• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Marvel Cinematic Universe |OT2| Discussion on released and future projects (spoilers)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Q

Quick

Banned
From Cracked's latest Photoplasty:

490466_v1.gif
 
Dunedain_Ranger

Dunedain_Ranger

Member
I feel like such an idiot watching Godzilla right now and it struck me the twins are
getting it on and married
I'll never look at them the same again !!
 
M

Mega Spooky

Member
The Ultimates had all kinds of crazy stuff going on.

When they showed Hawkeye's family in AoU, I was convinced they'd share the same fate as their Ultimates counterparts. Super glad they didn't lean on that.
 
R

richiek

steals Justin Bieber DVDs
Russo Brothers Say Avengers: Infinity War Concept Is That Marvel Universe Unites


When asked if they’ve had any talks of including the Guardians in Infinity War, Joe Russo responded, “That is another one that we would have to reserve as a surprise, but we will say this: People will not be disappointed in the amount of characters in the movie. The concept of Infinity War is that the Marvel universe unites to battle the greatest threat to the world and universe that you’ve ever seen, and we’re going to honor that concept.”

In regards to if they’ve started thinking about the more cosmic nature of Avengers: Infinity War as opposed to the grounded, gritty Winter Soldier and Civil War, Joe Russo said, “Yeah, we certainly have. I sat in the theater and watched Empire Strikes Back seven times in a row when I was a kid. Yeah, we're science fiction fans as well, Dungeons and Dragons. We collected all the books when we were kids. We had figurines. Anything that you could think of that has to do with fantasy or sci-fi or superheroes was in our universe. We're just going to approach the cosmic side with the same fervor that we did the earthbound work we've been doing. We also are going to work really hard to bring a psychological realism. We obviously can't bring a naturalism to it because it doesn't really exist outside of science fiction, but we can bring that psychological realism to it, to the characters, and that's going to be our focus.

Also, it's going to be our focus to explore the cosmic side, applying the same rules that we like to apply to the last two films that we've done. It ends up being the rules of physics always apply or apply as much as we can get them to apply based on what we're doing.”
Click to expand...


Russos are gonna be throwing everybody and the kitchen sink against Thanos. Awesome.
 
obin_gam

obin_gam

Member
GAMEPROFF said:
Maybe you should wait with statements like these until Thanos featured prominently in a movie as a Villain.
Click to expand...

Doubt he ever will at this pace. They have seriously failed big time building him up as a real threat. And it's not like they haven't had any chances. He's been featured three times now and not one of those times has he shown anything that me as an audience member interprets as "scary villain that will take a unification of everyone to beat".

I'm starting to think the climax of Infinity War 2 will feature all heroes fighting drones again. This time purple drones.
 
G

GAMEPROFF

Banned
obin_gam said:
Doubt he ever will at this pace. They have seriously failed big time building him up as a real threat. And it's not like they haven't had any chances. He's been featured three times now and not one of those times has he shown anything that me as an audience member interprets as "scary villain that will take a unification of everyone to beat".

I'm starting to think the climax of Infinity War 2 will feature all heroes fighting drones again. This time purple drones.
Click to expand...
Yeah, lets have this conversation again in 5 years
 
P

Pachimari

Member
All of Spider-Man, Black Panther and Vision will have strong arcs.

"It's a big movie and it includes a lot of characters. I think that a lot of them have really interesting arcs. I think Spider-Man in particular has a really fascinating arc." Said Joe Russo. Anthony Russo then chimed in and said, "Certainly Black Panther, who we introduce. Similarly there, introducing a character gives you a great opportunity to take them on a ride, you know?" Last but not least, Joe ended off the exchange by adding, "Vision goes on a journey, as well."
Click to expand...
 
G

GAMEPROFF

Banned
HP_Wuvcraft said:
Um.... why?

We're discussing how Thanos is portrayed now.
Click to expand...
Because claiming that they failed building up Thanos 10! movies and 5 years before Infinity War starts is stupid and I dont see any reason why I(!) should have this discussion now. You can do whatever you want, but I will participate maybe in 5,6 movies.
Is like stating that the gameplay of a game is shit when we only have seen rendertrailer.
 
