Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The Hollywood Reporter)   "Disney Has an Avengers-Sized Legal Problem (Maybe Bigger Than It Realizes)"   (hollywoodreporter.com) divider line
    More: Awkward, Stan Lee, Marvel Comics, Superhero, Iron Man, Copyright, Doctor Strange, Hulk, Thor  
•       •       •

4538 clicks; posted to Entertainment » and Business » on 27 Sep 2021 at 10:26 PM (2 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



47 Comments     (+0 »)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2021-09-27 7:11:59 PM  
Lol,
If Disney never pushed to extend copyright terms in the first place, they wouldn't have to pay anyone a damn dime and they could use all of those characters freely, like anyone else.
 
2021-09-27 9:09:19 PM  
This sounds more like a financial issue than a big legal problem. Just a few more people to share the oodles of wealth with.
 
2021-09-27 9:50:21 PM  
That this is framed as a problem for Disney and not one for creators is everything wrong with our economic system.
 
2021-09-27 9:59:05 PM  
Disney has ripped off plenty in their existence. This is just a sniffle of money to them. They'll move on to steal labor from more and more creative workers.
 
2021-09-27 10:31:15 PM  

blastoh: That this is framed as a problem for Disney and not one for creators is everything wrong with our economic system.


You mean people who happen to be related to the creators. The creators are dead.
 
2021-09-27 10:40:27 PM  
Like I said before, this is going to end up with shared copyrights between Marvel and the heirs, with the publishing rights remaining with Marvel. Nothing to see here, move along. This has all happened before and will happen again.
 
2021-09-27 10:58:01 PM  

RoyFokker'sGhost: Like I said before, this is going to end up with shared copyrights between Marvel and the heirs, with the publishing rights remaining with Marvel. Nothing to see here, move along. This has all happened before and will happen again.


Not to mention that Marvel Studios is intentionally moving away from several of those characters by replacing them with updated versions and pass-the-mantle successors. By the time it becomes a problem, Peter Parker's story in the MCU will be done and we'll be onto Miles Morales, which Kirby's estate can't do diddly-squat about. Iron Man's dead. Cap's retired and Falcon has become the new Captain America. Hawkeye is getting one last hurrah in his show and then passing the mantle to Kate Bishop. Nat is dead and will be replaced by Yelena as the Black Widow. Vision is dead and has been replaced by white Vision. Hulk is like raging fire. Kirby estate is like smoldering fire.
 
2021-09-27 11:21:11 PM  

RoyFokker'sGhost: Like I said before, this is going to end up with shared copyrights between Marvel and the heirs, with the publishing rights remaining with Marvel. Nothing to see here, move along. This has all happened before and will happen again.


Or more likely end up with no change given that, for better or worse, the creators don't have any claim on the characters.
 
2021-09-27 11:21:54 PM  
Clever headline

memegenerator.netView Full Size
 
2021-09-27 11:48:54 PM  
Tens millions of dollars to maybe half a dozen estates equals change found under the couch cushions for Disney. They'll be just fine.
 
2021-09-28 12:16:47 AM  
I would care more if this had anything to do with the actual creators of the characters.

But this is about the families of the creators wanting to seek to extract more profit from something they had nothing to do with.

Any copyright that extends beyond the death of the author is stupid.

It's also harmful to society, because it slows the flow and exchange of information, which hampers discovery, advancement, and progress.

\And yes, fiction is part of that.
 
2021-09-28 12:23:49 AM  
Those characters turned out to be worth billions to Disney, and will make billions more in the next few years.  They can give a few tens of millions to the estates of the guys who created them.
 
2021-09-28 12:27:13 AM  
Please -- this is not a problem for an entity that has claimed the Mouse as a copyright for damn near a century now.
 
2021-09-28 12:28:37 AM  
Locking up ideas as property is no sell a form of censorship than suppressing them. Copyright should be abolished. Besides, the stated purpose of copyright in the US at least was to promote the progress of science and the useful arts. It does not due that. It is stifling. Also, Hollywood movies are not science or the useful arts, they are just entertainment.
 
2021-09-28 12:36:35 AM  

WilderKWight: RoyFokker'sGhost: Like I said before, this is going to end up with shared copyrights between Marvel and the heirs, with the publishing rights remaining with Marvel. Nothing to see here, move along. This has all happened before and will happen again.

