Fantastic Four reborn! - - - - - - - Part 16

[Six]

My warning wasn't directed toward you at all....it was the deleted and infracted posts that were out of line.



Anyone who read anything on the net after such celebrities as Robin Williams and Joan Rivers recently died....saw a lot of talk about immature cruel evil internet trolls saying things because nothing would be done to them....well, people....you can be trolls elsewhere....we will not accept it here.

I apologize for my comment, I frequent many other forums that have more of an"anything goes" attitude, sometimes even encouraged by the mods, so that darker kind of humour slips out sometimes. I will adjust that for here.

 

[Kelly]

Thank you Six, much appreciated.

 

[Zarex]

And if this film fails, Fox would indeed be smart to sell the rights back in exchange for the rights to make a live-action X-Men TV show. It's the only way that I could see New Mutants working. So Fox gains around 3 billion, the X-Men TV rights and the rights to Hit Monkey. Marvel gets the Fantastic Four back along with poaching the Shi'Ar and Brood from Fox.

I also hope that Marvel also gets Spider-Man back.

3 billion for the FF cinematic rights? 3 BILLION DOLLARS?? FOX would have to kick in the distribution rights to the first Star Wars film along with the rights to Avatar, Apes and the Simpsons to justify Marvel parting with that kind of cabbage.

I think an X-23 show would be the perfect TV spinoff for the X-Men franchise. Young female Wolverine clone battling against the evil corporation that spawned her. Bring in Jackman as executive producer like he did with "Viva Laughlin" and have him make a few appearances. But the FOX - Marvel relationship is going to have to get a lot better for Marvel agree to partner up on a series.

 

[C. Lee]

Thank you Six.

 

[Donut]

3 billion for the FF cinematic rights? 3 BILLION DOLLARS?? FOX would have to kick in the distribution rights to the first Star Wars film along with the rights to Avatar, Apes and the Simpsons to justify Marvel parting with that kind of cabbage.

I think an X-23 show would be the perfect TV spinoff for the X-Men franchise. Young female Wolverine clone battling against the evil corporation that spawned her. Bring in Jackman as executive producer like he did with "Viva Laughlin" and have him make a few appearances. But the FOX - Marvel relationship is going to have to get a lot better for Marvel agree to partner up on a series.

Thankfully Disney / MARVEL are not stupid. They wont pay for the FF & give up more X-Men rights. They thankfully do not need the Fantastic Four to give up so much

 

[Joe Rockhead]

Let's say that Fox invests a generous $75 million in this FF production, and hopes to pull in $150 million from it. I think Fox would jump at the chance to get a $200 - $250 million offer for the FF, and right now Marvel/Disney are in a position where they don't have to offer a dime.

I think it's going to be a loooooong time before Marvel Studios features the Fantastic Four in any film.

I would LOVE it if Marvel worked in the Jim Hammond Android Torch into one of their films and the execution put Michael B Jordan's Johnny Storm to shame.

 

[justanotherguy]

They are probably holding the Hammond character back, just in case.

 

[Donut]

I don't see why. If fox dicked around & at the last minute & added in Quicksilver in their movie. When it was originally Juggernaut. Disney / MARVEL should do the same & not worry about it

 

[wobbly]

I would LOVE it if Marvel worked in the Jim Hammond Android Torch into one of their films and the execution put Michael B Jordan's Johnny Storm to shame.

The door is open for him, and a version of him (presumably unfinished by Horton since he looked like a mannequin) has already cameo'd in Captain America FA.

Not sure if they can use the 'Human Torch' name for him though? I read ages back (I think it was Feige) saying Marvel do have the rights for the Original Torch, but not sure if the name might be a trademark issue (could be a shared deal like the Maximoff twins).

Will be interesting if they drop any hints/easter eggs to Hammond with the Vision in AOU.

 

[Gamma Goliath]

There's always agent carter too.

 

[Majik1387]

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/george-l-little-dead-costume-731263

the guy who did the costumes for the film died

RIP

What a shame. He designed and consulted on a lot of costumes in movies I loved.

