The Rebooted "Keep Hope Alive" (that the rights can revert back to Marvel) Thread - Part 4

[Willie Lumpkin]

I agree with all of this, and what I presented was my "FOX used incriminating photos to sign Leonardo DiCaprio, Jennifer Lawrence, Dwayne Johnson and Liam Hemsworth for scale" scenario. Folks who are suggesting that the franchise can be revived at FOX are ignoring the numbers, and even in my wildly optimistic best case scenario, the thing still bleeds tens of millions of dollars. The FF at FOX is DUN.

Yeah, and that's where any real, logical case falls apart. I think people's fear that Fox will make another film is based on emotion, but I just can't see how, in the real world (with real people with real jobs on the line making these decisions) a new FF film has a snowball in hell's chance of being green-lit within 6 years.

They're not going to make it: "Just because . . . nanny, nanny boo boo".

Hundreds of millions of dollars don't get put on the line without many people at many levels discussing it, and when 95% of those people have no reason to want it to happen (and all the reason in the world to not want it to happen), it won't happen.

Who is going to be the person to put their career on the line to step up and make it happen?

 

[Random490]

Yeah, and that's where any real, logical case falls apart. I think people's fear that Fox will make another film is based on emotion, but I just can't see how, in the real world (with real people with real jobs on the line making these decisions) a new FF film has a snowball in hell's chance of being green-lit within 6 years.

They're not going to make it: "Just because . . . nanny, nanny boo boo".

Hundreds of millions of dollars don't get put on the line without many people at many levels discussing it, and when 95% of those people have no reason to want it to happen (and all the reason in the world to not want it to happen), it won't happen.

Who is going to be the person to put their career on the line to step up and make it happen?

That's what they did with the 1994 film. In fact I'm not sure if the contact states that they have to release it. So theoretically they could just make a bare bones movie and never let it see the light of day. Also I believe Silver Surfer, Galactus, and the Skrulls are part of the F4 deal and Fox could just make a movie with them.

But that wouldn't be the smartest movie, the F4 brand had been tainted, by the time audience would be willing for another go superhero films could go out of fashion. Their smartest play is to negotiate to get something from Marvel for an early return of the F4 rights. X-men tv property for example, could do nicely

 

[Zarex]

That's what they did with the 1994 film. In fact I'm not sure if the contact states that they have to release it. So theoretically they could just make a bare bones movie and never let it see the light of day. Also I believe Silver Surfer, Galactus, and the Skrulls are part of the F4 deal and Fox could just make a movie with them.

It was wildly reported that Avi Arad had budget and exhibition requirements written into the subsequent FF contract after he bought the Corman FF release and had it destroyed. And there has been no indication that an FF sidekick film would extend the contract.

But in any case - Why? Who would pay to see this film? Why in gods name would FOX flush more money down the toilet to hang onto rights they can't use? The Corman film was produced to enable Constantin films to hang onto the rights until a more lucrative deal could be reached with another studio. What would be the purpose of your proposed FOX bare bones movie that never sees the light of day?

But that wouldn't be the smartest movie, the F4 brand had been tainted, by the time audience would be willing for another go superhero films could go out of fashion. Their smartest play is to negotiate to get something from Marvel for an early return of the F4 rights. X-men tv property for example, could do nicely

That deal is already done.

http://marvel.com/news/tv/25282/fox_in_development_on_hellfire_working_title

 

[Willie Lumpkin]

That's what they did with the 1994 film. In fact I'm not sure if the contact states that they have to release it. So theoretically they could just make a bare bones movie and never let it see the light of day.

We have seen indications over the years that after the 1994 film, the new contract with Fox included "Quality Clauses" to prevent a recurrence.

It's likely that Fox has already been put on notice by Marvel lawyers after Fant4stic, so they will being watched if they try to do it on the cheap.

Also, as has been asked out numerous times in these discussion: Why would Fox want to make a cheap film just to keep rights that they don't intend to use?

In 1994, they weren't trying to keep the rights so they could make another film. They were trying to keep the rights long enough to flip them. Then, as now, it was all about the value of the rights - not making a film.

But now, the value of the rights has been tainted by Fox's weak efforts and the rights continue to lose value as the deadline nears. The sooner Fox sells, the more they'll get.

 

[Darth_Spock]

In 1994, they weren't trying to keep the rights so they could make another film. They were trying to keep the rights long enough to flip them. Then, as now, it was all about the value of the rights - not making a film.

But now, the value of the rights has been tainted by Fox's weak efforts and the rights continue to lose value as the deadline nears. The sooner Fox sells, the more they'll get.

This would be my reasoning. Make a decent offer while you possibly can but then there's Simon Kinberg........(sigh)

Was he speaking from the heart or was he coached by Fox execs to bring up being interested in another sequel and if so what would be the basis for it?

Were discussions on it already made and rejected and this talk of a sequel just back lash to that? Or were the Spiders and Bee's in Kinbergs head all riled up again?