J

jmood88

Member
peanutbutterlatte said:
I feel like if they're not going to show off Spider-Man they shouldn't be super frustrating with the vague comments about Spider-Man.

"How is Spiderman important to this movie?"

"Oh, he'll be super important. Wait and see."

"We are waiting. We want to see".

"....no."
Click to expand...
Why do you need to see him before the movie comes out?
 
TDLink

TDLink

Member
GAMEPROFF said:
Because claiming that they failed building up Thanos 10! movies and 5 years before Infinity War starts is stupid and I dont see any reason why I(!) should have this discussion now. You can do whatever you want, but I will participate maybe in 5,6 movies.
Is like stating that the gameplay of a game is shit when we only have seen rendertrailer.
Click to expand...

Eh, I think it's fair to discuss it right now. We know he for sure won't be in the next four films outside of, possibly, a post credits cameo (Civil War, Doctor Strange, Guardians 2, and Spider Man). Of the already existing MCU films, he's been in two: The Avengers and Guardians of the Galaxy. And really, even though he was "behind it all" in The Avengers, his appearance amount to nothing more than a cameo and Loki was truly the antagonist of that film. Guardians is the only film where he's a real character. And even in that movie he really only gets one scene, and then he's briefly on a skype call later. In that one scene he says some intimidating lines, but he doesn't really do anything. And Ronan betrays him, and he doesn't really do anything about that either. Now sure, he didn't have time to do anything there...but it still means they have done a pretty bad job of building him up.

Including the next 4 films where we know he will not appear, that means in 16 films they will not have built him as a credible threat. He's just the kinda goofy looking guy behind the curtain.

So prior to Infinity War that then leaves us with Thor Ragnarok and Black Panther. He could appear in either, or both, or neither. But even if he does, will it be enough of a build up? I'm not so sure.

We don't know much about Black Panther yet, but I feel like it would kind of be throwing that film under the bus to focus on Thanos. Plus it wouldn't make much sense for him already to be on Earth before Infinity War (again, outside of possibly a post credits scene). So I think Black Panther is probably out of the question.

Thor: Ragnarok is the more likely place we would see Thanos actually in the film, like Guardians. However, based on what we know that movie is already packed with characters. Including antagonists. Where would there be room for Thanos? He definitely isn't the main antagonist. Maybe there will in fact be a scene where he raids the Asgard vault or something, but I don't think that's going to be a major part of the movie. Considering all the characters we know are in Ragnarok, my guess is that if Thanos appears then his screen time will be similar to Guardians. Ie, not very much. If that's the case I can't really see him as being much more developed before Infinity War begins.

Let's also keep in mind that (as far as I'm aware) none of the MCU people have said that Thanos will appear again before Infinity War.

All that said, even if all he gets is the two Infinity War movies he should have plenty of time to be developed and more well rounded than prior baddies. But if their goal was to make him intimidating and "built up" from a post credits cameo and then one conversation in Guardians...I think they failed.
 
G

GAMEPROFF

Banned
And would agree if thats all but since I dont have seen the another ten, so I continue to think that this discussion is unnecesary this at this point.

And keep in mind. Until yesterday, the word was that Spider-Man will have a small cameo and yesterday the Russos said that he will have a big arc.
 
D

duckroll

Member
I dunno how I feel about Civil War at this point. I want to trust the Russos, but I wanted to trust Whedon too. Marvel definitely has their requirements for these big tentpoles, but I want a cohesive and focused story. I'm not convinced you can actually have satisfying arcs and journeys for characters who have never been in the cinematic universe before like Spider-man and Black Panther, and ALSO tell a complete and focused Captain America centric story with the Civil War theme holding it all together. It just feels like too much. And introducing Wakanda too?

I mean, I want to believe this is all going to work out great. But... I'm sure some people want to believe in Santa Claus too.
 
TDLink

TDLink

Member
GAMEPROFF said:
And would agree if thats all but since I dont have seen the another ten, so I continue to think that this discussion is unnecesary this at this point.

