The Rebooted "Keep Hope Alive" (that the rights can revert back to Marvel) Thread - - - - Part 13

[TheVileOne]

Since that has been the far more common pattern with Fox's releases, nothing, imo.

People forget, but the X-Men used to be one of Marvel's hottest brands back in the 1990s. With the right approach, a new X-Men movie franchise from Marvel could be just as big if not bigger than Avengers.

And by that, I mean a willingness to embrace the iconography and fun of the Avengers films and mix that with the drama and relevant social themes of the comics, which is doable. It's far from impossible. If the 90s cartoon could do it, then a live-action film can do it well.

The problem was in the 1990s, you couldn't really do the things in live-action with these films you could do with animation. Now live-action has caught up. So you can fully realize the dynamic style of these characters and still make them feel real and relatable.

 

[TheVileOne]

I'd love it myself but we're talking about a boutique studio here. I think 3 films a year should be the maximum whether they get Fox assets or not.

I'm always of the opinion that less is more, so if that means keeping the fans waiting a little longer to get it right and not overflooding the marketplace, then OK everyday.

Well Feige keeps talking about a different MCU. I get the sense they are writing out the phase 1 and 2 characters after the next two Avengers films. This gives them a completely new set of characters to play around with and focus on. And also characters that have longstanding history and brand recognition.

 

[spider-neil]

People forget, but the X-Men used to be one of Marvel's hottest brands back in the 1990s. With the right approach, a new X-Men movie franchise from Marvel could be just as big if not bigger than Avengers.

And by that, I mean a willingness to embrace the iconography and fun of the Avengers films and mix that with the drama and relevant social themes of the comics, which is doable. It's far from impossible. If the 90s cartoon could do it, then a live-action film can do it well.

The problem was in the 1990s, you couldn't really do the things in live-action with these films you could do with animation. Now live-action has caught up. So you can fully realize the dynamic style of these characters and still make them feel real and relatable.

The general audience may be burnt out on X-men. Downtime may not be a bad thing.

One thing to remember is acquiring the rights to X-men and Fantastic Four is you get the villains.

Dr. Doom
Galactus
Scrulls
Annilus
Diablo
Molecule Man
To name a few

You breathe new life into the MCU without the need for a single hero.
For instance you can have the Scrull Kree war.

 

[Darepool]

Well Feige keeps talking about a different MCU. I get the sense they are writing out the phase 1 and 2 characters after the next two Avengers films. This gives them a completely new set of characters to play around with and focus on. And also characters that have longstanding history and brand recognition.

I agree, new characters will be pushed front and center and for those new franchises within the MCU, the X-Men will take the Avengers place as the team 'event' film in the rotation. My guess would be every 3 years.

 

[First Avenger]

X-Men and Fantastic Four are the perfect successors to Avengers and Guardians, though I hope some of them survive to interact with them.

 

[spider-neil]

For me, Fantastic Four pretty much writes itself. Yet we've had 3 butchered movies. Marvel would be hard pressed to do worse.

The X universe has produced 10 movies (give or take) and I can't three stand out movies (for me). So Marvel would have a harder time breathing life into the franchise but they much still fancy their chances of eclipsing what has come before.

 

[Spider-Fan]

We get Avengers movies every three years, so every two years for an X-Men film would be OK with me, but I think it will be 3. That's perfectly acceptable.

I would say every 3 years with solos in the interim, like your Wolverine, Cable, etc. Well...Deadpool not with the Disney label, lol. I don't see how this model is not feasable (for those who are worried). I think it makes perfect sense, and I think Disney wants to get them up to near billion status like the others are.

 

[Darepool]

I would say every 3 years with solos in the interim, like your Wolverine, Cable, etc. Well...Deadpool not with the Disney label, lol. I don't see how this model is not feasable (for those who are worried). I think it makes perfect sense, and I think Disney wants to get them up to near billion status like the others are.

