TVTropes Now available in the app store!
Open

Follow TV Tropes

Following

Marvel Cinematic Universe

Go To

Welcome to the main discussion thread for the Marvel Cinematic Universe! This pinned post is here to establish some basic guidelines. All of the Media Forum rules still apply.

  • This thread is for talking about the live-action films, TV shows, animated works, and related content that use the Marvel brand, currently owned by Disney.
  • While mild digressions are okay, discussion of the comic books should go in this thread. Extended digressions may be thumped as off-topic.
  • Spoilers for new releases should not be discussed without spoiler tagging for at least two weeks. Rather, each title should have a dedicated thread where that sort of conversation is held. We can mention new releases in a general sense, but please be courteous to people who don't want to be spoiled.

If you're posting tagged spoilers, make sure that the film or series is clearly identified outside the spoiler tagging. People need to know what will be spoiled before they choose to read the post.

    Original post 
Since Thor and now Captain America came out this year, I wanted to get what Tropers thought of the concept and execution of the Marvel Cinematic Universe in general. Personally I love the idea and wonder why this idea hasn't been seriously tried before. It sorta seems to me like the DCAU in movie form (And well, ummm, with Marvel), and really 'gets' the comic book feel of a shared universe while not being completely alienating.

Edited by Mrph1 on Jul 29th 2024 at 3:09:00 PM

alliterator Since: Jan, 2001
#39901: Aug 5th 2015 at 2:17:48 PM

They probably shouldn't have agreed to perpetual contracts though. If they had signed ones that only had a ten year lifespan they would have all the rights back by now.

The contracts are for ten years - the studios have to make a movie every ten years or the contracts expire (that's how Marvel got back Daredevil and Ghost Rider and The Punisher). However, if the studios do make a movie within the allotted time period, they keep the rights.

Marvel probably shouldn't have included that, yes, but at the time they were going through bankruptcy. They pretty much needed cash and needed it right away. Writers, artists, editors, all of them were super worried about losing their jobs. So I don't blame Marvel at all for not caring what the contract said. After all, who could have predicted that they would form Marvel Studios and created an interconnected movie universe? A comic book/toy company making a movie studio? Unheard of!

Kostya (Unlucky Thirteen)
#39902: Aug 5th 2015 at 2:19:40 PM

I understand that. I'm saying it should have been ten years period and after that time was up Fox and Sony would have to negotiate a new contract if they wanted to keep making more movies. By then the MCU was underway so Marvel could have just refused and this wouldn't be an issue.

alliterator Since: Jan, 2001
#39903: Aug 5th 2015 at 2:21:12 PM

[up] The other studios probably would have never agreed to it then.

Kostya (Unlucky Thirteen)
#39904: Aug 5th 2015 at 2:24:53 PM

Why not? I don't think they were planning to make these big franchises and do constant reboots when they bought the rights. If they were lucky they could probably expect to make four or five movies over those ten years at which point interest would wane and the rights would just revert. Heck, at the time Spider-Man 3 and X-Men 3 came out it looked like those movies would be the end of their franchises. That was only about halfway through the contract period.

TobiasDrake (•̀⤙•́) (Edited uphill both ways) Relationship Status: Arm chopping is not a love language!
(•̀⤙•́)
#39905: Aug 5th 2015 at 2:25:51 PM

The other studios had Marvel over the same barrel Marvel currently has Sony over.

Sony's not in any danger of bankruptcy, mind, but the Spider-Man franchise's profitability has been steadily waning. It's a bad position to be in where your only options are to make a guaranteed flop or lose the ability to make any money at all.

Given the choice between making no money and making negative money, Sony opted to sit down to the table and try a piece of the MCU pie instead. Fox is not yet in that position.

edited 5th Aug '15 2:27:51 PM by TobiasDrake

My Tumblr. Currently side-by-side liveblogging Digimon Adventure, sub vs dub.
Bocaj Funny but not helpful from Here or thereabouts (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: Pining for the fjords
alliterator Since: Jan, 2001
#39907: Aug 5th 2015 at 2:36:23 PM

Just remember: in the '70s, DC Comics was bought by a company that eventually become Warner Brothers Communications. DC has been owned by a billion dollar company for most of the time it's been around.

