Good, they've got the Man Without Fear back, now let's see about getting the Fantastic Four back! They're in dire need of a good movie about them.
Daredevil Film Rights Returning to Marvel Studios
- Thread starter Fanghawk
- Start date
Daredevil is a bit grittier than Spidey, but unlike the depiction in the Affleck movie, comicverse DD does not intentionally kill enemies like the Punisher.(i think)Sovereignty said:
Nevertheless, he doesn't belong in an Avengers movie as he is more the dark alley type and is not a traditional member.
Interesting that you mention Black Widow though, as DD and her were 'partners' for a while and often crossover when shes slumming in Hells Kitchen.
Trishbot said:
I concur; Heroes for Hire movie is needed(or TV show). And yes, Marvel can now use the Kingpin as well, good point. But I wonder which b-list NYC street villains are owned under the Spider-man license...idodo35 said:
This feels like a hollow victory to me for two reasons. One because I rather marvel get the rights back for the fantastic four instead so they could possible appear in the avengers 2. And two because that sizzle reel of the Daredevil movie actually looked good, for me anyways. I hope this movie is still is a possibility
blase, punisher, DD are back to marvel. with chances of ghost rider.
a Marvel Knights movie universe aimed specifically at adults would be awesome.
a Marvel Knights movie universe aimed specifically at adults would be awesome.
... okay i really kinda wanna see that (that trailer spoof was awesome. Also had the warriors yay) however i cannot ethically support this until october 1st. Therefore;
*deep breath*
IT SUCKS!!!11! SRCE DAREDVIL!!111 ONLY IDiOTs AND MORNS LIKE TAT TRASH!!!.
(seriously check this post on oct. 1st and that will be gone.)
*deep breath*
IT SUCKS!!!11! SRCE DAREDVIL!!111 ONLY IDiOTs AND MORNS LIKE TAT TRASH!!!.
(seriously check this post on oct. 1st and that will be gone.)
There's a new FF movie coming. Sorry to say.Fappy said:
Yeah, it's pretty absurd that the company who willingly signed away the rights on a borderline perpetual deal can't just go "no, I changed my mind" and take them back even though the other party is adhering to the terms of the deal.Jandau said:
Costs 57 million to produce.Bullfrogg said:
51 million domestic.
81 million worldwide
132 million total gross.
How exactly does that equal bomb?
X-men First class cost similar and grossed similarly.
Firstly, X-Men first class grossed $146.4 million domestically and $353.6 million worldwide, so no, they did not gross similarly.malestrithe said:
Second of all, it did bomb when you consider that it only made half as much as it's predecessor. Spirit of Vengeance got third on it's opening weekend, behind two movies that had already been out for a week. It also did poorly in a time when superhero movies are doing amazingly well in the box office. Not to mention its extremely poor critical reception.
Eh. Iron Man was good, but Iron Man 2 suffered from the familiar trope of superhero movies wherein the sequel has two villians: Whiplash and his rapidly poisoning blood. The problem is, personal problems and external antagonists can't team up so they paid more attention to one to the detriment of the other. And in my opinion, they paid attention to the wrong one.Random Argument Man said:
Thor was about a B or so. It's got some solid parts, but the time frame which the story takes place in seems pretty goddamn fast. He's on Earth for what, two days before he has his character turnaround? Would've been more effective to have some sort of passage.
Hulk is Hulk. It's pretty hard to do that one wrong. It's like Transformers, just break a bunch of shit and everyone will clap.
Captain America was probably the worst one. It has a solid opening act, but then completely derails into a montage-filled mess for the second act.
They've got some good things, but stuff's been going downhill in terms of quality. And it's probably gonna be worse when they start sending superheros into space...
Haha, don't feel bad about that if you do. That's a big part of the reason Marvel puts out cartoons, I believe. It's a good way to introduce characters in a more approachable format.NameIsRobertPaulson said:
I think Ms. Marvel is a BAMF, I remember MovieBob saying in an episode of the show that Charlize Theron could play her well and now I can't get that thought out of my head, seems like it would be awesome. I'm also sure we'll be getting the Wasp because she pretty much has to show up in the Ant Man flick when they finally get around to putting it out. Oh and I've never liked Maria Hill, she is such a *****, anybody who's treated Spider-Man the way she has in the comics is an enemy in my book.NameIsRobertPaulson said:
When did the term "failed miserably" get changed to mean "it made a fair amount of money"?
At any rate, I'm all for Marvel getting the rights back for movie making. They've been doing a pretty damned good job so far.
At any rate, I'm all for Marvel getting the rights back for movie making. They've been doing a pretty damned good job so far.