Studio Rights Wars: The Internet Doesn't Care If Rumors Are True or False.
Friday, May 29, 2015 at 12:30PM 
I've expressed dismay many times here at TFE that what the internet mostly wants is rumors and future film nonsense rather than discussion of actual films that exist and that people can see. (Bet you ANYTHING that the word count on Star Wars "stand-alone" films that don't exist and won't for years is higher than the word count on Ex Machina which does exist and is amazingly worth discussing.) The Daily Beast has a current piece about rumors that seem to have erupted from actual facts (Marvel cancelling some series, toys, and retconning some characters including The Scarlet Witch -- all things that have always happened before billion dollar movies were involved and also within series where no billion dollar movies are involved). The piece suggests that Marvel is sabotaging Fox's efforts on X-Men and Fantastic Four. It's frankly a bizarre claim, even though it is more than obviously true that Marvel would want the rights back to these properties.
It's a bizarre claim because, let's face it, the only people that can actually sabotage a movie are the people making it and distributing it (producers, filmmakers, studio powers-that-be, actors, marketing department). All that really matters for Fox is whether or not their movies are hits and whether or not their movies are any good (these are not interdependent outcomes).
A good counterpoint example is Sony & Spider-Man. Marvel (sort of) got the rights back to Spider-Man -- albeit in an extremely limited and then internet exaggerated kind of way. But this wasn't because Marvel successfully sabotaged anything but because Sony made one terrible decision after another with the franchise. Finally, it probably looked wise to them to involve Marvel since they couldn't figure out what they were doing wrong. (Here's a clue: messing with Sam Raimi's immensely popular vision in the first place)
But Marvel cannot sabotage anything that they aren't involved with and hurting the reputation of two of their most valuable products isn't exactly good for long term business either.
Batman is now 76 years old
Weird fact: comic books do not sell in huge numbers despite superheroes ruling pop culture. Structurally they were the embryo of a billion dollar movie empire but, trust, if Marvel stopped making comic books altogether The Avengers would still sell tickets in movie theaters. According to Comichron The Avengers is currently selling less than 70,000 copies per issue and it's generally among the top 15 or so Marvel titles per month. At $5 a pop that's around $350,000 a month or about a million dollars less than what Age of Ultron made this past Wednesday alone. Comic books are still a foundation of course, but the reality is that most of the characters that created the billion dollar movie profits we're now seeing are self-sustaining as brands through merchandise and movies and television and have been for a long long time now. DC's Big Three Superman & Batman & Wonder-Woman and Marvel's Captain America will all soon be octogenarians (all were created between 1938 and 1942) and the bulk of today's mega-popular characters from The Avengers, Spider-Man, and X-Men franchises have already turned 50 having been born in the early to mid 1960s.
This part of the article in particular, discussing trouble with the new Fantastic Four and rumors of Matthew Vaughn reshooting parts of Josh Trank's Fantastic Four, really upset me because it proves how much the internet prefers discussing rumors to anything factual.
Consider the wording here:
A source with Fox told The Daily Beast that “while Vaughn was a producer on the project and involved in the production” the rumors of him taking over directorial duties during reshoots are “untrue,” although declined to comment further on the rumors.
It's the last part of the sentence that stings. So if I'm reading correctly, the source they contacted said bluntly that 'the rumors are untrue' and then The Daily Beast throws a little shade by adding 'declined to comment further on the rumors.'
What exactly should someone in the know say about rumors after they've already said they're untrue. Should they go on and on about them and pontificate about what the rumors might mean if they were true but they're not?
No, that's the internet's job.
P.S. I have no solution about getting the internet -- and thus the world or vice versa -- to care about actual movies more than they care about rumors about movies. And god help me, I still care about superheroes and superhero movies, despite the glut. (I blame it on my youth and my general love of "spectacles" which general are superhero movies nowadays since action movies are often colorless and they make too few glitzy musicals.) But for whatever reason I fret about this "we only care about movies that don't exist yet" problem and how to solve it all the time. If you have a solution please save the world / movie culture by sharing it in the comments.
Reader Comments (12)
It is your refusal to accept things as they are that is the problem. Old movies have an audience that is landlocked into approval or dismissal. Not much for a nuanced discussion except from those devoted to having one for just about anything in the media or pop culture. Those people are usually running blogs with less traffic than your site.
I love what you said about spectacle - it's one of the only upsides for these kinds of movies, though even still I'm definitely losing interest with these superhero movies. Actually, the one that more or less killed it all for me was Godzilla - technically not a superhero movie, but after I walked out of that weird unentertaining unhuman emptiness, I told myself - ok no more big budget movies like that for a while, unless I hear from multiple sources that I trust that it actually has a story worth seeing. I think the antidote is more reviews of actual movies, more features that discuss the elements of moviemaking (actresses, cinematographers, directors, themes, comparing and contrasting, filmographies). Your site is the antidote already. You're right - the rumors and speculation and anticipation have almost NOTHING to do with the actual movies that we love. Keep up the good work!
T-Bone, for me, it was Man of Steel last year. After that unhuman emptiness (love that phrase!), I swore off blockbusters until I felt it was worth my time. Surprisingly, that ended up being Mad Max last week which was definitely worth it.
