The "Keep Hope Alive" (that the rights can revert back to Marvel) thread

[Dark Raven]

I find it funny that anyone as a comic fan is inevitably going to end up learning a bit about IP law.

[Zarex]

Originally Posted by fangz

I'm confused too, because in this thread I'm reading things about people trading the merchandizing rights around. But say if Fox owns merchandising rights to X-Men, does that only apply to specifically an X-Men First Class T-shirt, for example? like, in this case, they wouldn't get money for a Wolverine T-shirt right?

or does it actually work like that? I can't imagine any amount of money that would make Marvel sell the actual complete merchandising rights to X-Men or Spider-Man. how does this stuff work?

It's extremely confusing. The only Marvel merchandising agreement that was somewhat transparent was the Spider-man joint venture with Sony. And that was only came to light due to a lawsuits filed back in 2003.

In any case, my understanding is that while merchandising profits for X-Men and FF movie merchandise (not yellow suited comic Wolverine) must be shared between Marvel and Fox, Disney/Marvel controls the process. That is, Disney can put as much (or as little) product in stores as they see fit. Back before the Disney purchase Marvel's major source of revenue was merchandising, and it would have seemed very unlikely for the company to close off a revenue stream from the sale of X-Men and FF related items.

This changed with the Disney purchase and the success of Marvel studios. Disney/Marvel is wisely focusing on properties they own outright, such as Avengers, Spider-man (Disney paid $287 million to purchase Sony's share of the Spider-man Joint Venture), and coming soon, Guardians of the Galaxy. Disney/Marvel is not going to clear space on store shelves for FF and X-Men merchandise when a portion of the proceeds (maybe) going to FOX.

This is, potentially, the best leverage Disney/Marvel has for gaining back film rights, or at least cutting a better deal with FOX. FOX is losing out on a major revenue stream and losing out on promotion for upcoming projects like DOFP and FF, and the projects are unlikely to have the worldwide visibility of the MCU films without it. Given the strong merchandising effort supporting the first two FF films, it gives me hope that an agreement will be reached between Disney and FOX to have the FF rebooted within the MCU.

[Dr Tactics]

Originally Posted by fangz

Casius---J = well, now see the Super Skrull was the one Skrull related property that I heard Marvel was NOT allowed to use. which would make sense because it's a Skrull with the powers of the FF, who they don't have cinematic rights to...

what you're saying doesn't make sense to me becuz the Skrulls weren't in FF2. so what's the restriction that you're talking about? there's no Skrulls.

Well in defense of Casius J's theory that Fox may not fully own the Super Skrull just the powers because the Super Skrull is in fact a Skrull none the less. So I give some credence to the theory of how Fox/Tim Story used Johnny in ROTSS to mimic a Super Skrull when he merged the FF's powers to defeat "Doom Surfer"..

and i think that whoever wrote that Hollywood Reporter piece, there's something about it that just points to them pulling a little too much out of their own ass. Cuz the whole thing is worded pretty unclearly about how much their source actually said. Like the reporter is the one adding on the stuff about Kree, Skrull and negative zone.

I can't see how Fox would have any right to do the Kree. God, this stuff has gotta be spelled out in the contract, I wish someone would just leak that. It'd answer so many questions in places like this.

I think it's Fox posturing if you ask me.. This movie if made it is almost sure to lose money and it was made just to keep Marvel away from the rights. Like I've said before that making this movie is like re-buying the rights or better yet purchasing an additional 7 year extension from Marvel being they'll have to recoup their own losses maybe worse then Disney had to with John Carter

'm confused too, because in this thread I'm reading things about people trading the merchandizing rights around. But say if Fox owns merchandising rights to X-Men, does that only apply to specifically an X-Men First Class T-shirt, for example? like, in this case, they wouldn't get money for a Wolverine T-shirt right?

or does it actually work like that? I can't imagine any amount of money that would make Marvel sell the actual complete merchandising rights to X-Men or Spider-Man. how does this stuff work?

