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

Status
Not open for further replies.
One day we'll get a Fox movie called "What if the FF never got their powers and were poor."

It will just be a gritty, down-to-earth drama about 4 non-powered individuals who never explore the cosmos, don't invent any machines and don't even live in New York. They'll just say that they wanted to do an Elseworlds-type story to explore the effect of non-super powers on ordinary human beings and the lack of changes that go through their dreary lives. They won't admit to it being anything to do with the budget, and FFINO defenders will buy completely into that and say how interesting this premise is.
 
One day we'll get a Fox movie called "What if the FF never got their powers and were poor."

It will just be a gritty, down-to-earth drama about 4 non-powered individuals who never explore the cosmos, don't invent any machines and don't even live in New York. They'll just say that they wanted to do an Elseworlds-type story to explore the effect of non-super powers on ordinary human beings and the lack of changes that go through their dreary lives. They won't admit to it being anything to do with the budget, and FFINO defenders will buy completely into that and say how interesting this premise is.


What frightens me is I can actually see this happening - A modern, realistic, grounded take on the FF!
 
Seriously, based on Fox's love for 'grounded' and 'gritty', you'd think they would have nailed Daredevil.
 
Seriously, based on Fox's love for 'grounded' and 'gritty', you'd think they would have nailed Daredevil.
Almost sure Rothman was out the door around the time the rights reverted.
 
John Campea is babbling about the FF rights again. He has finally admitted that Fox has s*** the bed too many times and should give the rights back to Marvel....only to change his stance immediately and claim that the FF would have more "narrative impact" in the X-universe. Apparently, the MCU now has "too many heroes" which would make the FF not special enough. Or something. :loco:

 
That's six minutes I'm never getting back. I'm not sure what Campea is talking about when he references "narrative impact". There are only a dozen or so powered humans in the cinematic MCU, and most of those folks are just super athletic. What's so special about the FF in a cinematic universe with dozens of mutants with crazy powers? Just because FOX treats the majority of their mutants as silent special effects, they still exist.

And you solve the MCU overcrowding problem by sticking the FF IN THE 60s. Done and done.
 
Pretty much the whole world realizes that,except the idiots at Fox.

Oh, they know.

If Fox can get away with making a FF movie about superkids and that fulfill the contract obligations then Avi Arad must have been high as a kite when these deals were made.

I dont believe for one second Fox would go through with this. If this is a scare tactic to get Marvel to make a move they need to come better than this ratchet plan. Fox making anymore FF films is the equivalent of making Pootie Tang 2.

The simple fact that Marvel can't get none of these characters (or others they loaned out, or Hulk distribution rights, or theme park rights) back without paying an exorbitant amount of money or hoping the licensee will just let it expire and revert back to them shows you that Avi Arad - and especially Marvel lawyers - were high as a kite when the deal was made.

I actually wonder if Marvel lawyers in the 90s were just a bunch of homeless people they got off 5th avenue to read over the contract in exchange for a footlong meatball sandwich from subway.
 
I actually wonder if Marvel lawyers in the 90s were just a bunch of homeless people they got off 5th avenue to read over the contract in exchange for a footlong meatball sandwich from subway.

I somehow doubt that.
 
Last edited:
I doubt it at as well.

Guys in the 1990s, you didn't have a huge comic book movie coming out every other month. It wasn't feasible for Marvel to be producing huge big budget movies either. The company was struggling to stay afloat in the 90s and almost went bankrupt.

No one was thinking about a cinematic comic book universe. The thought was maybe getting one movie made or something. Maybe James Cameron could do a big Spider-Man movie. Something like that.

Things are a lot different now. And let's be honest. If the earlier movies and contracts didn't happen the way they did, Marvel Studios may not be what it is today.

Think about it. The early successes such as X-Men, Spider-Man, etc. helped legitimize comic book movies that comic books were more than viable for film adaptations. All that helped Marvel Studios get to where it is now.

Keep in mind, even Iron Man was set up at other studios. The Iron Man movie first got announced in like 2003, and several years later nothing god produced. It wasn't until 2006 that Marvel got it back and said, "we are making it ourselves!"

Like it or not, that's the reality.
 
Ugh God please just give me a good FF film before I die!
 
That's six minutes I'm never getting back. I'm not sure what Campea is talking about when he references "narrative impact". There are only a dozen or so powered humans in the cinematic MCU, and most of those folks are just super athletic. What's so special about the FF in a cinematic universe with dozens of mutants with crazy powers? Just because FOX treats the majority of their mutants as silent special effects, they still exist.

And you solve the MCU overcrowding problem by sticking the FF IN THE 60s. Done and done.

And John Campea is probably laughing at you dressed like this:

tenor.gif


Drax looks like a bald and grey Campea

maxresdefault.jpg
 
John Campea is babbling about the FF rights again. He has finally admitted that Fox has s*** the bed too many times and should give the rights back to Marvel....only to change his stance immediately and claim that the FF would have more "narrative impact" in the X-universe. Apparently, the MCU now has "too many heroes" which would make the FF not special enough. Or something. :loco:



Thanks for the link, but I'm not even going to click. I have zero interest in this moron's opinions.
 
