Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 67
  1. #46
    Extraordinary Member Mike_Murdock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    7,156

    Default

    I will agree with others that an Ultraverse Warzone would have been really fun. I know nothing about it really (I'm far more likely to read the New Universe next because it seems to be connected to the Marvel Universe at the moment). As a general rule, I think Marvel benefits from being bigger and having more available toys to play with.
    Matt Murdock's cooler twin brother

    I'd give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety's sake!
    Thomas More - A Man for All Seasons

    Interested in reading Daredevil? Not sure what to read next? Why not check out the Daredevil Book Club for some ideas?

  2. #47

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Darthfury78 View Post
    It that's the case, Marvel should sell Malibu Comics back to the original owners.
    Or to someone else who would be willing to publish the characters notwithstanding the payments they would have to make to the creators.
    Sandy Hausler
    DC Boards Moderator (along with those two other guys)
    THE CBR COMMUNITY STANDARDS & RULES ~ Know them. Follow them. Love them.

  3. #48

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Thor-Ul View Post
    You are forgetting who is Marvel's parent company now and what kind of profile they like to show.
    I'm not forgetting anything. I'm just saying its ridiculous to say that a company should not be able to use intellectual property it purchased decades ago because one of the characters was created by someone convicted of possessing child pornography and he would have ton be paid. Of course, that didn't seem to bother Marvel pre-Disney, so I see no reason anything will change.
    Sandy Hausler
    DC Boards Moderator (along with those two other guys)
    THE CBR COMMUNITY STANDARDS & RULES ~ Know them. Follow them. Love them.

  4. #49
    Invincible Member XPac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    27,133

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Darthfury78 View Post
    It that's the case, Marvel should sell Malibu Comics back to the original owners.
    Do we know the original owners even want to buy them back?

  5. #50
    Astonishing Member Gaastra's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    2,561

    Default

    If she is, or at least if that was the intention, I would be surprised. But, well, the character is different enough to argument than she is a character created only for the MCU and had no relationship with the one from the comics beyond the name. Because if it was the Ultraverse one, some creator would had make a fuss about the payment of royalties.
    They did make her older and a bad guy but her ties to grandmaster and loki--and on a "contest of champions" with thor fighting another hero in avengers vs ultraforce and she had a staff like in the comics, and had the same color as her comic outfit with the same name as the comic version does raise eyebrows big time. Maybe marvel paid or got the ok to use a version her for the film because they took a lot from her for it.

    [IMG][/IMG]




    And most sites would be wrong if it is not. But the point is than she was too much different from the comic version to be a whole other character.
    How many mcu heroes and bad guys did they change? Even the shows like aos had 2-D man act nothing like the comic version. He didn't even get his powers! I don't remember hulks green female sidekick from the 70s dating starlord and wearing a earth t-shirt like she was in gotg or hala is thors sister who will lose her powers if thors home is gone! Heck what did thor 3 really have to do with the story of planet hulk other then the setting?

    Marvel changes all kinds of things.
    Last edited by Gaastra; 08-07-2019 at 08:36 AM.

  6. #51
    Amazing Member
    Join Date
    May 2019
    Posts
    63

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by shooshoomanjoe View Post
    Their Genesis line was still being published when Ultraverse came out. I don't remember what happened with Ex-Mutants and Dinosaurs for Hire but the creators of the Protectors destroyed their universe when Malibu was sold to Marvel so Marvel couldn't use their universe. Most of these characters are on the public domain though and I'd love to see them back.
    since all 3 had a crossover before the end, i would assume that they all live in the same world so when the protector earth got destroyed , i would the rest alll died as well.. yeah , a lot of the protector characters were from Centaur comics of the golden age , many of those characters did appeared in project superpowers but i would have loved a teamup back then between the protectors and the avengers since they shared a lot of similarities.

  7. #52
    Astonishing Member Gaastra's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    2,561

    Default

    Remember the "hole through the whole issue" gimmick? Don't you miss 90s gimmicks?

    [IMG][/IMG]

  8. #53
    Amazing Member Kaine322's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    55

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by shooshoomanjoe View Post
    Their Genesis line was still being published when Ultraverse came out. I don't remember what happened with Ex-Mutants and Dinosaurs for Hire but the creators of the Protectors destroyed their universe when Malibu was sold to Marvel so Marvel couldn't use their universe. Most of these characters are on the public domain though and I'd love to see them back.
    R.A. Jones, the Protectors' writer, has brought them back, after a fashion, in a series of prose novels. Except now their adventures take place during World War II. The 1st novel in the series is The Steel Ring. It's for sale on Amazon. Not a bad read.

  9. #54
    Incredible Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    825

    Default

    I would love to see the Ultraverse come back as a separate line from Marvel. If Disney is doing nothing with them but letting them gather dust they should try and see if any other company wants to buy them. What's the point of hanging onto something that not being used or will ever be used when they could make some money selling it off?

