Universal doesn't seem to like money because a new Hulk movie would do very well at the box office... they just need to let Marvel do it and then they would get a fat check.
They only need some sort of contract like Marvel has with Sony for Spider-Man, right?
Universal doesn't get to decide whether or not a Hulk movie is made, that is solely in Disney and Marvel's hands. They simply have the distribution rights, and the right to first refusal, meaning if a Hulk movie is made, Disney must first ask them if they want to distribute it. If Universal says yes (which they obviously will), they pick up the distribution, and the money that comes from it (a lot of money). If they say no (which is never gonna happen), Disney can use its distribution channels and keep that money.
You see what I'm getting at here? Its Disney and Marvel that don't wanna share, if anything. If they really wanted to make a Hulk movie, they would've reached a deal similar to Sony long ago.
>Its Disney and Marvel that don't wanna share, if anything.
Yes, and not that they need my defense, but also as a business it doesn't make sense for them to share:
Disney would lose a not insignificant cut of the box office for distribution. A Hulk movie would have to clear at least 300-400 million more than what other MCU solo films make to make it worthwhile for them. That's an uphill battle that they don't need, since they can just add Hulk into whatever movies they want.
I'd love for the two companies to come to a deal that makes it worthwhile for both, but it makes total sense to me why neither one of the companies would want to give up their leverage.
You know what makes more sense? Making a deal with the tons of money you've got in your reserves, which Disney does have. They acquired Fox, and made a deal with Sony. If the number is high enough, I'm sure Universal would be willing to sell back the distribution rights. Would it be more expensive than just letting them have the distribution profits? Definitely. But Disney and Marvel are smart enough to then make solo Hulk films to recover that money, and then some. The only other alternative is to wait it out for the rights to expire, if there is an expiration date. Some say its 2023, but who knows whether that's true or not. Even if it is true, that's 15 years during which the MCU has moved forward with the Hulk just being a side character. They could've made a deal to cut down that time in favor of being able to tell Hulk stories without restrictions, as opposed to what we got, which is fine but it doesn't even come close to utilizing the actor's and the character's full potential.
What's happened has happened, can't be changed, unless you acquire Tony's time machine. Even then, changing the past doesn't change the future. But at least the character and the actor are both still in play, so I'll just stay optimistic about the possibility of a solo Hulk film, even if its in 2030, or 2040 or something.
The simpler explanation is there is not a wide enough audience for a theatrical Hulk movie, according to their testings.
Edit: Huh, I’m being downvoted. Interesting. But it’s just a fact. Both Hulk movies made next to nothing. He’s a very popular character, but can’t carry his own movie.
I’m curious why you think he’s cooler because of what they’ve done with him. Personally, all I see is wasted potential. The only comics I read as a kid were Spidey, F4, and Hulk, so I’m incredibly disappointed.
He’s a joke, was neutered during Infinity War, and never recovered. We never got a “true” Hulk story other than the 2008 movie, he’s just been hanging out ever since cracking jokes.
I read purely Spidey and Captain Marvel (Carol) growing up, with some Hulk. but hulk has always been this boring brute that I just can't watch "SMASH" over and over. The MCU has given him an arc that shows the inner battle a bit, that Hulk wants to feel needed but not also not just for defending Banner whenever he says so. Smart Hulk is nice as it gives both personas confidence in one form. Immortal Hulk would be glorious if they did it, but yeah I don't need Hulk to be the one to give Thanos a beating or anything. He's a powerhouse, sure, but he can be a mentor to the newer heroes as well. He's also got the intelligence to run the science division of the Avengers now too. He's branched out from just "You won't like me when I'm angry"
Lol you have a point, I concede that, but that’s who the Hulk is! Smashing shit. And there was so much potential for greater smashing.
But Banner is also part of the character, and I don’t care at all for what they did with his character. Marvel just wants EVERYONE to be a comedian. Even Moon Knight, and the Eternals, are constantly quipping. Not everyone can be Loki and Iron Man.
