Daredevil back to Marvel Studios?

[Gaith]

It does; one nice thing about SF is that it's got a pretty sizable downtown, with some pretty high skyscrapers (much higher, say, than the pint-sized ones of Boston, or the non-existent ones of DC), but also has lots of other, very varied neighborhoods. Also, you've got the legitimately still-gritty and grungy Oakland just across the Bay. Fincher got some great mileage out of our Financial District in The Game, for instance.

Sure, Chicago could probably also work, but while it's got some great downtown areas, as seen in Transformers DOTM/TDK, I haven't really gotten the sense that its non-downtown neighborhoods are all that special or distinctive.

 

[FreezeC77]

If the ABC SHIELD series is a hit then I think the best way that the other studios who own Marvel rights could then 'link up' would be to use the series as 'promotion' for their movies. Somet type of storyline or appearance from main/minor/villain characters in the show right around the time the movie is coming out.

 

[FPAlpha]

I saw a comment from Lauren Shuler Donner today that she'd be glad to work out an Avengers/X-Men screen crossover, but even aside from the legal/financial difficulties, I'm not sure how it would work, since the X-franchise these days seems to be set squarely in the past, and it's hard to see how to move forward from the present of The Last Stand.

Simple.. either completely ignore the abomination that was Last Stand or just go past it and take the very few things with you that were ok (Hank McCoy for example).

If the ABC SHIELD series is a hit then I think the best way that the other studios who own Marvel rights could then 'link up' would be to use the series as 'promotion' for their movies. Somet type of storyline or appearance from main/minor/villain characters in the show right around the time the movie is coming out.

Please god no! The last thing i want is for any show to become a marketing vehicle for any product.. i hate that with a passion.

I don't have a problem with commercial products appearing onscreen but they way it's done is to shove our nose in it.. these extended 2-3 seconds where the camera lingers on the product and its logo makes me want to hurl ( i nearly walked out of a Brosnan Bond once because it became so unbearable on the nose).

 

[Turtletrekker]

Daredevil could be the tent-pole property for an entire new tier of Marvel movies. Tie together Daredevil with Power Man and Iron Fist and Punisher using Ben Urich as the link character ala Coulson, with Wilson Fisk as a recurring villain.

I like the idea of adding more non-Avengers films to the MCU, just to broaden it still further, but I'm not sure those other films would really need to build up to a single crossover like Avengers. No reason the whole MCU has to be locked into a single formula. It might be better just to have these films in a common universe and have occasional overlapping elements or characters, or maybe smaller crossovers or guest appearances.

On the other hand, your suggestion here is kind of cool, especially the Ben Urich part. Except I'd be happier if Daredevil and Spider-Man could be under the same roof, movie-rights-wise. After all, Kingpin was originally a Spider-Man character (and so was the Punisher, for that matter), and Urich has often been a semi-regular figure in Spidey comics as well as DD; plus Spidey and DD have often swung in the same circles themselves.

Agreed.. it is a very cool idea and i'd wish they'd make it R rated to really set it apart from the blockbuster Marvel movies, kinda like Marvel Max series that featured the best Punisher series ever by Garth Ennis (and they had the coolest Nick Fury cameo appearance.. drinking, swearing, beating up army generals with his belt and having threeways ). There doesn't need to be a giant team up movie like Avengers but cameos here and there and some storyline across the movies would be cool.

Spidey on the other hand won't revert to Marvel for a loooong time (if ever). They just started their new trilogy and it'll be another 5-6 years before that concludes and who knows what happens then. I don't see the studio letting go of Spider-Man anytime soon since it's a big moneymayker.. Marvel would have to dig very deep into their pockets to buy him out and i don't think they'd want to currently (though with the money they are making with their movies they sure could).

Dare to dream?

 

[Dream]

SONY will never give up the Spider-man film rights. It's a billion dollar franchise for them.

 

[Christopher]

Dare to dream?

Interesting -- and perhaps troubling. I enjoyed The Amazing Spider-Man. If this did happen and the rights changed hands, I hope that whoever picked them up would continue the existing series with its current cast, rather than doing yet another reboot.

Although that raises the question: hypothetically, of course, would there be any difficulties with incorporating the ASM universe into the Marvel Cinematic Universe? Perhaps the main continuity issue would be the Manhattan skyline, since there was no Stark Tower in ASM and no Oscorp Tower in The Avengers.

 

[Dream]

Although that raises the question: hypothetically, of course, would there be any difficulties with incorporating the ASM universe into the Marvel Cinematic Universe? Perhaps the main continuity issue would be the Manhattan skyline, since there was no Stark Tower in ASM and no Oscorp Tower in The Avengers.

Damn, I was hoping that we would not get Spider-man or Wolverine shoved into an Avengers film for at least another 20 years. I had already had enough of Wolverine taking over the X-men movies after X2.

The characters film rights being owned by seperate companies was the only thing stopping that from happening.

 

[Skywalker]

Although that raises the question: hypothetically, of course, would there be any difficulties with incorporating the ASM universe into the Marvel Cinematic Universe? Perhaps the main continuity issue would be the Manhattan skyline, since there was no Stark Tower in ASM and no Oscorp Tower in The Avengers.