Fox only has rights to produce,market and distribute the films. All merchandising relating to ANY Marvel characters period are Marvels which means that Marvel would be the one to manufacture, distribute and or partner with ie Mattel Toys merchandise related to the Movies. Since Marvel is now doing their own movies they will merchandise their own movies (and with Sony's with Spider-Man based on that merchandising deal) they don't have to now or really want to merchandise any movie products that will benefit another now rival movie studio. Thats why though there were toys related to the first three X-Men and 2 FF there were none for Fox Produced movies after 2008 when Marvel and Paramount released IM..

Edit: And to add, I think that there was a deal in place with Fox related with merchandising Marvel characters tie in with the movies but Marvel is in the drivers seat and Fox can never merchandise anything related to their Marvel movies without the full consent from Marvel

[Zarex]

Originally Posted by Dr Tactics

I think it's Fox posturing if you ask me.. This movie if made it is almost sure to lose money and it was made just to keep Marvel away from the rights. Like I've said before that making this movie is like re-buying the rights or better yet purchasing an additional 7 year extension from Marvel being they'll have to recoup their own losses maybe worse then Disney had to with John Carter

I simply don't see how this film becomes a box office success. For the first FF films, Fox experienced a significant drop off (12.5% per Box Office Mojo) in worldwide box office with the sequel, despite a 30% budget increase. Add in the inevitable reboot decrease of 15% or so, the lack of merchandising revenue, and the outlook is looking grimmer. Then you add in the increased production costs of a CGI Thing, a Negative Zone, and simply to keep the reboot from being as cheap looking as the initial duology.

Then you add to this a release date just 56 days before the Avengers and the film is going to be buried in A2 hype. Only the most ardent fans are going to see two Marvel superhero team up films within two months, and a large number of those fans are upset the FF doesn't get to play with their pals in the MCU. You add to that toxic mix a very green, although talented director, and this has the makings of a disaster. Hopefully FOX realizes this soon and Disney/Marvel and FOX can reach a deal to reboot the FF in their rightful film universe.

[fangz]

wow, thanx, that's all an eye opener, for sure. interesting stuff.

I really thought that the whole thing was bluffing by Fox, or posturing like Dr Tactics said until Trank became definitely attached to it. everything about it sounded like a sham up til then. but recently, (i don't think it's been talked about in this thread, but didn't check too far back), didn't Fox supposedly send Vaughn over to produce this now?

this would make sense, with Trank being green, as u say. But it seems like on some level, Fox is actually prepared to go thru with the movie, they wouldn't be tying up connections like Trank and, if true, Vaughn, with it otherwise, right?

[Zarex]

Originally Posted by fangz

wow, thanx, that's all an eye opener, for sure. interesting stuff.

I really thought that the whole thing was bluffing by Fox, or posturing like Dr Tactics said until Trank became definitely attached to it. everything about it sounded like a sham up til then. but recently, (i don't think it's been talked about in this thread, but didn't check too far back), didn't Fox supposedly send Vaughn over to produce this now?

this would make sense, with Trank being green, as u say. But it seems like on some level, Fox is actually prepared to go thru with the movie, they wouldn't be tying up connections like Trank and, if true, Vaughn, with it otherwise, right?

It certainly looks like they're going through with it. But I don't think it is costing Fox to much to announce a producer and director. What Fox really wants (IMHO) is a check.

[fangz]

You know Trank, I think, could be great for it. And i'm saying this becuz of the end of Chronicle especially...
Becuz we see Doom in past movies and in the comics even, tossing around energy bolts and ranting about this and that but it never really resonates I think, they way it did when that kid was tearing up the hospital downtown.

That was heavy stuff, partly becuz we witnessed this kid's descent, but also just the craziness and horror of it no matter his backstory. It was truly the uncomfortable expression of what would happen if the human will was given power and allowed to be unleashed. And if we could get a Doom with even half that weight in a movie, I think that'd be a heavy thing. scary. cuz Doom's way worse than that kid, haha. Doom's hell bent and chosen to embrace his own inner monstrosity.