    It's probably the same reason Fox kept hanging onto the FF rights. They won't/can't make money off the property but they sure as hell don't want anyone else to make money off it either.

  10. #55
    Invincible Member XPac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    27,133

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Toreador View Post
    I would love to see the Ultraverse come back as a separate line from Marvel. If Disney is doing nothing with them but letting them gather dust they should try and see if any other company wants to buy them. What's the point of hanging onto something that not being used or will ever be used when they could make some money selling it off?

    It's probably the same reason Fox kept hanging onto the FF rights. They won't/can't make money off the property but they sure as hell don't want anyone else to make money off it either.
    Keeping the Ultraverse away from DC probably was 90% of the reason Marvel bought it in the first place. That said, I'm iffy whether or not there's a line going around the block of people wanting to buy it. If the rumors about the contracts are even half as bad as marvel implies that they are, it might not be worth anyone's time.

  11. #56
    Mighty Member K7P5V's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    Chicago, Illinois
    Posts
    1,230

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gaastra View Post
    Remember the "hole through the whole issue" gimmick? Don't you miss 90s gimmicks?

    [IMG][/IMG]
    Hell yeah, dude. My favorite 90's gimmick is Rob Liefeld.

  12. #57
    Mighty Member Spider-Chan's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    1,144

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Toreador View Post
    I would love to see the Ultraverse come back as a separate line from Marvel. If Disney is doing nothing with them but letting them gather dust they should try and see if any other company wants to buy them. What's the point of hanging onto something that not being used or will ever be used when they could make some money selling it off?
    Despite what popular belief, Marvel is not using the characters because they don't want to pay the original creators. Tom Mason, one of the co-founders of Malibu, explains why Marvel can't use Ultraverse characters:

    Ah, a good question that brings up old stuff. Here’s a couple of things. I went to the Hudnall link above, and he’s wrong on at least one point. Marvel never bought Malibu for its coloring department. That was never true. Marvel bought Malibu for only one reason: to keep it away from DC which had been negotiating to buy the company since April/May 1994. (Marvel actively and repeatedly tried to shut down the coloring department post-acquisition and it was only saved through the intervention of Mark Gruenwald and the guy who ran the coloring department Mike Giles.)

    As far as I know, there are no creator contract issues with the Founders that would prevent the revival of the Ultraverse. I know that phantom issue gets tossed out there a lot, but both Tom Brevoort and Joe Quesada have stated that it’s not a creator contract issue that prevents Marvel from reviving it. And since I’m one of the people who has an Ultraverse contract and an interest in multiple characters, I would know. Also, Marvel owns the Ultraverse outright, so they don’t need anyone’s permission. (The Founders still keep in touch and we’ve all talked about it over the years – there’s nothing legal going on between the Founders and Marvel.)

    Johanna is correct that the Ultraverse contracts for the Founders do have participation %. However, the Founders do not have an ownership stake, do not share in any “profits” (however that may be defined), and have no control over the properties. (Just as if they had created a character for the DCU.) Character Interest Agreements for the Ultraverse simply state that writers and artists who created specific characters will receive a very small percentage of the money that comes in based on their media exploitation. The agreements were based on standard terms at DC at the time for creators who created a character for the DCU. And those terms are in perpetuity, so if for some reason there’s a Sludge movie, Steve Gerber’s estate receives a check. But, those percentages are not onerous and not out of line with what DC was offering at the time.

    Brevoort has stated in the past that the reason Marvel can’t discuss the Ultraverse properties is because there’s an NDA in place with certain parties.

    If you read the original press release where Scott Rosenberg left Marvel and announced the formation of Platinum Studios back in 1997, you’ll find this nugget: “Rosenberg also has an ongoing producer deal for all Malibu Comics properties.” http://goo.gl/v2WRc2

    So that NDA just might relate to that and probably has more to do with the reason why the Ultraverse properties have languished.


    So the reason they Marvel can't revive Ultraverse, is because the rights are partially tangled with Rosenberg's Platinum Studios company.

  13. #58

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Spider-Chan View Post
    Despite what popular belief, Marvel is not using the characters because they don't want to pay the original creators. Tom Mason, one of the co-founders of Malibu, explains why Marvel can't use Ultraverse characters:


    So that NDA just might relate to that and probably has more to do with the reason why the Ultraverse properties have languished.[/I]

    So the reason they Marvel can't revive Ultraverse, is because the rights are partially tangled with Rosenberg's Platinum Studios company
    .

    So pay off Mr. Rosenberg. Have a settlement. LOL. Oh well. Just one person in the way of using all these character concepts? Oh well..

