Sequels X-Men Live-Action TV Show in Development at Fox

[Val_Zod]

Money is nothing?

Depends. 100 million is nothing for them. They make more on average between film profits and merchandise. There is no one way in which your scenario is any more likely. A proper deal is one where both parties gain something out of it.

Your scenario far to favors Fox. With the idea of Marvel getting the FF in exchange for allowing Fox to produce, no less help them in the endeavor means

Fox gets to have Marvel's help and input to expand their Xmen brand

Marvel gets access to the FF and all the ancillary characters to play with in future films, as well as start marketing them alongside the MCU heroes

 

[def28]

Money isn't necessarily great unless it was a pretty significant amount. Marvel has a TON of television plans (possibly including Most Wanted and Damage Control) and a Fox show could slow down progress on something they 100% own.

It's not gonna slow things down. Obviously it has to be a decent amount of cash. The fact they can't do anything with these X characters yet they will be around regardless it just makes sense to actually get something out of it.

Depends. 100 million is nothing for them. They make more on average between film profits and merchandise. There is no one way in which your scenario is any more likely. A proper deal is one where both parties gain something out of it.

No ****, I just disagree with you that the money Marvel can potentially pull through X-Men won't be worth it. I'm not just talking tv.

 

[Eddie]

The thing is, though, that Marvel 100% can do X-Men on television without Fox. It has to be animated, but they've done it multiple times (Wolverine & the X-Men, Marvel Anime, etc.). Fox needs Marvel way more than Marvel needs Fox on this one, especially as an animated series would likely make Marvel/Disney more money in merchandise revenue.

 

[def28]

But who's to say we are not getting a new animated series as well? Marvel are not idiots, if they made this deal without any property or character trading there's obviously something to gain.

 

[Flint Marko]

You were completely wrong about the success of the FF film and the terms of the Spidey deal, so forgive me if I don't take your word as gospel.

Reversion won't be announced until after FOX squeezes a few bucks from FFINO DVD and streaming sales. I'm not holding my breath, as an announcement may not happen until 2016.

I'm not getting my hopes up, but I do think it's in the cards. I'm not putting any stock in it as I don't know if the two studios are going to see eye to eye on FF anytime soon, but for now it's within the realm of possibility.

 

[Val_Zod]

It's not gonna slow things down. Obviously it has to be a decent amount of cash. The fact they can't do anything with these X characters yet they will be around regardless it just makes sense to actually get something out of it.


No ****, I just disagree with you that the money Marvel can potentially pull through X-Men won't be worth it. I'm not just talking tv.

If you knew that, then you wouldn't be disagreeing with me.

 

[Eddie]

But who's to say we are not getting a new animated series as well? Marvel are not idiots, if they made this deal without any property or character trading there's obviously something to gain.

A new animated series doesn't require Fox, though. Making a deal has no effect on that. They've done quite a bit of X-Men animation without Fox. Hell, they used Shawn Ashmore as Iceman in one of them without Fox.

 

[def28]

A new animated series doesn't require Fox, though. Making a deal has no effect on that. They've done quite a bit of X-Men animation without Fox. Hell, they used Shawn Ashmore as Iceman in one of them without Fox.

Not saying it does. But there was a halt on all things animated X-Men other then Deadpool, Wolverine and Marvel Disk Wars for quite sometime. If something does pop up, this continues a trend of Marvel getting more friendly with their X-Men properties.

 

[Zarex]

But who's to say we are not getting a new animated series as well? Marvel are not idiots, if they made this deal without any property or character trading there's obviously something to gain.

Back in 2012 FOX requested an extension of their Daredevil live action rights. No new rights, mind you. Simply an extension of an existing deal. And the widely reporting asking price from Marvel for this extension was not money. It was the rights to the Silver Surfer and Galactus.

Disney/Marvel understands that any licensing fee from FOX pales in comparison to the revenue they can generate themselves by bringing back the live action rights to their characters. I would be stunned if early reversion of the FF rights weren't a key part of Marvel's compensation for conceding control over Marvel branded television programming.

 

[def28]

Back in 2012 FOX requested an extension of their Daredevil live action rights. No new rights, mind you. Simply an extension of an existing deal. And the widely reporting asking price from Marvel for this extension was not money. It was the rights to the Silver Surfer and Galactus.

I'm aware of that, we've discussed this for years now.

Again, I ****ing hope it's the rights. SS is one of my favorite characters and I hate that he's not in the MCU. But I disagree with the few of you who think that is the only thing to gain here. Or the only way a deal could have been made.

 

[Mr. Youtube]

Given that Constantin Films or whatever owns the F4 character rights I've read, does that mean that Fox could alter their sublicense to include Disney? Theoretically it seems possible unless there is a specific clause denying it.

