In Defence of Marvels New Mandates

In Defence of Marvels New Mandates

Quite the controversy has stirred as of late concerning new mandates that Marvel has put in place regarding the future of the Fantastic Four and X-Men. But not all is lost. Click the title and see how I defend these new mandates.

Editorial Opinion
By HenshinRider - Oct 08, 2014 07:10 AM EST
Filed Under: Marvel Comics

Hello all you beautiful people of the comic book movie world! My name is HenshinRider and allow me a moment for a ramble. Quite the controversy has stirred in the last week as it came to light that Marvel has cancelled Fantastic Four and it is ending in issue #645. Not only this, but according to Chris Claremont, Marvel have put the kibosh on X-Men creators from creating new characters. I have heard people wail left right and centre how this is stifling creativity and hampering creators. And I… tend to agree. Disappointed?  Hoped a contrary opinion? Well I guess you are in luck. How you ask? Well yes, I DO agree that this stifles creativity and really sucks. But I do see Marvels point of view and can see their justifications.
                                  


The first point is that Marvel does not want to help promote the competition, sure comics are not a huge market, but any advertising from Marvel is basically free advertising for Fox’s Fantastic Four reboot in 2015. Reports are that Marvel CEO, Ike Perlmutter, was apparently furious over negations with Fox over breakdown of the Galactus and Silver Surfer deal back in 2012. A bit of a D move on Marvel’s part. But it is a little understanble considering that Fantastic Four is a low selling title and there is really not that much to loose over embargoing the title.  This is something Marvel cannot justify with X-men as the titles are still selling well.
                                                    

As for the X-Men character mandate, it makes complete sense that Marvel does not want to provide Fox with more characters. I personally do not find that point as bad and is completely justifiable in my opinion. So for the short version of this editorial, just know that this is not the end of the world and that although this situation sucks… It could be worse. There are a few backdoors however that Marvel could exploit to make the best out of this situation.
                             

Let’s say upfront that this call seemingly has come from high up in the Marvel chain, so it is safe to assume that Marvel editorial may not be too pleased with these mandates – and neither will creators. But there are loopholes Marvel creative could exploit. Heck, with some creative re-jigging the mandates could bring a breath of fresh air and could bring the stories in exciting new directions.

Fantastic Four? Why not give it a name change for a year? Change the Status quo
This is an easy and very likely fix if Marvel editorial decide they want to bring back Fantastic Four. They just need to change the title of the book for a year or however long it takes. Just change to name to something that represents the team’s new status quo. Maybe they become corporate funded and change their name to match their new corporate name. Or maybe just expand the team so that they are not the Fantastic Four per say but maybe an Avengers B team that are mostly Fantastic Four. This could be a great opportunity to change up the team’s status quo. I think one of the best books Fantastic Four books in a while was the FF series by Matt Fraction and Mike Allred. This was because the status quo was changed and the Fantastic Four (although the book was not titled Fantastic Four) was a completely new team. Something similar could be done but maybe instead of a new Fantastic Four, you could expand the Fantastic Four into a bigger and greater team under a different name. A good idea could be to have the Fantastic Four absorbed into another team book, such as the Defenders or one of the 3000 Avengers books.
                                                      

Split the Fantastic Four up
This one is a given considering Reed’s role in many other books such as New Avengers etc. I think spreading the four as characters in different team books would be the way to go. Assuming that New Avengers has ended by the time Fantastic Four is cancelled, Reed would be a lock to be on any Avengers team – especially if the Illuminati is involved. The Thing likewise would be good in a grounded street level Avengers or any street level team title, like a new Heroes for Hire title. Human Torch would be a nice addition for the newly announced Spider-man and the X-men title. Human Torch and Spider-man have a pre-established history and both are jokesters, so this could add to the zany funny feel of the book. Sue Storm is the only odd one in the four. If you really wanted to shake the status quo up you could split Reed and Sue up momentarily and have her shack up with Namor. Look, I don’t really know what you could do with Sue – just throw her in some sort of team or something. I think the really interesting characters that could spin out of this mandate are Franklin and Valeria. I think Marvel should re-launch an Avengers Academy type teen book they could join in. They could be great in a teen centric book. This could be the launching point to nurture them to eventually grow up and spin off into their own titles in the future. Heck, throw Sue in there too as a mentor in the Academy book. See, I’ve figured out something with Sue!
                                                                    

