The Rebooted "Keep Hope Alive" (that the rights can revert back to Marvel) Thread - - - Part 12

[Dark Raven]

That's almost perfect, I would just pick two actors really close in age for Reed and Sue.

Reed and Sue have never been close in age though. There's always been a big gap between them.

 

[ludovica]

Reed and Sue have never been close in age though. There's always been a big gap between them.

I'd go contemporaries anyway.

 

[ADollarADay]

Yesterday's news that the James Bond franchise rights are being valued between $2 and $5 billion (With a B!) shows how forward thinking Iger was in buying up Marvel and Lucasfilm when he did. And that he may have dropped the ball by not securing the FF, X-Men and Spidey rights back in 2009, even if it would have been considered an overpay at the time.

Now Bond is different from the Marvel franchises licensed to other studios in that the proposed sale would involve all of the rights (TV, animation, publishing, merchandising), there are multiple potential suitors (Disney/Marvel would benefit more than any other potential bidder by regaining live action rights to their franchises) and none of the Marvel franchises can match James in terms of longevity (especially not 3 time failure the FF). But I can't see FOX selling the X-Men (and all of those characters!) or Sony parting with Spidey for less than $1 Billion, and probably much more than that.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/apple-amazon-join-race-james-bond-film-rights-1035539

Like you said, it's not apples to apples, but I do agree that Iger should have moved quickly to try and get all licensed IP back in house. It would have been cheaper at that time and before Avengers. Different ball game now. Oh well, hindsight is 20/20.

 

[TheVileOne]

Not really. They secured the rights to Star Wars and Marvel for bargain prices. And Sony wasn't going to give up Spider-Man either. Wasn't realistic. Same thing with X-Men, Fantastic Four etc.

They got what they were able to with the other stuff that was set up at Paramount. And then they got back Ghost Rider, Daredevil, and Punisher. All of that paid off pretty well.

The last two James Bond movies made like over a billion and $800 million worldwide respectively. Fantastic Four isn't really on that level by comparison. However, it potentially has more value to Marvel in the future than it currently does sitting at Fox. Oh well.

 

[UltimatePyro9]

Not really. They secured the rights to Star Wars and Marvel for bargain prices. And Sony wasn't going to give up Spider-Man either. Wasn't realistic. Same thing with X-Men, Fantastic Four etc.

They got what they were able to with the other stuff that was set up at Paramount. And then they got back Ghost Rider, Daredevil, and Punisher. All of that paid off pretty well.

The last two James Bond movies made like over a billion and $800 million worldwide respectively. Fantastic Four isn't really on that level by comparison. However, it potentially has more value to Marvel in the future than it currently does sitting at Fox. Oh well.

Yeah, and Marvel got GR, Daredevil, and Punisher back for free and it paid off massively with their TV shows. Same with Blade, but what will happen to that property in the MCU is up in the air.

The Fantastic Four are absolutely toxic as a brand at FOX. If they decide to push forward with their movies (terrible ideas at that), it would make even less money than before (and remember, Fant4stic bombed at the box office, so it remains a huge risk).

 

[ADollarADay]

Not really. They secured the rights to Star Wars and Marvel for bargain prices. And Sony wasn't going to give up Spider-Man either. Wasn't realistic. Same thing with X-Men, Fantastic Four etc.

They got what they were able to with the other stuff that was set up at Paramount. And then they got back Ghost Rider, Daredevil, and Punisher. All of that paid off pretty well.

The last two James Bond movies made like over a billion and $800 million worldwide respectively. Fantastic Four isn't really on that level by comparison. However, it potentially has more value to Marvel in the future than it currently does sitting at Fox. Oh well.

The point is that it would have been easier and cheaper to get those properties back at that time as opposed to now. In 2009, Marvel had Ironman that was successful and that was a major, 500MM+ BO hit and that's it. XMen and SM were proven successes, even though they had some rough outputs as well. Paramount could have easily said no as well, but Iger knew they needed it to kick start the MCU and most analysts at the time thought they were overpaying Paramount for it (just like they thought Disney overpaid for Marvel).

