"Fantastic Four" Flops With $26.2 Million 2nd Place Finish

[Luke Cage]

I think both sides are gonna have to work a deal that will help them. A few years ago Friege was trying to work a trade off of getting Silver Surfer and Galactus back. So I'd do what I posted in another thread. I'd trade them characters to use in films (with Marvel involvement of course) and the following characters since Marvel isn't in a rush to put them in films at the moment.


Ghost Rider
Tomb of Dracula
Blade
Moon Knight

There are some good franchise type films Fox can build there. Let them have the characters to do the films and they could have something here. Of course a big part of a deal worked out I'd say would be ...Fox and Disney need to unite for the common mega bucks they can achieve with X-Men vs. Avengers. That is the BIG MEGA BUCKS they both can earn. Disney could make a fortune on toys and merch from this type of film. Hugh Jackman would sign up in a friggen heart beat if he knew he was gonna be in some Marvel films.

Imagine the explosion if he showed up at the end scene of Civil War next year. (They can film an extra credit scene) . The moment it hits Fox and Disney are building to the next phase of the big films. Not only do you have Infinity War pt.1 and pt.2 ....you can have these 2 big films to build to an epic money making conclusion. But its all up to both sides making some good , giving in some things.

Let Marvel have the FF characters back. They won't quickly launch a FF film and can promise to wait til after X-Men vs Avengers in 2022 or 2023...to do that.

Marvel shouldn't trade them anything. You don't give up those properties for a failing FF franchise. Buy them back outright or work a deal like you did with Sony, but don't give anything back.

[AJBopp]

I really can't see Fox having any other option but to surrender the rights to Marvel.

I'm not sure what that deal looks like. It's not going to be "Well, we can't do anything with this, have it back."

Does Marvel buy the rights back? Is there an agreement where FOX surrenders some portion of what it paid for the rights to get it off their hands? Which way does the money flow?

And, included in the calculation, whatever money is being talked about to put the FF in Marvel's hands, FOX has to consider whether they are money ahead holding onto the FF rights for as long as their agreement allows so as not to allow Marvel to make a movie that will compete with FOX movies: Do they stand to gain more by disallowing competition, or through some business arrangement to revert the rights? Tough question that no one here can answer.

Of course, given FOX's track record with FF, it's probably a question no one there is competent to answer either.

[Calighoula]

I don't think Batman vs. Superman looks that bad.

That's not what I meant. Not at all. I don't know how you got that out of my post. I said erase — not replace.

[Calighoula]

I think both sides are gonna have to work a deal that will help them. A few years ago Friege was trying to work a trade off of getting Silver Surfer and Galactus back. So I'd do what I posted in another thread. I'd trade them characters to use in films (with Marvel involvement of course) and the following characters since Marvel isn't in a rush to put them in films at the moment.


Ghost Rider
Tomb of Dracula
Blade
Moon Knight

While I like the character, nobody is going to make a Moon Knight movie. He's one of the most blatant Batman rip-offs out there. That knowledge will shadow the movie all the way from its announcement through production, and on to its premiere.

[chamber-music]

I could see Fox trading them permission for an X-Men TV series for the FF and realted properties back now. With the buzz Deadpool is getting and with Gambit on deck I don't think Fox is going to sink any more money into a property that has not paid off for them the way they wanted for 3 films in a row.

It would be the smart thing to do but when it comes to the FF Fox seem incapable of doing the smart thing.

[Brian B]

That's not what I meant. Not at all. I don't know how you got that out of my post. I said erase — not replace.

I'm sorry - my bad.

[Anduinel]

I understand the logic in keeping the rights away, but really Fox spent $120M to make sure Marvel didn't get the rights back on a movie that couldn't even open at number 1. In essence they lost money trying to keep them. At this point if they're not going to go ahead with a sequel plus they NEED Marvel to continue to expand the properties they have I don't how them plugging their fingers in their ears and going "Nah Nah Nah" are going to help them in the long run. These are businesses afterall, they're looking to make money and so far its looking like FF is not a property that they've been able to make money off.

