The Rebooted "Keep Hope Alive" (that the rights can revert back to Marvel) Thread - - Part 11

[TheVileOne]

Ahem.

The merchandise and toys and game thing is a myth guys. It's a fake myth perpetrated by fans.

 

[Stark Bauer]

I don't know if it's been mentioned yet, but hopefully Latcham being at Fox only improves the relations between Marvel Studios and Fox so the thawing continues and a deal can be worked out sooner than later. I.e. In time for Avengers 4 or even Secret Wars!

 

[jaymes_e06]

I never put much stock into that (as you said) myth either but there has been a concerted effort to downgrade Fox owned properties as Marvel have made obviously fake love for Inhumans over the X-Men to position them in a higher esteem.

 

[Willie Lumpkin]

I don't know if it's been mentioned yet, but hopefully Latcham being at Fox only improves the relations between Marvel Studios and Fox so the thawing continues and a deal can be worked out sooner than later. I.e. In time for Avengers 4 or even Secret Wars!

Yeah, I think the chances of cooperation are improved for a couple reasons:

1. Latcham knows the key people at Marvel very well. Even if there was some animosity, he knows what Marvel would want and he's better equipped than anybody to work something out ( and if the split was amicable, all the better ).

2. Latcham recognizes the FF are FAR more valuable as part of the MCU than they are as stand alones. If he and Fox intend to hang on to the FF rights, he will likely only try to do so if there is an integration option.

I think five years from now, we'll look back and realize how HUGE this weekend's news was. But for now we have to wait and see how things develop. I'm hoping we'll get some more details in the coming days and hopefully some indication that Feige and Latcham remain friends and are both looking forward to some really cool things.

 

[Gamma Goliath]

I remember when marvel pulled an uatu collectable not long ago, and have recently pulled the F4 and all related properties from marvel heroes a few weeks ago. So there is truth to the myth.

 

[Zarex]

The merchandise and toys and game thing is a myth guys. It's a fake myth perpetrated by fans.

So what's the "fake myth" (as opposed to the "real myth")? That since the Disney buyout Marvel has either severely reduced or eliminated the appearance on FOX controlled characters on clothing, home furnishing, video games, animation, posters, toys, etc.? Because that is obviously the case.

 

[TheVileOne]

So what's the "fake myth" (as opposed to the "real myth")? That since the Disney buyout Marvel has either severely reduced or eliminated the appearance on FOX controlled characters on clothing, home furnishing, video games, animation, posters, toys, etc.? Because that is obviously the case.

The fake myth is that Marvel Disney completely banned Fox controlled characters. There's no ban.

 

[TheVileOne]

I never put much stock into that (as you said) myth either but there has been a concerted effort to downgrade Fox owned properties as Marvel have made obviously fake love for Inhumans over the X-Men to position them in a higher esteem.

It's not a downplay. It's simply a heavier focus on the characters they completely own and control, outside of Spider-Man. Which is smart because those characters and properties became very profitable as a result of the films. Fans claimed there was a character ban in place, when in fact there is none.

 

[DyfeddRex]

I know that many, including my roommate, say that holding out hope for the FF to return is a lost cause. What the heck, if you are here, your patron saint is a dude named Jude. Yes, it probably is a lost cause, but many thought the chances of Spidey's return to Marvel was as well.

So, in keeping with the thread's name, I will keep the hope alive in my heart, and, until proven totally wrong by having Faux's grip prove to last longer than my body and mind can hold out, will hope for an MCU FF sometime, preferably sooner, rather than later.

 

[TheVileOne]

My belief is it's not a lost cause. It's just going to take some time. Keep the hope alive brothers and sisters.

Also, buy the Fantastic Four Marvel Legends from hasbro

 

[ADollarADay]

I agree. Producers of general films are a dime a dozen. Producers who know how to build multi-billion dollar empires out of Marvel comic-book characters have unique and highly valuable skill-sets that would be of particular interest to Fox... especially at this moment.

...but here's the good news. If Latcham is smart, (and I'm sure he is) and Fox is smart enough to give him the control he needs (and I suspect the idea of him having his "own company" is all about Fox giving him that control - which was probably necessary to entice him away from Marvel), I think the third thing he'll do (after firing Kinberg and cancelling all current X-films other than Deadpool), will be to try to get whatever he can get from Marvel for the FF rights so he can focus on the X-Verse.

