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

Discussion in 'Marvel Films' started by kaijunexus, Jan 15, 2013.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. DigificWriter

    DigificWriter Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 4, 2002
    Messages:
    7,692
    Likes Received:
    0
    Why is everyone clamoring for this? I see about as much reason for the FF rights to revert to Marvel Studios as I do for Spider-Man to show up in Marvel's 'homegrown' films (which is NO REASON WHATSOEVER).
     
    #151
  2. marvelrobbins

    marvelrobbins Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2004
    Messages:
    18,411
    Likes Received:
    0
    Not to mention If you actully want to see a FF film made Odds are better to see It this way.So far MS should be called Avengers studios.

    Guardians of the galaxy may exsist solely to set up Thanos for Avengers sequel.

    Disney Isn't jumping into a Hulk sequel.And The Punisher,Blade,and Daredevil are sitting on self.The chances of R rated films based on them at DIsney Is about as likely as the 616 Nick Fury showing up.

    With Rothman gone from Fox chances are good for a good FF film.
     
    #152
  3. Zarex

    Zarex Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2012
    Messages:
    7,184
    Likes Received:
    13
    Because FOX swung and missed badly with the first two FF films, the Fantastic Four fits much better in the MCU than in whatever universe FOX can come up with, the MCU is incomplete without the First Family, the cosmic universe spearheaded by the Guardians of the Galaxy is severly limited without Galactus and the Silver Surfer, Thing vs. Hulk and Thor vs. the Surfer would be fantastic onscreen and countless other reasons.
     
    #153
  4. DigificWriter

    DigificWriter Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 4, 2002
    Messages:
    7,692
    Likes Received:
    0
    ^ I'm sorry, but I'm not buying your argument. Most of those 'reasons' are subjective opinions.

    Someone who didn't like any one of Marvel Studios 'homegrown' films could make the exact same argument in reverse.
     
    #154
  5. Zarex

    Zarex Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2012
    Messages:
    7,184
    Likes Received:
    13
    You asked "Why is everyone clamoring for this?", so I gave my own, admittedly subjective, reasons. I'd be interested in hearing your subjective opinions why rebooting the FF into the MCU is a bad idea.
     
    #155
  6. DigificWriter

    DigificWriter Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 4, 2002
    Messages:
    7,692
    Likes Received:
    0
    ^ It's not a bad idea; it's an unnecessary one.

    If Marvel wanted to, they could negotiate with FOX to find a way to make the FF and X-Men franchises a part of the MCU without FOX losing the rights to said franchises.
     
    #156
  7. Zarex

    Zarex Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2012
    Messages:
    7,184
    Likes Received:
    13
    Admittedly it's unnecessary, but now that I've seen how much fun a connected comic book universe is on the big screen (and this fall on the smaller screen) I have no desire to go back to having superheroes in silos.

    And I agree, Disney/Marvel and FOX will be equally to blame if the FF reboot takes place outside the MCU and without both companies working together to ensure the success of the franchise.
     
    #157
  8. DigificWriter

    DigificWriter Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 4, 2002
    Messages:
    7,692
    Likes Received:
    0
    ^ Marvel working out a deal with FOX so that they (Marvel) could establish that the FF and X-Men franchises are a part of the overall MCU tapestry is and should be optional, though.
     
    #158
  9. Willie Lumpkin

    Willie Lumpkin Trophy Husband

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2003
    Messages:
    11,451
    Likes Received:
    42
    In the simplest terms I can use, I would say:

    Because Marvel's track record has shown that they generally respect the characters and their heritage. They also trust the value of those characters enough to invest the money required to bring them to screen in a way that faithfully represents the characters while also providing the necessary updates for a modern film.

    Fox on the other hand has shown a general distrust for the characters and a need to 'fix' characters that aren't broken (the black uniforms for the X-Men and the butchered Doom character are two quick examples). They don't take the characters seriously and they cut corners - trying to squeeze the most dollars out of them with as little investment as possible - and in so doing, they weaken the properties that they should value.

    In addition, these characters should all be united and sharing the same universe as they did in the comics.

    With that said, I have resigned myself to the idea that Fox will make this film, and there's little hope at this point that the rights will go back to Marvel. And with that in mind, I am trying to remain optimistic. Even though Fox has chosen to not do Superhero films properly in the past, they have every capability as a studio of making good films. They simply need to recognize the value of these characters, understand the heritage that gives them that value, and invest what's required to get talented people to bring that to the screen.

    Fox has shown some signs of improvement, possible Anti-Christ Tom Rothman is gone and Josh Trank appears to be a very talented director.

    I'm at the point that I have given up on Marvel making the film and therefore I have no choice but to hope Fox can pull it off. And I am willing to keep an open mind and let them show me they can.
     
    #159
  10. DigificWriter

    DigificWriter Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 4, 2002
    Messages:
    7,692
    Likes Received:
    0
    ^ Marvel helps produce the films that are financed and distributed by outside studios, so FOX, Sony, etc. aren't making these things in a vacuum, and if the things you're ticked off about were really that big of a deal, somebody at Marvel would've stepped in and offered objections and suggestions.
     
