Simon Kinberg thinks there will be a Fantastic Four sequel

Certified IGN Reposter **Stature** : 194

Okay, Fox. If you like losing money, then go right ahead.

Final Boss, 5th Form **Stature** : 414

They lose more money if they give the rights completely away to Marvel. That's an even worse scenario for them.

Certified IGN Reposter **Stature** : 194

@RamboOnRedBull So they are just going to continue losing money until they get a hit? That makes no sense. What's the point of even keeping the rights if it's no longer profitable?

Final Boss, 5th Form **Stature** : 414

Mecha wrote:: @RamboOnRedBull So they are just going to continue losing money until they get a hit? That makes no sense. What's the point of even keeping the rights if it's no longer profitable?

What isn't profitable now can be profitable in the future. You don't give away rights because a movie that didn't do well today. There's a million type of movies that studios keep the rights to, keep making for years and that aren't profitable for a while.

It's more about reaching out to a potential audience (in the near or distant future) than it is about only making movies that sell in an instant moment. If it wasn't, cinema would still be black and white silent films.

Certified IGN Reposter **Stature** : 194

@RamboOnRedBull Here's the problem though, Fox ONLY has 7 years to make another Fantastic Four movie. Otherwise, the rights go back to Marvel. 7 years isn't even enough time for people to get rid of the bad taste of the reboot out of their mouths. As for other studios pumping out movies just to keep the rights, Fox has made FOUR Fantastic Four movies just to keep the rights. And they all were disappointing. So where does the line draw? If they do decide to make another one and that flops as well, can you still continue to say they are going to make another one just to keep the rights? Come on.

Final Boss, 5th Form **Stature** : 414

Mecha wrote:: @RamboOnRedBull Here's the problem though, Fox ONLY has 7 years to make another Fantastic Four movie. Otherwise, the rights go back to Marvel. 7 years isn't even enough time for people to get rid of the bad taste of the reboot out of their mouths. As for other studios pumping out movies just to keep the rights, Fox has made FOUR Fantastic Four movies just to keep the rights. And they all were disappointing. So where does the line draw? If they do decide to make another one and that flops as well, can you still continue to say they are going to make another one just to keep the rights? Come on.

Mecha, it's a business practice. Studios do it all the time.

As for the bad taste, well, what really ruined the movie was its marketing and reception to its quality. If they had made a GOOD F4 movie with clever marketing that fit the fanbase, it'd have been more than profitable. You can't stop making movies because the previous one flopped. That's a really bad practice to go by.

BTW, I don't know where you get this lousy argument from:

Quote :: can you still continue to say they are going to make another one just to keep the rights? Come on.

As I never stated that they'll keep the rights forever. Instead, what I said was that giving the rights back to their main rival who will, inevitably, find a way to reach out to potential millions instead of Fox - well, that's shitty from a business perspective. Really shitty.

Certified IGN Reposter **Stature** : 194

@RamboOnRedBull Well of course it would have done better if it was a good movie. But they didn't, and never have even after FOUR bad Fantastic Four feature films. So there is no reason to believe that the next one will be good either. Also I'm not saying they should stop, but they shouldn't rush it out either. That's what you fail to understand. However, they have no choice but to rush it out, since they only got 7 years to put out another one. I mean, it's not impossible to make a good movie in a span of 7 years, but nobody will be up to see a squeal or a reboot that soon. You make it sound sound so simple for Fox to keep the rights, but it's not.

Once again, I never said they should give the rights back to Marvel. But hey, the clock is ticking, so they will have no choice but to give the rights away once 7 years have pass without another Fantastic Four movie from Fox.

Mecha wrote:: @RamboOnRedBull Well of course it would have done better if it was a good movie. But they didn't, and never have even after FOUR bad Fantastic Four feature films. So there is no reason to believe that the next one will be good either. Also I'm not saying they should stop, but they shouldn't rush it out either. That's what you fail to understand. However, they have no choice but to rush it out, since they only got 7 years to put out another one. I mean, it's not impossible to make a good movie in a span of 7 years, but nobody will be up to see a squeal or a reboot that soon. You make it sound sound so simple for Fox to keep the rights, but it's not.

