Fantastic Four reboot-- Casting, Rumors, Pix, ect;

Is Michael B. Jordan the only one "cast" so far?

 

If Fox doesn't make another FF film, and really soon, the rights to the films will go back to Marvel and Disney. Fox doesn't want that, but after the box office of the last film, has clearly given up on a part three for that version.

Personally, I'm still holding out hope that Fox messes up and doesn't start shooting the film before the upcoming deadline and Marvel gets the rights back. Not just because I feel the FF NEEDS to be in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, but because some of the ideas I've been hearing about for this new film worry me. A black Human Torch? Really?

 

He's the only one that's been mentioned as under consideration, though nobody's been cast.

See post 166 and after.

 

Is it wrong of me to hope this production continues to have enough problems to ensure the rights go back to marvel

Because I'd love to see what Joss Whedon could do with Doctor Doom - Marvel's premier villain - and the Avengers.

 

I'd love to see Silver Surfer and Galactus in the more cosmic movies like GotG and presumably Avengers 3.

 

Yeah, it is kind of annoying that Galactus is part of the FF rights. He seems to be a pretty big deal for the whole MU, so it's a shame that we won't get to see him in an Avengers movie.

 

The FF and Spider-man are two characters I've only followed sporadically, while the Avengers and Captain America are two I've followed regularly.

 

Wow, you grew up fast.

Or do you mean you taped that one season and kept rewatching it over and over as you grew up...?

 

No, it's not wrong. I'm sure there are others (myself included) who hope for the same.

 

My exposure to him is through Avengers: EMH and LEGO Marvel Superheroes, so I guess that's where I started thinking of him as a universe wide villain.

 

This is the main reason I hope Marvel/Disney doesn't get the rights back, myself. Not that I don't think they'd do a bad job by any means, but there's only so many movies one studio can put out at a time, and only so much space in them. Having the X-Men, FF, and Spidey all in the hands of other studios prevents them from interacting, but it also means we get them more often.

Plus, we get movies with smaller characters. Seriously now, does anybody think we'd be getting Guardians of the Galaxy or Ant-Man movies if Marvel was making X-Men, Fantastic Four, and Spider-Man?

 

When Reed and Sue got married in the comics, it seemed like everyone under the sun showed up (though obviously it wasn't everyone).

 

Why shouldn't they be able to put out the entire Marvel catalog? It's not like there's only 2 directors and 3 actors out there available to do superhero movies.

If they could centralize all movies and tie them in together in one company the possibilities for crossovers and small cameos would be endless not to speak of the story potential in the larger universe.

Wo wouldn't want to see Hugh Jackman's Wolverine go up against Captain America (for some reason)? One of the strengths of the Marvel cinematic universe is the coherence.. all movies are tied together (however loosely) making them feel like they're happening on the same planet. Getting all the other books back under Marvel control would only enhance it.

It's all about logistics.. Hollywood is big enough to find the right people for the backoffice jobs and there's tons of good actors out there waiting to be found (who knew of Tom Hiddleston before he got to play Loki?). It would be more work but them Marvel studios could fine tune the release schedules so you could get major movies in the spring/summer blockbuster season and continue with smaller movies in the fall winter (with maybe a major movie for christmas season).

 

It's not a question of "should," it's a question of "could." The possibilities may be endless, but the resources to execute them are finite. One production company can only put out so many big-budget tentpole movies per year. Those things are expensive and time-consuming. So having the rights split among several different studios working in parallel means we get more Marvel movies per year than we could if only one studio were making them.

Plus it means you have different creative visions driving them, and that makes for more variety. And that helps keep the genre fresh and interesting to audiences.

I wouldn't mind more interaction, but I'd rather see it done through a cooperative agreement between the respective studios.

Actually I wouldn't like to see that, because the Fox X-Men universe and the Marvel Cinematic Universe have incompatible continuities. The X-Men films are in a world where mutants are pretty much the only superpowered beings and have been a major factor in society and history since 1963. The MCU, by contrast, has very few superpowered beings: basically Cap, the Hulk, Thor, and a smattering of others. Agents of SHIELD has clearly established that SHIELD's list of known superpowered "assets" is quite short, and that the world was largely unaware of the existence of such beings (other than Cap) until the Battle of New York. So the two realities just don't fit together. (In fact, they're technically considered two different alternate universes of the Marvel multiverse. I'm not sure how official this is, but the Marvel Wiki says that the MCU is Earth-199999 and the Fox X-Men universe is Earth-10005. The current Spider-Man film universe is Earth-120703, while the Raimi Spideyverse was Earth-96283.)

Now, the current Spideyverse is new enough that it could be reconciled with the MCU, so I wouldn't mind seeing that. I'd really like Spidey and Daredevil to be able to cross over, since they have a lot of overlap (notably the characters of Kingpin and Ben Urich). But the Fox X-Men universe is too distinct. It and the MCU have both established clear individual identities and histories, and it wouldn't be doing either of them a favor to trample over those histories to force them together (unless it were clearly established as a meeting of alternate universes).

Now, okay, that leaves the Fantastic Four in the X-Men universe, apart from the Avengers, but I think that's probably a good thing. You don't want either universe to get too cluttered with mega-heroes. The MCU already has Tony Stark and Bruce Banner, and it's about to get Hank Pym in the person of Michael Douglas, so it's pretty well-stocked with mega-genius inventors. So Reed Richards would feel like kind of an afterthought if he showed up in that universe, which is a little unfair, since he was the first of the breed. Having the FF debut in Earth-10005, where there isn't already a ton of competition for World's Most Brilliant Scientist, lets Reed stand out more. Although it would be challenging to establish the FF as a "royal family" of superheroes in a universe where superpowered beings are met with prejudice and fear. But maybe that could be their significance in that universe, in that they help turn attitudes around. And it would add some intensity to Ben Grimm's plight of being feared as a monstrous "Thing." Although, granted, it would rule out the Thing-Hulk feud. (How do the Thing and Wolverine get along, generally?)

 

The actors and directors probably wouldn't be the problem, but right now, all Marvel movies are overseen by a relatively small group of people (Kevin Feige as producer, Joss Whedon as creative consultant), making sure the storylines, the style and, most importantly, the quality stay consistent between the MCU movies. I doubt they could continue to do that if they put out, say, 3-5 movies a year. I mean, we're already seing somewhat lesser results with Agents of SHIELD, which Joss Whedon doesn't seem to have much time for.