 

[def28]

http://birthmoviesdeath.com/2015/10/14/the-x-men-get-into-the-tv-game-with-legion-and-hellfire

Some of Faraci's pov

Both of these shows are happening because Fox was able to strike a deal with Marvel; their ownership of the X-characters extended only to the movies previously. Marvel had to give their blessing and cooperation for this. Some online have decided this means Marvel Studios will be getting the X-Men back for some reason, but if anything this means the opposite - it only solidifies Fox being in the X-game for a long time (and Bryan Singer being along as well, as he's exec producing both shows). Could Fox have handed something else back, like Fantastic Four? Again, doubtful. This just feels like a money deal from where I'm sitting. Marvel couldn't really do anything with the X-characters on TV anyway (see the Mutant X lawsuit), so why not take cash from Fox as they try to figure out TV series for these guys?

Again, what's interesting is that Fox is using less popular, less well-known characters and going with offbeat concepts. Legion will probably barely feel like a superhero show (but I bet it feels like Mr. Robot!), while who knows what Hellfire will be like. I'll be following the development of these shows with great interest.

 

[CaptainWagner]

I just want my action figures

And not these questionable-looking ones Hasbro has been churning out. I want a return to form for the Marvel Legends line.

Hopefully this new deal, whatever it is, is a step in that direction.

Well, Hasbro did just aa line of X-Men Legends coming out next year, maybe they got wind of the deal beforehand.

Anyway, I'm very hyped for Hellfire (Is it too much to hope for Jones and Bacon?) Legion, I couldn't care less about the character, but with the Fargo showrunner involved, it has my attention.

 

[Zarex]

Given that Constantin Films or whatever owns the F4 character rights I've read, does that mean that Fox could alter their sublicense to include Disney? Theoretically it seems possible unless there is a specific clause denying it.

Constantin sold the rights to FOX and gets a check and a credit for their trouble. My guess is that company's involvement with the FF will end once FOX allows the live action rights to revert to the owner.

 

[Asteroid-Man]

except that's not going to happen.Singer,Donnor,and Kinberg are exec producing both shows.they have already "rebooted" the films and you
have deadpool,gambit,and the new mutants.and apocalypse defently won't be last X-Men films.

The character choosen obviously aren't those they are plans for in films.

We know the film and TV divisons of marvel are different now.I bet the chairman of disney had to step in for tv shows to happen.for marvel and Fox to co-produce tv shows and for Singer,Donnor,and Kinberg to be executive producers means unlike Spider-man this isn't cause where marvel basilly got everything except for Sony distributing the solo films.

already these shows said less like informercials for films like agents of shields Is.AOS now is basiclly setting up the inhumans film inless marvel stops trying to phase out Mutants for Inhumans.

Singer may direct pilot for one the shows I suspect.

Allow me to explain my post...

Essentially, after AoA, the main actors are out. AoA is also Singer's swan song, Jackman is out (after Wolverine 3) and so is the original cast. Soft reboots never do well with public opinion. AoA is supposed to end the X-Men stories up until now and Wolverine is supposed to be like an epilogue (not including Deadpool as it's more of a wildcard movie).

Based on what we've been hearing about Gambit, it'll likely tank - Deadpool might not do so well either as much as I want it to be good.

Fox has power now - they have more leverage for selling/making deals using X-Men. FF tanked, if Gambit tanks and Deadpool doesn't do well critically (or potentially financially as it is an R rating) and the audience doesn't adapt to the full recast of the X-Men universe or enjoy the TV shows (which are very obscure titles) they'll have absolutely no footing and will have lost on potentially a billion dollars of valuation leverage for negotiations.


It's like playing the stocks - sell just as you're coming off of the peak, not after you've run it into the ground.

 

[Dasher10]

Allow me to explain my post...

Essentially, after AoA, the main actors are out. AoA is also Singer's swan song, Jackman is out (after Wolverine 3) and so is the original cast. Soft reboots never do well with public opinion. AoA is supposed to end the X-Men stories up until now and Wolverine is supposed to be like an epilogue (not including Deadpool as it's more of a wildcard movie).

Based on what we've been hearing about Gambit, it'll likely tank - Deadpool might not do so well either as much as I want it to be good.

Fox has power now - they have more leverage for selling/making deals using X-Men. FF tanked, if Gambit tanks and Deadpool doesn't do well critically (or potentially financially as it is an R rating) and the audience doesn't adapt to the full recast of the X-Men universe or enjoy the TV shows (which are very obscure titles) they'll have absolutely no footing and will have lost on potentially a billion dollars of valuation leverage for negotiations.


It's like playing the stocks - sell just as you're coming off of the peak, not after you've run it into the ground.

