on them then we know they won't revert

[Whiskey Tango]

but since we know some work is being done on them then we know they won't revert

Do we know this, or do we know what Rothman's been repeating for several years?

[spideyboy_1111]

Did we miss the part where they probably won't turn them down if they naturally revert back ala Hulk or Punisher?

and with Slade now doing another film next, it appears DD and Elektra might be headed home very soon

[spideyboy_1111]

but since we know some work is being done on them then we know they won't revert

"tweets" arn't work being done. and would never hold up in court.


don't you find it suspicious Slade just tweeted nothing was happening on DD, then last week Rothman tweets that it's happening... and then this week Slade magically has a new directing gig ?

sorry.. but that's how fox works. They're known for it.

[roach]

Do we know this, or do we know what Rothman's been repeating for several years?

all we really have to go on is what the studio tells us...didnt they just hire a screenwriter

[roach]

sorry.. but that's how fox works. They're known for it.

they've done this before...elaborate?

[Dr Tactics]

Not even Marvel can fit FF into their slate. What is the point of another super team when you already have the Avengers? Do you redo the origin? Where would they fit in the time line? The FF aren't just some minor superheroes. They are every bit the celebrities that Tony Stark is.

This is the MCU. U meaning Universe. So what we've seen so far in the movies are pockets of events to make the story they want to show. You can expand this Universe with FF and fit them anywhere they (Marvel/Fox) would deem they belong

I think phase III Marvel is a good spot for their debut. Go with an Avengers Disassembled story line for Avengers 2. Break up the Avengers after some crazy threat, but save Thanos for a later time.

Then do a FF movie without rehashing the origin. Tell the origin in pieces, like flashbacks, brief scenes in the middle of the film, like Batman Begins. Show how they go from rejects to celebrity superheroes. I think the first two movies got that angle right but they did not expand on it.

Avengers 3 would bring back the Avengers and make them a staple once again, but you would have to explain the absence of the Fantastic Four which would be near impossible. If you include them you run the risk of being overloaded with characters. Not good.

I disagree. The reason it can work, like in the comics are that they are too many villains for one group to fight. So they take of their businesses separately and if a need for FF to Team with the Avengers (or have a card game during down time) then that can happen post Avengers 3 (Secret Wars, Infinity Gauntlet,Civil War, etc)

If you wait until after Avengers 3, you introduce the FF too late in the timeline. Doesn't make sense.

We don't have to push it back that far. Even in the current timeline of the MCU Iron Man 2 events were happening during the same time period as events in TIH. Heck They could have already been in space when the Tesseract was utilized to open the portal which may have exposed their Ship to Cosmic Rays and WALLA FF Origin. SHEILD is not everywhere. They we're otherwise busy and not affiliated with the monitoring space travel department. hey can fit easily with enough imagination and we don't have to wait till Phase III. If they do, so be it.

[spideyboy_1111]

they've done this before...elaborate?

yeah... they pretty much all but let WATCHMEN's rights expire... but when WB acquired the rights, and the film was about to hit theaters they then decided to sue... and lost in court pretty hard

[Saitou Hajime]

Don't forget announcing "plans" to reboot F4 immediately after the announcement of Disney's acquisition of Marvel.

[spideyboy_1111]

Don't forget announcing "plans" to reboot F4 immediately after the announcement of Disney's acquisition of Marvel.

And again a week before the avengers film, and it's had literally no progress

[Saitou Hajime]

And the repeated attempts at attaching Josh Trank's name to the F4 reboot, despite the man having moved on to do other things and going on record that he wasn't even approached to begin with.

[AvengeME]

This is the MCU. U meaning Universe. So what we've seen so far in the movies are pockets of events to make the story they want to show. You can expand this Universe with FF and fit them anywhere they (Marvel/Fox) would deem they belong



I disagree. The reason it can work, like in the comics are that they are too many villains for one group to fight. So they take of their businesses separately and if a need for FF to Team with the Avengers (or have a card game during down time) then that can happen post Avengers 3 (Secret Wars, Infinity Gauntlet,Civil War, etc)



We don't have to push it back that far. Even in the current timeline of the MCU Iron Man 2 events were happening during the same time period as events in TIH. Heck They could have already been in space when the Tesseract was utilized to open the portal which may have exposed their Ship to Cosmic Rays and WALLA FF Origin. SHEILD is not everywhere. They we're otherwise busy and not affiliated with the monitoring space travel department. hey can fit easily with enough imagination and we don't have to wait till Phase III. If they do, so be it.