I somehow doubt that.

I can't believe I have to clarify that that was a joke, but that was a joke.

I doubt it at as well.

Guys in the 1990s, you didn't have a huge comic book movie coming out every other month. It wasn't feasible for Marvel to be producing huge big budget movies either. The company was struggling to stay afloat in the 90s and almost went bankrupt.

No one was thinking about a cinematic comic book universe. The thought was maybe getting one movie made or something. Maybe James Cameron could do a big Spider-Man movie. Something like that.

Things are a lot different now. And let's be honest. If the earlier movies and contracts didn't happen the way they did, Marvel Studios may not be what it is today.

Think about it. The early successes such as X-Men, Spider-Man, etc. helped legitimize comic book movies that comic books were more than viable for film adaptations. All that helped Marvel Studios get to where it is now.

Keep in mind, even Iron Man was set up at other studios. The Iron Man movie first got announced in like 2003, and several years later nothing god produced. It wasn't until 2006 that Marvel got it back and said, "we are making it ourselves!"

Like it or not, that's the reality.

Even random people in shark tank with way worse products are wary about giving up anything in perpetuity to mr. wonderful kevin o'leary. You can have a bad deal, you can have a bad contract, but if you have it in perpetuity then you are pretty much ****ed. Marvel was talking about never doing another perpetuity contract in the early 90s (they had done the same in the 70s and 80s), but then - like Britney Spears - they did it again.

Marvel didn't have the leverage, but they could have - and should have -
safeguarded themselves and their properties. Any halfway decent lawyer would have advised them against signing anything in perpetuity, especially if it granted exclusive rights to the licensee. Maybe they were advised against it and just ignored it. I wouldn't be surprised.
 
Back in the day, Silver Sable managed to sell half a million copies and lasted for 30 issues. Don't discount that one.

I feel like right now Disney/Marvel know what they're doing. My main complaint is that they aren't trying to get the Hulk distribution rights back nor work out a deal with Universal who could do spin-offs for Red Hulk, She-Hulk and Totally Awesome Hulk. The latter deal works since Universal's monsters franchise has had two flops and zero hits. Same goes for not trying to get shared rights to a certain number of Fox characters who really belong in the MCU (Kang, Annihilus, Blastaar, Juggernaut, Henry Peter Gyrich, Abigail Brand, GW Bridge, all Shi'Ar, all Badoon and all Brood).

Fox are moving in the right direction but Future Foundation sounds bad so far. I'll remain cautiously optimistic since I feel like Silver Surfer would be a better choice compared to Future Foundation since there's more material surrounding the Surfer than there is for the Richards children.

Sony are quickly running out of ideas. Venom and Silver Sable are interesting in theory but untested as lead characters in live-action. Mysterio and Kraven could be good but will likely flop since I don't trust Sony to know what they're doing. If the Kraven film is an adaptation of Kraven's Last Hunt and involves Tom Holland in a supporting role, then I'd be pleased. I still have very little faith in Mysterio since it's hard to imagine that being good.

DC/Warner are the real problem. They're greenlighting too many films but only have release dates up through 2019 while only doing 1-2 films a year. Disney and Fox at the very least are dividing their properties up between TV and film. Warner prefer to double down on the same properties in two different mediums and have two different versions of Superman and The Flash running around at the same time. And now there's talk of a third universe with a Joker spin-off and an additional Joker film set in the DCEU. The Joker only works as an antagonist because he has no redeeming values. The second you humanize him is the second he is no longer interesting. DC also need to worry about too many franchises and how that creates long waits between sequels. DC simply are biting off more than they can chew and focusing on obscure properties rather than getting their A-listers established. For instance, Shazam and Suicide Squad coming out before a Batman solo film is a horrible idea. I'm actually shocked that Suicide Squad made money despite being critically reviled and an obscure property with poor word of mouth.

Here's a best case scenario.

Disney work out a deal with Universal for a Hulk franchise. They also work out a separate deal to get access to specific Fox characters.

Fox manage to use the Future Foundation film as a springboard for a new Fantastic Four film without having to retell the origin (which is good since Fox managed to botch both the 616 and Ultimate origins). We get a Doom who isn't tied to the FF's origin story. We also get a Silver Surfer spin-off. And kids wind up loving the new take on the Fantastic Four through Future Foundation while adults like Doom so Fox hit s broad audience when it's time for a new Fantastic Four film.

Seriously? Let me know how this all works out for that studio that is moving in the right direction. Their most popular characters (other than maybe Deadpool) are gone and the last X movie wasn't, well, very good OR very well received.

Some of want a proper FF movie made; one that embodies the spirit of the FF we know.
 
And John Campea is probably laughing at you dressed like this:

tenor.gif


Drax looks like a bald and grey Campea

maxresdefault.jpg

That's just sick. Why do you hate Dave Bautista? :cmad::cmad::cmad:
 
Well they do look alike. Maybe not Bautista so much but more Drax and Campea. If they combined, they could call him Campax.
 
