1/6 Hot Toys - The X-Men License - Interview with Chan

[Taibhse]

Your right, it probably wasn't an oversight, as I stated above. It was a financial move. I explained why in my previous post.

And just because they where involved with another franchise 30years ago doesn't really mean much. They didn't have the rights to the figures then either. Nor was it the same situation, as Lucas film never lost control of the rights to Star Wars. Being involved in a production of a movie does not mean you own the rights. They where essentially an investor. And they way movies where distributed back then has changed dramatically. Back then the only way to get a wide release (lots of theaters) was to partner with a major studio, as they had exclusivity rights with many theaters. That also played a part. But Lucas never licensed the film rights to fox. Fox did not have the likeness rights to Star Wars. So I guess in regards to likeness rights it's the same, but outside of that the situation is completely different

The point I was trying to make is that Star Wars pretty much wrote the book for film merchandising, so the idea that 20th Century Fox would not have learnt from that experience, seems unlikely.

 

[Josette]

So all we really know with HT and X-Men is that they have to go after the actors/actresses' likenesses individually for approval if they're to make them.....

And we know that Lawrence turned down approval for Marvel Select Mystique. Looks like they can automatically write off an HT JL Mystique....

 

[melkorjunior]

I wonder why Jennifer Lawrence turned down the Marvel Select figure...maybe she didn't like the job they did capturing her likeness? Or maybe she wouldn't allow them to use her likeness in the first place? But that seems odd, since it's essentially like turning down free money. Maybe Marvel balked at paying whatever likeness fee she was asking?

I can deal with a Rebecca Romijn Mystique just fine--she was a great Mystique. As long as I get one at some point.

 

[Motuxmen]

Mmm..don't think that's true, I seem to recall watching a documentary about Star Wars in which Lucas said the studio (Fox) thought the film would flop and didn't want the merchantising rights so Lucas bought them from Fox.

I'm no expert but I have been told that actors usually sign over thier likeneses for merchandising as part of a 'standard" studio/film contract it's al part and parcel of premoting the film.

This however is not a standard situation. Due to the rights being owned by marvel, then leased to fox.

Yes, most the time in the contract there are provisions for merchandise and use of likeness. But, promotional likeness uses and merchandise likeness use(rights) are not the same thing. They way the contracts are written marvel retains merch rights authority.

Some film contracts contain a section on use and consent of use of likeness for merchandise in regards to actors. But it's all part of the amount an actor gets paid. Often times with more popular stars and more established and popular franchises the actors get a cut of all merchandise profits. If not, they get paid up front(it's generally just reported that an actor makes X amount on a film, but that total is not just for acting, it includes everything).

And just so you know, I'm not just guessing, nor did the info come from tv. I work(ed) in the film industry, have many SAG member friends, know execs at studios. Not bragging or anything, I just happen to have first hand knowledge. That's where the majority of my info is from(though not all).

As for the rights and whatnot with Star Wars...it does not matter. Either way you slice it the rights belong to Lucasfilm then, and when sold Lucasfilm belongs to Disney. But it is also a separate situation.

The way things are with these few marvel properties that are not in house (xmen, FF, spidey) are a unique situation.

Fox opted to not acquire the actors merchandise(not promotion, that is a separate thing) rights. It wasn't an oversight. It wasn't an FU to the fandom. It was a fiscal choice, based on 6 or 7 previous movie release experiences. This wasn't a new property, wasn't a reboot, (technically) wasn't a new studio. They did not think the outlay of money, or promise of percentage, was an adequate financial risk given the history of the property. So they retained the rights to the movie merchandise and told any potential manufacture (sideshow, diamond select, hasbro, hot toys ect) that they would need to deal with not just them(the studio) but the actor(s) and marvel.

 

[Taibhse]

This however is not a standard situation. Due to the rights being owned by marvel, then leased to fox.

Yes, most the time in the contract there are provisions for merchandise and use of likeness. But, promotional likeness uses and merchandise likeness use(rights) are not the same thing. They way the contracts are written marvel retains merch rights authority.

Some film contracts contain a section on use and consent of use of likeness for merchandise in regards to actors. But it's all part of the amount an actor gets paid. Often times with more popular stars and more established and popular franchises the actors get a cut of all merchandise profits. If not, they get paid up front(it's generally just reported that an actor makes X amount on a film, but that total is not just for acting, it includes everything).