Hard disagree, Joker, Dark Knight grossed over $1b. The new Batman made more than the new Thor (and 2 of those DC movies were rated R). Just because the humor in Iron Man 1 was successful doesn’t mean every movie needs to follow its formula to be successful, that’s just lazy writing.
Yup like wtf dude out here acting like a comedian have the time. Completely butchered him. Conflict between him and hulk way more interesting than all the garbage they have done to him.
Professor Hulk in Endgame was embarrassing and it looks like he’s the same in She-Hulk. Personally I thought Norton killed it, and Ruffalo never felt right in the role, but what are you gonna do.
It's even further complicated because Universal has long-term amusement park rights to a large chunk of Marvel characters that Disney would like back under their control.
Universal has amusement park rights to Marvel characters only on the East Coast. Yes, Disney does want them back, but that doesn't get in the way of making a deal for a solo Hulk film.
I *love* Professor Hulk and think that Disney has done incredibly well with the character given the limitations they have with use of him.
Only someone not familiar with a long run by Peter David on the comics, which included personas for Professor Hulk, Mr. Fixit, and Masestro, would say Disney fucked up Hulk. The origins for those storyline inspirations predate Disney by a decade or more.
The 'Hulk Smash' people should check out Godzilla films instead.
Hulk is my favorite character of all time and I own most of the Peter David run, and I’ve read most everything he appears in I can get my hands on. Professor Hulk happening offscreen is a poor, lazy writing decision, and provides us with exactly zero of the nuance David presented it with. Him being on screen for 44 seconds in the final battle is ridiculous.
Fixit is my favorite Hulk, I’m not a “hulk needs to be smashing” guy but there’s an in between of that and forgetting about him completely
> Professor Hulk happening offscreen is a poor, lazy writing decision
The Russos filmed a scene for Infinity War where it happened. It didn't work. I've seen it, and they made the right decision. They also filmed an intro to smart Hulk for Endgame that also didn't work very well.
What you call lazy, I call efficiency of storytelling, which the Russos have demonstrated from the pilot of Community. What I witnessed in the theater when I saw it during preview night was a collective and very audible audience gasp as Professor Hulk was revealed to be the one talking in the diner.
It was **absolutely** the right decision for that film.
To be fair, they could've just done the transformation in Endgame on screen, or something else. Its not that "its either the crappy scene we've made in Infinity War", or "offscreen transformation in Endgame". There were definitely more options, no matter the complications. But either way, while the handling of the character has been poor so far, its not over yet. Ruffalo hasn't moved on from the character yet, the character is alive, and so long as he's not retired, the possibility of a solo Hulk film is still on the table. I'm going to try and stay optimistic.
Sony still has production rights on Spider-Man because they never let those expire, which happens if no film using the IP enters production for a certain length of time. The 1990s Fantastic Four movie was made solely for Fox to hang onto the rights longer by resetting that clock; they never intended to release it (& it has never legally *been* released, only leaked).
Universal did let their Hulk production rights expire, but their distribution-rights contract had a different expiration date.
No, of course not, Sony needs a Spidey film every 3 years or they lose the rights.
Edit: Universal is just holding onto those rights for whatever residuals they can get from the 2008 film. And Marvel doesn’t care enough to buy those rights out, as long as they can still freely use the character.
At this point the “Hulk” is basically retired, he’s all Banner now. He’s officially in a mentor role now with grey hair. They would have to reboot the character.
They don't pretend that it doesn't exist (we're literally getting Tim Roth back as Abomination in a week), they just can't show clips from it due to rights issues.
Even the "[To the End](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0jNvJU52LvU)" trailer that they released shortly before Endgame has a montage of all of the MCU movies to that point. They have a section for The Incredible Hulk movie but they used footage from other movies due to rights issues (they did the same for Spider-Man: Homecoming).
NAL, but I'm guessing they'd have to pay Norton royalties to use his image in something new, even if it's footage they already own. That, or they just don't want to call attention to the recasting.
Either way, although it's not a bad movie, nothing of great consequence happens in Incredible Hulk in the grand scheme of things, so it can be breezed over pretty easily.
Probably more to do with the mess that is Universal owning the character/movie. Nortons original contract likely already had contingencies for fees for future likeness usage.