But the FF are an established team. They are global celebrities. It would be stupid not to involve them in a mass scaled invasion, which you would expect for something like Avengers 3. As far as the sequel, I think the villain will be a more personal one on a smaller scale, so depending on the scale of the threat, you could leave the FF out of that. If the villain threatens global annihilation it can't be done. At least Reed would have to be involved and you have to explain the absence of the rest.

I am thinking Avengers 2 will be darker and it won't have a happy ending, if they follow the Star Wars model. Something significant should happen at the end of the film. I think the team should break up and pave the way for other superhero teams in the MCU.

Now if you had a smaller scaled threat that brought back the Avengers for part 3, like Kang or Masters of Evil, you don't need the FF. Thanos you do.

[AvengeME]

I think everyone missed the part where they said they aren't purchasing back the rights to anymore characters

I remember reading a while back that Marvel gets a continuous commission for licensed properties, aside from a small portion of box office revenue. If that is the case I can see why Marvel is in no rush to re-purchase these properties.

Whatever that fee is, it is probably too small for Fox and Spiderman to care knowing the potential returns of a feature film. But at this rate, DD and FF are going by the wayside.

[spideyboy_1111]

But the FF are an established team. They are global celebrities. It would be stupid not to involve them in a mass scaled invasion, which you would expect for something like Avengers 3. As far as the sequel, I think the villain will be a more personal one on a smaller scale, so depending on the scale of the threat, you could leave the FF out of that. If the villain threatens global annihilation it can't be done. At least Reed would have to be involved and you have to explain the absence of the rest.

I am thinking Avengers 2 will be darker and it won't have a happy ending, if they follow the Star Wars model. Something significant should happen at the end of the film. I think the team should break up and pave the way for other superhero teams in the MCU.

Now if you had a smaller scaled threat that brought back the Avengers for part 3, like Kang or Masters of Evil, you don't need the FF. Thanos you do.

Doesn't that depend if the team is created yet? Or if they're even on earth at the time or even in this dimension? It'd be incredibly easy to say they've been stuck in the negative zone

[AvengeME]

Doesn't that depend if the team is created yet? Or if they're even on earth at the time or even in this dimension? It'd be incredibly easy to say they've been stuck in the negative zone

Then put them in the negative zone. But explaining that every time would be kinda tedious. The point is, the Avengers were a last ditch effort to bring together super individuals to fight a greater battle. If and when the FF are established and active, the Avengers kinda lose their purpose. Who is more reliable the Hulk, a Norse God, and a loose cannon like Stark? Or the FF?

But yeah I suppose their absense could be explained if they went on a mission to space or whatever. They have to explain that to the audience though. But why would they go on a space mission to begin with if the fate of the planet is on the brink?

One thing you could do is make a two part series. The FF investigates a pending threat taking place after Avengers 2 in their next movie. That investigation is on going, but it is tied into Avengers 3, which they do not actively participate in. Two separate stories that connect and do not both take place on Earth. Maybe they get stuck in space or the Negative Zone.

[spideyboy_1111]

well the comics have pulled it off for years... The Avengers are more of a global task force than the Fantastic Four are... and the Fantastic Four are suppose to be more adventurous and inventors than "lets stop the bad guy". the Fan4 are also not part of a global task force.

[KangConquers]

well the comics have pulled it off for years... The Avengers are more of a global task force than the Fantastic Four are... and the Fantastic Four are suppose to be more adventurous and inventors than "lets stop the bad guy". the Fan4 are also not part of a global task force.

Any Fantastic 4 reboot needs to put the explorer aspect back into the franchise.

[spideyboy_1111]

Any Fantastic 4 reboot needs to put the explorer aspect back into the franchise.

indeed. it's imperative imo

[AvengeME]

Still too much of a hassle for Marvel to introduce the FF. You already have great minds in Stark, Banner, and maybe Pym so I think Reed wouldn't bring much more in that respect. Thing/Hulk are pretty redundant. The Storms' powers are kinda cheesy as it is. I am having my doubts that they will pursue the FF, or even utilize them immediately should the rights revert back.