  14. #59
    Traveler of omniverses Thor-Ul's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Halfway between Asgard & Krypton
    Posts
    2,710

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gaastra View Post
    They did make her older and a bad guy but her ties to grandmaster and loki--and on a "contest of champions" with thor fighting another hero in avengers vs ultraforce and she had a staff like in the comics, and had the same color as her comic outfit with the same name as the comic version does raise eyebrows big time. Maybe marvel paid or got the ok to use a version her for the film because they took a lot from her for it.
    So that are the core elements of the character then? Her relationships with other charactersin onlyone crossover comic? Her only appearance in a crossover without any relevante role? I can see an easter egg or a homage, but not the same character.

    How many mcu heroes and bad guys did they change? Even the shows like aos had 2-D man act nothing like the comic version. He didn't even get his powers! I don't remember hulks green female sidekick from the 70s dating starlord and wearing a earth t-shirt like she was in gotg or hala is thors sister who will lose her powers if thors home is gone! Heck what did thor 3 really have to do with the story of planet hulk other then the setting?

    Marvel changes all kinds of things.
    Yes, but there is a breakig point where you adapt the character. To adapt there must be made certain changes to condense its core concept but still be recognizable as the same character represented on the pages and on the screen. Something like the organic webshooters can raise some eyebrowns, but don't change the core of Spider-man, but in the Trevor/Mandarin case, you have a problem because they created another character using a familiar name. And that is the case with this Topaz.


    Quote Originally Posted by Spider-Chan View Post
    Despite what popular belief, Marvel is not using the characters because they don't want to pay the original creators. Tom Mason, one of the co-founders of Malibu, explains why Marvel can't use Ultraverse characters:

    Ah, a good question that brings up old stuff. Here’s a couple of things. I went to the Hudnall link above, and he’s wrong on at least one point. Marvel never bought Malibu for its coloring department. That was never true. Marvel bought Malibu for only one reason: to keep it away from DC which had been negotiating to buy the company since April/May 1994. (Marvel actively and repeatedly tried to shut down the coloring department post-acquisition and it was only saved through the intervention of Mark Gruenwald and the guy who ran the coloring department Mike Giles.)

    As far as I know, there are no creator contract issues with the Founders that would prevent the revival of the Ultraverse. I know that phantom issue gets tossed out there a lot, but both Tom Brevoort and Joe Quesada have stated that it’s not a creator contract issue that prevents Marvel from reviving it. And since I’m one of the people who has an Ultraverse contract and an interest in multiple characters, I would know. Also, Marvel owns the Ultraverse outright, so they don’t need anyone’s permission. (The Founders still keep in touch and we’ve all talked about it over the years – there’s nothing legal going on between the Founders and Marvel.)

    Johanna is correct that the Ultraverse contracts for the Founders do have participation %. However, the Founders do not have an ownership stake, do not share in any “profits” (however that may be defined), and have no control over the properties. (Just as if they had created a character for the DCU.) Character Interest Agreements for the Ultraverse simply state that writers and artists who created specific characters will receive a very small percentage of the money that comes in based on their media exploitation. The agreements were based on standard terms at DC at the time for creators who created a character for the DCU. And those terms are in perpetuity, so if for some reason there’s a Sludge movie, Steve Gerber’s estate receives a check. But, those percentages are not onerous and not out of line with what DC was offering at the time.

    Brevoort has stated in the past that the reason Marvel can’t discuss the Ultraverse properties is because there’s an NDA in place with certain parties.

    If you read the original press release where Scott Rosenberg left Marvel and announced the formation of Platinum Studios back in 1997, you’ll find this nugget: “Rosenberg also has an ongoing producer deal for all Malibu Comics properties.” http://goo.gl/v2WRc2

    So that NDA just might relate to that and probably has more to do with the reason why the Ultraverse properties have languished.


    So the reason they Marvel can't revive Ultraverse, is because the rights are partially tangled with Rosenberg's Platinum Studios company.
    So that settles it? If there is an studio involved, with all the projects involving superheroes universes in movies and tv and other media, they hardly would leave Marvel and Disney go with one of these properties and don't want their share. Just see how messed still is the use of Namor, or how the FF and X-men were played down until the purchase of FOX.
    Maybe if Disney acquired Platinum Studios, they would confirm if Topaz from Thor Ragnarok was the Ultraverse Topaz. Or ask if Mike W. Barr received some payment from MarvelDisney. Unless the NDA also involved that point.

    Thanks for sharing the info, Spider-Chan. There is a lot info to dig on.
    Internet Rule 14: Do not argue with trolls it means they win.

  15. #60
    Extraordinary Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    5,349

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by XPac View Post
    Do we know the original owners even want to buy them back?
    All the money comic book movies are making these days, why is that even a question?

    My personal theory is that the Malibu characters exist in a corporate limbo. They never had that much exposure, so no one is willing to spend the money that it would take to untangle the rights. At the same time, they don't want to give up those same rights and watch someone else make bank.

    Any way forward involves some personal, professional risk, so...

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •