Marvel Cancelling Fantastic Four Comics to Spite Fox?

[sonicyouth]

such a sad day for Mickey Mouse..

 

 

who would have thought Mickey Mouse could ever stoop to such lows...

 

Mammon has them all...

 

JiminyCricket, I don't know you, and Im glad.. you are sad and pathetic..

 

anyone that loves comic books or has any appreciation for the years of blood sweat and tears artists throughout the world have put into this hobby,

 

 

should be ashamed of Disney, and taking steps backward...

 

for Mammon???

 

have fun with that.. Jiminy, you pile.. gentiles me off.

 

 

 

 

[kimik]

Fantastic Four Skinned

...Marvel’s Senior VP Brevoort posted ”My denying rumors isn’t likely to keep anybody who’s prone to paranoia from panicking. But really, does this even seem remotely plausible to people? Does it make any sense? Folks have a very strange idea as to the way a business is run.”

 

But Tom knows exactly what’s going on and why, and his words were chosen with care. Because this is not a rational business choice, it is an emotional one.

 

Isaac Perlmutter, CEO of Marvel Comics and the largest single shareholder of Disney, used to be the guy in charge of Toy Biz. When Marvel bought that company, he successfully negotiated himself onto the Marvel board. And then when the publisher went bankrupt, was the man who successfully negotiated Marvel Comics out of that situation, becoming Marvel’s largest shareholder and CEO in the process. He is the man most responsible for Marvel Studios making films themselves. And it was he who decided to sell Marvel to Disney, and made over a billion in the process, to add to his existing billion – he is the richest man in comics by a long way.

 

Known for his penny pinching at every level, and rather personal politics when making decisions, the story we first reported about the Fantastic Four titles being cancelled to snub Fox Studios smacked of his decision making. And that’s what we eventually learned. Despite some people’s beliefs about Disney, we have been told by Marvel and close-to-Marvel sources that this an Ike decision. It’s simply down to Fox putting out the Fantastic Four movie, and him being fed up when he sees the Fantastic Four comic being promoted or even published, even in the Marvel offices and what he sees as giving free publicity to the film...

 

As Louise said yesterday, cutting off his nose to spite his face.

 

This quote from the article pretty much sums it up:

 

And while Ike wouldn’t be so insane to cancel the high selling X-Men comics, he has seen their promotional use reduced. And the lesser selling Fantastic Four is much less of a problem to cancel. It’s not being cancelled for low sales, many Marvel books sell worse (although more people have now read Bleeding Cool’s initial report than, well, read the Fantastic Four).

 

The FF is now a second or arguably third tier comic property in line with DD and Thor. Add in the fact that Fox made two movies that did not do well at the box office, and Marvel can easily cancel the title.

[Bosco685]

Fantastic Four Skinned

 

Wow! Is that what is behind this?

 

Already the creation of new IP, new characters in Fantastic Four and X-Men comics has been discouraged by Ike as all characters associated with each book are instantly accessible for free by Fox, no matter when they were created.

 

Don't add new characters, or else Fox can instantly use them in movies?

 

[General Zod]

Marvel declares all out war on Fox? ...well, according to Rob Liefeld.

 

I was thinking about creating a thread about Rob's tweet history. Between dissing DC editors, writers and Stan Lee (over Deadpool), he sure has a penchant for burning bridges. Didn't know if making the thread would be too TMZ-like.

[General Zod]

such a sad day for Mickey Mouse..

 

 

who would have thought Mickey Mouse could ever stoop to such lows...

 

Mammon has them all...

 

JiminyCricket, I don't know you, and Im glad.. you are sad and pathetic..

 

anyone that loves comic books or has any appreciation for the years of blood sweat and tears artists throughout the world have put into this hobby,

 

 

should be ashamed of Disney, and taking steps backward...

 

for Mammon???

 

have fun with that.. Jiminy, you pile.. gentiles me off.

 

 

 

 

I scrolled back up and down the thread and I, uh, I'm lost. What is this in reference to? Do you need some meds?

