|
bobkatt013 posted:I doubt very much they get merchandise money from the comic characters, just their movie counterparts. If they got all merchandise rights that would be crazy and a horrible contract.
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2015 22:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 16:52 |
|
|
Aphrodite posted:It can't be all of it, or there would be no X-Men merchandise ever. Eh there's barely been anything since X3 came out, which was before the MCU started making a bazillion dollars a year. First Class and Days of Future Past were both very successful superhero movies with pretty much no merchandise to speak of.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2015 22:33
|
|
|
There's still X-Men t-shirts and other things like that, though mostly from 3rd parties.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2015 22:47
|
|
|
Travis343 posted:Eh there's barely been anything since X3 came out, which was before the MCU started making a bazillion dollars a year. First Class and Days of Future Past were both very successful superhero movies with pretty much no merchandise to speak of. Yeah since marvel has to sign off on it. We know there is pettiness on both side, but you made it sound like its for all X-men related merch and that's not true.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2015 23:26
|
|
|
bobkatt013 posted:Yeah since marvel has to sign off on it. We know there is pettiness on both side, but you made it sound like its for all X-men related merch and that's not true. While it still exists, now compared to MCU merch it's a drop in the bucket because Fox still gets paid despite not being film related.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2015 23:31
|
|
|
bobkatt013 posted:Yeah since marvel has to sign off on it. We know there is pettiness on both side, but you made it sound like its for all X-men related merch and that's not true. It was mentioned earlier in the thread that while Fox doesn't get everything from non-movie X-Men merch, they do get 40%.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2015 01:40
|
|
FilthyImp posted:The original Xmovie was kind of a gambit, and Marvel wasn't quite doing gangbusters at the time. I can see them offloading a bunch of risk through a bad contract like that. Marvel was exploding at the time and they decided to take a very short sighted approach to fixing it. I guess it worked out in the end, but I can't help but wonder if it wouldn't have made more sense financially to seek a buyout then instead of climbing out of the pit only to let Disney buy them out anyway.
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2015 03:33
|
|
|
Lurdiak posted:Marvel was exploding at the time and they decided to take a very short sighted approach to fixing it. I guess it worked out in the end, but I can't help but wonder if it wouldn't have made more sense financially to seek a buyout then instead of climbing out of the pit only to let Disney buy them out anyway. I think that would have been entirely dependent on who bought them. Warner ' s ownership of DC hasn't really lead to a bunch of great comics.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2015 03:45
|
|
|
Well neither give much of a poo poo about the comic side so it is a wash on that front.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2015 06:03
|
|
|
Lurdiak posted:Marvel was exploding at the time and they decided to take a very short sighted approach to fixing it. I guess it worked out in the end, but I can't help but wonder if it wouldn't have made more sense financially to seek a buyout then instead of climbing out of the pit only to let Disney buy them out anyway. They sold the rights in 94 and at that time they were doing lots of stupid poo poo
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2015 06:36
|
|
|
Rhyno posted:Correct, Fox can not just create a toy line without Marvel. Seems like someone at Fox should have realised this was a poor deal for them also if it has just led to there being no merch and no money for either party.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2015 13:02
|
|
|
There was merchandise early on. It's only later Marvel got petty.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2015 20:52
|
|
|
After all, it was X-Men movie merch that had everyone saying, "Wait, THIS is what Deadpool looks like?!"
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2015 21:16
|
|
Aphrodite posted:There was merchandise early on. It's only later Marvel got petty. It's really more of a Disney move, I feel.
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2015 21:59
|
|
|
Ever since they realized that the Marvel brand itself had become valuable, they've been extra-stingy with associating it with any IPs they don't control "enough" of the rights/revenue for. If you're buying superhero shirts and action figures, then by god they want to be sure you're using that money for and ~*creating brand attachment with~* characters that aren't cash cows for someone else.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2015 22:16
|
|
|
It kicked up a bit recently, when they started pulling licenses. Before that while you still couldn't find X-Men or Fantastic Four stuff on Marvel's merchandise shop, you had other companies making licensed shirts, statues etc. It seemed like only 2 or 3 companies got theirs pulled though. Sideshow just announced a Dark Phoenix, while one of the others had even that same character canceled. And they still released Emma Frost, a 90s Jean Grey and some other stuff over the last few months. There's the ArtFX X-Men line too.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2015 22:27
|
|
|
Besides Cable and X-man, what other characters have a reverse monocle? I'm sure I've seen a few, but I can't think of any right now.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2015 22:47
|
|
|
Technically those are the same guy. Rachel Grey as the Phoenix, sometimes.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2015 22:58
|
|
|
Longshot! He started it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2015 23:25
|
|
|
DivineCoffeeBinge posted:Longshot! He started it. So Shatterstar too!