Everything has a price, and since we are already doing what ifisms, what if Disney offered Sony or Fox 20B for the movie rights to those properties? That will never happen, but they would accept without blinking an eye. The cost of purchasing those today, even Fantastic Four, is much higher than it would have been back in 2009.

 

[UltimatePyro9]

The point is that it would have been easier and cheaper to get those properties back at that time as opposed to now. In 2009, Marvel had Ironman that was successful and that was a major, 500MM+ BO hit and that's it. XMen and SM were proven successes, even though they had some rough outputs as well. Paramount could have easily said no as well, but Iger knew they needed it to kick start the MCU and most analysts at the time thought they were overpaying Paramount for it (just like they thought Disney overpaid for Marvel).

Everything has a price, and since we are already doing what ifisms, what if Disney offered Sony or Fox 20B for the movie rights to those properties? That will never happen, but they would accept without blinking an eye. The cost of purchasing those today, even Fantastic Four, is much higher than it would have been back in 2009.

I don't know how valuable the Fantastic Four property is now, considering the last movie bombed and another Fox-helmed FF would be met with more backlash.

 

[TheVileOne]

The point is that it would have been easier and cheaper to get those properties back at that time as opposed to now. In 2009, Marvel had Ironman that was successful and that was a major, 500MM+ BO hit and that's it. XMen and SM were proven successes, even though they had some rough outputs as well. Paramount could have easily said no as well, but Iger knew they needed it to kick start the MCU and most analysts at the time thought they were overpaying Paramount for it (just like they thought Disney overpaid for Marvel).

Everything has a price, and since we are already doing what ifisms, what if Disney offered Sony or Fox 20B for the movie rights to those properties? That will never happen, but they would accept without blinking an eye. The cost of purchasing those today, even Fantastic Four, is much higher than it would have been back in 2009.

I find it hard to believe it would've been easier. In 2009, the Marvel sale wasn't even official yet. Fox was still making and actively developing X-Men films. Wolverine came out in 2009. First Class came out in 2011. They wouldn't have been able to wrest that control from Fox. The way the contracts are set up it would've been impossible.

Sony was also still getting ready to reboot Spider-Man too. Also, the MCU still wasn't even really paying off at the time yet either. It wasn't going to happen with any of those properties in 2009.

 

[ADollarADay]

I find it hard to believe it would've been easier. In 2009, the Marvel sale wasn't even official yet. Fox was still making and actively developing X-Men films. Wolverine came out in 2009. First Class came out in 2011. They wouldn't have been able to wrest that control from Fox. The way the contracts are set up it would've been impossible.

Sony was also still getting ready to reboot Spider-Man too. Also, the MCU still wasn't even really paying off at the time yet either. It wasn't going to happen with any of those properties in 2009.

I find it hard to believe how it wouldn't be. No one knew Super heroes and super hero cinematic universes would be this big.

They can certainly amend the contracts. Paramount was supposed to distribute and IIRC produce The Avengers. That's the easy part.

I will agree that it wasn't gonna happen because no one knew how big the MCU was going to get. What the other guy and I are saying is, if Iger had the foresight to see how big the MCU was really going to get, he could have made a play and "overpaid" for those properties at that time. Whatever you think would take for Fox/Sony/Universal to part with whatever rights they have today, I believe it would take a fraction of that in 2009 or even 2010. We can agree to disagree, but I find it hard to think otherwise.

 

[NealKenneth]

Keep in mind folks, the price of a deal isn't just based on the success of the films so far...it also factors in how valuable the property could be to the potential buyer.

To Fox, it's a money loser...to Disney it is worth billions.

 

[Zarex]

I find it hard to believe it would've been easier. In 2009, the Marvel sale wasn't even official yet. Fox was still making and actively developing X-Men films. Wolverine came out in 2009. First Class came out in 2011. They wouldn't have been able to wrest that control from Fox. The way the contracts are set up it would've been impossible.

