[Boards: 3 / a / aco / adv / an / asp / b / bant / biz / c / can / cgl / ck / cm / co / cock / d / diy / e / fa / fap / fit / fitlit / g / gd / gif / h / hc / his / hm / hr / i / ic / int / jp / k / lgbt / lit / m / mlp / mlpol / mo / mtv / mu / n / news / o / out / outsoc / p / po / pol / qa / qst / r / r9k / s / s4s / sci / soc / sp / spa / t / tg / toy / trash / trv / tv / u / v / vg / vint / vip / vp / vr / w / wg / wsg / wsr / x / y ] [Search | | Home]

HICKMAN: "‘Fantastic Four’ Comics Were Really Canceled

This is a blue board which means that it's for everybody (Safe For Work content only). If you see any adult content, please report it.

Thread replies: 53
Thread images: 7

http://www.slashfilm.com/marvel-canceled-fantastic-four-comics-jonathan-hickman/
https://www.newsarama.com/35805-why-marvel-doesn-t-publish-the-fantastic-four-and-what-it-will-take-to-make-them-start-again.html

>The concrete “whys” of the Richards family’s absence have been a matter of speculation since they left the Marvel Universe in Secret Wars, but as it turns out, the actual reason for their disappearance from Marvel's publishing line may be exactly what some conspiracy minded fans have said all along - 20th Century Fox's ownership of the franchise's film rights - but maybe not for the reasons they may expect.

>”I think it’s pretty common knowledge at this point that Marvel isn’t publishing Fantastic Four because of their disagreement with Fox,” Hickman explained. “While it bums me out, I completely understand because, well, it isn’t like they’re not acting out of cause. Fox needs to do a better job there.”

>Hickman’s reasoning seems to imply that Marvel did indeed drop the FF because of the Fox films – not necessarily for financial reasons, but because the most recent reboot was both critically and financially unsuccessful, and failed to reflect well on Marvel's comic books. Marvel still publishes an entire line of X-Men comic books, for example, despite Fox also controlling that franchise's film rights.

>[John] Barber spelled it out more directly, saying “Not to be blunt, but three f---ing terrible movies don’t help anything.”
>>
>>94485663
Read it again. It was canceled because they didn't want the comic F4 to suffer after a shit film.
>>
>>94485663
>because the most recent reboot was both critically and financially unsuccessful, and failed to reflect well on Marvel's comic books
by this logic they should be cancelling most of their comics. most of the comics themselves fail to reflect well on marvel's comic books right now.
>>
Why does Marvel actively attempt to punish and push away its remaining fans?

What a pathetic corporation.
>>
>>94485738
A comic failing because its a comic doesn't have the same wide brand appeal as a movie or video game failing.
>>
>>94485663
In other news: The Sea Is Blue, Comics Are Silly, And OP Is A Faggot.
>>
>>94485663
>not necessarily for financial reasons, but because the most recent reboot was both critically and financially unsuccessful, and failed to reflect well on Marvel's comic books
>Marvel still publishes an entire line of X-Men comic books, for example, despite Fox also controlling that franchise's film rights.
Yes, that only happened recently with RessurXion. If Inhumans hadn't bombed like Nagasaki, they would have shut down the muties too. Unfortunately too many people know the X-Men, so they know how hard they're gimping themselves. Still, the comics they released for them have absolute shit designs, story and art, so maybe they should've just been cancelled.
>>
If they cancelled the books because of the movie, couldn't they just rebrand the fantastic four into something else? Then the team could maybe come back in there own book?
>>
>>94485719
>>94485738
>the movie failed
>let's cancel one of our most popular franchises that's still selling well

And the only reason they're still putting out x-titles is because the Inhuman push failed miserably. The F4 were taken away and people didn't complain enough. X-fags, the battered housewives of comic fandoms, made their voices heard.

And Spider-Man is too big of a cash cow to even consider canceling, even when Sony had all the movie rights.
>>
>>94485663
>Marvel still publishes an entire line of X-Men comic books, for example, despite Fox also controlling that franchise's film rights
>>94485982
>And the only reason they're still putting out x-titles is because the Inhuman push failed miserably.

Maybe that's because the X-Men are one of the few things that consistently sell as well as Events, Number Ones and Batmen?
>>
>>94486136

They really do. I used to complain how they would buy just about any shitty comic when Marvel was trying to make them shit. This time it actually worked out for them.
>>
>>94485663
>Disney gets the chance to buy back the Fantastic Four rights
>Ike Pearlmutter tells them not to buy them, saying they can get the rights cheaper from Fox if they hold out
>Fox keeps the rights and refuses to sell them back now
>Ike Pearlmutter blames Fox for not giving them the FF rights when he was too stupid to buy them back
Why hasn't Disney hired a hitman to kill Ike? (He's as bad as Amy Pascal at this point). It's not like they couldn't afford one.
>>
>>94485719
>It was canceled because they didn't want the comic F4 to suffer after a shit film.