Not to mention that Marvel Studios is intentionally moving away from several of those characters by replacing them with updated versions and pass-the-mantle successors. By the time it becomes a problem, Peter Parker's story in the MCU will be done and we'll be onto Miles Morales, which Kirby's estate can't do diddly-squat about. Iron Man's dead. Cap's retired and Falcon has become the new Captain America. Hawkeye is getting one last hurrah in his show and then passing the mantle to Kate Bishop. Nat is dead and will be replaced by Yelena as the Black Widow. Vision is dead and has been replaced by white Vision. Hulk is like raging fire. Kirby estate is like smoldering fire.


Except....none of these new characters have even 1/100th the popular appeal of the classic ones. What's the point of having a franchise, if all the characters are new, unfamiliar, non-nostalgic, and unloved? After a few expensive box office bombs, Disney/Marvel may have to return to the well, despite the profit sharing involved with that.

/RDJ will reprise Iron Man within 5 years. Bank on it.
 
2021-09-28 12:37:26 AM  
Cool theorycrafting, bro.

The problem here is that it really doesn't matter what your legal reasoning is, because the fundamental premise is false.  Disney didn't settle the case because they were afraid of losing money from the case directly, or losing access to their characters.  They already have solutions to both of those things:

(1) They have more money than god, and no penalty assigned could possibly actually dent their pocketbook in any meaningful way.

(2) The "original" copyright owner doesn't typically have a claim to derivative works, so even if they lost the property "entirely" that'd only mean the first short run of whatever character was solely authored by the person in question.  Everything else is a "different character", especially if the character has ever been rebooted from scratch in any fashion.  Disney actually initially had a plan to simplify this in the form of the "Ultimate Universe" which was owned and made for-hire under disney's own contracts mostly.  "Nah, man, we're not adapting Iron Man, we're adapting Ultimate Iron Man, Thor, etc.  Totally different characters we started from scratch, we don't owe you anything".  (It's slightly more complex than that but not all that much more complex.)

The reason Disney settled was financial in an entirely non-legal sense: Kirby is legendary in the field, and making national news for basically picking on his widow was likely to spark a rebellion among the current employees and put a dent in the viewership for the movies.  Most of Disney's native marketing is channeled through fans of the comics, who tend to provide massive word of mouth that pulls in the more normal viewers.  All of those fans discussing how Disney was shafting one of the handful of names that even non-comics-fans would recognize instead of how fondly they remember reading Squirrel Girl as a kid or whatever the fark was going to bring sales down by shooting the core marketing avenue in the foot.

Other lesser-known creators aren't going to get that level of changing the venue to the court of public opinion, Disney will just laugh and sic the lawyers on 'em.
 
2021-09-28 1:33:59 AM  
The keys to the future are IP and real estate.  Get either of those and you'll be set for life
 
2021-09-28 1:58:02 AM  

Corn_Fed: WilderKWight: RoyFokker'sGhost: Like I said before, this is going to end up with shared copyrights between Marvel and the heirs, with the publishing rights remaining with Marvel. Nothing to see here, move along. This has all happened before and will happen again.

Not to mention that Marvel Studios is intentionally moving away from several of those characters by replacing them with updated versions and pass-the-mantle successors. By the time it becomes a problem, Peter Parker's story in the MCU will be done and we'll be onto Miles Morales, which Kirby's estate can't do diddly-squat about. Iron Man's dead. Cap's retired and Falcon has become the new Captain America. Hawkeye is getting one last hurrah in his show and then passing the mantle to Kate Bishop. Nat is dead and will be replaced by Yelena as the Black Widow. Vision is dead and has been replaced by white Vision. Hulk is like raging fire. Kirby estate is like smoldering fire.

Except....none of these new characters have even 1/100th the popular appeal of the classic ones. What's the point of having a franchise, if all the characters are new, unfamiliar, non-nostalgic, and unloved? After a few expensive box office bombs, Disney/Marvel may have to return to the well, despite the profit sharing involved with that.

/RDJ will reprise Iron Man within 5 years. Bank on it.