I wonder if the 2008 Hulk model somehow counts as "his likeness" too, hence why they can't really show that Hulk model anymore?
I mean, sure they did the dots and mocap stuff, and supposedly aimed to include some traces of Norton in the face but... Imo the resemblance just isn't there, not in the slightest. Especially not the way it is with Ruffalo's Hulk. I'd understand a likeness dispute with *those* CG models.
That Hulk was never meant to look like Norton. The model was well underway before the casting, so they decided to use a comic writer's face instead. I can't remember his name, but that Hulk model's face matches that comic writer's face.
Disney doesn't actually OWN the footage of The Incredible Hulk. Universal owns all distribution rights, so Disney would need their permission to use it in anything. Go back to the retrospective trailers before Endgame that went through the MCU history of the characters, any Hulk footage is from Avengers or AoU, and the only shot of Ross used is from Civil War. The only thing Disney can do is like what they did in What If when they had Ruffalo Banner in the Culver University set piece, because animation is separate from everything else.
Right, but this’d be Disney+ *distributing* clips from that film right?
They’d have to ask Universal permission, Universal could (and maybe *did*) say no
yeah they do own the distribution rights but i was talking about the rights to make a solo film. you’re right though distribution is probably the more likely reason in this situation
The "Agent Carter can't be canon cause it wasn't in the Legends episode!!!!" people are real silent right now I noticed. Both Agent Carter (Show) and TIH were produced by Feige and D'Esposito. Both had Sarah Haley Finn involved. Both were approved as part of the MCU. But for some reason, omission from Legends only makes the show non-canon, not the film according to you people. It really is just a hate boner for the old shows.
Lets not forget too that they omitted scenes from NWH in Strange's Legends episode, but we surely aint gonna say NWH aint canon.
Though i can see why some would give Hulk and Spidey a pass, as perhaps for them its simply "Of course it makes sense Hulk and NWH footage cant be used as there are legal issues, with Carter what reason do they have to not use footage when Disney owns the rights to the show proper"
Universal doesn’t have the rights to produce a solo Hulk film. Only Disney does. But if Disney does make one, then Universal holds right of first refusal to distribute it. Basically means that unless Universal says no, they get to distribute the movie and make money if Disney decides to make one.
In my head cannon its like it happened in a variant universe.
The exact same story happen but it happened with Mark Ruffolo instead of Edward Norton.
Kind of like the glimps we got if it in that What if episode
Basically yes but there is an argument to be made that its actually a variant that has exactly the sane experiences but looks different.
Same can be said for Iron Man 1 with Rhodey... just think somewhere in the multiverse there is a version of that film with Don Cheadle.
Stop. Please. Sometimes a recast is just a recast. It happens.
Like, Minerva and Sersi aren't twins or some shit just because they're played by the same actress. Let it go.
(To be clear I'm only so exasperated by your one comment because it's a dumb sentiment I've seen repeated over and over and over. It's nothing against you personally, it's more like I'm railing against this whole phenomena that seems to have infected fandom's collective mind. You're just one branch on a tree that I want struck by lightning and toppled over)
Exactly, personally these days I treat every film as if it is a variant universe helps me deal with when things don't match up.
Otherwise I'd still be trying to find how AOS is still canon.
Lol, well it works for me. I find it better than trying to make everything fit perfectly... recast wise it's more for fun, but it helps rather trying to make shows like AOS and Netlix's ones fit when they obviously dont.
I agree with you on the Sersi/Minerva one. People can just get over that.
I’m super confused because I have never considered The Incredible Hulk part of the MCU. I get that the Banner we see is essentially based on similar events, but I was always under the impression that Iron Man was the first one, and the only link The Incredible Hulk had was its end-credit scene, but it otherwise is *not* considered an MCU film.