Once again, I never said they should give the rights back to Marvel. But hey, the clock is ticking, so they will have no choice but to give the rights away once 7 years have pass without another Fantastic Four movie from Fox.

By your logic WB shouldn't make a movie based on a different hero other than Batman or Superman because they haven't found success in launching other DC heroes. Yes, you ARE saying they should stop unless they want to lose more money. 7 years? Movies can get done in 3. If the reboot is good then yes, they will. Rambo never said it was simple, nor implied it.

Lol And who says there won't be another F4 film during those 7 years? It doesn't even need to be a F4 film for them to keep the rights. They can just as easily do a Silver Surfer film and not mention the F4 at all.

Certified IGN Reposter **Stature** : 194

@yonny616 That's a stupid comparison. WB never found success with their DC characters besides Batman and Superman, because all they do is Batman and Superman. Where as with Fantastic Four, they already made four films from that franchise and they all sucked. Where did I say they should stop? Go right ahead and quote me where I said they should stop. And do you honestly think Fox will do ANOTHER reboot in 3 years?

Name one franchise that got rebooted 3 years later after the last one. Go right ahead.

Mecha wrote:: @yonny616 That's a stupid comparison. WB never found success with their DC characters besides Batman and Superman, because all they do is Batman and Superman. Where as with Fantastic Four, they already made four films from that franchise and they all sucked. Where did I say they should stop? Go right ahead and quote me where I said they should stop. And do you honestly think Fox will do ANOTHER reboot in 3 years?

Name one franchise that got rebooted 3 years later after the last one. Go right ahead.

You think it's stupid because you know it's right. Just because they failed doesn't mean they should just throw in the towel. That's not how businesses usually work, especially when you know there's a huge market there for whatever you're selling. They made 3. The 1994 was produced by a different company. Everything in your little "if they want to keep losing money, then go ahead" posts implies that you think they should stop. Did you bother finishing my post? They can make a film about Silver Surfer. They DON'T need to make an F4 film to keep the rights.

Certified IGN Reposter **Stature** : 194

@yonny616 No, you're not right. When did WB ever made a Wonder Woman movie? When did they ever made a Flash movie? When did they ever made a Aquaman movie? Oh that's right, they NEVER did because they mostly focused on Batman and Superman. Where Fantastic Four had FOUR movies and they all failed. I never said they should throw in the towel. I clearly said above that, and I quote, "I'm not saying they should stop, but they shouldn't rush it out either." Learn how to read next time. No, YOU don't know how the businesses works. You just don't make another right away every time the previous movie flops at the box-office. Who cares if the first movie isn't from the same company? It's still the same franchise. Quit twisting my words. All I'm saying is they should slow down, not stop. No one is ready for another sequel or reboot so soon. You guys are not talking Silver Surfer though. You guys are talking another Fantastic Four movie.

Mecha wrote:: @yonny616 No, you're not right. When did WB ever made a Wonder Woman movie? When did they ever made a Flash movie? When did they ever made a Aquaman movie? Oh that's right, they NEVER did because they mostly focused on Batman and Superman. Where Fantastic Four had FOUR movies and they all failed. I never said they should throw in the towel. I clearly said above that, and I quote, "I'm not saying they should stop, but they shouldn't rush it out either." Learn how to read next time. No, YOU don't know how the businesses works. You just don't make another right away every time the previous movie flops at the box-office. Who cares if the first movie isn't from the same company? It's still the same franchise. Quit twisting my words. All I'm saying is they should slow down, not stop. No one is ready for another sequel or reboot so soon. You guys are not talking Silver Surfer though. You guys are talking another Fantastic Four movie.

Want to know why they focused on Batman and Superman only? Because they haven't found success with other DC heroes. Fox made Three, tres, 3! And Bullshit! Your whole "if they want to keep losing money" point is all about them stopping and letting rights revert. I don't know how the business work? LMAO Says the guy that thinks they should stop trying to reach a huge market that IS there just because they failed a few times. Who said they'd make one right away? You said they have seven years, I said films can be made in three not that we'll have a new F4 in three. So take your own advice and learn to read. Then don't lump it in with the rest of the Fox-Four films as a way to prove a point when it's not even their film. So WB shouldn't have rebooted Batman yet then? No one honestly cares as long as it's good. No, we're talking about the rights. Which they can keep by making a Silver Surfer film that ignores F4 completely.