I don't think the internet only cares about movies that don't exist yet. I think the change is that the internet now cares just as much about movies that don't exist yet as well as the movies that do. The cause can be attributed to multiple sources: the internet's inexhaustible appetite for information; the press having to fill hours of static/blank pages with something; fans gaining a more powerful voice via social media; creators now talking directly to fans; studios spending near equal amounts of money stoking the appetite for the movie and the movie itself, and more reasons still. It's not a problem to be solved, more a problem to be managed individually, because there's too much momentum built by the industry and the fans -- you would need to be Superman to stop it, reference completely intentional.
It doesn't bother me as much as it does you, mainly because so much of it is speculation, and so much of the noise is performative and attention-seeking. And really, we're all guilty of that, in one way or another.
/3rtful -- i've never understood why you come here if you dislike our approach so much. But here's the thing: Accepting things as they are is passive and when it comes to the movies I am not a passive participant, hence the blog and the punditry. There would be no point in commenting on anything ever if you just accept that "it is what it is"
No interest in being a zombie consumer. Not my calling in life
F -- that's a good point although I would disagree with your percentages. I don't think it's equal. I think the scale has tipped in favor of the nonexistent which is the real problem. That's one thing that is actually better about TV coverage on the internet. Sure there is some speculation but a lot of it seems to be direct involvement with what actually exists (i.e. recapping, memes, etcetera) there's some of that on movie blogs but not enough.
I've never understood why you come here
Because I was never formally uninvited.
There's a few things you have to understand:
Ex Machina, for example, is a independent release that might not be available to a good portion of the country, so it cannot generate a massive dialogue because it just isn't a known quantity. A lot of these properties, on the other hand, have gone so far beyond just film that they're pretty ingrained in fan's heart. Then you have to take into account that some fans of these bigger films just might not be cinephiles. It's not how we see it but most people find movies to be entertainment and nothing more.
Now in general, I don't think speculations and rumors about movies is a bad thing. People have - and always will be - interested in what can be. It allows them to dream about possible themes, characters, etc. In that sense, though, a film can be very finite. You can talk about its themes, characters, plot until you're blue in the face but at some point there's only so many directions you can go with it.
I'm not saying that people shouldn't talk about the films that are available to them now; they absolutely should. However, I don't think they should be looked down on for dreaming about what could be. Hell, some of us - like myself - just love it all: Past, Present and Future.
@Nathaniel - TV is a different medium though, so the audience has different expectations. TV also has one feature that movies don't, and that's the ability to course correct. Whether that happens later on in the season in the network TV model or the next season in the new cable model, it's a crucial feature that I think most audiences are aware of. The internet TV audience gets passionate in a different way, because they think and/or know that if they create enough noise that the creators will hear it and can affect change while the show is ongoing.
Movies, most people think a movie property will only have one shot, and studios often imply that they can only finance one shot, and when there's only one chance, over-investment is bound to happen in all phases of a movie's life cycle. I can feel the combined terror/excitement of Wonder Woman fans despite never going into those forums, for example. And they will make their voice heard pre-production, because they think that it will better the odds if the filmmakers know. The studios feed this frenzy, because they use it to gauge interest, do some marketing and generate buzz. The press reports it, because they're interested and/or they need to write about something. It's an ugly cycle, and seems,...inescapable, for a lack of a better word.
daniel -- perhaps i come off grumpy writing this one? sorry. I don't look down on any one for dreaming of movies. I've made it my life. I just think it's only healthy to dream about movies if you have balance (i.e. that you love the ones that exist more than the ones in your head... unless you're a filmmaker of course in which case by all means fantasize about imaginary movies and feed that creative drive)
but Ex Machina is a wide release now. and has been doing okay for itself (it's now A24's biggest hit ever)
everyone -- i'm just grumpy. i've noticed this pattern where every other month i tend to despair at The State of Things In Terms of ClickBait Rumors. I just view them as the empty calories/fast food of the internet and so many people are getting unhealthy feeding solely from those outlets that thrive on them. There's just no nutritional value in it ;)
I think you do a great service as a blog, providing more than speculation. And yes, constant speculation fills the void but does get tiring.
If you are looking for some suggestions regarding movie content, why don't we take a closer look at the books some of the upcoming movies are based on? Maybe we could have a book corner where 3-4 TFE readers volunteer to read the books and report back... just a thought.
Also, "accepting things as they are" is not an option for me. As a woman I cannot subscribe to a policy that would accept sexism and just learn to live with it.
Besides as a Canadian I have seen activism work. We have entrenched human rights into our constitution, (1982) and this led to maternity benefits, anti-discrimination legislation in the workplace, and legal Gay marriage. Activism can change things significantly in terms of consumer attitudes, and this in turn can have an effect.
Accepting things as they means operating from a realistic place of proper expectation and thinking of solutions for a dire situation.
People feel more involved with the film if they are speculating the possibilities in advance than just commenting in hindsight. The most interest is generated from adaptions or exciting properties. Fandoms get excited while thinking/worrying about the possibilities. For excample in enjoy more about discussing the possibilities of the next Disney princess film Moana than about arguing wheather it was horrible that there was not poc characters in Frozen or trying to argue that Frozen might not be the best Disney film ever.
But these rumors are about big films with fandoms. I think if they did not excist people would be talking about old films or small ones. I do not think the this habbit is really taking out from other films.
PS. I wish I could have been more eloquent but my English is still not the best.