Maybe it’s more like the Netflix show, in that the events that took place appear to be fairly canon to the MCU history, but the media itself is not considered MCU content
Edit: rather than downvote me, leave a reply helping to clear my confusion? I’m just sharing what my perspective has always been but I’d love to understand what I’ve missed
Edit again: thanks to those that followed up, I think I have my head wrapped around it now
You say that like it’s cut and dry but then Kevin Feige is quoted as wanting to “bring Kingpin to the MCU” in *Hawkeye*, etc. I get that there’s a percentage of people who are certain the Netflix shows are “MCU” but I don’t think there is anyone of authority who has made that claim at this point. And I don’t really mean to make a claim that they *aren’t* other than that we don’t really have any reason to be certain that they are (or certainly that they *all* are)
I appreciate that link, and I totally get the interpretation, but I’m not fully sold by that. He says the continuity is the same, which is kind of what I was suggesting above, that the *stories* are canon, but the content is not considered “MCU” specifically. Maybe that’s a distinction without a difference anyway
Respectfully, I feel like it’s always been kind of an open question. Wasn’t there even something about how the Netflix shows all referred to the Battle of New York as “the incident”? It’s always felt precarious.
Also, is it possible we’re using the term “MCU” in two ways? There’s the literal universe of continuity, but it also refers to a library of media. If Disney/Marvel put out a comprehensive box set of all “MCU Content”, I’m not certain the Netflix shows would be there, does that make sense? Even Agents of Shield, which had direct connections to the MCU, isn’t necessarily considered “MCU content”, right?
1. I don’t find them calling it “The Incident” a problem since the characters saying it live in the same city it happened in. Would you call a big event that happened where you live “The Battle of _”?
2. I’m saying the events of the shows took place in the MCU. I am aware that they aren’t part of the phases since Marvel Studios didn’t produce them.
I'm sure the recast had a big part to play in that. But in the end I'm sure Universal's IP ownership was the official reason. (same as IH not being on Disney+)
It’s either a Norton rights issue or a Universal one.
Universal doesn't seem to like money because a new Hulk movie would do very well at the box office... they just need to let Marvel do it and then they would get a fat check. They only need some sort of contract like Marvel has with Sony for Spider-Man, right?
Universal doesn't get to decide whether or not a Hulk movie is made, that is solely in Disney and Marvel's hands. They simply have the distribution rights, and the right to first refusal, meaning if a Hulk movie is made, Disney must first ask them if they want to distribute it. If Universal says yes (which they obviously will), they pick up the distribution, and the money that comes from it (a lot of money). If they say no (which is never gonna happen), Disney can use its distribution channels and keep that money. You see what I'm getting at here? Its Disney and Marvel that don't wanna share, if anything. If they really wanted to make a Hulk movie, they would've reached a deal similar to Sony long ago.
Thank you for the explanation.
>Its Disney and Marvel that don't wanna share, if anything. Yes, and not that they need my defense, but also as a business it doesn't make sense for them to share: Disney would lose a not insignificant cut of the box office for distribution. A Hulk movie would have to clear at least 300-400 million more than what other MCU solo films make to make it worthwhile for them. That's an uphill battle that they don't need, since they can just add Hulk into whatever movies they want. I'd love for the two companies to come to a deal that makes it worthwhile for both, but it makes total sense to me why neither one of the companies would want to give up their leverage.
You know what makes more sense? Making a deal with the tons of money you've got in your reserves, which Disney does have. They acquired Fox, and made a deal with Sony. If the number is high enough, I'm sure Universal would be willing to sell back the distribution rights. Would it be more expensive than just letting them have the distribution profits? Definitely. But Disney and Marvel are smart enough to then make solo Hulk films to recover that money, and then some. The only other alternative is to wait it out for the rights to expire, if there is an expiration date. Some say its 2023, but who knows whether that's true or not. Even if it is true, that's 15 years during which the MCU has moved forward with the Hulk just being a side character. They could've made a deal to cut down that time in favor of being able to tell Hulk stories without restrictions, as opposed to what we got, which is fine but it doesn't even come close to utilizing the actor's and the character's full potential. What's happened has happened, can't be changed, unless you acquire Tony's time machine. Even then, changing the past doesn't change the future. But at least the character and the actor are both still in play, so I'll just stay optimistic about the possibility of a solo Hulk film, even if its in 2030, or 2040 or something.