Sony was also still getting ready to reboot Spider-Man too. Also, the MCU still wasn't even really paying off at the time yet either. It wasn't going to happen with any of those properties in 2009.

It's all both hypothetical and in hindsight, but let's say for s&g that Disney offered FOX $1 billion for the live action rights to the X-Men and FF character families at the time of the Marvel purchase. It more than likely wouldn't get the deal done now. But given Rothman's limited enthusiasm for Marvel licensed properties, his desire to move away from the high cost of X-Men team films and the reboot risk he was facing, an overpay from the Mouse may have been seen as an attractive option.

Raimi's Spider-Man films were even more successful for Sony, but given the reboot risk they were facing Japan may have considered a $2 billion offer. The point is that the James Bond negotiations have raised the price for established movie franchises to a Level far higher than they were last decade.

 

[wobbly]

Keep in mind folks, the price of a deal isn't just based on the success of the films so far...it also factors in how valuable the property could be to the potential buyer.

To Fox, it's a money loser...to Disney it is worth billions.

Keep in mind Fox only have one potential buyer. They can't sell FF or X-Men to anyone but Disney, so there isn't competing buyers to bump up the price. Theres also the deadline to factor in, giving Fox relatively little time to give a failure time to pass from memory before trying again.

And the idea of Fox getting silly money for the FF based on what Marvel might theorically earn from having them back is a bit of a head scratcher to me considering the state the movie rights are in at Fox.

I've made this analogy before but worth repeating: with the FF Fox are like a car salesman with a beat up wreck of an old classic car. They have no idea how to restore it themselves so if they want to sell it on for further use it will have to be to the one buyer both willing and capable of fixing it up.

At that point how realistic is it to demand from the buyer the worth of the car if it is restored? (or some number nearing that and way beyond the current value of the beat up old heap).

 

[Willie Lumpkin]

Keep in mind Fox only have one potential buyer. They can't sell FF or X-Men to anyone but Disney, so there isn't competing buyers to bump up the price. Theres also the deadline to factor in, giving Fox relatively little time to give a failure time to pass from memory before trying again.

And the idea of Fox getting silly money for the FF based on what Marvel might theorically earn from having them back is a bit of a head scratcher to me considering the state the movie rights are in at Fox.

I've made this analogy before but worth repeating: with the FF Fox are like a car salesman with a beat up wreck of an old classic car. They have no idea how to restore it themselves so if they want to sell it on for further use it will have to be to the one buyer both willing and capable of fixing it up.

At that point how realistic is it to demand from the buyer the worth of the car if it is restored? (or some number nearing that and way beyond the current value of the beat up old heap).

Exactly. If Fox is not going to make a film, the value of the property is what Marvel is willing to pay for it and not a penny more.

To fine-tune your analogy slightly, I would create a scenario in which your wreck of a classic car was left to one of two sons, John and Scott, by their father when he died. Scott is skilled at restoring cars and has the money, tools and talent to do it. John can't even begin to restore a car.

The father left strict instructions in his will that John will get the car, but John can only sell it in it's un-restored form to Scott. If John restores it, he is allowed to sell it to whomever he wants, but he must restore it himself. After 7 years, if the car hasn't been restored, Scott will receive ownership.

What is the value of that car? Scott might be able to restore it and sell it for several hundred thousand dollars, but that's not the value of the car. The value of the car is what Scott is willing to pay for it. And by the way, the two brothers HATE each other. Neither is about to do any favors for the other. Scott, knowing his brother has no ability to restore the car, is likely to just sit back and wait until the car is his after 7 years rather than paying anything to John now.

If John wants to get anything for the car, he has to cut his price to a point that will make Scott willing to pay now rather than wait, and that number is likely to be far below even the market value of the un-restored car.

 

[Dark Raven]

Exactly. If Fox is not going to make a film, the value of the property is what Marvel is willing to pay for it and not a penny more.

To fine-tune your analogy slightly, I would create a scenario in which your wreck of a classic car was left to one of two sons, John and Scott, by their father when he died. Scott is skilled at restoring cars and has the money, tools and talent to do it. John can't even begin to restore a car.