Do you really believe that? Really?
>>
>>94486136
>Maybe that's because the X-Men are one of the few things that consistently sell as well as Events, Number Ones and Batmen?

They actually haven't, the only reason the recent series had so high orders was because it was a relaunch.

Prior to the Blue/Gold relaunch the main X-titles were around the 30,000 levels.
>>
>>94486197
However I also do have to point out that their X-Men still sold better than most Marvel titles.
>>
>HICKMAN: "water is wet"
>>
>>94485755
that doesn't make sense though because the Fantastic Four and FF (Future Foundation) books were both selling very well on their own merit, despite the movies being bad. there was no reason to cancel them.
>>
>>94486176
Ike would probably kill the hitman first.
>>
>>94485982
The FF haven't sold well in recent memory save for Hickman's run.
>>
>>94486136
The X-Men have never recovered from the early oughts.
What was once bar none the most successful franchise in comics history is now no competition for the reign of the cookie cutter garbage batbook.
>>
>>94485663
>>[John] Barber spelled it out more directly, saying “Not to be blunt, but three f---ing terrible movies don’t help anything.”
I can buy this. It's cause the movies are so terrible they just shut it all down

but X-men are just too big, you can't stop that
>>
>>94486176
Because Ike is the one who has the hitman's contact info
>>
>>94486628
>I can buy this. It's cause the movies are so terrible they just shut it all down

It's mostly scapegoating. I mean, sure, it is a good idea to not be associated with Fox's retarded moves using the Fantastic Four, but the first was only kinda bad in a mediocre way and the second was bad in a sub mediocre way and the most recent one was bad in a dumpster fire way. It's not like DC canceled Batman comics just because Batman and Robin was a box office flop or Marvel canceled Daredevil comics just because Daredevil did worse than the first Fantastic Four movie and Elektra was a box office flop.
>>
File: 1415919489927.gif (2MB, 200x200px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
1415919489927.gif
2MB, 200x200px
>>94485663
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
REEEEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAAALLY?
>>
>>94485982
>And Spider-Man is too big of a cash cow to even consider canceling, even when Sony had all the movie rights.

Didnt the last 2 or 3 movies bomb. I mean before homecoming?
And even than they didnt canceled it.
>>
>>94486850
Wait.
>>94485663
>“While it bums me out, I completely understand because, well, it isn’t like they’re not acting out of cause. Fox needs to do a better job there.”
Oh wow, so they're making an entire article about one thing Hickman casually said, not even speaking based on any knowledge, but just based on a personal feeling of his.

So yeah, just another clickbait news article.
>>
>>94485663
>We can't make money with these characters in movies
>So let's stop making money with them in comics too!
>The last thing we want is to help the people who are currently in custody of our characters to be successful in any way
marvel is like a bitter divorced dad
>>
>>94485719
This fucking Disney damage control.
>>
>>94486880
Bombed by what they wanted. They got tons if money though.
>>
>>94487767
>We have F4 comic fans, rare moviegoers get past one story arc to translate to good comic selling numbers
>just incase they could think that movie = comic, shut the comic down
Or an insane cuckhold wive.
>>
>>94486880
Those movies were under exclusive ownership of Fox.

Before Homecoming they've planned to make Amazing Spiderman 3 and Venom, both outside marvel cinematic universe. Because of a recent bargain struck between Marvel and Sony though has blurred the lines of ownership. The agreement reached by both studios goes as follows: Sony retains the standalone movie rights to Spider-Man, Marvel gets creative control over the web-slinger in all formats, and both parties get to walk away rich.

Subsequently, Sony cancelled all those movies that was planned before the bargain. Except, maybe, Venom....Though it will be in its own universe.
>>
>>94487873
>What they wanted
Mhh, ok, but is this before or after the whole promotion and ads? There is still a difference. But did f4 this less money than spidey did?
>>
>>94487989
What does that mean? homecoming was a cinematic success, but regarding what it costed, icluding advertisment, promotion, was a bomb?
>>
>>94486177
Do I think a company would intentionally sabotage it's own profits out of spite by canceling a book? No. And that's what you idiots are pushing for when you keep going on about some grand F4 conspiracy.

Do I think a company would retire a book and let it sit on the back burner until the blowback from a horrible film relaunch passed? Yes. Which is why only Reed and Sue remain in limbo while the other half of the team and Doom still run around.

Just like with the X-Men conspiracy and everything else /co/ is wrong.

>>94486476
Book was barely staying over the 30k threshold, had zero media coverage, and wasn't making any headlines. It was a falling book staying afloat via the creators not off it's characters or anything happening inside. Marvel made the call that the film tanking would just completely kill off any remaining appeal for the characters. Sent them off in grand style and are likely waiting for the media appeal to turn back around.
>>
Aren't they planning on doing some half-assed F4 title for Legacy?

