The Marvel Movie Character Rights (and where they are)

  • 110 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
#1 Edited by Gambit1024 (10217 posts) - - Show Bio

Alright guys, I've been seeing on just about every social networking site, blog sites, and right here on CV questioning the same exact thing about The Avengers film:

OMG WHERE ARE SPIDERMAN AND WOLVERINE?! THERE AVENGERS IN THE COMICS! THIS IS BULLSH*T!- A quote taken from one of the Avengers fan-pages on Facebook

So, I'm going to make it very clear on a whole list I've gathered, why this particular crossover did not happen, and why it probably won't happen anytime soon.

Let me begin by saying film rights and comic rights and TV rights are all very different things. In the comics, all those characters (Cap, Wolverine, Spider-Man, etc.) are owned by Marvel Comics. They've been there since forever. That won't ever change. Since Marvel Comics owns them all, every single crossover can and has happened since each character's creation (Namor and the Human Torch, Spider-Man and the Avengers, etc.)

Now the TV rights are another animal. Since Disney bought the TV rights to ALL of Marvel's characters, they can all be used in the same show much in the same way that they are in the comics. So if Hulk wants to team up with Spider-Man in Disney XD's Ultimate Spider-Man cartoon, they can (and have) do (and done) so. Before Disney bought Marvel however, shows like Spectacular Spider-Man and Wolverine and the X-Men were in in their own little worlds, so Spider-Man would've never been able to team up with Hulk back then. Same goes for Wolverine and the Avengers, or Wolverine and Spider-Man for that matter. After Disney bought the rights, both those shows were canceled and now Disney can do whatever they want with them. As far as animated TV films go, I can only assume Disney now has complete control over the characters too, much like Lionsgate did before them (case in point, Wolverine was a main character in Hulk Vs). So, if Disney said that they want to do a Civil War TV movie, I believe they would be allowed to do such a thing.

Edit: It appears that I got some of the TV rights issues wrong. Apparently Chris Yost, the guy partly responsible for Wolverine and the X-Men has confirmed that that particular show was in fact set in the same world as Avengers: Earth's Mightiest Heroes and Hulk Vs. That means that Marvel probably owned the X-Men TV rights all along (which makes more sense now that I think about it. Captain America and Nick Fury had guest appearences on X-Men Evolution when it was on). Also, TV rights are filled with many loopholes, and not every Spider-Man cartoon was owned by Marvel or Sony. My apologies, and thank you for bringing that to my attention.

Now come the film rights. This is where most people seem to get the most confused. Years ago, Marvel Comics sold many of their characters' film rights to various studios, such as Universal, Fox, and Sony. Because the X-Men and Spider-Man films were so incredibly successful, Marvel Comics decided to open up their own film studio, Marvel Studios. Marvel Studios had recently obtained their film rights to Iron Man, Captain America, and Thor (who were previously owned by Artisan, but they never did anything with them, so Marvel got them back). They also re-obtained Hulk and Namor, who were previously under the Universal Studios name. With these specific characters back under Marvel Studios control, it is possible to not only have an Iron Man movie, but to have Iron Man meet Hulk and Thor in the same film, without anybody getting sued! That's great! Now in 2012, the dream became a reality, and now we have a honest to God Avengers film that doesn't suck.

"Now where do Spider-Man, Wolverine, and Daredevil come in Gambit1024? Why weren't they in the Avengers movie too?" Right here, little voice in my head!

See, Marvel Studios couldn't re-obtain all of their rights. With Spider-Man doing so well at Sony and X-Men doing so well at Fox, neither of those studios would dare give up any of those franchises for anything. If Spider-Man were to ever meet Captain America in the Avengers movie, Marvel/Disney would get the pants sued off of them, because he's Sony's baby. So here's which rights lie where (to my knowledge, anyway):

  • Sony- Spider-Man and Ghost Rider (and all related villains, characters, etc.)
  • Fox- X-Men, Daredevil, and the Fantastic Four (and all related villains, characters, etc.)
  • Marvel Studios/Disney- All the characters that aren't affiliated with Spider-Man, Ghost Rider, X-Men, Daredevil, and the Fantastic Four.

Now of course, there are some little exceptions. For example, the characters Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch were so closely related to both the Avengers (they were both members for a very long time) and to the X-Men (they're Magneto's children), they can be used by both Fox and Marvel/Disney. There are rules to things they can/cannot say, however. In an Avengers movie, they aren't allowed to discuss "mutants" or Magneto or the X-Men. In an X-Men movie, they aren't allowed to discuss the Avengers or Hulk or Iron Man.

"Alright, Gambit1024! I understand why Spider-Man and Wolverine can't be in the Avengers now, after all! But there's still one thing I don't get: Can Marvel/Disney get the rights to those characters back?" They sure can, little voice!

See, the contracts for say, Daredevil and the FF, say that "If Fox doesn't make a movie without these guys in it after this many years, the rights go back to Marvel." Easy squeezie, right? Wrong. Since Fox cares oh so much about the money these potential cash-cows make, (and who can blame them?) they will do everything in their power to keep these names until they realize that people will not pay any more money to see them. That's exactly what happened with the Punisher, and now he's under the Marvel/Disney roof with all of his old friends.

So I hope I've been clear to everyone about this issue, and I hope someone's learned something from this thread. And if you don't wanna read it all, I'll just say it shortly and loudly:


The end. :)

Edit: If you're still not satisfied, provided a very pretty picture to yet again drill heads with this information:

#2 Posted by Chaos Burn (1898 posts) - - Show Bio

I got a feeling a lot of people will be linked to this page....

#3 Posted by ReVamp (23014 posts) - - Show Bio

Spidey shouldn't be in it regardless. I could see Wolverine in it, but I'd hate the implications that would have on comics.

#4 Edited by cattlebattle (14808 posts) - - Show Bio

I think the last two sentences would have sufficed....
Wolverine and the X-Men was not i its "own little world" It was supposed to based in the same universe as Hulk vs, and Avengers EMH......and the TV rights didn't "get bought by Disney", they lost financing from their partner on the show and couldn't produce it anymore
You used a misconception in an attempt to clear up misconceptions?!

#5 Posted by Gambit1024 (10217 posts) - - Show Bio

@cattlebattle: Where was it ever confirmed/hinted at that WatX was in the same universe as Avengers EMH and Hulk vs? And how else could Disney have gotten the TV rights to Spider-Man and X-Men?

Not being confrontational, I just really want to know. lol

#6 Posted by Deadcool (6928 posts) - - Show Bio
Basically This
#7 Posted by Gambit1024 (10217 posts) - - Show Bio

@Deadcool: Pretty much. I just went in depth to avoid dumb questions.

#8 Posted by Baddamdog (2834 posts) - - Show Bio

Omg thank you for this. Maybe now people will stop saying 'OemGeEeEe Y IZnt' SpYdamen && Wolvareen in Avengaaaarzzzzz!?!?!'

#9 Posted by cattlebattle (14808 posts) - - Show Bio
@Gambit1024 said:

@cattlebattle: Where was it ever confirmed/hinted at that WatX was in the same universe as Avengers EMH and Hulk vs? And how else could Disney have gotten the TV rights to Spider-Man and X-Men?