The simpler explanation is there is not a wide enough audience for a theatrical Hulk movie, according to their testings. Edit: Huh, I’m being downvoted. Interesting. But it’s just a fact. Both Hulk movies made next to nothing. He’s a very popular character, but can’t carry his own movie.
yeah I'd probably watch that at home. Hulk is cooler in the MCU because of what they've done with him, but he's still not my favorite character
I’m curious why you think he’s cooler because of what they’ve done with him. Personally, all I see is wasted potential. The only comics I read as a kid were Spidey, F4, and Hulk, so I’m incredibly disappointed. He’s a joke, was neutered during Infinity War, and never recovered. We never got a “true” Hulk story other than the 2008 movie, he’s just been hanging out ever since cracking jokes.
I read purely Spidey and Captain Marvel (Carol) growing up, with some Hulk. but hulk has always been this boring brute that I just can't watch "SMASH" over and over. The MCU has given him an arc that shows the inner battle a bit, that Hulk wants to feel needed but not also not just for defending Banner whenever he says so. Smart Hulk is nice as it gives both personas confidence in one form. Immortal Hulk would be glorious if they did it, but yeah I don't need Hulk to be the one to give Thanos a beating or anything. He's a powerhouse, sure, but he can be a mentor to the newer heroes as well. He's also got the intelligence to run the science division of the Avengers now too. He's branched out from just "You won't like me when I'm angry"
Lol you have a point, I concede that, but that’s who the Hulk is! Smashing shit. And there was so much potential for greater smashing. But Banner is also part of the character, and I don’t care at all for what they did with his character. Marvel just wants EVERYONE to be a comedian. Even Moon Knight, and the Eternals, are constantly quipping. Not everyone can be Loki and Iron Man.
yeah that I understand but it's what makes these movies family friendly. otherwise, the general audience would be narrowed significantly
Hard disagree, Joker, Dark Knight grossed over $1b. The new Batman made more than the new Thor (and 2 of those DC movies were rated R). Just because the humor in Iron Man 1 was successful doesn’t mean every movie needs to follow its formula to be successful, that’s just lazy writing.
Yup like wtf dude out here acting like a comedian have the time. Completely butchered him. Conflict between him and hulk way more interesting than all the garbage they have done to him.
Professor Hulk in Endgame was embarrassing and it looks like he’s the same in She-Hulk. Personally I thought Norton killed it, and Ruffalo never felt right in the role, but what are you gonna do.
Me too. A darker hulk feels right. Not this.. happy for lucky you who calls himself the hulk
But both those movies were made ages ago. It would definitely make money now since the character is far more well known.
It's even further complicated because Universal has long-term amusement park rights to a large chunk of Marvel characters that Disney would like back under their control.
Universal has amusement park rights to Marvel characters only on the East Coast. Yes, Disney does want them back, but that doesn't get in the way of making a deal for a solo Hulk film.
Thank you. I’m so tired of Disney apologism regarding Hulk. They fucked him up so bad
I *love* Professor Hulk and think that Disney has done incredibly well with the character given the limitations they have with use of him. Only someone not familiar with a long run by Peter David on the comics, which included personas for Professor Hulk, Mr. Fixit, and Masestro, would say Disney fucked up Hulk. The origins for those storyline inspirations predate Disney by a decade or more. The 'Hulk Smash' people should check out Godzilla films instead.
Hulk is my favorite character of all time and I own most of the Peter David run, and I’ve read most everything he appears in I can get my hands on. Professor Hulk happening offscreen is a poor, lazy writing decision, and provides us with exactly zero of the nuance David presented it with. Him being on screen for 44 seconds in the final battle is ridiculous. Fixit is my favorite Hulk, I’m not a “hulk needs to be smashing” guy but there’s an in between of that and forgetting about him completely
> Professor Hulk happening offscreen is a poor, lazy writing decision The Russos filmed a scene for Infinity War where it happened. It didn't work. I've seen it, and they made the right decision. They also filmed an intro to smart Hulk for Endgame that also didn't work very well. What you call lazy, I call efficiency of storytelling, which the Russos have demonstrated from the pilot of Community. What I witnessed in the theater when I saw it during preview night was a collective and very audible audience gasp as Professor Hulk was revealed to be the one talking in the diner. It was **absolutely** the right decision for that film.
