Marvel Reboots?

[sunshineblotters]

Last I checked The Incredible Hulk was a success box office wise. Not a huge success mind you but they didn't take any losses. I figured the whole reasoning behind not doing more was cuz of the cost to do them. TIH was great to me to but I don't know about a Ruffalo version going on.

I don't really agree that when Marvel gets the rights back they'll be unable to reboot. They just need to find the right angle and story to improve it. Won't be hard. It's the main reason they haven't immediately come with a Ghost Rider or Daredevil reboot. They can have their own phases with the aforementioned 4-5 heroes they just got back.

It was a success. But every article I have read so far concerning why they haven't done it, they said the fans were't big on the movie. Transformers Dark of The Moon is currently the 6th highest grossing film in the box office yet most people, fans and critics, agree it was complete garbage. And somehow they trust Michael bay and Megan Fox for the Turtles movies

Just so we are clear I am not saying they can't reboot. I am just saying they can't use the origins story. Reboot it so it isn't related to their previous versions but skip their origins. Go straight into their 5th-10th year as a hero. I just don't see any other angle they can use for F4 and Hulk. MAYBE Spiderman but I highly doubt it. But seriously nobody want to see that AGAIN. There is enough material out there concerning that topic. Some of it recent. If they were to talk about origins again it should be through brief flashbacks and shouldn't be a main subject in the movie.

And Incredible Hulk isn't a reboot, not technically. It is still a continuation of Ang Lees Hulk, it pretty much picks up where the first one left off. The first Hulk ended with Banner somewhere in South America and that is exactly where Incredible Hulk started off. Sure things were tweaked here and there but for the most part, it is a part 2.

Did not know that. The Hulk is not considered part of Avengers yet the Incredible Hulk is so I assumed it was a reboot.

I think Marvel can definitely reboot XMen, just use the original heroes and add Wolverine but don't center everything on him. Make it Prof X, Cyclops, Jean, Iceman, Beast and Angel, then add Wolverine. I would love to see more aggressive disagreement with Cyclops and Wolverine. Make it still about XMen vs. the Brotherhood but execute it better and give Magneto a better team and a more devious plan.

XMens started 13 years ago and by the time Marvel gets it, it might be in it's 20th or 25th year, if ever. So Marvel can certainly reboot it by then w/o a problem. It'll be for a whole new generation by then.

Also if they are going to do that then they should stick to the comics and add Wolverine at the same time as Storm, Banshee, Nightcrawler and I forget who else was part of the x-men second class. I think it was polaris but I am not sure.

 

[sunshineblotters]

Budhha was that a reply to my x-men rant? NVM. I was simply trying to say that Fox will run it to the ground and moviegoers will not want to see it again. It would be easy to reboot the X-Men but with how well those films are doing the rights will belong to fox until no one wants to see it again.

 

[HTownsOwn84]

I just want to know who in the hell agreed to these dumb*** deals at Marvel and not put a certain time period on them

bankrupt or not it was just stupid

 

[water]

So far, I've loved all the reboots 

 

[rell826]

**** Disney and their kid friendly mantra. The overall goodness that gets added to their films cheapens it to me.

 

[thenoguy]

I don't see why a reboot is any worse than a tacked on sequel to an unsuccessful first try like Daredevil or the Fantastic 4. As long as the story is sufficiently different, which is possible even while retaining the origin elements, the movie is probably not going to feel any more repetitive/derivative than any sequel would anyway. You pretty much know what you're going to get from this type of movie in terms of structure going in.

 

[sunshineblotters]

I just want to know who in the hell agreed to these dumb*** deals at Marvel and not put a certain time period on them
bankrupt or not it was just stupid

That is what I tried to say in the other thread and people were not having it. Seriously their lawyers should lose their law licenses for that type of legal advice. And any businessman who supported it should be publicly shamed.

And no one answered how they got into such financial trouble when I asked. Did a movie flop or something?

