ComicConnoisseur Posted June 8, 2015 Share Posted June 8, 2015 Why does Human Torch look like Apollo Creed's son? Interesting perspective from this Fantastic Four fan. I thought he was joking at first, but this black guy is really upset about Johnny Storm. Warning not safe for work language 1950's war comics 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bosco685 Posted June 8, 2015 Author Share Posted June 8, 2015 Interesting perspective from this Fantastic Four fan. I thought he was joking at first, but this black guy is really upset about Johnny Storm. Warning not safe for work language At least she knows comic book history. Although I think Ultimates Nick Fury came out before the Marvel Studios' Samuel L. Jackson version. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doktor Posted June 8, 2015 Share Posted June 8, 2015 (edited) At least she knows comic book history. Although I think Ultimates Nick Fury came out before the Marvel Studios' Samuel L. Jackson version. You are correct. Bryan Hitch designed Ultimate Nick Fury around 2001 modeled after Sam Jackson. Jackson apparently found out & long story short, essentially demanded the role if they were to ever adapt for film. 7 or 8 years later, they did & he got the role. Nick Fury Jr is the one that resulted as a way for Marvel to get the movies & the 616 more in-line with each other. That he conveniently looks exactly like Ultimate Nick Fury is... well... comic books. Edited June 8, 2015 by Doktor Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bosco685 Posted June 8, 2015 Author Share Posted June 8, 2015 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bosco685 Posted June 11, 2015 Author Share Posted June 11, 2015 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prince Namor Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 Oh god... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prince Namor Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 Here's an interesting thought for those of you who love these original characters, but think this movie is going to suck.... Remember how Quicksilver was able to be in both Marvel AND Fox movies because he was in TWO different teams? Well... in the current Marvel Universe the FF will be no more... but Ben Grimm is joining... the Guardians of the Galaxy! Remember how James Gunn talked about some surprise appearances a few months back? I LOVE the idea! Keep Ben Grimm alive in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, baby! And Johnny Storm is joining... the Inhumans! Heck, we could start hearing and seeing the Inhumans on the big screen as early as the Civil War movie next spring.... This would circumvent the movie rights issue, because they're characters owned by Marvel who are NOT a part of the Fantastic Four. Man, that Disney is crafty.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chip Cataldo Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 Great points, Chuck. Here's to hoping! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davenport Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 The difference with Quicksilver was time and distance between films and appearances. Right now the FF trailers show the MARVEL logo, as opposed to the 'MARVEL Studios' logo. Do general audiences make the distinction? If FF characters show up in different films with changed actors would it confuse the hell out of audiences? Maybe, maybe not. Hard to say, really. Maybe audiences just accept characters like Thing and Human Torch at face value, doesn't matter who's in the role. 'Oh it's the Thing, sure, hey, the Human Torch, oh yeah, flame on.' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prince Namor Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 Here's another scenario... Old Man Logan is joining the regular Marvel Universe. In a few years, Hugh Jackman will be done with XAOA and the final Wolverine movie... he'll be free to do any role he wants.... Including an Old Man Logan movie..... for Marvel Studios.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prince Namor Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 The difference with Quicksilver was time and distance between films and appearances. Right now the FF trailers show the MARVEL logo, as opposed to the 'MARVEL Studios' logo. Do general audiences make the distinction? If FF characters show up in different films with changed actors would it confuse the hell out of audiences? Maybe, maybe not. Hard to say, really. Maybe audiences just accept characters like Thing and Human Torch at face value, doesn't matter who's in the role. 'Oh it's the Thing, sure, hey, the Human Torch, oh yeah, flame on.' If Ben Grimm shows up in the GOTG2 movie, I have a feeling that a) Marvel will do it right and b) People will see that as the real Ben Grimm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marvelfangirl Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 But does Marvel Studio have the right to do this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bosco685 Posted June 11, 2015 Author Share Posted June 11, 2015 But does Marvel Studio have the right to do this? I don't think so. If they did, wouldn't Disney have done this already with the primary FF characters? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prince Namor Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 But does Marvel Studio have the right to do this? I don't think so. If they did, wouldn't Disney have done this already with the primary FF characters? If they make them a part of another team, separate from each other they can. Just like Quicksilver. Ben in the GOTG, Johnny in the Inhumans, and Old Man Logan could be a stand alone movie (different universe) or they could make him a member of the... Avengers? He's NOT the same character, he's an alternate character from a different universe. They haven't done this previously because they wanted to buy the rights back. But Fox said no. So.... Just watch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bosco685 Posted June 11, 2015 Author Share Posted June 11, 2015 With the current hard feelings between Fox and Disney's CEO, you may be on to something. Heck, he cancelled the comic titles to spite them. Why not trying and plug in the characters wherever he can? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Broke as a Joke Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 I'm pretty sure Marvel can't do that with characters that Fox has movie rights for. Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch was an odd case where they were previously Avengers but had mutant backgrounds. No matter what Marvel does with The FF going forward it wont affect the cinematic universe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davenport Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 With the current hard feelings between Fox and Disney's CEO, you may be on to something. Heck, he cancelled the comic titles to spite them. Why not trying and plug in the characters wherever he can? Maybe the step down at 21st Century Fox ,the son taking over, will change the dynamic. (emphasis mine) "...James, and other people familiar with the company, describe him as curious and a risk taker like his father. But they also cite two big differences that they like: James is less sentimental about certain assets than his father..." Who knows. Maybe some doors will re-open, hands will shake and... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doktor Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 Marvel still can't touch the FF or X-Men characters. Those that are NAMED in contracts. The contracts likely look a lot like a big list of characters regularly associated with the FF and X-franchise comics as well as a caveat of "and all associated mutants/relatives". Quicksilver & Scarlet Witch though were not NAMED characters in the contracts. They were "associated mutants" which allowed Fox to use them, but as they weren't directly named, and as they were more closely associated with the Avengers franchise, they were a special case. I guarantee that Wolverine, The Thing, Human Torch/Johnny Storm, Magneto, etc were all named characters. As Quicksilver was only on one non-X-Men X-team (X-Factor) and Scarlet Witch has never been an X-Man, they fell into a legal grey area which gave Marvel the rights to use them too, provided that they not use the 2 M-words (Mutant & Magneto). The same way that Fox was allowed to use them without ever mentioning their long-standing affiliation with the Avengers. As none of the other big characters from the FF or X franchises fall into that category except for maybe Peter Gyrich, there's not really many other grey areas. The only other big one is the Skrulls. Fox has Super Skrull. Marvel however can use the Skrull race. But since using the Super Skrull without the Skrull race is akin to using any human character without the rights to the Human race, they get the Skrull race by default. But as mentioned, since they were not specifically named, Marvel can use them. Why they have not so far is because of the very fine line between Skrull & Super Skrull. We've seen Skrulls do Super Skrull-y things and there's not really a clear delineation between them anymore (Secret Invasion being a prime example). And rather than get tied up in a court battle with Fox over it though with a judge debating the differences between a Skrull and a Super Skrull when Marvel sometimes doesn't even seem to know exactly what that line is, they've just elected to use other alien races when it's not essential to the plot that the characters be the actual Skrulls. Hence, the Chitauri in Avengers. They're the Skrulls of the Ultimate Universe, but they're not called Skrulls and not really that similar, so it's not a big deal. Plus, they were just cannon fodder anyway. But they're in the same legal grey area. It'll just probably involve a trial in front of a judge like the Toy Biz Mutant/human thing on import tariffs a decade or 2 back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Hog Posted June 12, 2015 Share Posted June 12, 2015 With the current hard feelings between Fox and Disney's CEO, you may be on to something. Heck, he cancelled the comic titles to spite them. Why not trying and plug in the characters wherever he can? Maybe the step down at 21st Century Fox ,the son taking over, will change the dynamic. (emphasis mine) "...James, and other people familiar with the company, describe him as curious and a risk taker like his father. But they also cite two big differences that they like: James is less sentimental about certain assets than his father..." Who knows. Maybe some doors will re-open, hands will shake and... I don't mean to say anything politically charged but with Fox News so focused on certain demographics, I'm AMAZED that Fox did a race swap in the first place. Before calling the movie progressive, people should be more amazed by how uncharacteristicly progressive Fox is being. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rjrjr Posted June 12, 2015 Share Posted June 12, 2015 But does Marvel Studio have the right to do this? No. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