But besides that, Chronicle was a story about these 3 particular kids and how they dealt with this meteor thing. It wasn't like a story about some everyman, it was very particular and made it obvious that it was. and that's another reason why I can see him being great for FF, becuz I think he would see them as 4 individual weird people that ended up kind of bound together by this accident. I guess I mean that he wouldn't just default any of them to some stereotypical role in a dysfunctional family. Which is the pitfall with a movie like the FF, is like too much sitcom, not enough real dynamic.

Too much just doesn't add up about this movie tho, like it's been mentioned, how are they gonna spend enough money for a good Thing? Reed's pretty expensive I think also, to get right. And just a bunch of stuff doesn't seem like it's being revealed the same way other movies are, there's something weird about it. Definitely, and I'm starting to get attached to Trank being the director so it's not just that I'm trying to wish and hope it dies back to Marvel.

[Dr Tactics]

Originally Posted by fangz

You know Trank, I think, could be great for it. And i'm saying this becuz of the end of Chronicle especially...
Becuz we see Doom in past movies and in the comics even, tossing around energy bolts and ranting about this and that but it never really resonates I think, they way it did when that kid was tearing up the hospital downtown.

That was heavy stuff, partly becuz we witnessed this kid's descent, but also just the craziness and horror of it no matter his backstory. It was truly the uncomfortable expression of what would happen if the human will was given power and allowed to be unleashed. And if we could get a Doom with even half that weight in a movie, I think that'd be a heavy thing. scary. cuz Doom's way worse than that kid, haha. Doom's hell bent and chosen to embrace his own inner monstrosity.

But besides that, Chronicle was a story about these 3 particular kids and how they dealt with this meteor thing. It wasn't like a story about some everyman, it was very particular and made it obvious that it was. and that's another reason why I can see him being great for FF, becuz I think he would see them as 4 individual weird people that ended up kind of bound together by this accident. I guess I mean that he wouldn't just default any of them to some stereotypical role in a dysfunctional family. Which is the pitfall with a movie like the FF, is like too much sitcom, not enough real dynamic.

Too much just doesn't add up about this movie tho, like it's been mentioned, how are they gonna spend enough money for a good Thing? Reed's pretty expensive I think also, to get right. And just a bunch of stuff doesn't seem like it's being revealed the same way other movies are, there's something weird about it. Definitely, and I'm starting to get attached to Trank being the director so it's not just that I'm trying to wish and hope it dies back to Marvel.

Keep in mind that as great of a story Chronicle was made on a 12 Mill budget. FF doesn't have that luxury.


Well it would be best that Trank was directing this movie under the Marvel umbrella (MCU) instead of (exclusively) with Fox. A co-produced budget between Disney and Fox would insure that any vision Josh would have for this FF movie can be possible($250 or more budget within reach of being greelit in anticipation with a $750 or more return + shared merchandising revenue) and also then the FF can get it's own spot on the calendar in 2016 and be marketed properly instead of shoe horned against the Avengers,Ant-Man, Pirates and potentially JL, and SWVII in a 5 month period. So I do wish it to die if Fox won't come to their senses. Vaughn wouldn't be needed and Feige is a much better producer for Marvel movies IMO based on the track records.

[Dr Tactics]

I thought this was an interesting article to share..

http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/03/...ossover-movies

Unfortunately, Marvel’s model is difficult to replicate, unless you’re a single studio fortunate enough to captain a mega-franchise. The issue lies, of course, with licenses. Even Marvel Studios struggled to assemble the Avengers; the Hulk once belonged to Universal, and Iron Man was with New Line. Marvel only had the means with which to win them back after a significant financial pact in 2005, enabling it to declare independence as a studio.