The father left strict instructions in his will that John will get the car, but John can only sell it in it's un-restored form to Scott. If John restores it, he is allowed to sell it to whomever he wants, but he must restore it himself. After 7 years, if the car hasn't been restored, Scott will receive ownership.

What is the value of that car? Scott might be able to restore it and sell it for several hundred thousand dollars, but that's not the value of the car. The value of the car is what Scott is willing to pay for it. And by the way, the two brothers HATE each other. Neither is about to do any favors for the other. Scott, knowing his brother has no ability to restore the car, is likely to just sit back and wait until the car is his after 7 years rather than paying anything to John now.

If John wants to get anything for the car, he has to cut his price to a point that will make Scott willing to pay now rather than wait, and that number is likely to be far below even the market value of the un-restored car.

You should've named "John" as "Josh" instead. Then it could be Josh Trank and Scott Buck.

 

[Xeno]

Keep in mind Fox only have one potential buyer. They can't sell FF or X-Men to anyone but Disney, so there isn't competing buyers to bump up the price. Theres also the deadline to factor in, giving Fox relatively little time to give a failure time to pass from memory before trying again.

And the idea of Fox getting silly money for the FF based on what Marvel might theorically earn from having them back is a bit of a head scratcher to me considering the state the movie rights are in at Fox.

I've made this analogy before but worth repeating: with the FF Fox are like a car salesman with a beat up wreck of an old classic car. They have no idea how to restore it themselves so if they want to sell it on for further use it will have to be to the one buyer both willing and capable of fixing it up.

At that point how realistic is it to demand from the buyer the worth of the car if it is restored? (or some number nearing that and way beyond the current value of the beat up old heap).

Does Fox actually own the FF rights, or does Constantin Film own the rights and retain the ability to sell them back to Marvel/Disney? After reading about Constantin's internal fight over potentially selling off/shuttering its film unit, I'm confused on that point. As I understand it, Constantin merely has a contract with Fox to produce FF films. That makes me wonder whether or not Disney can cut Fox out of the equation and makes a deal with Constantin for the return of the FF, or a Sony/Spider-Man type of production deal.

 

[Willie Lumpkin]

Does Fox actually own the FF rights, or does Constantin Film own the rights and retain the ability to sell them back to Marvel/Disney? After reading about Constantin's internal fight over potentially selling off/shuttering its film unit, I'm confused on that point. As I understand it, Constantin merely has a contract with Fox to produce FF films. That makes me wonder whether or not Disney can cut Fox out of the equation and makes a deal with Constantin for the return of the FF, or a Sony/Spider-Man type of production deal.

I'm 99.9% sure Constantin has no say in what happens with the rights. While they still get a producer credit and probably a small amount of cash, Fox decides if they make another film or transfer back to Disney.

I'm sure if Constantin had any say in it, they would have worked a deal with Marvel long ago.

 

[Random490]

I'm 99.9% sure Constantin has no say in what happens with the rights. While they still get a producer credit and probably a small amount of cash, Fox decides if they make another film or transfer back to Disney.

I'm sure if Constantin had any say in it, they would have worked a deal with Marvel long ago.

Constantin owns the rights, they have a deal for Fox to produce it. I'm pretty sure Fox has final say in it. It's a good deal for them because they never really had the ability to make fx heavy films, so Fox does all the work and they get some revenue without spending a dime.

There was a rumor a few years ago that Constantin was going to close their film division(I believe they're main source of income is from soccer broadcasts or something) and that Marvel could technically buy they rights back. I think it's believe that Constantin can't resell the rights (which is why Fox can't just buy them) but you could potentially buy the film division and as a result the film rights as well. That was just a rumor though, there's no way of knowing if there any clauses in the contracts to prevent it.

 

[wobbly]

Constantin owns the rights, they have a deal for Fox to produce it. I'm pretty sure Fox has final say in it. It's a good deal for them because they never really had the ability to make fx heavy films, so Fox does all the work and they get some revenue without spending a dime.