It's certainly feasible, the question for me is how many films do Marvel Studios actually want to produce in a year? They'd have a chance to control market saturation to a large degree with this deal, and I kind of hope they do... At this point do we need a Wolverine solo? He's one of my favorite characters in fiction - period, but aside from the main X-Men films, I'm not sure solo X-films would be in the cards off the bat.

The main question they'd have to figure out is how to inrtoduce mutants into the MCU, which has been around for a decade.

 

[SPO2 Dalisay]

For me, Fantastic Four pretty much writes itself. Yet we've had 3 butchered movies. Marvel would be hard pressed to do worse.

The X universe has produced 10 movies (give or take) and I can't three stand out movies (for me). So Marvel would have a harder time breathing life into the franchise but they much still fancy their chances of eclipsing what has come before.

I don't think so much about the ten films which could be seen like 5 Spider-Man films or the Daredevil film were. But rather mutant history on earth being incompatible with MCU history, which ran from super soldiers to high technology to aliens/Inhumans. If the actual classic X-Men characters are children in the MCU world as it stands right now they can be integrated into the future. To have Shoah survivors running schools and fighting sentinels when Tony Stark escaped from the Ten Rings just makes no sense.

 

[Spider-Fan]

It's certainly feasible, the question for me is how many films does Marvel Studios actually want to produce in a year? They'd have a chance to control market saturation to a large degree with this deal, and I kind of hope they do... At this point do we need a Wolverine solo? He's one of my favorite characters in fiction - period, but aside from the main X-Men films, I'm not sure solo X-films would be in the cards off the bat.

The main question they'd have to figure out is how to inrtoduce mutants into the MCU, which has been around for a decade.

I think Wolverine at Marvel would be worth exploring. I loved Logan and The Wolverine, but those people that want like Omega Red and maybe Alpha Flight...Marvel is more likely to give us THAT Wolverine. Doesn't make it better, but makes it worth exploring. Yeah, I am sure he will be more PG13 than R like in Logan, but I think they can make it work.

 

[Marvel united]

That's true. The X-Men started out as kids anyway so going that route makes the most sense for the Marvel Cinematic Universe continuity. Just do Marvel's the Uncanny X-Men

 

[First Avenger]

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...favor-disney-as-buyer-for-studio-media-assets

Hold on to your b*tts.

 

[rebellion]

aaaaaah, please God, make it happen

 

[First Avenger]

We're getting bits of news everyday, we must be very close right?

 

[Iceman]

I think they might have an eye on getting something agreed in principle before Xmas. But it's a complex process and whether what they agree would work and be allowed is another matter.

 

[ImSGirl95]

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...favor-disney-as-buyer-for-studio-media-assets

Hold on to your b*tts.

 

[DyfeddRex]

My money says that at least 3 of the 4 core IP sets will trade hands regardless, as a side deal. The two Marvel IP sets, and SW:ANH. Avatar may or may not be part of the side deal. That would be set up to work as straight IP rights for cash deal, and made with acknowledgement in the deal that the rights go back to the IP Originator (Marvel/Lucas). That would get the Mouse a good bang for the buck, and as it is returning rights to the originators, not be subject to regulatory review, and stand regardless. Bet that was something the Murdochs drug feet on, but had to accept.

Now, the rest of the deal, it might not be as big as thought. Disney might just cherry-pick a few assets, or do the deal with a right to spin-off sale the parts that won't fit, or have issues, and tell DOJ that they plan to do so, in x (forgive the mutant pun, but that is the normally used variable letter) months/years, after finding a buyer. That they wisely steered away from the full deal will be important.

Now, one true question is whether the Murdochs get a stake in the Mouse for it, and how much of a voting block/seats that might mean, as that could be a HUGE issue, even in the current administration's view of business deals. They know there would be tremendous backlash at the more liberal Mouse being invaded by the conservative Fox, not to mention the conflict of interest in holding such big chunks of two networks via that. I think (but ain't sure) that the Mouse resisted this on these grounds, they have enough problems just juggling the distribution issues alone in the merger. They don't need to fight the feds and other nations' regulatory agencies for this deal.

