Netflix is so cheap with special effects that I would not want to see that.
Black Panther Teaser trailer...
- Thread starter D'Evils
- Start date
but they smart
I didnt say Stan did good with the deals. I never mentioned the deals being in his favor.
I will speak for myself here, but I dont see HOW he avoids selling those rights at all.
It's my understanding that they eat half the budget just paying a license fee. The thing would look like that 1994 constantin movie and torch would look like iron fists chi effect
It's my understanding that they eat half the budget just paying a license fee. The thing would look like that 1994 constantin movie and torch would look like iron fists chi effect
yup
Like I said you gonna have to go back and research that
its all there...
it was a fascinating time...
and a GREAT potential documentary.
point #3 is moot - Marvel had already sold multiple licenses previously - no one is saying marvel should not have sold.
Please read again - the amount of the deal wasn't the sin - it is the terms - no competent lawyer would have allowed a client to give away so many rights to an IP with no checks or limitations - a bargain price ok... but no annual fee? etc...
The industry story is that Stan made the deal over a weekend without legal review. It was not the first time Marvel licensed characters, they had a process - which your beloved crackhead bypassed, and pocketed most of the fee
Most with any business experience, and at that point Stan had a lot, and not under the influence of narcotics, which by all accounts Stan was consistently high, would not have made that deal...
The only pass is if... Stan was visited by a few goodfellas, then it becomes understandable
for F4 not at all- they have the license almost with no fees for a movie.It's my understanding that they eat half the budget just paying a license fee. The thing would look like that 1994 constantin movie and torch would look like iron fists chi effect
I'm unsure of how a series would be handled- but they could do annual movies via Netflix
I think Fox has an exclusive on distribution and they would want to get a greater return than they can get via Netflix
Fam thats exactly what the other brother told me!
I said we all would have sold. I never said the terms were great.
My point is Stan HAD to sell.
no - he didn't have to sell, unless it was some gangster shit -
he should have walked away or at the very least let the lawyers handle it
everyone is saying he never should have signed THAT deal.
even worse he pocketed the $$ - so how was that good for Marvel?
don't confuse it like its all the same - he could have let the people do their jobs and even give the lic for free but still protect the IP... but hey, the coke inventory was almost dry.
The level of malfeasance Stan was up to at the time:
F4 wasn't the only fuckery with Stan - he made a bunch of bad deals in hollywood for Marvel that benefited him personally in the short term.
he cost people jobs and jacked creators for their IP, and I'm not talking about Kirby...
when it comes down to it - Stan Lee was a con man, a huckster, an embezzler, but not a businessman - he is lucky that he can live off of the copyrights he stole
I'm talking about the Netflix shows that Netflix licences from marvel.
I'm assuming Netflix would have to pay up to Fox in order to use the fantastic four. These types of fees are expensive
A show like Luke Cage probably cost Netflix 3 mil per episode and id bet half is going to pay marvel. ( that's why AOS is better than the Netflix shows ; ABC and Disney are the same company. no license = bigger budget ).
i was just looking at this today. i wanted to see who owned marvel cause i thought it was stan lee but homie only worth 50 million. and deal the disney deal was 4billion. where did the rest of the money go?
Stan Lee never owned Marvel... (1 reason why I called him an embezzler)
When Disney acquired Marvel in 09- Marvel was a publicly traded company.
between 86 and 91 Marvel was sold multiple times - it became a publicly traded company in 91
The $4billion was mostly a stock swap of Disney shares to Marvel shareholders
iirc - Netflix isn't licensing the characters from Marvel - Netflix only has a distribution license for the various series
all of the shows are produced by Marvel Studios in partnership with each individual showrunner's production companies.
So Kevin Feige runs it. Marvel is avoiding anyone not Marvel - having creative control of its IP
I think they can. If they can do what they do with Hulk (can't be in a stand alone movie by Marvel) they can do it with the Fantastic Four.
Think about it...it's another phase...
Silver Surfer in one movie...
maybe some science tech with with Reed in another...
Gage reactions...build the trust...then come out with the Fantastic Four project. I know its money that is the main factor and reverting rights but yall can work a deal out. People just want to be stubborn as shit...like Stuart....that's all I can see in my head...
add greed & egos
cool idea - Silver Surfer... maybe instead of a film, a series 8 to 10 parts
origins to
herald to
quest for home to
herald again
establish skrulls and a few other alien cultures in the process
maybe F4 would be better as a series
I feel like we working with some cuz!
You aint say one lie...
I have never seen an industry besides the government with more individuals ill equipped to lead than studio execs.
BLACK PANTHER Trailer hits during NBA Playoff Game!