Well, see, that's sort of the thing about Kevin Feige and Marvel Studios.  They don't halfass sh*t and jump straight to the payoff like you do jumping to the money shot every time you go to PornHub.  They spend time and effort setting up and establishing characters and make them into household names.

You're looking for DC/Warner Bros. if rushed, nonsensical bullsh*t is your game.
 
2021-09-28 2:01:17 AM  

Jim_Callahan: Cool theorycrafting, bro.

The problem here is that it really doesn't matter what your legal reasoning is, because the fundamental premise is false.  Disney didn't settle the case because they were afraid of losing money from the case directly, or losing access to their characters.  They already have solutions to both of those things:

(1) They have more money than god, and no penalty assigned could possibly actually dent their pocketbook in any meaningful way.

(2) The "original" copyright owner doesn't typically have a claim to derivative works, so even if they lost the property "entirely" that'd only mean the first short run of whatever character was solely authored by the person in question.  Everything else is a "different character", especially if the character has ever been rebooted from scratch in any fashion.  Disney actually initially had a plan to simplify this in the form of the "Ultimate Universe" which was owned and made for-hire under disney's own contracts mostly.  "Nah, man, we're not adapting Iron Man, we're adapting Ultimate Iron Man, Thor, etc.  Totally different characters we started from scratch, we don't owe you anything".  (It's slightly more complex than that but not all that much more complex.)

The reason Disney settled was financial in an entirely non-legal sense: Kirby is legendary in the field, and making national news for basically picking on his widow was likely to spark a rebellion among the current employees and put a dent in the viewership for the movies.  Most of Disney's native marketing is channeled through fans of the comics, who tend to provide massive word of mouth that pulls in the more normal viewers.  All of those fans discussing how Disney was shafting one of the handful of names that even non-comics-fans would recognize instead of how fondly they remember reading Squirrel Girl as a kid or whatever the fark was going to bring sales down by shooting the core marketing avenue in the foot.

Other lesser-known creators aren't ...


Both supporting and refuting your post...

Disney renegotiated a copyright contract with Bill Mantlo, creator of Rocket racoon, a few months before the release of Guardians of the Galaxy; which was a big 'if' in the minds of analysts and critics leading up to the actual release.

Disney wasn't legally or contractually obligated to do this for Mantlo, who had severe medical and mental issues following being struck by a care in the 90's. But it was good for PR.

As has been noted elsewhere, the real problem is current Disney CEO Bob Chapek, who seems ready to burn the company down and destroy everything his predecessor, Bob Iger, built, so long as every possible penny is pinched in favor of Disney.
 
2021-09-28 2:18:53 AM  

Corn_Fed: WilderKWight: RoyFokker'sGhost: Like I said before, this is going to end up with shared copyrights between Marvel and the heirs, with the publishing rights remaining with Marvel. Nothing to see here, move along. This has all happened before and will happen again.

Not to mention that Marvel Studios is intentionally moving away from several of those characters by replacing them with updated versions and pass-the-mantle successors. By the time it becomes a problem, Peter Parker's story in the MCU will be done and we'll be onto Miles Morales, which Kirby's estate can't do diddly-squat about. Iron Man's dead. Cap's retired and Falcon has become the new Captain America. Hawkeye is getting one last hurrah in his show and then passing the mantle to Kate Bishop. Nat is dead and will be replaced by Yelena as the Black Widow. Vision is dead and has been replaced by white Vision. Hulk is like raging fire. Kirby estate is like smoldering fire.

Except....none of these new characters have even 1/100th the popular appeal of the classic ones. What's the point of having a franchise, if all the characters are new, unfamiliar, non-nostalgic, and unloved? After a few expensive box office bombs, Disney/Marvel may have to return to the well, despite the profit sharing involved with that.

/RDJ will reprise Iron Man within 5 years. Bank on it.


To add in tp what others have said...

Was Iron Man a household name after 40+ years in comics, prior to the 2008 movie?
Thor?
Guardians of the Galaxy?
Captain Marvel?
Black Panther?
Black Widow?

The only two 'bankable' characters in the Marvel Studio 'stable' when the MCU began were Hulk and Captain America. Remember, it took a few years to negotiate with Sony for Spidey to join in.

Almost every single character in the MCU was an unknown, with no nostalgic ties to the general public. In 10 years, Kevin Fiege and the others at Marvel Studios turned them into some of the most bankable franchises in movie history.

