The "Keep Hope Alive" (that the rights can revert back to Marvel) thread - Part 8

[The Infernal]

Not what he signed up for but hey it helps to be flexible.

When it comes to the movie versions of Stryker vs Juggernaut. He traded up significantly.

 

[Dark Raven]

I guess if you're trying to bring all your properties back home you have to start somewhere. Even if that might require burning a few bridges and missing out on a few bucks.

It's Fox who burnt those bridges, not Marvel. Fox aren't the ones trying to get all their properties back under one roof.

And they already started bridge burning in the early 2000s when they sued Marvel Entertainment for Mutant X being too similar to X-Men, and prevented Marvel from using the word "Mutant" from thereon after.

 

[Docker2.0]

Agreed. We know Disney/Marvel are willing to pass on the potentially lucrative merchandising movie tie-ins they can produce for Fox's efforts, and I think 'Wolverine: Origins' was the last that was supported with toys and so on by Marvel, so we can assume they aint getting on well at all.

I think the Galactus/Surfer swap offer for a Daredevil extension being turned down burned any bridges they might have had, or might have been able to build at any rate (I think Disney had taken over at that point, so with new upper management the relations were always gonna be different from then on. Prior to that 'Marvel Entertainment' at least seemed to be amiable enough with Fox).

Can you blame them? Fox was just being nasty for the heck of it concerning Galactus and Silver Surfer.......characters they have no plans on using any time soon, nor do they have any idea of what to do with them. They come off petty concerning the rights of these characters and Quiksilver. It was pathetic the stunt they pulled concerning Pietro.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

When it comes to the movie versions of Stryker vs Juggernaut. He traded up significantly.

Can't disagree with that. If you were to rank the most important characters in the film franchise, Wolverine, Xavier, Magneto, and Mystique are at the top, and then it is probably Stryker. Maybe Jean, then Stryker. But he's certainly in the top half dozen.

Young Stryker is the better role to have. Even in DoFP alone as Stryker is a recurring villain throughout instead of a character in just one five minute action scene and then tossed on the scrap heap.

 

[wobbly]

Can you blame them? Fox was just being nasty for the heck of it concerning Galactus and Silver Surfer.......characters they have no plans on using any time soon, nor do they have any idea of what to do with them. They come off petty concerning the rights of these characters and Quiksilver. It was pathetic the stunt they pulled concerning Pietro.

I don't blame them at all. Marvel put out a reasonable offer: You give us back 2 characters you are doing nothing with, and you have more time to produce a project you do currently have in active development. That seems fair enough to me.

I suspect Fox thought they did enough time to get DD at least shooting though, and that's why they turned it down (tried to keep all the toys). As I understand it Slade bailing late on was what caught them out there. Carnahan tried to get something going fast for them, but it was too little too late.

The Quicksilver move was also another slap in the face.

So yeah, I don't blame Disney/Marvel at all for playing hard ball now with Fox.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

Agreed. We know Disney/Marvel are willing to pass on the potentially lucrative merchandising movie tie-ins they can produce for Fox's efforts, and I think 'Wolverine: Origins' was the last that was supported with toys and so on by Marvel, so we can assume they aint getting on well at all.

The only Fox character I've seen a lot of merchandise for in the past few years is Deadpool.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

I don't blame them at all. Marvel put out a reasonable offer: You give us back 2 characters you are doing nothing with, and you have more time to produce a project you do currently have in active development. That seems fair enough to me.

I suspect Fox thought they did enough time to get DD at least shooting though, and that's why they turned it down (tried to keep all the toys). As I understand it Slade bailing late on was what caught them out there. Carnahan tried to get something going fast for them, but it was too little too late.

The Quicksilver move was also another slap in the face.

So yeah, I don't blame Disney/Marvel at all for playing hard ball now with Fox.