The X-Men characters are perfectly capable of building a Marvel-like empire in the right hands, and I suspect Latcham is smart enough to focus on X-Men and build that world without allowing FF to be a distraction from that focused, singular goal.

That's wishful thinking on your part. The FF is not going back to Marvel unless Disney opens up that wallet. For some reason, and out of nowhere, I got reminded of Crash bandicoot on the gaming side, which is in a similar situation. While they are not exactly the same use case (i.e. there is no leasing or licensing of an IP like there is with FF), they are similar enough.

Everybody knows FF's story on this board, so I'll skip it. Crash Bandicoot is an old franchise, originally developed for the old Playstation 1. Originally developed by Naughty Dog on work for hire (sounds familiar?) where Universal owned the rights to the franchise. Sony bought Naughty Dog (the developer), Activision later bought Universal (the rights owner). The first 3 games (plus the kart racing game) were superb. I remember gawking over them as a kid and at the time, the sales of Crash rivaled those of Nintendo's Mario.

Since Sony bought the developer but didn't own the rights, they weren't about to keep developing games for IPs they didn't own, so they started creating their own IPs, and the world was forever grateful because TLOU and Uncharted came out because of it. Activision, though, tried to milk Crash due to its high popularity. The games all sucked, but they kept milking them (any gamer knows that Activision is known to milk franchises to the ground). From "Wrath of the Cortex" in 2001, the games started sucking. Sales started to drop. By 2008, they had released like 5 or 6 games across different systems and, what was once a competitor to Mario in quality and sales, was now a joke whereas Mario was a much better and much better selling game.

Activision then stopped releasing Crash games because they sucked too much and no one wanted to buy them. From 2008 until 2016 there were no games released or announced. Fans started digging and seeing how long Activision had to use the trademark or they would lose it (kinda what we did here). Fans started being vocal about Activision selling the rights to Sony so ND could do the game justice (sounds familiar?). In 2016 Activision announced Crash Trilogy remake for PS4. They didn't sell the rights and created the game in-house. It is the first Crash game to review and sell well since 1999 and it is making Activision money, there's energy around the Crash IP, and - most likely - more games in the franchise are coming.

Moral of the story. Fox will try with FF until Disney pays them. They still regret losing DD, they are still salty about not giving an opportunity to buy Lucasfilm. In both cases Disney has made those franchises, once Fox licensed, much bigger and more profitable.

FF is staying with Fox until Iger and co make a move, I don't expect anything to the contrary and you shouldn't either.

 

[TheVileOne]

I'm not sure Latcham's priority is to make sure Marvel gets the FF and X-Men rights back from Marvel.

 

[Raiden]

I know that many, including my roommate, say that holding out hope for the FF to return is a lost cause. What the heck, if you are here, your patron saint is a dude named Jude. Yes, it probably is a lost cause, but many thought the chances of Spidey's return to Marvel was as well.

So, in keeping with the thread's name, I will keep the hope alive in my heart, and, until proven totally wrong by having Faux's grip prove to last longer than my body and mind can hold out, will hope for an MCU FF sometime, preferably sooner, rather than later.

The only optimism I feel is that, FF rights ultimately do belong to Marvel/Disney, but Fox has the leasing rights that are renewed when they made a movie within 7 years. Someday, when the superhero properties become as popular as Western, there will be less and less incentive for Fox to make FF movies just to renew it. That's the day that Marvel will finally get it back.

It might take 50-75 years for it to happen, though.

 

[universeman]

Maybe Disney is pulling a Hydra. Which in this case FOX would be Shield. I mean first the Russos, now Latcham.

 

[Willie Lumpkin]

That's wishful thinking on your part. The FF is not going back to Marvel unless Disney opens up that wallet. For some reason, and out of nowhere, I got reminded of Crash bandicoot on the gaming side, which is in a similar situation. While they are not exactly the same use case (i.e. there is no leasing or licensing of an IP like there is with FF), they are similar enough.

