Stampe
Super Freak
Anyway, hope I haven't posted this here before, but here's my team squaring off against Apocalypse.
That looks awesome
X-MEN Team setups
- Thread starter Butttornado
- Start date
Help Support Collector Freaks Forum:
That looks awesome
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2014
- Messages
- 3,828
- Reaction score
- 9
"Marvel has reacquired the rights to “Ghost Rider,” “The Punisher,” “Blade” and “Daredevil”. Doesn’t sound like they plan to use them right away."
I'm guessing a Ghost Rider or Blade PF will be popping up eventually since we've finally seen Daredevil and a new Punisher (without the bad ass portrait)
I'm guessing a Ghost Rider or Blade PF will be popping up eventually since we've finally seen Daredevil and a new Punisher (without the bad ass portrait)
Mister Ski
Super Freak
Anyway, hope I haven't posted this here before, but here's my team squaring off against Apocalypse.
Cool photo Peedi!
savageHULK
Super Freak
This thread singlehandedly stopped me from ordering bats or supes. Than you. Haha
Antman84
Super Freak
Anyway, hope I haven't posted this here before, but here's my team squaring off against Apocalypse.
Wow peedi that is phenomenal
I want more bad guys to recreate the intro to the animated series
savageHULK
Super Freak
I get a little blood flow going in that special place when I think about one day having a Cable and Bishop or cable and cyclops display
Josh-A-Tron
Super Freak
They've had the rights back for Punisher, Blade and Ghost Rider since way before the Disney acquisition. Daredevil was the only one Fox was trying to hold onto, glad they didn't.
If Marvel hadn't sold off all these movie rights in the '90s they probably would have gone out of business. Who knows what X-Men statues would be available now if that happened.
Josh-A-Tron
Super Freak
Not only that but at the time Marvel didn't have the power to start it's own studio like it did after Films like Spider-man and X-men got made. The films gave them added revenue and credit to get the loans that made Marvel Studios possible, which then made them attractive to Disney, who has more buying power than just about any entertainment group on the planet.
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2014
- Messages
- 3,828
- Reaction score
- 9
Marvel had the veto power to approve this Cable Marvel Select figure that is coming out Winter 2014.
There's no reason why Sideshow can't do Cable, Nightcrawler, Jim Lee Beast, Iceman, Archangel, Storm
all those figures have recently been announced from other toy makers.
Disney did nothing to support the X-Men films, yet they approve merchandise for that epic flop Ghost Rider 2. That movie had toys warming the pegs for years...
I wish they would put as much effort into the Marvel section as they did with their own Court of the Dead. We've only seen 6 X-Men from that 90s era in 5 years verses 9 Court of the Dead figures in 2 years.
Marvel does have veto power but they still are a business that wants to make money, I think by now all those mutants should've been released.
There's no reason why Sideshow can't do Cable, Nightcrawler, Jim Lee Beast, Iceman, Archangel, Storm
all those figures have recently been announced from other toy makers.
Disney did nothing to support the X-Men films, yet they approve merchandise for that epic flop Ghost Rider 2. That movie had toys warming the pegs for years...
I wish they would put as much effort into the Marvel section as they did with their own Court of the Dead. We've only seen 6 X-Men from that 90s era in 5 years verses 9 Court of the Dead figures in 2 years.
Marvel does have veto power but they still are a business that wants to make money, I think by now all those mutants should've been released.
Josh-A-Tron
Super Freak
Marvel had the veto power to approve this Cable Marvel Select figure that is coming out Winter 2014.
There's no reason why Sideshow can't do Cable, Nightcrawler, Jim Lee Beast, Iceman, Archangel, Storm
all those figures have recently been announced from other toy makers.
Disney did nothing to support the X-Men films, yet they approve merchandise for that epic flop Ghost Rider 2. That movie had toys warming the pegs for years...
I wish they would put as much effort into the Marvel section as they did with their own Court of the Dead. We've only seen 6 X-Men from that 90s era in 5 years verses 9 Court of the Dead figures in 2 years.
Marvel does have veto power but they still are a business that wants to make money, I think by now all those mutants should've been released.
Veto power just means they can reject the design. If that cable figure was already in play as a previous contract Marvel may have to allow that figure to come out. Just as they've had to allow Jean Grey and Emma Frost to come out as I'm sure Sideshow already had certain approval for them. And Disney didn't care about the Ghost Rider License at the time of Ghost Rider II, and wasn't actively trying to find a way to reacquire the license. What they're doing may suck as a collector, but let's face it, do you really want Fox to make another FF after what we've heard of the newest iteration?