There was a rumor a few years ago that Constantin was going to close their film division(I believe they're main source of income is from soccer broadcasts or something) and that Marvel could technically buy they rights back. I think it's believe that Constantin can't resell the rights (which is why Fox can't just buy them) but you could potentially buy the film division and as a result the film rights as well. That was just a rumor though, there's no way of knowing if there any clauses in the contracts to prevent it.

My understanding is Constantin's 'ownership'* is basically worthless as it is Fox who will decide the fate of the rights. If they revert due to Fox not making a film, or they make any deal with Marvel, or they do try another film, its all in Fox's hands. Constantin are very much a silent partner in all of this.

So if someone did buy up their film division, even if were Disney themselves, they would hold the same position Constantin currently does. The get a producer credit and distribution rights in Germany, but that's it.

*Saying Sony or Fox 'own' the rights is misleading. What they really own is a licence to the movie rights, one that lasts 'in perpetuity' as long as they meet the production deadlines.

So in this instance its kinda like Constantin leased a property from Marvel, and could reside within that in perpetuity as long as they periodically did something that was agreed to within a given time frame. Then they sub-let it to Fox (with Marvels permission to do so) who took over full control of the lease with those same terms.

 

[Zarex]

if Constantin had any control whatsoever over the FF film rights they a) would have almost certainly gotten into bed with Disney/Marvel back in 2009. Constantin b) would have been involved in the proposed "DD extension for Galactus and the Surfer" trade back in 2012. Per the trades, the negotiation was between FOX and Disney/Marvel and Constantin was not mentioned. And if not that, c)Constantin certainly would have pulled the rights from the Murdochs either during the production of FFINO or after it stole our hearts way back in the summer of 2015.

The idea that Constantin is pulling the strings on the FF franchise is ridiculous when you take a look at what has actually happened.

 

[ADollarADay]

Worth noting that - while this is not true for Marvel contracts because they all suck major donkey balls - the licensee's rights are usually null and void if they are acquired by a company, especially a competitor. A couple of good examples based on publicly available contracts are the HP theme park rides at Universal and DC theme park rides at Six Flags.

On to who owns the FF live action movie rights, I think it's pretty fair to say that FOX owns them. I will copy and paste what I wrote in another forum. Circumstantial evidence suggests Fox owns it and Constantin gets some kind of credit and distribution rights in Germany/Austria

- Constantin got the original rights in 1986, started photography in 1992 and "released" in 1994. This was done to keep the rights. That suggests the movie had to start production in 6 years and release in 8 years to keep the rights. Constantin produced that as per imdb.
- Next movie didn't release until 2005 and production on that didn't start until 2004. It was supposed to start in the 90s, but it never happened. Based on the rush to keep the rights for the 1994 release, it stands to reason that the rights lapsed and it was amended or a new contract was drawn. The timing to make movies is similar to before as we know Fox's 2015 movie was made at the bottom of the 9th to keep the rights.
- Fantastic Four, FF ROTSS, and Fan4stic are all produced by Fox in association with Constantin and Marvel as per imdb. Constantin owns distribution rights in Germany.
- Marvel had to deal with Fox, not Constantin, to get the full production rights to Ego. Had Constantin still owned the contract, that wouldn't be feasible without their okay
- The last movie specifically said "Property of Fox" on the trailer and ™ AND © 2017 TWENTIETH CENTURY FOX FILM CORPORATION. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. PROPERTY OF FOX. This wouldn't happen if Constantin owned the rights.
http://www.fantasticfourmovie.com/home
Compare that with the latest Resident Evil movie which is co produced by Constantin. © 2016 Constantin Film Produktion GmbH. All Rights Reserved.
© 2017 Layout and Design Sony Pictures Home Entertainment Inc. All Rights Reserved.
http://www.evilcomeshome.com/
- Gunn and Feige have said, in passing or otherwise, that Fox owns the rights and they would have to deal with them. While execs and directors are often wrong, given there's no evidence to the contrary, I will believe them here.

