Confusion with Quicksilver

[Slushy]

How is it Marvel and Fox are able to use the same character without breaching the contract with each other? And if that's the case, why didn't they bother re-using the same actor for the role?

 

[cherokeesam]

There's some crossover between "X-Universe" and "616 Universe" characters from the comics. The enormous catch-all that is "X-Men" covers a lot of ground, and includes a lot of characters that overlap in other groups and franchises like the Avengers. So when Fox acquired their movie rights, they also acquired some of those grey areas where you've got characters/storylines/concepts that fit into the X-Verse as well as the Avengerverse. Wanda & Pietro happen to be two of the biggest examples of that.

 

[OnTheAir]

How is it Marvel and Fox are able to use the same character without breaching the contract with each other? And if that's the case, why didn't they bother re-using the same actor for the role?

Kevin Feige has never gone into deep detail about it publicly. The assumption has always been that Marvel Studios and Fox agreed to share the rights to both Quicksiler and Scarlet Witch. Wanda and Pietro have a 50 year history as part of the X-Men franchise, and a 49 year history as part of the Avengers franchise.

From a 2012 article:

According to Feige, both Marvel and 20th Century Fox could use Quicksilver and The Scarlet Witch. "It's a little complicated," he said about the rights issues around these sibling characters. "If they want to use them in the 'X-Men' movies they could, if we want to use them in the 'Avengers' movie we could."

http://blogs.indiewire.com/theplayl...arlett-witch-in-avengers-x-men-films-20120420

[YT]O2nEz-AXmig[/YT]

There is also speculation that as part of the agreement, Marvel Studios cannot acknowledge Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch as mutants, X-Men or Magneto's children (or the existence of the X-Men and Magneto, for that matter) in their movies. Likewise, Fox cannot acknowledge Pietro and Wanda's status as Avengers (or, again, the Avengers' existence) in their films.

The two studios aren't using the same actor because they do not share a cinematic universe. There is no intersection/interaction between the world that Fox has created for the X-Men and the cinematic universe that Marvel Studios has created for its characters. If Marvel and Fox used the same actor, the general audience would be looking for more crossovers, wondering "why isn't Iron Man in this X-Men film?" Or, "why isn't Wolverine in this Avengers movie?" Further, they would have to collaborate on storyline. For example, if Bryan Singer wants to kill off Quicksilver in one of his films, he can do it. He doesn't have to consult with Joss Whedon to see what his plans for the character may be.

It's kind of like how there are two Hercules movies this year, from two different studios, that aren't connected in any way.

 

[metaphysician]

Honestly, saying that the Maximoffs have "50 years history as X-Men and 49 as Avengers" is deceptive. They started off as members of the Brotherhood, left a year later to join the Avengers, and largely never looked back. Between the Kooky Quartet and House of M, I think the only non-crossover appearance in an X-comic was a brief period where Quicksilver lead an X-Force team. Other than that, you had them appearing in Avengers comics, Avengers spin-offs, Quicksilver appearing in some Inhumans stuff, Wanda appearing in some magical stuff. . .

 

[Slushy]

Thanks, guys!

 

[The.Brotherhood]

Hope someone can answer this:


For the contract clause of the x-men rights that was made IIRC decades ago, would that contract hinders all the aspects / elements for the MCU as a whole regarding the x-men / mutants even if there are "newly" created characters / elements long after the contract was made?

Thank You.



Long live the Brotherhood

 

[Spider-Fan83]

kinda surprised it took this long for there to be a character overlaps between Studios...
there's gonna be some other characters (even miscellaneous supporting cast) that fit into that same grey area of the copyright agreements

 

[R_Hythlodeus]

Hope someone can answer this:


For the contract clause of the x-men rights that was made IIRC decades ago, would that contract hinders all the aspects / elements for the MCU as a whole regarding the x-men / mutants even if there are "newly" created characters / elements long after the contract was made?

Thank You.



Long live the Brotherhood

yes. with the exception of the Sub-Mariner retcon since Namor's rights are with Universal

 

[Orba]

First Class included several mutants that did not appear until after Fox got the film rights so it seems that all new mutants are automatically added to the list of those available to Fox.