Everybody knows FF's story on this board, so I'll skip it. Crash Bandicoot is an old franchise, originally developed for the old Playstation 1. Originally developed by Naughty Dog on work for hire (sounds familiar?) where Universal owned the rights to the franchise. Sony bought Naughty Dog (the developer), Activision later bought Universal (the rights owner). The first 3 games (plus the kart racing game) were superb. I remember gawking over them as a kid and at the time, the sales of Crash rivaled those of Nintendo's Mario.

Since Sony bought the developer but didn't own the rights, they weren't about to keep developing games for IPs they didn't own, so they started creating their own IPs, and the world was forever grateful because TLOU and Uncharted came out because of it. Activision, though, tried to milk Crash due to its high popularity. The games all sucked, but they kept milking them (any gamer knows that Activision is known to milk franchises to the ground). From "Wrath of the Cortex" in 2001, the games started sucking. Sales started to drop. By 2008, they had released like 5 or 6 games across different systems and, what was once a competitor to Mario in quality and sales, was now a joke whereas Mario was a much better and much better selling game.

Activision then stopped releasing Crash games because they sucked too much and no one wanted to buy them. From 2008 until 2016 there were no games released or announced. Fans started digging and seeing how long Activision had to use the trademark or they would lose it (kinda what we did here). Fans started being vocal about Activision selling the rights to Sony so ND could do the game justice (sounds familiar?). In 2016 Activision announced Crash Trilogy remake for PS4. They didn't sell the rights and created the game in-house. It is the first Crash game to review and sell well since 1999 and it is making Activision money, there's energy around the Crash IP, and - most likely - more games in the franchise are coming.

Moral of the story. Fox will try with FF until Disney pays them. They still regret losing DD, they are still salty about not giving an opportunity to buy Lucasfilm. In both cases Disney has made those franchises, once Fox licensed, much bigger and more profitable.

FF is staying with Fox until Iger and co make a move, I don't expect anything to the contrary and you shouldn't either.

Okay. I'm putting you in charge. Your job is to build an MCU type world at Fox. You can't cross-over FF and X-Men, but you can mix and match X-Men characters all you want.

Would you screw around with FF, or would you focus on X-Men?

I would do the latter. Since I would do the latter, I assume Latcham would also do the latter.

 

[Willie Lumpkin]

I think most of us can see the broad difference between Marvel and Fox ( Other than the obvious quality disparity). Marvel has a much better, more cohesive long-term plan.

From the beginning, they have built their world on strong characters and the combination of those characters, with their unique, well-defined personalities, giving each combination of characters a fresh, interesting feel.

Marvel didn't start with the Avengers. They built their universe brick by brick with good, solid stand-alone films that gave us insight into each unique character. Then when they brought them all together, the interactions of those unique personalities that we knew and understood and liked were 90% of what made the films work.

And each film, while being unique, merges and flows with the other films beautifully. That comes from an over-arching master-plan that has individual films acting as puzzle pieces filling in the larger story.

Fox has failed to do that. Their films seem disjointed and unconnected. The solo films seem completely different than the team films and the team films and the solo films feel familiar and formulaic to one another. They don't flow and mix and progress like the Marvel films do.

I strongly suspect Latcham has been hired by Fox to build something similar with their Marvel characters. If that's the case, I think Latcham's first task is to start over and plan out a rough concept of the films going forward for the next 10 years.

If done right, the development of the X-Men should be something that takes place over time with individual characters being introduced slowly so moviegoers can get to know each of their personalities (just like he did with the Marvel characters).

Then, once Cyclops is a fully fleshed out character and Beast is a fully fleshed out character and Jean Grey is a fully fleshed out character and Gambit is a fully fleshed out character and Colossus is a fully fleshed out character and Storm is a fully fleshed out character (etc. etc. etc.) we can enjoy watching those characters interact in a much more fun way than we have been able to in the past.

A film that teams Cyclops with Jean Grey will feel very different than a film that teams Gambit with Storm. And films that team Beast with Colossus or Wolverine with Iceman etc. etc. etc. will all be fresh and fun and unique and not feel like we're watching the same film over and over again.

I think it can be done and I think it can be fun and amazing and profitable, but it needs to be done right.

