The Rebooted "Keep Hope Alive" (that the rights can revert back to Marvel) Thread - - - - - - - - - - Part 19

[Protar]

Speaking of new franchises, which comics Avengers are still untapped who started as solo heroes rather than in the pages of Avengers?

Hercules (actually started out on Earth as a Thor supporting character, which I'd actually be more excited to see than a cold launch.)
Patsy Walker!
Tigra
She-Hulk (we're never getting this film)
Moon Knight
Quasar
Machine Man
Spider-Women
Captain Britain
The Sentry
... Then in 2010 they inducted Nova Dick Rider and a bunch of solo heroes who are on Netflix now.

Obviously, Patsy will continue to be a major supporting character in Jessica Jones, presumably taking on the Hellcat mantle in S3. From the way things are going she probably goes down a more anti-heroic route than the comics.

With Hercules, I think they will probably streamline the Eternals and the Greek God characters into one, to avoid any confusion. So we may get some interpretation of Hercules in the Eternals movies

I know little of Tigra, Sentry, Machine Man or Quasar. Tigra and Machine man seem like supporting characters. Quasar and Sentry could be potential franchises in far-flung future phases when they need new heavy hitters to replace Captain Marvel.

They will probably want to avoid genderswapped character counterparts in the films. Even if in reality Spiderwoman and She-Hulk are very different characters to Spiderman and Hulk, from a marketing perspective it comes across as gimmicky. It would also be bizarre to have a She-Hulk franchise before a Hulk franchise. Maybe these guys could get tv shows though? I think once Disney's streaming service gets off the ground we will be seeing lots more MCU TV shows that will cross over with one another like the CW do currently (she-hulk/daredevil lawyer crossover when?). Moonknight is another prime candidate for a show.

I think a Captain Britain film could work with a bit of retooling. A third franchise called Captain X is undesirable from a marketing pov, and a guy wearing a flag costume isn't really how us Brits do patriotism. But if they do get the X-Men rights, they could do an Excalibur film with Psylocke as a co-lead. A film blending two British genres - Arthurian legend and bond-esque spy films could be a lot of fun and something uniquely british. Think Kingsman crossed with Harry Potter crossed with Doctor Who.

 

[MasterCat]

Oh, right, we can't talk about Patsy Walker without bringing up the whole "Netflix shows are totally MCU even though Disney is ending our relationship with Netflix in 2019" issue.
Too bad. I think it would be hilarious if they released a straight romcom titled Patsy Walker and had her become Hellcat in a later MCU film.

Ugh. I'm dreading them screwing up Hercules now.

Greer "Tigra" Nelson was the original user of the Hellcat suit. Her '70s comic was short-lived so she was brought back in Marvel's horror titles. Greer finds out that the woman who designed the Hellcat suit comes from a Secret society of werecats and that she's one too!

Machine Man is Jack Kirby's OC from a licensed 2001: A Space Odyssey comics. Trademark law being rational and just, he's property of Marvel Entertainment rather than Jack Kirby, Isaac Asimov or Stanley Kubrick.

Quasar was just another white American who got cosmic powers. Basically a more powerful Nova.

The Sentry is an epic troll by Stan Lee, claimed to be a character he created shortly before the Fantastic Four. Superman power set, lives in a demonic-looking New York penthouse with a supercomputer, mentally ill. Most significantly, he was a founding member of the New Avengers (said penthouse was perched atop Avengers Tower when the original NA lived there.)

And then there's Moon Knight.

 

[Protar]

Despite the lack of connectivity between Marvel Netflix and the movies, like it or not they are still part of the MCU. The references are one-way, but a big part of their advertising is that they're part of the MCU. Sadly, with Disney moving into their own streaming service, it seems likely that MCU Netflix will increasingly be kept in their own little bubble, but it's still poor branding to decanonise those shows entirely. On the bright side, I am hopeful that the future tv shows on Disney's streaming service will be more connected to one another and to the movies.