And just so you know, I'm not just guessing, nor did the info come from tv. I work(ed) in the film industry, have many SAG member friends, know execs at studios. Not bragging or anything, I just happen to have first hand knowledge. That's where the majority of my info is from(though not all).

As for the rights and whatnot with Star Wars...it does not matter. Either way you slice it the rights belong to Lucasfilm then, and when sold Lucasfilm belongs to Disney. But it is also a separate situation.

The way things are with these few marvel properties that are not in house (xmen, FF, spidey) are a unique situation.

Fox opted to not acquire the actors merchandise(not promotion, that is a separate thing) rights. It wasn't an oversight. It wasn't an FU to the fandom. It was a fiscal choice, based on 6 or 7 previous movie release experiences. This wasn't a new property, wasn't a reboot, (technically) wasn't a new studio. They did not think the outlay of money, or promise of percentage, was an adequate financial risk given the history of the property. So they retained the rights to the movie merchandise and told any potential manufacture (sideshow, diamond select, hasbro, hot toys ect) that they would need to deal with not just them(the studio) but the actor(s) and marvel.

I take the point you are making about costs, however isn't it a bit foolhardy of Fox, or indeed any studio, to negotiate the movie merchandise' rights, without the actors merchandising rights?.. I mean doesn't that pretty much make the movie merchandise rights they do have, worth a fraction of what they might otherwise be (obviously if the actor gets little or no 'face' time, this would not be an issue)?

As we are currently seeing, many merchandising companies cannot be bothered with the complexity of negotiating three ways: Fox, Marvel and the actors.. Not least because any negotiations have three opportunities to fail, rather than just one.. and negotiations of this nature involve teams of lawyers, which means that even failed negotiations cost serious bucks.

Back in the day, perhaps peeps were less bothered about toys not looking remotely like the actors, nowadays not so much.

 

[Motuxmen]

I take the point you are making about costs, however isn't it a bit foolhardy of Fox, or indeed any studio, to negotiate the movie merchandise' rights, without the actors merchandising rights?.. I mean doesn't that pretty much make the movie merchandise rights they do have, worth a fraction of what they might otherwise be (obviously if the actor gets little or no 'face' time, this would not be an issue)?

As we are currently seeing, many merchandising companies cannot be bothered with the complexity of negotiating three ways: Fox, Marvel and the actors.. Not least because any negotiations have three opportunities to fail, rather than just one.. and negotiations of this nature involve teams of lawyers, which means that even failed negotiations cost serious bucks.

Back in the day, perhaps peeps were less bothered about toys not looking remotely like the actors, nowadays not so much.

It does make things more complex. However, fox had the likeness negotiated during the first couple movies, and they made little or no profit. That's why they didn't do it this time.

As for how other movies and things do it....this is unique situation. They don't just have to pay the actors. There is another company involved, a company that has as much or more control of the rights, and gets a large percentage of the profit. In other movies the studio pays the actors, and that's it. Here, they pay the actors, and pay marvel. So based on the previous amount they spent, and the fact it would cost nearly twice as much for dofp likeness rights because it's essential two casts in one movie, and the fact they had to pay (or give a percentage) to marvel the opted not to acquire the likeness rights. It's a simple cost benefit analysis, with a nearly 15 year history to use for statistics. With the first few movies they had the likeness rights(that's why those movies had toys) and with first class they opted not to. They compare how much money they spent on the rights, to how much profit they made from the merchandise. It turned out that there was little or no profit difference between having the rights and not having the rights. Then along came dofp, same property so they could reasonably expect the same sales from merchandise, however the likeness rights cost would double. So they smartly opted to not pay for them. If some small company like hot toys wanted to do a limited run of one or two characters it's much easier to negotiate with one or two actors independtly then to do so with a dozen.

 

[Taibhse]

It does make things more complex. However, fox had the likeness negotiated during the first couple movies, and they made little or no profit. That's why they didn't do it this time.

As for how other movies and things do it....this is unique situation. They don't just have to pay the actors. There is another company involved, a company that has as much or more control of the rights, and gets a large percentage of the profit. In other movies the studio pays the actors, and that's it. Here, they pay the actors, and pay marvel. So based on the previous amount they spent, and the fact it would cost nearly twice as much for dofp likeness rights because it's essential two casts in one movie, and the fact they had to pay (or give a percentage) to marvel the opted not to acquire the likeness rights. It's a simple cost benefit analysis, with a nearly 15 year history to use for statistics. With the first few movies they had the likeness rights(that's why those movies had toys) and with first class they opted not to. They compare how much money they spent on the rights, to how much profit they made from the merchandise. It turned out that there was little or no profit difference between having the rights and not having the rights. Then along came dofp, same property so they could reasonably expect the same sales from merchandise, however the likeness rights cost would double. So they smartly opted to not pay for them. If some small company like hot toys wanted to do a limited run of one or two characters it's much easier to negotiate with one or two actors independtly then to do so with a dozen.

