Why didn't Marvel do as many direct to dvd animated movies as DC did for Batman? They could easily have adapted a lot of Spider-Man storylines or villains that otherwise wouldn't have appeared in the live action movies or cartoons.
Marvel was going bankrupt
>>150339491And their solution was to sell off the publishing rights to make movies and cartoons, instead of making them all themselves.
>>150339448So Marvel has always been late to it, they suffered in the cartoon side of things compared to DC. However, there was a short period right before the MCU where they tried >That one Ultimate's movie which was actually more like their 616 counterparts but apparently being an Ultimate's adaptation?>The Young Avengers movie>Hulk Vs Wolverine >Planet Hulk annnnd thats it unless you count the marvel anime stuff
>>150339509>instead of making them all themselves.With what money?
>>150339448because Marvel is allergic to good ideas, they tried a few movies but the execs latter canned the idea
>>150339695All were kino.
>>150340078Probably a loan. Though, to be fair. Maybe they shouldn't have cancelled their big money series (X-Men and Spider-Man: the Animated Series) for arbitrary reasons. Also, they should've put more care into them. Like, you're making a SPIDER-MAN cartoon and some crazy chick in S & P decides to tell you that he can't throw a punch AND you decide to just arbitraily cut the guy's budget? They should've been threatening to walk away from Fox and bring it to literally any other network that would have them and never do business with them again. Call in Stan the Man to pull his jew connections if you have to. Then start doing tie-in movies like Batman did. If they had done a Mask of the Phantasm for Spider-Man that tied into the '94 cartoon it would have done gangbusters. Everyone acts like Fox Kids was this purietent network, but they were airing THE SIMPSONS at the same time (though not as part of Fox Kids, mind you, though I do remember seeing commercials for it during the Fox Kids programming block) it's not like they didn't have a case to make to some higher up that it was discriminatory to them to have Homer strangling Bart but tell them a SUPER HERO couldn't punch bad guys. If that didn't work they should've went to Cartoon Network and Nickelodeon trying to work out a deal, heck, any channel that would take them.
>>150339448It's kind of weird the Ultimates line never took off, but I think it's mostly because nobody really knew the Marvel heroes until the MCU happened. Besides Spider-Man, the X-Men, and maybe The Hulk I was always like: "Who the heck are those guys? Where's the Flash, where's Batman?"I guess it must be a hold over from having movies in the 80's. It's surprising Marvel never pulled of live action movies in the 80's when DC was doing it. I think that would have launched them into a higher cultural relevancy. I mean, The Hulk, Conan and Howard the Duck did well. I guess things must've just been a little nuts with Jim Shooter trying to get the bullpen under control and them getting bought and sold 2-3 times during the 80's. It looks like they started figuring it out by the 90's when they pumped out the cartoons and Men and Black & Blade before FINALLY getting Spider-Man out in the 2000's, but it's strange they didn't do anything sooner. I know a lot of their guys need a bunch of special effects. but they could have done something like Beast Master or some 80's Dark Fantasy movie for Thor or gone with a more down to Earth guy like Daredevil or Spider-Man, or heck, even Blade. Unless they thought a black guy wouldn't do so hot there's no reason they couldn't have done a Blade movie in the 80's.
>>150342438How they gonna get a loan when they just blew up their accounts and owe money on a loan from trying to become their own distributor?
