From what I've heard, I think Fox owns the rights to certain named Skrulls (probably those connected to Fantastic Four, like the Super Skrull), but that more general Skrulls can be used.
[Movies] MCU: Phase 3 And Beyond
- Thread starter BananaHands
- Start date
Copyright laws are weird, and you can blame Disney.
I remember hearing that the reason the Chitauri were used in the first Avengers movie was because Marvel couldn't use the Skrulls. At that time, Ego was also under Fox's control, and we know they relinquished that so they could make changes to Negasonic Teenage Warhead. Marvel and Fox had a few talks and we know Fox was allowed to make X-Men-related TV shows like Legion and The Gifted, but we don't know everything that Marvel got out of the deal. So it's possible the Skrulls being usable is a new thing that they're just not explaining right now.
And there could be more surprises of that nature in the near future since neither company is disclosing all aspects of the deal.[DOUBLEPOST=1500811848,1500811477][/DOUBLEPOST]I kinda like this fan-made Infinity War poster more than the official one.
I wouldn't be surprised if Fox gave up several side elements of it's remaining franchises so it could focus on the only one making money (X-Men). No executive wants to lose the F4 rights because Marvel would just turn around and make it a monster hit, but no executive wants to use the F4 for anything because they don't know what to do with it.
Because they can't imagine that The Incredibles got it right, Family first, Superheroes second. It's why they're called the "First Family"and why Sue and Reed's wedding was such a big freaking deal.
And why their kids are enjoyable characters rather than intrusions on the adults' adventures.
That has gotta feel so awful as a Fox executive, right? Knowing they have this thing, this thing that could be so successful, but they lack the talent and vision to make it so. Knowing that if they handed it over, Marvel Studios could do everything Fox wishes they could, and make it look effortless. Inadequacy that's not only felt, but mathematically provable.
Especially in light of Spider-man: Homecoming, which is hands down the best Spider-man movie since Raimi's Spider-man 2 (if not better). It's already made it's money back and almost surpassed the gross of the previous two movies after being out only a few weeks. It's proof that Marvel understands it's franchises better than the rights-holders and enough to put the fear of god into any boardroom.
Gone...
I don't understand why they don't release the the official trailer. Do they really want people's first impression to be a bad fan cam recording? Do they think people WON'T record and post it? Plus, other studios release their trailer pretty much at the same time as their comic con panel.
GasBandit
Staff member
Usually in these cases, it's not even the company itself issuing the copyright claim. There are automated systems, companies that make that their livelihood, and even individual trolls who just want to pee in everybody's good time.
But yes, it's surprising that Disney hasn't posted the trailer on their official channels.
I saw half its screen version. From a knee's POV. It was as riveting as that can be.
Fixed.
The people's hero.
And gone again. I guess it'll be out again at some point.
I'll know the studios have started to care about "super kids" once they (try to?) make a Power Pack movie.
--Patrick
I'll do you one better--Super Babies: Baby Genius 2.
Fixed. (again)
fade
Staff member
I did not like Zendaya's character in Homecoming. She was such a cliche.
As for Vulture's defeat, I guess I saw it like this:
I really liked how the Shocker named himself, too. None of this "Oo, I got my name because the news gave it to me" trite crap, and none of this "we'll just avoid the issue by never using a name" crap *cough vulture cough*.
As for Vulture's defeat, I guess I saw it like this:
Trying to take the arc reactors was the last act of a defeated man. By that point, Peter already rallied and beat him. He was on his last legs and trying to get out with a profit.
I really liked how the Shocker named himself, too. None of this "Oo, I got my name because the news gave it to me" trite crap, and none of this "we'll just avoid the issue by never using a name" crap *cough vulture cough*.
Fan posters are so much better these days than official.
And yet they aren't, they're just doing dumb Photoshop monster mash posters. Maybe closer to release we'll see something closer to the cover.Thanos is the ultimate jobber.
[DOUBLEPOST=1501320677,1501320487][/DOUBLEPOST]All the fan posters are just aping this.
Which is totally fine, since so should Marvel Studios seeing as it's one of the best covers of any comic, ever.
I'm sure there's other Squirrel Girl art for you that merits jacking off to.
fade
Staff member
I have no idea what the hell this even means.[DOUBLEPOST=1501338511,1501338353][/DOUBLEPOST]Ah. I get it. This is some kind of attempt to say I think she should be hot? That has nothing to do with it at all. Why would you jump to that conclusion? It is possible that I find the art unappealing on other grounds despite being born with a penis.
I guess thinking art isn't good means you'd rather be jacking off? Personally I'd just prefer the art to look better, jacking off is optional
Of course you can. Anyone can. But you get aggro'd by it every time someone posts art from the current run. It's not just finding it unappealing. It hits a nerve with you. I didn't even know Gas and Poe didn't like it because they don't have that opinion set to auto-reply when the art comes up. Truth is, it's not my cup of tea either, but I'm not getting sand up my urethra each time I open the new issue.
So since I've seen people on other sites complain about the art because Squirrel Girl doesn't look like Power Girl or She-Hulk I took a wild guess and got it wrong.
She's supposed to look like a shy teenage girl with a "conspicuously awesome butt." Am I close?
It's mandatory in phase 4.
fade
Staff member
Im not sure what aggrod means. I'm fairly certain you're heaping a great deal of emotion on a statement of "blech". I'm also fairly certain this is maybe the second time I've said something about squirrel girl, and neither time were what I would describe as hitting a nerve. It's more on the level of "not what I would've gone with". Not sure where the other is coming from.[DOUBLEPOST=1501343193,1501343000][/DOUBLEPOST]I just searched the forum for squirrel girl, and I mention I don't like it twice. Both recently. Here and in the streaming thread. Are you mixing me up with someone else?
GasBandit
Staff member
Yeah, it's not that she doesn't look like supermodel, it's that it looks like it took 15 seconds and 5 lines to draw her, and 10 seconds with a photoshop paintbucket tool to ink her.
Maybe I'm just spoiled because I'm used to shading and stuff.
I mean, the comics I've been reading most recently were the Darth Vader comics, where every panel looks like this.
Comparing that, even Galactus up there looks paltry with his entire two shades of purple with no gradients.