Not being confrontational, I just really want to know. lol

Wolverine and the X-Men was in continuity with Hulk vs...this is confirmed by Chris Yost on the commentaries, which is in continuity obviously with Hulk vs Thor...which is in the same universe as Avengers EMH can likely google it 
Read the continuity section here
While your correct with the movie rights and Spectacular Spider-Man with Sony giving the rights to Disney/Marvel.......its otherwise difficult to explain TV rights.....for instance Spider-Mans CGI series in 2002 was owned by Sony, yet had the Kingpin not only appear in it, but he was voiced by Michael Clarke Duncan, basically Foxs Daredevil version of the character...there are so many loopholes when it comes to rights and embargos......its ridiculous...don't even get me started on DCs rights issues of the past
#10 Posted by WildStyle (337 posts) - - Show Bio

Good thread

#11 Posted by Gambit1024 (10217 posts) - - Show Bio

@cattlebattle: Alright so I'll edit it to include that. Anything else I got wrong? (I'm trying to be as clear as possible)

#12 Posted by DEGRAAF (8375 posts) - - Show Bio

I still dont understand why They couldnt make Planet Hulk to match the comic? Why they switched Silver Surfer out for Beta Ray Bill. I always heard it was bc Fox owned the rights to the Silver Surfer but it just seemed odd since it was a cartoon movie not a real life movie.

#13 Posted by MadRooster81 (186 posts) - - Show Bio

This was great! Thanks!

#14 Posted by JediXMan (35010 posts) - - Show Bio

@Deadcool said:

Basically This

Nice pic.

Only thing is that Marvel recently got the rights to Blade and Punisher back. Though I'm not certain how that worked, since the Punisher TV show they want to make will be aired on Fox.

#15 Posted by Enosisik (1172 posts) - - Show Bio

Because contracts like this that are worth potential millions are done in fine details and specifics. For instance if I were to buy the rights to make a Stilt-man movie the projected revenue would be low so the contract might be for me to make two films in ten years. Now without a protection clause in affect, I could hold those rights hostage by making a couple of movies that only cost me $10 to make thus fulfilling my deal. To keep this from happening they will put things in the contract that state that the film must generate a certain amount of money or the difference be paid by the film studio. For something like stilt-man who probably wouldn't make much money as a film, they might ask for extra rights to use the character in other forms such as tv or advertising. For something like Iron-man that's going to gain a lot of money the contracts are probably going to be much more complex with percentages of gross being distributed in many directions but with both sides taking great care of the investment. So Marvel would make sure the contract was void if it did not make the amount of money that is estimated. In high budget movies the film studio will not pay out the difference because of cost and because they can just move on to the next project. Theres just lots of different contracts and stipulations with this stuff that no one knows for sure unless they make it public.

#16 Posted by Invisible_Witch (339 posts) - - Show Bio

Thank you soooo much for making this But quick question does that mean the X-men and F4 can have crossover ?

#17 Posted by Nova`Prime` (4172 posts) - - Show Bio

If Marvel Studios wanted to get the rights to the above characters back Disney's pockets are deep enough to make it happen. But why do that when you can let the other movie companies make movies and then you get a cut of the sales. Its a win win for Marvel Studios, it only sucks for us fans who want to see Spidey, some X-Men, and the Avengers in the same movie.

#18 Posted by deadpool6_6_6 (1064 posts) - - Show Bio

@ReVamp said:

Spidey shouldn't be in it regardless. I could see Wolverine in it, but I'd hate the implications that would have on comics.

why not spiderman? I think he'd be good.

#19 Posted by Primmaster64 (21665 posts) - - Show Bio

Ahh where really stupid....

#20 Posted by Gambit1024 (10217 posts) - - Show Bio

@JediXMan: I'm not sure on how the Punisher's rights were outside of film. TV rights are usually sketchy and full of loopholes. Doesn't matter anymore in the Punisher's case because Fox isn't picking the show up anyway (for the better, imo)

@Invisible_Witch: Theoretically, yes. Since Fox owns the FF, X-Men, and even Daredevil, there could be a movie where the Thing, Wolverine, and Daredevil team-up and fight Dr. Doom. I don't know why they'd do that, but yes, since they own the rights, they can do whatever they want with them as far as film goes.

@BlueLantern1995: I did mention Scarlet With and Quicksilver's situation. The Iron Patriot armor is an Iron Man suit, and was prominently featured in Avengers comics, so there shouldn't be any conflict regarding that.

