Technically, it started the comic.It also happens in the comic...
Technically, it started the comic.It also happens in the comic...
Of course, the story that culminated in the Infinity Gauntlet comic was building up for over a year in the Jim Starlin scripted Silver Surfer book and in the Thanos Quest mini series. By the time the Infinity Gauntlet comic started, the readers had already seen Thanos' quest to acquire all the gems and seen him use the Gauntlet to kick the asses of the Silver Surfer, Drax and Galactus.Technically, it started the comic.
Difficult to say for sure, but typically the rights tend to revolve around the books, not just the specific characters so it tends to encompass all the supporting and derivative characters too. It varies though.When it comes to rights issues like the one related to The Hulk, would using a different Hulk character get them around it? Do the issues apply to all Hulk characters or just the Bruce Banner one? Would Marvel be able to do a Amadeus Cho Hulk move as a way around the issues?
For prosperity's sake. Is that so awful?Why make a big deal about the box office? I mean . . . regardless of how a movie performs in the theaters, one is either going to like it or not.
Don't get me wrong. I like the movie very much. In fact, it's rather refreshing that 2018 marks the first time in three years in which I have enjoyed releases from the MCU. But what is the point in keeping up with the box office?
Difficult to say for sure, but typically the rights tend to revolve around the books, not just the specific characters so it tends to encompass all the supporting and derivative characters too. It varies though.
I don't know, that seems like too much to work with. I'm fine with the Skrull-Kree war featuring in Captain Marvel, but there's so much to deal with in The Untitled Sequel that throwing the Skrulls into the mix as well feels like overkill and overstuffing the film. I hope this rumor doesn't turn out to be true.Avengers: Untitled Infinity War Sequel rumored to involved the Skrulls.
http://comicbook.com/marvel/2018/05/10/avengers-4-skrulls-rumors/
That's strange as there's obviously no problem using Ross or Talbot in the MCU.
At a minimum, number of tickets needs a population adjustment, because there are more people now that in, say, 1939. There are numerous other variables, like ticket price as a percentage of discretionary income, theater saturation, ..... The list of factors needed for an accurate comparison just goes on and on!Yeah, as much as I enjoy following the box office results it isn't very hard for movies coming out today to break records compared when comparing them to movies that came out decades ago.
I wish at times we went by number of tickets sold rather than by $$$$ made.
If you adjust the numbers for inflation Gone With The Wind is still #1 with 1,850,728,800 in 1939. Unadjusted it was $198,676,459 and if you think about how cheap the tickets probably were back then, that is insane.
I agree. Wake me when the record is REALLY broken. Until then those so-called top movies are asterisks .Yeah, as much as I enjoy following the box office results it isn't very hard for movies coming out today to break records compared when comparing them to movies that came out decades ago.
I wish at times we went by number of tickets sold rather than by $$$$ made.
If you adjust the numbers for inflation Gone With The Wind is still #1 with 1,850,728,800 in 1939. Unadjusted it was $198,676,459 and if you think about how cheap the tickets probably were back then, that is insane.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.