Certified IGN Reposter **Stature** : 194

@yonny616 They never found success with other DC characters because WB never made movies about those other characters, you derp. And what makes you think the next Fantastic Four movie will even make money? You must believe it will make money since you don't seem to be a bit concern that it could very well lose money. Never said they should stop reaching to the huge market. Learn to read. How many times does Fantastic Four has to fail to make you realize that they are losing money? It's not that simple to just make another Fantastic Four movie in just three years as you make it seem. The Fantastic Four franchise is already seen as toxic to the general audience? So what makes you think it will even make money? Oh, because it will turn out to be a good film? That's easier said than done. You don't know if it will be good or not. At this point, the Fantastic Four can't afford anymore risk. It doesn't matter if it's their film or not. Point is, Fantastic Four has been attempted to be made into live-action four times and failed. Also what are you talking about? It's been almost 5 years since the highly SUCCESSFUL Dark Knight Risies was released, and Batman doesn't get his own movie until 2018 probably. So no, it's not the same. Even if they make another Fantastic Four movie that was good, it doesn't mean it will be successful at the box-office. No, you're talking about making another Fantastic Four movie, don't lie.

Mecha wrote:: @yonny616 They never found success with other DC characters because WB never made movies about those other characters, you derp. what makes you think the next Fantastic Four movie will even make money? You must believe it will make money since you don't seem to be a bit concern that it could very well lose money.

GL was supposed to be followed by The Flash and WB got cold feet because GL failed. What are you on about? I never said it will make money and why should I be concerned? I have no stake in the company.

Quote :: Never said they should stop reaching to the huge market. Learn to read.

"Okay, Fox. If you like losing money, then go right ahead." "What's the point of even keeping the rights if it's no longer profitable?"

You haven't out right said it, but your choice of words do heavily imply it. So I read fine, maybe you should learn to express your thoughts in writing better.

Quote :: How many times does Fantastic Four has to fail to make you realize that they are losing money? It's not that simple to just make another Fantastic Four movie in just three years as you make it seem. The Fantastic Four franchise is already seen as toxic to the general audience? So what makes you think it will even make money? Oh, because it will turn out to be a good film? That's easier said than done. You don't know if it will be good or not. At this point, the Fantastic Four can't afford anymore risk. It doesn't matter if it's their film or not. Point is, Fantastic Four has been attempted to be made into live-action four times and failed.

What are you on about? I know they've lost money on it. Never said it was simple or that they'd make one in just three years you twat. Batman was also considered toxic and didn't get a reboot until about 7 years later. The next one can be a moderate success and it'll reassure Fox keeping the rights was the right decision. Never said it would turn out to be a good film? Again what are you on about? Again a Surfer film wouldn't be a F4 film and wouldn't need to acknowledge the F4 until later down the line. One of those times isn't Fox's fault. So trying to use it as something to further your point is moot and stupid.

Quote :: It's been almost 5 years since the highly SUCCESSFUL Dark Knight Risies was released, and Batman doesn't get his own movie until 2018 probably. So no, it's not the same. Even if they make another Fantastic Four movie that was good, it doesn't mean it will be successful at the box-office. No, you're talking about making another Fantastic Four movie, don't lie.

When are we first seeing this rebooted Batman? Oh right. Batman v Superman in 2016. 4 years after TDKRises. The mere fact you think people wouldn't be ready for a sequel, or a reboot, in the possible span of 7 years is ridiculously dumb. So yes, it's pretty much the same. And if they decided to go with Surfer to keep the right then it's possible we won't see the F4 for 8 years too. Again, it can be a moderate success and that'd be enough for Fox. No, you're turning it into that. I came in saying they can keep the rights by making a Surfer film instead of an F4 film. So kindly fuck off. I love you

Certified IGN Reposter **Stature** : 194

@yonny616 1. Well they are going to make another Green Lantern movie. Only difference is, they got all the time in the world to make sure they get it right this time. As for whether it will make money or not, you sure seem pretty optimistic that it will. Any concern that it won't, all of a sudden I'm wrong. Yeah, like you guys were so right about this turning out to be a good movie. At least I'm concern for a reason. I've been hoping for a good Fantastic Four movie since 2005, and so far this franchise keeps disappointing and disappointing for many years. Where as you guys keep being optimistic because you guys are too delusional about my concerns.