And the Fantastic Four don't fit into that plan. They would just get in the way. They would just confuse and distract viewers and take up release spots that should be devoted to building that amazing X-Verse.

And no matter how valuable they may or may not be, if they get in the way of that plan, they need to be let go. It's like a baseball team that signs a player to a multi-million dollar long-term contract only to find he can't perform and nobody else wants him. It may rub them the wrong way to cut him loose and lose all that money, but often doing things like that make far more sense (to the TEAM) than insisting he stays on the team when he's not producing.

The big leap I'm taking is assuming Fox has the ability to see the things that seem so obvious to all of us, but the hiring of Latcham makes me think they're getting a clue. And if they give him the freedom and ability to do what he needs to do, I think things will start becoming what we all know they could be with the X-Men.

 

[Willie Lumpkin]

As a quick illustration of how Fox has failed to properly define their characters, think about this for a moment.

Imagine a party and imagine a waiter runs into Tony Stark (as we've seen the character on film - not comics) with a tray of champagne. Now imagine how Tony Stark might react.

Now imagine the same thing but with Steve Rogers and imagine how he might react.

Do you imagine two very different reactions?

Now imagine Hank McCoy (as we've seen him on film) and Scott Summers in the same situation. Based on what you know from the films (and not the comic books) do you have the same ability to imagine how their reactions might be different?

From my point of view, the answer is 'no'. They're generic characters with generic personalities. We haven't really gotten to know either one of them well enough to understand them and their unique personalities.

And that poor character development makes for dull, uninteresting films. If Fox can get us to really know Hank McCoy and get us to really know Scott Summers and understand their personalities and what makes them unique, the X-Men stories will be much more compelling.

If I asked a similar question with Logan or Wade Wilson, most people would have a much better idea of how the characters would react because those characters have been explored in their own films. We need to get more of that with more X-Men characters before we can invest in those characters in the way we are invested in Marvel characters.

If Fox continues to bumble with FF related films, they will be taking films away from X-Characters that they could otherwise be defining for audiences and increasing the value of the brand.

 

[Spiderine]

At what point is it worth it to Fox to continue a charade of making FF related films that dont bring them much if any profit? I dont recall a situation of any studio doing this with a failed franchise that never materialized.

It can do more damage than good. If working with Marvel is not an option since both sides would have to agree to work together on films then playing a game of keep away would be expensive.

And all it does is piss off the fanbase more. Did the internet get excited for the rumors of Doom and Fantastikids?

 

[Willie Lumpkin]

At what point is it worth it to Fox to continue a charade of making FF related films that dont bring them much if any profit? I dont recall a situation of any studio doing this with a failed franchise that never materialized.

I think it's all about getting something out of Marvel now. It would seem borderline crazy for them to actually make a film nobody wants.

Leaking or announcing that they're working on scripts is completely meaningless - and actually makes me think it's far less likely they actually intend to make a film.

If they're seriously at the early stages of developing a film they believe they will actually release, they wouldn't be talking about it at these early stages.

 

[ADollarADay]

Okay. I'm putting you in charge. Your job is to build an MCU type world at Fox. You can't cross-over FF and X-Men, but you can mix and match X-Men characters all you want.

Would you screw around with FF, or would you focus on X-Men?

I would do the latter. Since I would do the latter, I assume Latcham would also do the latter.

If I am Latcham - and that's what my job is (i.e. to build Cinematic Worlds) - I'm doing both, especially since it's so cheap to keep the rights and the potential is so huge. Characters like Doom, Surfer, Galactus, et. al can provide unique stories and movies to a more connected universe. Plus all the other interesting shared and unique characters they would lose as well like Skrulls and Watchers, including Super Skrull and Uatu. I would argue that the above characters make for a more interesting single movie than someone like Gambit from the X-Men.

You know it, I know it, Marvel knows and Fox knows it. FF potential is huge, at least GoTG level, but probably above it. While X-Men has Avengers BO potential for ensemble movies, I would argue that FF is nothing to sneeze at with GoTG BO potential for ensemble movies and Dr. Strange BO potential for standalone ones.