I've said this in Marvel Films folder, but I will repeat it here. I think Marvel should consider themselves very fortunate that Fox turned that down. I absolutely believe that Daredevil and all that comes with him (Kingpin, Bullseye, the Hand, Elektra, etc.) is far more valuable than just Galactus and Silver Surfer. In exchange for the Fantastic Four license? Sure. But Galactus and Silver Surfer wasn't enough.

I absolutely would rather be the side that got Daredevil in that arrangement.

 

[Surfer]

I've said this in Marvel Films folder, but I will repeat it here. I think Marvel should consider themselves very fortunate that Fox turned that down. I absolutely believe that Daredevil and all that comes with him (Kingpin, Bullseye, the Hand, Elektra, etc.) is far more valuable than just Galactus and Silver Surfer. In exchange for the Fantastic Four license? Sure. But Galactus and Silver Surfer wasn't enough.

I absolutely would rather be the side that got Daredevil in that arrangement.

As much as the Silver Surfer and Galactus are amongst my favorite characters in the Marvel Universe, I agree in that acquiring two characters versus the many they obtained by getting the rights back for Daredevil, that the later was the better deal.

Surfer

 

[starscream22]

i don't think the relationship between Fox and Disney/Marvel are as bad as many make out on here.

You might wanna do a little more research then. Characters like Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch were worked out in the contracts way before Disney acquired Marvel. Otherwise if it where up to Fox, that goofy version of QS that you all seen last Summer via Fox would be all we get.

Remember, Fox want a franchise. They have managed to reinvigorate the Planet of the Apes (2 excellent films, imo), but they want more.

.......okay.....in what way does this reboot give you a "Planet of the Apes" vibe in terms of quality? Don't confuse a films distribution with the the actual production company behind it. The one behind this reboot is clearly different!

Personally I think Fox wants to keep hold of FF4 thinking there is better potential in it than the other rights that reverted back

Of course...better potential for a pay out maybe. Only Disney isn't buying for whatever ridiculous price Fox is charging for it. So as a result, here comes Victor Domashev. Same actor who played Ceasor but obviously not the same quality!

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

There are probably a number of characters that are shared between the studios, but we don't know how many. We know of at least four to my knowledge: Quicksilver, Scarlet Witch, the Skrulls (except for Super Skrull which is Fox only), and Lady Viper. There are probably more that we don't know about.

 

[lukebrodyg]

It's Fox who burnt those bridges, not Marvel. Fox aren't the ones trying to get all their properties back under one roof.

And they already started bridge burning in the early 2000s when they sued Marvel Entertainment for Mutant X being too similar to X-Men, and prevented Marvel from using the word "Mutant" from thereon after.

Oh. It seemed implied it was Marvel refusing to play ball with ridiculous expectations (namely the price of rights) from Fox. Either way, I'm impressed with Marvel and have never been impressed with Fox so I'm cool with bridges being burnt period in this regard.

 

[Ragnaroknroll]

Can't disagree with that. If you were to rank the most important characters in the film franchise, Wolverine, Xavier, Magneto, and Mystique are at the top, and then it is probably Stryker. Maybe Jean, then Stryker. But he's certainly in the top half dozen.

Young Stryker is the better role to have. Even in DoFP alone as Stryker is a recurring villain throughout instead of a character in just one five minute action scene and then tossed on the scrap heap.

Fair enough. That may very well be but it wasn't even my point. My point is Fox shoehorned in a character at the expense of another purely to wave it in Marvel's face.

You might wanna do a little more research then. Characters like Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch were worked out in the contracts way before Disney acquired Marvel. Otherwise if it where up to Fox, that goofy version of QS that you all seen last Summer via Fox would be all we get.

Exactly. Thank goodness. I want to see Pietro. Not Peter the Spy Kid.

 

[Ragnaroknroll]

I've said this in Marvel Films folder, but I will repeat it here. I think Marvel should consider themselves very fortunate that Fox turned that down. I absolutely believe that Daredevil and all that comes with him (Kingpin, Bullseye, the Hand, Elektra, etc.) is far more valuable than just Galactus and Silver Surfer. In exchange for the Fantastic Four license? Sure. But Galactus and Silver Surfer wasn't enough.