**** Disney and their kid friendly mantra. The overall goodness that gets added to their films cheapens it to me.

I agree.

I don't see why a reboot is any worse than a tacked on sequel to an unsuccessful first try like Daredevil or the Fantastic 4. As long as the story is sufficiently different, which is possible even while retaining the origin elements, the movie is probably not going to feel any more repetitive/derivative than any sequel would anyway. You pretty much know what you're going to get from this type of movie in terms of structure going in.

I'm not saying tack it on to a **** movie like DareDevil. Besides DD hasnt had a reboot yet so it wouldnt be repetitive. Last DD movie was the only one. I was simply saying that there are some heroes that can do without the origin backstory. Even before the first Sony trilogy EVERYONE knew who Spiderman was and how he got his powers. Even people who dont mess with comics/superheroes. Until the Avengers movies he was easily the most recognized Marvel Character. Now we have seen his origins twice in a 10 year span. No need to make it 3 times. If Marvel got its rights back they should just jump into a story of a more experienced peter parker (i.e. 5 years after he got his powers). But have no ties to any of the Sony movies. Same with when they get F4 back from Fox

 

[rfx45]

I just want to know who in the hell agreed to these dumb*** deals at Marvel and not put a certain time period on them
bankrupt or not it was just stupid

That is what I tried to say in the other thread and people were not having it. Seriously their lawyers should lose their law licenses for that type of legal advice. And any businessman who supported it should be publicly shamed.

And no one answered how they got into such financial trouble when I asked. Did a movie flop or something?

It's not about people "not having it", it's just that you do no seem to understand business and how it works. If Marvels lawyer could do something about it, they would have but if other movie companies would not agree to make movie hence giving Marvel some profits on the process, then Marvel would be under right now. Again, Marvel had no capital to start up their movies so they had to sell the rights and in return, they got a percentage. If the part of the deal is they can make them infinitely if they keep doing it every 5 years, then Marvel has to say yes or go bankrupt.

A lot comes to play in business, CEOs and Presidents invest and they do not always work out. Comics were huge in the 80's but by the 90's, they were not as big, it was becoming a video game industry. Lots of other factors and business insider stuff goes on to business so you really have to dig deep.


When you aasked why Marvel went bankrupt, I told you to google it but I guess you didn't because you are asking again. I'll even make it easier, here's another article, read before asking again in another thread: http://www.businessweek.com/stories/2002-05-05/marvels-misery

In 1989, financier Ronald O. Perelman bought Marvel Entertainment Group from New World Entertainment for $82.5 million, putting up $10.5 million of his own money and borrowing the rest. His timing couldn't have been better: The first Batman movie had just been released, and a comic-book-collecting mania was gathering steam. Perelman spent the next few years dressing up Marvel before selling a piece of it in an initial public offering that raised $82 million, the bulk of that going to pay down debt and the rest going to one of Perelman's many holding companies. Then, he went on a debt-fueled buying spree, patching together trading-card companies, a sticker outfit, and a controlling interest in a toy company.

But Perelman's lucky streak ran out: Trading cards tanked, the sticker craze came unglued, and comics as collectibles sank under a supply glut. Soon, Marvel was choking on its debt load. Its stock, which had soared more than tenfold from 1991 to 1993, fell into a swoon, as did its high-yield bonds. The banks, owed hundreds of millions, began to sweat. Finally, in 1996 Marvel missed an interest payment, putting it technically in default.

Perelman, who was in no danger financially, came up with a convoluted scheme in which he would "rescue" Marvel by merging it with Toy Biz, a profitable maker of action figures in which he held a controlling interest. All he asked in return was 400 million shares, or 80%, of a recapitalized Marvel. His cost per share came to 85 cents, at a time when Marvel shares were about $3. Understandably, existing shareholders went ballistic, as did the junk-bond holders.