    #160
  11. Zarex

    Zarex Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2012
    Messages:
    7,184
    Likes Received:
    13
    Feige has stated many times that Marvel Studios has little to do with the FOX films. The film licensing contracts that were written back in the 90s gave almost full control to the studios regarding film content while retaining control over merchandise.
     
    #161
  12. DigificWriter

    DigificWriter Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 4, 2002
    Messages:
    7,692
    Likes Received:
    0
    ^ Hmm. Even so, the things that FOX has done with its Marvel properties aren't so egregious that they should lose the rights to those properties. Fans might disagree with some or all of those decisions, but that means absolutely nothing.

    Edit: as for FOX 'fixing' things, it's called taking creative license, which is totally within their rights to do.
     
    #162
  13. Zarex

    Zarex Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2012
    Messages:
    7,184
    Likes Received:
    13
    Come on now - remember the title of this forum thread!

    The thing I keep coming back to is the following -I don't see the potential revenues from this project being worth the enormous risk for FOX.

    ROTSS grossed $289 million worldwide (per Box Office Mojo). Given the results of the recent reboots of Spider-man and X-Men, the reboot will likely struggle to reach this amount. But let's say, despite opening up just 56 days before Avengers 2 and disappointing many fans who want to see the team in the MCU, Trank's film sees a slight boost to $300 million.

    I managed a movie theater about a million years ago, but at the time the studios kept 90% of proceeds from opening week, and the percentages dropped for each following week. From what I have heard, the splits going to the theaters are much more generous in overseas markets. But let's say in total FOX realizes about 65% of the gross, or $195 million.

    The first two films looked as though they were cheaply made despite decent budgets, but if Trank, Millar and company are going to show us the negative zone and a fully CGI Thing, the budget will need a boost. ROTSS cost (again, per Box Office Mojo) $130 million. With four characters (at least) requiring expensive special effects, I am estimating a $50 million boost to $180 million.

    On to merchandise and other ancillary revenue - unfortunately for FOX, there isn't any. Perouse Marvel 10Ks prior to the Disney buy out and you will see that despite giving away the house on film rights, Marvel maintained a majority interest in merchandise rights for licensed characters and control over their usage. And I don't think Disney is going to clear Avengers, Spider-man and Star Wars toys off the shelves to make room for stretchable Mr. Fantastics and Thing hands.

    So in what I see as a best case scenario, FOX is looking at a $15 million return on an $180 million budget. And that's assuming their very green (though talented) director can keep the film's costs under control and Disney/Marvel doesn't do something wacky like release The Incredibles 3D in the same time frame.

    There is a reason FOX nixed a third FF film despite receiving ancillary revenue from the sale of backpacks, toys and t-shirts. And why they have waited so long to put a reboot into production. Keep Hope Alive!
     
    #163
    Last edited: Apr 5, 2013
  14. Dr Tactics

    Dr Tactics Ill Brova

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2000
    Messages:
    945
    Likes Received:
    0
    It is not a issue of can they. It's a question of should they and if the "fixes" they made from a business stand point contributed on their bottom line. They have every right to do whatever they want but movies are supposed to be a profit making business. I somewhat agree with Willie Lumkin that Tom Rothman fell short of fixing their Marvel universe into the profit making business that Marvel has done it self so that problem is gone so there's nowhere to go but up. This is all about what's best for the FF. the X-Universe is fine with Fox. So to me this Fox shared universe is counter productive and this march 2015 release date has to be forced not because the want to put it out more than they have to to keep the rights. So they still have to compete with SW VII, JL and the Avengers and march releases don't make that much money. So Fox can do whatever they want. But if they want to make a profit then they'll chose for the FF to ride the sails of the MCU as opposed to the X-Men.
     
    #164
  15. Willie Lumpkin

    Willie Lumpkin Trophy Husband

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2003
    Messages:
    11,451
    Likes Received:
    42
    The products speak for themselves. Look at Dr. Doom in the Fantastic Four. If Marvel didn't fix Doom, what would they fix? The Doom character in FF is clear evidence that if there is oversight by Marvel, that oversight is insufficient.
     
    #165
  16. Willie Lumpkin

    Willie Lumpkin Trophy Husband

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2003
    Messages:
    11,451
    Likes Received:
    42
    A lot of interesting information there, but one area you don't mention (unless it's included in the other areas and I'm not aware) is DVD's and Blu-Rays. With improved TV's, sound systems etc. and people creating their own home theaters, a big chunk of box office revenues have given way to DVD/Blu-Ray sales and rentals. Does Fox get the bulk of that money? If so, I can imagine them doing pretty well just on that.

    Also, one disappointing thing about the FF was that there was very little quality supporting merchandise such as toys, books etc. The contract details you mention may touch on the reason why and if so, that is another strong reason Marvel should control everything.

    But as I say, I'm resigned to my fate, so I'm not going to spend a lot of time thinking about what might have been.
     
