Namor the Sub-Mariner

[Silvermoth]

I reckon just make the namor movie anyway and we’ll all just agree not to tell universal about it

 

[Originalavenger]

So 15 years since The Incredible Hulk.

Universal Pictures should have just worked with Marvel Studios for

Marvel Studios' Hulk 2
Marvel Studios' Hulk 3
Marvel Studios' Namor
Marvel Studios' Namor 2
Marvel Studios' Namor 3

They probably would get some healthy money from it.

You are correct!! They prob have been asking for a boatload of money!! Marvel sad no!!

 

[Originalavenger]

Been reading up and the distribution rights normally only have a 15 year life span (sometimes some added pay windows)

 

[Bayne]

I've always suspected the issue was not that Universal refused to play ball, but simply that Marvel didn't have enough faith in the Hulk as a solo character after two cinematic flops to be interested in paying Universal a cut of a potentially already small box office. Not to mention how weird it would've been for them to go to a second Hulk movie after literally replacing the Hulk himself (though that part at least is no longer an issue by now as there's been over a decade in between at this point).

 

[metaphysician]

tho, I didn't mind the changes to the character

an can appreciate the use of cultural lore, to establish a new backstory

I almost wish they didn't go the fails God route...
in a world where we have met literal Gods (where recently, Thor:Love&Thunder, even went out of it way to confirm that the Gods of ever cultural actually exist)

seems like a step backwards

but, maybe that can even be a plot point in a future appearance of the character, the Real K’uk’ulkan shows up challenging Namor and his people or something like that

Um, given that Namor was empowered by one of the Aztec gods, calling him a "false god" seems to be jumping to conclusions. At worst, he's a Moon Knight style divine champion, except more powerful and also immortal. Most likely, "rule and be worshipped as a living god-king" is exactly what his pantheon wants him to do.

 

[metaphysician]

If you want a justifying 'premise' for the Defenders, you could always steal one from a similarly named team, the Secret Defenders: "Dr Strange needs a team to help him deal with some kind of big supernatural menace, he calls in favors from his rolodex". Strange has a ready made excuse to know pretty much anyone in the setting, and a problem that makes him go "I need backup" would easily explain why he called on the heaviest hitters.

( And the dubious team dynamics would still apply, since one, Dr Strange is not ultimately a great leader, and two, not everyone will be thrilled at finding out their job is basically "defensive line for the sorcerer supreme". . . )

 

[Originalavenger]

I've always suspected the issue was not that Universal refused to play ball, but simply that Marvel didn't have enough faith in the Hulk as a solo character after two cinematic flops to be interested in paying Universal a cut of a potentially already small box office. Not to mention how weird it would've been for them to go to a second Hulk movie after literally replacing the Hulk himself (though that part at least is no longer an issue by now as there's been over a decade in between at this point).

That is possible bane but I really think if universal asked for a reasonable amount Disney would’ve snapped it up especially if it also includes def Namor!! Plus I know head of comcast/universal still is pissed that Disney didn’t accept his offer when they wanted to buy disney!! I could be off though

 

[psylockolussus]

A Defenders movie featuring Hulk, Dr. Strange, Namor, Silver Surfer and Valkyrie would just look like another Avengers movie with a different name and roster.

Another reason why I don't see it happening. That line up could be just for Avengers 7, and it would make more money for the title alone.

 

[Lily Adler]

A Defenders movie featuring Hulk, Dr. Strange, Namor, Silver Surfer and Valkyrie would just look like another Avengers movie with a different name and roster.

Another reason why I don't see it happening. That line up could be just for Avengers 7, and it would make more money for the title alone.

Or make it Doctor Strange 3...

 

[psylockolussus]

Or make it Doctor Strange 3...

I prefer a Ds3 with mostly Dr. Strange characters rather another Avengers Civil War.

 

[Lily Adler]

I prefer a Ds3 with mostly Dr. Strange characters rather another Avengers Civil War.

Well Strange does recruit Hulk and Namor to battle a Lovecraftian demon. Throw in Valkyrie and tease Silver Surfer and you got a movie.

 

[Iceman]

Wonder why Universal don't let the characters get used and ask for a riskless fixed fee or a portion of box office profit. There must be some level at which both would be happy. The alternative for Universal is to make nothing from any film rights.

 

[Silvermoth]

Seems a bit fishy to me.

haha no seriously look we all know these guys. It’s not just about money it’s about power and never compromising.

I wonder if the universal deal includes streaming though? Like, could they do something on Disney+? I wish I could know

 

[psylockolussus]

Is the Incredible Hulk even on Disney+?