 

[spideyboy_1111]

What a shame. He designed and consulted on a lot of costumes in movies I loved.

90% of his costume designing was military movies... out of curiosity what costumes were you such a big fan of?

 

[Majik1387]

90% of his costume designing was military movies... out of curiosity what costumes were you such a big fan of?

In his designs, Max Payne, The Crazies, and Warm Bodies; In his consultation credits, Galaxy Quest, Red Dawn, Toys, and Striptease.

While yes I know most the latter was Albert Wolsky's designs, but Little was pretty much his protege in the sense that Greg Nicotero was Tom Savini's protege in special effects makeup.

He mostly did military designs yeah, and granted it's hard to screw up designing military, but when it wasn't military-based, it was fresh, realistic, but also didn't look simply bought off the rack or supplied by a fashion designer for a movie.

 

[wobbly]

3 billion for the FF cinematic rights? 3 BILLION DOLLARS?? FOX would have to kick in the distribution rights to the first Star Wars film along with the rights to Avatar, Apes and the Simpsons to justify Marvel parting with that kind of cabbage.

I think an X-23 show would be the perfect TV spinoff for the X-Men franchise. Young female Wolverine clone battling against the evil corporation that spawned her. Bring in Jackman as executive producer like he did with "Viva Laughlin" and have him make a few appearances. But the FOX - Marvel relationship is going to have to get a lot better for Marvel agree to partner up on a series.

$3 billion is a ridiculous number for the FF. Star Wars was $4 billion and the FF is nowhere near Star Wars.

Disney's best bargaining chips for a deal I think are live action TV rights for anything X-Men (they'd want to keep animation I think) and reintroducing merchandising support for Fox's efforts there. Neither of those concessions would cost Marvel any money and both would be something they would earn from too (more from the latter).

A cash offer for the FF though would be considerably less than $3 billion. If that's the kind of money Fox would demand then that's never gonna happen.

Unfortunately it does seem the studios dislike for each other does make a reasonable/mutually beneficial deal unlikely.

 

[Zarex]

$3 billion is a ridiculous number for the FF. Star Wars was $4 billion and the FF is nowhere near Star Wars.

Disney's best bargaining chips for a deal I think are live action TV rights for anything X-Men (they'd want to keep animation I think) and reintroducing merchandising support for Fox's efforts there. Neither of those concessions would cost Marvel any money and both would be something they would earn from too (more from the latter).

A cash offer for the FF though would be considerably less than $3 billion. If that's the kind of money Fox would demand then that's never gonna happen.

Unfortunately it does seem the studios dislike for each other does make a reasonable/mutually beneficial deal unlikely.

I think that Marvel's days of selling off any rights is long over. The studio did sell of their participation interest in the Sony's Spidey films, but that (along with $278 million) got the Mouse Sony's 25% share of the Spider-Man Limited Partnership.

But that doesn't mean the two studios couldn't partner up on deals. Marvel could produce an X-23 or X-Force TV show for FOX or one of Twenty-First Century's cable networks. Marvel could allow for expanded tie-in merchandise for XM:A or the Wolverine sequel. But FOX, like Sony, is going to have to make concessions for the deals to get done.

 

[starscream22]

I think that Marvel's days of selling off any rights is long over. The studio did sell of their participation interest in the Sony's Spidey films, but that (along with $278 million) got the Mouse Sony's 25% share of the Spider-Man Limited Partnership.

But that doesn't mean the two studios couldn't partner up on deals. Marvel could produce an X-23 or X-Force TV show for FOX or one of Twenty-First Century's cable networks. Marvel could allow for expanded tie-in merchandise for XM:A or the Wolverine sequel. But FOX, like Sony, is going to have to make concessions for the deals to get done.

Funny thing is I think Disney may have already made that money back with ASM2's merchandizing while Sony struggles to break even with it's Blu-ray/DVD/rentals.

 

[CyclopsWasRight]

I think it's going to be a loooooong time before Marvel Studios features the Fantastic Four in any film.