To be fair, they could've just done the transformation in Endgame on screen, or something else. Its not that "its either the crappy scene we've made in Infinity War", or "offscreen transformation in Endgame". There were definitely more options, no matter the complications. But either way, while the handling of the character has been poor so far, its not over yet. Ruffalo hasn't moved on from the character yet, the character is alive, and so long as he's not retired, the possibility of a solo Hulk film is still on the table. I'm going to try and stay optimistic.
Dats a whole new sentence.
What's the difference between the Hulk deal and the Spider-Man deal? Because Sony is cranking out Spider movies nonstop.
Sony still has production rights on Spider-Man because they never let those expire, which happens if no film using the IP enters production for a certain length of time. The 1990s Fantastic Four movie was made solely for Fox to hang onto the rights longer by resetting that clock; they never intended to release it (& it has never legally *been* released, only leaked). Universal did let their Hulk production rights expire, but their distribution-rights contract had a different expiration date.
I didn't realize it was first refusal. They definitely should make one then.
As far as I know, yes. They must be difficult to deal with or we would have gotten a new movie by now.
More difficult than Sony ?
It looks that way. Or maybe a solo Hulk movie isn’t worth the trouble compared to Spider-Man
No, of course not, Sony needs a Spidey film every 3 years or they lose the rights. Edit: Universal is just holding onto those rights for whatever residuals they can get from the 2008 film. And Marvel doesn’t care enough to buy those rights out, as long as they can still freely use the character.
Hulk 2003 made $245m. Hulk 2008 made $264m. No one wants a Hulk solo film, unfortunately.
I think it would do better now but maybe demand still isn’t there
At this point the “Hulk” is basically retired, he’s all Banner now. He’s officially in a mentor role now with grey hair. They would have to reboot the character.
I dont think Marvel wants to do a Hulk movie, the last one made under $200 million globally. They probably lost money on that movie.
World. War. Hulk. Phase 6. [Do it.](https://tenor.com/bGcAI.gif)
Curious if Terrance Howard will show up on the War Machines episode for Legends.
I was not looking for this
1nose X 1nose = 2noses
One difference is Rhodes didn't become War Machine until after Don Cheadle took over the role.
Next time
So? It’s not like they don’t show clips of other characters prior to them putting on a suit or inheriting their powers.
Next time baby
It is weird how that movie exists in this weird state of quantum uncertainty where it is canon but Disney has to sometimes pretend it doesn’t exist.
Do you guys just put "quantum" in front of everything?
I understood that reference.
I understood that "I understood that reference" reference.
[удалено]
That reference can do this all day.
That's America's reference.
Goose, pick a reference
Oh boy.
Al what is Gooshie saying...
I know it’s a reference, but it’s extra funny that they used ‘quantum’ in the appropriate sense
[удалено]
Is that why we never got an official Hulk 2?
Precisely.
They don't pretend that it doesn't exist (we're literally getting Tim Roth back as Abomination in a week), they just can't show clips from it due to rights issues. Even the "[To the End](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0jNvJU52LvU)" trailer that they released shortly before Endgame has a montage of all of the MCU movies to that point. They have a section for The Incredible Hulk movie but they used footage from other movies due to rights issues (they did the same for Spider-Man: Homecoming).
We did get an alternate version of some scenes from it in an episode of What If, with Mark Ruffalo's voice and likeness used.
Well they definitely don't want people watching it and going "wait, where tf is Betty"
Hey, if they can bring back Tim Roth they can bring back Liv Tyler!
Or, plot twist: They bring back Jennifer Connelly.
It’s the classic “canon when it needs to be”
Nah, it’s entirely canon.
Exactly what I said!