And keep in mind. Until yesterday, the word was that Spider-Man will have a small cameo and yesterday the Russos said that he will have a big arc.
Click to expand...

No one has ever said Spider-Man would be a cameo in Civil War. They said it would be the first film he appeared in prior to his own in the MCU. The size of the role he has in Civil War has been debated, but the Russos saying he has an arc is the first real descriptor.

And like I summed up in my post, you don't have to see the next 10 to realize that Thanos won't be in most of them. The creators of these movies and MCU top brass have said he will not be in Civil War, will not be in Doctor Strange, will not be in Guardians 2, and will not be in Spider-Man.

duckroll said:
I dunno how I feel about Civil War at this point. I want to trust the Russos, but I wanted to trust Whedon too. Marvel definitely has their requirements for these big tentpoles, but I want a cohesive and focused story. I'm not convinced you can actually have satisfying arcs and journeys for characters who have never been in the cinematic universe before like Spider-man and Black Panther, and ALSO tell a complete and focused Captain America centric story with the Civil War theme holding it all together. It just feels like too much. And introducing Wakanda too?

I mean, I want to believe this is all going to work out great. But... I'm sure some people want to believe in Santa Claus too.
Click to expand...

This is how I feel about it too. Arcs for Vision and Black Panther aren't what I want in a Captain America film. That said, the trailer made it seem like despite all the characters the story focus was staying on Captain America and Bucky...which is good. I'm cautiously optimistic right now.
 
M

Magwik

Banned
TDLink said:
No one has ever said Spider-Man would be a cameo in Civil War. They said it would be the first film he appeared in prior to his own in the MCU. The size of the role he has in Civil War has been debated, but the Russos saying he has an arc is the first real descriptor.

And like I summed up in my post, you don't have to see the next 10 to realize that Thanos won't be in most of them. The creators of these movies and MCU top brass have said he will not be in Civil War, will not be in Doctor Strange, will not be in Guardians 2, and will not be in Spider-Man.



This is how I feel about it too. Arcs for Vision and Black Panther aren't what I want in a Captain America film. That said, the trailer made it seem like despite all the characters the story focus was staying on Captain America and Bucky...which is good. I'm cautiously optimistic right now.
Click to expand...
I honestly think we are taking the word arcs too literal here. More than likely the film will deal with the characters coming into their own and defining what they stand for and who they are. Vision really didn't have that in Ultron, and it only seems logical to do so with this huge rifting conflict. I think the movie will be fine, though I find it weird how much they are suddenly talking about Spidey
 
A

AnotherDayAnotherDollar

Banned
Long post.

I'm trying to put together who owns the rights to Marvel's characters for film/TV shows/merchandise/theme parks etc. Let me know if I missed anything or if anything is outdated or wrong.

  • Marvel owns the merchandise rights to every one of their characters.
  • Marvel owns the rights to live/animated TV shows for all of their characters
    • For spiderman, Xmen, and presumably Fantastic Four, Marvel would need consent from SPE and Fox respectively in order to release a TV show with said characters
    • It is also unknown if a straight to video release is enough to maintain the license. That is, if in 2021, Fox releases a shitty straight to video, 200K budget FF movie, will the license rights reset?
  • Disney/Marvel cannot use a lot of their characters (Spidey, IronMan, Cap, Wolverine, Hulk, etc) in their Orlando theme parks, but can use in other parks worldwide and any park disney decides to open in the US west of the Mississippi. Any character that Universal is currently using on their parks is possibly theirs for perpetuity, if they want. Universal cannot use any new characters that are not already there.