Introduce new X-Men characters in other titles
This is the easiest way for creators to bring in new characters. Most creators have two or three books under their belt as well as their X-Men titles. For example, Bendis has Guardians of the Galaxy, Peter David has Spider-man 2099, Chris Yost has New Warriors, so on and so forth. Point is that creators have a way to introduce new characters they want to have appear their X title. They can just have the character appear in their other book for a few issues or arcs and then introduce them in their X title from then on. So technically the character was never introduced in an X title. If the problem is that Fox has the rights to any mutant character then just make them a dormant Inhuman (It’s practically the same thing to be honest).
                                                   

                                                                           Nigtmare fuel...
Wrap up
So as I said, this situation sucks. It sucks for the creators. It sucks for the readers. But, we have to chin up and just roll with the punches. In the history of comic books there have been far worse mandates (Such as Jim Shooter’s mandate against homosexual characters or the comic’s code authority). So it is not the end of the world, in fact it could give way to new exciting directions for these characters and could really shake up the status quo. And also remember that nothing lasts forever, I guarantee in a year or two the mandates will be lifted and status quo will return. So let me know what you think – do you think these mandates spell the end for Marvel or do you not really care either way? Sound off below and share your thoughts and don't forget to hit that beautiful red glove if you liked this article. Thanks for reading and have a great day.
                                                   

 
Marvel Comics Announces A New DEADPOOL VS. SPIDER-MAN Crossover But Not The One We Necessarily Expected
Related:

Marvel Comics Announces A New DEADPOOL VS. SPIDER-MAN Crossover But Not The One We Necessarily Expected

AMAZING SPIDER-MAN: Peter Parker Gets Some Help From The X-Men In Closing Chapters Of 8 DEATHS OF SPIDER-MAN
Recommended For You:

AMAZING SPIDER-MAN: Peter Parker Gets Some Help From The X-Men In Closing Chapters Of 8 DEATHS OF SPIDER-MAN

DISCLAIMER: As a user generated site and platform, ComicBookMovie.com is protected under the DMCA (Digital Millenium Copyright Act) and "Safe Harbor" provisions.

This post was submitted by a user who has agreed to our Terms of Service and Community Guidelines. ComicBookMovie.com will disable users who knowingly commit plagiarism, piracy, trademark or copyright infringement. Please CONTACT US for expeditious removal of copyrighted/trademarked content. CLICK HERE to learn more about our copyright and trademark policies.

Note that ComicBookMovie.com, and/or the user who contributed this post, may earn commissions or revenue through clicks or purchases made through any third-party links contained within the content above.

HenshinRider
HenshinRider - 10/8/2014, 8:24 AM
@MexicanChinman I'll try to find the article I read it from. I think it was a Bleeding Cool one released around the time the whole controversy started coming out all those months ago. So I'll do some digging and see if I can find it
yossarian
yossarian - 10/8/2014, 8:38 AM
Good stuff. It really doesn't need a defense though.

If you own publishing rights to the X-Men and license out the rights for the X-Men for film...why would you continue to go through the work of making new characters for them to use? Seriously. Why? You are going to go through the effort and cost to make X money in comic sales and then someone else can make more money on the films?

Also, it isn't like the X-Men movies are that kid friendly. They aren't exactly "adult only" but nothing about them are really aimed at kids. So why would Marvel produce toys for films which won't sell? Does anyone actually think that Disney/Marvel wouldn't make money if it was cost effective? I'm sure there is a market analysis and sales charts to show that it isn't worth the effort.

I really don't see it as an effort to hurt Fox. It's just business. Fox makes plenty of money to justify more X-Men movies, and will likely make enough money on the F4 to continue making more F4 movies too.