[VintageComics]

such a sad day for Mickey Mouse..

 

 

who would have thought Mickey Mouse could ever stoop to such lows...

 

Mammon has them all...

 

JiminyCricket, I don't know you, and Im glad.. you are sad and pathetic..

 

anyone that loves comic books or has any appreciation for the years of blood sweat and tears artists throughout the world have put into this hobby,

 

 

should be ashamed of Disney, and taking steps backward...

 

for Mammon???

 

have fun with that.. Jiminy, you pile.. gentiles me off.

 

 

 

 

I scrolled back up and down the thread and I, uh, I'm lost. What is this in reference to? Do you need some meds?

 

Mammon is a biblical word that is synonymous with greed.

[Bropper]

Maybe if Marvel trades the rights of Loki, Bullseye, Mandarin, Kingpin and Thanos to Fox for the rights of the Toad the relationship between the 2 companies would get better. No need to go to Disney to get approval of the trade. Just hold a press conference at Marvel headquarters.

 

And since Fox probably has the rights to the Skrulls you can give a shout out to them in Skrull. Win win. Seriously, Toad has been mistreated for years. Time for him to come back home to Marvel. Poor Toad.

[Buzzetta]

I am starting to believe that this may be the fallout of having two Quicksilvers.

 

If it is deemed that any character created in the pages of X-Men and Fantastic Four becomes fair use to use by Fox then it would make sense to cancel the title of Fantastic Four and slide those characters into a different book. If the characters are being used under a different title then technically Mr. Fantastic, The Invisible Girl, the Human Torch and the Thing are teaming up with non-FF characters and thus their rights are not allowed to go to Fox.

 

However, the argument against this is the Black Panther argument. At some point there was a cut off with what was allowed and what was not. Marvel is supposedly using the Black Panther in the Marvel Cinematic Universe. There had to have been a line somewhere in the FF contract with Fox.

 

With the X-Men, there seems to be no limit to using whatever character is deemed a mutant in the pages of Marvel. This was seen with the inclusion of Blink who was created after the X-Men contract was hammered out and the initial movie was in the planning stages.

[revat]

I am starting to believe that this may be the fallout of having two Quicksilvers.

 

If it is deemed that any character created in the pages of X-Men and Fantastic Four becomes fair use to use by Fox then it would make sense to cancel the title of Fantastic Four and slide those characters into a different book. If the characters are being used under a different title then technically Mr. Fantastic, The Invisible Girl, the Human Torch and the Thing are teaming up with non-FF characters and thus their rights are not allowed to go to Fox.

 

However, the argument against this is the Black Panther argument. At some point there was a cut off with what was allowed and what was not. Marvel is supposedly using the Black Panther in the Marvel Cinematic Universe. There had to have been a line somewhere in the FF contract with Fox.

 

With the X-Men, there seems to be no limit to using whatever character is deemed a mutant in the pages of Marvel. This was seen with the inclusion of Blink who was created after the X-Men contract was hammered out and the initial movie was in the planning stages.

 

Good points. Marvel is going to be under some extra pressure to make Quicksilver just as cool without looking like they're copying Fox in doing so. It won't be easy.

[ComicConnoisseur]

Marvel declares all out war on Fox? ...well, according to Rob Liefeld.

If this is true, then it`s a shocking turn of events for the Sony ASM Garfield saga, as two weeks ago it looked like the Fox X-Men movie franchise had a better future, but now with this news the Sony Garfield Spider-Man looks like it will be around for a much longer time.

This news if true is a stunning reversal of fortunes if i ever saw one for both the X-Men and ASM Garfield movie sagas!

[Buzzetta]

Marvel declares all out war on Fox? ...well, according to Rob Liefeld.

If this is true, then it`s a shocking turn of events for the Sony ASM Garfield saga, as two weeks ago it looked like the Fox X-Men movie franchise had a better future, but now with this news the Sony Garfield Spider-Man looks like it will be around for a much longer time.

This news if true is a stunning reversal of fortunes if i ever saw one for both the X-Men and ASM Garfield movie sagas!

