Rate the Teaser Trailer!

[TheComicbookKid]

Ego works better with the Guardians than Galactus. because Ego works better when played for laughs as comic relief. I doubt that Fox would want Ego and they won't trade Galactus for him. Galactus is too important to the FF and I don't want to see Ego played seriously.

I don't know if you watch Doctor Who, but there was an episode a few years ago called The Doctor's Wife about a living asteroid trying to escape a dying universe.

After it ended, I remember thinking that's how you do Ego! It was funny, dramatic, scary...everything.

Especially after ROTSS, I just think SS/Galactus should be their own thing or in line with Marvel's Galactic Universe. They need to interact with a large number of creatures/planets and Marvel has them already.

And if Marvel will presumably get full rights to Namor back in three years, they aren't going to be in a rush to trade the character that they built their entire empire on. The only issue with the rights as they are is that Fox is sitting on a lot of cosmic stuff that they will never use. Fox will never use the Badoon. Fox will never use the Brood. Marvel and Fox could both presumably use the Shi'Ar and a deal to split the Shi'Ar rights the same way that Quicksilver is would work in Marvel's favor since Fox can't do War of Kings, Fox can't do Galactic Storm and Fox can't do Darkhawk. Marvel doesn't really need Galactus to build the Guardians and Inhmans properties and they'd gain very little from them but they could really profit from the Badoon, Shi'Ar and Brood. Marvel should also possibly also share Uatu The Watcher or even work out a deal to gain him exclusively. Those are the cosmic rights that Marvel should work towards attaining, Galactus isn't nearly as valuable.

Split Galactus ( Fox uses Ultimate while Marvel uses the 616) and Uatu goes to Fox while Marvel gets SS. Fox uses a different herald.

Even if the FF goes forward, I just can't see Fox bothering with a galactic universe. Just concede that to Marvel and get some more FF characters and X-men tv rights.

 

[Flint Marko]

Well, in a addition to his vision being trash, they delayed production on this for 2 years (until the last minute) and had it rewritten multiple times, keeping him from doing any other projects.

I didn't know this. Where is this info from exactly?

 

[sleekstereo]

And if Marvel will presumably get full rights to Namor back in three years, they aren't going to be in a rush to trade the character that they built their entire empire on. The only issue with the rights as they are is that Fox is sitting on a lot of cosmic stuff that they will never use. Fox will never use the Badoon. Fox will never use the Brood. Marvel and Fox could both presumably use the Shi'Ar and a deal to split the Shi'Ar rights the same way that Quicksilver is would work in Marvel's favor since Fox can't do War of Kings, Fox can't do Galactic Storm and Fox can't do Darkhawk. Marvel doesn't really need Galactus to build the Guardians and Inhmans properties and they'd gain very little from them but they could really profit from the Badoon, Shi'Ar and Brood. Marvel should also possibly also share Uatu The Watcher or even work out a deal to gain him exclusively. Those are the cosmic rights that Marvel should work towards attaining, Galactus isn't nearly as valuable.

I doubt Fox will give up on Shi'Ar or share them with Marvel. Especially if they want to revisit the Phoenix saga with the younger cast of Jean, Storm, Cyclops. They already have an unneeded headache of having two Quicksilvers on screen, why create another one with the Shi'Ar.

And frankly, if the choice is the Shi'Ar in a Phoenix storyline vs. anything Marvel has to offer, I'll go with the Phoenix storyline.

 

[coreymb16]

No. There were specific statements from people in the know that have been linked and discussed to death on this forum. I don't care enough to go looking for them or get into it again, but they're here.

Which means you don't have any conclusive evidence that there is no way FOX can legally crossover X-Men/FF. All speculation, no facts-these should be important for every sure-fire arguments. One vague article does not count.

 

[Dasher10]

I doubt Fox will give up on Shi'Ar or share them with Marvel. Especially if they want to revisit the Phoenix saga with the younger cast of Jean, Storm, Cyclops. They already have an unneeded headache of having two Quicksilvers on screen, why create another one with the Shi'Ar.