Well they do look alike. Maybe not Bautista so much but more Drax and Campea. If they combined, they could call him Campax.

You just keep making it worse! :argh:
 
Why does it feel like Sony and Warner are currently giving us all sorts of Superhero movies which we don't want and nobody asked for?

Stuff like Black Adam, Joker and now Nightwatch. Protip: Nobody wants this stuff.

The problem is that Sony give us spin-offs that we don't want. Venom and Silver Sable = yes. Kraven = only if it's based on Kraven's Last Hunt and features Spider-Man. Mysterio = cautiously optimistic but mostly negative. Miles Morales = aimed at a younger audience just like the character in the comics is. I'm not the target audience but it's still a good investment. Nightwatch = absolutely not and a waste of Spike Lee's talents.

Warner try to do too much and often focus on the wrong things. Nobody cares about a solo Joker film. Nobody cares about more obscure characters like Shazam over A-listers like Batman, Green Lantern and Flash. DC have their priorities wrong and focus too hard on two separate universes (three if you count Gotham) which involve doubling-up on the same characters.

Fox's problem is that they care about the X-Men but not the Fantastic Four. Noah Hawley has seen nothing but success as a showrunner and director on Fargo and Legion and his novel Before The Fall managed to win the 2017 Thriller Award from the ITW and he's now managing to reboot the FF with a Doctor Doom movie. Fox are also smartly skipping the FF's origin by rebooting them as supporting characters in a Future Foundation spin-off. IMO, we need a Silver Surfer movie as well alongside a full FF reboot. Fox aren't perfect but they're learning from mistakes and getting around to being at Disney/Marvel's level. Fox are also doing the same thing with their AvP universe by putting people like Ridley Scott and Shane Black in charge.

Universal's problem is that they just don't care. They could either sell back the distribution rights to Marvel or they could do what Sony did and work with Marvel and build a Hulk universe with Red Hulk, She-Hulk and Totally Awesome Hulk film series. Red Hulk would be an 80s-style action film/total power fantasy with Red Hulk blowing up terrorists, dictators and drug lords abroad to the point where it's basically Rambo with superpowers and be as ridiculous and over the top as humanly possible. She-Hulk would be an office comedy/romantic comedy. Totally Awesome Hulk would be a coming of age tale of a young boy learning to handle the responsibility of his incredible powers. Instead Universal are focusing on a Monster universe of PG-13 rated horror films that lack any actual horror while being written and produced by Alex Kurtzman and inevitably keep bombing. Vin Diesel's Riddick and Fast and Furious films are the only Universal franchises which manage to remain profitable. Jurassic Park is getting there but it's really dependent on the next movie not failing. The best thing that Universal can do is scrap the monsters universe since Dracula Untold and The Mummy were both terrible.

And Lions Gate, Paramount and The Wienstein Company all manage to make money despite not having a comic book franchise.

Disney/Marvel manage to do things the most right. Marvel's main problem is that they have a cancerous tumor named Scott Buck attached to them who needs to be surgically removed.
 
Why does it feel like Sony and Warner are currently giving us all sorts of Superhero movies which we don't want and nobody asked for?

Stuff like Black Adam, Joker and now Nightwatch. Protip: Nobody wants this stuff.

You always seem to treat your opinions like facts.
I get what you're saying, but I want a Nightwatch movie: Spawn not bogged down by its mythology and plus time travel? Yeah!
And a lot of people will see a Joker solo, maybe not me, but whatever.
 
You always seem to treat your opinions like facts.
I get what you're saying, but I want a Nightwatch movie: Spawn not bogged down by its mythology and plus time travel? Yeah!
And a lot of people will see a Joker solo, maybe not me, but whatever.

You and very few people. Only a very few amount of fans are calling for these movies to be made. Half of them you have never even heard of Nightwatch. With the exception the Joker, I can guarantee you that none of them will be a financial success.
 
You and very few people. Only a very few amount of fans are calling for these movies to be made. Half of them you have never even heard of Nightwatch. With the exception the Joker, I can guarantee you that none of them will be a financial success.

Economically that may very well may be, and I was half joking about Nightwatch.
But if it turns out great, people will go see it; now that's the difficult part.
Again, I get your point, Kraven, Mysteryo, Black and Silver, are all wrong propositions, instead I may welcome something like Black Adam or Nightwatch: look at Blade in 1998, who asked for that?
When a character is mostly a blank slate, especially to the general public, it may work.
Where I see a problem is characters who are intrinsecally antagonists and putting them in the main role. Venom I would say is the exception: they can be the protagonists but I absolutely would prefer them appeared in a Spidey movie beforehand.
You know what they should be doing? Superior Foes of Spider-Man.
Look at Suicide Squad and imagine it without the Joker and with a screenplay in place: it would have worked.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Staff online

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
202,387
Messages
22,095,549
Members
45,890
Latest member
amadeuscho55
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"