Fox has just been screwing the pooch, but if that is what they hired Latcham for and if that's his job, then they'll keep both franchises, and try to build on both of them, make no mistake about it. Unless, of course, Disney opens up that checkbook.

 

[Willie Lumpkin]

If I am Latcham - and that's what my job is (i.e. to build Cinematic Worlds) - I'm doing both, especially since it's so cheap to keep the rights and the potential is so huge. Characters like Doom, Surfer, Galactus, et. al can provide unique stories and movies to a more connected universe. Plus all the other interesting shared and unique characters they would lose as well like Skrulls and Watchers, including Super Skrull and Uatu. I would argue that the above characters make for a more interesting single movie than someone like Gambit from the X-Men.

You know it, I know it, Marvel knows and Fox knows it. FF potential is huge, at least GoTG level, but probably above it. While X-Men has Avengers BO potential for ensemble movies, I would argue that FF is nothing to sneeze at with GoTG BO potential for ensemble movies and Dr. Strange BO potential for standalone ones.

Fox has just been screwing the pooch, but if that is what they hired Latcham for and if that's his job, then they'll keep both franchises, and try to build on both of them, make no mistake about it. Unless, of course, Disney opens up that checkbook.

I agree there is potential, but the FF requires a lot of money to make a lot of money - and Fox has shown very limited interest in that type of property (Will that change with Latcham? Possibly, but I suspect Fox's marching orders to him will be to do what Marvel does... without spending as much).

What about the potential of a Beast movie? What about the potential of a Colossus movie? What about the potential of a Cyclops movie? What about the potential of a Storm movie?

I think all of those films could make money if done right, and they wouldn't require the same kind of budgets that would be required to do the FF right. Plus they have the added advantage of being able to be integrated into a large, lush X-Verse.

If Latcham held a press conference and said: "We're going to do FF and we're going to do it right. We're going to hire the best directors who respect the characters. We're going to create production design that is faithful to the comic-books. We're not going to balk at spending $200 million + per film." it could work. And I'd even give them a chance (if their actions backed up their words).

But I think the chances of Fox changing their stripes in that way is very, very unlikely.

For Marvel, it would be SOP, not so much for Fox.

 

[Zarex]

If I am Latcham - and that's what my job is (i.e. to build Cinematic Worlds) - I'm doing both, especially since it's so cheap to keep the rights and the potential is so huge. Characters like Doom, Surfer, Galactus, et. al can provide unique stories and movies to a more connected universe. Plus all the other interesting shared and unique characters they would lose as well like Skrulls and Watchers, including Super Skrull and Uatu. I would argue that the above characters make for a more interesting single movie than someone like Gambit from the X-Men.

It's cheap to carry the rights, but not so cheap to extend them. FFINO had a reported $120M production and was a hallway and warehouse filled pile of hot garbage. Even a Doom villain backstory or a Franklin & Valeria spy kids adventure, assuming they would extend the rights, wouldn't be cheap.

This isn't a situation like Deadpool or Logan, where FOX can put an R rated sub-$100M flick into production featuring characters fans want to see on the big screen. Remy may not be as interesting as Super Skrull or Uatu, but he will (eventually) be done on the cheap. FOX has a model for their Marvel licensed films that works, and the proposed FF spinoffs don't fit.

You know it, I know it, Marvel knows and Fox knows it. FF potential is huge, at least GoTG level, but probably above it. While X-Men has Avengers BO potential for ensemble movies, I would argue that FF is nothing to sneeze at with GoTG BO potential for ensemble movies and Dr. Strange BO potential for standalone ones.

As sad as it is to say, that is not remotely the situation after three disastrous big screen appearances from the FF and two extremely successful (three next year) GOTG films. A Marvel FF film has the chance to be quite successful, but it's not touching Guardians.

 

[ADollarADay]

I agree there is potential, but the FF requires a lot of money to make a lot of money - and Fox has shown very limited interest in that type of property (Will that change with Latcham? Possibly, but I suspect Fox's marching orders to him will be to do what Marvel does... without spending as much).

What about the potential of a Beast movie? What about the potential of a Colossus movie? What about the potential of a Cyclops movie? What about the potential of a Storm movie?