At any rate, the Terrifics will hopefully be a great supplement.
>>
>>94488227
>Do I think a company would intentionally sabotage it's own profits out of spite by canceling a book? No. And that's what you idiots are pushing for when you keep going on about some grand F4 conspiracy.

You can think that all you want, it still doesn't make you correct.

>Just like with the X-Men conspiracy and everything else /co/ is wrong.

Sure, blame everyone else. That's what Marvel always seems to do.
>>
File: 1498869341197.gif (982KB, 320x287px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
1498869341197.gif
982KB, 320x287px
>>94485663
Big fucking shocker
>>
>>94488094
Its simply means that Marvel is still anal about rights and creative control because they actually DID sell all their comic characters to Fox, Sony and Universal before they've created Marvel Studios or the concept of a cinematic universe.

Just knowing the legal mess you can predict stuff like....Marvel will never create a standalone Hulk movie because Universal holds the exclusive production rights. So you can expect them to shoehorn Hulk in every MCU movie, from the Avengers to Thor because that would not breach Universal's rights.

Financial failure of any given movie was always secondary since the rights gives a chance to milk cash from any future projects.

All of them, Marvel, Fox, Universal, Sony will fight over those rights and continue to cancel movies that were in production regardless over the success of a single movie.

Here are the rediculous facts. If you like X-men, Wolverine, FF, Silver Surfer, Galactus and Deadpool movies, your giving money directly to Fox. If you like Avengers, Thor, Iron man, Black Panther, Captain America you're giving it to Marvel. If you like the Hulk movies you're handing your cash to Universal. Namor is in legal limbo because Universal keeps filing complaints against Marvel...
>>
>>94488227
Hi ike
>>
>>94488417
>If you like X-men, Wolverine, FF, Silver Surfer, Galactus and Deadpool movies, your giving money directly to Fox. If you like Avengers, Thor, Iron man, Black Panther, Captain America you're giving it to Marvel. If you like the Hulk movies you're handing your cash to Universal. Namor is in legal limbo because Universal keeps filing complaints against Marvel...
I dont really care who gets my money. As long as i get good movies. And Fox gave us goodand bad x-men. Some Ok F4. Universal an OkHulk and a bad one. Marvel gave us good movies and some meh ones. One house doesnt mean we get only good movies.
>>
>>94488234
They're doing a new Marvel Two-in-One.
>>
>>94488642
>Some Ok F4

I wouldn't call the last one "ok."
>>
>>94485982
>cancel one of our most popular franchises
Fantastic Four are usually related with all the cosmic thing and the negative zone, that's now replaced with Guardians and Nova. They still can't find a villain as Doom but at this point who cares
>>
>>94488227
>Book was barely staying over the 30k threshold, had zero media coverage, and wasn't making any headlines.

on what fucking earth is 30k cancellation sales for marvel

marvel pushes dogshit that's sub 20
>>
>>94488769
forgot there were 3 movies, never saw it. I meant the first 2
>>
>>94488888
>sub 20
sub 16
nice digits
>>
>>94488888
he tries to prove his narrative.
From Iron man and Captain Marvel we know that movies dont relate to comic sales that much that would explain the f4 cancelation.
>>
>>94489051
i mean captain america
>>
>>94488227
>Book was barely staying over the 30k threshold,

Oh you mean like a lot of other books Marvel publishes.
>>
Eh, I bleed F4, but honestly I don't need them in this cuurent Marvel climate. They'd probably just have Reed and Sue divorce (Reed completely at fault), Reed replaced by some brown chick, and Johnny replaced with Wyatt Wingfoot who will now only talks in Native American stereotype and wear "traditional Native American garb.
>>
>>94485663
>[John] Barber spelled it out more directly, saying “Not to be blunt, but three f---ing terrible movies don’t help anything.”
yeah let's wait a decade after 2 failures and a reboot to cancel the comic
no fuck you
>>
>>94485929
What, like some sort of Foundation?
A Foundation of the Future?
>>
>>94489724
I'm astonished they don't have some All New FF team running around now since there is a long history of replacing everybody with randos.
Thread posts: 53
Thread images: 7


[Boards: 3 / a / aco / adv / an / asp / b / bant / biz / c / can / cgl / ck / cm / co / cock / d / diy / e / fa / fap / fit / fitlit / g / gd / gif / h / hc / his / hm / hr / i / ic / int / jp / k / lgbt / lit / m / mlp / mlpol / mo / mtv / mu / n / news / o / out / outsoc / p / po / pol / qa / qst / r / r9k / s / s4s / sci / soc / sp / spa / t / tg / toy / trash / trv / tv / u / v / vg / vint / vip / vp / vr / w / wg / wsg / wsr / x / y] [Search | Top | Home]
Please support this website by donating Bitcoins to 16mKtbZiwW52BLkibtCr8jUg2KVUMTxVQ5
If a post contains copyrighted or illegal content, please click on that post's [Report] button and fill out a post removal request
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows an archive of their content. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.