Spidey, F4, and X-Men replaced in MCU?

[Aztec]

It seems to me that Marvel have decided to write off their characters being held (hostage?) by other studios: Spider-Man, the Fantastic Four, and the X-Men. Why do I say this? Because they are actively trying to "replace" them in the MCU with similar characters. Take a look.

Spider-Man: A quirky, superhero with bug based powers. MCU's answer: Ant-Man

Fantastic Four: A dysfunctional family/team of cosmic traveling superheroes. MCU's answer: Guardians of the Galaxy

X-Men: A group of genetically unique and incredible individuals hidden within the population. MCU's answer: The Inhumans

I think this strategy is brilliant on Marvel's part. It's clear that Fox and Sony won't let the rights revert so it's time to move on without them. What better way than to make these characters unnecessary and/or redundant in the MCU. Besides Marvel excels at introducing new characters to the audiences. So the lack of "character star power" is not an issue here.

So far they've rocked it with GOTG and they are seemingly building an impressive Ant-Man. We'll see when they announce The Inhumans. Thoughts?

 

[kedrell]

Well it's clear that while Marvel may wish to have the rights back, they certainly don't need them to be even more successful than the studios who DO have the rights. But I'll say that I look forward to a day when all this rights business is behind us and no longer being a topic of conversation.

 

[metaphysician]

Eh, I think some of those connections are kind of vague. The only straight replacement, I would say, is the use of "Gifted" in Agents of SHIELD as not-called-mutants. The rest is them just doing stuff with other characters and teams they have.

 

[Ragnaroknroll]

Provided the final product continues to be quality, I think Marvel actually has the advantage by pursuing quirkier unknown properties at this point. It helps keeps things fresh for audiences while other companies like Sony and Fox risk wearing out their characters' popularity by trying to draw from the same well again and again. Who wants to see yet another reboot when you can see something completely new?

They may not have perfect drop-in replacements for the characters they've lost but Marvel's definitely moving on. How much you wanna bet the Celestials and Adam Warlock replace Galactus and Silver Surfer respectively in the cosmic scale threat and metallic skinned messianic figure categories?

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

Marvel Universe is a big place.

MCU is just fine without Spider-man and X-men. The only missing property that leaves somewhat of a void is Fantastic Four and Marvel Studios proved with GotG that their cosmic universe can thrive without them.

 

[Chris B]

I don't think the Fantastic Four and Spider-Man would seem redundant if they were ever introduced. Though the Inhumans as an X-Men substitute has always made sense to me.

 

[The Question]

The Inhumans don't really make sense as X-Men substitutes at all. They have powers. That's the only connection.

 

[T"Challa]

They are not trying to replace anyone. They are just focusing on trying to develop unique properties. GOTG characters are nothing like the F4 imo..and if they do the inhumans, it will have a very different feel than the X-Men.

 

[SuperFerret]

I've not yet heard of a person who is not disappointed in Ant-Man, so I'm sort of stuck on that "impressive" comment.

 

[Raiden]

I've not yet heard of a person who is not disappointed in Ant-Man, so I'm sort of stuck on that "impressive" comment.

I have faith in Marvel that they will be able to deliver us a great Ant-Man movie. After GOTG, they got my benefit of the doubt.

 

[Aztec]

They may not have perfect drop-in replacements for the characters they've lost but Marvel's definitely moving on. How much you wanna bet the Celestials and Adam Warlock replace Galactus and Silver Surfer respectively in the cosmic scale threat and metallic skinned messianic figure categories?

I agree 100%. In fact in GOTG they showed the Celestial destroying a planet with an Infinity Stone. That was very much in the style of Galactus and let's be honest The Celestials even look quite a bit like Galactus. Also Warlock would make sense to serve in the Silver Surfer role for the MCU.

As for Ant-Man I think the cast, and Marvel's damn near impeccable back record (especially the last two films), are reason enough to have faith that this film will be good. I can see him sliding into that Spidey role nicely.

The Inhumans totally have that X-Men secret society of super freaks vibe. They could work well in that role. Especially if they are revealed to be the "Miracles" of the MCU.

I stand behind my original statement. Marvel is moving on and using what they have to best recreate their comic tradition on the big screen.

 

[Mike Murdock]

I can buy the Fantastic Four/Guardians of the Galaxy analogy. It's not remotely perfect and I think Marvel would use the Fantastic Four much more broadly (and, more likely, on Earthbound adventures). But the space and group dynamics are certainly true.

Inhumans vs. X-Men is something to wait and see. I think the Inhumans bring a lot different to the table and I doubt the movies would avoid those differences. The characters are such an important part of each dynamic and I don't think they're the same. Black Bolt isn't Professor X, Madusa isn't Jean Grey. Gorgon, Karnak, whoever, isn't Wolverine.

I don't see the Ant-Man/Spider-Man comparison at all beyond both involving creepy crawling things.

 

[kedrell]

I've not yet heard of a person who is not disappointed in Ant-Man, so I'm sort of stuck on that "impressive" comment.

You have now. With this split it's Marvel I'll be sticking with rather than Edgar Wright.
I supported his hiring as director because I trust Marvel and Fiege, not because I'm an Edgar Wright fan(which I'm not as I've only seen the one of his movies, Scott Pilgrim, and I hated it).