I absolutely would rather be the side that got Daredevil in that arrangement.

Yes. Agree. Definitely. As bummed as I am about Galactus and Silver Surfer, the deal wasn't in the best interests of Marvel long term. From a business perspective a franchise is worth far more than two characters. I feel Marvel was being way too generous here. I remember being dumbfounded that Fox did not take the deal but I guess they must have really undervalued the DD franchise.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

Fair enough. That may very well be but it wasn't even my point. My point is Fox shoehorned in a character at the expense of another purely to wave it in Marvel's face.

I don't disagree. I was just speaking for the actor in question.

 

[Ragnaroknroll]

I don't disagree. I was just speaking for the actor in question.

My bad for unintentionally derailing the thread.

 

[Dark Raven]

Fox are trolling Marvel at this point with most of what they do in regards to the FF movie. Even making Doom an internet troll is the biggest middle finger to them and the fans.

 

[starscream22]

Agreed. We know Disney/Marvel are willing to pass on the potentially lucrative merchandising movie tie-ins they can produce for Fox's efforts, and I think 'Wolverine: Origins' was the last that was supported with toys and so on by Marvel, so we can assume they aint getting on well at all.

I think the Galactus/Surfer swap offer for a Daredevil extension being turned down burned any bridges they might have had, or might have been able to build at any rate (I think Disney had taken over at that point, so with new upper management the relations were always gonna be different from then on. Prior to that 'Marvel Entertainment' at least seemed to be amiable enough with Fox).

It's really not that "lucrative" considering that Fox would get the bigger cut.
And Disney didn't pay $4B for Marvel just to line another studios pockets.

To put it lightly Fox, Sony, etc. got pretty fat off of Marvels early financial misfortune. Now enters Disney who clearly knows better. And after looking at how bad Marvel was suckered earlier on and wont stop till they get back what should all be theirs.

So in the grand scheme of things getting a small fraction from movie merchandise simply wont cut it! Spider-man alone sold over $1.3B in merchandise last year.

http://www.**************.com/fansites/KingPatel/news/?a=111109

So I doubt Marvel/Disney is missing out on the table scraps that Fox's contracts offer.

Plus how would allowing Fox to make even more money off of an IP via movie merchandise give them reason to release it back any sooner to a company who clearly wants the rights back....?

 

[Ragnaroknroll]

It's really not that "lucrative" considering that Fox would get the bigger cut.
And Disney didn't pay $4B for Marvel just to line another studios pockets.

To put it lightly Fox, Sony, etc. got pretty fat off of Marvels early financial misfortune. Now enters Disney who clearly knows better. And after looking at how bad Marvel was suckered earlier on and wont stop till they get back what should all be theirs.

So in the grand scheme of things getting a small fraction from movie merchandise simply wont cut it! Spider-man alone sold over $1.3B in merchandise last year.

http://www.**************.com/fansites/KingPatel/news/?a=111109

So I doubt Marvel/Disney is missing out on the table scraps that Fox's contracts offer.

Plus how would allowing Fox to make even more money off of an IP via movie merchandise give them reason to release it back any sooner to a company who clearly wants the rights back....?

I agree. Although I think a better link might be:

www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/superhero-earns-13-billion-a-748281

This is why Marvel is delighted to promote Spider-Man along with all of their MCU films even though they don't have the movie rights. Bargaining for the full merchandising rights was genius. When it comes to popularity, it's not even close. Spider-Man rules all. Who knows if that can be sustained with the damage Sony is doing to the brand but even so - the ones making out here are Marvel. I don't think Marvel cares two whits about Fox's paltry merchandising "opportunities".

Besides since Fox is supposedly so "adult oriented" why the hell do they need toys? Maybe if Fox gave us classic X-Men in full color costumes we'd be having a different conversation but that's all too "kiddy" and "cartoonish" right?