Enter Carl Icahn, corporate predator extraordinaire, who had bought up the junk bonds, which were backed by Perelman's controlling shares in Marvel. Icahn forced Marvel into bankruptcy to seize the stock, resulting in legal proceedings so messy that it's nearly impossible to separate the players, their interests, and their ultimate goals.

And another: http://technoccult.net/archives/2012/10/09/the-secret-history-of-how-marvel-comics-went-bankrupt/

Bank’s concerns weren’t rooted in some naïve idealism about artistic purity; he worried about Marvel’s long-term business interests. Field representatives had gone out to nearly forty different stores, collecting sell- through numbers—the number of copies that retailers actually sold to readers, as opposed to the larger number of copies that distributors sold to retailers—for a dozen different comics over a three-issue period. The findings were stunning.

“Every time we did one of these stupid-*** covers that caused us to increase the price by 33 percent—say issue #475—we would have a 20-percent drop-off from 474 to 476. The numbers would spike for #475, but we’d actually lose readers from #474 to #476. It was consistent with every single example.”

Of course, none of this would have an impact on Marvel’s quarterly goals. Marvel’s bottom-line reports, which only reflected distributor-level numbers, would continue to show sales and profits going up, even as the readership began to cool and the retailers, who couldn’t return unsold copies, absorbed the costs. “In the meantime,” said Bank, “we were killing the stores that were feeding us.”

Buy this book if you want to know further:
View media item 544172

 

[sunshineblotters]

It's not about people "not having it", it's just that you do no seem to understand business and how it works. If Marvels lawyer could do something about it, they would have but if other movie companies would not agree to make movie hence giving Marvel some profits on the process, then Marvel would be under right now. Again, Marvel had no capital to start up their movies so they had to sell the rights and in return, they got a percentage. If the part of the deal is they can make them infinitely if they keep doing it every 5 years, then Marvel has to say yes or go bankrupt.

A lot comes to play in business, CEOs and Presidents invest and they do not always work out. Comics were huge in the 80's but by the 90's, they were not as big, it was becoming a video game industry. Lots of other factors and business insider stuff goes on to business so you really have to dig deep.

Well I didnt catch your answer but I am actually very fluent in business. I can assure you that they could've put a 30 year cap (or something extremely long like that) and gotten the capital they needed for these movies. Which would give 3rd parties up to 30 years to use the movie rights provided that they are doing something with it.

YOU don't understand business if you truly think forfeiting rights (for what could be an indefinite amount of time) was a good idea or even the only option. You truly think that they couldn't sell rights for X-Men for 30 years? Discount future cash flows on that franchise for 30 years (releasing films like fox is doing) under a WORST case scenario you are looking at 2.5 billion just off box office sales (for Fox excluding licensing). Not going to discount the money Fox did make to prove my point but I assure you I am correct.

Toys, DVDs, merchandise, etc would make that figure way more. Only an idiot couldn't have sold that franchise for 30 years and made great money off of it. It was a terrible deal on Marvel's end. No two ways about it. Not only that (putting aside any bias I have for selling these rights) it is almost as stupid that they sold the rights to their highest selling franchise (X-Men) under those terms. That should've been the one franchise they put a time cap on.

Don't say I don't understand business. i will embarrass most people on here in business knowledge and I don't have any field experience yet.

Future generations of businessmen will look at this deal and laugh at Marvel. If they didnt have people to make these calculations internally, it wouldn't have cost too much to hire people who know what they are doing to do this.

Marvel got ******, no vaseline, when it came to the X-Men and Spiderman franchises and they have no one to blame but themselves. And their stupidity at the time frustrates their fans

 

[rfx45]

Again, read up everything I posted, they were in trouble. You think Marvel didn't have million dollar lawyers? You act like you know more at what they can do back then, but you obviously don't. Don't get me wrong, I am not claiming that I do but just accept it. Nothing you can say can convince me or anyone here that you know more than Marvels lawyers back then. Hell you didn't even have an idea why Marvel went bankrupt an hour ago and all of a sudden you think you know better than them? They obviously had a bad CEO that took advantage of the company and buried it to the ground but just accept it, I don't know why you guys seem to think it is as simple as just "hey, we will sell it but only for 30 years then we get it back, ok?"