 

[The Question]

You have now. With this split it's Marvel I'll be sticking with rather than Edgar Wright.
I supported his hiring as director because I trust Marvel and Fiege, not because I'm an Edgar Wright fan(which I'm not as I've only seen the one of his movies, Scott Pilgrim, and I hated it).

I mean, even if Wright was wrong for the film, eleventh hour changes in the director's seat almost never end well.

 

[Zant]

It seems to me that Marvel have decided to write off their characters being held (hostage?) by other studios: Spider-Man, the Fantastic Four, and the X-Men. Why do I say this? Because they are actively trying to "replace" them in the MCU with similar characters. Take a look.

Spider-Man: A quirky, superhero with bug based powers. MCU's answer: Ant-Man

Fantastic Four: A dysfunctional family/team of cosmic traveling superheroes. MCU's answer: Guardians of the Galaxy

X-Men: A group of genetically unique and incredible individuals hidden within the population. MCU's answer: The Inhumans

I think this strategy is brilliant on Marvel's part. It's clear that Fox and Sony won't let the rights revert so it's time to move on without them. What better way than to make these characters unnecessary and/or redundant in the MCU. Besides Marvel excels at introducing new characters to the audiences. So the lack of "character star power" is not an issue here.

So far they've rocked it with GOTG and they are seemingly building an impressive Ant-Man. We'll see when they announce The Inhumans. Thoughts?

Held hostage? What does that mean?

 

[metaphysician]

Well, Fox certainly seems to be holding the Fantastic Four hostage. The reboot looks to be a pure minimum-cost rights grab, rather than an attempt to actually make money off them.

The rest, I agree, characterizing as "hostage taking" is unfair. Fox actually does try to make X-Men movies that will sell well and make money; ditto for Sony and Spider-man. How good a job they do is up for grabs, but they actually do put in the effort.

 

[SuperFerret]

You have now. With this split it's Marvel I'll be sticking with rather than Edgar Wright.
I supported his hiring as director because I trust Marvel and Fiege, not because I'm an Edgar Wright fan(which I'm not as I've only seen the one of his movies, Scott Pilgrim, and I hated it).

It's less Wright's departure and more the cluster**** of nonsense going on around the film. The director change is the tip of the iceberg, but everything about this movie came off as wrong from the get-go.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

These characters only resemble the ones you mentioned in the most vague sense. They are not similar characters, beyond being superheroes. You could just as easily say Spider-Man is a rip off of Superman.

Plus, these are all Marvel characters that have histories going back decades. It isn't like Marvel just created them for the films. The most recent was Rocket who made his debut in 1976. Groot actually pre-dates The Fantastic Four.

You're grasping at straws here.

 

[Aztec]

These characters only resemble the ones you mentioned in the most vague sense. They are not similar characters, beyond being superheroes. You could just as easily say Spider-Man is a rip off of Superman.

Plus, these are all Marvel characters that have histories going back decades. It isn't like Marvel just created them for the films. The most recent was Rocket who made his debut in 1976. Groot actually pre-dates The Fantastic Four.

You're grasping at straws here.

I'll have to disagree here. It seems to me that Marvel is filling voids and roles left by their more popular characters that aren't available to them. Thus telling Fox/Sony that they don't care and/or need these characters.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

I'll have to disagree here. It seems to me that Marvel is filling voids and roles left by their more popular characters that aren't available to them. Thus telling Fox/Sony that they don't care and/or need these characters.

How are Peter Quill and Reed Richards similar characters?
Peter Parker and Scott Lang (or Hank Pym, for that matter)?
Black Bolt and Wolverine?

They aren't.

 

[Aztec]

They play SIMILAR ROLES in the Marvel Universe.

"We need a cosmic adventuring team. We'd usually use the Fantastic Four...hmmm...we don't have them. Who do we have that can fill that role? Guardians of the Galaxy."

Same deal for Spidey/Ant and X-Men/Inhumans (or "Miracles" depending on which direction they go).

 

[Spider-Aziz]

The Inhumans don't really make sense as X-Men substitutes at all. They have powers. That's the only connection.

Maybe it's choosing the team of misfits?

 

[Mike Murdock]

"We need a cosmic adventuring team. We'd usually use the Fantastic Four...hmmm...we don't have them. Who do we have that can fill that role? Guardians of the Galaxy."

But the Fantastic Four also do far more than that and far less than that (their cosmic adventures are usually on Earth and they have plenty of adventures involving strange things that don't involve space). Guardians is more of a Star Wars type atmosphere, which Fantastic Four never has.

Same deal for Spidey/Ant and X-Men/Inhumans (or "Miracles" depending on which direction they go).

First off, "Miracles" and Inhumans aren't the same thing. Second, I think you're missing the point that characters matter. People who want to see the X-Men want to see the characters we love (even First Class at least had Professor X, Beast, and Magneto). Inhumans can't fill that role even if there are superficial similarities.

And I still have no idea how Spider-Man and Ant-Man fill the same role at all. By that, I mean I see next to no similarities.

 

[The Question]

Maybe it's choosing the team of misfits?

But the Inhumans aren't a team of misfits. They're the royal family of a hidden civilization.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

But the Inhumans aren't a team of misfits. They're the royal family of a hidden civilization.

Right. Black Bolt and the Inhumans are way closer to Namor and the Atlanteans than they are to the X-Men.

Guardians is more of a Star Wars type atmosphere, which Fantastic Four never has.

Right. Guardians is more like Star Wars. Fantastic Four is more like Jules Verne.