Marvel doing to film what it did to comics.

[UnrulyAppendage]

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/37037

 

I wish I could come on here and say I know otherwise, but sadly I know otherwise. There is a very very strong chance that unless David Maisel pulls his head out of his and work on this deal - you'll see Jon Favreau directing anything but an IRON MAN 2 or an AVENGERS movie.

 

While the details of Favreau's deal on the first IRON MAN are not public knowledge - he was paid an upfront fee - with real backend participation. Given the success that is clearly happening with IRON MAN - this deal is going to reward MARVEL STUDIOS greatly.

 

That said - MARVEL should look back at their own Comic History - their history of over the talent and artists that created much of their library often resulted in those artist leaving the company... creating incredibly profitable characters for other companies and for themselves - resulting in lost revenue for MARVEL that had they treated their artists fairly and justly - rewarding those that brought in the rewards for the company... well, maybe Marvel's comic branch wouldn't have been through such a grotesque roller coaster ride.

[Calamerica]

This reminds me of when I used to have a zillion shares of Occidental petroleum in the 1980's - 1990's.

 

Great talent left the company because of political pressures, glass ceilings, refusing to promote within the company, and the old Curmudgeon Armand hammer had a lot to do with that - Mr. Hammer was the exquisite example of Croneyism and did not believe in meritorious achievment with the upcoming Boomers grasping at the Seniority branched trees.

 

The talent of course went to Oxy's competitors. Being in the oil industry( now again under a microscope), this hurt Oxy's competitive base somewhat, but the company churned, plugged away as usual.

 

When Hammer died( I think it was 1992) things changed. Ms. Tomasi and others took control and actually managed to re-hire several Key Employees that were strategically helpful in their overseas operations, particularly the United Arab Emirates( UAE).

 

After I gave up on the company, sold my shares at a small loss, the company's stock has risen 6x and even had a stock split and TWO increases in the dividend.

 

Oh well.

 

Marvel did the same thing when Perelman took over, but I can't recall the year(s).

 

Perelman was upset that Jack Kirby was earning 25% of the Artist pay, and ticked Mr. Kirby off that Mr. Kirby bolted to DC. The rest is history.

 

Perelman was gone soon enough, but the damage was done. The remaining talent Marvel had must have thought that every day they worked there was their possible last day.

 

Too bad that the wrong people ate in the right places but as they are the WRONG people that don't have the vision needed to prosper properly.

 

But the other example that sticks out in my mind id the old IBM stories of the Senior Watson versus his son, Watson Jr.

It was JUNIOR that got IBM where they once were as the old man did not understand computers.

 

But once Watson Jr. was retired, whomever took his place made one BIG blunder - they passed on Bill Gates. Boy has IBM regretted that bonehead error.

 

CAL just ranting in the wee hours of the night

[WEBHEAD]

This reminds me of when I used to have a zillion shares of Occidental petroleum in the 1980's - 1990's.

 

Great talent left the company because of political pressures, glass ceilings, refusing to promote within the company, and the old Curmudgeon Armand hammer had a lot to do with that - Mr. Hammer was the exquisite example of Croneyism and did not believe in meritorious achievment with the upcoming Boomers grasping at the Seniority branched trees.

 

The talent of course went to Oxy's competitors. Being in the oil industry( now again under a microscope), this hurt Oxy's competitive base somewhat, but the company churned, plugged away as usual.

 

When Hammer died( I think it was 1992) things changed. Ms. Tomasi and others took control and actually managed to re-hire several Key Employees that were strategically helpful in their overseas operations, particularly the United Arab Emirates( UAE).

 

After I gave up on the company, sold my shares at a small loss, the company's stock has risen 6x and even had a stock split and TWO increases in the dividend.

 

Oh well.

 

Marvel did the same thing when Perelman took over, but I can't recall the year(s).

 

Perelman was upset that Jack Kirby was earning 25% of the Artist pay, and ticked Mr. Kirby off that Mr. Kirby bolted to DC. The rest is history.

 

Perelman was gone soon enough, but the damage was done. The remaining talent Marvel had must have thought that every day they worked there was their possible last day.

 

Too bad that the wrong people ate in the right places but as they are the WRONG people that don't have the vision needed to prosper properly.

 

But the other example that sticks out in my mind id the old IBM stories of the Senior Watson versus his son, Watson Jr.