 

It would not surprise me though if Sony has questioned whether or not they could use certain characters and Marvel politely declined. For example, Marvel has the rights to the Kingpin again through regaining the Daredevil rights. I doubt that Kingpin, created early on in the pages of ASM will be going to Sony.

 

Disney and Marvel is looking to regain as much control back over their intellectual property as possible. Sony and Disney may be playing 'nice' as if you remember there were talks between the two companies over the inclusion of Oscorp tower in city skyline in Avengers. However, in the end...

 

Disney wants ALL cinematic Marvel properties under its control.

 

 

[comicwiz]

Maybe Marvel has no plan. Maybe they're just doing this to be a dik and that's it.

 

There is another indirect, non-comic related issue that might soon present itself, as Disney announced it would be re-releasing the original theatrical releases of Star Wars ANH on dvd/blu-ray. My understanding is these are the versions pre-dating all the changes Lucas made for the "digital" and "special editions." The issue is that FOX owns the rights to these, so it will be interesting to see how this whole mess plays out.

[jaybuck43]

Marvel declares all out war on Fox? ...well, according to Rob Liefeld.

If this is true, then it`s a shocking turn of events for the Sony ASM Garfield saga, as two weeks ago it looked like the Fox X-Men movie franchise had a better future, but now with this news the Sony Garfield Spider-Man looks like it will be around for a much longer time.

This news if true is a stunning reversal of fortunes if i ever saw one for both the X-Men and ASM Garfield movie sagas!

 

It would not surprise me though if Sony has questioned whether or not they could use certain characters and Marvel politely declined. For example, Marvel has the rights to the Kingpin again through regaining the Daredevil rights. I doubt that Kingpin, created early on in the pages of ASM will be going to Sony.

 

Disney and Marvel is looking to regain as much control back over their intellectual property as possible. Sony and Disney may be playing 'nice' as if you remember there were talks between the two companies over the inclusion of Oscorp tower in city skyline in Avengers. However, in the end...

 

Disney wants ALL cinematic Marvel properties under its control.

 

 

The rumors that I am hearing is that due to the amount of money Marvel has to pay Fox under the licensing rights is what sent Ike over the edge. Basically the checks were getting bigger and bigger, and he finally cut a check so big that he flipped out, and the decree was sent down that Marvel was no longer supporting Fox. As such FF was canceled and Marvel/Disney is not putting the machine behind anything that they have to cut a check to Fox over. But again this is just the rumors I am hearing.

[General Zod]

such a sad day for Mickey Mouse..

 

 

who would have thought Mickey Mouse could ever stoop to such lows...

 

Mammon has them all...

 

JiminyCricket, I don't know you, and Im glad.. you are sad and pathetic..

 

anyone that loves comic books or has any appreciation for the years of blood sweat and tears artists throughout the world have put into this hobby,

 

 

should be ashamed of Disney, and taking steps backward...

 

for Mammon???

 

have fun with that.. Jiminy, you pile.. gentiles me off.

 

 

 

 

I scrolled back up and down the thread and I, uh, I'm lost. What is this in reference to? Do you need some meds?

 

Mammon is a biblical word that is synonymous with greed.

 

And where does Mickey Mouse fit in? I did see the suicidal strips but that was in a different thread.

[VintageComics]

I think in his post Mickey Mouse was symbolic for 'Disney' and he was lamenting over how Mickey could mess over Marvel so badly for the sake of greed.

 

 

[awakeintheashes]

Hey, Jaybuck, you're quoted in the same article as Liefeld. You've made it!

 

Late Night Fantastic Four Play

[bffnut]

The rumors that I am hearing is that due to the amount of money Marvel has to pay Fox under the licensing rights is what sent Ike over the edge. Basically the checks were getting bigger and bigger, and he finally cut a check so big that he flipped out, and the decree was sent down that Marvel was no longer supporting Fox. As such FF was canceled and Marvel/Disney is not putting the machine behind anything that they have to cut a check to Fox over. But again this is just the rumors I am hearing.

