The Big Picture: Wrongs & Rights

 Pages 1 2 3 4 5 NEXT
 

Wrongs & Rights

MovieBob takes a close look at what it takes to get a character from the comics into the movies.

Watch Video

I want to see Black Panther, Ant-Man and Wasp, and Doctor Strange. Maybe Luke Cage and Jessica Jones? They could use another black hero. No mutants, so no Quicksilver or Scarlet Witch. And probably not the Vision, either, without Scarlet Witch. Hmmm... Moondragon?

my brother asked me why they don't make a justice league movie and that was my exact response xD

I'm pretty sure we'll be getting the Mutants back soon enough if I know anything about how Fox does business.

Man and I thought the rights with anime licensing was confusing, it looks like will be getting more, cheaply made marvel movies from now on since the last thing hollywood wants is to have Disney having a pg-13 franchise that doesn't star Johnny Deep. On the otherhand having the avengers in Kingdom Hearts 3 would cause the internet to go nuts, unlike the kingdom hearts wiki's april fools joke about Akaranger(from Goranger) being a hidden boss in the japanese 3ds kingdom hearts game.

http://kingdomhearts.wikia.com/wiki/AkaRenger

I know Marvel is planning Black Panther, Antman, Luke Cage, Doctor Strange, Power Pack and Inhumans films. As for DC ignoring the whole Superman mess the major problem they have is a lot of there characters outside of Batman don't translate well to other media.

From what I heard, The Punisher has gone back to Marvel. Movies didn't make that much money (second one was okay though) and there are no plans for another one by other studios.

Not sure how or if they'll use him considering the deal with Disney is that the movies must be PG-13.

I looked at the title and thought 'oh god not another lecture on how racist or inappropriate something is', but then I found this instead.

That was kind of interesting (coming from someone who doesn't know the characters who are under dispute).

Isn't the Superman movie license held by the creator's estate with comic rights to DC/TimeWarner and movie rights to a different studio?

Also: it doesn't just apply to media.

so..so confusing. Seriously how people keep up with all of this?

or it's just that DC's characters are INFINITELY more difficult to write for considering how things are set up. They're very idealized which doesn't exactly make for plausible drama unless you go through heavy rewrites. By no means are they bad characters, but most of them don't have the right kind of baggage. Batman is easy to write for considering his origin story.

Well, as disappointing as it is that the X-Men and the Avengers can't cross over, I can at least console myself with the fact that First Class was really good. Kind of the exception, though. Other than Spider-Man (which tanked at the third film) or X-Men (which arguably tanked on the third film [I liked it well enough] but definitely tanked on the fourth film), what Marvel movies not produced by Marvel themselves have actually been any good?

That explains why all the Avengers tie-ins are done well why the new Ghost Rider and Spiderman films are complete bullocks.

This also means that sense Fox owns mutants we'll never get a good Deadpool movie ;_;

Life is cruel.

How long though do they have to wait before Disney can say "Your clearly have no serious intentions to actually make this movie any time soon." cause I'm pretty sure Daredevil, Blade and Fantastic Four should be up for reclaiming now.

DVS BSTrD:
I'm pretty sure we'll be getting the Mutants back soon enough if I know anything about how Fox does business.

I'm guessing Disney would have to offer them a lot of money. Like in Billions.

OMG, this is perfect! I've been trying to explain to people why we won't be seeing Spider-Man, Wolverine, etc. in a theoretical Avengers 2 movie, and this is going to REALLY help out!

TheEnglishman:
How long though do they have to wait before Disney can say "Your clearly have no serious intentions to actually make this movie any time soon." cause I'm pretty sure Daredevil, Blade and Fantastic Four should be up for reclaiming now.

It's probably in the fine print of the actual agreement but My guess is something like 5 to 10 years. So yeah that's good for blade but not the other 2.

This is all really obvious, and the most unfortunate thing is that people will now cite it verbatim for no other reason than MovieBob said it.

...Which is fine in this case, I guess, but for the wrong reasons.

I still really would like to see cameos of guys from other studios, but I do understand it won't happen. What we want and what can be done are often completely different scenarios.

Also, I want a good Daredevil movie, so yes, I do want another Daredevil movie. And I will NOT cry if it's a reboot.

DVS BSTrD:
I'm pretty sure we'll be getting the Mutants back soon enough if I know anything about how Fox does business.

Nah.

See, they can keep rebooting things. They could literally do another X-Men reboot next year and keep the rights going, make a decent amount of cash, and prevent that future boo-boo. Since a reboot can mean completely new cast, they don't run into the problem they do with several TV series and since they have to worry about the reversion of rights they cannot afford to treat it the same as most of their projects.

Thankfully, Marvel does have a bit of material to work with within their own series of movies, don't they? Take War Machine, for example. We know he exists in the continuity of the movies, and, he didn't show up in The Avengers (which I was a bit sad about). Likewise, isn't Marvel already working on plans for movies for more "obscure" characters, like Doctor Strange and the like?

TheEnglishman:
How long though do they have to wait before Disney can say "Your clearly have no serious intentions to actually make this movie any time soon." cause I'm pretty sure Daredevil, Blade and Fantastic Four should be up for reclaiming now.

Fantastic 4 is only 5 years old and they've got a project in progress. Daredevil also has a attempt at a movie in progress.

"clearly no intent" is hard to demonstrate here.

The rights to Blade may go back far enough that they can literally sit on it. Bob makes the concept sound really old, but it's a relatively novel concept to go "you're not using it, so we get it back."

Disney has always been notorious for lobbying the government to increase the number of years that creative works stay out of the public domain. The reason IP and copyright laws have gotten the way they are is probably because of them. I guess we'll never get that crossover when Captain America meets the Fantastic Four and realizes that he and Johnny are the same person (maybe in a weird, Fight Club sort of way).

Speaking of future Avengers, I'm pretty sure that Edgar Wright is still going to make an Ant-Man movie. It's strange that Marvel would pick a stylish and semi-author director like Wright, since they tend to pick more workmanlike directors that can get the job done quickly and cheaply, like Jon Favreau and Joe Johnston. Regardless, with Edgar Wright directing the film the result will probably be spectacular, but not make as much money as Disney would have hoped.

Really want to know more about the spiderman disappointment rumors. whered you hear that bob?

edit nvm

http://badassdigest.com/2012/04/26/transformers-writers-to-pen-amazing-spider-man-sequel/

I'm confused. Is Deadpool considered a mutant now? I thought his regeneration factor was created after he was born.

"There is some dispute over who owns the rights to Namor, the Sub-Mariner"

And yet...no one cares. Because seriously, a Sub-Mariner movie would be only slightly more exciting than an Aquaman movie.

Good video though, nice to get a little more info on this stuff.

"...aside from Batman, Warner Bros. seems to really suck at this."

This just in, Bob has made a massive understatement. Film at 11.

I wouldn't mind seeing a Runaways movie.

The rights for both Punisher AND Blade have already reverted to Marvel Studios. http://www.comicbookmovie.com/blade_movies/news/?a=42706

DemBones:
Disney has always been notorious for lobbying the government to increase the number of years that creative works stay out of the public domain. The reason IP and copyright laws have gotten the way they are is probably because of them.

This is a different set of IP and copyright laws than the one you're thinking of. This is an IP use law. It's not the same as the IP creation law.

If I created a character, that is my IP.
If you want to make a movie of my character, I can give you permission to use my IP, as long as you give me some money.

That's how this works.

Dude I want Antman and the wasp in their own movie.

I'm happy any time someone points out just how much money Warner Bros. ISN'T making by producing good DC Comics movies. Nobody beats the House of Ideas. It'd make me just pee myself with delight if Avengers outperformed Dark Knight Rises, and I bet it will. I saw that hovercraft thing in the last DKR trailer and facepalmed.

upgray3dd:
I'm confused. Is Deadpool considered a mutant now? I thought his regeneration factor was created after he was born.

Yes, but more than anything, he's a supporting character for the X-Men. His origin story is tied into Wolverine's, he's part of X-Force, used to hand around with Cable a lot etc.

I believe Marvel Studios has the Blade and Punisher rights returned to them.

http://www.comicmix.com/news/2011/07/26/marvel-studios-regains-punisher-and-blade/

Edit: Just scrolled up after posting this, I have been ninja'd. :(

Still I really hope all those character film licenses go back to Marvel Studios.

Going forward, Dr. Strange is the next logical choice for a stand-alone hero. He's of a different flavor from the other heroes (magic, as opposed to miscellaneous science or mythological gods), so there's room for something new.

Lots of Ant-Man friends out there, but I don't know that he could work in a stand-alone. Also, we have to ask if he's really a different enough character to add to the ensemble. Troubled science guy? We got that covered twice. He'd have to be in a shared movie (like how Black Widow was introduced via Iron Man, or Hawkeye through Thor).

Black Panther is, I feel, a character whose time has passed -- the "everything African is tribal and jungley" era in comics. The only viable reason to run with him is the racial homogeneity of the current team. That leaves us Luke Cage... and I'm not sure he's the best way to go, either. A better choice, for my money, would be a recasting of either Dr. Strange or Ant-Man as non-white.

Dr. Strange could work very well under a different race or ethnicity, as long as we avoid the tendency to make "magical minorities" so overbearingly stereotypical (basically, don't make a black Dr. Strange look like the James Bond Baron Samedi). But then again, why focus only on black? Why not Hispanic Central or South American? Indian?

Can the Escapist get in trouble for having (not)Rouge and (not)Iron Man in their ad bumper for the publisher's club? Or does that fall under "original character, do not steal"

upgray3dd:
I'm confused. Is Deadpool considered a mutant now? I thought his regeneration factor was created after he was born.

Deadpool is weapon x based which sets him as an x-men villain (in the same sense of lady deathstrike or the shi'ar,i forget how its spelt apologies)

Lex Darko:
I wouldn't mind seeing a Runaways movie.

There was talk of both series or a film, however i don't think its gone further than scripts. I too would love it. Shame that marvel fumbled that series though :(

 Pages 1 2 3 4 5 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here