I think for Cosmic Marvel you bring them back. I feel Avengers should be mostly Earth based and used solely for military purposes. For exploration purposes, say an alternate dimension, Namor and the Atlanteans, or other strictly scientific/archeological endeavors with opportunities for action, it would work. Something between Star Trek and Indiana Jones with superhero elements.

[spideyboy_1111]

I dont think you know reed very well at all if you actually think banner and stark cover his purpose....

[metaphysician]

Yeah, there's plenty of room for the Fantastic Four. They fill a distinct niche from the Avengers. Its not like they are the Defenders, who would be largely redundant.

[TheFantasticJoe]

Is it wrong that I mainly want the Fantastic Four rights back for its role in the grand scheme of things rather than the team itself? I'd love to see Doctor Doom, Silver Surfer, and Galactus incorporated into the MCU, as I feel they're essential parts of the Marvel Universe. I'm less concerned with solo movies.

Also, I heard the Fantastic Four and Daredevil rights officially revert in 2014. Is there any truth to this?

[spideyboy_1111]

Is it wrong that I mainly want the Fantastic Four rights back for its role in the grand scheme of things rather than the team itself? I'd love to see Doctor Doom, Silver Surfer, and Galactus incorporated into the MCU, as I feel they're essential parts of the Marvel Universe. I'm less concerned with solo movies.

Also, I heard the Fantastic Four and Daredevil rights officially revert in 2014. Is there any truth to this?

it's all speculation at this point.. DD's should be up this (or by last) year

[KangConquers]

Now if you had a smaller scaled threat that brought back the Avengers for part 3, like Kang or Masters of Evil, you don't need the FF. Thanos you do.

Kang won't happen. He's not "Small scale", the problem is that Loki stole his big move in Avengers 1.

[Whiskey Tango]

I would just like to have the FF back. You can forget about Spidey for another 10-15 years unless Sony Pictures goes bust (it's possible) and the X-Men have always been their own thing even within the confines of the MU but the FF bring a lot to the table.

[Bruce Malone]

Why did the Hulk's right's seem to revert back seemingly so fast you had another film out within 5 years? Same for punisher as well i suppose. Yet there has not been a DD film in 9 years. It seems so unbalanced.

[metaphysician]

Why did the Hulk's right's seem to revert back seemingly so fast you had another film out within 5 years? Same for punisher as well i suppose. Yet there has not been a DD film in 9 years. It seems so unbalanced.

Hulk reverted because Universal apparently wasn't sure they had a winner with TIH, so they made a deal with Marvel to co-produce halfway through. I have no clue what internal politics made them decide ditching the license was a good idea, though.

Punisher is easier: the first movie was mediocre and viewed as a failure, the second was an absolute flop. Lionsgate probably figured that license wasn't worth anything at all.

[KangConquers]

I'd honestly like all the rights back, the problem is I'm more interested in seeing new characters on the screen than a bunch of reboots. I'm much more interested in seeing Guardians of the Galaxy for the first time than F4 for the 3rd, or Black Panther for the first time than Daredevil for the 2nd.

[Whiskey Tango]

I'm ready to see the FF, not a weak half-assed attempt. I'd prefer Moon Knight over Daredevil.

[KangConquers]

I'm ready to see the FF, not a weak half-assed attempt. I'd prefer Moon Knight over Daredevil.

I'd love a good F4 reboot, I'd just wouldn't want to see everything they've been working on for years pushed back to make way for it.

I guess there is something to be said about F4 being the only A-list marvel property to not receive a good movie.

[DJ_KiDDvIcIOUs]

They need to get F4 back asap. DD is imperative too.

[KangConquers]

They need to get F4 back asap. DD is imperative too.

F4 I agree with, but imo there are so many movies I'm more interested in seeing than a Daredevil reboot: Probably close to a dozen.

[Sardaukar]

I don't know if everyone has seen this article: http://screenrant.com/marvel-comics-movies-characters-carl-6766/

Looking forward, Marvel can regain their characters but it’ll be nothing short of jumping through a ring of fire. The studio can shell out truckloads of cash to buy them back or wait for box office numbers to be so bad the studio that owns them doesn’t have any interest in following them up, ie. Ang Lee’s Hulk (thanks, Universal!). Not meeting a deadline for filming the property is the easiest way – most of the contracts have a clause that allows the rights to revert back to Marvel if principle photography doesn’t begin by a certain date after the initial release or if they make an upfront payment as if they were going to start principal photography. This, in part, is the reason we see studios releasing films in rapid succession.

