- May 23, 2005
- 63,609
- 50,740
Did Disney buy the rights to the characters or do they own marvel period like they own the comics part of the brand and everything associated not just the movie or tv Rights??????
News On Future Films Based on Comics/Paranormal/Sci-Fi
- Thread in 'General' Thread starter Started by Bend_The_Knee,
- Start date
- Dec 13, 2004
- 74,801
- 62,635
All the films Marvel has the rights to that isn't owned by another studio.
Pretty much Marvel Entertainment.
Pretty much Marvel Entertainment.
Last edited:
- Feb 15, 2012
- 16,421
- 2,164
If you make a movie that flops it is not your budgets fault. Other than that there are some solid points you cant saturate the market.
Disney bought Marvel in it's entirety back in 09 for $4 billion. But Marvel had done all these stupid deals way before then. Disney has to honor the contracts Marvel already made. Right now Universal has Namor, Fox has F4, X-Men, and Deadpool, Sony has Spiderman. Everything else has gone back to Marvel.
- Jul 16, 2001
- 5,723
- 309
A movie flopping is directly related to marketing which is directly related to budget.
But also, so far all of the X-Men movies I have seen have sucked, so I imagine that trend will continue and they will most likely be flops.
But also, so far all of the X-Men movies I have seen have sucked, so I imagine that trend will continue and they will most likely be flops.
- Feb 15, 2012
- 16,421
- 2,164
^lol. I didnt word that right. I was talking about high budget movies. At that point you had the budget and misappropriated it. Also low budget movies have made a killing in the box office more than just a few times. Saw is the most famous example.
They all suck but Fox is making good money on them. Wolverine did 300 mill opening week(end?). Fox doesnt give a **** what comic fans think. A majority of the audience of these films had never heard of most of these characters a decade ago.
The X-Men franchise is not going back to Disney until superhero movies are out of style. As someone put it earlier watching a Marvel Studios X-Men flick will be something to do with your future kids/grandkids.
They all suck but Fox is making good money on them. Wolverine did 300 mill opening week(end?). Fox doesnt give a **** what comic fans think. A majority of the audience of these films had never heard of most of these characters a decade ago.
The X-Men franchise is not going back to Disney until superhero movies are out of style. As someone put it earlier watching a Marvel Studios X-Men flick will be something to do with your future kids/grandkids.
- Dec 13, 2004
- 74,801
- 62,635
Flop isn't based on the budget but I mentioned it because all these superhero films cost so much and if are out of dates and have to put a Inhumans films next to Superman vs Batman, The Hobbit, etc... then it will flop. At the end of the day, they really do not know which film will flop. Everyone though Johnny Depps name could save the Lone Ranger but they were dead wrong but could you blame them after the success of all those Pirates film? Again, I mentioned the budget because it does play a role because it is always a risky investment and those other films being made by others and Marvel still getting a small percentage is money in their pocket w/o putting up their own money.
Point is, Disney/Marvel doesn't need all the Marvel films back because it'll get wasted and put on the back burner and gather dust in their archives than making some money on it in the hand of the other studios.
I do not think so, I believe they only bought Marvel Entertainment, which concise of the films and tv shows only. I do not think they have control of the comics department, at least all I remember them talking about when DIsney bought were the films and tv show possibilities, no talks of Mickey showing up next to Spiderman in the pages of a comic book. I could be wrong though.
Point is, Disney/Marvel doesn't need all the Marvel films back because it'll get wasted and put on the back burner and gather dust in their archives than making some money on it in the hand of the other studios.
I do not think so, I believe they only bought Marvel Entertainment, which concise of the films and tv shows only. I do not think they have control of the comics department, at least all I remember them talking about when DIsney bought were the films and tv show possibilities, no talks of Mickey showing up next to Spiderman in the pages of a comic book. I could be wrong though.
- Dec 13, 2004
- 74,801
- 62,635
From the UK press conference of Thor2, Feige said they are planning on Marvel films up til 2017 so it looks like they have it all set until A3 and not much more for what happens after?
Those unknown phase 3 films will also be announced next year.
Those unknown phase 3 films will also be announced next year.
- Feb 15, 2012
- 16,421
- 2,164
Valeria Von Doom sold a toy to Disney in F4. Mckey has no place in the comics but I will check again.