Before Black Panther, Hollywood 'knew' that there wasn't a mainstream audience for a Black film
Before Captain Marvel, Hollywood 'knew' that there wasn't a mainstream audience for a female lead action film.

Marvel took the time to build characters and the franchises up. And they shattered everyone's expectations about 'genre films'. An they'll keep doing it, too.
 
2021-09-28 3:18:03 AM  
Aren't all these characters played out anyway?
 
2021-09-28 3:39:05 AM  

Mugato: Aren't all these characters played out anyway?


Is a black Captain America played out?
Is Black Panther or Captain Marvel played out?

I'm looking forward to the new Dr. Strange movie.
I could do another Ant Man movie. I liked them just fine.

Thor isn't going to be Thor much longer, transitioning in the next movie I believe.
 
2021-09-28 4:01:30 AM  

macdaddy357: Also, Hollywood movies are not science or the useful arts, they are just entertainment.


Non-educational books are just entertainment.
Stage plays are just entertainment.
Poetry is just entertainment.
Bollywood movies are just entertainment.
Arthouse movies are just entertainment.
Statues are just entertainment (well, the looking at them anyway).

Which arts would you say isn't entertainment?
 
2021-09-28 4:18:05 AM  
Is a black Captain America played out?
Is Black Panther or Captain Marvel played out?


Yeah, actually.  I guess Black Panther has another movie in him. You conveniently left out Iron Man.

Endgame was pretty much it. Now they're just digging at the bottom of the barrel.
 
2021-09-28 4:58:03 AM  

Mugato: Is a black Captain America played out?
Is Black Panther or Captain Marvel played out?

Yeah, actually.  I guess Black Panther has another movie in him. You conveniently left out Iron Man.


He's dead. So it doesn't matter if he's played out or not.
 
2021-09-28 5:56:20 AM  
Corn_Fed:
Except....none of these new characters have even 1/100th the popular appeal of the classic ones.

Marvel made them popular beyond neckbeard comics readers. Seriously, Marvel made a a trigger happy trash panda a thing

/RDJ will reprise Iron Man within 5 years. Bank on it.

Do not take financial advice from this man
 
2021-09-28 6:47:41 AM  

Mugato: Aren't all these characters played out anyway?


There's (at most) 80 years worth of story arcs just from Marvel. I could pitch 20 highly successful and acclaimed story arcs to be turned into movies and still not scratch the surface. And that's without even getting into the new additions to the MCU, X-Men and Fantastic Four.

In short: no, Marvel characters are far from played out. And DC's characters are just going to waste

Even beyond the Big 2, there's other comic universes that are just perfect for Movie/TV adaptation. Sure, we've got shows like Invincible, The Boys, Walking Dead, Preacher. Sandman and Grendel are on the way. Still waiting on an Elfquest adaptation. The Invisibles would be phenomenal as a series. Fables, after the stink of Once Upon A Time fades away. And I would gladly commit murder if it would get us an adaptation of Astro City's 'Confession' or 'Tarnished Angel' arcs.

IPs adapted from comics are going to be with us for a long, long time.
 
2021-09-28 7:04:43 AM  

Aquapope: Those characters turned out to be worth billions to Disney, and will make billions more in the next few years.  They can give a few tens of millions to the estates of the guys who created them.


So you are good with the Walton family making gazillions of dollars doing absolutely nothing?
 
2021-09-28 7:42:05 AM  
I am pretty sure it will end in a settlement with an agreement that the heirs can never file a lawsuit like this again.

Because the reality is no one wants to watch a movie or read a comic about an off brand Spiderman not connected to the rest of the Marvel Universe, that doesn't have the rest of his back story. The same way there was no interest in making any more off brand James Bond movies after Never Say Never Again. So if the rights to those characters went back to the creators what would they do with them?

Plus Steve Ditko died was never married and never had kids, so who exactly controls his estate?
 
2021-09-28 8:37:36 AM  

Nonrepeating Rotating Binary: Mugato: Aren't all these characters played out anyway?

Is a black Captain America played out?
Is Black Panther or Captain Marvel played out?

I'm looking forward to the new Dr. Strange movie.
I could do another Ant Man movie. I liked them just fine.