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2014
- Messages
- 3,828
- Reaction score
- 9
Um... this struggle between Fox and Disney has been going on for a while now, it's not something new.
Marvel rejected merchandise for the X3, First Class, and Wolverine movies to make space for their own colossal flops and toy products ie Ghost Rider 2.
Ill find you the article.
Marvel rejected merchandise for the X3, First Class, and Wolverine movies to make space for their own colossal flops and toy products ie Ghost Rider 2.
Ill find you the article.
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2014
- Messages
- 3,828
- Reaction score
- 9
Where it all starts: The movie rights
Decades ago, before Marvel was the ultra-successful blockbuster-making company it is today, it was actually teetering on the brink of bankruptcy. In order to get out of that bankruptcy, it struck licensing deals with companies like Fox and Sony around 1996. "Because the studios were in strong positions, they agreed to share only about 5 percent of the revenue from each film with Marvel," the Wall Street Journal reported.
Sony got Spider-Man. Fox got the X-Men and the Fantastic Four. Marvel got the characters, villains included, that were not part of those franchises. Sony and Fox parlayed those rights into huge hits like X-Men (2000) and Spider-Man (2002).
In order to keep these rights and keep making that superhero blockbuster money, Sony and Fox need to keep using the characters they have. Otherwise, as we saw with characters like Daredevil and Elektra (whose film rights were formerly owned by Fox), the characters revert back to Marvel's control.
What's in Marvel's best interest?
From a completely cynical and business perspective: it's in Marvel's best interest for Sony and Fox to lose their rights to their big characters, because it would mean that Marvel would reclaim those popular, money-making franchises.
But there's also another layer to this: Marvel is also a comic book company. It's in control of the source material that Sony and Fox use, and it has say when it comes to cartoons, toys, and licensing. And this makes some X-Men and Fantastic Four fans nervous because Marvel could, if it wanted to, downplay their favorite characters by limiting the merchandise. For instance, Marvel has a deal where it benefits from Spider-Man's movie products even though Sony owns the movie rights.
Rob Liefeld, a comics creator who helped make the X-Force title, tweeted about a Marvel freeze-out of X-Men merchandise back in June:
"X-Men will match If not exceed ASM2's domestic box office, meaning lots of eyeballs, but there are no toy tie-ins. The Fox shut out is real."
Brevoort responded, stating that Marvel didn't see the need to promote the X-Men (or other titles that the company isn't getting the full revenue from):
You're talking about issues involving licensing and animation, and those are questions you'd need to ask to our people that oversee those areas.
I will say two things, though, both of which are pretty self-evident, I think.
1) There are only so many hours in the day, and so many initiatives you can have going at once,. So you need to pick and choose where you want to spend your time and your efforts.
2) If you had two things, and on one you earned 100% of the revenues from the efforts that you put into making it, and the other you earned a much smaller percentage for the same amount of time and effort, you'd be more likely to concentrate more heavily on the first, wouldn't you?
----
Nothing good came out of the deal with Disney and Marvel IMO, same thing will happen with Lucasfilm.
Decades ago, before Marvel was the ultra-successful blockbuster-making company it is today, it was actually teetering on the brink of bankruptcy. In order to get out of that bankruptcy, it struck licensing deals with companies like Fox and Sony around 1996. "Because the studios were in strong positions, they agreed to share only about 5 percent of the revenue from each film with Marvel," the Wall Street Journal reported.
Sony got Spider-Man. Fox got the X-Men and the Fantastic Four. Marvel got the characters, villains included, that were not part of those franchises. Sony and Fox parlayed those rights into huge hits like X-Men (2000) and Spider-Man (2002).
In order to keep these rights and keep making that superhero blockbuster money, Sony and Fox need to keep using the characters they have. Otherwise, as we saw with characters like Daredevil and Elektra (whose film rights were formerly owned by Fox), the characters revert back to Marvel's control.
What's in Marvel's best interest?
From a completely cynical and business perspective: it's in Marvel's best interest for Sony and Fox to lose their rights to their big characters, because it would mean that Marvel would reclaim those popular, money-making franchises.
But there's also another layer to this: Marvel is also a comic book company. It's in control of the source material that Sony and Fox use, and it has say when it comes to cartoons, toys, and licensing. And this makes some X-Men and Fantastic Four fans nervous because Marvel could, if it wanted to, downplay their favorite characters by limiting the merchandise. For instance, Marvel has a deal where it benefits from Spider-Man's movie products even though Sony owns the movie rights.