- Feb 15, 2012
- 16,421
- 2,164
Disney is a conglomerate. They own ESPN, Pixar, ABC and a whole bunch of companies i cant remember but you dont see disney anywhere in any of those places except the recent agents of shield show
- Dec 13, 2004
- 74,801
- 62,635
Looking it up, then I guess Disney does own all of Marvel. It turns out Marvel Entertainment is the parent company of Marvel Comics, I though they were two different entities and that Disney only bought the movie/tv part of the company.
- Aug 23, 2004
- 14,106
- 6,328
I think they do own the comics part but they don't interfere with it.
- Feb 15, 2012
- 16,421
- 2,164
Makes sense. Disney also owns Lifetime Channel and the History Channel. Even Disney knows there are places Mickey is not welcome.
I am surprised that Star Wars comics are still being published by IDW(i think). You would think they would do that internally with Marvel's Icon branding. Or there I say integrate it to cosmic universe with different characters than the movie since that took place in the distant past.
It wouldnt matter though. You can buy a part of a company. Google owns motorolas cell phone division
I am surprised that Star Wars comics are still being published by IDW(i think). You would think they would do that internally with Marvel's Icon branding. Or there I say integrate it to cosmic universe with different characters than the movie since that took place in the distant past.
It wouldnt matter though. You can buy a part of a company. Google owns motorolas cell phone division
Last edited:
- Dec 13, 2004
- 74,801
- 62,635
Huh? Are you just looking to disagree with everything? I just said you were right and still looking for a reason to argue?
And yes, it does matter. Marvels movie rights was with Paramount, that is the studio that was mainly distributing those films. So if Disney just wanted those rights, Marvel could very well just sell those rights like they did with the other franchises but I guess with the weak sales of comics, having Disney back the comic side of the company could only help, not hurt.
- Dec 13, 2004
- 74,801
- 62,635
Feige on Daredevil and Punisher.
- Aug 23, 2004
- 14,106
- 6,328
That last line.... makes me feel confident about those characters and the Marvel movies in general
- Feb 15, 2012
- 16,421
- 2,164
I like Punisher. Dont give a **** about DD. I doubt Punisher will be part of the Avengers. Prolly just take place in the same universe. But we all know a disney Punisher film would suck. Punisher will not work with a disney tone.
I knew there was a countdown! Anyway like I said, I doubt they even moved forward with F4 in time either. They are just bull ******** being in preproduction so they wouldnt have to return the rights to their second biggest marvel franchise.
But what about Blade? Doubt disney can ignore that one. It was successful amongst fans and in the box office. It would only make sense.
I knew there was a countdown! Anyway like I said, I doubt they even moved forward with F4 in time either. They are just bull ******** being in preproduction so they wouldnt have to return the rights to their second biggest marvel franchise.
But what about Blade? Doubt disney can ignore that one. It was successful amongst fans and in the box office. It would only make sense.
Last edited:
rell826
Banned
- Apr 25, 2013
- 6,740
- 2,125
The Marvel under Disney is too light and family oriented. Never get a sense of danger or devastation. Punisher and Blade doesn't fit those molds. Maybe under the Miramax imprint but I don't see it happening.
- Jul 31, 2007
- 8,013
- 5,151
That was a retcon that got a retcon
Falcon was never really a mutant. He may turn out to be an Inhuman the way Infinity is going though.And technically Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch were X-universe characters since they were in Magneto's Brotherhood for a while but with the way X-Men was going back then it was much easier for much more successful lines to borrow and end up keeping X-characters that weren't that prominent (X-Men sales in the 60s weren't that good so it'd be easy for one editor to ask another editor for some characters not in use).
Nah, Disney owns Marvel in it's entirety. Not just the film rights. Also the animation. Marvel entertainments includes the comic publishing and tv division. That's due to Marvel comics turning in to Marvel Entertainment back in the early 2000s (cuz before they were all separate like you thought).
It's why so many comic fans have speculated and expect for their to be some sort of Marvel/Star Wars crossover in the comics (for the time being I think IDW owns the licensing rights to SW comics).
A few years ago Disney let Marvel relaunch a line of comics they owned before they bought Marvel, Crossgen comics.
For the most part though, Disney is hands off with Marvel comics and let them do what they do as long as they make a profit.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_assets_owned_by_Disney#Marvel_Entertainment
I think that's the problem you're seeing it as a Disney movie and not a Marvel movie. They chose to make their films the way they are because they want to make the most money and that means allowing kids to go see.