And financially, keep in mind that Marvel sold their whole company to Disney because to them, that is the most profitable way to make films. So obviously there is something to not doing things by yourself, an investor or someone else's pocket dong the investing makes it easier and cheaper I guess. Marvel has more control now because they are in a good place, they can make demands. Back then, when you are in debt, the company doesn't have much choice. You are on bankruptcy, chapter 11 and everything is up to the bankruptcy court to pay off creditors. There was likely a creditor committee that was placed to make decisions about selling to get paid, it might not even be up to Marvel at that point.



Also, on the DoFP thread you were asking XMen to return to Marvel but then go on and say this?

Originally Posted by Rell826 View Post

**** Disney and their kid friendly mantra. The overall goodness that gets added to their films cheapens it to me.

I agree.

I mean XMen going back to Marvel meant it is going to Disney. So what is it you want?





Anyways, to add, I think this pretty much summarizes it all up w/o much legal jargon: http://www.milehighcomics.com/tales/cbg38.html

Diamond and Capital, the two main distributors to the comics world in 1994, had already substantially weakened the Direct Market by allowing too many undercapitalized and inexperienced retailers to open their doors during the epic battles they waged for market share during the 1980's and early 1990's. When these neophyte retailers were faced with having to order from Heroes World in addition to their primary distributor, they began folding in droves. This led to even further declines in the sales in Marvel Comics.

While all this operating idiocy was going on, Ronald O. Perelman continued trying to build Marvel into a mini entertainment conglomerate. In a flurry of acquisitions during the early 1990's, Marvel purchased Fleer Trading Cards, SkyBox Trading Cards, Panini Stickers, Welsh Magazines, and Malibu Publishing. The total cost of these acquisitions (plus an ill-advised repurchase of half of the stock held by the public) ultimately pushed Marvel's bank debt to over $700 million dollars. That's more than eight times what Perelman paid for the company in 1989! At the same time as Marvel was going deeply into debt internally, Perelman convinced an army of gullible investors to purchase $900 million in zero coupon bonds, with the only collateral backing the bonds being his ownership of 60% of Marvel's stock. Because the paper trails are hard to follow, there is some debate as to how much all this financial magic ultimately netted Perelman, but Raviv speculates that he (through his holding companies) benefited to the tune of somewhere between $200-$400 million dollars.

And we all know what happened to trading cards, stickers and magazines. Most are practically dead now.

Seems like Marvel also killed the collectors market by flooding it themselves with a bunch of variants and different prints: http://www.slate.com/articles/busin..._the_business_story_behind_the_avengers_.html

The comic book industry, flooded by Marvel (and other companies) with gimmicky collector’s editions, cratered

And again, get over it. It's really no use complaining about it now and saying Marvel could have, should have, would have.

 

[x Buddha Bless x]

Yeah, get over it.

It's not even as funny that dudes are trying to pretend they know what the business climate was like in the 90s for Marvel and an owner like Perelman. This 30 year talk is nonsense. Companies on the verge of bankruptcy don't get to dictate terms to that degree.