Apparently Disney/Marvel and Sony had actually agreed to show the OsCorp Tower in The Avengers, but the idea fell through because the Manhattan skyline in The Avengers had already been rendered before the OsCorp design was completed for TASM.

Too bad, that would have been a neat little easter egg.

 

[Turtletrekker]

Although that raises the question: hypothetically, of course, would there be any difficulties with incorporating the ASM universe into the Marvel Cinematic Universe? Perhaps the main continuity issue would be the Manhattan skyline, since there was no Stark Tower in ASM and no Oscorp Tower in The Avengers.

Damn, I was hoping that we would not get Spider-man or Wolverine shoved into an Avengers film for at least another 20 years. I had already had enough of Wolverine taking over the X-men movies after X2.

The characters film rights being owned by seperate companies was the only thing stopping that from happening.

I think that there is very little danger of Spider-Man "taking over" an Avengers film. There are too many leads already and too many unexplored "classic" Avengers. And can you imagine asking Downey Jr., Hemsworth, Evans ect to take a supporting role to Andrew Garfield? Not gonna happen.

Rather instead, it could be the new "tent-pole" for street-level Marvel movies, instead of Daredevil as I suggested upthread.

Having said that, I absolutely would want the "Avengers" and "Street" franchises to co-exist in the same cinematic universe. Simply using SHIELD could accomplish that.

 

[Ian Keldon]

Dare to dream?

Interesting -- and perhaps troubling. I enjoyed The Amazing Spider-Man. If this did happen and the rights changed hands, I hope that whoever picked them up would continue the existing series with its current cast, rather than doing yet another reboot.

There's a third option: give the franchise back to Rami and let him make IV.

 

[Alidar Jarok]

Although that raises the question: hypothetically, of course, would there be any difficulties with incorporating the ASM universe into the Marvel Cinematic Universe? Perhaps the main continuity issue would be the Manhattan skyline, since there was no Stark Tower in ASM and no Oscorp Tower in The Avengers.

Damn, I was hoping that we would not get Spider-man or Wolverine shoved into an Avengers film for at least another 20 years. I had already had enough of Wolverine taking over the X-men movies after X2.

The characters film rights being owned by seperate companies was the only thing stopping that from happening.

I tend to agree about the X-Men. I think the universe is so deep and has its own morals and themes that any other characters would just be a distraction.

Avengers and Spiderman don't need to be as separate, but there's certainly a difference of portrayal. The Avengers are much more public than Spiderman, especially with Tony Stark being openly identified as Iron Man. Spiderman is a more personal story of Peter Parker, which I think will help keep him separate. That being said, Spiderman's involvement with SHIELD was a cool part of the 90s cartoon.

Based on that cartoon, I tend to agree that the ideal world would put Spiderman, Daredevil, and Punisher in one universe, the X-Men in another, and the Avengers in a third.

 

[Allyn Gibson]

Based on that cartoon, I tend to agree that the ideal world would put Spiderman, Daredevil, and Punisher in one universe, the X-Men in another, and the Avengers in a third.

I don't know how viable it would be, but I think a Hawkeye vs. The Punisher movie could be pretty damn awesome, especially if Tom Jane reprised his role as Frank Castle. Frank kills someone big that catches the attention of S.H.I.E.L.D., and Nick Fury assigns Clint to bring him in.

 

[Trekker4747]

There's a third option: give the franchise back to Rami and let him make IV.

Ummmmm. No.

 

[Captaindemotion]

SONY will never give up the Spider-man film rights. It's a billion dollar franchise for them.

My thoughts exactly.

 

[Christopher]

SONY will never give up the Spider-man film rights. It's a billion dollar franchise for them.

My thoughts exactly.

But the rumors aren't about the film studio giving up a single franchise. They're about the Sony Corporation, a multinational conglomerate dealing primarily in electronics, film & television, music, and financial services, possibly having to sell off the entire film studio (along with its TV and music assets) in order to remain financially solvent. So whatever rights Sony Pictures owns would presumably stay with the studio, but the studio itself could come under new ownership. Indeed, those rights are part of what makes the studio a valuable asset to potential buyers.

And it's not like this hasn't happened before. Heck, Columbia Pictures has only been owned by Sony since 1989. It's not uncommon for studios to be acquired by new conglomerates.

 

[Captaindemotion]

They're still just rumours at this stage.

Sony has come out and said that this is not the case, "Sony’s entertainment businesses are not for sale. Period,” Jim Kennedy, a Sony spokesman is quoted as saying

Of course, we all know businessmen never lie!

 

[Christopher]

^Of course, one should always be skeptical of rumors. I'm just trying to clarify what the rumor is about. It's valid to say that the studio wouldn't want to give up the Spidey rights, but that's not the issue here; it's the studio itself that's rumored to be up for sale by the conglomerate that currently owns it.

 

[Gaith]

^Of course, one should always be skeptical of rumors. I'm just trying to clarify what the rumor is about.

"Right! This calls for immediate discussion!"

​

 

[Ian Keldon]

There's a third option: give the franchise back to Rami and let him make IV.

Ummmmm. No.

Why not? He made 3 very good and profitable Spider-Man films. Even 3 (the least well regarded) still grossed more than $70 million more than the reboot. (US only)

 

[Flying Spaghetti Monster]

I thought his Spider-Man films added up to being just average. I don't have any desire to see Raimi do another one!