Marvel Prepping Four Series and a Miniseries

[Dark Raven]

Perhaps, but it just won't feel like the Defenders. I thought that Marvel Studios gain the rights back to the Surfer? Never been much of a fan of Namor, i followed him because he was a Defender.

Anyway, i was hoping after Dr. Strange, they might do a Defenders movie. There is a rumor of a new Hulk movie, for phase 3 or 4. If they have the rights to Surfer, then they could do a Defenders movie, with those three plus a few secondary characters. Oh well, i'll take the Net Flicks version.

Surfer is part of the FF rights that Fox has. If they had Surfer they'd probably have FF.

I don't really associate the Surfer with the Defenders that much though, because he wasn't in the book very long. Namor was longer. I associate Hulk, Dr Strange, Namor, Valkyrie, Nighthawk and Hellcat the most with the team.

I think Marvel is just calling DD, Cage, Fist and Jones the Defenders, rather than trying to create a mini series about the actual team. So they're slapping on a brand name associated with something else mainly for marketing purposes.

 

[Aztec]

This is amazing! Marvel is just owning everything these days. I hope Agents of SHIELD improves though. I also hope to see a Punisher cameo in one of these series'. I'm a little perplexed as to why they are calling it The Defenders but I'm sure they have a plan.

I think I'll have to change my sig back to a Marvel one for the time being, lol. (Although I think DC have finally begun to move in the right direction as well.)

 

[Homer J. Fong]

This is interesting. We all knew Marvel TV wanted to amp up their output, but to read today that that meant four shows, in 2015, on Netflix, that was a surprise. Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. isn't good enough yet that I'm excited for any future MCU television shows, but what they're going for is a fascinating gamble (Marvel Studios: Redefining the Word Cocky Since 2008). I don't know from Iron Fist, or Luke Cage, or Jessica Jones, so it's on these shows to make me. Hopefully we're looking at very cool expansion of this Marvel universe and what it means.

 

[Marvel Spider]

They probably called it The Defenders because A.) it sounds close to The Avengers and B.) the team calling themselves "Marvel Knights" would be strange.

 

[Sawyer]

I don't see why they can't just have the title be Marvel Knights. Doesn't mean they have to call themselves that.

 

[Eddie]

I don't see why they can't just have the title be Marvel Knights. Doesn't mean they have to call themselves that.

It might have something to do with Marvel already using Marvel Knights as a label for some of their DVD/Blu-ray stuff.

 

[Dark Raven]

I don't see why they can't just have the title be Marvel Knights. Doesn't mean they have to call themselves that.

Exactly. In shows like Numb3rs, the team didn't call themselves Numb3rs.

Besides, Marvel Knights doesn't sound any worse than Marvel's Agents of SHIELD. The "Marvel" will look like the brand name, and the whole thing will just suggest it's a different type of heroes.

 

[kedrell]

Feige said it was with Universal.

When did he say this? If it's true, did Marvel just give them like a 30 year timeframe in which to begin production because that doesn't make much sense.

 

[Dr. Evil]

When did he say this? If it's true, did Marvel just give them like a 30 year timeframe in which to begin production because that doesn't make much sense.

He said it here:

http://screenrant.com/hulk-3-sequels-universal-owns-namor-rights/

 

[Sawyer]

Marvel's Agents of SHIELD is a ****ing terrible title.

I can kind of understand the "Marvel's" just to put the brand name out there, but the "Agents of" still pisses me off.

 

[Anubis]

Exactly. In shows like Numb3rs, the team didn't call themselves Numb3rs.

Besides, Marvel Knights doesn't sound any worse than Marvel's Agents of SHIELD. The "Marvel" will look like the brand name, and the whole thing will just suggest it's a different type of heroes.

I don't know, I think that they think that Baywatch Nights ruined ever using that combination of words effectively again.

 

[Dr. Evil]

I don't know, I think that they think that Baywatch Nights ruined ever using that combination of words.

Baywatch Nights....where Hasselholf sang the theme and when I first noticed Angie Harmon

 

[Dark Raven]

Marvel's Agents of SHIELD is a ****ing terrible title.

I can kind of understand the "Marvel's" just to put the brand name out there, but the "Agents of" still pisses me off.

And they probably called themselves that to distinguish themselves from The Shield to avoid any confusion.

But even calling themselves "Marvel's The Defenders" won't still set them apart. There's that long-running 60s legal TV series and its recent remake called "The Defenders". Audiences can think it's just a new version if they see the name.

And they will probably have to change it to something that's more of a mouthful. Marvel did that with the Avengers in the UK because of the British 60s TV series "The Avengers" and we ended up with the name "Avengers Assemble."

So based on how Marvel has already called SHIELD "Agents of SHIELD" and The Avengers "Avengers Assemble", it's quite likely they aren't going to even keep it simply as "Marvel's The Defenders."