It’s common knowledge that a licence deal struck in ‘94 is the reason we won’t be seeing that deceptively unrealistic proposal – an X-Men/Avengers crossover – any time soon. Fox has thirteen odd years worth of X-Men on the big screen, and Sony’s invested enough in Spider-Man to reboot it from the popular Raimi adaptation with plans for a number of future films. Their roots in these franchises – and their pockets - go deep.
Historically, the only way to eschew such licensing issues is to use characters in the public domain – hence the frequent appearances of Dracula, Frankenstein’s Monster and Sherlock Holmes in popular cinema – or that somewhat trickier proposition; collaborate with another studio. There’s the slim possibility that Fox and Marvel could put aside massive creative differences and storyline continuity in their respective properties to work together, but such partnerships tend to sit uneasily. Freddy vs Jason’s years of development hell began because New Line and Paramount both wanted the licence of the other’s character. Hell, New Line’s subsequent Freddy Vs Jason Vs Ash proposal didn’t make its way out of the starting gate.

Really, Spielberg’s the only guy to have done it with finesse. As the producer of 1988’s Who Framed Roger Rabbit, it was he who was tasked with calling upon the giants of the animation world to bring their characters together in a single movie. And while there were some holdouts - Popeye, Tom and Jerry, Little Lulu, Casper and the Terrytoons never made it – his achievement in bringing together characters from Warner, Fleischer Studios, King Features Syndicate, Felix the Cat Productions, Turner Entertainment and Universal Pictures to star alongside Disney stalwarts was remarkable.

The key was compromise. An agreement was drawn up between Disney and Warner Bros. that Warner’s highest-profile characters should appear to be ‘equal’ to Disney’s; hence the fact Bugs and Mickey appear together, and Daffy and Donald are both depicted as master musicians. Disney faced similar hurdles more recently while trying to collect video game characters for its video game themed Wreck It Ralph, when publishers like Nintendo and Sega began to deliver increasingly specific – and eccentric - requests when it came to Disney’s depictions of their iconic characters. Ever consider how Bowser would drink his coffee? Someone at Nintendo has.

In the case of Roger Rabbit (and this weird anti-drugs cartoon crossover tele-movie from the ‘90s, but let’s not go there) there was a sense of goodwill attached to the project that must have been seductive to Warner et al. The film was pitched as a celebration of animation’s golden era, an honest amalgamation of Disney’s beautiful artwork, Warner’s characterization, and Tex Avery’s humour.

[kaijunexus]

If there's one thing that should keep our hope alive in this thread, it's FOX's fumbling of the Daredevil property rights. Daredevil was in very much the same situation that the Fantastic Four are currently in, minus a tentative release date.

A director was attached. We would hear little rumblings about what they were planning for the film, and many of the ideas were met with a fair amount of excitement from fans. The deadline for making a movie to keep the rights was rapidly approaching. Fan-base support for Fox making another film in the franchise was divided, and many wanted to rights to revert back to Marvel. FOX's previous two attempts at putting their property to film were critically panned and not very financially successful.

It was very much the same general climate. ...and what happened?

Fox dropped the ball and the rights reverted.

Don't give up hope.

[Willie Lumpkin]

Originally Posted by kaijunexus

If there's one thing that should keep our hope alive in this thread, it's FOX's fumbling of the Daredevil property rights. Daredevil was in very much the same situation that the Fantastic Four are currently in, minus a tentative release date.

A director was attached. We would hear little rumblings about what they were planning for the film, and many of the ideas were met with a fair amount of excitement from fans. The deadline for making a movie to keep the rights was rapidly approaching. Fan-base support for Fox making another film in the franchise was divided, and many wanted to rights to revert back to Marvel. FOX's previous two attempts at putting their property to film were critically panned and not very financially successful.

It was very much the same general climate. ...and what happened?

Fox dropped the ball and the rights reverted.

Don't give up hope.

That's an interesting point. We're less than 2 years from the announced release date and we haven't heard anything that would lead us to believe anything is actually happening.

Directors can be let go and scripts can be tossed.

Until we start hearing about locations, casting etc., we haven't passed the point of no return.