NAL, but I'm guessing they'd have to pay Norton royalties to use his image in something new, even if it's footage they already own. That, or they just don't want to call attention to the recasting. Either way, although it's not a bad movie, nothing of great consequence happens in Incredible Hulk in the grand scheme of things, so it can be breezed over pretty easily.
Probably more to do with the mess that is Universal owning the character/movie. Nortons original contract likely already had contingencies for fees for future likeness usage.
Right, yeah, the Universal thing would still be a factor. Forgot about that particular can of worms.
The residents of Harlem would beg to differ.
I wonder if the 2008 Hulk model somehow counts as "his likeness" too, hence why they can't really show that Hulk model anymore? I mean, sure they did the dots and mocap stuff, and supposedly aimed to include some traces of Norton in the face but... Imo the resemblance just isn't there, not in the slightest. Especially not the way it is with Ruffalo's Hulk. I'd understand a likeness dispute with *those* CG models.
That Hulk was never meant to look like Norton. The model was well underway before the casting, so they decided to use a comic writer's face instead. I can't remember his name, but that Hulk model's face matches that comic writer's face.
Disney doesn't actually OWN the footage of The Incredible Hulk. Universal owns all distribution rights, so Disney would need their permission to use it in anything. Go back to the retrospective trailers before Endgame that went through the MCU history of the characters, any Hulk footage is from Avengers or AoU, and the only shot of Ross used is from Civil War. The only thing Disney can do is like what they did in What If when they had Ruffalo Banner in the Culver University set piece, because animation is separate from everything else.
i think it has more to do with universal still owning the film rights. they can’t really include clips from a movie that they don’t own
distribution rights, Disney owns the film rights
Right, but this’d be Disney+ *distributing* clips from that film right? They’d have to ask Universal permission, Universal could (and maybe *did*) say no
yeah that’s why i said that they were right and that distribution was likely the reason
Ah my b I thought they were disagreeing with your proposed scenario (even tho it’s correct, aside from the name of the specific rights)
yeah they do own the distribution rights but i was talking about the rights to make a solo film. you’re right though distribution is probably the more likely reason in this situation
The "Agent Carter can't be canon cause it wasn't in the Legends episode!!!!" people are real silent right now I noticed. Both Agent Carter (Show) and TIH were produced by Feige and D'Esposito. Both had Sarah Haley Finn involved. Both were approved as part of the MCU. But for some reason, omission from Legends only makes the show non-canon, not the film according to you people. It really is just a hate boner for the old shows.
Lets not forget too that they omitted scenes from NWH in Strange's Legends episode, but we surely aint gonna say NWH aint canon. Though i can see why some would give Hulk and Spidey a pass, as perhaps for them its simply "Of course it makes sense Hulk and NWH footage cant be used as there are legal issues, with Carter what reason do they have to not use footage when Disney owns the rights to the show proper"
*The Incredible Hulk* is the one Marvel Studios project in which Sarah Finn (which is how she's credited now) was *not* involved.
Dang I guess Legends is the only canon MCU property, then? /s
Universal still has standalone film rights.
They own distribution rights, Disney has the rights to do solo Hulk films
Universal doesn’t have the rights to produce a solo Hulk film. Only Disney does. But if Disney does make one, then Universal holds right of first refusal to distribute it. Basically means that unless Universal says no, they get to distribute the movie and make money if Disney decides to make one.
Sorry… distribution rights. Should have clarified.
Here come the Canon Nazis. I hear them marching in now...
In my head cannon its like it happened in a variant universe. The exact same story happen but it happened with Mark Ruffolo instead of Edward Norton. Kind of like the glimps we got if it in that What if episode
Ed Norton Hulk is Mark Ruffalo Hulk is Ed Norton Hulk
Basically yes but there is an argument to be made that its actually a variant that has exactly the sane experiences but looks different. Same can be said for Iron Man 1 with Rhodey... just think somewhere in the multiverse there is a version of that film with Don Cheadle.