 

[Zarex]

It's really not that "lucrative" considering that Fox would get the bigger cut.
And Disney didn't pay $4B for Marvel just to line another studios pockets.

According to the last annual report for Marvel Entertainment prior to the Disney buyout "we retain control over merchandising rights and retain more than 50% of merchandising-based royalty revenue". Marvel would get a larger cut in any merchandising effort, though the split is not disclosed.

One of the major reasons for Marvel launching an independent slate of films was that while the Sony Spider-Man films were profitable for the company due to Spidey's ability to move merchandise, the FOX films were not. Here's a quote from a FORTUNE article in 2007, "Marvel goes Hollywood"

Soon after "Spider-Man 2" opened in 2004, though, the stock dropped more than a third. Wall Street thought Marvel was all Spider-Man. By this time Fox had "Fantastic Four" and a third X-Men movie in the pipeline. But those characters didn't move merchandise like Spider-Man, who was not set to return to the screen until this year.

Though the X-Men in the FF both have long storied histories for Marvel, both properties are dogs for the company.

 

[Nokio]

If Marvel owns the animated film rites to Xmen and F4, why not just let Pixar work on an animated film of F4 just to shove it in Fox's face. That's what I would do.

 

[Nokio]

i don't think the relationship between Fox and Disney/Marvel are as bad as many make out on here. They were able to use Quicksilver in both studios after talking. Also, Fox hold the distribution rights to the original 6 Star Wars films which Disney probably wants.

Personally I think Fox wants to keep hold of FF4 thinking there is better potential in it than the other rights that reverted back. Probably had a script floating around for Chronicle 2, had Trank signed on already for Chronicle 2, so decided to mash them together. Get a quick turn around on a film, on low budget, offers new origins, which they can then adapt to a bigger blockbuster with more time, budget and effects. Or start again with bigger budget, time (which they'll now have) and a more faithful adaptation.

Remember, Fox want a franchise. They have managed to reinvigorate the Planet of the Apes (2 excellent films, imo), but they want more.

I don't see the potential if they are churning out films that are a stark contrast to the their comic counterparts. Why make a F4 film and not do it right in the 1st place? How many times can the franchise be rebooted where the audience is like we'll go see it desite that last soso one. They put out F4 by Trank and it tanks, do you think another bigger and better one can be done later on? I think they'll have to wait at least a decade before the audience will have an interest.

 

[Zarex]

If Marvel owns the film rites to Xmen and F4, why not just let Pixar work on an animated film of F4 just to shove it in Fox's face. That's what I would do.

Marvel doesn't control the cinematic rights to the X-Men and Fantastic Four. And Pixar already did an animated film of F4, one that looks closer to the source material than Trank's FFINO.

 

[Eddie]

The only Fox character I've seen a lot of merchandise for in the past few years is Deadpool.

It's entirely possible the merchandising rights for Deadpool are different than the rest of the Fox controlled characters. Deadpool's film rights weren't always with Fox. They didn't acquire him until after all of the other characters they currently have.

 

[spideyboy_1111]

Theres lots of x-men merch, its just all comic book related.

Theres been 2 exclusive x-men legends waves in the last year and a half... the wolverine Legends wave featuring a "build a puck" figure, emma frost, cyclops, wolverine and sabretooth.

Then this year we got a toys r us exclusive original 5 box set, and an x-men legends wave with a baf of jubilee, and featured storm, magneto, modern "x" cyclops, stryfe, and another wolverine.

The movies are the only things not getting merch

And a year and 1.5-2 years ago we got a SDCC x-force box set, and figures of jim lee jean grey and jim lee archangel...

 

[Eddie]

It's not that there isn't any merch (Funko also puts out X-Men bobbleheads. I have one myself). It's just that there's noticeably less than there used to be before the movie rights thing seems to have gotten ugly. Even Wolverine gets way less than he ever did before. What little I've seen the past several years tends to be tied into other things, as well. Superhero Squad, for example.