There have been many times that I have been looking forward to a project like this and been disappointed that it got scrapped. But in this case I might be glad to find out it will take a few years more than I originally thought.

[spideymouse]

Originally Posted by Willie Lumpkin

That's an interesting point. We're less than 2 years from the announced release date and we haven't heard anything that would lead us to believe anything is actually happening.

Directors can be let go and scripts can be tossed.

Until we start hearing about locations, casting etc., we haven't passed the point of no return.

There have been many times that I have been looking forward to a project like this and been disappointed that it got scrapped. But in this case I might be glad to find out it will take a few years more than I originally thought.

I still think this movie has a better chance of being made for 2015 than the Justice League movie.

[kaijunexus]

Originally Posted by spideymouse

I still think this movie has a better chance of being made for 2015 than the Justice League movie.

Unfortunately, I'd probably agree with that statement.

[Zarex]

The interesting thing about this situation is that while the FF IP rights likely aren't worth very much to FOX, the rights to the First Family, Doom, Galactus, the Surfer and the Skrulls are of great value to Marvel as the company moves to Phase 3 and beyond. So whether or not FOX is actually planning on putting a couple of hundred million into a reboot, we're going to be treated by a stream of upbeat production updates from Millar until FOX is forced to fish or cut bait. To use Millar's own words regarding the JL film, the FF reboot looks like "an excellent way of losing $200 million".

[metaphysician]

Yep. Fox is going to hold on as long as possible in the hopes of getting a check from Disney, or some equivalent consideration. The only question is if they are actually seriously trying to make a movie, only putting in enough effort to put something out to extend the license, or doing little other than bluffing.

[Dr Tactics]

Originally Posted by Zarex

The interesting thing about this situation is that while the FF IP rights likely aren't worth very much to FOX, the rights to the First Family, Doom, Galactus, the Surfer and the Skrulls are of great value to Marvel as the company moves to Phase 3 and beyond. So whether or not FOX is actually planning on putting a couple of hundred million into a reboot, we're going to be treated by a stream of upbeat production updates from Millar until FOX is forced to fish or cut bait. To use Millar's own words regarding the JL film, the FF reboot looks like "an excellent way of losing $200 million".

Who says Fox owns the Skrulls outright? Does Fox own those character/alien race outright along with the FF team,Doom Galatus and the Surfer? Being Marvel has Namor, The Inhumans and Black Panther (All originating for the Lee/Kirby era of the FF) who says they even have rights to FF characters and villains outside of the aforementioned? I think that in itself is a big bargaining chip to restructure the original 1994 movie licensing deal concerning the FF at least.

[Project862006]

Originally Posted by kaijunexus

If there's one thing that should keep our hope alive in this thread, it's FOX's fumbling of the Daredevil property rights. Daredevil was in very much the same situation that the Fantastic Four are currently in, minus a tentative release date.

A director was attached. We would hear little rumblings about what they were planning for the film, and many of the ideas were met with a fair amount of excitement from fans. The deadline for making a movie to keep the rights was rapidly approaching. Fan-base support for Fox making another film in the franchise was divided, and many wanted to rights to revert back to Marvel. FOX's previous two attempts at putting their property to film were critically panned and not very financially successful.

It was very much the same general climate. ...and what happened?

Fox dropped the ball and the rights reverted.

Don't give up hope.

the difference here is fox never really cared about DD

DD honestly could be made for 90- 100 million and a film that doesn't really scream summer blockbuster

while F4 is the definition of summer blockbuster it has space,huge cgi,spectacle,scope,super powers,sci fi,etc.

they obviously are more invested in F4 if they weren't they would of given up galactus and silver surfer for longer rights on DD like marvel purposed

[Zarex]

Originally Posted by Dr Tactics

Who says Fox owns the Skrulls outright? Does Fox own those character/alien race outright along with the FF team,Doom Galatus and the Surfer? Being Marvel has Namor, The Inhumans and Black Panther (All originating for the Lee/Kirby era of the FF) who says they even have rights to FF characters and villains outside of the aforementioned? I think that in itself is a big bargaining chip to restructure the original 1994 movie licensing deal concerning the FF at least.