It was JUNIOR that got IBM where they once were as the old man did not understand computers.

 

But once Watson Jr. was retired, whomever took his place made one BIG blunder - they passed on Bill Gates. Boy has IBM regretted that bonehead error.

 

CAL just ranting in the wee hours of the night

 

 

excellent points !

 

 

WEBHEAD

[brasseye]

It's a little after lunch time here for me... ramble away

[awe4one]

Marvel did the same thing when Perelman took over, but I can't recall the year(s).

 

Perelman was upset that Jack Kirby was earning 25% of the Artist pay, and ticked Mr. Kirby off that Mr. Kirby bolted to DC. The rest is history.

 

Cal...Perleman bought Marvel in 1989. Kirby left Marvel for DC in 1970.

 

Jim

[Wally's Comics]

Marvel did the same thing when Perelman took over, but I can't recall the year(s).

 

Perelman was upset that Jack Kirby was earning 25% of the Artist pay, and ticked Mr. Kirby off that Mr. Kirby bolted to DC. The rest is history.

 

Cal...Perleman bought Marvel in 1989. Kirby left Marvel for DC in 1970.

 

Jim

 

time travel?

 

 

[sckao]

 

I would say don't get into an uproar about this... Favreau has expressed an interest in directing the Avengers movie and the rushed schedule clearly cannot accommodate him working on Iron Man 2 and the Avengers movies at the same time.

 

I'd like to think that the issue isn't strictly monetary and that there are other aspects in negotiation here.

 

I'm also thinking they're waiting for this weekend's Hulk debut to see how well their Cinematic Marvel Universe concept is going to do. The new Hulk trailers showing Robert Downey Jr are clearly trying to connect with the Iron Man audience. (A good move in my opinion even if he only shows up in a brief scene.)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[awe4one]

I would say don't get into an uproar about this... Favreau has expressed an interest in directing the Avengers movie and the rushed schedule clearly cannot accommodate him working on Iron Man 2 and the Avengers movies at the same time.

 

I'd like to think that the issue isn't strictly monetary and that there are other aspects in negotiation here.

 

I'm also thinking they're waiting for this weekend's Hulk debut to see how well their Cinematic Marvel Universe concept is going to do. The new Hulk trailers showing Robert Downey Jr are clearly trying to connect with the Iron Man audience. (A good move in my opinion even if he only shows up in a brief scene.)

 

What I think this is is an attempt by the director, via a well placed leak, to influence negotiations that are in the preliminary stages. I don't automatically assume Marvel is in the wrong here. This smells like an orchestrated attempt to force Marvel's hand by portraying them to the fans as being stingy...

 

Jim

[joe_collector]

Right in the latest investor prospectus from Marvel, they spell out exactly what they feel will work for movies:

 

1) The character is key.

2) The concept is key.

3) The talent is to be kept cheap and low on the front-end deals - less than 15% I believe.

4) If the talent asks for too much, we recast - see #1 and #2.

 

Marvel believes, right or wrong, that Iron Man will sell tickets no matter who directs it, writes it, and stars in it - it has a built-in insufficiently_thoughtful_person fanboy audience who will take what Marvel gives them and be happy to get anything.

 

If Favreau wants a real paycheck on par with other studio ventures, too bad, there's the door sucker. Downey Jr. wants a raise since Iron Man made a bazillion dollars? Sorry sucker, Tom Selleck will work for scale and the fanboys won't care as long as we give 'em lots of CGI action.

 

And let me tell you, this strategy is really popular with mega-agencies , many of which will probably stop sending their clients to Marvel. The only reason to do these stupid funny book movies is for the cash and the potential for long-term employment through sequels - take those away and you'll be lucky to get B-list talent.

 

So get ready for a lot of very good 1st movies from Marvel, but likely declining quality as time goes by.

[shadroch]

Sounds like Disneys standard practice. Put money into the first movie and go cheap on the sequels.Once an audience is hooked on Iron Man,they go see the character,not the actor.

[HighVoltage]

I would say don't get into an uproar about this... Favreau has expressed an interest in directing the Avengers movie and the rushed schedule clearly cannot accommodate him working on Iron Man 2 and the Avengers movies at the same time.

 

I'd like to think that the issue isn't strictly monetary and that there are other aspects in negotiation here.