2. I was talking about if they were to move forward with a sequel, they will lose money. I wasn't talking about another reboot, crossover, or whatever. You don't honestly think a sequel would actually be successful do you?

3. Eight years, not seven. Batman was rebooted 8 years after Batman & Robin. Also it doesn't matter if it's Fox's fault or not. The public sees four bad Fantastic Four movies. Don't care who put them out or what.

4. You're missing the point. Batman is a popular character and The Dark Knight Rises was a very successful film. WB can get away with rebooting it a lot sooner. With Fantastic Four it's a lot more risky, because they are no longer popular and the last movie flopped both critically and financially. So no, it's not the same. That's a stupid comparison that you're making.

Final Boss, 5th Form **Stature** : 414

Mecha wrote:: @RamboOnRedBull Well of course it would have done better if it was a good movie. But they didn't, and never have even after FOUR bad Fantastic Four feature films. So there is no reason to believe that the next one will be good either.

From a studio perspective, they can. Fox doesn't make movies - filmmakers do. It's a matter of getting the right material and the right filmmakers without ruining what you planned to do. That's something every studio knows they can accomplish.

Also I'm not saying they should stop, but they shouldn't rush it out either. That's what you fail to understand.

Since when did I state that you said they should stop? Quote me, please.

However, they have no choice but to rush it out, since they only got 7 years to put out another one. I mean, it's not impossible to make a good movie in a span of 7 years, but nobody will be up to see a squeal or a reboot that soon. You make it sound sound so simple for Fox to keep the rights, but it's not.

People are always willing to see another F4 movie if they believe it's going to be good. You know how? By presenting it as a good movie to the public prior to its release. That starts with the marketing, and leads up to good word-of-mouth. It's what marketing is there to do, in the first place.

Once again, I never said they should give the rights back to Marvel. But hey, the clock is ticking, so they will have no choice but to give the rights away once 7 years have pass without another Fantastic Four movie from Fox.

Once again, you fail to comprehend what it is that is being told to you. No-one argued that you want them to give the rights away, so there goes another lousy argument with nothing to hold it.

Certified IGN Reposter **Stature** : 194

@RamboOnRedBull I don't even know where this is going anymore? What the hell are you on about? I'm trying being realistic here. My whole point is that Fox has very limited options right now. They only got 7 years, the Fantastic Four brand is no longer popular anymore after 3 or 4 bad films, nobody wants a sequel, and nobody wants it to be rebooted AGAIN this soon. The last time they rebooted a superhero franchise this soon after one bad movie, was The Incredible Hulk. And it still wasn't all that successful at the box-office, despite positive reviews. I've been hoping for a good Fantastic Four movie since 2005, and after so many years of disappointments I still hoped Josh Trank's Fantastic Four would be good. But it wasn't. So I'm not going to get my hopes up for whatever Fox is planning. You can choose to remain optimistic, but fool me once, shame of me. Fool me twice, shame on you.

Final Boss, 5th Form **Stature** : 414

Mecha wrote:

@RamboOnRedBull I don't even know where this is going anymore? What the hell are you on about?

I stated:

Quote :: They lose more money if they give the rights completely away to Marvel. That's an even worse scenario for them.

To which, you began arguing why they can't make a good one because they already made 4 bad ones. I never said anything about F4 or Fox. All I told you was that they lose more money by giving the rights away completely. You turned it into a debate that didn't have to be.

I'm trying being realistic here. My whole point is that Fox has very limited options right now. They only got 7 years, the Fantastic Four brand is no longer popular anymore after 3 or 4 bad films, nobody wants a sequel, and nobody wants it to be rebooted AGAIN this soon. The last time they rebooted a superhero franchise this soon after one bad movie, was The Incredible Hulk. And it still wasn't all that successful at the box-office, despite positive reviews.

We've gone through this already. 2 whole pages of it, in fact.

I've been hoping for a good Fantastic Four movie since 2005, and after so many years of disappointments I still hoped Josh Trank's Fantastic Four would be good. But it wasn't. So I'm not going to get my hopes up for whatever Fox is planning. You can choose to remain optimistic, but fool me once, shame of me. Fool me twice, shame on you.

