But, strichtly speaking, that Topaz was not Ultraverse Topaz, but a new character created exclusively for the movie. (And who will not be used again I guess).
"Never assign to malice what is adequately explained by stupidity or ignorance."
"Great stories will always return to their original forms"
"Nobody is more dangerous than he who imagines himself pure in heart; for his purity, by definition, is unassailable." James Baldwin
Marvel Comics has another female Topaz.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Topaz_(Marvel_Comics)
Topez movie version was both versions combined. She even had the ultraverse versions stick like weapon.
Except they did it again with another comic company right after than buried all the characters from that company! Guess marvel just likes buying comic companies and wasting its characters.But that only make the mystery deeper: Why Marvel don't use the Ultraverse characters? Whatever the reason is, it seems to be more complicated than just give the creators a bigger share of the profits. I mean, Marvel can't be that greedy and petty. Isn't?
Once ok. Could see a copywrite but two times? Plus, how long did it take marvel to use marvelman?
Yup and after letting them rot looks like marvel is at last using them again!
[IMG][/IMG]
Now how about you do that with ultraverse marvel!
I don't think the Topaz from Thor Ragnarok had a huge influence from the other Topaz from Marvel. She didn't looked too much like an indian sorceress. But there was a lot of confusion about the character: https://bleedingcool.com/comics/usin...ole-can-worms/
To be honest, it was Disney who bought Crossgen. What Marvel did later with the propierties (or what was told to them to do with the properties) is another story.
EDIT: And has been this element of the seventh infinity stone ever brought back?: https://www.cbr.com/ego-stone-lost-i...emesis-marvel/
Last edited by Thor-Ul; 01-10-2023 at 10:52 AM.
"Never assign to malice what is adequately explained by stupidity or ignorance."
"Great stories will always return to their original forms"
"Nobody is more dangerous than he who imagines himself pure in heart; for his purity, by definition, is unassailable." James Baldwin
Holy cow... It seems like an Ultraverse character made a cameo in the last decade. But same as the case of cinematic Topaz, it was a very "on the edge" appearance:
Spider-Prime (Prime#1)
Spider-Prime? from Spider-Verse #2 (2015):
00_Spider-Prime.jpg
Debatable if can count as an appearance).
Anyway, when hypothecally these characters would lapse into public domain? Just to know when Marvel realy would do something with them.
Or who knows, this year maybe they could give us a surprise. Isn't Strazcinsky writting some secret project? He wrote a good story with the Twelve, so maybe he could do something decent with the Ultraverse.
"Never assign to malice what is adequately explained by stupidity or ignorance."
"Great stories will always return to their original forms"
"Nobody is more dangerous than he who imagines himself pure in heart; for his purity, by definition, is unassailable." James Baldwin
Beggars can't be choosers.
"Never assign to malice what is adequately explained by stupidity or ignorance."
"Great stories will always return to their original forms"
"Nobody is more dangerous than he who imagines himself pure in heart; for his purity, by definition, is unassailable." James Baldwin
It's like when marvel sneaks in dr who, godzilla, alf or others into a background. I'll take it. Course marvel owns ultraverse unlike the others. You think prime could have been a bigger help in spider-verse with superman like strength but a least he showed up.
Yeah, Prime's power is in part based on his imagination... and he imagined being spider-man or something.
Which makes the Ultraverse situation even more confusing. If Marvel really own them and they can be used without problems, then why not make the character do a full appearance? He was limited to do a cameo similar to one made by Amalgam Spider-Boy. Do Prime (and all the Ultraverse characters) somekind of similar legal restrictions?
"Never assign to malice what is adequately explained by stupidity or ignorance."
"Great stories will always return to their original forms"
"Nobody is more dangerous than he who imagines himself pure in heart; for his purity, by definition, is unassailable." James Baldwin
I wouldn't mind seeing other Malibu properties that Marvel bought. The Adventure imprint had a fantasy series called The Adventurers that had several spinoffs. Amazing Man from their Genesis line was already brought into the Marvel 616 universe so why not the other characters from the Protectors? Marvel missed out on an opportunity to publish an X-Mutants title after House of M. I don't know who owns Cat Claw but the Daily Bugle was mentioned so there's a connection there. They could leave off the Aircel line though since they published borderline child porn comics.
Honest, I have not the whole information about other Malibu's propierties and what was the deal with them, outside the Ultraverse. But I think than several of their other series were either licensed IP, creator owned and public domain characters, including the characters from Protectors. So they are not something than Marvel could own 100% or exploit exclusively. And Marvel is petty enough to do that. Remember how X-Men and FF were downgraded because Marvel didn't own the movie rights. For least know prpierties, they can ignore them.
Last edited by Thor-Ul; 01-12-2023 at 07:54 PM.
"Never assign to malice what is adequately explained by stupidity or ignorance."
"Great stories will always return to their original forms"
"Nobody is more dangerous than he who imagines himself pure in heart; for his purity, by definition, is unassailable." James Baldwin