Plus, if Constantin owned it, don't you think Disney would have been quick to deal with them?

 

[TheVileOne]

It's all both hypothetical and in hindsight, but let's say for s&g that Disney offered FOX $1 billion for the live action rights to the X-Men and FF character families at the time of the Marvel purchase. It more than likely wouldn't get the deal done now. But given Rothman's limited enthusiasm for Marvel licensed properties, his desire to move away from the high cost of X-Men team films and the reboot risk he was facing, an overpay from the Mouse may have been seen as an attractive option.

Raimi's Spider-Man films were even more successful for Sony, but given the reboot risk they were facing Japan may have considered a $2 billion offer. The point is that the James Bond negotiations have raised the price for established movie franchises to a Level far higher than they were last decade.

It would never have happened. And Mickey Mouse never would've paid $1-2 billion just for one set of characters they technically already owned.

 

[TheVileOne]

I find it hard to believe how it wouldn't be. No one knew Super heroes and super hero cinematic universes would be this big.

They can certainly amend the contracts. Paramount was supposed to distribute and IIRC produce The Avengers. That's the easy part.

I will agree that it wasn't gonna happen because no one knew how big the MCU was going to get. What the other guy and I are saying is, if Iger had the foresight to see how big the MCU was really going to get, he could have made a play and "overpaid" for those properties at that time. Whatever you think would take for Fox/Sony/Universal to part with whatever rights they have today, I believe it would take a fraction of that in 2009 or even 2010. We can agree to disagree, but I find it hard to think otherwise.

I highly doubt it.

Also, at the end of the day, all the characters are still technically owned by Marvel. As Wobbly pointed out, what Fox owns is a license for the film rights as long as the contract requirements are met.

So from my perspective, Disney should try to exercise legal wrangling by claiming Fant4stic was a contract violation and get the rights back that way. Tie it up in the courts. At the very least it would prevent Fox from making another one.

 

[Art Freak]

And round and round we go. If only we had sticky threads...

 

[ADollarADay]

It would never have happened. And Mickey Mouse never would've paid $1-2 billion just for one set of characters they technically already owned.

They paid $175MM upfront + 35MM for every subsequent movie that 3rd party made for 25% of merchandise rights to a character they already owned, so it's not that out of the question to go up to a bil or 2. It's all about ROI.

I highly doubt it.

Also, at the end of the day, all the characters are still technically owned by Marvel. As Wobbly pointed out, what Fox owns is a license for the film rights as long as the contract requirements are met.

So from my perspective, Disney should try to exercise legal wrangling by claiming Fant4stic was a contract violation and get the rights back that way. Tie it up in the courts. At the very least it would prevent Fox from making another one.

Exactly, so they own the live movie rights in perpetuity unless they default or disney pays up. I'm fairly certain they aren't defaulting so that leaves only one option. We can disagree, but the price now would be higher, and like I said, I find it hard to argue otherwise, but you can believe what you want, it's not like either one of us can prove the other wrong since it's a hypothetical.

We have had major talks about legal rights on these threads. I have become a mini expert on it haha. Fox did not breach or default on the contract with Fan4stic. I talked to a lawyer sometime ago and - he didn't have a view on the contracts, of course - but one thing that could be done is taking them to court to try to renegotiate the initial terms since conditions have changed. That would still be a hairy, costly, and lengthy trial that everyone involved would prefer to avoid, with no guarantees of the prosecution winning. Disney's best option, if they want any rights Marvel gave away back, is to pay up.

 

[Spiderine]

Or........Disney can sit back and watch Fox try and make a ridiculous Fantastikids movie or A Doom movie fans seem uninterested in and try to pass those off as fulfilling its contract obligations because at this point niether seems likely. End result maybe they get the property back without paying a dime.

The past is the past. Disney didnt bother paying for those properties back then because they probably werent priority to them. Fox has to prove they are serious about wasting more money otherwise Me and Disney calls their bluff.