They're not going to alter the characters of Blade, Punisher, and Ghost Rider just for that. I think Feige is smart enough to know it won't work. So they'll be as dark as they need to be for w/e kind of vision they have. Don't expect rated R movies though. They might warp Punisher in to an action flick where he kills a lot of ppl and it's not like a movie for him needs sex or a whole lot of foul language (he can just kill them before they get to curse).
Namor being a mutant is a retcon. He was not labeled that originally. He just had the super strength and wings on his ankles which ppl realized wasn't explainable by simply being half-human half-Antlantean. The concept of mutant in the marvel universe didn't exist then cuz the Timely universe simply wasn't developed that way (even though Stan and Jack were writing and involved back then).
Last edited:
rell826
Banned
- Apr 25, 2013
- 6,740
- 2,125
Kill them before they curse. Don't half *** his character please.
- Jul 31, 2007
- 8,013
- 5,151
It wouldn't be half assing his character at all. Punisher barely talks when he's doing his thing. So what if he kills a bunch of criminals that don't get to curse at him before he kills them?
I'm just going off the past 2 Punisher films when it came to explicit acts or language. There's a way to navigate through that and still make it a great movie. Marvel could also just go the action thriller route with his movies as well.
I'm just going off the past 2 Punisher films when it came to explicit acts or language. There's a way to navigate through that and still make it a great movie. Marvel could also just go the action thriller route with his movies as well.
Last edited:
- Feb 15, 2012
- 16,421
- 2,164
Yah and Jean Grey being a telepath was also a retcon. As well as Beyonder being Inhuman and Scarlet Witch possessing chaos magic abilities. You can't say that a character doesnt have those things simply because they were retconned.
- Feb 15, 2012
- 16,421
- 2,164
An even better example is Vulcan, the third Summers Brother, was not created until 2006 but if you list the order in which characters joined the X-Men he was 14th-ish (including Xavier) and was part of Xaviers secret team meaning he joined before Storm, Colossus, Banshee, and Wolverine despite being created a few decades later. But you can't say he wasnt an X-man because it was a retcon
Last edited:
- Dec 13, 2004
- 74,801
- 62,635
Retcon or not, there are blurred lines between mutants and non-mutants in Marvels Universe, retcon or not.
Falcon might be a mutant now but he will never be mentioned in the Avengers or Capt. America film because Fox has the rights to the distinction.
The point I was trying to make is that just because Namor was labeled a "mutant" in some point in his life doesn't mean he is suppose to be in the XMen universe (which Sunshine was saying that he should be) and be strictly owned by Fox. Namor has actually been associated more with the Avengers than XMen too.
Deadpool is big enough of a name as his own franchise (and not a mutant might I add though they might have made him one from origins) and the talks of him returning to Marvel if not used means he is not necessarily part of the XMen universe deal, he has his own rights separate from the XMen.
Falcon might be a mutant now but he will never be mentioned in the Avengers or Capt. America film because Fox has the rights to the distinction.
The point I was trying to make is that just because Namor was labeled a "mutant" in some point in his life doesn't mean he is suppose to be in the XMen universe (which Sunshine was saying that he should be) and be strictly owned by Fox. Namor has actually been associated more with the Avengers than XMen too.
Deadpool is big enough of a name as his own franchise (and not a mutant might I add though they might have made him one from origins) and the talks of him returning to Marvel if not used means he is not necessarily part of the XMen universe deal, he has his own rights separate from the XMen.
Last edited:
- Feb 15, 2012
- 16,421
- 2,164
Yah I know I was wrong. Scarlet and Quick example proved your point.
Even in the X-Comics they always make the distinction that he is not a mutant anyway. He had get mutant dna on his body to distract a Sentinel from attacking cable and hope in Cable 25 (recent volume)
He is only associated to the X-Men because he was introduced in an issue of New Mutants and he often sides with them. Even was a main character in Uncanny X-Force Vol. 1
Even in the X-Comics they always make the distinction that he is not a mutant anyway. He had get mutant dna on his body to distract a Sentinel from attacking cable and hope in Cable 25 (recent volume)
He is only associated to the X-Men because he was introduced in an issue of New Mutants and he often sides with them. Even was a main character in Uncanny X-Force Vol. 1
Last edited:
rell826
Banned
- Apr 25, 2013
- 6,740
- 2,125
I've never understood the appeal Deadpool has. Could someone explain it to me in non-essay format.