 

[Spooderman]

Honestly, saying that the Maximoffs have "50 years history as X-Men and 49 as Avengers" is deceptive. They started off as members of the Brotherhood, left a year later to join the Avengers, and largely never looked back. Between the Kooky Quartet and House of M, I think the only non-crossover appearance in an X-comic was a brief period where Quicksilver lead an X-Force team. Other than that, you had them appearing in Avengers comics, Avengers spin-offs, Quicksilver appearing in some Inhumans stuff, Wanda appearing in some magical stuff. . .

Although they were featured heavily in the X-Men TV shows, specifically X-Men: Evolution and Wolverine & the X-Men

 

[chamber-music]

Honestly, saying that the Maximoffs have "50 years history as X-Men and 49 as Avengers" is deceptive. They started off as members of the Brotherhood, left a year later to join the Avengers, and largely never looked back. Between the Kooky Quartet and House of M, I think the only non-crossover appearance in an X-comic was a brief period where Quicksilver lead an X-Force team. Other than that, you had them appearing in Avengers comics, Avengers spin-offs, Quicksilver appearing in some Inhumans stuff, Wanda appearing in some magical stuff. . .

I think you meant when Quicksilver was a member of X-Factor in the 90's and his membership of the new current X-Factor team

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

First Class included several mutants that did not appear until after Fox got the film rights so it seems that all new mutants are automatically added to the list of those available to Fox.

I assume it is specifically X-Men characters and not all mutants. Otherwise Fox would have the rights to characters like Wiccan or Molly Hayes.

 

[Raiden]

It's too bad that Woverine and Beast aren't usable by Marvel Studios even though they also hold membership cards as the Avengers.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

I really have no idea who would have the rights to Firestar. She made her debut in a Spider-Man cartoon and has been involved with both the X-Men and the Avengers.

 

[Spider-Fan83]

where do the rights fall, for characters make up for the movies ?

for example, Agent Coulson... did they copyright him after he first appeared in Iron man?

he didn't exist when they made the original copyright agreement, whats stopping Sony or fox, from hiring Clark Gregg to showing up in their movies (other then not being able to mention him as being from S.h.i.e.l.d)
[BLACKOUT]though, that may not be an issue, anymore, lol, Hail Hydra[/BLACKOUT]

 

[Zarex]

where do the rights fall, for characters make up for the movies ?

for example, Agent Coulson... did they copyright him after he first appeared in Iron man?

he didn't exist when they made the original copyright agreement, whats stopping Sony or fox, from hiring Clark Gregg to showing up in their movies (other then not being able to mention him as being from S.h.i.e.l.d)
[BLACKOUT]though, that may not be an issue, anymore, lol, Hail Hydra[/BLACKOUT]

Original characters created for film and television belong to the studio that created them. The Coulson character belongs with Marvel Studios. General Hager, created after Feige refused FOX using Nick Fury in the FF sequel, belongs to that studio.

 

[OnTheAir]

Honestly, saying that the Maximoffs have "50 years history as X-Men and 49 as Avengers" is deceptive. They started off as members of the Brotherhood, left a year later to join the Avengers, and largely never looked back. Between the Kooky Quartet and House of M, I think the only non-crossover appearance in an X-comic was a brief period where Quicksilver lead an X-Force team. Other than that, you had them appearing in Avengers comics, Avengers spin-offs, Quicksilver appearing in some Inhumans stuff, Wanda appearing in some magical stuff. . .

Well, I didn't say they had 50 years specifically "as X-Men"...I said they had 50 years as part of the franchise. However, I agree with what appears to be your larger point. I've been reading comics since around 1980, and I've always been much more of an Avengers guy than an X-Men guy. As such, I came to know Wanda and Pietro as part of the Avengers, and therefore associate them with that franchise much more than I do the X-franchise. I know others with more of an X-Men background see things differently, and that's fine. I was just trying to be fair to both franchises.