Agreed. This is the only guaranteed Fantastic Four movie for the next decade.

With that being the case as a fan of the property I'm hoping for a good movie that's makes a tidy Box Office and leads to an ongoing franchise because if it flops or succeeds, if it's bad or good the result will be the same, the rights remain where they are.
I'd rather have more Fantastic Four movies than wait a decade.

There's a very small possibility of them selling or exchanging them but I doubt both parties will reach an agreement.

I would LOVE it if Marvel worked in the Jim Hammond Android Torch into one of their films.

I would hope they aren't as petulant as that.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/george-l-little-dead-costume-731263

the guy who did the costumes for the film died

RIP

RIP

 

[Zarex]

I would hope they aren't as petulant as that.

How is Marvel potentially featuring one of the Big Three from the Timely era in a feature film or television program being petulant?

 

[wobbly]

I would hope they aren't as petulant as that.

Was Fox being 'petulant' when they decided to drop a young Juggernaut (after casting him) to have Quicksilver for the prison break, a decision made after Whedon announced the twins were going to be in AOU?

Seriously, Marvel have in fact already introduced the original Torch, trumping anything Fox had planned here, when they had his easter egg cameo in Cap1.

If they do decide to use Hammond in full? So what? He is their character. Given he is a different character (a innovative idea as originally presented: A truly synthetic human, rather than just a smart robot) and he pre-dates Johnny Storm's creation by a couple of decades as well, using him wouldn't be 'petulant' at all.

Certainly no more than DOFP sneaking QS in late on

 

[Donut]

Was Fox being 'petulant' when they decided to drop a young Juggernaut (after casting him) to have Quicksilver for the prison break, a decision made after Whedon announced the twins were going to be in AOU?

Seriously, Marvel have in fact already introduced the original Torch, trumping anything Fox had planned here, when they had his easter egg cameo in Cap1.

If they do decide to use Hammond in full? So what? He is their character. Given he is a different character (a innovative idea as originally presented: A truly synthetic human, rather than just a smart robot) and he pre-dates Johnny Storm's creation by a couple of decades as well, using him wouldn't be 'petulant' at all.

Certainly no more than DOFP sneaking QS in late on

Maybe he just does not want MARVEL doing a better Human Torch then fox & would be more liked then Michael Fake Jordan

 

[Dark Raven]

Hopefully the original Human Torch might even make an appearance in A:AOU or Agent Carter. He already cameoed in CA:TFA. Even if he looks somewhat similar to the FF Torch and has the same powers, that didn't stop Fox from using Quicksilver in DOFP.

And I could even see Tony Stark making a joke and calling Jim Hammond "the Human Torch" in the same way he called Hawkeye "Legolas", thereby getting in a reference to his actual comics name, even though he might not be referred to as that in a MCU movie. Now could Fox really complain about that? It's not like New Line Cinema suddenly were up in arms and emphasising that they actually own the rights to Legolas now, just like WB/DC never were complaining about the Superman reference in Raimi's Spider-Man when Aunt May said that he isn't Superman.

Also, the way Joss Whedon writes, he's always getting these pop culture references into his material ever since Buffy. Everyone has always been referred to by some other popular character whom one of Whedon's own characters might resemble at that point in behaviour or appearance.

So I could see Marvel getting his name in there even that way.

On another note, is the word "mutant" really excluded from being used at all in any way by Marvel? After all, Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles uses that word and Fox aren't complaining about them and saying that people might associate them with the X-Men. Besides, "mutant" is a word in everyday English.

 

[Donut]

Hopefully the original Human Torch might even make an appearance in A:AOU or Agent Carter. He already cameoed in CA:TFA. Even if he looks somewhat similar to the FF Torch and has the same powers, that didn't stop Fox from using Quicksilver in DOFP.

And I could even see Tony Stark making a joke and calling Jim Hammond "the Human Torch" in the same way he called Hawkeye "Legolas", thereby getting in a reference to his actual comics name, even though he might not be referred to as that in a MCU movie. Now could Fox really complain about that? It's not like New Line Cinema suddenly were up in arms and emphasising that they actually own the rights to Legolas now, just like WB/DC never were complaining about the Superman reference in Raimi's Spider-Man when Aunt May said that he isn't Superman.