Fair enough.. slightly surprised Fox did not promote figure merchandising from the original X-Men trilogy more heavily, back in the day though.. imho, those figures are more iconic than the younger versions anyway.
I suspect 1/6 Wolverine figure sales may have been relatively disappointing for such an iconic character.. sufficient to justify further Jackman variants, but insufficient to generate much enthusiasm for the rest of the original team and even less for the First Class team, from Toy manufacturers.. combine that with the extra expense of the double hit costs for DoFP and that would indeed explain the lack of figures.

 

[melkorjunior]

I also think X-Men as a movie property has cooled in general over the past few years due in part to the ascendance of the Marvel movies, especially Avengers, which gave us the first superhero team outside the X-Men. There was a time not too long ago when the X-Men franchise and Spider-Man were the only decent superhero movies around so their merchandise was a lot more popular then. Now people care a lot more about Iron Man and Cap than Wolverine and Spidey.

 

[Taibhse]

I also think X-Men as a movie property has cooled in general over the past few years due in part to the ascendance of the Marvel movies, especially Avengers, which gave us the first superhero team outside the X-Men. There was a time not too long ago when the X-Men franchise and Spider-Man were the only decent superhero movies around so their merchandise was a lot more popular then. Now people care a lot more about Iron Man and Cap than Wolverine and Spidey.

 

[hokietwo]

I also think X-Men as a movie property has cooled in general over the past few years due in part to the ascendance of the Marvel movies, especially Avengers, which gave us the first superhero team outside the X-Men. There was a time not too long ago when the X-Men franchise and Spider-Man were the only decent superhero movies around so their merchandise was a lot more popular then. Now people care a lot more about Iron Man and Cap than Wolverine and Spidey.

Exactly ^

Cliffs notes Version: X-men movies suck, the figures won't sell so there is no royalty worth paying. Pray they make professor X, count your blessings and move on. Shoot this thread in the head and /close.

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz...................

 

[Motuxmen]

Fair enough.. slightly surprised Fox did not promote figure merchandising from the original X-Men trilogy more heavily, back in the day though.. imho, those figures are more iconic than the younger versions anyway.
I suspect 1/6 Wolverine figure sales may have been relatively disappointing for such an iconic character.. sufficient to justify further Jackman variants, but insufficient to generate much enthusiasm for the rest of the original team and even less for the First Class team, from Toy manufacturers.. combine that with the extra expense of the double hit costs for DoFP and that would indeed explain the lack of figures.

I agree actually. Had things been handled better with this license before, things very well could have been better.

But, the only thing I can see from being an avid xmen fan over the years, is that outside of the comics and films other items just don't seem to sell well. There could be many reasons. But, for whatever reason xmen merchandise just seems to be a very niche market.

Don't take my understanding and explanation of the reason why the studio and marvel do things to mean I want it this way. I agree that it may have been the best fiscal move for a company, but I don't like it personally. I want hot toys and replica props and costumes from all the films, and all the characters.

 

[pturtle]

I also think X-Men as a movie property has cooled in general over the past few years due in part to the ascendance of the Marvel movies, especially Avengers, which gave us the first superhero team outside the X-Men. There was a time not too long ago when the X-Men franchise and Spider-Man were the only decent superhero movies around so their merchandise was a lot more popular then. Now people care a lot more about Iron Man and Cap than Wolverine and Spidey.

Yet it's the highest grossing Superhero movie of the year so far, and the highest grossing X-Men film to date.

The X-Men franchise did at one point cool down but that had nothing to do with Marvel Studios, it had to do with the crappy X3 and XOW films. The X-Men films are doing just as good as all the marvel films aside from one Iron Man film and one Avengers film. X-Men Apocalypse could possibly make a billion as well.

I can't believe after DOFP people are still talking like this about the franchise.

I’m 100% confident a Fassneto, an accurate Wolverine, Old Magneto, and Old Professor sell out, a young Mystique and a young Professor X have a great chance at selling out as well.

 

[Taibhse]

Yet it's the highest grossing Superhero movie of the year so far, and the highest grossing X-Men film to date.