"So far" is the key, though. If Fox holds on to the property and take another pass at it later, they might hit a winning formula. And while $120 million is likely more money than any of us will see in our lifetimes, that's the cost of one low-grade movie at Fox. Certainly, they don't want to lose money. I'm sure there would have been a lot of smiles if the film had been a hit. But Fox isn't in the same financial straits as Sony, for example, and didn't invest as much in the FF as Sony did into Spidey. Fox can absorb a relatively inexpensive dud. So they lose relatively little, retain the rights to a property that they can still exploit down the road, and keep it out of the hands of a serious competitor that's already shown they can turn unknown and underperforming properties into franchise juggernauts.

It's not what I'd call win-win, but it still makes sense for Fox to do what they can to hold on to the FF.

[Star_Jammer]

Batman v. Superman will erase the bad taste this flick has left in the audience's collective oral cavities.

Jus' sayin'...

[Calighoula]

^Cute! Neato!

[Divine Spark]

While I like the character, nobody is going to make a Moon Knight movie. He's one of the most blatant Batman rip-offs out there. That knowledge will shadow the movie all the way from its announcement through production, and on to its premiere.

Would be nice to see him in Daredevil.

[Calighoula]

Would be nice to see him in Daredevil.

Now that I could see.

[Redvector]

I think the only ones to suffer from this is FF, I mean I doubt we'll see anything until the Rights are at risk again post 2020. As for a Crossover from what I've seen online, Fox doesn't have the rights to cross them over without permission from Marvel, who have already said "Hell No!" and after this I'd bet it's "NO F**KING WAY!!"

Fox was just blowing smoke up our collective butts. They knew how much of a dog this FF reboot was from the jump and this crossover thing was never going to happen, whether it was contractually allowed or not. In fact Fox is already back peddling on it.

[chamber-music]

"So far" is the key, though. If Fox holds on to the property and take another pass at it later, they might hit a winning formula. And while $120 million is likely more money than any of us will see in our lifetimes, that's the cost of one low-grade movie at Fox. Certainly, they don't want to lose money. I'm sure there would have been a lot of smiles if the film had been a hit. But Fox isn't in the same financial straits as Sony, for example, and didn't invest as much in the FF as Sony did into Spidey. Fox can absorb a relatively inexpensive dud. So they lose relatively little, retain the rights to a property that they can still exploit down the road, and keep it out of the hands of a serious competitor that's already shown they can turn unknown and underperforming properties into franchise juggernauts.

It's not what I'd call win-win, but it still makes sense for Fox to do what they can to hold on to the FF.

Why would they even try and make another FF film down the road when audiences have repeatedly shown they don't care all that much about their three previous attempts. Audiences may not be as forgiving as you think. Fox may possibly lose money on this film. Is losing money worth keeping a property out of another studios hands when they could possibly gain more by selling, trading or bargaining a deal with Marvel that may be more lucrative?


Like Albert Einstein said insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

[tabo61]

Marvel Studios left a message on Fox's voicemail that said " I told you so"

[SUPERECWFAN1]

Marvel shouldn't trade them anything. You don't give up those properties for a failing FF franchise. Buy them back outright or work a deal like you did with Sony, but don't give anything back.

Well we have to understand that with Marvel they are getting a ton of characters they build future films with. Its called a trade off because they want Doom , Galactus , Kang and others. This way they achieve getting them and creating a fair trade off.

While I like the character, nobody is going to make a Moon Knight movie. He's one of the most blatant Batman rip-offs out there. That knowledge will shadow the movie all the way from its announcement through production, and on to its premiere.

You can actually gear the film around a former merc who nearly dies in Egypt and an Egyptian god either takes control of his fate or ...he's went completely insane and decides to become a costumed vigilante. You can make it a very different , brutal piece and so un-Batman it works.