Canceling the F4 book does seem odd. But maybe they just aren't happy with the direction Fox is taking them? Maybe it has nothing to do with Fox. Is the book really selling that well? I don't know. Maybe they ran numbers and figured they can make the same amount of money by using the F4 in other titles?
HenshinRider
HenshinRider - 10/8/2014, 8:44 AM
@MexicanChinman After a bit of painstaking research I can't seem to find the proof. So that has led to one conclusion that I may only be remembering forum conjecture from the time. So I shall amend this and remove that part from my argument. Either way my points still stand. Marvel has not much to loose to cancel Fantastic Four considering it's low sales numbers, so I guess why not try this tactic.
HenshinRider
HenshinRider - 10/8/2014, 4:01 PM
Some pretty good responses guys. Lemme try to get responses to y'all in one hit.

@Yossarian Wow, I completely forgot to touch the whole no toys thing for X-Men films, thanks for reminding me. But yes I completely agree that the X-Men franchise doesn't need toys and is aimed at a more adult audience.

@Deathpillow Thanks for the compliment man! It's alg that you disagree with parts of my article - we all have different opinions and what not. But I actually see your point and hadn't considered the whole no development for newer characters. Hopefully seeing as Fox kind of strays away a little from the comic influence then there can be some leniency towards developing those characters. Wishful thinking I know. But hopefully there is, otherwise a book like Spider-Man and the X-Men is kind of dead in the water considering all the newish mutants on the roster.

@GliderMan That would be the perfect world. I still dream of a movie with Hugh Jackman Wolverine in a bar with Thor. It may happen, who knows, unlikely now... But then again Film-makers aren't execs that are sometimes blinded by corperateness, so maybe we could see Hugh Jackman and Bryan Singer lobby hard for this in the future (I know Hugh's pretty keen on it). Also we may have Spidey in the MCU too if all pans out. I think putting Garfield in an Avengers film helmed and penned by Whedon would absolutely kill and make me squee all over the place in joy. Oh and did you say Avengers 2 trailer?!! Where when where I want it I want it I want it!

@MantiniuMan Hey I never said I support it, in fact I open with it's a sucky situation and that I don't like it. I just say I can understand it, and technically Fox didn't cause Marvel to cancel the books -Marvel did it themselves and to be honest as Yossarian said they are well within their right to do it. Considering this isn't the first time that sales have been fairly low with FF it may be time for a hiatus anyway. It will come back though. There is absolutely no way Marvel would drop their first family indefinitely.

@Amazing512 Yeah exactly. I was so shocked to hear that Fraction was leaving FF last year - I was like "didn't he just start like 6 months ago O.o". Hickman's run was pretty good and critically acclaimed and I wouldn't be surprised if the numbers on those books were on the low side as well.
xstartripper
xstartripper - 10/8/2014, 5:21 PM
I think people understand the business reasons for why Marvel is doing this (or at least they do now if they didn't before thanks to you). The problem is that it makes it look like Marvel cares more about money and films than it does about art and comics, and I think that's why some are mad.

I'm not a Marvel fan, so I have no [valid] opinion, but I do find the whole Marvel vs Fox thing highly entertaining. Makes me very grateful DC has all its characters under one roof.
HenshinRider
HenshinRider - 10/8/2014, 6:02 PM
@xstartripper This is when we get into the age old argument of artistic license vs profits. Marvel is a company that is has to fend for itself despite being under the arm of the mouse. If Marvel lags behind and begins costing Disney more money than it gets back then you can betcha that there would be more management edicts like or worse than this. So it's kind of a tricky balance. I personally hate to see it when artists visions are compromised, such as Greg Rucka in Punisher - but ultimately it comes hand in hand with working with such a power house as Marvel or DC (Both companies function this way as they have to answer to higher masters). I think that's why so many creators are going to creator owned stuff with Image to work on their stuff without all the corporate niggling. It's an interesting discussion regardless and might be best saved for a future editorial. We shall see.