I think after The Avengers, Hulk 2 would have been easily the highest grossing Hulk film especially if it was released in 2012. Then Hulk 3, would have even earned more.

I'm not sure if Disney's role or Universal, to do the marketing when Universal got the distribution rights.

Ultimately, we missed out on at least 2 Hulk movies because they couldn't cooperate. I highly doubt Disney and Marvel Studios would pass on at least 1 Hulk movie (if they had all the rights) given he's a major player in the MCU even moreso than Black Widow, Guardians of the GalaXy and Ant-Man.

 

[Bayne]

Is the Incredible Hulk even on Disney+?

I think after The Avengers, Hulk 2 would have been easily the highest grossing Hulk film especially if it was released in 2012. Then Hulk 3, would have even earned more.

I'm not sure if Disney's role or Universal, to do the marketing when Universal got the distribution rights.

Ultimately, we missed out on at least 2 Hulk movies because they couldn't cooperate. I highly doubt Disney and Marvel Studios would pass on at least 1 Hulk movie (if they had all the rights) given he's a major player in the MCU even moreso than Black Widow, Guardians of the GalaXy and Ant-Man.

It's not on D+ over here. Don't know about America.

And Marvel did do 'at least 1 Hulk movie'. I still stand by the opinion that it was the performance of that movie (and Ang Lee's) that left them largely unmotivated to do the work necessary to keep up deals and relationships with Universal. They were simply better off putting that effort into characters they actually owned and also who they were just better at selling to audiences.

 

[Spider-Fan]

It's not on D+ over here. Don't know about America.

And Marvel did do 'at least 1 Hulk movie'. I still stand by the opinion that it was the performance of that movie (and Ang Lee's) that left them largely unmotivated to do the work necessary to keep up deals and relationships with Universal. They were simply better off putting that effort into characters they actually owned and also who they were just better at selling to audiences.

In the end, I think this is true. They work with Sony on Spider-Man because it financially makes sense to do so. TIH is the lowest grossing film in the MCU to date, though I do think a new Hulk film would perform a lot better. But even if it ends up in like the 600-700 mil territory, is that enough to warrant dealing with Universal? Especially when they have to pay Universal part of that profit?

This is why I hope the reversion rumors are true

 

[Lip]

How does the rights for She-Hulk works? I thought she was considered part of the "Hulk universe" and was attached to his rights. Or is it something similar to Wanda, who is a mutant but was also attached to the Avengers rights?

I mean, they were able to give her a solo show. Could that be the same case for Namor or even Hulk?

 

[Bayne]

I think Universal only has movie distribution rights, nothing about shows. Not 100% on that, though.

 

[Batgirl0202]

I wonder if the universal deal includes streaming though? Like, could they do something on Disney+? I wish I could know

I'm wondering if Universal only has right of refusal to distribute theatrical Hulk solo movies. This would explain why Marvel/Disney was able to do the She-Hulk show and why Bruce was able to appear in it...

Or if Universal also has TV production rights, perhaps there's a clause stating that Marvel/Disney can do live action Hulk shows as long as they're under 30 minutes, similar to the Sony Spider-Man contract that only allows Marvel to produce animated television Spidey shows with episodes shorter than 44 minutes. This would explain the relatively brief length of the She-Hulk episodes...

Character rights issues really are a pain in the arse...

 

[Silvermoth]

A namor world war 2 series would be fun. Just saying

 

[Originalavenger]

Universal only has distribution rights for hulk and Namor!! No tv rights!! Since then niversal still has some time left on distribution rights they still say where it can be streamed!! If it’s true that on June 7th 2023 the rights revert back to Disney then Hulk movie will “go back” to Disney and I expect it to be on Disney+ shortly after

 

[Iceman]

Universal only has distribution rights for hulk and Namor!! No tv rights!! Since then niversal still has some time left on distribution rights they still say where it can be streamed!! If it’s true that on June 7th 2023 the rights revert back to Disney then Hulk movie will “go back” to Disney and I expect it to be on Disney+ shortly after

Oh nice. If true that’s not long at all.

 

[Albright]

Might be a long time until we see Talocan again.

 

[metaphysician]

Wonder why Universal don't let the characters get used and ask for a riskless fixed fee or a portion of box office profit. There must be some level at which both would be happy. The alternative for Universal is to make nothing from any film rights.

I mean, for all we know they have. And Marvel has replied with "We could do that, or we could just make one of the dozens of other possible movies in which we pay you nothing at all. So we are going to do that instead."

 

[Iceman]

I mean, for all we know they have. And Marvel has replied with "We could do that, or we could just make one of the dozens of other possible movies in which we pay you nothing at all. So we are going to do that instead."

True, makes sense.