Thor isn't going to be Thor much longer, transitioning in the next movie I believe.


And Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings is still #1 at the box office three weeks after it's premiere, which is pretty impressive since we're still in a pandemic.
 
2021-09-28 8:43:22 AM  

snowshovel: Aquapope: Those characters turned out to be worth billions to Disney, and will make billions more in the next few years.  They can give a few tens of millions to the estates of the guys who created them.

So you are good with the Walton family making gazillions of dollars doing absolutely nothing?


Leave the Waltons alone, they were all happy on Walton Mountain until John Boy got all uppity about how it was not enough for him.  Fark, John Boy.
 
2021-09-28 9:00:06 AM  

browneye: Nonrepeating Rotating Binary: Mugato: Aren't all these characters played out anyway?

Is a black Captain America played out?
Is Black Panther or Captain Marvel played out?

I'm looking forward to the new Dr. Strange movie.
I could do another Ant Man movie. I liked them just fine.

Thor isn't going to be Thor much longer, transitioning in the next movie I believe.

And Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings is still #1 at the box office three weeks after it's premiere, which is pretty impressive since we're still in a pandemic.


That actually makes it less impressive. What competition is there?
 
2021-09-28 9:00:18 AM  

Corn_Fed: WilderKWight: RoyFokker'sGhost: Like I said before, this is going to end up with shared copyrights between Marvel and the heirs, with the publishing rights remaining with Marvel. Nothing to see here, move along. This has all happened before and will happen again.

Not to mention that Marvel Studios is intentionally moving away from several of those characters by replacing them with updated versions and pass-the-mantle successors. By the time it becomes a problem, Peter Parker's story in the MCU will be done and we'll be onto Miles Morales, which Kirby's estate can't do diddly-squat about. Iron Man's dead. Cap's retired and Falcon has become the new Captain America. Hawkeye is getting one last hurrah in his show and then passing the mantle to Kate Bishop. Nat is dead and will be replaced by Yelena as the Black Widow. Vision is dead and has been replaced by white Vision. Hulk is like raging fire. Kirby estate is like smoldering fire.

Except....none of these new characters have even 1/100th the popular appeal of the classic ones. What's the point of having a franchise, if all the characters are new, unfamiliar, non-nostalgic, and unloved? After a few expensive box office bombs, Disney/Marvel may have to return to the well, despite the profit sharing involved with that.

/RDJ will reprise Iron Man within 5 years. Bank on it.


I'd just like to point out that Into the Spider-Verse, a movie which starred Miles Morales, which featured several non-Peter Parker Spider-Men, and whose main Peter Parker was someone who incels would insult as a beta cuck and not at all like the real Spider-Man they know and love, made almost $400 million in theaters and will have a sequel coming out next year.
 
2021-09-28 9:06:26 AM  

RoyFokker'sGhost: Corn_Fed: WilderKWight: RoyFokker'sGhost: Like I said before, this is going to end up with shared copyrights between Marvel and the heirs, with the publishing rights remaining with Marvel. Nothing to see here, move along. This has all happened before and will happen again.

Not to mention that Marvel Studios is intentionally moving away from several of those characters by replacing them with updated versions and pass-the-mantle successors. By the time it becomes a problem, Peter Parker's story in the MCU will be done and we'll be onto Miles Morales, which Kirby's estate can't do diddly-squat about. Iron Man's dead. Cap's retired and Falcon has become the new Captain America. Hawkeye is getting one last hurrah in his show and then passing the mantle to Kate Bishop. Nat is dead and will be replaced by Yelena as the Black Widow. Vision is dead and has been replaced by white Vision. Hulk is like raging fire. Kirby estate is like smoldering fire.

Except....none of these new characters have even 1/100th the popular appeal of the classic ones. What's the point of having a franchise, if all the characters are new, unfamiliar, non-nostalgic, and unloved? After a few expensive box office bombs, Disney/Marvel may have to return to the well, despite the profit sharing involved with that.

/RDJ will reprise Iron Man within 5 years. Bank on it.

To add in tp what others have said...

Was Iron Man a household name after 40+ years in comics, prior to the 2008 movie?
Thor?
Guardians of the Galaxy?
Captain Marvel?
Black Panther?
Black Widow?