So I could see Marvel getting his name in there even that way.

On another note, is the word "mutant" really excluded from being used at all in any way by Marvel? After all, Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles uses that word and Fox aren't complaining about them and saying that people might associate them with the X-Men. Besides, "mutant" is a word in everyday English.

If the two studios are already using the Quick Silver name in a movie. Then Human Torch should be no problem. As a character name for Disney / MARVEL

 

[wobbly]

Hopefully the original Human Torch might even make an appearance in A:AOU or Agent Carter. He already cameoed in CA:TFA. Even if he looks somewhat similar to the FF Torch and has the same powers, that didn't stop Fox from using Quicksilver in DOFP.

And I could even see Tony Stark making a joke and calling Jim Hammond "the Human Torch" in the same way he called Hawkeye "Legolas", thereby getting in a reference to his actual comics name, even though he might not be referred to as that in a MCU movie. Now could Fox really complain about that? It's not like New Line Cinema suddenly were up in arms and emphasising that they actually own the rights to Legolas now, just like WB/DC never were complaining about the Superman reference in Raimi's Spider-Man when Aunt May said that he isn't Superman.

Also, the way Joss Whedon writes, he's always getting these pop culture references into his material ever since Buffy. Everyone has always been referred to by some other popular character whom one of Whedon's own characters might resemble at that point in behaviour or appearance.

So I could see Marvel getting his name in there even that way.

On another note, is the word "mutant" really excluded from being used at all in any way by Marvel? After all, Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles uses that word and Fox aren't complaining about them and saying that people might associate them with the X-Men. Besides, "mutant" is a word in everyday English.

We know Marvel does have the original Timely Torch's rights, but it's unclear on whether they can call him the same 'code' name. Could well be a shared deal like with the Twins. If they can I would hope they do. A hint to Hammond with the Vision in AOU would be sweet (Tony could be examining him and some carbon dating reveals his artificial cells are at least 70 years old, something like that).

If they were to take the Vision that route (no idea if they will) I'd avoid the whole time duplicate thing marvel had to cook up (ret-con) so both could co-exist for the current day. Just reveal Ultron developed the Vision from an earlier prototype Horton made would be a better option (imo).

On using the names from other companies as casual references (like Legolas or Superman as you noted) I would think that falls under 'fair use' (that's how the parodies get away blatant riffs on others IP's).

Regarding 'Mutant', afaik that term is off limits for Marvel to use in any context relating to heroes, powers, etc. That is apparently all part of the X-Men deal and the aftermath of the 'Mutant X' lawsuit: They simply cannot use the term.

Others can of course because its a generic real world term that cannot be copyrighted, but for Marvel, with Fox having the cinematic ownership of their specific usage for it, it's a no go area.

Even in The Shield show they have avoided using the term when it would have been apt. Co-incidently for a character born with pyro-kinetic powers (he called himself 'Scorch'). For now I think they have stuck with calling powered types, whatever the source of the powers, 'registered gifted'. The Inhumans are likely in the works to serve as Marvel's own 'born that way' heroes down the line.

 

[Willie Lumpkin]

This is what started it all:

It would be great if Marvel could acknowledge/pay tribute to the original Human Torch at some point, and I can't imagine why Fox would have a problem with that.

Hell, even Josh Trank featured a photo of the original Human Torch on his twitter (10 minutes before somebody yanked the plug).

 

[Dark Raven]

Well Trank probably can't Tweet a pic of the original Human Torch since Marvel own him.

He was referred to as the Synthetic Man in CA:TFA. I don't think that sounds a very good name for a former WWII hero though. He does seem to have stopped operating by the time of CA:TFA as he was in a glass cage (suggesting he predates Cap and they didn't team up), unless it's something similar to that scene at the beginning of "Marvels" where he was also put in one to be buried for a while but that didn't succeed and he came back to life.