Yeah, they never do well. Nobody liked The Living Daylights, Goldeneye or Casino Royale.

 

[SuperT]

Allow me to explain my post...

Essentially, after AoA, the main actors are out. AoA is also Singer's swan song

....huh? McAvoy, Fassbender and Hoult have all said they'd come back, it's a matter of renegotiating contracts at this point. Singer already said himself he's not leaving the X-Men franchise when he announced he was doing 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea a few months back, otherwise he wouldn't be EP on these two television shows.

They're not wasting time recasting characters like Storm, Jean Grey, Cyclops, Nightcrawler, etc. just to reboot the following movie after that just because Jackman is leaving. They're rightfully doing what they should be doing - expanding from the foundation they've already laid with First Class and DOFP. The Hellfire show being set in the 60's is proof enough they're not rebooting anything.

As far as Deadpool and Gambits performances, how could possibly assume they're going to tank or do gangbusters at the box office? Makes zero sense at all to up and reboot this franchise now.

 

[Angryfantasyfan]

I wonder how connected to the X-Men Movieverse these shows will be? Vulture.com brings up a good point:

But the news releases announcing the shows conspicuously lack any use of the terms "mutant" or "X-Men," or even any character names other than David Haller. This appears to be the closest deal Fox and Marvel have had in their notoriously chilly relationship, but we're still probably a long way away from The Young Wolverine Chronicles or Road Trippin' With Storm and Jubilee

 

[Eddie]

Or... maybe they didn't mention mutants or X-Men because it was friggin' obvious that it's about mutants from the X-Men franchise...

 

[marvelrobbins]

Bryan Singer isn't leaving franchise.he's executive producing both tv shows.
and may direct a pilot for one.He has done with a few tv projects.he already
said he isn't leaving films.If fox wants the next X-Men film in July 2018
then he probally produces and someone else directs.

They already recast most of characters with younger cast.these shows follow
deadpool,gambit,and new mutants expanding X-Men universe.Now i firmly expect wolverine to be last time any of original cast are in films.

 

[Angryfantasyfan]

Or... maybe they didn't mention mutants or X-Men because it was friggin' obvious that it's about mutants from the X-Men franchise...

It's not obvious to someone who isn't into X-Men comics. Legion is hardly a household name.

From Deadline.com:

Neither series has the X-Men branding though both are set in the same universe and both stem from 20th Century Fox’s Marvel deal for the rights to the X-Men franchise, which has spawned 11 movies, including several that are in the pipeline.

A different version of The Hellfire Club was previously seen as the primary antagonists of X-Men: First Class, led by Kevin Bacon’s Sebastian Shaw.

 

[Asteroid-Man]

Yeah, they never do well. Nobody liked The Living Daylights, Goldeneye or Casino Royale.

Bond is a whole other beast. Look at the Schumacher Bat-films vs the Burton ones.

....huh? McAvoy, Fassbender and Hoult have all said they'd come back, it's a matter of renegotiating contracts at this point. Singer already said himself he's not leaving the X-Men franchise when he announced he was doing 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea a few months back, otherwise he wouldn't be EP on these two television shows.

They're not wasting time recasting characters like Storm, Jean Grey, Cyclops, Nightcrawler, etc. just to reboot the following movie after that just because Jackman is leaving. They're rightfully doing what they should be doing - expanding from the foundation they've already laid with First Class and DOFP. The Hellfire show being set in the 60's is proof enough they're not rebooting anything.

If they retain the original cast and Singer is still attached as more than just a Producer, they can keep churning 'em out - I'm mainly talking about if all of these actors drop and this is a real sendoff the way Singer said it would be in his most recent interview.

As far as Deadpool and Gambits performances, how could possibly assume they're going to tank or do gangbusters at the box office? Makes zero sense at all to up and reboot this franchise now.

Bookmark my post and come back to me in a couple of years.

 

[DigificWriter]

Yeah, they never do well. Nobody liked The Living Daylights, Goldeneye or Casino Royale.

The only movie on that list that is actually a reboot is Casino Royale, and it's anything but 'soft'.

Dr. No through Die Another Day form a singular continuity, and Casino Royale through SPECTRE (so far) form an entirely separate continuity.

 

[GuestStar2004]

So hellfire will be set in the 60s? Is this official news or just assuming

 

[GuestStar2004]

Awesome news. Legion is one of the more interesting, versatile X-Men characters in recent years, with immense potential, and its awesome to see the Hellfire Club getting some love. I hope Ellen Page makes appearances on one of the shows, and that January Jones isn't anywhere near the other one.

Well if hellfire is set in the 60s Ellen page most certainly won't be showing up in that one