 

[The.Brotherhood]

yes. with the exception of the Sub-Mariner retcon since Namor's rights are with Universal

Thanks! But what I really want to know too is if Marvel Comics creates a new character let's say this year (2014) and the character is a mutant or within the x-men side, can Marvel Studios use that character for their films?

Thanks!

 

[Orba]

The whole situation is a bit messy and since none of us have seen the contract its hard to know for certain. X-Men First Class contained the characters Azazel, Darwin and Angel Salvadore all of whom first appeared in the X-Men comics after 2000. However in the past there has been mention of Marvel planning to do a film based on the Runaways comics, and as Kahran mentioned one of those is the character Molly Hayes who is a mutant.

If I was to guess I would say that all mutants created before the film rights were signed are automatically part of the film rights no matter where they first appeared unless they were part of a separate film rights deal (for example I'm sure that I remember reading that Cable has his own rights deal separate from the rest of the X-Men). This is because many well known mutants did not have their first appearances in an X-Men comic (Wolverine in Incredible Hulk, Sabertooth in Iron Fist, Rogue and Mystique in Avengers).

However with new characters it seems that those that appear in X-Men comics are automatically added to the X-Men film rights, but with mutants that first appear outside the X-Men books things get fuzzier. Things suggest that Marvel could use them but that they could not refer to them as being "Mutants". Some have suggested that the reason the the newly created Ms Marvel character was an Inhuman rather than a Mutant (which she probably would have been in the past) is to steer clear of this grey area.

But ultimately the only people who really know are the lawyers.

 

[The.Brotherhood]

The whole situation is a bit messy and since none of us have seen the contract its hard to know for certain. X-Men First Class contained the characters Azazel, Darwin and Angel Salvadore all of whom first appeared in the X-Men comics after 2000. However in the past there has been mention of Marvel planning to do a film based on the Runaways comics, and as Kahran mentioned one of those is the character Molly Hayes who is a mutant.

If I was to guess I would say that all mutants created before the film rights were signed are automatically part of the film rights no matter where they first appeared unless they were part of a separate film rights deal (for example I'm sure that I remember reading that Cable has his own rights deal separate from the rest of the X-Men). This is because many well known mutants did not have their first appearances in an X-Men comic (Wolverine in Incredible Hulk, Sabertooth in Iron Fist, Rogue and Mystique in Avengers).

However with new characters it seems that those that appear in X-Men comics are automatically added to the X-Men film rights, but with mutants that first appear outside the X-Men books things get fuzzier. Things suggest that Marvel could use them but that they could not refer to them as being "Mutants". Some have suggested that the reason the the newly created Ms Marvel character was an Inhuman rather than a Mutant (which she probably would have been in the past) is to steer clear of this grey area.

But ultimately the only people who really know are the lawyers.

Well that sucks for the rights. Another confusing one here, QS and SW are more so part of the avengers than X-men that's why MS pulled off a loophole to use them. As you've mentioned that some mutants (like cable) have separate contracts because they first appear at a non-xmen comics, do you have any idea who else fits this bills? Thanks!


And another one just to confuse things further, do you have any idea whose studios have the upper rights in claiming the movie rights for those mutants that appeared first in a non-xmen comics? Because if the "mutant appeared first in this comics" will be the basis for the film rights, I think there's a lot of grey area characters (mutants) out there.

Thanks Again!

 

[cherokeesam]

Well that sucks for the rights. Another confusing one here, QS and SW are more so part of the avengers than X-men that's why MS pulled off a loophole to use them. As you've mentioned that some mutants (like cable) have separate contracts because they first appear at a non-xmen comics, do you have any idea who else fits this bills? Thanks!


And another one just to confuse things further, do you have any idea whose studios have the upper rights in claiming the movie rights for those mutants that appeared first in a non-xmen comics? Because if the "mutant appeared first in this comics" will be the basis for the film rights, I think there's a lot of grey area characters (mutants) out there.

Thanks Again!

I dunno about mutants having separate contracts if their first appearance was outside of an X-Comic, but I can think of several cases where Marvel Studios might be able to claim overlap:


*Beast --- was a major member of the Avengers for several decades. In terms of film, Fox seems pretty clear that they intend to hold on to him, though, and I've never heard Feige & Company express any interest in acquiring him.