Published at: June 9, 2017, 8:31 p.m. CST by headgeek
Hey folks, Harry here... Watching Cleveland dominating the early going of tonight's game of the NBA PLAYOFFS - which is totally in sudden death for Cleveland. But I really am not a basketball guy. I was going to watch as long as it took to see the BLACK PANTHER Trailer - but that cat has flown and that's what I'm here to present for you:
I've seen it twice, but I need to rewatch about 20 more times - me or Quint will be back with more!
Keep it cool,
Harry
Ahoy, squirts! Quint here. Figured I'd weigh in with some preliminary thoughts on that rather intriguing teaser trailer. First thing: Ryan Coogler is clearly setting his own tone here, somewhere between the colorful excesses of the Guardians of the Galaxy movies and the the more down to earth Iron Man films. The exageration in Black Panther all stems from African imagery, which is instantly fresh and different and cool.
The music (by Run the Jewels) also helps give the footage a little extra pop.
What does this mean? It means that Marvel is continuing to evolve and isn't afraid to let these standalone movies have their own, strong identities so they can mix multiple strong flavors together in their big team-up movies, creating an entirely new flavor.
It means that the cast and crew look like they're having a ton of fun and even in that 2 minutes we see that translate visually.
Now, you can never tell if a movie is going to be wholly good or bad based on a single trailer. You can tell a tone and flavor and hint of what's to come. All that hit the right buttons for me. Whether the feature will succeed... well, I guess we'll have to wait and see, but after seeing Creed it'd be incredibly foolish to bet against Coogler's ability to tell a visually interesting, character-driven story.
Published at: June 9, 2017, 8:31 p.m. CST by headgeek
Hey folks, Harry here... Watching Cleveland dominating the early going of tonight's game of the NBA PLAYOFFS - which is totally in sudden death for Cleveland. But I really am not a basketball guy. I was going to watch as long as it took to see the BLACK PANTHER Trailer - but that cat has flown and that's what I'm here to present for you:
I've seen it twice, but I need to rewatch about 20 more times - me or Quint will be back with more!
Keep it cool,
Harry
Ahoy, squirts! Quint here. Figured I'd weigh in with some preliminary thoughts on that rather intriguing teaser trailer. First thing: Ryan Coogler is clearly setting his own tone here, somewhere between the colorful excesses of the Guardians of the Galaxy movies and the the more down to earth Iron Man films. The exageration in Black Panther all stems from African imagery, which is instantly fresh and different and cool.
The music (by Run the Jewels) also helps give the footage a little extra pop.
What does this mean? It means that Marvel is continuing to evolve and isn't afraid to let these standalone movies have their own, strong identities so they can mix multiple strong flavors together in their big team-up movies, creating an entirely new flavor.
It means that the cast and crew look like they're having a ton of fun and even in that 2 minutes we see that translate visually.
Now, you can never tell if a movie is going to be wholly good or bad based on a single trailer. You can tell a tone and flavor and hint of what's to come. All that hit the right buttons for me. Whether the feature will succeed... well, I guess we'll have to wait and see, but after seeing Creed it'd be incredibly foolish to bet against Coogler's ability to tell a visually interesting, character-driven story.
We see both in the trailer.
Which one is better?
I need Coogler to come through with the gold finish and the cape though. That would make the fans go nuts.
We see both in the trailer.
Which one is better?
I need Coogler to come through with the gold finish and the cape though. That would make the fans go nuts.
It seems the new costume is a mix of the classic and Wakanda Tech.
(All black not good for flim)
I want him to break out one of the armors for Infinity War...
The video doesn't say he destroys Vibranium it says he destroys Wakanda, the video does say he makes it inert and in doing so he killed Wakanda's economy.
Marvel makes crossovers and tie-ins. Storm's addition is a tie-in at least and a crossover at most.
You're making this harder than it needs to be ... so okay, kool.
did no one comment on what an awesome piece this was?I'ma just add my $0.02 cents.
As much as alot of us would like to see certain Marvel characters 'come back home'... it won’t be so easy for Marvel to re-acquire the rights to their ‘characters’ which they have sold to other major Hollywood Studios
The main reason is because of none of the other Hollywood Studios have endured something similar to the Sony Email Hack of 2014.
That 2014 hacking scandal was the SINGLE biggest reason WHY Spider-Man ever made an appearance in Civil War.If that had not happened…. most likely, Spidey would have never appeared in ANY Marvel Studio movie, anytime soon.
If you Google these 4 keywords: “Amy Pascal + email + scandal”… you will reveal tons of links to articles that have been written over the last 3 years that really go in-depth about the hack / virus & its aftermath on Sony Pictures.
But I will save y’all the trouble of reading through all the stuff on your own... and just pull some excerpts from different articles... and use them to ‘draw my own conclusions’ about the Marvel/Spider-Man deal.
And it should all make sense by the time you finish reading. Trust.