 

[kedrell]

He said it here:

http://screenrant.com/hulk-3-sequels-universal-owns-namor-rights/

Uh-huh. Ok well Marvel could probably buy him back pretty cheap(relatively, of course). It sure looks like Universal isn't using him anytime soon, if ever. This isn't like buying back Spider-man.

 

[Dr. Evil]

And they probably called themselves that to distinguish themselves from The Shield to avoid any confusion.

But even calling themselves "Marvel's The Defenders" won't still set them apart. There's that long-running 60s legal TV series and its recent remake called "The Defenders". Audiences can think it's just a new version if they see the name.

And they will probably have to change it to something that's more of a mouthful. Marvel did that with the Avengers in the UK because of the British 60s TV series "The Avengers" and we ended up with the name "Avengers Assemble."

So based on how Marvel has already called SHIELD "Agents of SHIELD" and The Avengers "Avengers Assemble", it's quite likely they aren't going to even keep it simply as "Marvel's The Defenders."

The recent TV "Defenders" was crap because Jim Belushi was in it.

 

[Anubis]

All the more reason to make the distinction.

 

[Dark Raven]

The recent TV "Defenders" was crap because Jim Belushi was in it.

But it still exists and is unlikely to have faded from TV audiences' memories. It was only, what, a year or two ago?

And the 1998 "The Avengers" movie with Ralph Fiennes and Uma Thurman was also crap. Didn't stop Marvel from rechristening their film "Avengers Assemble" in the UK to avoid confusion.

 

[Dr. Evil]

All the more reason to make the distinction.

Of course, anything with Jim Belushi in it is crap.

 

[kedrell]

But it still exists and is unlikely to have faded from TV audiences' memories. It was only, what, a year or two ago?

And the 1998 "The Avengers" movie with Ralph Fiennes and Uma Thurman was also crap. Didn't stop Marvel from rechristening their film "Avengers Assemble" in the UK to avoid confusion.

I think that was more because of the 60's series than the film adaption.

 

[Merlex]

Silver Surfer is with Fox. You may remember him from a little movie that involved a lot of garbage and Galactus the cloud. If you don't remember that, congratulations you lucky, lucky person. There was a rumor that Fox tried to negotiate a deal where Fox would keep Daredevil and instead relinquish the Surfer and Galactus, but... yeah, that doesn't seem to have happened.

I remember, unfortunately i own it. But i read somewhere that Marvel got a bunch of their characters back. The contracts expired or something. They own the Punisher now. Even if they don't have the Surfer because of F4, they may still be able to use him. Marvel is using the Scarlet Witch, and Quicksilver for Avengers 2. The are mutants and belong with the X-Men. Though Avengers 2, can't mention that they are mutants.

 

[Dark Raven]

I think that was more because of the 60's series than the film adaption.

I know it was. I'm just saying that the Avengers film adaption was also crap, in response to Dr Evil saying that the Jim Belushi Defenders series was crap. Both were remakes.

My point was that just because one is crap doesn't mean that Marvel can then go and use the same name and hope theirs will supersede it. It won't work like that. Audiences will already have a negative association with it.

Even if there isn't a negative association, they'll still want their own identity and won't want their product confused with another.

Marvel did that in the UK with the Avengers, but left it as it was in the US. However, the Defenders TV series was in the US, so Marvel will probably have to change theirs to something else to set it apart from that. Which is why it seems odd that they want to call it the Defenders, only to probably have to end up with a title like "Agents of SHIELD" which sounds terrible (probably to avoid being confused with "The SHIELD").

 

[Dr. Evil]

Did anyone even watch the Defenders series with Jim Belushi?

I remember it because Belushi is an awful actor, living in his late brother's shadow.

 

[Anubis]

I might have seen an ep or two.

 

[Merlex]

Surfer is part of the FF rights that Fox has. If they had Surfer they'd probably have FF.

I don't really associate the Surfer with the Defenders that much though, because he wasn't in the book very long. Namor was longer. I associate Hulk, Dr Strange, Namor, Valkyrie, Nighthawk and Hellcat the most with the team.

You forgot Daimon, he spent almost a decade on the team. Surfer was in 23 issues, and is considered a founding member. Plus there was that prophesy about the original 4 (Strange, Hulk, Namor & Surfer) destroying the world.

I think Marvel is just calling DD, Cage, Fist and Jones the Defenders, rather than trying to create a mini series about the actual team. So they're slapping on a brand name associated with something else mainly for marketing purposes.

Yeah i got that. I just wish they called them Heroes For Hire instead.

 

[Homer J. Fong]

Did anyone even watch the Defenders series with Jim Belushi?

I remember it because Belushi is an awful actor, living in his late brother's shadow.

It was canceled after one season, so I'm going to say no, they didn't.

All this talk about the title...well, it doesn't surprise me, but the title is not something I'd really thought about. I've only ever associated Marvel's "The Defenders" with Beast, Namor, and Doctor Strange. I don't know if there are other incarnations of that team the way there are a million incarnations of The Avengers and everyone in the Marvel universe has been on that team - and I don't care that they're calling this mini-series "The Defenders." I imagine there are very few who do.