Fantastic Four (2015)

Originally posted by marwash22
Spidey is more of the posterboy, sure (though an argument could be made that Wolverine has taken over that status in the last 15 years or so), but in regards to what Disney/Marvel is doing with the MCU, having the rights to X-Men is much more important.

there's no way Fox would turn down a $5 billion check.

I think their main poster boy has always been Spidey tbh and it must annoy them they can't use the face of their comics.

And in terms of the big screen, Spidey is definitely the big seller between him and Wolverine.

Add that to Sony having had all sorts of financial problems in recent years, I honestly think Disney putting in an offer for Spidey seems like the most likely scenario (If they put in a bid for anyone that is).

Disney should have bought spiderman instead of star wars.

Sony needs to be willing to sell it though. Which I don't think they will unfortunately.

Star Wars is more profitable than Spider-Man. Not to mention they got the whole of Lucasfilm in the deal. But most importantly Lucas wanted to retire and sell up.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
Sony needs to be willing to sell it though. Which I don't think they will unfortunately.

Star Wars is more profitable than Spider-Man. Not to mention they got the whole of Lucasfilm in the deal. But most importantly Lucas wanted to retire and sell up.

I know it wouldn't be better for Disney, but it would be better for me 😄

Another studio can do star wars, I wanna see spiderman on the Avengers.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
But most importantly Lucas wanted to retire and sell up.

The abuse he received every time he rereleased an OT film and changed/added something and the nonstop jabs at everything from his intelligence to his manhood that started in May of 1999. Little guy just couldn't cope.

Originally posted by Robtard
No. Lucas got trolled into rage-selling and rage-retiring. The abuse he received every time he rereleased an OT film and changed/added something and the nonstop jabs at everything from his intelligence to his manhood that started in May of 1999. Little guy just couldn't cope.

Sooo.... We should give Sony the same abuse and jabs about them having Spider-Man ; )

LoL, no. Sony is a corporate titan, their ego and emotional fortitude is nigh unshakeable. ie thier troll filters work

I don't see why Marvel couldn't just offer to pay Sony a fixed fee of like $50mill to use Spider-Man in Avengers. Marvel would easily get that money back (plus a whole lot more), and Sony would get $50mill for doing absolutely nothing. Given all the talk of their financial problems I don't see how they could refuse that. Not to mention it would give a boost to future Spider-Man movies, just as all the Avengers solo franchises have had boosts in success post-Avengers.

Come on you big corporate fools, use some common sense and find a way to give fans what we want!

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
I don't see why Marvel couldn't just offer to pay Sony a fixed fee of like $50mill to use Spider-Man in Avengers. Marvel would easily get that money back (plus a whole lot more), and Sony would get $50mill for doing absolutely nothing. Given all the talk of their financial problems I don't see how they could refuse that. Not to mention it would give a boost to future Spider-Man movies, just as all the Avengers solo franchises have had boosts in success post-Avengers.

Come on you big corporate fools, use some common sense and find a way to give fans what we want!

1. It would screw with continuity for Marvel. The spiderman universe and Avengers universe aren't compatible.

2. Sony would want much more than just 50 million. It's really hard to measure just how much of the audience was attracted by spiderman to the Avengers movie.

3. I doubt Marvel would earn tremendous amounts of money for having spiderman in there. The audiences for spiderman and Avengers very much overlap, so it would be the same people coming

Originally posted by Firefly218
1. It would screw with continuity for Marvel. The spiderman universe and Avengers universe aren't compatible.

How so?

Besides wouldn't have to be the exact same Spider-Man Sony are currently using. You can have 2 different versions of the same character. Quicksilver anyone?

Originally posted by Firefly218
2. Sony would want much more than just 50 million. It's really hard to measure just how much of the audience was attracted by spiderman to the Avengers movie.

Considering it's going to be free money for Sony I don't see why they should turn it down (especially when it's all but guranteed to boost the next solo Spider-Man movie as well-They need to think long term). Then once the impact is seen on the box office, re-negotiations could take place for the next time he's used.

Frankly the only reason Sony wouldn't go for it would be corporate pride that they're not sharing directly in the box office. That and all the lawyers giving them headaches over the legalities. But it's really a lost opportunity for them to make easy money.

Originally posted by Firefly218
3. I doubt Marvel would earn tremendous amounts of money for having spiderman in there. The audiences for spiderman and Avengers very much overlap, so it would be the same people coming

I've heard that argument but don't believe that at all. Do you know Avengers made pretty much the combined gross of Iron Man 2, Thor and Captain America?

So I find it really hard to believe that adding the poster boy of Marvel comics and still one of the biggest solo superhero franchises, wouldn't add a few hundred million to the Avengers gross. Considering Avengers gross is still far far behind Avatar's and even Titanic's gross, there's still plenty of more money that can be made at the box office.

But again for Marvel corporate pride will come in. They will be like- Why should we pay Sony to use our own character, when we're the ones having massive more success than Sony anyway?

Originally posted by Firefly218
1. It would screw with continuity for Marvel. The spiderman universe and Avengers universe aren't compatible.

there would be no type of continuity issues especially since there was a rumor before that Avengers tower was to appear in a Garfield Spidey film

Originally posted by Firefly218 2. Sony would want much more than just 50 million. It's really hard to measure just how much of the audience was attracted by spiderman to the Avengers movie.

Money should not be a problem.. Not really , judging the fact that the first Garfield Spidey film made $752 million worldwide and Garfield Spidey 2 just crossed $ 500 million worldwide obviously people like what they see so having Garfield in an Avengers film can and will benefit both parties

Originally posted by Firefly218 3. I doubt Marvel would earn tremendous amounts of money for having spiderman in there. The audiences for spiderman and Avengers very much overlap, so it would be the same people coming

yes they would as both comic book fans and non comic book fans will flock to the theater

Originally posted by BruceSkywalker

Money should not be a problem.. Not really , judging the fact that the first Garfield Spidey film made $752 million worldwide and Garfield Spidey 2 just crossed $ 500 million worldwide

TASM2 is almost at $700mill WW.

Originally posted by BruceSkywalker
yes they would as both comic book fans and non comic book fans will flock to the theater

Oh yeah... Spider-Man with Iron and the Hulk! Can you just imagine the excitement!

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
TASM2 is almost at $700mill WW.

oops lol.. but yeah people like it

Originally posted by DARTH POWER Oh yeah... Spider-Man with Iron and the Hulk! Can you just imagine the excitement!

I would see that at least 5 or 6 times..

Shots fired!

John Byrne Explains Why 'Racebending' Doesn't Help THE FANTASTIC FOUR Reboot

http://www.comicbookmovie.com/news/?a=102277

He had some good points. Race - swapping and color blind casting are different

Originally posted by Kazenji
Shots fired!

John Byrne Explains Why 'Racebending' Doesn't Help THE FANTASTIC FOUR Reboot

http://www.comicbookmovie.com/news/?a=102277

Personal prejudice: Hispanic and Latino women with blonde hair look like hookers to me, no matter how clean or “cute” they are. Somehow those skin tones that look so good with dark, dark hair just don’t work for me with lighter shades. -John Byrne, 2005

smh

Because they all have poor acting skills.

This movie looks like shit.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1502712/

Poor cast, Poor director. Piss poor movie making.

Rewatching the prior FF films, I realize their main flaw was near B&R level campiness. If these films can avoid that, it may have a chance. I did like Doom's electrokinetic powers though.

Originally posted by Time Immemorial
This movie looks like shit.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1502712/

Poor cast, Poor director. Piss poor movie making.