The X-Men franchise did at one point cool down but that had nothing to do with Marvel Studios, it had to do with the crappy X3 and XOW films. The X-Men films are doing just as good as all the marvel films aside from one Iron Man film and one Avengers film. X-Men Apocalypse could possibly make a billion as well.

I can't believe after DOFP people are still talking like this about the franchise.

I’m 100% confident a Fassneto, an accurate Wolverine, Old Magneto, and Old Professor sell out, a young Mystique and a young Professor X have a great chance at selling out as well.

I think an interesting parallel might be the Pirates of the Caribbean films.. the franchise made a ton of money but pretty much the only 1/6 figure to really motivate a lot of collectors into getting their wallet out, is Jack Sparrow.. with the cost of figures getting ever higher, Collectors are having to make tough choices.
Many figure threads start off with a lot of positivity.. but when push comes to shove, if a character comes along form a franchise the Collector prefers, then anther excellent figures may get dropped from their purchase list due to financial pressures.. a year is a loooong time in Toy production schedules.

I just have a sneaky feeling that X-Men might be one of those franchises where, even if more figures were available, they might be the figures that end up getting dropped from purchase lists, when wallets get squeezed by other iconic figures... YMMV

 

[Johnny Utah]

I'm watching DOFP right now and want a Fassneto figure bad.

 

[pturtle]

I think an interesting parallel might be the Pirates of the Caribbean films.. the franchise made a ton of money but pretty much the only 1/6 figure to really motivate a lot of collectors into getting their wallet out, is Jack Sparrow.. with the cost of figures getting ever higher, Collectors are having to make tough choices.
Many figure threads start off with a lot of positivity.. but when push comes to shove, if a character comes along form a franchise the Collector prefers, then anther excellent figures may get dropped from their purchase list due to financial pressures.. a year is a loooong time in Toy production schedules.

I just have a sneaky feeling that X-Men might be one of those franchises where, even if more figures were available, they might be the figures that end up getting dropped from purchase lists, when wallets get squeezed by other iconic figures... YMMV

That makes sense, but they would definitely sell better than some of the other figures HT is making right now. If HT is that worried, then they should just make the sure-things.

From that interview, I'm pretty confident we'll get at least a figure or two from DOFP.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[WhoaItsJBot]

They should start with 70s Wolverine and Fassbender Magneto. The sales from those two alone would cover any losses on less desirable figures from the line.

They're the only two I want, anyway.

 

[karamazov80]

They should start with 70s Wolverine and Fassbender Magneto. The sales from those two alone would cover any losses on less desirable figures from the line.

They're the only two I want, anyway.

Unfortunately, the evidence doesn't seem to support this:

https://www.sideshowtoy.com/collectibles/marvel-wolverine-hot-toys-901949/

https://www.sideshowtoy.com/collectibles/marvel-the-wolverine-hot-toys-902128/

My own feeling is that this is why HT haven't done more, more than anything else. If HT can't sell Wolverines easily, then why bother with other X-characters? Of course, you can argue those films weren't as good, and the characters didn't look as interesting, but if I were in HT's shoes I would move on to more Iron Men instead of this.

 

[pturtle]

Not only has HT been making Wolverine figures from the worst films in the series and overpricing them, but each Wolverine so far has had major likeness issues. A perfectly sculpted Hugh Jackman in his 70s attire fairly priced would certainly sell out in my opinion.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[karamazov80]

There's no real reason to think likeness would be improved on subsequent releases (see: Tony Stark). And you could speculate that it would sell, assuming everything worked out, but HT likes to gamble on the sure bet. Of course, I would love to see these happen, but Chan's history tells us to be cautious when hoping for something that isn't really obvious, like more Iron Men or Predators. By the time a figure was even released the next film will probably be coming, so the rational move from Chan's POV, if he's going to do X-Men at all, is probably to look forward to that, and try to line up a prototype or two to coincide with the release of the film.

 

[ironwez20]

I also think X-Men as a movie property has cooled in general over the past few years due in part to the ascendance of the Marvel movies, especially Avengers, which gave us the first superhero team outside the X-Men. There was a time not too long ago when the X-Men franchise and Spider-Man were the only decent superhero movies around so their merchandise was a lot more popular then. Now people care a lot more about Iron Man and Cap than Wolverine and Spidey.

Nah.... Wolverine and spidey are still more popular. Movie wise sure but cap and ironman are pretty much being put in the limelight cuz Disney owns them. If Disney owned xmen or spiderman those two characters would be put on the back burner real quick .