 

[WeaponXCII]

Somewhat off-topic (well, not really- you'll see when you go to it...), but did anyone else catch what the first sin was for the CinemaSins video on Fifty Shades Freed? t:

 

[MasterCat]

Despite the lack of connectivity between Marvel Netflix and the movies, like it or not they are still part of the MCU. The references are one-way, but a big part of their advertising is that they're part of the MCU. Sadly, with Disney moving into their own streaming service, it seems likely that MCU Netflix will increasingly be kept in their own little bubble, but it's still poor branding to decanonise those shows entirely. On the bright side, I am hopeful that the future tv shows on Disney's streaming service will be more connected to one another and to the movies.

But Disney didn't give away the rights to Daredevil, Iron Fist, Luke Cage, Jessica Jones, Patsy Walker and the Punisher to Netflix in perpetuity, did they? Unless they did, they'll regain the rights to reboot those characters in 2019, either for streaming or films. Not that I actually want any of the scarce cinema slots to go to them for a long time (unless it's Patsy Walker, just for how hilarious that would be).

 

[The Infernal]

There are moments I'm absolutely certain this will be the case.

So far, everything that could possibly go wrong with FF has. It seems to be a cursed property.

Chin up, Willie. Feige has shown he knows how to assemble a good team to make a project work. Besides we know the bar can't be set any lower than Fox has set it.

 

[Detective Conan]

There’s been all this talk about whether Disney would be willing to spend money to get the rights back to FF or not and..

I just realize that in a post-Incredibles world, the idea of a doing a Fantastic Four film seems rather redundant. The Incredibles in many ways already fills the shoes of Fantastic Four as this ‘ ‘cool superhero family’ series that unlike Fantastic Four is actually popular with moviegoers. Even if Marvel gets the ability to do a Fantastic Four film wouldn’t it be like doing John Carter after Superman & Star Wars came out? Where even though Carter inspired those aforementioned series the fact that its movie adaption came out after the series it inspired had already had successful cinematic outings before it just makes it look like it’s the other way around, thus making the whole concept seem rather generic and uninspired.

It’s a well known fact that in the first Tim Story movie made significant script revisions and changed its ending because it was being released a year after the first Incredibles came out and they wanted to avoid as much comparisons to that film as possible.

To me, making another FF film after two highly popular Incredibles movies would make the Fantastic Four very derivative — making it look like a live-action verision Of The Incredibles — unless there is something that Marvel can do to differentiate it from that property it just seems like it’s going to run into that hurdle. In a way, Disney already ‘has’ a Fantastic Four in Incredibles — a much successful one at that.

 

[Random490]

But Disney didn't give away the rights to Daredevil, Iron Fist, Luke Cage, Jessica Jones, Patsy Walker and the Punisher to Netflix in perpetuity, did they? Unless they did, they'll regain the rights to reboot those characters in 2019, either for streaming or films. Not that I actually want any of the scarce cinema slots to go to them for a long time (unless it's Patsy Walker, just for how hilarious that would be).

Tough to say since people are understandably tight lipped about these deals. I'm willing to bet their are clauses to allow for film appearances/adaptations since setting in the same universe is a selling point, though I don't Marvel Studios is interested in creating movies from a tv show. Seems like retreading ground they when they could go for something new. I would like to believe that if the shows are canceled they can just take future seasons or new series with the same actors to other platforms (So if Netflix is done and decides not to order anymore episodes) But Netflix would hold on to the episodes they did order and most places don't want new seasons to a show without the past seasons available.

I don't think any of those characters are in such high demand that Disney would bother rebooting them, I'd think they'd rather focus on new characters that haven't been adapted. If they really wanted the characters on their plat form I think an animated show is more likely. Using the same character to capture a different demographic without too much brand confusion.

 

[Willie Lumpkin]

There’s been all this talk about whether Disney would be willing to spend money to get the rights back to FF or not and..

I just realize that in a post-Incredibles world, the idea of a doing a Fantastic Four film seems rather redundant. The Incredibles in many ways already fills the shoes of Fantastic Four as this superhero family series that unlike Fantastic Four is actually popular with moviegoers. Even if Marvel gets the ability to do a Fantastic Four film wouldn’t it be like doing John Carter after Superman & Star Wars came out? Where even though Carter inspired those aforementioned series the fact that its movie adaption out after the series it inspired had already had sucessful cinematic outings before it just makes it look like it’s the other way around, thus making the whole concept seem rather generic and uninspired.