Marvel, on the other hand, was owned by a magazine company. Which flopped. And then it was bought by a film company. Which flopped. And then a toy company. Which flopped.

Wackd Since: May, 2009
#39908: Aug 5th 2015 at 3:05:09 PM

Quite. Imagine a world where Marvel declared bankruptcy in the 90's and DC bought up all their properties.
Wouldn't anti-monopoly laws prevent that?

Maybe you'd be less disappointed if you stopped expecting things to be Carmen Sandiego movies.
TobiasDrake (•̀⤙•́) (Edited uphill both ways) Relationship Status: Arm chopping is not a love language!
(•̀⤙•́)
#39909: Aug 5th 2015 at 3:08:36 PM

Other comic companies exist.

My Tumblr. Currently side-by-side liveblogging Digimon Adventure, sub vs dub.
Mukora Uniocular from a place Since: Jan, 2010 Relationship Status: I made a point to burn all of the photographs
Uniocular
#39910: Aug 5th 2015 at 3:11:10 PM

Yeah, I don't think anti-monopoly laws are nearly that strong. I mean, Disney was allowed to buy Pixar, Marvel, Lucasfilms...

"It's so hard to be humble, knowing how great I am."
Wackd Since: May, 2009
#39911: Aug 5th 2015 at 3:20:40 PM

[up][up]Correct me if I'm wrong but doesn't the relatively small size of Dark Horse, IDW, et al mean that a DC/Marvel fusion would be considered a defacto monopoly?

I mean, Disney's bought a few production companies, but Universal, Fox, Warner Bros., and Paramount are still serious competitors.

Maybe you'd be less disappointed if you stopped expecting things to be Carmen Sandiego movies.
Heatth (X-Troper) Relationship Status: In Spades with myself
#39912: Aug 5th 2015 at 4:01:49 PM

[up]You are forgetting manga. I don't know the numbers, but there are big manga publishers, such as Viz Media. If you take them into account, even a Marvel+DC union is not that close to monopoly.

Bocaj Funny but not helpful from Here or thereabouts (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: Pining for the fjords
Funny but not helpful
#39913: Aug 5th 2015 at 4:30:12 PM

The best case scenario would be marvel IP sold off wholesale to DC.

The worst case would have been the properties being auctioned off to different companies.

Among other things, that would have made selling reprints of earlier stuff very difficult.

Forever liveblogging the Avengers
Swanpride Since: Jun, 2013
#39914: Aug 5th 2015 at 5:32:15 PM

Monopoly is rarely an issue in the media because, well, those rules are mainly created to prevent one company to control the whole market and force the customer to pay unreasonable prices as a result. But even a studio which owns various properties can hardly own all the publisher and movie productions, and even if they own a number of successful franchises, there is no need for the audience to watch them. Monopoly only becomes an issue if, for example, the big studios start to make under the table agreements to keep the salaries of their employees down and similar.

When if comes to Marvel and Fox, I am on Marvel's side because I think that Fox is misusing the agreement. As far as I can tell the clause that the rights get extended was originally added to ensure that if Fox built up a successful franchise like X-men, Marvel can't suddenly turn up and say "well, that's nice, but now those characters revert back to us, thanks for your good work". But Fox is using the clause as a loophole. Whenever a right is about to expire, they are putting a cheap production in motion, showing the movie in one theatre and therefore are able to keep the rights. The only reason why they didn't do this with Daredevil is because someone at Fox dropped the ball and didn't put the movie into production in time. While what Fox is doing is not against the contract, it is twisting the spirit of the agreement.

TobiasDrake (•̀⤙•́) (Edited uphill both ways) Relationship Status: Arm chopping is not a love language!
(•̀⤙•́)
#39916: Aug 5th 2015 at 5:39:14 PM

Cheap movie production? Days of Future Past cost $200 million to make.

My Tumblr. Currently side-by-side liveblogging Digimon Adventure, sub vs dub.
Heatth (X-Troper) Relationship Status: In Spades with myself
#39917: Aug 5th 2015 at 5:46:28 PM

[up]I think she was talking about Fantastic Four.