I just want to know who in the hell agreed to these dumb*** deals at Marvel and not put a certain time period on them

bankrupt or not it was just stupid

Not at the time. The comic bubble burst, they were going out of business. Disney didn't own them at the time and they were desperate. During this period there were only campy Superman and Batman movies or terrible ones and by and large failed attempts at live action shows. There was no reason to think shortly after the new millennium superhero movies would come in to their golden age and quickly become a big thing. Not to mention there were reasonable stipulations and clauses set in place in the contracts that made it so they could get the rights back after a certain amount of time (cuz at the time nobody is thinking any movie studio would be able to sustain X-Men movies for 13 years). Basically, if they don't sell the movie rights there's a chance there's no marvel comics at all

 

[sunshineblotters]

^Seems like Sony and Fox knew that it would be big business. I dont think people understand how frowned upon giving away your core competencies (if you can call them that in this scenario) is for even a short amount of time. The company has no control over quality under a scenario like that. And Marvel has proven to be a textbook example of this

 

[x Buddha Bless x]

^Seems like Sony and Fox knew that it would be big business. I dont think people understand how frowned upon giving away your core competencies (if you can call them that in this scenario) is for even a short amount of time. The company has no control over quality under a scenario like that. And Marvel has proven to be a textbook example of this

Even if they knew something Marvel didn't it wouldn't matter cuz Marvel didn't even have the money to make those movies in the first place let alone good ones. It's like you're not grasping that giving away their ip's is nothing in the face of going out of business and all of the ip's being basically useless.

You know what happens when a company goes in to bankruptcy right? Marvel would've lost all of it.

Besides they're not really hurting now for the X-Men and Spider-Man. They managed to do an amazing job and make the Avengers a-list.

 

[robinvandamn]

FF4 already going to rebooted, I dont mind that. I NEED Marvel to get back the rights to The Punisher, DD, X-men, and Ghost Rider. I believe they're the only ones that can do it right. Why won't anyone ask Kevin Smith for concepts on these tho?

his Superman script was terrible and from what was reported his take on Green Hornet sucked too

 

[6 Rings G.O.A.T.]

The punisher need a reboot..

View media item 544199

 

[sunshineblotters]

I am grasping that. Again I am saying they should have sold their rights for a LONG amount of time. Not indefinitely.

Bill gates is not hurting, but if he could double his net worth I am sure he would.
Marvel aint hurting now but with spiderman and x-men in their cinematic universe they would be doubling their revenues (at least).

 

[robinvandamn]

Fox has X-Men films lined up from 2014 to 2020.. Marvel isn't getting those rights back anytime soon.

 

[sunshineblotters]

Fox has X-Men films lined up from 2014 to 2020.. Marvel isn't getting those rights back anytime soon.

my point exactly. X-Men came out in 2000. Between then and say 2025 they would have made so much that if Marvel knew what they were doing when they sold the rights, they could've sold the rights at a huge discount (even a billion dollars would've been worth it) and had enough to keep marvel alive and make some really nice movies.

 

[x Buddha Bless x]

I am grasping that. Again I am saying they should have sold their rights for a LONG amount of time. Not indefinitely.

Bill gates is not hurting, but if he could double his net worth I am sure he would.
Marvel aint hurting now but with spiderman and x-men in their cinematic universe they would be doubling their revenues (at least).

Marvel literally has thousands of other characters though. If they can make Avengers a billion dollar franchise I'm sure they can and will churn out Inhumans, Defenders, Heroes For Hire, Black Panther, Dr. Strange, ******g Man-Thing, etc. and execute it so they're successful. If GoTG is a success what you're saying will be more of a moot point.

As far as your 30 year plan, listen man, I'm sure there's an alt universe out there where Marvel did this, everything was roses, and can't wait to make Spidey and X-Men movies in the 2040s. There's probably another version where they suggested this, companies scoffed, waited til they went bankrupt and then just raided the dead carcass.

I also don't get why you think Marvel wouldn't offer up their most successful property, the X-Men, at the time. You think FOX wanted to buy the Power Pack instead?

I will say it's strange to me that if you know how business works so well why you think your idea could be put on the table and other companies would just snatch it up without a second thought. Sony and FOX wouldn't make other demands in their purchase. Like for some reason they'd think renting is better than buying and just go with it no questions asked. I mean cuz that's how business usually works. First offer on the table is taken and that's that. No scheming, no trying to screw the other guy over, no trying to get the best deal possible when you're in the position of power, etc. Nah, that rarely happens.