It’s a well known fact that in the first Tim Story movie made significant script revisions and changed its ending because it was being released a year after the first Incredibles came out and they wanted to avoid as much comparisons to that film as possible.

To me, making another FF film after two highly popular Incredibles movies would make the Fantastic Four very derivative — making it look like a live-action verision Of The Incredibles — unless there is something that Marvel can do to differentiate it from that property it just seems like it’s going to run into that hurdle. In many ways, Disney already ‘has’ a Fantastic Four in Incredibles —a much successful one at that.

I hear this "Disney already did the FF" all the time, but I don't agree.

Incredibles is great and well done and clearly influenced by the FF, but it's a completely different style.

It's a comedy and a spoof and send-up of Superheroes.

The FF I imagine would be serious, not a comedy. It would have funny moments, but those moments would be based on the interactions of the characters, not silly situations in the service of comedy (monologuing, capes etc.).

To me, FF would be more similar to Star Trek than Incredibles ( I believe the original Star Trek drew elements from the original FF comics ).


The biggest problems with the Story films were the elements that were played too much for laughs. The FF film should have grand, spectacular visuals and high stakes. The world should be hanging in the balance and it should feel like it.


In Rise of the Silver Surfer, the world was on the verge of ending, but it never felt intense because it was so poorly done. When Galactus comes in the FF film, it should be "Holy s*** this is intense", not a yuk-fest.

 

[MasterCat]

It’s a well known fact that in the first Tim Story movie made significant script revisions and changed its ending because it was being released a year after the first Incredibles came out and they wanted to avoid as much comparisons to that film as possible.

What were these changes? The Fantastic 4 of 1962 have very little in common with the Incredibles. The only "family" element is that Sue and Johnny are siblings. They fight all their memorable villains, meet the Inhumans and Black Panther, and Sue had been in at least one love triangle (Namor) before there was a family with children.

The absolute best thing they could do with the FF, which they should definitely spend $0 on, is to NOT make them "Marvel's first family." Don't even have Reed and Sue marry until a third film.

 

[Crimz]

I hear this "Disney already did the FF" all the time, but I don't agree.

Incredibles is great and well done and clearly influenced by the FF, but it's a completely different style.

It's a comedy and a spoof and send-up of Superheroes.

The FF I imagine would be serious, not a comedy. It would have funny moments, but those moments would be based on the interactions of the characters, not silly situations in the service of comedy (monologuing, capes etc.).

To me, FF would be more similar to Star Trek than Incredibles ( I believe the original Star Trek drew elements from the original FF comics ).


The biggest problems with the Story films were the elements that were played too much for laughs. The FF film should have grand, spectacular visuals and high stakes. The world should be hanging in the balance and it should feel like it.


In Rise of the Silver Surfer, the world was on the verge of ending, but it never felt intense because it was so poorly done. When Galactus comes in the FF film, it should be "Holy s*** this is intense", not a yuk-fest.

Also the Incredibles is a pure superhero movie, while a faithful Fantastic Four film would be an epic space/dimensional (and even time travel) adventure film that happens to involve people with powers.
The Fantastic Four are explorers who go to exciting imaginative places that should be visually breathtaking if done right. Their superheroics are secondary, they will save the day when it calls for it but that is not their main goal. A FF film should be a crazy adventure film at heart and the things it shares with Incredibles are only the family part and similar powers.

 

[Willie Lumpkin]

What were these changes? The Fantastic 4 of 1962 have very little in common with the Incredibles. The only "family" element is that Sue and Johnny are siblings. They fight all their memorable villains, meet the Inhumans and Black Panther, and Sue had been in at least one love triangle (Namor) before there was a family with children.

Specifically, there was a scene in the original FF film in which Ben rescues a cat in a tree by shaking it out, and there was a similar scene in The Incredibles.

I'm not aware of anything else, but that specific scene was actually shot but then not included because of its similarity with the Incredibles.

 

[Crimz]

What were these changes? The Fantastic 4 of 1962 have very little in common with the Incredibles. The only "family" element is that Sue and Johnny are siblings. They fight all their memorable villains, meet the Inhumans and Black Panther, and Sue had been in at least one love triangle (Namor) before there was a family with children.