I was never optimstic about any F4 movie. Keep your blabbering elsewhere.

Certified IGN Reposter **Stature** : 194

@RamboOnRedBull When did I ever said they can't make a good Fantastic Four movie? Point out exactly where I said that. You guys really can't get into an argument without twisting somebody's words.

Mecha wrote:: @yonny616 1. Well they are going to make another Green Lantern movie. Only difference is, they got all the time in the world to make sure they get it right this time. As for whether it will make money or not, you sure seem pretty optimistic that it will. Any concern that it won't, all of a sudden I'm wrong. Yeah, like you guys were so right about this turning out to be a good movie. At least I'm concern for a reason. I've been hoping for a good Fantastic Four movie since 2005, and so far this franchise keeps disappointing and disappointing for many years. Where as you guys keep being optimistic because you guys are too delusional about my concerns.

Yes, because they own him. Better than being pessimistic. Who said you're wrong? Again who said? Okay, I don't care about your concerns. Why should I?

Quote :: 2. I was talking about if they were to move forward with a sequel, they will lose money. I wasn't talking about another reboot, crossover, or whatever. You don't honestly think a sequel would actually be successful do you?

"What's the point of even keeping the rights if it's no longer profitable?"

This is all about the franchise, not just a potential sequel.

Quote :: 3. Eight years, not seven. Batman was rebooted 8 years after Batman & Robin. Also it doesn't matter if it's Fox's fault or not. The public sees four bad Fantastic Four movies. Don't care who put them out or what.

Oh so much difference to my "about 7 years" estimate. Doesn't change the fact WB managed to make a reboot of a toxic franchise in the same time span Fox has to.

Quote :: 4. You're missing the point. Batman is a popular character and The Dark Knight Rises was a very successful film. WB can get away with rebooting it a lot sooner. With Fantastic Four it's a lot more risky, because they are no longer popular and the last movie flopped both critically and financially. So no, it's not the same. That's a stupid comparison that you're making.

You have no point. People complained, and again are, when another iconic character in Spider-Man was rebooted too soon. It makes it even worse when it's popular considering more people will acknowledge it.

Final Boss, 5th Form **Stature** : 414

Mecha wrote:: @RamboOnRedBull When did I ever said they can't make a good Fantastic Four movie? Point out exactly where I said that. You guys really can't get into an argument without twisting somebody's words.

You pretty much argued that they can't make the next one any good.

Right here:

Quote :: Well of course it would have done better if it was a good movie. But they didn't, and never have even after FOUR bad Fantastic Four feature films. So there is no reason to believe that the next one will be good either.

And then you argued it here again:

Quote :: Yeah, like you guys were so right about this turning out to be a good movie. At least I'm concern for a reason. I've been hoping for a good Fantastic Four movie since 2005, and so far this franchise keeps disappointing and disappointing for many years. Where as you guys keep being optimistic because you guys are too delusional about my concerns.

Every time somoene brings up another F4 by Fox, you always try to argue how the next one won't be any good, either. You did it on this thread, and you've done it in other threads as well.

Also, not only are you directly implying it, but you're even using it as argument for why Yonny and I are wrong. Go fetch.

Certified IGN Reposter **Stature** : 194

@yonny616 1. If you know that WB owns Green Lantern then why are you making that silly comparison? You know very well Fox is just renting out Fantastic Four for a certain amount of time. That is if they can keep up putting out a new movie before those 7 years are up. Also you sure do seem to care about my concerns, since you can't even accept the possibility that Fox could very well fail with Fantastic Four again.

2. Well I was talking about the sequel, because Simon Kinberg is talking about the sequel. He didn't say anything about another reboot, crossover, or Silver Surfer.

3. There is a big difference actually. Because if Fox took 8 years just to make another Fantastic Four, without Silver Surfer, then they'll lose the rights. So yes, it is a big difference. Besides, Batman was never on the same level of toxic as the Fantastic Four franchise is. Three or four bad movies, and a reboot that made LESS than Batman & Robin both critically and financially. So good luck recovering from that any time soon.