This is just my opinion on 'the landscape', based on various articles.
Some of y'all might agree.Some won't. To each their own.
——————————————————————————————————————————————
Spider-Man. All day. Every day.
First, I gotta point out something important…
Sony has NO major tent-pole, blockbuster-level FRANCHISE MOVIES under their belt…. besides Spider-Man.
This has been a major criticism of Sony Pictures, for years. (But it also plays a major reason 'why' things happened the way they did.)
- Spider-Man movies LITERALLY pay all the salaries of all the Studio Executives.
- Spider-Man even pays for some of the other movies they put out.
- Spider-Man keeps the lights on in the office & on the movie lot.
- Spider-Man sends their kids to college.
- Spider-Man pays their mortgage.
Seth Rogen & those Judd Apatow movies tend to do well for Sony, but NONE of them are ‘franchise-level’ films. They are all just ‘one-offs’.
Back in 2014, after Spidey… Seth Rogen-type movies kinda ran the place. (Creatively speaking. Not literally.)
Which also means…. their environment does not ‘cultivate in-house talent’ well and make it conducive for their Studio Writers to create a Franchise worthy products. (Because they are not known for finding the next “Game of Thrones” type of tent-pole... or even 'looking'.)
Sony is just eating off of Spider-Man Movies & his Licensing deals.
Ever since 2000.
——————————————————————————————————————————————
How Bad Was It?
One article details ‘just how bad the hack was for Sony’….
Outside Sony, it would eventually seem as if all the studio's info had been exposed for everyone to see. But inside the studio, nobody could access anything. “Everything was so completely destroyed. It was surreal. Everything was down,” one ex-employee told me. “It wasn’t just one system or one part of the lot or one building. The network was completely chewed up by the virus."
The telephone directory vanished. Voicemail was offline. Computers became bricks. Internet access on the Sony lot was shuttered. The cafeteria went cash-only.
Contracts (and the templates those contracts were based on) disappeared.
“It was an Earth-shattering change,” an ex-employee says. “There was no ability to reference anything else that had happened before the hack.”
These last 2 sentences above are CRITICAL.
Think about it…
- The Amazing Spider-Man (Starring Andrew Garfield) was released in July 2012.
- The Amazing Spider-Man 2 was released in May 2014.
- The massive hack happened in November 2014.
- Marvel’s Contract with Sony meant that Sony MUST release (or be deep into production of) a new Spider-Man movie every 3 years, or so.
- But all kinds of Movie Contracts and important documents are now LOST.
- If the Contracts disappeared… you best believe other stuff like shooting schedules, production notes, whole scripts, Casting Decisions, Screenwriter’s Notes, Director’s Notes, Producer’s Notes, Location Agreements, Location Licenses, Set Construction Contracts… and all kinds of important legal (or production-related) documents were GONE also.
- With no way to determine ‘the next milestone’ in the Marvel Contract that needs to be met, in order to ‘keep the rights to Spider-Man’…. things are about to get messy.
- Even if a copy of the Marvel contract is located off-site in some random Corporate Lawyers office.. the Master Production Schedule is needed to reconcile ‘what ELSE needs to be done’ today, next week, next month, or next fiscal quarter… so that the Corporate Lawyers can PROVE that Sony is ‘living up to the agreement’.
By now for Sony… THE. STRUGGLE. IS. REAL.
——————————————————————————————————————————————
And if all of THAT is NOT BAD ENOUGH….
The top 2 bosses in the company (Michael Lynton & Amy Pascal) plus numerous other key Sony Execs get their ALL emails exposed.
And it is revealed that Amy (in particular) was SHITTIN' on various Hollywood (A-List) Talent.
Including, but not limited to...
And these folks were all the ‘top-earners’ for Sony Pictures… who are NOT named ‘Peter Parker’.
- Angelina Jolie
- Leonardo DiCaprio
- Jennifer Lawrence
- Michael Fassbender
- Kevin Hart
- Will Smith’s Whole Family
- Barack Obama
- Countless Writers & Producers
- Just to name a few
——————————————————————————————————————————————
FROM BAD TO WORSE….
For the whole year of 2015....Sony’s BIGGEST box-office hit was…. Paul Blart: Mall Cop 2
Domestic Gross: $71 million
Worldwide Gross: $107 million
Let that sink in.
——————————————————————————————————————————————
MARVEL TO THE RESCUE....
At this point, Sony Pictures ain’t making money.
The future looks bleak for alot of those Sony Studio Executives (in various departments) who are probably one single 'flop' away from the unemployment line. (Consultants from Bain & Company are roaming the hallways... hanging around meetings in the conference rooms... taking notes everywhere... trying to determine whose gonna get picked for the inevitable 'Downsize Draft' that folks are mumbling about in the break room)
Amy Pascal & all the Sony execs done pissed off alot the (A-List) ‘talent’ in Hollywood, plus alot of the folks who help FINANCE their movies (who were Obama supporters). And those who were not pissed off, are probably very leery & outright cynical.