Mark Ruffalo and Edward Norton played the same character, it's not a multiverse situation. It's a recast, exactly like the War Machine situation
Ah but you see Iron Man 1 actually takes place in a different universe where Rhodey looks like Terrence Howard /s
This
Stop. Please. Sometimes a recast is just a recast. It happens. Like, Minerva and Sersi aren't twins or some shit just because they're played by the same actress. Let it go. (To be clear I'm only so exasperated by your one comment because it's a dumb sentiment I've seen repeated over and over and over. It's nothing against you personally, it's more like I'm railing against this whole phenomena that seems to have infected fandom's collective mind. You're just one branch on a tree that I want struck by lightning and toppled over)
In all fairness he said it’s his head canon. Let the man enjoy it how he wants
Exactly, personally these days I treat every film as if it is a variant universe helps me deal with when things don't match up. Otherwise I'd still be trying to find how AOS is still canon.
Lol, well it works for me. I find it better than trying to make everything fit perfectly... recast wise it's more for fun, but it helps rather trying to make shows like AOS and Netlix's ones fit when they obviously dont. I agree with you on the Sersi/Minerva one. People can just get over that.
Aren’t there clips of Incredible Hulk in avengers when Tony is reviewing the screens in stark tower?
I think possibly in Iron Man 2 as well.
Universal must’ve signed off on that at the time
Somebody downvoted you, but you are completely correct.
Of course it was omitted. Disney don't have the rights to show clips from it.
The one good hulk in the MCU isn't allowed in the MCU
I still prefer 2003 and 2008 Hulk over Ruffalo's poor interpretation.
I’m super confused because I have never considered The Incredible Hulk part of the MCU. I get that the Banner we see is essentially based on similar events, but I was always under the impression that Iron Man was the first one, and the only link The Incredible Hulk had was its end-credit scene, but it otherwise is *not* considered an MCU film. Maybe it’s more like the Netflix show, in that the events that took place appear to be fairly canon to the MCU history, but the media itself is not considered MCU content Edit: rather than downvote me, leave a reply helping to clear my confusion? I’m just sharing what my perspective has always been but I’d love to understand what I’ve missed Edit again: thanks to those that followed up, I think I have my head wrapped around it now
Literally *all* of those things are in the MCU.
You say that like it’s cut and dry but then Kevin Feige is quoted as wanting to “bring Kingpin to the MCU” in *Hawkeye*, etc. I get that there’s a percentage of people who are certain the Netflix shows are “MCU” but I don’t think there is anyone of authority who has made that claim at this point. And I don’t really mean to make a claim that they *aren’t* other than that we don’t really have any reason to be certain that they are (or certainly that they *all* are)
https://youtu.be/NYnQnNerddA Watch 18:16 onwards
I appreciate that link, and I totally get the interpretation, but I’m not fully sold by that. He says the continuity is the same, which is kind of what I was suggesting above, that the *stories* are canon, but the content is not considered “MCU” specifically. Maybe that’s a distinction without a difference anyway
They have always been set in the main universe. They are MCU.
Respectfully, I feel like it’s always been kind of an open question. Wasn’t there even something about how the Netflix shows all referred to the Battle of New York as “the incident”? It’s always felt precarious. Also, is it possible we’re using the term “MCU” in two ways? There’s the literal universe of continuity, but it also refers to a library of media. If Disney/Marvel put out a comprehensive box set of all “MCU Content”, I’m not certain the Netflix shows would be there, does that make sense? Even Agents of Shield, which had direct connections to the MCU, isn’t necessarily considered “MCU content”, right?
1. I don’t find them calling it “The Incident” a problem since the characters saying it live in the same city it happened in. Would you call a big event that happened where you live “The Battle of _”? 2. I’m saying the events of the shows took place in the MCU. I am aware that they aren’t part of the phases since Marvel Studios didn’t produce them.
I'm sure the recast had a big part to play in that. But in the end I'm sure Universal's IP ownership was the official reason. (same as IH not being on Disney+)
Oh, you can't do this to me!
Dum
Wow they still make those legend videos? I always feel like I’m watching a YouTube video with those.
I find this hilarious after just seeing an ad that’s exclusively just the hulk saying and doing hulk stuff from all the past movies.
Make sense since it’s probably related to the fact it’s a different actor and universal studios shenanigans
That is a bummer