Has the Fox film harmed the Fantastic Four comic?

[MarvelMaster616]

Not an unreasonable questions to ask. Fantastic Four has suffered more than any other property when it comes to bad movies. That said, I don't think it's the movies themselves that harm Fantastic Four. It's the whole issue surrounding the movie rights. The story about Isaac Pearlman's anger towards Fox is well-known. Both he and Marvel have made it very clear that they're not big on any property whose movie rights they don't own. The story surrounding XM Studios is proof enough of that. But bad movies didn't stop Marvel from making great Daredevil comics after the movie. Now that Marvel has his rights back, they've got more incentive to make him awesome. There's no incentive whatsoever to make the Fantastic Four awesome and so long as that's the case, the comics will suffer.

[ishikabe]

Nope. Movies don't spike up comic sales when they're good and won't spike down sales or "Tarnish" the brand when they're bad. In case people haven't noticed Green Lantern still gets published and Hal Jordan is still there no matter how much the film sucked. The FF is just getting some needed bed rest like Thor a few years back.

Initially, the announcement of a movie and the opening of a movie makes those comics related to the movie spike now days. But I haven't seen comics drop because of bad movies yet. You are about 50% right here.

[Spideyparker75]

Glad I didnt see the movie.

I think its hard to tell if it will effect the comic in any way one way or the other. They are different mediums. I dont think they will make another FF movie anytime soon though.

[Of Atlantis]

Anyone doubting how a bad movie can affect character reputations should look no further than Ghost Rider.

Batman, Green Lantern, Spider-man and Wolverine have the luxury of being popular characters able to withstand the reputation of their movies being poor to average.

Properties like Fantastic Four and Ghost Rider need a good push, and suffer immensely when their movies bomb as hard as they do. They don't sell exceptionally well anymore, not like Avengers or X-Men, so further lowering their reputation just doesn't get new readers to be interested in their books. In Ghost Rider's case, Marvel doesn't even feel the need to try to launch a series with Johnny Blaze or Danny Ketch after the second movie, instead trying to replace them twice. At least in Fantastic Four's case, the characters are irreplaceable, but I'm betting we won't see a Fantastic Four ongoing, at least a successful one, for a while.

[DrNewGod]

Anyone doubting how a bad movie can affect character reputations should look no further than Ghost Rider.

Batman, Green Lantern, Spider-man and Wolverine have the luxury of being popular characters able to withstand the reputation of their movies being poor to average.

Properties like Fantastic Four and Ghost Rider need a good push, and suffer immensely when their movies bomb as hard as they do. They don't sell exceptionally well anymore, not like Avengers or X-Men, so further lowering their reputation just doesn't get new readers to be interested in their books. In Ghost Rider's case, Marvel doesn't even feel the need to try to launch a series with Johnny Blaze or Danny Ketch after the second movie, instead trying to replace them twice. At least in Fantastic Four's case, the characters are irreplaceable, but I'm betting we won't see a Fantastic Four ongoing, at least a successful one, for a while.

You know, it wasn't all that long ago that Avengers didn't sell all that well, and not so long before that, the X-Men were in cancellation limbo. I'm a fan of Johns comment that there aren't bad characters, just bad writing. The FF needed the right hand on the title. If Marvel ever gets around to trying them again, I hope they pick that right creator.

[ian0delond]

I remember the time where there was no Guardian of the Galaxy related books.
I hardly believe they become so many because of great writing.

[Of Atlantis]

You know, it wasn't all that long ago that Avengers didn't sell all that well, and not so long before that, the X-Men were in cancellation limbo. I'm a fan of Johns comment that there aren't bad characters, just bad writing. The FF needed the right hand on the title. If Marvel ever gets around to trying them again, I hope they pick that right creator.

We're in an age where if a character doesn't have a successful movie and a good reputation to the general public and readers alike, it won't sell unless it's given headline grabbing gimmicks, unfortunately. You definitely don't want potential readers to think "bad movie" when trying to decide whether or not to buy a book. A great creative team and high quality only brings in so many readers realistically. There have been many stellar books cancelled before their time.

[MyriVerse]

Not at all. FF fans don't care about that terrible movie. If Marvel puts out a great FF book, fans will buy it. Period

FF fans aren't going to be the market if Disney made an FF movie, the general public would be and they will remember the badly talked about FF and connect them. The property is toxic for the foreseeable future.

Plus the op meant comics

He's the one talking about comics. You are not. He's absolutely 100% correct. As a comic book, there is nothing whatsoever toxic about the property. The failure of the movie has zero effect on the sales of a book.

Anyone doubting how a bad movie can affect character reputations should look no further than Ghost Rider.

No. That blame is solely because of the horrible books that have been printed in the past 10 years. It has nothing at all to do with the movies.

[XPac]

I don't think FOX's treatment of the FF has harmed the franchise. But I think it's mediocre handling of them prevents FF from growing more than it should.

[Carabas]

We're in an age where if a character doesn't have a successful movie and a good reputation to the general public and readers alike, it won't sell unless it's given headline grabbing gimmicks, unfortunately. You definitely don't want potential readers to think "bad movie" when trying to decide whether or not to buy a book. A great creative team and high quality only brings in so many readers realistically. There have been many stellar books cancelled before their time.