The only characters I am certain FOX has the rights to use are the ones I have actually seen on the screen. In the case of the Skrulls, I am assuming FOX has some rights to the characters as we've seen Super-Skrull Johnny Storm in the FF sequel.

To me, the big bargaining chip for Marvel is that although a well-made FF reboot will be quite costly, it's difficult to see how a reboot will outgross the $330,000,000 (per Box Office Mojo) earned by the first film back in 2005. With additional revenue streams from merchandise, video games and the like Disney/Marvel likely can justify this risk. I don't see FOX reaching this same conclusion.

[FVD]

There could still be a chance that the FF Reboot could actually turn out to be good. I'm just glad that Tom "Control Freak" Rothman is gone from Fox. Still I am curious as to this announcement that Mark Millar will be making as reported the other day. Maybe we could actually get a crossover between Fox and Disney/Marvel, but why Millar? Why would he speak out for Fox anyway? If he'd make such a statement we'd be expecting Feige to make a responding statement almost immediately. But it would help the MCU greatly with the likes of Galactus and the Silver Surfer taking part especially for the GotG film.

[Dr Tactics]

Originally Posted by FVD

There could still be a chance that the FF Reboot could actually turn out to be good. I'm just glad that Tom "Control Freak" Rothman is gone from Fox. Still I am curious as to this announcement that Mark Millar will be making as reported the other day. Maybe we could actually get a crossover between Fox and Disney/Marvel, but why Millar? Why would he speak out for Fox anyway? If he'd make such a statement we'd be expecting Feige to make a responding statement almost immediately. But it would help the MCU greatly with the likes of Galactus and the Silver Surfer taking part especially for the GotG film.

Thats a great question.. If he really is doing his job as consultant he's saying this X-Men/FF shared universe isn't gonna work. They don't need Millar to negotiate. They can do that directly with Feige really.. They really need Millar to say "Hey dummies, this shared universe thing don't make sense.. And if it don't make sense (post-Avengers) it won't make money Talk to Marvel and work it out"? Hmmm... Come to think of it, if that was to happen the I agree. Hiring Millar was brilliant, if his only Job was to be the voice of reason amongst the clueless in the suits

But, I digress..

FF Reboot could be great but they'll still lose money if it's done outside the MCU. I also am curious as we all are on this announcement but I don't expect anything to excite me. I hope to be wrong but with Tom or not it is Fox after all and it's wishful thinking that they'll honor the comicbook genre with respect. (And don't bring up XM-FC. I'm not addressing the merits or lack of)

[Mulholland-Jr]

We got Josh Trank directing, Matthew Vaughn producing, Mark Millar overseeing it and a writer who seems appropriate for the material. I don't know how this movie could sound anymore exciting but all you guys care about is what greedy movie studio is behind it. Because as we all know Marvel Studios never screws up. Just ask these guys:

Jon Farveau
Edward Norton
Terrence Howard
Mickey Rourke
Patty Jenkins

[Willie Lumpkin]

Originally Posted by Mulholland '49

We got Josh Trank directing, Matthew Vaughn producing, Mark Millar overseeing it and a writer who seems appropriate for the material. I don't know how this movie could sound anymore exciting but all you guys care about is what greedy movie studio is behind it. Because as we all know Marvel Studios never screws up. Just ask these guys:

Jon Farveau
Edward Norton
Terrence Howard
Mickey Rourke
Patty Jenkins

It's not just that Marvel/Disney has a FAR better track record than FOX (and it would be very difficult to argue the contrary), but the characters should be integrated into the Marvel universe.

We won't get FF/Inhumans, FF/Black Panther, Hulk Vs. Thing etc. etc. etc. until Marvel has the rights.