Rob Liefeld, a comics creator who helped make the X-Force title, tweeted about a Marvel freeze-out of X-Men merchandise back in June:
"X-Men will match If not exceed ASM2's domestic box office, meaning lots of eyeballs, but there are no toy tie-ins. The Fox shut out is real."
Brevoort responded, stating that Marvel didn't see the need to promote the X-Men (or other titles that the company isn't getting the full revenue from):
You're talking about issues involving licensing and animation, and those are questions you'd need to ask to our people that oversee those areas.
I will say two things, though, both of which are pretty self-evident, I think.
1) There are only so many hours in the day, and so many initiatives you can have going at once,. So you need to pick and choose where you want to spend your time and your efforts.
2) If you had two things, and on one you earned 100% of the revenues from the efforts that you put into making it, and the other you earned a much smaller percentage for the same amount of time and effort, you'd be more likely to concentrate more heavily on the first, wouldn't you?
----
Nothing good came out of the deal with Disney and Marvel IMO, same thing will happen with Lucasfilm.
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2014
- Messages
- 3,828
- Reaction score
- 9
It's hard to say if there's something nefarious going on with how Marvel is handling the X-Men. What we do know is that there are a myriad of X-Men titles around right now like All-New X-Men, Uncanny X-Men, X-Men, X-Force, and so on and so forth.
And, perhaps it's a coincidence, but a lot of characters that Marvel owns the full rights to show up in those titles. The Guardians of the Galaxy were part of a cross-over event in All-New X-Men. In the latest run of Uncanny X-Men, SHIELD, the Avengers, and She-Hulk have all shown up at one point or another. And in a comic called Uncanny Avengers, which is about a team of Avengers and X-Men, the X-Men story has slowly been turned into an Avengers-centered plot.
The story lines involving the X-Men could be taken as affronts. In 2005, Marvel implemented the "Decimation" storyline, where Scarlet Witch (an Avenger) altered reality and took away powers from over 90 percent of the mutant population. This eventually resulted in the deaths of some mutants, as well as classic mutants like Jubilee — a long-standing member of the X-Men — losing their powers.
New mutants wouldn't start showing up again until 2010, after the "Second Coming" story arc. That was followed by the "Avengers vs. X-Men" crossover event in 2012, which ended with five X-Men going power-hungry and turning into villains (X-Men fans don't really like it when Avengers beat up on X-Men). And further, the franchise's 50th birthday was marked by an event called "Battle of the Atom," largely seen by X-Men fans as underwhelming.
When you look at the big Marvel news over the past few months, you'll notice that the X-Men — save for a Storm solo series — have largely been absent. In July, Marvel announced that Thor would be a woman. The company followed that a day later when it announced that Captain America would be black. Aside from the Storm solo series, the next big event for the X-Men will be the death of Wolverine — but, again, neither of those events got the kind of buzz that Marvel got with Thor and Captain America.
What do fans think of this?
It's split. The important thing to understand here is that there are several different segments within the Marvel fanbase. With movies like Guardians, Captain America: Winter Soldier and X-Men: Days of Future Past each drawing over $90 million in their opening weekends, it's safe to say that Marvel has a lot of fans, and it's more than likely that a lot of these fans aren't exclusively tied to a favorite superhero (i.e. there are probably fans who love X-Men but also really enjoyed the Guardians of the Galaxy movie, and vice versa).
52275512c5486
A classic X-Men roster (Marvel)
But when you break things down to just the comic readers, the situation becomes a bit more fragmented, and allegiances are a bit more pronounced. At Comic Book Resources, a popular comics site, the forums aren't just split into DC and Marvel but rather are split into: Marvel, Spider-Man, Superman, Wonder Woman, and X-Books (and so on). And in those fandoms, there's even more jagged segmentation.
In the X-books forum, a message board to discuss everything going on in the different X-Men titles, there's a 17-page (and counting) thread called The Complex, a thread made especially for fans (and their skeptics) who believe that Marvel is purposely short-changing the X-Men.
"It's feeling like Marvel is sort of just going through the motions with the X-Men, and is using them as a legacy cash-cow while simultaneously shoving Inhumans and GOTG down our throats," one fan writes there.