 

[Darepool]

My money says that at least 3 of the 4 core IP sets will trade hands regardless, as a side deal. The two Marvel IP sets, and SW:ANH. Avatar may or may not be part of the side deal. That would be set up to work as straight IP rights for cash deal, and made with acknowledgement in the deal that the rights go back to the IP Originator (Marvel/Lucas). That would get the Mouse a good bang for the buck, and as it is returning rights to the originators, not be subject to regulatory review, and stand regardless. Bet that was something the Murdochs drug feet on, but had to accept.

Now, the rest of the deal, it might not be as big as thought. Disney might just cherry-pick a few assets, or do the deal with a right to spin-off sale the parts that won't fit, or have issues, and tell DOJ that they plan to do so, in x (forgive the mutant pun, but that is the normally used variable letter) months/years, after finding a buyer. That they wisely steered away from the full deal will be important.

Now, one true question is whether the Murdochs get a stake in the Mouse for it, and how much of a voting block/seats that might mean, as that could be a HUGE issue, even in the current administration's view of business deals. They know there would be tremendous backlash at the more liberal Mouse being invaded by the conservative Fox, not to mention the conflict of interest in holding such big chunks of two networks via that. I think (but ain't sure) that the Mouse resisted this on these grounds, they have enough problems just juggling the distribution issues alone in the merger. They don't need to fight the feds and other nations' regulatory agencies for this deal.

That is definitely one of the major issues. I don't see any way that Iger gives away 1/4 to those people..This is in part a legacy deal for him. If that were the make or break issue I'd guess break.

 

[Willie Lumpkin]

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...favor-disney-as-buyer-for-studio-media-assets

Hold on to your b*tts.

It seems odd that Fox would specifically let it be known they prefer Disney since that would seem to weaken their bargaining position.

... which makes me wonder if the bargaining is done and they're just telegraphing the direction they're going so people are ready when the announcement comes.t:

 

[Spider-Fan]

It seems odd that Fox would specifically let it be known they prefer Disney since that would seem to weaken their bargaining position.

... which makes me wonder if the bargaining is done and they're just telegraphing the direction they're going so people are ready when the announcement comes.t:

Likely, I think the framework of the deal is done. Now it is a matter of crossing various Ts, dotting some Is, etc. Then making sure it passes before announcing anything.

 

[Willie Lumpkin]

I think they might have an eye on getting something agreed in principle before Xmas. But it's a complex process and whether what they agree would work and be allowed is another matter.

At that point, I don't think we need to worry about those details derailing what we want.

Sure, the justice department may have a problem with some TV channels, for example, and in that case the deal might be altered slightly, but once they agree in principle, it will either be the deal in full or a slightly scaled-back deal to make concessions.

 

[Willie Lumpkin]

Likely, I think the framework of the deal is done. Now it is a matter of crossing various Ts, dotting some Is, etc. Then making sure it passes before announcing anything.

I hope, I hope, I hope...

Damn it, I'm starting to get excited now.

 

[Iceman]

At that point, I don't think we need to worry about those details derailing what we want.

Sure, the justice department may have a problem with some TV channels, for example, and in that case the deal might be altered slightly, but once they agree in principle, it will either be the deal in full or a slightly scaled-back deal to make concessions.

As long as it includes F4 and X-Men rights that's pretty much all I'm after.

 

[Spider-Fan]

As long as it includes F4 and X-Men rights that's pretty much all I'm after.

Don't forget Star Wars! I want my Original Trilogy Theatrical Cut Blu Rays!!!

 

[Iceman]

Don't forget Star Wars! I want my Original Trilogy Theatrical Cut Blu Rays!!!

Oh yes of course!!

4K versions thanks