[kaijunexus]

Originally Posted by Mulholland '49

We got Josh Trank directing, Matthew Vaughn producing, Mark Millar overseeing it and a writer who seems appropriate for the material. I don't know how this movie could sound anymore exciting but all you guys care about is what greedy movie studio is behind it. Because as we all know Marvel Studios never screws up. Just ask these guys:

Jon Farveau

- Director of two of the most successful films in the MCU so far, producer of Avengers and Iron Man 3, acted in all Iron Man films so far...has had nothing but good things to say about Marvel Studios

Edward Norton

- Had a disagreement with Marvel Studios on the final cut of the film (note he is not editor or director, but only a co-writer and actor in the film), refused to promote The Incredible Hulk in a juvenile form of protest and ended up not being asked to return in The Avengers.

Terrence Howard

- By all acounts was a prima donna on the set of Iron Man 1 and was very difficult to work with. Also, he refused to make less money per picture than Robert Downey Jr., who was playing IRON MAN!! Howard was subsequently dropped for any further films.

Mickey Rourke

- Much like Norton, was unhappy with the final product of the film and how his role was treated in it. Before being cast, Rourke apparently balked at the amount Marvel offered him but ended up taking the role anyway. Rourke, by all accounts, appears to be yet another actor that is notoriously difficult to work with.

Patty Jenkins

- Left the Thor sequel project based on creative differences with Marvel. By all accounts, she split on very good terms and even said that she would like to direct another Marvel Studios film someday.


"Because as we all know Marvel Studios never screws up. Just ask these guys"

So....wut?

[xeno000]

Originally Posted by kaijunexus

- Director of two of the most successful films in the MCU so far, producer of Avengers and Iron Man 3, acted in all Iron Man films so far...has had nothing but good things to say about Marvel Studios

- Had a disagreement with Marvel Studios on the final cut of the film (note he is not editor or director, but only a co-writer and actor in the film), refused to promote The Incredible Hulk in a juvenile form of protest and ended up not being asked to return in The Avengers.

- By all acounts was a prima donna on the set of Iron Man 1 and was very difficult to work with. Also, he refused to make less money per picture than Robert Downey Jr., who was playing IRON MAN!! Howard was subsequently dropped for any further films.

- Much like Norton, was unhappy with the final product of the film and how his role was treated in it. Before being cast, Rourke apparently balked at the amount Marvel offered him but ended up taking the role anyway. Rourke, by all accounts, appears to be yet another actor that is notoriously difficult to work with.

- Left the Thor sequel project based on creative differences with Marvel. By all accounts, she split on very good terms and even said that she would like to direct another Marvel Studios film someday.


"Because as we all know Marvel Studios never screws up. Just ask these guys"

So....wut?

Game, set and match. Well played, sir.

[spideyboy_1111]

Originally Posted by kaijunexus

- Director of two of the most successful films in the MCU so far, producer of Avengers and Iron Man 3, acted in all Iron Man films so far...has had nothing but good things to say about Marvel Studios

- Had a disagreement with Marvel Studios on the final cut of the film (note he is not editor or director, but only a co-writer and actor in the film), refused to promote The Incredible Hulk in a juvenile form of protest and ended up not being asked to return in The Avengers.

- By all acounts was a prima donna on the set of Iron Man 1 and was very difficult to work with. Also, he refused to make less money per picture than Robert Downey Jr., who was playing IRON MAN!! Howard was subsequently dropped for any further films.

- Much like Norton, was unhappy with the final product of the film and how his role was treated in it. Before being cast, Rourke apparently balked at the amount Marvel offered him but ended up taking the role anyway. Rourke, by all accounts, appears to be yet another actor that is notoriously difficult to work with.

- Left the Thor sequel project based on creative differences with Marvel. By all accounts, she split on very good terms and even said that she would like to direct another Marvel Studios film someday.


"Because as we all know Marvel Studios never screws up. Just ask these guys"

So....wut?

not to mention, Marvel also has a franchise there building. It's there films, they should have it their way.