So, there is 2 things that Sony needs to do, to get back on track…
With Sony looking for a creative way to put a spotlight on its top franchise, they knew Marvel would be eager (and willing) to get its hands on Spidey again. (the reality is… Sony really ain’t got ‘no choice’. They are no longer in a any position to play ‘hardball’ with Marvel over Spiderman.
- Make another Spider-Man movie. Pronto
- Plus some spinoffs, or sequels. (Like yesterday.
)
If they make another Spidey movie…. welp, they gotta make him YOUNGER… so they can keep riding that ‘meal ticket’ for the next decade, at least. So the next step for Sony, of course, is to recast Spider-Man. (Welp, guess that "Amazing Spider-Man 3” movie is now cancelled.)
As a result, Sony goes back to Spidey’s roots and puts the character back in high school, which would require it to cast a younger actor. (enter Tom Holland
But now Sony ‘needs more cowbell’
So they move forward with the Spider-Man related villain movie “Sinister Six,” and “Venom” spinoffs, plus announce other projects that feature female characters in the “Spider-Man” universe. (enter Silver Sable & Black Cat
——————————————————————————————————————————————
THE ART OF THE DEAL...
Here’s why…
- Sony did not make a DIME off the Civil War Movie.
- Sony won’t make a DIME off the Avengers: Infinity Wars movie
- Marvel won’t make a DIME off the Homecoming movie.
- Nor any other Spiderman sequels.
Sony needed to breathe life into its “Spider-Man” franchise;. So they lend their 'big gun' back to Marvel, in order to generate more exposure for its biggest moneymaker. Doing so also creates some serious goodwill among Spider-Man fans, who have wanted to see the character become part of the Avengers.
Marvel now gets access to one of its most popular characters — it already controlled the rights for TV, merchandise and other platforms, but the holy grail for Disney lately has been film, where it has been able to launch franchises that impact the bottom line of ALL of its various divisions.
And the deal that gets worked out is....
This whole deal will probably end as soon as Sony gets that (Homecoming) ‘re-up package’ from Prop Joe.
- Marvel Studios won’t pay Sony Pictures for the rights to put Spider-Man in “Captain America: Civil War,” the “Avengers” franchise or its other superhero films, as part of its new partnership with the studio, according to sources with knowledge of the deal.
- But at the same time, Marvel won’t receive a cut of the box office for any of Sony’s films that feature Spider-Man.
- Sony won’t receive a percentage of the revenue Disney makes from Marvel’s films that have Spider-Man, either.
(According to Amy Pascal herself, that is...)
——————————————————————————————————————————————
That Spider-Money lasts a long time
The proof is in the pudding… look at Sony Pictures’ financials for 2016:
Sony’s Pictures Division Reports Loss Of $719M; Company’s Overall Net Profit Takes 50% Hit
http://deadline.com/2017/04/sony-pi...loss-overall-net-profit-down-half-1202078945/
Sony Pictures lost almost $1 billion dollars last year… without any Spider-Man revenue.
Welp, if you lose 50% of your business in a single year…. ssshhheeeeiiiiiittt.... it means that 2 straight years WITHOUT Spider-Man income might just drop them down from being a ‘major’... to an ‘independent’-level Movie Studio.
The Sony Execs have blamed movies like The Ghostbusters reboot, and The Magnificent Seven for underperforming.
However, in the same breath, they ALSO claim they will make about $4 billion by next year.
Wait. Hol up… They said $4 Billion, huh?
Ummm… when does that next Spider-Man movie come out again??
Oh yeah, I almost forgot.
——————————————————————————————————————————————
Sources:
http://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2015/07/sony-box-office-paul-blart
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/spider-mans-sony-marvel-deal-772163
http://www.slate.com/articles/techn...ony_employees_on_the_hack_one_year_later.html
http://www.usmagazine.com/celebrity...al-joked-about-president-obamas-race-20141112
http://variety.com/2017/biz/asia/losses-at-sony-pictures-division-cut-group-profits-1201976056/
Thanks homie.
I don't even know if it's true or not, but the shit was so well written, I'm sold.
I must say...
There wasn't even. WHIFF of Coonery!
There wasn't even. WHIFF of Coonery!
Nah, Feige runs the movie side of things. The tv stuff is a different division.
Feige runs everything live action tv and film report to him
Jeph Loeb used to run animation - not sure who it is now
Nope. Feige runs the movie side. Loeb runs the tv side under Ike Perlmutter, who used to have a hand in the movie side with Feige.
Similar threads