#21 Posted by Yung ANcient One (5171 posts) - - Show Bio

yeah ... ... ... whatever.


#22 Edited by PhoenixoftheTides (4257 posts) - - Show Bio

I work in the entertainment field on the legal side, so I'm familiar with these types of issues - I didn't want to say anything since I have no specialized knowledge or insider info regarding the terms and stipulations in their contracts. Bravo on doing the research and breaking it out in such a sensible way.

#23 Posted by Gambit1024 (10217 posts) - - Show Bio

@PhoenixoftheTides: Thanks. And feel free to ask any questions you might have. I'm certain that I know everything there is to know about the movies. TV rights are a different story, but.... Yeah. If you have a question regarding the movies, don't be shy, lol.

#24 Posted by maddave (1 posts) - - Show Bio

Just want to say that you can read the transcript of the Marvel v Fox litigation on Westlaw. Some of the details of the contract are there; interestingly, despite the media reporting that Fox won, actually Marvel did. Marvel COULD make a live TV show of the X-men, so long as Fox cannot show that it does not weaken the film license. The onus would seem to be on Fox, which could be difficult to show.

More interestingly, it emerged that although this was one of those deals where the license had to be used otherwise it would expire, ANY movie had to be approved by Marvel. They have a veto to any future movies by Sony or Fox. They could, in theory, refuse to allow any more movies for the next 7 years, meaning that the license would expire. The one issue is that I believe there is a doctrine of good faith in most US states (my legal background is in English law.) So, they could not just have a blanket refusal otherwise this would not be in good faith, but certainly they could argue that some of the X-movies have royally sucked and are damaging the brand (which I would argue they have been doing since the start, hence the huge drop in the market share of the X-men comics.)

This would also mean that any talk of Fox or Sony releasing some old tat to keep their licenses expiring is utter nonsense. It HAS to be approved by Marvel, who would certainly not approve of a $10 straight to dvd movie.

#25 Posted by johnkmccubbin91 (3897 posts) - - Show Bio

There is a possibility that spider-man might be in the next Avengers film as Avi Arad (Marvel Studios founder/producer) was in talks with Sony for Spider-Man appearing in Avenger sequels as they already came to an agrement to use the OsCorp building in Avengers (alought the design for that wasn't complete in time to add so never was used). So we might see Spidey in a future Avengers film would be good for both Marvel and Sony.

Plus I noticed you said that Marvel bought Disney it was the other way aroud Disney bought Marvel Entertainment (which Marvel Studious is a part of) in 2009.

#26 Posted by Teerack (10000 posts) - - Show Bio

Do you know when the contracts expire?

#27 Posted by johnkmccubbin91 (3897 posts) - - Show Bio

If you mean the contracts the other studios have as it said in the article its so many years after the studio haven't made a film

#28 Posted by Gambit1024 (10217 posts) - - Show Bio

@johnkmccubbin91 said:

There is a possibility that spider-man might be in the next Avengers film as Avi Arad (Marvel Studios founder/producer) was in talks with Sony for Spider-Man appearing in Avenger sequels as they already came to an agrement to use the OsCorp building in Avengers (alought the design for that wasn't complete in time to add so never was used). So we might see Spidey in a future Avengers film would be good for both Marvel and Sony.

Plus I noticed you said that Marvel bought Disney it was the other way aroud Disney bought Marvel Entertainment (which Marvel Studious is a part of) in 2009.

Regarding the Spider-Man thing: You're absolutely right about that, and apparently there was a tweet made this week teasing a possible revelation in that possibility to be revealed at SDCC. It could be a troll hyping people up, or it might actually be legit. Either way, it's not entirely impossible, but with the rights being at their current state, it's a tad improbable. I look forward to any reveal of this.

And the other thing must've been a typo. I'll look it over.