And frankly, if the choice is the Shi'Ar in a Phoenix storyline vs. anything Marvel has to offer, I'll go with the Phoenix storyline.

If it's the original Phoenix Saga or Guardians/Inhumans: War of Kings, I'll take the latter. Just not at the cost of Namor or Ego.

 

[Flint Marko]

Which means you don't have any conclusive evidence that there is no way FOX can legally crossover X-Men/FF. All speculation, no facts-these should be important for every sure-fire arguments.

Okay, well I'll check on you in ten years when we haven't seen any sort of significant crossover between the properties and see if you believe us then.

 

[coreymb16]

Okay, well I'll check on you in ten years when we haven't seen any sort of significant crossover between the properties and see if you believe us then.

I just don't believe someone who presents a stance without proof to back it up. I'm didn't comment on whether FOX will or should do a crossover or not. I asked if it was legally possible or not. I tried to look it up to no avail.

 

[Dasher10]

I just don't believe someone who presents a stance without proof to back it up. I'm didn't comment on whether FOX will or should do a crossover or not. I asked if it was legally possible or not. I tried to look it up to no avail.

Tom Brevoort's personal blog stated that they are separate contracts and they cannot be crossed over.

Confirmation from Marvel. Fox will need to trade something that Marvel wants.

 

[Flint Marko]

I just don't believe someone who presents a stance without proof to back it up. I'm didn't comment on whether FOX will or should do a crossover or not. I asked if it was legally possible or not. I tried to look it up to no avail.

Willie posted this to answer your question, I guess you didn't see it:
http://forums.superherohype.com/showpost.php?p=28057233&postcount=288
At this point we have never heard definitively from either side, but if one had to assume, the logical assumption would be that Fox is unable to intermingle their IPs.

 

[Willie Lumpkin]

Which means you don't have any conclusive evidence that there is no way FOX can legally crossover X-Men/FF. All speculation, no facts-these should be important for every sure-fire arguments. One vague article does not count.

Did I ever claim I had 'conclusive evidence'?

Sleekstereo made a statement that wasn't quite correct:

The source is this board, not anyone actually in the know. Its based on the speculation on what the contract says or doesn't say. But we don't know what the contract says or doesn't say. So some are speculating it means they can't crossover.

Until a crossover film is announced for 2018 of course.

After a very quick search, I provided one example (I'm not about to go back and try to find everything we've analyzed over the years) of Zak Penn (someone in the Know) saying:

"I was also misquoted regarding Fox and the Fantastic Four. To clarify, I simply pointed out that other studios can't do crossovers like they had in the comics, but Marvel Studios can. I never asked Fox to do anything, nor did they stop me, those legal issues are not even up for debate."

http://forums.superherohype.com/showpost.php?p=28057233&postcount=288

Since there was a false impression that nobody in the know had ever commented, I offered a comment from someone in the know.

I wasn't making an argument. I wasn't trying to prove a point. I was just offering some information.

 

[Tony Stark]

Which means you don't have any conclusive evidence that there is no way FOX can legally crossover X-Men/FF. All speculation, no facts-these should be important for every sure-fire arguments. One vague article does not count.

They are separate contracts. That's not speculation that's a fact. They are two separate contracts. This is no different than any other studio that has separate IP contracts from a similar source. There is no implication that they can use those IP's together whether it's characters in a novel adaptation or a comic book.

The only exceptions you've seen to this is in movies like League of Extraordinary Gentlemen or Van Helsing, where you had Van Helsing fighing Dracula and Frankenstein and Jack the Ripper. Why are they allowed to do that? Because those characters are public domain.

 

[Zarex]

Ooh, Ooh! I've got one. From an interview with ASM2 producers Avi Arad and Matt Tolmach on the Playlist. Arad was asked about Wolverine and Beast making an appearance in a Spider-Man film:

" Now, for Sony and Fox to make this deal and for Disney to endorse it... We'll probably have peace in the Middle East before that."

Now, why the heck would Disney have to endorse a private business arrangement between Sony and FOX, unless crossovers were not written into any of these contracts?