*Cloak & Dagger --- A few years ago, Marvel Studios were developing a TV show based on these two mutants. The show vanished into vaporware, but its existence (even on paper) muddles the copyright issues even further, since Marvel's live TV rights are allegedly a lot broader than the feature film franchises.

*Similarly, the Six Pack were in TV development for awhile, I guess as a kiddie show. All those younguns are muties.

*Namor --- he's the odd man out for right now, belonging to Universal, and they don't seem to have any plans developing a standalone movie about him at all. Chances are, at some point, Marvel Studios and Fox will start a bidding war for the rights. Not sure when those expire at Universal.

*Typhoid Mary --- technically, she's a mutant. And she appeared in Elektra, which was still a Fox movie, so there was no discrepancy there when she appeared. Nowadays, Kevin Feige has confirmed that Elektra, Kingpin and several other characters who are vital to the Daredevil mythos belong to Marvel Studios now (or are at least shared). I'd say there's a good chance that Mary would fall under the Daredevil/Elektra banner.

 

[Orba]

Well that sucks for the rights. Another confusing one here, QS and SW are more so part of the avengers than X-men that's why MS pulled off a loophole to use them. As you've mentioned that some mutants (like cable) have separate contracts because they first appear at a non-xmen comics, do you have any idea who else fits this bills? Thanks!


And another one just to confuse things further, do you have any idea whose studios have the upper rights in claiming the movie rights for those mutants that appeared first in a non-xmen comics? Because if the "mutant appeared first in this comics" will be the basis for the film rights, I think there's a lot of grey area characters (mutants) out there.

Thanks Again!

Some old mutant characters don't have separate contracts because they first appeared in non-x-men books, its just that it seems that when the film rights deals happened in the 90s there were a few mutant characters were given their own (as I said I'm sure I remember it being claimed that Cable was one of those).

BTW I don't think Cloak and Dagger are mutants, at one point in their comics they thought they were but it was later found that they weren't (possibly due to Marvel not wanting to give Fox more characters).

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

Original characters created for film and television belong to the studio that created them. The Coulson character belongs with Marvel Studios. General Hager, created after Feige refused FOX using Nick Fury in the FF sequel, belongs to that studio.

So does that mean X-23 belongs to WB because she was created for X-Men Evolution?

 

[Brutalitops]

I dunno about mutants having separate contracts if their first appearance was outside of an X-Comic, but I can think of several cases where Marvel Studios might be able to claim overlap:


*Beast --- was a major member of the Avengers for several decades. In terms of film, Fox seems pretty clear that they intend to hold on to him, though, and I've never heard Feige & Company express any interest in acquiring him.

*Cloak & Dagger --- A few years ago, Marvel Studios were developing a TV show based on these two mutants. The show vanished into vaporware, but its existence (even on paper) muddles the copyright issues even further, since Marvel's live TV rights are allegedly a lot broader than the feature film franchises.

*Similarly, the Six Pack were in TV development for awhile, I guess as a kiddie show. All those younguns are muties.

*Namor --- he's the odd man out for right now, belonging to Universal, and they don't seem to have any plans developing a standalone movie about him at all. Chances are, at some point, Marvel Studios and Fox will start a bidding war for the rights. Not sure when those expire at Universal.

*Typhoid Mary --- technically, she's a mutant. And she appeared in Elektra, which was still a Fox movie, so there was no discrepancy there when she appeared. Nowadays, Kevin Feige has confirmed that Elektra, Kingpin and several other characters who are vital to the Daredevil mythos belong to Marvel Studios now (or are at least shared). I'd say there's a good chance that Mary would fall under the Daredevil/Elektra banner.

Cloak and Dagger and the Power Pack aren't mutants. I believe Cloak and Dagger are mutates (i.e. Spider-Man) who got their powers from experimental drugs and the Power Pack were given their powers from an alien.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

Cloak and Dagger originally got their powers from experimental drugs, but were later revealed to be mutants. Even later on, this got retconned back to their original origin.