The only two 'bankable' characters in the Marvel Studio 'stable' when the MCU began were Hulk and Captain America. Remember, it took a few years to negotiate with Sony for Spidey to join in.

Almost every single character in the MCU was an unknown, with no nostalgic ties to the general public. In 10 years, Kevin Fiege and the others at Marvel Studios turned them into some of the most bankable franchises in movie history.

Before Black Panther, Hollywood 'knew' that there wasn't a mainstream audience for a Black film
Before Captain Marvel, Hollywood 'knew' that there wasn't a mainstream audience for a female lead action film.

Marvel took the time to build characters and the franchises up. And they shattered everyone's expectations about 'genre films'. An they'll keep doing it, too.


Even Captain America was a bit of a gamble. He was known, but his previous feature was starring Slab Bulkhead.

Besides the name being well-known, Captain America wasn't exactly a bankable character at that point. I guarantee most general audiences didn't know who Steve Rogers was before seeing it.
 
2021-09-28 9:07:51 AM  

SuperChuck: That actually makes it less impressive. What competition is there?


The comedy hit Free Guy! Which sounds like it should star Rob Schneider but doesn't. And Malignant, which is free if you have HBO.
 
2021-09-28 9:15:53 AM  

SuperChuck: browneye: Nonrepeating Rotating Binary: Mugato: Aren't all these characters played out anyway?

Is a black Captain America played out?
Is Black Panther or Captain Marvel played out?

I'm looking forward to the new Dr. Strange movie.
I could do another Ant Man movie. I liked them just fine.

Thor isn't going to be Thor much longer, transitioning in the next movie I believe.

And Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings is still #1 at the box office three weeks after it's premiere, which is pretty impressive since we're still in a pandemic.

That actually makes it less impressive. What competition is there?


The biggest-grossing movies other than Shang-Chi which are in wide release at the moment are Free Guy and Jungle Cruise. Assuming Shang-Chi grosses another $10 million domestically before leaving theaters, it'll become the biggest domestic movie in the past two years. The current leader of the past two years is Bad Boys for Life. All three of those other movies I named feature actors known to be perennial box office draws (Ryan Reynolds, The Rock, Emily Blunt, Will Smith, Martin Lawrence) while the biggest known actor in Shang-Chi played a bit part for comedic relief. Personally, I think that's pretty impressive.
 
2021-09-28 9:38:50 AM  

Serious Black: Corn_Fed: WilderKWight: RoyFokker'sGhost: Like I said before, this is going to end up with shared copyrights between Marvel and the heirs, with the publishing rights remaining with Marvel. Nothing to see here, move along. This has all happened before and will happen again.

Not to mention that Marvel Studios is intentionally moving away from several of those characters by replacing them with updated versions and pass-the-mantle successors. By the time it becomes a problem, Peter Parker's story in the MCU will be done and we'll be onto Miles Morales, which Kirby's estate can't do diddly-squat about. Iron Man's dead. Cap's retired and Falcon has become the new Captain America. Hawkeye is getting one last hurrah in his show and then passing the mantle to Kate Bishop. Nat is dead and will be replaced by Yelena as the Black Widow. Vision is dead and has been replaced by white Vision. Hulk is like raging fire. Kirby estate is like smoldering fire.

Except....none of these new characters have even 1/100th the popular appeal of the classic ones. What's the point of having a franchise, if all the characters are new, unfamiliar, non-nostalgic, and unloved? After a few expensive box office bombs, Disney/Marvel may have to return to the well, despite the profit sharing involved with that.

/RDJ will reprise Iron Man within 5 years. Bank on it.

I'd just like to point out that Into the Spider-Verse, a movie which starred Miles Morales, which featured several non-Peter Parker Spider-Men, and whose main Peter Parker was someone who incels would insult as a beta cuck and not at all like the real Spider-Man they know and love, made almost $400 million in theaters and will have a sequel coming out next year.


its also the best Spiderman movie.
 
2021-09-28 10:10:46 AM  

RoyFokker'sGhost: Still waiting on an Elfquest adaptation.


Feck yes.
 