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2015 23:29
|
|
|
Stryfe, but that's just Cable again.
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2015 23:31
|
|
|
Lurdiak posted:Stryfe, but that's just Cable again. Ultimate Cable! That's not Cable.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2015 23:34
|
|
|
Just pull up any Liefeld created Marvel character (not named Deadpool but who knows, maybe his eye was glowing under the mask)
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2015 01:51
|
|
|
At least one guy in Bloodstrike or Brigade or BloodBlood has the stupid glowing eye as well.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2015 02:00
|
|
|
CharlestheHammer posted:Well neither give much of a poo poo about the comic side so it is a wash on that front. Wasn't New 52 rushed into production because corporate wasn't happy with the comic sales?
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2015 20:46
|
|
|
Skwirl posted:Wasn't New 52 rushed into production because corporate wasn't happy with the comic sales? Essentially. Some books were thrown together literally overnight and given to creative teams that made no sense.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2015 20:48
|
|
|
That is the rumor but we can't say for sure. The Reboot was DC as gently caress tho so it probably would have been the same either way.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2015 20:49
|
|
|
Rhyno posted:At least one guy in Bloodstrike or Brigade or BloodBlood has the stupid glowing eye as well. I would totally read and book called BloodBlood.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2015 20:50
|
|
|
Rhyno posted:Essentially. Some books were thrown together literally overnight and given to creative teams that made no sense. Like giving Liefeld 3 separate ongoings over 2 years?
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2015 21:06
|
|
|
Gaz-L posted:Like giving Liefeld 3 separate ongoings over 2 years? You hit that nail on the head. ANd then you have things like Snyder's Swamp Thing that had 3 three issues in the can and had to be pulled back and a bunch of things changed to make it N52.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2015 21:08
|
|
|
Yeah, I would not be even a little bit surprised to discover that Leifeld got his ongoings because some dude in a suit said "Hey, I've noticed that when this guy was on a book it sold, like, a bajillion copies, we should get him on board" and no one had the heart or balls to tell him "Yeah, but it's not 1996 anymore." See also: why M. Night Shamayalan keeps getting huge budgets to work with despite the fact that the vast majority of his movies are not very good.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2015 21:14
|
|
|
Skwirl posted:I would totally read and book called BloodBlood. You wanted blood? 
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2015 21:15
|
|
|
Ah, Deathmate Red. The book that didn't single-handedly kill the '90s speculator market, but serves as a good headstone for it anyway.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2016 00:29
|
|
|
Senior Woodchuck posted:Ah, Deathmate Red. The book that didn't single-handedly kill the '90s speculator market, but serves as a good headstone for it anyway. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2016 08:10
|
|
|
Well, it's like this as I understand it. It was a Valiant / Image crossover. Valiant could put out their half of it on time; Image could not. The Valiant and Image books at the time were at a high point of collector speculation; wealthy speculators would buy ten copies or whole cases. But Deathmate was more expensive due to its prestige format at the unheard-of-at-the-time price of $5 an issue, so the cost of investment was much higher. The Image books being late had the knock-on effect that some stores had paid large quantities of money for product that didn't arrive, and distributors at the time generally required a book to be more than six months late before providing any sort of refund on orders. So you had stores having invested large amounts of money they couldn't get back for half a year, if at all. This was not unique to Deathmate, but was a general issue with Image books selling wildly but running so late that comic shops were effectively running a debt to stock their books - but the books were too "hot" to just ignore. In any case, the problem is that the late books basically wrecked confidence in the crossover, to the point where the sales for the last issue were only about a third of those of the initial issues. Which left those who invested the early issues high and dry, because they had about two to three times of supply than the actual demand for the books.... And that's without embarrassing moments like Bob Layton of Valiant literally going over to Rob Liefeld's house to perform a sit-in to get him to finish his art pages.  
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2016 08:43
|
|
|
I have fond memories of throwing that book in the trash with a lot of other Image books last summer. The holofoil will still be there millennia from now.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2016 13:03
|
|
|
deathmate is such a terrible title for an even shittier premise, the gently caress was anyone thinking with that poo poo
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2016 18:53
|
|
|
Acne Rain posted:deathmate is such a terrible title for an even shittier premise, the gently caress was anyone thinking with that poo poo Money.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2016 18:59
|
|
|
Acne Rain posted:deathmate is such a terrible title for an even shittier premise, the gently caress was anyone thinking with that poo poo  Plus, it was the '90s, so you had to combine words to make new words otherwise it wasn't cool.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2016 19:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 16:52 |
|
|
Dario the Wop posted:It's because the story was two cosmic characters (Image's Void and Valiant's Solar) meeting between dimensions and mating, thus causing the merger and eventual death of their universes. I never tire of the fact that they are banging on that cover.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2016 19:29
|
|