    #166
    Last edited: Apr 5, 2013
  17. Zarex

    Zarex Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2012
    Messages:
    7,184
    Likes Received:
    13
    Revenue from DVDs, Blue-Ray, On-Demand and Netflix can certainly ameliorate losses box office losses, but I don't know why FOX would greenlight a film that's dependent on these streams to make a profit.

    There may not have been a lot of quality merchandise associated with the first two films, but there was a lot of it - t-shirts, backpacks, Thing hands and feet, talking Thing 12" action figures, bendable Mr. Fantastic, Human Torch mask and gloves, Fantasticar playset. I remember because I still have all of that crap lying around my house.
     
    #167
  18. Kelly

    Kelly #RESIST

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2004
    Messages:
    69,905
    Likes Received:
    0
    Production studios have all realized that there is massive money in DVD's, Blue-Ray, On-Demand....not so much Netflix (takes too long for them to get there and to the Red Boxes, but still a nice little profit)....that is why you don't see movies in theaters for as long as you use to.....I remember when movies were in theaters for 3 - 4 months...as of about 2003, that has pretty much changed.

    As far as merchandise, there was pretty much....NONE with the 2nd movie, and no fast food restaurant collectibles with the 2nd one. The first movie had far more merchandise with it....
     
    #168
  19. Zarex

    Zarex Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2012
    Messages:
    7,184
    Likes Received:
    13
    By the time of the sequel's release, Marvel was well into production on their first two features under the Merrill Lynch financing arrangement. I wouldn't be surprised if restricting FOX's merchandising revenue on ROTSS was an attempt by Marvel to lessen the probability of a third film in the series, and hasten the rights reversion date.

    Either that or they still had tons of unsold stuff from the first film.
     
    #169
    Last edited: Apr 6, 2013
  20. Willie Lumpkin

    Willie Lumpkin Trophy Husband

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2003
    Messages:
    11,451
    Likes Received:
    42
    Definitely, and I think that hurt the film's success. I remember buying a book about the making of the first film, but there was nothing like that for the second film.

    I remember at the time thinking: "They're not even trying to promote this film. It doesn't feel like an event at all."

    I saw that as a sign that the studio wasn't serious about the property and they were simply sucking the life out of it. I still think that's true to some extent, but Zarex's comments on the agreements could tell part of the behind-the-scenes story.

    The question now is: "How do the current agreements affect Fox's ability/willingness to go out and really promote this film?" If their hands are tied by agreements and they can't go all out with products to support the release, that will diminish the scale and the scope of the film even if they do everything else right. And that also reduces Fox's incentive to do it right.

    These seemingly obscure technical details are probably the biggest reason Marvel should get the rights back. I want to see a guy dressed as the Thing when I go to Disney World. Until Marvel/Disney has full rights, FF will be a red-headed step-child in the Marvel universe when they should be THE Marvel keystone.
     
    #170
  21. Zarex

    Zarex Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2012
    Messages:
    7,184
    Likes Received:
    13
    Disney recently announced the first Marvel attraction at a Disney theme park - Iron Man Tech presented by Stark Industries at the Innoventions building in Disneyland. This attaction may also be installed at Disney parks in Tokyo, Paris, Shanghai and Hong Kong - but not Walt Disney World.

    Marvel sold the theme park rights east of the Mississippi to Universal back in the 90s when the company opened their second gate in Orlando. So a Thing walkaround character at Walt Disney World is going to require an agreement on yet another horrible "in perpetuity" deal that Avi Arad signed.
     
    #171
  22. metaphysician

    metaphysician Not a Side-Kick

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2012
    Messages:
    11,233
    Likes Received:
    0
    The Fantastic Four has a lot of setting elements tied to it that would be useful for the larger MCU, unlike Spider-man.
     
    #172
  23. spideyboy_1111

    spideyboy_1111 Young Avenger

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2001
    Messages:
    66,458
    Likes Received:
    4
    disney world yes... but they are free to do as they wish with DisneyLand. Anaheim and disney have been fighting over some land development for years at disneyland, but if they ever get more space... i'd almost guarantee it'd be for marvel
     
    #173
  24. jaqua99

    jaqua99 ....I need a horse!

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2012
    Messages:
    8,300
    Likes Received:
    1
    I just thought of a way to make it work. What if Kang is the villain? We know there are other versions of Kang. If time travel works itself into the MCU, immortus can maybe show up at some point? and maybe "The Other", can be a NEW double of Kang. So each of the film studios could have a version of Kang in it, sort of showing that each studio is a different universe in a giant multiverse??

    that's wishful thinking lol
     
    #174
  25. Kelly

    Kelly #RESIST

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2004
    Messages:
    69,905
    Likes Received:
    0
    Remember all of the stuff they did during the NBA Championships...Burger King promo, Toys R Us had huge displays with all of their stuff....on TV they had TV spots for each of the team....2nd movie, NOTHING....absolutely nothing.
     
    #175
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"