 

[Random490]

It was wildly reported that Avi Arad had budget and exhibition requirements written into the subsequent FF contract after he bought the Corman FF release and had it destroyed. And there has been no indication that an FF sidekick film would extend the contract.

But in any case - Why? Who would pay to see this film? Why in gods name would FOX flush more money down the toilet to hang onto rights they can't use? The Corman film was produced to enable Constantin films to hang onto the rights until a more lucrative deal could be reached with another studio. What would be the purpose of your proposed FOX bare bones movie that never sees the light of day?



That deal is already done.

http://marvel.com/news/tv/25282/fox_in_development_on_hellfire_working_title

I wish there was a place I can find out about all these clauses.

Also that deal is rumored to have included F4. I'm keeping my fingers crossed.

 

[ernesth100]

For a secons I thought it was confirmed. Damn. Fingers crossed too. I really think the MCU needs the fresh blood after IW.

 

[Willie Lumpkin]

I wish there was a place I can find out about all these clauses.

Also that deal is rumored to have included F4. I'm keeping my fingers crossed.

If you go here: http://forums.superherohype.com/showthread.php?p=33604673 and start at the third post you'll see some discussion of possible wording of the quality clause, but to summarize the key points:

In 1994 (so right around the same time with some of the same Marvel managers and lawyers who were likely involved in creating the Fox contract) Marvel and Universal studios created a contract governing Universal's Marvel area in Islands of adventure. Here is the exact wording regarding quality in that contract:

Each THE MARVEL UNIVERSE shall be operated and maintained in a first class manner consistent with the highest standards of the theme park industry and shall be deemed “open” only when operated in such manner (subject to temporary closures for force majeure events as described in the prior paragraph).

At such time as any THE MARVEL UNIVERSE is no longer open at a particular Universal Theme Park, all exclusivity and marketing rights acquired by MCA as a result of the opening of such THE MARVEL UNIVERSE at such Universal Theme Park, as set forth in Section IV below, shall terminate and this Agreement shall thereafter be construed as if the notice of intent to open THE MARVEL UNIVERSE had not been given by MCA.

With that language in mind, I speculated that the language in the film contract could look something like:

Each FANTASTIC FOUR FILM shall be produced and distributed in a first class manner consistent with the highest standards of the film industry. If a FANTASTIC FOUR FILM is produced that is not consistent with that standard all exclusivity and marketing rights acquired by Fox as a result of releasing FANTASTIC FOUR FILMS, as set forth in Section IV below, shall terminate and this Agreement shall thereafter be construed as if the notice of intent to allow production of FANTASTIC FOUR FILMS had not been given by MCA.

If the wording is similar to that, Marvel could probably sue Fox right now to invalidate the contract based on Fant4stic. But lawsuits are ugly and expensive and air dirty laundry and create bad publicity and the outcome is uncertain and Marvel needs to continue, as much as possible, a good working relationship with Fox.

But while Marvel likely wants to avoid taking it to court and would much rather work it out amicably, they likely would have no choice but to take it to court if Fox tried to pull a 1994. And if the wording is similar to this, I think Marvel would have a strong legal case, based on the previous 3 films and any apparent attempt by Fox to make another cheap film, to invalidate the contract.

 

[Gabe99]

EXCLUSIVE: Talking 'X-MEN: APOCALYPSE,' 'STAR WARS' and More with Simon Kinberg

LRM:
Okay. What's up with Fantastic Four? ... And, Will Marvel ever consider helping out or getting involved with a Fox project just like they did with Sony?

Simon Kinberg:
We haven't had any discussions with Marvel about them getting involved on any of the movies at Fox, as far as I know, and we, meaning me and Fox and Hutch Parker, who's producer too, have been talking a lot about what to do next with FANTASTIC FOUR. It's a super, super, super high priority for all of us, and for me personally, it's a super high priority because it really bums me out that we disappointed the fans and that we didn't make a great movie last time out. I think we learned a lot of lessons from that experience and lessons that we could bring to the next one and hopefully make a movie that is worthy of the title.

 

[First Avenger]

EXCLUSIVE: Talking 'X-MEN: APOCALYPSE,' 'STAR WARS' and More with Simon Kinberg

-.-
The idiot talks like he's Kevin Feige.

 

[Val_Zod]

EXCLUSIVE: Talking 'X-MEN: APOCALYPSE,' 'STAR WARS' and More with Simon Kinberg

How delusional is this guy?

 

[GoblinScrier]

EXCLUSIVE: Talking 'X-MEN: APOCALYPSE,' 'STAR WARS' and More with Simon Kinberg

NOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!! He keeps bringing this up...surely Fox is not really doing this...all our hoping and praying that the rights are either already reverted or going to be could be dead again...make it stop!!!!

 

[Gabe99]

The Consistent Link: Simon Kinberg on X-Men: Apocalypse

You also co-wrote X-Men: The Last Stand.
Was it you who came up with the “the third movie is always the worst” joke in X-Men: Apocalypse?