2021-09-28 10:13:51 AM  

cocozilla: Serious Black: Corn_Fed: WilderKWight: RoyFokker'sGhost: Like I said before, this is going to end up with shared copyrights between Marvel and the heirs, with the publishing rights remaining with Marvel. Nothing to see here, move along. This has all happened before and will happen again.

Not to mention that Marvel Studios is intentionally moving away from several of those characters by replacing them with updated versions and pass-the-mantle successors. By the time it becomes a problem, Peter Parker's story in the MCU will be done and we'll be onto Miles Morales, which Kirby's estate can't do diddly-squat about. Iron Man's dead. Cap's retired and Falcon has become the new Captain America. Hawkeye is getting one last hurrah in his show and then passing the mantle to Kate Bishop. Nat is dead and will be replaced by Yelena as the Black Widow. Vision is dead and has been replaced by white Vision. Hulk is like raging fire. Kirby estate is like smoldering fire.

Except....none of these new characters have even 1/100th the popular appeal of the classic ones. What's the point of having a franchise, if all the characters are new, unfamiliar, non-nostalgic, and unloved? After a few expensive box office bombs, Disney/Marvel may have to return to the well, despite the profit sharing involved with that.

/RDJ will reprise Iron Man within 5 years. Bank on it.

I'd just like to point out that Into the Spider-Verse, a movie which starred Miles Morales, which featured several non-Peter Parker Spider-Men, and whose main Peter Parker was someone who incels would insult as a beta cuck and not at all like the real Spider-Man they know and love, made almost $400 million in theaters and will have a sequel coming out next year.

its also the best Spiderman movie.


Best Marvel movie and I don't think it's particularly close. And I generally don't much care for animation.
 
2021-09-28 10:59:05 AM  

drewogatory: cocozilla: Serious Black: Corn_Fed: WilderKWight: RoyFokker'sGhost: Like I said before, this is going to end up with shared copyrights between Marvel and the heirs, with the publishing rights remaining with Marvel. Nothing to see here, move along. This has all happened before and will happen again.

Not to mention that Marvel Studios is intentionally moving away from several of those characters by replacing them with updated versions and pass-the-mantle successors. By the time it becomes a problem, Peter Parker's story in the MCU will be done and we'll be onto Miles Morales, which Kirby's estate can't do diddly-squat about. Iron Man's dead. Cap's retired and Falcon has become the new Captain America. Hawkeye is getting one last hurrah in his show and then passing the mantle to Kate Bishop. Nat is dead and will be replaced by Yelena as the Black Widow. Vision is dead and has been replaced by white Vision. Hulk is like raging fire. Kirby estate is like smoldering fire.

Except....none of these new characters have even 1/100th the popular appeal of the classic ones. What's the point of having a franchise, if all the characters are new, unfamiliar, non-nostalgic, and unloved? After a few expensive box office bombs, Disney/Marvel may have to return to the well, despite the profit sharing involved with that.

/RDJ will reprise Iron Man within 5 years. Bank on it.

I'd just like to point out that Into the Spider-Verse, a movie which starred Miles Morales, which featured several non-Peter Parker Spider-Men, and whose main Peter Parker was someone who incels would insult as a beta cuck and not at all like the real Spider-Man they know and love, made almost $400 million in theaters and will have a sequel coming out next year.

its also the best Spiderman movie.

Best Marvel movie and I don't think it's particularly close. And I generally don't much care for animation.


I don't know that I'd say it's the very best Marvel movie as art is somewhat subjective, but it's one of a very few I'd put in contention for that honor, along with Spider-Man 2 (the Tobey Maguire one), Black Panther, and Thor: Ragnarok.
 
2021-09-28 12:25:40 PM  

Ishkur: Please -- this is not a problem for an entity that has claimed the Mouse as a copyright for damn near a century now.


Steamboat Willie was 1928. Wonder how many lawyers are gonna write editorials about how ludicrous the copyright system is for the 100th anniversary, b/c I have zero doubt Disney will lobby congress and get it extended past that point.
 
2021-09-28 12:34:22 PM  

Trocadero: Ishkur: Please -- this is not a problem for an entity that has claimed the Mouse as a copyright for damn near a century now.

Steamboat Willie was 1928. Wonder how many lawyers are gonna write editorials about how ludicrous the copyright system is for the 100th anniversary, b/c I have zero doubt Disney will lobby congress and get it extended past that point.