That fan is referring to Marvel's deep investment in the Inhumans, a race of superhumans whose powers lie dormant until exposed to a substance called Terrigen Mist. The Inhumans were an integral part of Marvel's "Infinity" crossover event, where a Terrigen Mist bomb was released on Earth, turning many people into Inhumans. From an editorial standpoint, this gave and will give Marvel a whole new batch of superhumans to write. But some X-Men fans think that there's more going on here, and believe that the Inhumans will be Marvel's way of creating X-Menesque characters without having to use the X-men, thus opening up more movie possibilities and diminishing their favorite X-Men and X-Women.
"Marvel WILL shove Inhumans down your throats, it IS going to happen. They will not stop until the property is considered a success. They will put whatever creative teams they need to on it to make it work," another fan chimed in at The Complex. "They will change whatever mutants into Inhumans to make it work."
Granted, these views don't represent the views of all X-Men fans. These fans are the ones most likely to believe the conspiracy theories full-tilt. And though these X-Men truthers might seem, to Marvel fans in general or even some fellow X-Men fans, largely crazy, the fact that their views warrant a 17-page discussion feels like there's something there that should, at the very least, be examined. Marvel's writers know this.
"I was told when I started writing the X-Men that there is a very small part of the readership that feels very persecuted," Brian Michael Bendis, one of Marvel's star writers wrote in June, addressing rumors of an X-Men cancellation. "[T]hese readers think that Marvel hates the X-Men with a fiery passion and are looking to destroy it... so even though the best artists on the planet and franchise writers have been put in charge of this very important part of the Marvel universe, some people still think that Marvel is out to blow its own foot off," he added.
Bendis writes the wildly fun All-New X-Men comic. And devout X-Men fans would point you to the fact that All-New X-Men has curiously been a vehicle for crossovers with other Bendis comics like Guardians of the Galaxy (which Marvel owns the rights to) and Ultimate Spider-Man.
And, perhaps it's a coincidence, but a lot of characters that Marvel owns the full rights to show up in those titles. The Guardians of the Galaxy were part of a cross-over event in All-New X-Men. In the latest run of Uncanny X-Men, SHIELD, the Avengers, and She-Hulk have all shown up at one point or another. And in a comic called Uncanny Avengers, which is about a team of Avengers and X-Men, the X-Men story has slowly been turned into an Avengers-centered plot.
The story lines involving the X-Men could be taken as affronts. In 2005, Marvel implemented the "Decimation" storyline, where Scarlet Witch (an Avenger) altered reality and took away powers from over 90 percent of the mutant population. This eventually resulted in the deaths of some mutants, as well as classic mutants like Jubilee — a long-standing member of the X-Men — losing their powers.
New mutants wouldn't start showing up again until 2010, after the "Second Coming" story arc. That was followed by the "Avengers vs. X-Men" crossover event in 2012, which ended with five X-Men going power-hungry and turning into villains (X-Men fans don't really like it when Avengers beat up on X-Men). And further, the franchise's 50th birthday was marked by an event called "Battle of the Atom," largely seen by X-Men fans as underwhelming.
When you look at the big Marvel news over the past few months, you'll notice that the X-Men — save for a Storm solo series — have largely been absent. In July, Marvel announced that Thor would be a woman. The company followed that a day later when it announced that Captain America would be black. Aside from the Storm solo series, the next big event for the X-Men will be the death of Wolverine — but, again, neither of those events got the kind of buzz that Marvel got with Thor and Captain America.
What do fans think of this?
It's split. The important thing to understand here is that there are several different segments within the Marvel fanbase. With movies like Guardians, Captain America: Winter Soldier and X-Men: Days of Future Past each drawing over $90 million in their opening weekends, it's safe to say that Marvel has a lot of fans, and it's more than likely that a lot of these fans aren't exclusively tied to a favorite superhero (i.e. there are probably fans who love X-Men but also really enjoyed the Guardians of the Galaxy movie, and vice versa).
52275512c5486
A classic X-Men roster (Marvel)
But when you break things down to just the comic readers, the situation becomes a bit more fragmented, and allegiances are a bit more pronounced. At Comic Book Resources, a popular comics site, the forums aren't just split into DC and Marvel but rather are split into: Marvel, Spider-Man, Superman, Wonder Woman, and X-Books (and so on). And in those fandoms, there's even more jagged segmentation.
In the X-books forum, a message board to discuss everything going on in the different X-Men titles, there's a 17-page (and counting) thread called The Complex, a thread made especially for fans (and their skeptics) who believe that Marvel is purposely short-changing the X-Men.