I think you'd be much better off hoping FOX and Sony eventually make the best Spidey and X-Men movies they possible.

 

[Nawzlew]

Deadpool movie would be ******g awesome.

 

[sunshineblotters]

Marvel literally has thousands of other characters though. If they can make Avengers a billion dollar franchise I'm sure they can and will churn out Inhumans, Defenders, Heroes For Hire, Black Panther, Dr. Strange, ******g Man-Thing, etc. and execute it so they're successful. If GoTG is a success what you're saying will be more of a moot point.

As far as your 30 year plan, listen man, I'm sure there's an alt universe out there where Marvel did this, everything was roses, and can't wait to make Spidey and X-Men movies in the 2040s. There's probably another version where they suggested this, companies scoffed, waited til they went bankrupt and then just raided the dead carcass.

repped because this made laugh.

There has been talk about an Inhumans movie but nothing really concrete. Hope it happens. Dr. Strange seems like a very strong possibility for Phase III from what I have read.

Deadpool movie would be ******g awesome.

Lol see how fox ****** up deadpool in the first wolverine movie? It would be trash considering only fox could make it

 

[rfx45]

I am grasping that. Again I am saying they should have sold their rights for a LONG amount of time. Not indefinitely.

Bill gates is not hurting, but if he could double his net worth I am sure he would.
Marvel aint hurting now but with spiderman and x-men in their cinematic universe they would be doubling their revenues (at least).

How can you be so sure of that? This is hindsight. Back then, Marvel wouldn't have guessed it would turn into a billion dollar business since all the other films before have been a failure, hell F4 from '94 didn't even release. How are they to guess that, "hey, 15 years from now, we will make billions once we get these films back."


And going back to Chapter 11, again with that comes comes a creditors committee who sits on the board and decides how the company is reorganized, they have a big say and most of these guys just wants to get paid back so they really would not care if the whole company sold everything. Keep in mind the other investors and stockholders who just wants to get out of the hole the CEO dug em in. It isn't all up to Marvel to decide. Not sure how it all worked out but maybe we should just be thankful that Marvel got a loophole on how to get these rights back? It could have ended much worse.



And to be fair, Sony and Fox wasn't in bankruptcy so they could afford to take a risk. No risk, no reward and it is a very big risk. That is why Captain America & Thors rights returned because it isn't a guarantee to make money. Fox has been planning an XMen film since 1994 and it didn't release until 2000 and if it weren't for that success, Sony likely wouldn't go on with SpiderMan 2 years later and everything snowballed to what we have today. So it really worked out for the best.

Again if Marvel had simply folded as a company, who knows what we would have now. Maybe Fox getting the rights is a blessing in disguise.

 

[robinvandamn]

I am grasping that. Again I am saying they should have sold their rights for a LONG amount of time. Not indefinitely.

Bill gates is not hurting, but if he could double his net worth I am sure he would.
Marvel aint hurting now but with spiderman and x-men in their cinematic universe they would be doubling their revenues (at least).

Marvel makes a substantial amount off of the Fox and Sony films..

They have plenty on their plate already.. If they owned all the right then we would never be getting films like GoTG.. which could open the door for a lot of other obscure properties

 

[x Buddha Bless x]

Again if Marvel had simply folded as a company, who knows what we would have now. Maybe Fox getting the rights is a blessing in disguise.

An apocalyptic future timeline.

We'd probably get a reverse of what almost happened in the 70s. Probably see Spidey and the X-Men at DC. Lesser known characters probably drift in to public domain :x

 

[sunshineblotters]

I dont think Cpt America and Thors rights were sold. Were they?

I seriously hope you are right because that would be the only thing that makes up for these trash x-men movies. I dont even mind spiderman being with Sony. They are doing a great job with those films for the most part imo.