 

This question isn't aimed at you, jaybuck, as you were just repeating the rumor that you heard.

 

Why would Marvel pay anything to Fox? The point of a licensing agreement is to generate money to the owner of the IP. Fox pays money to Marvel whenever it uses the X-Men and FF charters to make a movie.

[revat]

The rumors that I am hearing is that due to the amount of money Marvel has to pay Fox under the licensing rights is what sent Ike over the edge. Basically the checks were getting bigger and bigger, and he finally cut a check so big that he flipped out, and the decree was sent down that Marvel was no longer supporting Fox. As such FF was canceled and Marvel/Disney is not putting the machine behind anything that they have to cut a check to Fox over. But again this is just the rumors I am hearing.

 

This question isn't aimed at you, jaybuck, as you were just repeating the rumor that you heard.

 

Why would Marvel pay anything to Fox? The point of a licensing agreement is to generate money to the owner of the IP. Fox pays money to Marvel whenever it uses the X-Men and FF charters to make a movie.

 

I don't know the specific type of agreement here, but it could be something like this:

 

1. At the point of sale in the 90's, FOX paid $XXXXX amount for the liscenses and the rights to make the FF and X-Men movies.

 

2. As part of the original agreement, it is agreed that Marvel 'kicks in' some amount $YYYYY for the actual production of each movie, as it is in their interests, FINANCIAL and CONTENTwise for the movie to be successful.

 

3. Also as a part of the original agreement, AFTER the release of the movie, MARVEL gets a royalty on the percentage of profits on the movie.

 

 

So MARVEL in theory would be happy as long as 3 is significantly larger than 2, BUT it could result in that money (from 2) being tied up for 2 years or so. BUT if the difference in 2 and 3 is relatively small (got to account for interest and/or opportunity cost), and Marvel feels like its brand is being hurt by sub par movies and they're afraid of comic movies fatigue hurting their own wildly successful movies, it might be in their best interests to try to get the rights back for FF.

 

In the past, Marvel might have said, "Hey, if they make an FF movie and we get pretty much $10M for doing nothing, cool with us." But now DISNEY says, "We could make the movie ourselves and make $200M, PLUS the added bonus of creative control AND cross promotion with our comics AND control over the release pacing of our comic movies, not to mention, we don't have to front any random monies (point 2 above) to help with the production of some other studio's movie." Also we should note that now, Marvel is owned by Disney, a DIRECT COMPETETOR of FOX.

 

 

[bffnut]

That's totally conjecture on your part, right?

 

I did a short search for the Fox/Marvel Licensing Agreement, and found the following information from a 2001 lawsuit involving a breach of contract. Unless the agreement was changed or I missed something, I don't see where Marvel gives money to Fox.

 

http://www.leagle.com/decision/2001156155FSupp2d1_1156.xml/TWENTIETH%20CENTURY%20FOX%20FILM%20CORP.%20v.%20MARVEL%20ENTERPRISES

 

"In addition to the $1.6 million purchase price, and a percentage of gross proceeds..."

 

C. 1993 Agreement

 

In October 1993, Fox and Marvel entered into an agreement (the "1993 Agreement" or "Agreement") pursuant to which Marvel licensed to Fox the exclusive right to create, produce, distribute and market theatrical motion pictures based on the "X-Men Property" (or "Property"), which refers to the "X-Men comic book series." (1993 Agreement ¶ 6.) The scope of the grant of rights was broad, although the media within which they could be exploited (i.e. theatrical motion pictures) was narrow. Paragraph 6 of the Agreement, entitled "Granted Rights," states that Property to which Fox obtained rights included (i) certain characters specified in Exhibit A to the Agreement, (ii) the so-called "origin stories" of those characters appearing in the story or screenplay of the film, (iii) all individual storylines from individual comic books other than the origin stories, and, in a catch-all provision, (iv) "all other elements relating to the Property and the Characters." (Id.) (emphasis added). This paragraph also specifies that the rights "include 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." (Id.) In addition to the $1.6 million purchase price, (Declaration of Thomas Rothman dated June 26, 2001 ("Rothman Decl.") ¶ 10)2, and a percentage of gross proceeds, (1993 Agreement ¶¶ 4, 5), Marvel was able to reserve, in Paragraph 7 of the Agreement, certain rights for itself in connection with the films to be developed by Fox.3 Other ancillary rights, which define the scope of Fox's granted rights as applied to other media, are treated in Paragraph 8, the content of which is at the center of the parties' contractual dispute in this case. Paragraph 8, entitled "Other Rights," reads in pertinent part:

Marvel reserves all television rights [based on the Property] (other than television rights with respect to the Pictures produced hereunder). However, prior to the reversion (if any) of the Rights ... Marvel shall not, without Fox's prior written consent, which consent may be withheld in Fox's sole discretion, produce, distribute or exploit or authorize the production, distribution or exploitation of any live-action motion picture for free television exhibition, pay television exhibition, non-theatrical exhibition, or home video exhibition (on cassettes or discs) or any feature-length animated motion picture for non-theatrical exhibition or home video exhibition (on cassettes or discs).4

 

(1993 Agreement ¶ 8.) The possible reversion of rights to Marvel is addressed in Paragraph 9. In effect, this paragraph sets control dates by which Fox must create sequels by requiring reversion where "Subsequent Pictures" are not made within

[155 F.Supp.2d 8]

a certain time. (Id. ¶ 9.) The reversion dates set forth in this Paragraph were extended by an amendment to the Agreement signed by the parties on or about October 10, 2000.5 (See "X-Men II" Amendment/Extension ¶ 2(d).)

 

Paragraph 11 further defines the logistics of the production of Fox's films, by requiring that Marvel must approve: (i) the "fundamental elements" of the story, namely the basic storyline, character integrity, living habitat, and conformity with the so-called "X-Men Handbook" written by Marvel; (ii) the screenplay, to the extent it substantially alters a fundamental element; (iii) costumes; (iv) the photography of scenes, to the extent it substantially alters a fundamental element; and (v) the content of director's cuts, to the extent it substantially alters a fundamental element.

 

Particularly given the catch-all provision in Paragraph 6, the scope of the license to Fox is broad, encompassing any property contained in the "X-Men Universe" of comic books that Fox "may require" in order to create and produce its films, including the right to use Marvel's copyrights and trademarks in such property as Marvel would as owner of such rights. However, Exhibit A to the Agreement limits the characters which Fox may exploit to (i) certain "Initial Characters," comprising the principal and featured characters in the approved story, screenplay, or Marvel's publications, as well as 15 other "Core Characters" from the X-Men Universe of comics, and (ii) certain "Additional Characters," who are among the characters from a limited "X-Universe" of seven comic books, which Fox may add by written notice to Marvel.6 (Ex. A to 1993 Agreement ¶¶ 1, 3, 4.)

 

Finally, Paragraph 18 of the Agreement incorporates certain "Other Terms and Conditions" into the Agreement "n accordance with Fox's standard Option/Purchase Agreement, but as such agreement would have been modified following good faith negotiation within Fox's usual parameters taking into account Marvel's and the Property's stature." (1993 Agreement ¶ 18.) While such provisions are generally designed to eliminate the future need for negotiation, this vague provision leaves additional terms and conditions largely open for negotiation based only on unspecified elements of custom.7

 

 

[dupont2005]

Maybe Marvel has no plan. Maybe they're just doing this to be a dik and that's it.

 

There is another indirect, non-comic related issue that might soon present itself, as Disney announced it would be re-releasing the original theatrical releases of Star Wars ANH on dvd/blu-ray. My understand is these are the versions predating all the changes Lucas made for the later for the "digital" and "special editions." The issue is that FOX owns the rights to these, so it will be interesting to see how this whole mess plays out.

Wow, I thought Lucas retained the rights to everything until he sold to Disney. I didn't know there was any Star Wars IP that he didn't own.

 

I wonder why Fox never released the theatrical versions? There was definitely a demand for them.