Film rights:
  • Spiderman: Shared rights between Marvel and Sony Pictures. Sony has the rights and creative control for standalone movies whereas Marvel can use spiderman in their MCU movies. There is the possibility that Sony will be able to use other Marvel characters in standalone movies, but it's not confirmed. It is also unknown if Marvel will be able to use other Spidey universe characters in their movies - such as Venom. As part of the merchandising agreement in 2011, Marvel does not get a share of the film's theatrical revenue. Unknown if Marvel gets a share from the DVD/Blu-Ray/Digital distribution revenue. According to wkileak documents, unless SPE was able to change the contract to 5 years for photography and 7 years for release, then rights revert back to Marvel if Sony doesn't start production of a movie 3 years 9 months or release it 5 years 9 months after the last movie released.
    • Coincidentally, Spiderman 3 released in April/May 2007 and Amazing Spiderman began photography in December 2010 (3 years, 7 months) and released in June/July 2012 (5 years 2 months)
    • Likewise, if they don't begin photography for the next spiderman by March/April 2016, then, presumably, the remaining rights not already at marvel, i.e. solo movies, will revert back to Marvel
    • Unknown who owns the rights to animated theatrical release. Sony is releasing an animated movie in 2018, but it might be part of the deal they reached last year.
    • It is also unknown if a straight to video is enough to maintain the license
    • I am not sure what is meant by Marvel having to pay SPE $175M upfront, $35M per $1B spidey box office revenue, and $135M/10 year period as per the wikileak document. That's confusing to me because it sounds like Marvel is paying SPE to use their IP and not the other way around, which would just be weird.
  • Hulk: Movie rights belong to Marvel and Marvel is free to use him in any of their movies. Complications arise when we start talking about a standalone movies where Universal apparently has distribution - but not production - rights to any of his standalone movies. That means if Marvel/Disney produces a Hulk movie now, Universal has rights of first refusal to distribute it. It is unknown when those rights expire and revert back to Marvel.
  • Namor: Marvel has ultimate control of Namor and can use him in any of their movies, if they want to. There are some complications in using him though as Universal, Fox, and Legendary all may have some rights claims there. Unknown when those rights expire and revert back to Marvel.
  • X-Men: Fox owns the rights to XMen and all of its characters and universe. Rumor has it its deal are much more favorable than Sony's original deal on Spider man (7 years to begin photography and 10 years to release a movie). However that is just a rumor because since the 2000 XMen movie, films in the series have been released every 3 years, which makes me think the deal is more in line with Spidey's deal (3 years photography, 5 years movie release). Marvel also can't even use the word "mutant" in their movies/tv shows.
    • It is unknown if Fox just needs to release a movie in the Universe in order to keep the license or if they have to continue reusing characters as well, and if they don't, do they lose that character's right. For example, if Fox only releases Deadpool 2 in 2019 and nothing else, do they reset the whole Xmen license from that point? Certainly seems like it based on:
      The rights granted to Fox included "the right to use the title (or subtitle or portion of the title) of the Property or any component of the Property as the title of any Picture or related exploitation."
      Click to expand...
    • Scarlett Witch and Quicksilver are shared characters where both Marvel and Fox can use them in their movies
    • Unknown what share Marvel gets from each movie's revenue.
    • Unknown who owns the rights to animated theatrical release.
  • Fantastic Four: Similar to XMen, Fox owns the rights to Fantastic Four and all of its characters and universe. Its deal seems to be 7 years to begin photography and 10 years to release a movie
    • Fox began photography of the bomba FF 2015 movie in May 2014, 6 years and 11 months after the previous movie. Presumably they rushed to begin photography to keep the license and not lose it. They probably still regret losing the Daredevil/Elektra license after they rushed to try to keep it and were unable to.
    • Presumably, Fox doesn't have to begin photography until July 2022, or they will lose the license.
    • Like XMen, it is unknown if Fox just needs to release a movie in the Universe in order to keep the license or if they have to continue reusing characters as well
    • Unknown what share Marvel gets from each movie's revenue.
    • Unknown who owns the rights to animated theatrical release.
  • Marvel Recently got the license back to:
    • Man-Thing
    • Taskmaster
 
R

Razgriz-Specter

Member
AnotherDayAnotherDollar said:
Long post.

I'm trying to put together who owns the rights to Marvel's characters for film/TV shows/merchandise/theme parks etc. Let me know if I missed anything or if anything is outdated or wrong.