The absolute best thing they could do with the FF, which they should definitely spend $0 on, is to NOT make them "Marvel's first family." Don't even have Reed and Sue marry until a third film.

They don't have to be the first but they should definitely be a family and have family be one of their important aspects. Reed and Sue should be at least be engaged in the first film.

 

[Willie Lumpkin]

Also the Incredibles is a pure superhero movie, while a faithful Fantastic Four film would be an epic space/dimensional (and even time travel) adventure film that happens to involve people with powers.
The Fantastic Four are explorers who go to exciting imaginative places that should be visually breathtaking if done right. Their superheroics are secondary, they will save the day when it calls for it but that is not their main goal. A FF film should be a crazy adventure film at heart and the things it shares with Incredibles are only the family part and similar powers.

 

[Bach]

Only a few more hours.

 

[DawnWarrior]

Only a few more hours.

The suspense is legit killing me.

 

[ImSGirl95]

Until what exactly? Wasn't the voting next month on 10th?

 

[Marvel united]

Until what exactly? Wasn't the voting next month on 10th?

Until Murdoch and the board decide whether to take Comcast's bid over Disney's

 

[ImSGirl95]

Until Murdoch and the board decide whether to take Comcast's bid over Disney's

I see. Does this mean no vote next month?

 

[Willie Lumpkin]

I see. Does this mean no vote next month?

Probably. They'll probably officially announce they're considering Comcast's bid and then Disney will have to submit their modified bid. Since Comcast is hoping for a long bidding war, they'll probably postpone the vote so that can happen.

The only surprise we might get would be for the board to say they're not considering the bid. But not only is that unlikely, but it wouldn't put anything to rest, because shareholders would likely revolt if that happened.

 

[Spider-Fan]

But Disney didn't give away the rights to Daredevil, Iron Fist, Luke Cage, Jessica Jones, Patsy Walker and the Punisher to Netflix in perpetuity, did they? Unless they did, they'll regain the rights to reboot those characters in 2019, either for streaming or films. Not that I actually want any of the scarce cinema slots to go to them for a long time (unless it's Patsy Walker, just for how hilarious that would be).

Your assessment is not correct. Loeb (his own words being those shows will continue as long as Netflix wants them) has stated the Netflix shows will continue past 2019. The proof of this statement being correct is Jessica Jones was renewed for a 3rd season. One that cannot air any sooner than 2019. Netflix doesn't own these characters. They own the distribution rights for their shows. It's different. The versions you're seeing on Netflix for these characters are the MCU versions. Loeb has even stated that he works with Marvel Studios to make sure their shows don't conflict with the movies and the Russos and writers of IW even considered putting them in IW in the early stages (before deciding the easter egg wasn't worth it).

 

[Protar]

But Disney didn't give away the rights to Daredevil, Iron Fist, Luke Cage, Jessica Jones, Patsy Walker and the Punisher to Netflix in perpetuity, did they? Unless they did, they'll regain the rights to reboot those characters in 2019, either for streaming or films. Not that I actually want any of the scarce cinema slots to go to them for a long time (unless it's Patsy Walker, just for how hilarious that would be).

Honestly, I have no idea what situation with the Netflix rights is. I agree that Disney will not have given Netflix the rights to those characters in perpetuity, but is Disney able to pull the plug on the Netflix shows whenever they want? If it is possible, then Disney will surely want to just move future seasons of the Marvel Netflix properties over to their own streaming service, but it may be that Marvel has the rights to the characters, while Netflix has the rights to those specific incarnations. If it is possible to avoid a reboot though, Disney will avoid it.

 

[Chip Chipperson]

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/disney-boosts-fox-bid-713-billion-cash-stock-1120841

Will you all just calm down now, Disney raised their bid to 71 billion in cash, also including stock

 

[ADollarADay]

Disney raises bid for Fox assets to $38 a share

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/06/20/disney-raises-bid-for-fox-assets-to-38-a-share.html

The new bid rivals Comcast's $35 a share all-cash bid last week, in a deal that would be valued at $65 billion. Disney's new bid allows Fox shareholders to choose cash or stock.

 

[Marvel united]

It's on, now, Comcast.