"It's feeling like Marvel is sort of just going through the motions with the X-Men, and is using them as a legacy cash-cow while simultaneously shoving Inhumans and GOTG down our throats," one fan writes there.
That fan is referring to Marvel's deep investment in the Inhumans, a race of superhumans whose powers lie dormant until exposed to a substance called Terrigen Mist. The Inhumans were an integral part of Marvel's "Infinity" crossover event, where a Terrigen Mist bomb was released on Earth, turning many people into Inhumans. From an editorial standpoint, this gave and will give Marvel a whole new batch of superhumans to write. But some X-Men fans think that there's more going on here, and believe that the Inhumans will be Marvel's way of creating X-Menesque characters without having to use the X-men, thus opening up more movie possibilities and diminishing their favorite X-Men and X-Women.
"Marvel WILL shove Inhumans down your throats, it IS going to happen. They will not stop until the property is considered a success. They will put whatever creative teams they need to on it to make it work," another fan chimed in at The Complex. "They will change whatever mutants into Inhumans to make it work."
Granted, these views don't represent the views of all X-Men fans. These fans are the ones most likely to believe the conspiracy theories full-tilt. And though these X-Men truthers might seem, to Marvel fans in general or even some fellow X-Men fans, largely crazy, the fact that their views warrant a 17-page discussion feels like there's something there that should, at the very least, be examined. Marvel's writers know this.
"I was told when I started writing the X-Men that there is a very small part of the readership that feels very persecuted," Brian Michael Bendis, one of Marvel's star writers wrote in June, addressing rumors of an X-Men cancellation. "[T]hese readers think that Marvel hates the X-Men with a fiery passion and are looking to destroy it... so even though the best artists on the planet and franchise writers have been put in charge of this very important part of the Marvel universe, some people still think that Marvel is out to blow its own foot off," he added.
Bendis writes the wildly fun All-New X-Men comic. And devout X-Men fans would point you to the fact that All-New X-Men has curiously been a vehicle for crossovers with other Bendis comics like Guardians of the Galaxy (which Marvel owns the rights to) and Ultimate Spider-Man.
Josh-A-Tron
Super Freak
Ghost Rider II was a Sony property when it was made, so any revenue from the toys would have been Split. Just as any revenue from X3, First class and Wolverine would have been split between Fox and Disney, however, Sony seems to have been much more open to Sharing it's Spider-man License with Disney, hence why there isn't as much Animosity between Sony and Disney as there seems to be with Fox and Disney.
Josh-A-Tron
Super Freak
I'd have to disagree, but that's subjective to taste. I find Sony's Spider-man Films to be mostly contrived and while they newer ones get Peter a little beter they completely lack inspiration one of his strongest parts, his villains; and Fox's FF films to be utterly boring and soulless, while I do like X-men, X2, X-men First Class and X-men DOFP, X-men Last Stand And the Wolverine films have shown me that Fox can destroy those too.
savageHULK
Super Freak
I agree. Except I enjoyed the most recent wolverine film. More so than x1 and x3
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2014
- Messages
- 3,828
- Reaction score
- 9
What if this is real? How should I feel?
If Marvel weren't considering ways to streamline its involvement in X-Men stuff and maximize the franchises and characters it does own, it would be surprising. The way the film rights deals are drawn and the way things have shaken out, Marvel actively promoting the franchises from which it benefits the most — a strategy that Brevoort hinted at — makes solid sense. Any company with a semblance of savvy would do the same thing in this situation.
What you also have to consider is if Marvel is still a comic company first, or if it is positioning itself to be more of a general entertainment company. Is it still making the bulk of its money from comic books, or has it decided that movies are really the future? If Marvel still thinks of itself as a comic book company, then you could still conceivably see investment being poured into X-Men titles because they sell. If it happens that Marvel transitions into a movie-first company, then it could, if it wanted to, start cutting X-Men titles.
The differences in scale are substantial. For comparison: The Avengers made somewhere around $1.5 billion in its box office earnings, while the estimated North American market size for print and digital comics in 2013 was $870 million, Comicchron, a site that analyzes and researches comic sales, reported.
When you look at X-Men comics specifically, X-Men #1 and Uncanny X-Men #1, were both in the year-end top 10 of North American comic sales in 2013. According to Comicchron's numbers, the issues sold 186,300 and 182,700 issues respectively. But if you dig deeper and look at individual months this year, X-Men titles haven't been as impressive with All-New X-Men being the only X-title in the top 20 (usually floating around 17-18) of sales for the last three months.