I think anybody can have a valid opinion despite what "allegiance" you side yourself with. It's your opinion and you are entitled to it - as long as it's not mindless trolling lol. But yes I must say for many years I was very annoyed at DC/WB for dropping the ball so hard considering all the characters are under one roof. I mean they had all these toys to play with and it seemed like all WB were interested in were Batman and Superman because they were profitable. But, they seem to be making strides towards using what they have to their full potential (I'm a massive fan of Arrow and it looks like Flash is shaping up to be the same), so here's to a good future for the DC film franchise.
xstartripper
xstartripper - 10/8/2014, 9:33 PM
@HenshinRider I agree that business is very important and it sucks that sometimes it does have to compromise an artistic vision, but that's the price you pay for staying afloat. Of course, the nature of this particular business move is a little different. This particular one highlights just how important the films are for Marvel. They're even prioritizing the films over the comics. Which I suppose makes sense since Marvel films are the ones bringing home the bacon really, but I can see why it would be looked at as a slap in the face to comic fans. Looking forward to that editorial.

Meh, I think someone who actually reads F4 and X-Men would have a more valid opinion than I would. I keep imagining it in DC terms, like what if they'd cancelled (pre-New 52) Titans because of company politics? I'd've flipped out. It just sucks for fans. And yeah, I'm a massive fan of Bats and Supes, but it's about damn time DC dipped into its incredible arsenal of characters. I'm glad Arrow has sorta opened the door for the other characters. And I'm also grateful to the MCU for motivating DC to get off their asses in the film department. It's almost like the knowledge that they COULD use those characters at any time made them complacent, whereas Marvel had to figure something out with the characters they could still license.
cimmerian
cimmerian - 10/9/2014, 2:02 AM
Good read! Nice work, HenshinRider.

I support Marvel's Mandate. Even if it'll do little to hurt Fox. This is the least Marvel can do to show that they're not in favor of what Fox has been doing to their characters.
Characters listed here are great and very popular in the comics. But in the movies, their image have been ruined by Fox.
1. Cyclopes - Bryan Singer turned him into a wimpy supporting character while Brett Ratner unceremoniously killed him off.
2. Storm - Miscasted and had a shitty supporting role
3. Galactus - fart cloud
4. Deadpool - yeah... Don't have to say it.
5. Juggernaut in X-Men 3. No connection to Professor X. Just a thug.
6. Lady Deathstrike in X-Men 2. Though I love Kelly Hu's performance. She would have been terrific if Bryan Singer didn't turn her her into a brain-washed henchman.
7. Sabretooth in X-Men. Just a thug with no connection to Wolverine.
8. Callisto, Psylocke and all the rest of the mutants in X-Men 3. Different powers with no personalities.
9. Viper in The Wolverine. Turned into a mutant who was out of place in the movie.
10. Silver Samurai in The Wolverine. Just a robot.
11. Henry Gyrich - turned out to be Mystique. Hate killing off screen.
12. Emma Frost - miscast and killed off in the next movie.
13. Banshee & Angel- killed off in the next movie.
14. Sentinels - useless in the 70s era.
15. Havok - no relation to Cyclopes?
16. Quicksilver - I don't care if people loves him. Fox stole the idea of Impulse from DC.
17. Phoenix - secondary character in the second act of X-Men 3.
18. Doctor Doom - Stan Lee said it best!
And the list goes on! So why should Marvel continue to create new characters only for Fox to ruin them?

As for Fantastic Four. I'd love to see a Hulk versus Thing battle of the titans match! Marvel needs Galactus and Silver Surfer for their Cosmic universe. So If they're planning Annihilation, they'd nee Annihilus and the Negative Zone. The Skrulls are great addition to start a Kree-Skrull war. The Watcher was never presented in FF rise of the silver surfer. Obviously they didn't know what to do with him.

Dammit! I hope the Fantastic Four reboot will flop big time!

There are too many reasons why these franchise are better off at Marvel. Fox is just holding on to them because there's money involved.
MightyZeus
MightyZeus - 10/9/2014, 4:11 AM
This is some good stuff. You've hit the nail on the head on some of the topics you've listed in the article. I disagree with some of the article but not all. I actually loved reading through the FF comics and it's a shame that the FF will be no more on pages.
View Recorder