#29 Posted by daredevil21134 (15459 posts) - - Show Bio


#30 Edited by johnkmccubbin91 (3897 posts) - - Show Bio

This is the only legit statement I've found from Arad to Crave

If something like that happens, it’s great for Disney, it’s great for Sony. If the right story comes in, we are now working on Venom first. It’s our first out. So our thinking is in the right direction. Avengers to me was an expected success so I never looked at it because Avengers was successful

I think it be great business for both Disney and Sony so I don't see why not Sony would still own Spidey solo films and they'd get a chunck out of Avengers films and we get Spidey in Avengers win win win

#31 Posted by playhouse (21 posts) - - Show Bio
@JediXMan: Only thing is that Marvel recently got the rights to Blade and Punisher back. Though I'm not certain how that worked, since the Punisher TV show they want to make will be aired on Fox.

Fox wouldn't actually be producing the show. They'd just be the network airing it. Far as I know, Marvel would actually be the production house on that series. Another example would be the Wonder Woman series that that pilot was shot for. WBTV was producing it but the plan was for it to air on NBC rather than the WB-owned CW. Or take a look at Scrubs. That show was produced by ABC Studios all of its nine seasons but it aired on NBC for 7 of those seasons. Production is different than airing a show. Though, networks do have a say in how the production company makes their show, including things like casting, storylines, etc., because they are the ones paying for it.

#32 Posted by THORSON (3741 posts) - - Show Bio

daredevil, punisher, blade has been reverted back to marvel

elektra still remains with fox

quicksilver and scarlet witch can be used by both marvel and fox

#33 Posted by dude1983 (2 posts) - - Show Bio

Fox must likely won't do another Elektra film, so those rights should revert back in 2015. The last Ghost Rider movie had a decent profit but Fox may be uninterested in another sequel since X-Men and Fantastic Four will be their own shared cinematic universe. In the end, Sony and Fox will make damn well sure to keep movies in production so their rights aren't lost. Interesting fact, though. Disney will receive full distribution rights to all the Star Wars movies EXCEPT Episode IV: A New Hope. Fox holds those rights indefinitely, so technically Fox could release the movie without Disney's approval, even though Dusney

#34 Posted by dude1983 (2 posts) - - Show Bio

wIll get a share in the profits due to ownership of the characters. Disney will get all rights in 2020 to ever my other movie but Fox will forever profit off of A New Hope.

#35 Posted by tsaimelemoni (30 posts) - - Show Bio

I was kind of hoping that the Elektra rights would go back with Daredevil, but I guess not.

Maybe if the Wolverine solo movies are going to involve the Hand, they can have Elektra team up with him and try and fix that mess of her solo film.

#36 Edited by Strider92 (18051 posts) - - Show Bio

@gambit1024: Not quite true. Sony and Marvel have an agreement on filming and merchandising rights. For example the newest Iron Man animated movie was release by a joint venture of Sony and Marvel despite Sony not owning anything to do with Iron Man:

Check the bottom left

Marvel and Sony were collaborating on the Avengers to put Oscorp tower into the Avenegrs movie however the production speed went all fritzy and it didn't happen. Both producers however did plainly state that Oscorp tower was originally planned to be in the Avengers.

The only reason Sony would EVER sue Marvel is if they used Spider-man or Ghost Rider without their consent however due to the merchandising partnership and the fact Sony seem quite willing to Co-Op with Marvel some of their characters (more notably Spider-man) could very well end up in the Avengers or another joint venture given the fact it would have happened if the production timing had been alright.

#37 Posted by phaedrusnyc (3 posts) - - Show Bio

This is not the first article I've seen that says Scarlet Witch and Quicksilver can be used by either studio, but I have yet to see any statement from the players that says that. Licensing is pretty specific- are you saying this because this is a deal that has been confirmed or because people are assuming that because the characters fit in two baskets they're up for grabs? Considering Marvel Studios hadn't worked out its self-financing deal when the movie rights for X-Men were sold to Fox, it's hard for me to understand why they would have been prescient enough to negotiate that "out."