TobiasDrake (•̀⤙•́) (Edited uphill both ways) Relationship Status: Arm chopping is not a love language!
(•̀⤙•́)
#39918: Aug 5th 2015 at 6:01:02 PM

Oh. They haven't posted a budget yet but the new one looks fairly expensive.

My Tumblr. Currently side-by-side liveblogging Digimon Adventure, sub vs dub.
Swanpride Since: Jun, 2013
#39919: Aug 5th 2015 at 6:02:21 PM

[up][up][up]I am not talking about X-men. That's the property Fox has obviously an interest in, even if I don't like their take personally. But if you ask me, Fox is one of the main reasons why Fantastic 4 never became a really big seller. How could it with a mainstream media presence which looks like this?

[up] The new one isn't a cheap production but the main reason why it isn't is because they thought that the director of chronicle might be able to make something successful of the property, not because they believed in the property itself.

edited 5th Aug '15 6:03:56 PM by Swanpride

wehrmacht belongs to the hurricane from the garden of everything Since: Dec, 2010 Relationship Status: YOU'RE TEARING ME APART LISA
belongs to the hurricane
#39920: Aug 5th 2015 at 6:03:49 PM

[up][up] according to a report in april it's 122 million.

edited 5th Aug '15 6:04:37 PM by wehrmacht

Nohbody "In distress", my ass. from Somewhere in Dixie Since: Jan, 2001 Relationship Status: Mu
"In distress", my ass.
#39921: Aug 5th 2015 at 6:07:44 PM

Whenever a right is about to expire, they are putting a cheap production in motion, showing the movie in one theatre and therefore are able to keep the rights.

As they say on the internet, lolwut.

The above quote describes nothing of what Fox has done with the F4 rights since the 2005 release (the unreleased 1994 F4 movie was a desperate grab to retain the film rights, I'm not disputing that). None of them have been a "cheap production", and neither of the released films have been shown in only one theater.

(Some numbers on the Fox-F4 franchise.)

You may not like what Fox is doing with the reboot (I'm indifferent, as I never really cared that much about F4, comics or movies), but that doesn't make it a half-assed grab to retain property rights

All your safe space are belong to Trump
TobiasDrake (•̀⤙•́) (Edited uphill both ways) Relationship Status: Arm chopping is not a love language!
(•̀⤙•́)
#39922: Aug 5th 2015 at 6:08:43 PM

Eh, I think the main reason the Fantastic Four never really caught on is because of the Fantastic Four.

Each of the individual members of the Fantastic Four is capable of being an engaging and compelling character and is a lot of fun to have in the shared universe when they appear in other people's comics. When you put them all together and make them have an adventure together, though, the result is significantly less than the sum of its parts.

The same also holds true for Doom, who is a far better character when he's not duking it out with the ACCURSED RICHARDS and is free to just go be Marvel's definitive Evil Overlord with style and class.

My Tumblr. Currently side-by-side liveblogging Digimon Adventure, sub vs dub.
Swanpride Since: Jun, 2013
#39923: Aug 5th 2015 at 6:21:16 PM

[up][up]It is obvious that Fox's sole interest on the property is to keep it out of Marvel's hands. They announced this movies years ago but didn't put it into production until the very last minute.

Granted, the cheap production trick is what they wanted to do with Daredevil (thankfully they didn't in the end), but what is the future of the F4 at Fox? Another movie in ten years in which someone makes some movie and then slaps the Fantastic 4 title on it?

TargetmasterJoe from Velocitron Since: May, 2013 Relationship Status: I like big bots and I can not lie
#39924: Aug 5th 2015 at 6:30:56 PM

Hey guys, if Marvel ever gets the F4 rights back (the way I see it, it's only a matter of time before Fox slips up), what do you guys think the odds are that Marvel will have Franklin and Valeria Richards (Reed and Sue's kids)?

edited 5th Aug '15 6:31:30 PM by TargetmasterJoe

Theokal3 Since: Jan, 2012
#39925: Aug 5th 2015 at 6:32:57 PM

[up]Well, we already discussed that and how unlikely it is.


Total posts: 186,763
Top