I just watched the new Fantastic Four movie trailer, which is a property that 20th Century Fox studios has the rights to. Sure enough, the 20th Century Fox logo appears at the start of the trailer, but this is followed by the Marvel logo.
So, I guess what I am curious about is what sort of control and power does Marvel have over the characters they have sold to other studios, most notably the X-Men and Fantastic Four for 20th Century Fox, and Spider-Man for Sony. I would presume that Marvel allows their own logo to appear before these movies as a sign of consent that they stand behind these movies as ‘legit’.
However, what would happen if 20th Century Fox decided to create a movie with the X-Men or Fantastic Four that the Marvel corporation does not approve of. Could they remove their logo from the start of the movie?
Basically, does the presence of the Marvel logo before movies made by studios other than Marvel Studios an acknowledgement that Marvel still retains some creative control over the characters they have sold to other studios.
Because the Fantastic Four are Marvel characters. It’s not a mark of approval, it’s a statement of ownership. The only thing Marvel can do is revoke Fox’s rights to do FF movies if they go too long without making one. (Or presumably, if they violate the contract in some way…removing Marvel’s logo might be a good way to accomplish that, actually.)
You’ve never seen a movie begin with four or five “studio” and “distributor” and “producer” and “owner” logo clips? Each and every one represents some link in the chain between first concept and what you’re about to watch. Marvel is in there because FF is their property, and they are one big effin’ dog in Hollywood these days. Ten years ago, it might have been a minor title credit. Now they get to wave their… logo in your face. Fox has no choice but to allow it.
ETA: Which has nothing to do with the fact that three attempts to build a FF franchise is at least one too many, probably two. Especially given how much they appear to have fugged up the story and characters.
OTOH, I bet there won’t be a Dodge ad in the middle of this one. :smack:
I assume that the degree of creative control they retain is that they had the opportunity to choose whether to sell the rights. But they’ve taken that opportunity, and so now the other studios have the right to include the Marvel logo for the same reason they have the right to use the characters: Because they bought it, and that’s what the contract says.
Marvel/Disney has been trying for years to get the X-Men, Spider-Man, and Fantastic Four rights back in-house. If they had the option of removing approval from the movies, they would have exercised it.
Hmm. So you think Fox is using the Marvel logo because they can (because it has enormous marketing cachet right now), rather than because Marvel is (now) strong enough to insist on it?
Why would they ever not want to use the logo? Yes, the Marvel name has a lot of draw right now, but they’re comic book movies, and the core audience for comic book movies is obviously people who like comic books. The Marvel name might not always have been as big a draw as it is now, but it’s always been at least something of a draw, and it’s never been a handicap.
Because nobody in H’weird shares any credit they aren’t forced to. The “prestige” of being just a 20thCF production outweighs the cachet of the Marvel splash.
Marvel’s logo appears in the movies because Marvel insisted that their logo appear when they negotiated the contract with Fox. The characters are still Marvel characters, and they would want that to be acknowledged.
From Fox’s point of view, it causes no harm for the Marvel logo to appear, as contracted for, and it might even constitute something of a benefit. However, without that contract, Fox would not use the logo because it would be a source of possible liability for false designation of origin.
Is that a statement of knowledge, or of presumed knowledge? Because while the contract surely addresses the issue, I’d think it’d be just as likely to be Fox who insisted on it, rather than Marvel.
They do if they think it’ll sell more tickets. Think of all of the cases where a studio bought the rights to a book, just so they could slap the title on a completely unrelated movie. Do you really think that they called that Will Smith movie I, Robot because they were forced to? No, they paid a lot of money for the privilege of sharing that credit, because they thought it would put butts in the seats.
The Marvel logo has been at the front of movies based on their characters long before there was any premium on such a thing. Before there was a Marvel Studios. It was at the front of Universal’s Hulk, Raimi’s Spider-Man, Daredevil, etc. Years ago.
This isn’t Fox trying to bamboozle anyone or gain benefit from Marvel’s prestige. It’s just a thing that has always been. Most likely a condition of adopting the rights.
Though I’m sure in 2015 they don’t mind the association one bit.
If you’re asking me if I witnessed the negotiations, no I didn’t.
But I have enough experience in trademark matters to have a good idea of what the situation is. From Fox’s point of view, the “Spiderman” name is plenty good to get all the good will and fan loyalty it needs.
“Marvel” doesn’t add anything more to Spiderman than Spiderman has on its own. Fox is not a tiny outfit that needs to ride on Marvel’s good will for a Spiderman project.
Maybe if we were talking about a character that nobody has heard of, perhaps Fox would prefer to call it “Marvel’s WhoDaFuckIzzat” or “Stan Lee Presents: WhoDaFuckIzzat.”
But with something like Spiderman, so far as Fox is concerned, they would love to have people think of Spiderman as a Fox property and not care whether “Marvel” is front and center in people’s minds.