#38 Posted by ONIT (7 posts) - - Show Bio

I read that Marvel has scripts for Ms. Marvel, Doctor Strange, Iron Fist, Luke Cage, Black Panther and The Runaways. Concerning Ms. Marvel, who owns the movie right for the Kree? The people I asked before had two answers. Answer 1 was FOX owns the Kree rights, but Marvel is allowed to use Ms. Marvel as long as the Kree are never mentioned. Answer 2 was Marvel owns the rights for the Kree. What the real deal?

#39 Posted by The_Brave_Family (13 posts) - - Show Bio

Sony is just a bunch of business men in suits who don't give a crap about Spider-Man's mythology. Like people have said, they're just gonna milk him dry for as long as they can - I remember reading about how they tried to incorporate the OsCorp Tower in The Avengers... I laughed at that. They were desperate and went to their rival company (when Marvel/Disney shouldn't be) to get the littlest recognition to spread buzz all over the internet hoping to get more viewers for their sorry excuse of a reboot. Sony is just like Fox who are doing just as much of a bad job. Mark Millar is trying to make a shared universe with X-Men and the Fantastic Four? It basically means more money for them and a long time till we see X-Men and FF's rights revert back to Marvel... The fact that these 2 companies are attempting reboots goes to show how scared they are. I think they know that their time is coming to an end. Bryan Singer literally did not care about the X-Men franchise after X2 until late last year when he and Vaughn s*** their pants seeing how the Avengers crapped all over their work. I laughed when Matthew Vaughn left and suddenly Singer came back, happy to be there when he spent the previous 7 years not caring about Fox at all. Same goes for Marc Webb, sure everyone expected him to come back for a Spider-Man sequel but he knew that the reboot needed to step-up or hell, another reboot :P

#40 Edited by ONIT (7 posts) - - Show Bio

Just remembered something about the Fantastic Four movie right. FOX does NOT have them. As far as I know those movie rights were bought by German producer Bernd Eichinger (-> Constantin Film) in 1986. Constantin Film made a F4 movie in 1994 to kep the movie rights but the film was never released. Then Constantin Film teamed up with FOX to do F4 movies in 2005 and 2007. Since F4 is being rebooted I assume the movie rights are still with Constantin Film and the partnership with FOX is still on.

@the_brave_family: Bryan Singer did not care about the X-Men franchise after X2 until late last year after the Avengers success? You wrote so in June 2013. That's one of the reasons why you're wrong. After X2 Singer was supposed to be the director of X3 so he still cared about the franchise. Unfortunately, Singer also had a contract with Warner and they forced him to do Superman Returns instead of X3. After X3 Singer was scheduled to direct X-Men: First Class, so he wrote the story for the movie (see movie credits) but once again his contract with Warner forced him out again but his story for First Class was used and Singer stayed as a producer while Vaughn directed. First Class was released in 2011 so including pre-production this is at least 2 years before the Avengers success. Vaughn was supposed to direct X-Men: Days of Future Days and Singer was supposed to produce again. Vaughn had to change his plans so he is producing now and Singer is directing again, They simply swapped their duties for the film which is filming right now but went into pre-production before the Avengers movie has its success last year. Additionally, while the X-Men Origin movies were made, the X-Men movie producer Donner kept giving interviews how involved Singer still is and how they are trying to do a X4. Those plans were made around 2009. That's even before Iron Man 2 came out and 3 years before The Avengers came out.

#41 Posted by oldnightcrawler (5695 posts) - - Show Bio

@gambit1024: I think I pretty much knew all of this, but thanks for checking it all out and putting this together.

I heard that the rights to Daredevil (and related characters) recently reverted back to Marvel due to not meeting their deadline, meaning that Marvel could use those characters now; is that so? If it is, you might want to edit your post.