Here’s a breakdown of the whole thing in list form (any characters/franchises not listed are under the rights of Marvel Studios):

20th Century Fox

Daredevil: Daredevil/Matt Murdock, Elektra (Natchios), The Kingpin/Wilson Fisk, Bullseye, Jack Murdock, Karen Page, Ben Urich

Elektra: Christine Cord/Tatoo, Typhoid Mary/Marry Alice Walker, Kirigi, Stick, Stone

Fantastic Four: Doctor Doom/Victor von Doom, Human Torch/Johnny Storm, Invisible Woman/Susan Storm, Mr. Fantastic/Dr. Reed Richards, The Thing/Ben Grimm, Nova/Frankie Raye, Alicia Masters, Willie Lumpkin

X-Men Mutants: [Agent Zero/Maverick/David North], Angel/Warren Worthington III, Arclight/Phillippa Sontag, Beast/Dr. Henry Phillip “Hank” McCoy, , [Bolt/Christopher Bradley], Callisto, Colossus/Piotr Nikolaievitch Rasputin, Cyclops/Scott Summers, [Deadpool/Wade Wilson], Emma (Grace) Frost, Jean Grey/Phoenix, Juggernaut/Cain Marko, Gambit/Remy LeBeau, Glob Herman/Herman Gardner, Iceman/Bobby Drake, Jubilee/Jubilation Lee, Katherine “Kitty” Anne Pryde, [Kestrel/John Wraith], Lady Deathstrike/Yuriko Oyama, Leech, Magneto/Erik Magnus Lehnsherr, Mastermind/Jason (Wyngarde), Multiple Man/James Arthur Madrox, Mystique/Raven Darkholme, Nightcrawler/Kurt Wagner, Phat/William Robert “Billy-Bob” Reilly, Professor Charles Xavier, Psylocke/Elizabeth “Betsy” Braddock, Pyro/St. John Allerdyce, Quill/Max Jordan, Rogue/(Anna) Marie, Sabretooth/Victor Creed, Sebastian Hiram Shaw, [Silver Fox], Siryn/Theresa Rourke Cassidy, (The) Spike, Storm/Ororo Munroe, Wolverine/Logan

X-Men Non-Mutants: Drake Family (Steven, Madeline, Ronny), Grey Family (Dr. John, Elaine), Henry Peter Gyrich, Robert Edward Kelly, Dr. Moira Kinross MacTaggert, Dr. Kavita Rao, William Stryker, Bolivar Trask, Warren Worthington II

[B]New Line Cinema

Vampires: Blade, Deacon Frost, Dracula/Vlad Tepes

Non-Vampires: Hannibal King, Abraham Whistler [UPDATE: Since the time of writing this, The Blade rights have been transferred back into Marvel's hands.]

Sony Pictures

Ghost Rider: Ghost Rider/Johnny Blaze, Blackheart/Legion, Phantom Rider/Carter Slade, Abigor, Gressil, Mephistopheles, Wallow, Barton Blaze, Roxanne Simpson

Spider-Man: Spider-Man/Peter Parker, Doctor Octopus/Otto Octavius, Green Goblin/Norman Osborn, (New) Green Goblin/Harry Osborn, [The Lizard]/Dr. Curt Connors, Sandman/Flint Marko, Venom/Eddie Brock Jr., Betty Brant, Dennis Carradine (Buglar), J. Jonah Jameson, Ben Parker, May Parker, John Jameson, Joseph “Robbie” Robertson, Gwen Stacy, Mendel Stromm, Flash Thompson

Lionsgate Entertainment

Punisher: The Punisher/Frank Castle, Jigsaw/Billy Russoti, Microchip/Linus Liberman, Joan the Mouse, Maginty, Mr. Bumpo, Spacker Dave, The Russian, Maria Elizabeth Castle, Detective Martin Soap [UPDATE: Since the time of writing this, The Punisher rights have been transferred back into Marvel's hands.]

[venom892]

So wait Sony doesn't have the rights to all the Spider-man villains/allies?