 

I'm also thinking they're waiting for this weekend's Hulk debut to see how well their Cinematic Marvel Universe concept is going to do. The new Hulk trailers showing Robert Downey Jr are clearly trying to connect with the Iron Man audience. (A good move in my opinion even if he only shows up in a brief scene.)

 

What I think this is is an attempt by the director, via a well placed leak, to influence negotiations that are in the preliminary stages. I don't automatically assume Marvel is in the wrong here. This smells like an orchestrated attempt to force Marvel's hand by portraying them to the fans as being stingy...

 

Jim

 

Most certainly agree here. And I agree with some of what Vince posted as well. But - Marvel can't be so vain or financially stupid as to believe that Iron Man succeeded on story and visuals alone. Downey Jr. owned that role & subsequent IM movies without him just won't be as good or bring in as much $$.

[shadroch]

Sequels don't need to make as much money to be more profitable.Hollywoods book-keeping is arcane,but follows a certain logic.

[EastEnd]

One could also argue that Favreau and Downey Jr. should be grateful to Marvel for entrusting them with this opportunity that has now catapulted both of their careers and substantially raised their asking prices for future film projects... this is particularly true of Robert Downey Jr.. Without Iron Man, both of them continue to make independent films for comparatively small dollars.

 

 

[FFB]

Your eternal and boundless optimism and faith in your fellow man has always been an inspiration to me.

 

Right in the latest investor prospectus from Marvel, they spell out exactly what they feel will work for movies:

 

1) The character is key.

2) The concept is key.

3) The talent is to be kept cheap and low on the front-end deals - less than 15% I believe.

4) If the talent asks for too much, we recast - see #1 and #2.

 

Marvel believes, right or wrong, that Iron Man will sell tickets no matter who directs it, writes it, and stars in it - it has a built-in insufficiently_thoughtful_person fanboy audience who will take what Marvel gives them and be happy to get anything.

 

If Favreau wants a real paycheck on par with other studio ventures, too bad, there's the door sucker. Downey Jr. wants a raise since Iron Man made a bazillion dollars? Sorry sucker, Tom Selleck will work for scale and the fanboys won't care as long as we give 'em lots of CGI action.

 

And let me tell you, this strategy is really popular with mega-agencies , many of which will probably stop sending their clients to Marvel. The only reason to do these stupid funny book movies is for the cash and the potential for long-term employment through sequels - take those away and you'll be lucky to get B-list talent.

 

So get ready for a lot of very good 1st movies from Marvel, but likely declining quality as time goes by.

[Subliminal]

Jon Favreau gave his side in discussions on his page. Marvel is setting dates a not even asking him or Downey if they are available when they do it.

 

Jon's myspace forum Q&A

 

 

[joe_collector]

Your eternal and boundless optimism and faith in your fellow man has always been an inspiration to me.

 

Hey, you go read it and tell us what you think.

[Calamerica]

Marvel did the same thing when Perelman took over, but I can't recall the year(s).

 

Perelman was upset that Jack Kirby was earning 25% of the Artist pay, and ticked Mr. Kirby off that Mr. Kirby bolted to DC. The rest is history.

 

Cal...Perleman bought Marvel in 1989. Kirby left Marvel for DC in 1970.

 

Jim

whoever was in charge of Marvel circa 1969 pushed Kirby to DC - whoever it was, if it was not Perleman, was upset at Kirby's cheques...

 

CAL

[awe4one]

According to this, the initial report is much to do about nothing. Like I posted before, it all sounds like negotation posturing to me...

 

Regarding Those 'Iron Man 2' Rumors...

 

Jim

[UnrulyAppendage]

According to this, the initial report is much to do about nothing. Like I posted before, it all sounds like negotation posturing to me...

 

Regarding Those 'Iron Man 2' Rumors...

 

Jim

 

I hope this is true. I don't have a vested interest in this one way or the other, but it would be a shame to see history repeated with another medium. I would hope the business model for Marvel to pay the talent based on percentage of profits. This would motivate the talent and and would keep the production costs down.

 

I am looking forward to a live action Marvel universe. I am surprised Marvel decided to let Sony renew the license to Spidey.

[joe_collector]

I am surprised Marvel decided to let Sony renew the license to Spidey.

 

Obviously, they didn't have a choice.

 

And even if the license ever did revert, anything Sony added to the story (organic web-shooters, specific costume design, plots, new characters, etc.) would remain their property.