To be honest, I don’t remember who came up with it. Certainly it was something I was aware that it would poke fun at X3. It was also a bit dangerous because First Class and Days of Future Past are very good films and it potentially puts Apocalypse in the crosshairs as well. It was just a joke that I thought people would get a chuckle out of. We’re ten years away from X3 and we felt that if Deadpool can make fun of X-Men movies, we can too.

 

[First Avenger]

The Consistent Link: Simon Kinberg on X-Men: Apocalypse

Hey Simple Simon,your second threequel is getting WORSE reviews than your first threequel!

I REALLY hope he's talking out of his @ss in regards to F4. God I hate him.

 

[Spiderine]

As long as some interviewer keeps bringing up FF to him he is going to express his desire to do another one. Kinberg doesn't green light films for FOX.

 

[Orba]

Kinberg says stuff like "we disappointed the fans" but when he talks about FFINO I feel like there is a lack of acknowledgement of his own personal involvement in the mess. Trank is the posterchild for the films failure but Kinberg was the guy on set everyday writing it, he was the Producer that was supposed to be supervising Trank. Kinberg is every bit as guilty of creating that abomination as Trank yet when he talks about it the acknowledgement of failing the fans always seems to be more distanced than someone that deeply involved should be.

I mean the film lost as much as $100million yet the guy who wrote it and was lead Producer is just "we'll get it right next time".

 

[Willie Lumpkin]

"We haven't had any discussions with Marvel about them getting involved on any of the movies at Fox, as far as I know."

Interesting equivocation. If you were Simon Kinberg, wouldn't you assume you were fully informed and nothing would be happening that you didn't know? What's it mean that he's putting that disclaimer in there?

 

[Willie Lumpkin]

Kinberg says stuff like "we disappointed the fans" but when he talks about FFINO I feel like there is a lack of acknowledgement of his own personal involvement in the mess. Trank is the posterchild for the films failure but Kinberg was the guy on set everyday writing it, he was the Producer that was supposed to be supervising Trank. Kinberg is every bit as guilty of creating that abomination as Trank yet when he talks about it the acknowledgement of failing the fans always seems to be more distanced than someone that deeply involved should be.

I mean the film lost as much as $100million yet the guy who wrote it and was lead Producer is just "we'll get it right next time".

I blame Kinberg more than Trank. Kinberg was the one out there saying things that were completely wrong every chance he had. Kinberg is the one who said Ben's story wasn't interesting enough and had to be changed.

It's not a case of "Whoops, we did a couple things wrong." You did everything wrong.

The fact that he's still too dumb to understand how badly he screwed this up isn't surprising, but it is infuriating.

 

[Willie Lumpkin]

Simon Kinberg is as capable of making a Fantastic Four movie as a typical second grader is of solving complex quantum mechanics problems.

The idea that he really figured it out between August and now is laughably ludicrous.

 

[wobbly]

"We haven't had any discussions with Marvel about them getting involved on any of the movies at Fox, as far as I know."

Interesting equivocation. If you were Simon Kinberg, wouldn't you assume you were fully informed and nothing would be happening that you didn't know? What's it mean that he's putting that disclaimer in there?

"Two words, Mr. President: Plausible deniability".

If anything has/will happen with the FF that contradicts Simple Simon's verbal diahrea, the hack can just point back to that disclaimer and say he didn't know.

 

[wobbly]

I'd add he was non specific on the movies at Fox. If the FF are already off their slate for example (reversion deal already or soon to be agreed) then Marvel wouldn't be involved in a 'Fox' film.

The talk of trying again being a 'high priority' has my bullsh#t sense tingling big time.

 

[Zarex]

Who the heck does Simon think he is talking to when he threatens to follow up the mega-flop, FFINO? Fans hated it! Non-fans hated it! The film did $56M domestic! There is absolutely zero audience for this thing, and every mention of FOX crapping out more FF films subjects him to further ridicule.

I'm wondering if he's still upset about fan backlash and is just trolling at this point.

 

[ernesth100]

I wiah Marvel would go to court or something with this. Honestly, no judge in their right mind would let Fox keep the rights.

 

[Willie Lumpkin]

"Two words, Mr. President: Plausible deniability".

If anything has/will happen with the FF that contradicts Simple Simon's verbal diahrea, the hack can just point back to that disclaimer and say he didn't know.

That's what I'm thinking. If you imagine you're him and you absolutely know, as Fox's Marvel Property Guru, that there have been no discussions, why would you couch it like that?

His wording makes me think that as Fox's Marvel Property Guru, he knows or suspects there has at least been some talk.

 

[Dark Raven]

That's what I'm thinking. If you imagine you're him and you absolutely know, as Fox's Marvel Property Guru, that there have been no discussions, why would you couch it like that?

His wording makes me think that as Fox's Marvel Property Guru, he knows or suspects there has at least been some talk.

Maybe he knows there's been some talk and he's not been party to it, because he's slowly finding himself demoted to the Trank scapegoat role, but he can't be sure of it.