Movies have nothing to do with it. The fandom doesn't let movies dictate their buying habits.
Good reputation to the general public has nothing to do with it. The general public wouldn't buy a comic if you held a gun to its head.

Old fans may not care much about the movies, but good luck selling a comic when it relies on the influx of new fans to keep it afloat. Marvel has some serious damage control to do I think.

But there is no influx of new fans from movies. The first Avengers film? One of the biggest blockbusters ever? Didn't cause more than a minor and very temporary blip in the Avengers comics sales charts.

[Of Atlantis]

No. That blame is solely because of the horrible books that have been printed in the past 10 years. It has nothing at all to do with the movies.

You're taking me out of context here. I mention exactly how the books that came after were a way for Marvel to replace Ghost Rider because they simply assumed the movies killed the chance for the comic franchise to prosper. Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance came out in 2011, Johnny Blaze was replaced as the flagship Ghost Rider in 2012 by Alejandra, which bombed, and then Reyes, which also bombed.

Unfortunately, it's even further sullied the reputation of the character by having lackluster stand-ins carry their title in attempts to replace him and try to sell through gimmicks.

Movies have nothing to do with it. The fandom doesn't let movies dictate their buying habits.
Good reputation to the general public has nothing to do with it. The general public wouldn't buy a comic if you held a gun to its head.

But there is no influx of new fans from movies. The first Avengers film? One of the biggest blockbusters ever? Didn't cause more than a minor and very temporary blip in the Avengers comics sales charts.

A "minor, temporary" blip adds up when you're selling 5 Avengers books and the debut issues regularly sell over 200k, despite the steady decline.

I'm referring more to the general comic reading public, but it's not like it helped interest the wider audience either. If you want to get comic fans who haven't traditionally bought a certain title or enjoyed certain characters, I doubt having a movie bomb and gain a piss poor reputation would help sway them in any way, shape or form.

When all you have to go by when deciding to buy a new title is a bad movie still fresh in your mind, you're not going to be willing to spend money. It'll take years of notable cameos in other books and a general positive presence in the MU to recover from that.

Maybe Marvel has the right idea to split the Fantastic Four up, recover their reputation in the eyes of readers outside their own team and then reunite them after appealing to new fans who wouldn't traditionally invest in an FF book. I suppose it kind of makes sense to throw them across diverse platforms like the GotG and the Inhumans.

[Thor-Ul]

There is a comic of the Fantastic Four??? Wow. I thougth that was a myth.

Sarcasm off, still hurt abotu that decision. And with FOX still wanted to keep the film rights, I don't know if Marvel would pulish a 4F comic soon.

[XPac]

There is a comic of the Fantastic Four??? Wow. I thougth that was a myth.

Sarcasm off, still hurt abotu that decision. And with FOX still wanted to keep the film rights, I don't know if Marvel would pulish a 4F comic soon.

In the least I wouldn't fault marvel for having the franchise lay low for a little bit.

It's almost coincidental timing that the FF book vanished right before this bomb of a movie was about to be set off.

[Carabas]

A "minor, temporary" blip adds up when you're selling 5 Avengers books and the debut issues regularly sell over 200k, despite the steady decline.

Not really. A 3% bump for all of one month is just a 3% bump. It's tiny. It's almost negligible.

I'm referring more to the general comic reading public, but it's not like it helped interest the wider audience either. If you want to get comic fans who haven't traditionally bought a certain title or enjoyed certain characters, I doubt having a movie bomb and gain a piss poor reputation would help sway them in any way, shape or form.

The FF have had a piss-poor reputation among the (very small) 'general comic reading public' long before Marvel sold those rights to Fox.
Thsi film isn't going to help. It's not going to hurt either. Perlmutter's irrationaity over the rights on the otherhnd...

When all you have to go by when deciding to buy a new title is a bad movie still fresh in your mind, you're not going to be willing to spend money. It'll take years of notable cameos in other books and a general positive presence in the MU to recover from that.

Maybe Marvel has the right idea to split the Fantastic Four up, recover their reputation in the eyes of readers outside their own team and then reunite them after appealing to new fans who wouldn't traditionally invest in an FF book. I suppose it kind of makes sense to throw them across diverse platforms like the GotG and the Inhumans.

You're reversing the causality.
What Marvel did with the FF characters isn't because Fox made bad movie. It's because Fox was going to make a movie of an at the time completely undetermined quallity.
They did all or most of that long before the film came out.

What Marvel is or isn't doing with the FF has nothing to do with the awefulness of the film and everything with Perlmutter getting his knickers in a twist over Fox not wanting to deal with him. As is Fox's right.

[AcesX1X]

In the least I wouldn't fault marvel for having the franchise lay low for a little bit.

It's almost coincidental timing that the FF book vanished right before this bomb of a movie was about to be set off.

"lay low?" they're being taken out of everything, in all spaces of the medium. comics, toys, merchandise apparel. i love seeing people justify disney's every action of deep sixing the ff while fox does everything in their power to keep them in the public eye.