  • Marvel owns the merchandise rights to every one of their characters.
  • Marvel owns the rights to live/animated TV shows for all of their characters
    • For spiderman, Xmen, and presumably Fantastic Four, Marvel would need consent from SPE and Fox respectively in order to release a TV show with said characters
    • It is also unknown if a straight to video release is enough to maintain the license. That is, if in 2021, Fox releases a shitty straight to video, 200K budget FF movie, will the license rights reset?
  • Disney/Marvel cannot use a lot of their characters (Spidey, IronMan, Cap, Wolverine, Hulk, etc) in their Orlando theme parks, but can use in other parks worldwide and any park disney decides to open in the US west of the Mississippi. Any character that Universal is currently using on their parks is possibly theirs for perpetuity, if they want. Universal cannot use any new characters that are not already there.

Film rights:
  • Spiderman: Shared rights between Marvel and Sony Pictures. Sony has the rights and creative control for standalone movies whereas Marvel can use spiderman in their MCU movies. There is the possibility that Sony will be able to use other Marvel characters in standalone movies, but it's not confirmed. It is also unknown if Marvel will be able to use other Spidey universe characters in their movies - such as Venom. As part of the merchandising agreement in 2011, Marvel does not get a share of the film's theatrical revenue. Unknown if Marvel gets a share from the DVD/Blu-Ray/Digital distribution revenue. According to wkileak documents, unless SPE was able to change the contract to 5 years for photography and 7 years for release, then rights revert back to Marvel if Sony doesn't start production of a movie 3 years 9 months or release it 5 years 9 months after the last movie released.
    • Coincidentally, Spiderman 3 released in April/May 2007 and Amazing Spiderman began photography in December 2010 (3 years, 7 months) and released in June/July 2012 (5 years 2 months)
    • Likewise, if they don't begin photography for the next spiderman by March/April 2016, then, presumably, the remaining rights not already at marvel, i.e. solo movies, will revert back to Marvel
    • Unknown who owns the rights to animated theatrical release. Sony is releasing an animated movie in 2018, but it might be part of the deal they reached last year.
    • It is also unknown if a straight to video is enough to maintain the license
    • I am not sure what is meant by Marvel having to pay SPE $175M upfront, $35M per $1B spidey box office revenue, and $135M/10 year period as per the wikileak document. That's confusing to me because it sounds like Marvel is paying SPE to use their IP and not the other way around, which would just be weird.
Click to expand...
I would really like to see Spiderman stuff referenced on the tv stuff going forward.
Jessica Drew appearing all around, Daily Bugle & Oscorp being shown in NYC or being referenced.

I also wonder if Sony could do SpiderGwen or a new character like Silk.
 
R

richiek

steals Justin Bieber DVDs
For spiderman, Xmen, and presumably Fantastic Four, Marvel would need consent from SPE and Fox respectively in order to release a TV show with said characters
Click to expand...

Actually, Fox had to get Marvel's permission to make 2 new Xmen TV shows. The fact that Marvel granted permission and is working with Fox has lead to some speculation that the Fantastic Four rights may revert to Marvel in exchange for the Xmen TV rights.
 
A

AnotherDayAnotherDollar

Banned
richiek said:
Actually, Fox had to get Marvel's permission to make 2 new Xmen TV shows. The fact that Marvel granted permission and is working with Fox has lead to some speculation that the Fantastic Four rights may revert to Marvel in exchange for the Xmen TV rights.
Click to expand...

Good point, but isn't that a two way street? That is Marvel can't release them without SPE/Fox consenting and vice versa?

Regarding FF movie rights, didn't Fox and Marvel come out and deny that was the case? I'm with you though and think Marvel had to get something out of it. Not sure what though.
 
H

HP_Wuvcraft

Banned
GAMEPROFF said:
Because claiming that they failed building up Thanos 10! movies and 5 years before Infinity War starts is stupid and I dont see any reason why I(!) should have this discussion now. You can do whatever you want, but I will participate maybe in 5,6 movies.
Is like stating that the gameplay of a game is shit when we only have seen rendertrailer.
Click to expand...

But Thanos has been a major role in at least one of the films.

GAMEPROFF said:
Just wait when Peter shows up in Daredevil
Click to expand...

None of the superheroes are ever showing up in the TV shows. For not only budget reasons but because the two divisions want to keep shit separate.
 
Q

Quick

Banned
AnotherDayAnotherDollar said:
Regarding FF movie rights, didn't Fox and Marvel come out and deny that was the case? I'm with you though and think Marvel had to get something out of it. Not sure what though.
Click to expand...

The rumours of the rights to the Fantastic Four either reverting back to Marvel or being shared by the two companies have so far been shut down officially. But there's always talk on the sidelines, like rumblings of Spider-Man's movie rights would either revert of be shared, and eventually coming true.

I don't doubt that talks have probably taken place from within Fox as to what they'll do with the FF license. Maybe even going so far as to actually talk to Marvel about it. But either way, it'll probably take some time.
 
N

Nyanmaruz

Member
HP_Wuvcraft said:
None of the superheroes are ever showing up in the TV shows. For not only budget reasons but because the two divisions want to keep shit separate.
Click to expand...
Marvel really should have done what DC has done with their TV and DCEU universes in the first place if they wanted to keep their shit separated from the beginning.
There's absolutely no point for Marvel to have their TV stuff part of the MCU either than to create hype and importance for TV so people would tune in.
What's even more lame is that Marvel is giving people false hope that one day their TV stuff will finally legitimately connect to the movies.
They should just stop fucking around and come out and confirm that the two mediums are never going to connect.
 
G

guek

Banned
TDLink said:
All that said, even if all he gets is the two Infinity War movies he should have plenty of time to be developed and more well rounded than prior baddies. But if their goal was to make him intimidating and "built up" from a post credits cameo and then one conversation in Guardians...I think they failed.
Click to expand...

That wasn't their goal at all. The post-credit scenes have all been for fanservice and really nothing else. They never have any significant bearing on the plot of the movies they appear in and occasionally tie up an ancillary plot thread (like where the aether ended up at the end of Thor TDW).

Thanos only feels unsatisfying right now as a fan because fans tend to want everything, right now, right away. His appearances so far haven't been to build him up but instead designed so when he does finally take center stage, casual fans can have the enjoyment of looking back at a throwaway character they didn't really understand and have those appearances click. Doing more than what they've done would be great for us diehards that see every marvel movie but suck for the majority of viewers that are more casual fans.
 
Q

Quick

Banned
Nyanmaruz said:
Marvel really should have done what DC has done with their TV and DCEU universes in the first place if they wanted to keep their shit separated from the beginning.
There's absolutely no point for Marvel to have their TV stuff part of the MCU either than to create hype and importance for TV so people would tune in.
What's even more lame is that Marvel is giving people false hope that one day their TV stuff will finally legitimately connect to the movies.
They should just stop fucking around and come out and confirm that the two mediums are never going to connect.
Click to expand...

But it makes so much sense to keep them connected. The appeal of the MCU, other than the heroes themselves, is the fact that they all share the same universe, and are affected by actions in each movie. It's been a one-way street of secondary characters popping into Agents of SHIELD or Agent Carter, but each show is important in giving us context of the overall MCU.

The Battle of New York in The Avengers had long-lasting impact that can be seen on Agents of SHIELD, Daredevil, and Jessica Jones. Further emphasis on how the SSR was run and seeing the threads that will eventually form SHIELD is shown in Agent Carter.

Inhumans are being hyped up for the eventual Inhumans movie, too.

While it sucks that we haven't seen Agents of SHIELD make some noise in the movies, they're important in their own right.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Tom Holland’s Spider-Man Is Returning To The MCU &
News
15
2K
Kacho replied
Deadpool & Wolverine: 30 Spoiler-Filled Details From the First 35 Minutes
Spoilers
19
5K
Toots replied
Report: A Marvel 6v6 Overwatch-Style Shooter Is Coming
News
22
2K
Kurakasis replied
Disney Getting Nervous About Brie Larson(The Marvels), May Push Movie Back
2
95
9K
Grildon Tundy replied
Deadpool & Wolverine | Rotten Watch
Community
29
2K
Durien replied
Top Bottom