I think all of those films could make money if done right, and they wouldn't require the same kind of budgets that would be required to do the FF right. Plus they have the added advantage of being able to be integrated into a large, lush X-Verse.

If Latcham held a press conference and said: "We're going to do FF and we're going to do it right. We're going to hire the best directors who respect the characters. We're going to create production design that is faithful to the comic-books. We're not going to balk at spending $200 million + per film." it could work. And I'd even give them a chance (if their actions backed up their words).

But I think the chances of Fox changing their stripes in that way is very, very unlikely.

For Marvel, it would be SOP, not so much for Fox.

All of those movies, with the possible exception of Beast, would cost more than a standalone Dr. Doom movie or a Fantastic Four origins movie (i.e. college years). I think the cost of Storm, for example, would be similar to a SS movie. And I am not sure the suggested standalone X-Men ones would gross more either.

I mean, no offense, but you are doing mental gymnastics to try to reason why Fox would want to deal to get Marvel the rights back because they would be better focusing on one franchise. I agree they would be better in the MCU, but from all the evidence and from Fox's business standpoint, it seems pretty obvious they are going to keep both rights. Again, Disney will have to pay up to get those rights.

It's cheap to carry the rights, but not so cheap to extend them. FFINO had a reported $120M production and was a hallway and warehouse filled pile of hot garbage. Even a Doom villain backstory or a Franklin & Valeria spy kids adventure, assuming they would extend the rights, wouldn't be cheap.

This isn't a situation like Deadpool or Logan, where FOX can put an R rated sub-$100M flick into production featuring characters fans want to see on the big screen. Remy may not be as interesting as Super Skrull or Uatu, but he will (eventually) be done on the cheap. FOX has a model for their Marvel licensed films that works, and the proposed FF spinoffs don't fit.



As sad as it is to say, that is not remotely the situation after three disastrous big screen appearances from the FF and two extremely successful (three next year) GOTG films. A Marvel FF film has the chance to be quite successful, but it's not touching Guardians.

Both rumored movies seem and sound significantly cheaper than the 2015 FF.

I didn't say FF would touch Guardians in the next movie, I said they have the potential. And they do.

Look, the writing is on the wall. Fox is intended on keeping the rights and developing more movies. Dr. Doom movie is coming, the kids movie is possibly coming too. Latcham is going to try and become Kevin Feige there, but with two distinct universes as opposed to one. Will it be a mess to keep up? Of course. But execs are thinking of money. We can deny and try to do some reasoning as to why they shouldn't do it, but there's mounds of evidence and implications and hints that they are going to keep at it. Only way to save it is Iger and the board.

 

[Willie Lumpkin]

Even a Doom villain backstory or a Franklin & Valeria spy kids adventure, assuming they would extend the rights, wouldn't be cheap.

This is a key point. Could a Doom-as-a-kid in Latveria be done cheaply? Yes. but who wants to see that? Doom is spectacle. Comic books are fantasy and highly visual. Sure, FF Annual was cool and worked as a small, short story, but it only worked because of everything else we already knew about Doom.

People paying money to see a Dr. Doom film want to see the guy they know from the comic-books. I don't think they're going to walk out of a film version of FF Annual #2 saying: "Yeah! Let's see it again tomorrow!"

A simple story could work on TV, but a film that wants to draw comic-book fans in will have to be something more.

 

[Willie Lumpkin]

All of those movies, with the possible exception of Beast, would cost more than a standalone Dr. Doom movie or a Fantastic Four origins movie (i.e. college years).

As I touched on in my comments above, it's not cheap if nobody shows up and the box office receipts don't cover costs.

Nobody wants to see Doom and FF pre-accident. Fox has already done two cheap FF origin films and those didn't do well because they didn't capture what FF fans want to see. How many times can Fox try to go to that well? Just dressing it up as something different won't fool anybody.

People who have bought FF comic-books did so because they liked the visually spectacular nature of them.

If Fox made three great FF films and then stepped back to make a simple Doom prequel film, yeah, that could work. At this moment with fan sentiment where it stands, Fox could make a great Doom origin film and still lose money on it.

A Magneto film would do much better because theater-goers are more interested in that character at this moment. But even that would be a hard-sell to a comic-book film audience that wants to see something cool for their money.