Stan Lee Returns To Marvel Studios 1 1

[troydivision1]

The 20-year deal includes future appearances in Marvel movies and TV series, along with apparel and theme park experiences.

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-news/stan-lee-marvel-studios-licensing-deal-1235149039/

 

[Phicks]

This is really creepy.  And wrong.

[JC25427N]

Well before everyone jumps off the deep end with pitchforks without actually reading the article and only reading OP's one line, the jist I got from the article is that the brand "Stan Lee" was licensed to Marvel. The article states they're pretty much gonna use it minimally for now (just existing audio/video to use in marketing, merchandise, theme parks). But this would give them the right to basically digitally recreate him to stick him in movies and things of that nature like the one line the OP quoted (The article explicitly states they DON'T plan on doing this but they basically have the license to do that, but it is a slippery slope so I understand the kneejerk reactions)

 

 

Edited May 19, 2022 by JC25427N

[s-man]

I hear they will be doing a recreation of just his moustache in a spin-off of Monsters Inc. called Moustache Inc.

His 'stache will join Tom Selleck and Burt Reynold's on the big screen.

David Crosby looking to direct, says he would be a natural.

[mrwoogieman]

I wouldn't be surprised if those close to him in his declining years saved his used tissues, dandruff, nail clippings, etc., and are looking to partner up with an at home cloning service. Parasites!

 

[theCapraAegagrus]

On 5/18/2022 at 8:50 PM, JC25427N said:

...this would give them the right to basically digitally recreate him to stick him in movies and things of that nature like the one line the OP quoted...

Let's not shake it off as improbable, considering what they did with Tarkin in Rogue One. Including this in the deal suggests that they entirely intend on doing it, despite "not having current plans to do so". It would be awful in every way, shape, and form IMO.

[Ken Aldred]

I wouldn’t be happy seeing an Uncanny Valley version of him, as with Princess Leia in that same film. Even worse than the Grand Moff.

Edited May 19, 2022 by Ken Aldred

[Lord Gemini]

On 5/18/2022 at 7:50 PM, JC25427N said:

Well before everyone jumps off the deep end with pitchforks without actually reading the article and only reading OP's one line, the jist I got from the article is that the brand "Stan Lee" was licensed to Marvel. The article states they're pretty much gonna use it minimally for now (just existing audio/video to use in marketing, merchandise, theme parks). But this would give them the right to basically digitally recreate him to stick him in movies and things of that nature like the one line the OP quoted (The article explicitly states they DON'T plan on doing this but they basically have the license to do that, but it is a slippery slope so I understand the kneejerk reactions)

 

 

As long as the CGI is as well done as it was with Luke Skywalker in Book of Boba Fett, I'm fine with it.

[D84]

Just one more reason to hate Disney. 

[mattn792]

On 5/18/2022 at 8:21 PM, s-man said:

I hear they will be doing a recreation of just his moustache in a spin-off of Monsters Inc. called Moustache Inc.

His 'stache will join Tom Selleck and Burt Reynold's on the big screen.

David Crosby looking to direct, says he would be a natural.

[F For Fake]

On 5/19/2022 at 7:57 AM, Ken Aldred said:

I wouldn’t be happy seeing an Uncanny Valley version of him, as with Princess Leia in that same film. Even worse than the Grand Moff.

I loved Rogue One, but the Tarkin and Leia stuff was TERRIBLE. Particularly Tarkin, it was like a CGI recreation of a rubber Halloween fright mask. JUST RECAST THE PARTS. It would ultimately be more respectful than resurrecting the dead.

[mattn792]

"The deal does give Marvel permission to use Lee’s name, voice, likeness and signature in movies and television projects, as well as to use images, existing footage and existing audio recordings featuring him. The rights to use Lee’s name, voice, likeness and signature exclusively in theme parks, cruise lines and in-park merchandise were also included in the deal. Audiences and parkgoers could see Lee turn up as figures and toys, and on apparel and stationery."

Not sure what a few of you are so up in arms about, this seems like a pretty standard dead celebrity licensing deal.  They aren't selling Stan Lee blood signatures or trying to resurrect him with an A/C Delco for one last witty cameo.

[F For Fake]

As for Stan Lee, he never met a buck he wouldn't chase, so this seems oddly appropriate in his case. 

[chrisco37]

[Cat]

We've already had action figures of him, so that's not exactly new ground. It seems like a logical expansion into other areas. A biopic could do quite well, depending on how it's played. 

[Namtak]

Id rather see romita sr on screen!or even Roy Thomas or larry lieber!

[Sigur Ros]

On 5/19/2022 at 9:23 AM, D84 said:

Just one more reason to hate Disney. 

Aw, don't be $o har$h with Di$ney

 

[shadroch]

So kids twenty years from now will see Stans image in cameo spots in movies and might have to wear a Stan inspired tshirt.

The horror.  It's not like they are going to wheel his body on to sets.  I don't have a problem with this at all. 

[theCapraAegagrus]

The only problem I have is if they create CGI versions of him for live-action movies. Nothing else would bother me.

[MR SigS]

On 5/19/2022 at 9:38 AM, theCapraAegagrus said:

The only problem I have is if they create CGI versions of him for live-action movies. Nothing else would bother me.

This.

Celebrate the man, honor and remember, but don't recreate him into a digital puppet. Let him rest in peace.