4. Well you're partly right. The Amazing Spider-Man still made a shit load of money though. So it just proves my point that you can still take that risk with the more popular characters. You are right about the last part you said though. People wouldn't care to see another Batman without Nolan or Bale this soon. However, because he'll crossover with Superman in the next movie, it will just bring more people to go see it if anything. Why do you think I didn't include Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice as a Batman reboot in one of my comments above?

@RamboOnRedBull There is a difference between getting your hopes up and not believing that a good Fantastic Four movie can be done.

Mecha wrote:: @yonny616 1. If you know that WB owns Green Lantern then why are you making that silly comparison? You know very well Fox is just renting out Fantastic Four for a certain amount of time. That is if they can keep up putting out a new movie before those 7 years are up. Also you sure do seem to care about my concerns, since you can't even accept the possibility that Fox could very well fail with Fantastic Four again.

Go read my comparison again. It has nothing to do with who owns what. Okay, and? They're "renting out" F4. So? They managed to do one even though it turned out bad. When did I say that that wasn't a possibility. Do you understand what the word optimism means? And no I don't give one fuck about your lousy concerns.

Quote :: 2. Well I was talking about the sequel, because Simon Kinberg is talking about the sequel. He didn't say anything about another reboot, crossover, or Silver Surfer.

"What's the point of even keeping the rights if it's no longer profitable?"
THAT isn't just about a sequel, but about the franchise as a whole.

Quote :: 3. There is a big difference actually. Because if Fox took 8 years just to make another Fantastic Four, without Silver Surfer, then they'll lose the rights. So yes, it is a big difference. Besides, Batman was never on the same level of toxic as the Fantastic Four franchise is. Three or four bad movies, and a reboot that made LESS than Batman & Robin both critically and financially. So good luck recovering from that any time soon.

I was talking about the difference between me saying 7 or 8. Yes, they would. What's your point? I know that. It's why I said a Surfer film could keep them the rights for another seven years to hold off on another F4 film. Oh fucking bullshit. Batman & Robin is considered on the worst film of all time. It took 7, sorry 8, years before WB actually knew how to get out of the slump. That's the same thing people said about Superman and Batman after IV and B&R.

Certified IGN Reposter **Stature** : 194

@yonny616 1. Doesn't matter. You can't compare a property that is owned by someone to a property that is basically being rented out. Because WB isn't limited with their properties like Fox is with Fantastic Four. WB can take their sweet ass time to get their properties right. Where as Fox has to rush out Fantastic Four, which could compress the quality of their film. So no, it's still a silly and unfair comparison. And you think releasing a bad Fantastic Four movie okay as long as they keep the rights how?

2. I was thinking about the first comment I made for some reason? Derp. Anyway, what I meant by that comment was that how much money will Fox lose until they make a good Fantastic Four movie? I'm not saying they should give up the rights, but at the same time it isn't a hot enough property for them right now to rush things over for. It's like Fox can't just let go of the rights, but they can't just rush out another one either. So they are stuck like Sony was with Spider-Man. Only worse because Fantastic Four flopped, while The Amazing Spider-Man movies still made money at the box-office. So it just doesn't make sense to desperately hold on to a property this much that not a lot of people care about.

3. No. It took 6 years for WB to finally develop Batman Begins. Then it was released 2 years later. Once again, you keep comparing properties that are owned to properties that are being rented out. HERP DERP, DA SAM CAN BEE SAED 4 DC CARECTRZ AS WEL HURRRR. Are you obtuse or something? I clearly said "any time soon". How long did it take for Superman to recover after Superman IV: The Quest For Peace? 19 YEARS. Oh but by your logic, it's no different, correct? It's a silly and unfair comparison that only simpleminded people make.

Final Boss, 5th Form **Stature** : 414

Mecha wrote:: @RamboOnRedBull There is a difference between getting your hopes up and not believing that a good Fantastic Four movie can be done.

There's a difference between having low expectations and claiming someone is delusional for not sharing your pessimism:

Quote :: you guys keep being optimistic because you guys are too delusional about my concerns.

Go fetch.

» Tim Miller and Simon Kinberg want Spider-Man in Deadpool 2
» Fantastic Four sequel cancelled?
» Fantastic Four sequel cancelled
» FANTASTIC FOUR Sequel Gets New Release Date!
» Fox is moving forward with Fantastic Four sequel?