Does it need to me extended? Mickey Mouse is also a Disney trademark (which never expires). So even If Steamboat Willie was public domain what can you do with it without getting sued for trademark infringement? Make a shot for shot remake of it with different looking characters?
 
2021-09-28 12:41:00 PM  

RoyFokker'sGhost: Mugato: Aren't all these characters played out anyway?

There's (at most) 80 years worth of story arcs just from Marvel. I could pitch 20 highly successful and acclaimed story arcs to be turned into movies and still not scratch the surface. And that's without even getting into the new additions to the MCU, X-Men and Fantastic Four.

In short: no, Marvel characters are far from played out. And DC's characters are just going to waste

Even beyond the Big 2, there's other comic universes that are just perfect for Movie/TV adaptation. Sure, we've got shows like Invincible, The Boys, Walking Dead, Preacher. Sandman and Grendel are on the way. Still waiting on an Elfquest adaptation. The Invisibles would be phenomenal as a series. Fables, after the stink of Once Upon A Time fades away. And I would gladly commit murder if it would get us an adaptation of Astro City's 'Confession' or 'Tarnished Angel' arcs.

IPs adapted from comics are going to be with us for a long, long time.


Animated Elfquest on HBO, like Spawn. I'd watch it!
 
2021-09-28 2:23:43 PM  

solcofn: Animated Elfquest on HBO, like Spawn. I'd watch it!


I don't know anything about Elfquest but the Spawn animated series was awesome.
 
2021-09-28 6:49:03 PM  
Anybody here want the Baptist version of the Marvel Universe?

Cuz I sure as hell don't.
 
2021-09-29 12:12:31 AM  

neeNHA: Anybody here want the Baptist version of the Marvel Universe?

Cuz I sure as hell don't.


Technically, there's nothing stopping the religious nutters from making their own God Squad superhero comics that are influenced by the big names. Marvel has a knock-off of the Justice League (Squadron Supreme), and DC has at least 2 knock-offs of the Avengers (Champions of Angor and 1 or 2 others). And I mean...*direct* knock-offs; even Stevie Wonder can see that Hyperion is Superman. And one of the most critically acclaimed comics series, Astro City is mostly populated by homage/knock-off characters.

The copyright laws regarding character names/depictions are...more like guidelines, y'see.
 
2021-09-29 8:53:53 AM  

drewogatory: cocozilla: Serious Black: Corn_Fed: WilderKWight: RoyFokker'sGhost: Like I said before, this is going to end up with shared copyrights between Marvel and the heirs, with the publishing rights remaining with Marvel. Nothing to see here, move along. This has all happened before and will happen again.

Not to mention that Marvel Studios is intentionally moving away from several of those characters by replacing them with updated versions and pass-the-mantle successors. By the time it becomes a problem, Peter Parker's story in the MCU will be done and we'll be onto Miles Morales, which Kirby's estate can't do diddly-squat about. Iron Man's dead. Cap's retired and Falcon has become the new Captain America. Hawkeye is getting one last hurrah in his show and then passing the mantle to Kate Bishop. Nat is dead and will be replaced by Yelena as the Black Widow. Vision is dead and has been replaced by white Vision. Hulk is like raging fire. Kirby estate is like smoldering fire.

Except....none of these new characters have even 1/100th the popular appeal of the classic ones. What's the point of having a franchise, if all the characters are new, unfamiliar, non-nostalgic, and unloved? After a few expensive box office bombs, Disney/Marvel may have to return to the well, despite the profit sharing involved with that.

/RDJ will reprise Iron Man within 5 years. Bank on it.

I'd just like to point out that Into the Spider-Verse, a movie which starred Miles Morales, which featured several non-Peter Parker Spider-Men, and whose main Peter Parker was someone who incels would insult as a beta cuck and not at all like the real Spider-Man they know and love, made almost $400 million in theaters and will have a sequel coming out next year.

its also the best Spiderman movie.

Best Marvel movie and I don't think it's particularly close. And I generally don't much care for animation.


Because I'm a huge fan of the live-action MCU, I really want to dispute this assertion. But I can't. Into the Spider-Verse is that good.
 
Displayed 47 of 47 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking




On Twitter


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.