Let's summarize!

1) The Marvel licensing agreements with FOX and Sony are all separate contracts.

2) It is highly unlikely that crossover language is contained in these agreements signed back in the 1990s.

3) If crossover language is not included in the contracts, neither party has any idea about payment terms, character reversion, etc. as a result of a crossover.

4) If FOX or Sony attempted a crossover with the licensor's permission, Marvel could sue to have FOX or Sony found in violation of the agreements and ask the courts to tear up the contracts.

5) Avi Arad, Zak Penn and Tom Breevort, insiders all, have given their opinion that crossovers require Mama Marvel's permission.

 

[R_Hythlodeus]

Ooh, Ooh! I've got one. From an interview with ASM2 producers Avi Arad and Matt Tolmach on the Playlist. Arad was asked about Wolverine and Beast making an appearance in a Spider-Man film:

" Now, for Sony and Fox to make this deal and for Disney to endorse it... We'll probably have peace in the Middle East before that."

Now, why the heck would Disney have to endorse a private business arrangement between Sony and FOX, unless crossovers were not written into any of these contracts?

Let's summarize!

1) The Marvel licensing agreements with FOX and Sony are all separate contracts.

2) It is highly unlikely that crossover language is contained in these agreements signed back in the 1990s.

3) If crossover language is not included in the contracts, neither party has any idea about payment terms, character reversion, etc. as a result of a crossover.

4) If FOX or Sony attempted a crossover with the licensor's permission, Marvel could sue to have FOX or Sony found in violation of the agreements and ask the courts to tear up the contracts.

5) Avi Arad, Zak Penn and Tom Breevort, insiders all, have given their opinion that crossovers require Mama Marvel's permission.

yes, but do you have prove?

 

[Zarex]

I doubt Fox will give up on Shi'Ar or share them with Marvel. Especially if they want to revisit the Phoenix saga with the younger cast of Jean, Storm, Cyclops. They already have an unneeded headache of having two Quicksilvers on screen, why create another one with the Shi'Ar.

And frankly, if the choice is the Shi'Ar in a Phoenix storyline vs. anything Marvel has to offer, I'll go with the Phoenix storyline.

Marvel's not offering anything. They're listening to offers from FOX, which came to them on bended knee to get the X Men TV rights.

 

[sleekstereo]

Marvel's not offering anything. They're listening to offers from FOX, which came to them on bended knee to get the X Men TV rights.

That was in terms of Marvel could offer us, the audience, in bringing the Shi'Ar to screen. I rather have Fox keep the Shi"Ar and include them in a Phoenix storyline than Marvel having them and including them in whatever.

 

[starscream22]

That was in terms of Marvel could offer us, the audience, in bringing the Shi'Ar to screen. I rather have Fox keep the Shi"Ar and include them in a Phoenix storyline than Marvel having them and including them in whatever.

Great, I wouldn't.

Revert back to Marvel!

 

[Whiskey Tango]

yes, but do you have prove?

Revert back to Marvel!

 

[Tymminator]

In your opinion. Many would disagree with you about Marvel's worst being better than Fox's best (But I still enjoy Thor 2).

I agree, I wouldn't say that. I'm a Marvel Studios Fanboy and I think DoFP was better than quite a few Marvel Studios films, but I can say these two things....

1) Marvel Studios best is better than Fox's best (IMO)
2) Marvel Studios worse is better than Fox's worse. (IMO)

Marvel Studios as a young company has made almost as many CBM's as Fox in half the time and even if you look at the MS misfires, they still work better than Fox's misfires.

That said, re: this trailer, all I can say is that it wasnt a horrible trailer, but I find it interesting some people see it as an awesome trailer and rate it a "10" cause even as a teaser I didn't feel it was all that. Again it wasn't horrible, but to me a "10" teaser is one you would never forget. Even if this movie does well, I can't see people remembering this trailer in the future, but that's just me.

 

[GR8GODZILLAGOD]

Giving it a 5. It was such a generic trailer.