Guardians' success has showed that Marvel can make really successful movies based on characters that don't have the recognition of the X-Men or Spider-Man. It also showed that Marvel's movies can make people buy comic books. Here's a snapshot of Comixology's best-selling titles from Friday. Notice how many of them are Guardians titles (it should be noted that Comixology had a sale to coincide with the release of the movie):
In a way, the fact that Marvel doesn't have the rights to Spider-Man, the Fantastic Four, or X-Men has motivated the company to gamble, take chances, and fully flesh out characters that may not have had the same gravitas as its well-known heroes. If Marvel had kept the rights to all of its characters, it's unlikely the company would make a Guardians movie, talk about a Black Panther movie, or give Black Widow the platform to become as popular as she is today. We'd probably be watching X-Men 33: Wolverine Does Something Again.
On the other side of that, you have to feel for fans of comic books like the X-Men and the Fantastic Four. They know that their titles probably aren't high up on the list of Marvel's priorities, and it's probably not in Marvel's best interests to give either franchise a fantastic, popular storyline that could be turned into a movie when there are other properties where that storyline would benefit the company more.
There's a tagline from the first X-Men movie — a very successful product of this rights dispute — that seems awfully prescient for anxious X-Men fans today: "The time is coming when all that we are afraid of will be all that can save us."
That time, if you ask X-Men fans, is already here.
Update: A reader pointed out that Comixology had a sale to coincide with the Guardians movie release. That probably helped the sales during the week. The post has been updated to reflect that.
If Marvel weren't considering ways to streamline its involvement in X-Men stuff and maximize the franchises and characters it does own, it would be surprising. The way the film rights deals are drawn and the way things have shaken out, Marvel actively promoting the franchises from which it benefits the most — a strategy that Brevoort hinted at — makes solid sense. Any company with a semblance of savvy would do the same thing in this situation.
What you also have to consider is if Marvel is still a comic company first, or if it is positioning itself to be more of a general entertainment company. Is it still making the bulk of its money from comic books, or has it decided that movies are really the future? If Marvel still thinks of itself as a comic book company, then you could still conceivably see investment being poured into X-Men titles because they sell. If it happens that Marvel transitions into a movie-first company, then it could, if it wanted to, start cutting X-Men titles.
The differences in scale are substantial. For comparison: The Avengers made somewhere around $1.5 billion in its box office earnings, while the estimated North American market size for print and digital comics in 2013 was $870 million, Comicchron, a site that analyzes and researches comic sales, reported.
When you look at X-Men comics specifically, X-Men #1 and Uncanny X-Men #1, were both in the year-end top 10 of North American comic sales in 2013. According to Comicchron's numbers, the issues sold 186,300 and 182,700 issues respectively. But if you dig deeper and look at individual months this year, X-Men titles haven't been as impressive with All-New X-Men being the only X-title in the top 20 (usually floating around 17-18) of sales for the last three months.
Guardians' success has showed that Marvel can make really successful movies based on characters that don't have the recognition of the X-Men or Spider-Man. It also showed that Marvel's movies can make people buy comic books. Here's a snapshot of Comixology's best-selling titles from Friday. Notice how many of them are Guardians titles (it should be noted that Comixology had a sale to coincide with the release of the movie):
In a way, the fact that Marvel doesn't have the rights to Spider-Man, the Fantastic Four, or X-Men has motivated the company to gamble, take chances, and fully flesh out characters that may not have had the same gravitas as its well-known heroes. If Marvel had kept the rights to all of its characters, it's unlikely the company would make a Guardians movie, talk about a Black Panther movie, or give Black Widow the platform to become as popular as she is today. We'd probably be watching X-Men 33: Wolverine Does Something Again.
On the other side of that, you have to feel for fans of comic books like the X-Men and the Fantastic Four. They know that their titles probably aren't high up on the list of Marvel's priorities, and it's probably not in Marvel's best interests to give either franchise a fantastic, popular storyline that could be turned into a movie when there are other properties where that storyline would benefit the company more.
There's a tagline from the first X-Men movie — a very successful product of this rights dispute — that seems awfully prescient for anxious X-Men fans today: "The time is coming when all that we are afraid of will be all that can save us."
That time, if you ask X-Men fans, is already here.
Update: A reader pointed out that Comixology had a sale to coincide with the Guardians movie release. That probably helped the sales during the week. The post has been updated to reflect that.
Similar threads