#42 Posted by JonnJonzz_JL (2 posts) - - Show Bio

I'm a little concerned about Marvel scooping rights to Iron Patriot via Rhodey and not the more interesting story arc of Norman Osborne stealing, repainting and donning one of Stark's suits. I guess that means Osborne is destined to be crazy and a Goblin instead of the guy who leads the defeat of the Skrull invasion? That's too bad. Would make a good Spiderman movie instead of the same boring plots over and over again. Marvel may not own Spidey movies, but they sure have painted Fox into a corner.

#43 Posted by JasondeRouslin (1 posts) - - Show Bio

This is really great thread. Thanks for clearing a lot up. From the money / investment side am I correct in saying that no matter what Disney I.e marvel makes both naming rights and character rights for all characters therefore getting some if not all of the merchandise profit for each movie. Also to use the "marvel" logo on these movies they have to pay some sort of fee to Disney I'd presume?

#44 Edited by Cufanai (1 posts) - - Show Bio

So, I knew most of this(and some of the changes that have happened since the article was written), but I still have a question.

The Long Version: There's Marvel's Marvel Cinematic Universe(note the capital letters)--the MCU. And then, if Fox ever crosses over Fantastic Four with Xmen(or perhaps even if they don't, with the Xmen movies, Wolverine movies, and now, I hear, an X-force movie), there's Fox's Marvel Movie Universe(again, note the capitals)--the MMU. But what all exactly does Sony own the rights to? If they wanted to create their own (let's call it the) Marvel Cinematic Continuity--the MCC-- with separate movies/series for, say, Spiderman, Black Cat, Venom, Silver Sable, Paladin, Cloak and Dagger, Madame Webb, Moon Knight, and possibly other Spiderman supporting characters, could they do it, considering, for examples, Silver Sable's connection to both Spiderman(and consequently the MCC) as well as the MMU(through her relationship with Doctor Doom), or Cloak and Dagger starting as Spiderman supporting characters(MCC) but over time, becoming attached to Dr. Strange(MCU) and mutants(MMU), etc. culminating in a team up movie(called "Slingers", maybe, or "Spiderwebs"?), do they have the rights to do this?

In a nutshell: Seemingly obviously the rights to Black Cat, Venom, and Madame Webb fall under Sony's Spiderman rights umbrella, but does that umbrella also cover characters who started out as or became the most well-known as Spider-man supporting characters but also have somewhat major connections to Fox and/or Marvel Studios characters?

#45 Posted by Smart_Dork_Dude (3366 posts) - - Show Bio

Actually I heard a rumor that Venom was over at Marvel right now and they're the ones making the Venom movie. Avi Arad even said it!!!

#46 Edited by drgnx (3633 posts) - - Show Bio
#47 Posted by MartianManhunterIsBetterThanCyborg (2422 posts) - - Show Bio

Namor is still at Universal

#48 Edited by hyiena (2952 posts) - - Show Bio

How much more time does fox have before F4 reverts back to marvel it can't be to long since Daredevil did. Ghostrider, Blade, and Punisher also all reverted.

#49 Posted by flameboy298 (2792 posts) - - Show Bio

@hyiena: I think its tolate now sense a F4 is already being rebooted..I hope something bad happens so Marvel gets the rights back...I mean its silly that other Studios own their characters.

#50 Posted by TazzMission (5766 posts) - - Show Bio

@hyiena: I think its tolate now sense a F4 is already being rebooted..I hope something bad happens so Marvel gets the rights back...I mean its silly that other Studios own their characters.

in some cases it is smart but and there is a huge but it depends on who owns those rights. i mean hey the first 2 blade films were great and as far as fantastic 4 go's just based on history alone there is zero chance itll do well. i mean holy crap bruh they had 2 films and still left a terrible taste in fans mouths. i mean yea i hate the idea of people losing work but i wouldnt mind if it failed and marvel gets the rights back.

This edit will also create new pages on Comic Vine for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Comic Vine users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.