Bendis on Cancelling X-Men Titles

[Flightpath07]

Then I'm really lost as to what your point is.

The whole thing stemmed from rumours regarding the Fantastic Four title.
Fantastic Four is a different beast; it's less profitable and it's one single title.
I can totally see another FF situation or a Heroes Reborn situation; but again that's a change, not a cancellation.
However I admit cancellation could be possible for that particular title based solely on money.

The X-titles won't be cancelled.
Changed, is a possibility; and I've never disagreed with that.

Even if the only X-titles are ones without the word "X-Men" (ie. Cyclops, Storm, X-Factor, whatever...) there will still be X-titles.

Wolverine, even in death hasn't been cancelled; there are at least a year's worth of books with Wolverine in the title coming out while he's dead.

Actually, Phil, the 'whole thing' came from this thread, originally.

http://community.comicbookresources....e-to-the-X-Men

And I'm not quick to dismiss this as mere fiction.

And, X-Titles without the word "X" in them are still X titles?!? That makes very little sense.

I'm talking about the potential to limit the use of most of the mutant characters, pick and choose a few to use (on teams called Avengers, Defenders, whatever, just not a 'mutant team'), and then wait a few years for the hullabaloo to die down, see what they want to do down the road. It may not make sense from a comics viewpoint, but from a Financial viewpoint, big-picture? Considering that another movie company is getting filthy rich off of Marvel's mutant characters? Yeah, it makes a Lot of sense.

[Phil]

Well, isn't it possible that Marvel has come up with a plan of action that has some big cosmic character coming along, The Collector or The High Evolutionary or Thanos, or whomever, and this character then reveals that "mutants" were never any such thing. That they aren't the next stage of human evolution, but something implanted into humans on purpose.

Why would they stop calling themselves X-Men though?
They still have the "x-factor" even if that "x" is implanted.
They still have "x-tra" powers.
They were still founded by "X-avier"

Your fix doesn't explain why they'd stop being X-Men which is what you say this whole mess is to avoid.

it makes perfect sense, at that point, to have all "mutant" titles drop the terms mutant and mutie, even drop the "X" out of the titles, change things up and go on, somewhat sort-of status quo, but with a big change in behind the scenes.

It makes no sense at all.
X-Men is a brand that sells.
You lose that brand name you lose money.
Marvel may as well burn their profits.

That also alleviates any pressure when it comes to Marvel Studios now using characters that were 'previously associated' with the X-Men, as the X-Men are no more.

What pressure though?
Where is this pressure?

You see, that is the problem here; I can see PLENTY of perfectly logical reasons for Marvel to change up the mutant corner of its universe.

Change, yes. Cancel, no.

Fans of a certain book, aren't going to drop it suddenly because its characters no longer call themselves mutants (or Marvel changes the title of the series)

Disagreed.
A name can mean a lot.

Marvel doesn't make much money on comics, they are MUCH more concerned with movies and other merchandising where they make the real bucks.

Absolutely completely untrue.

The money does not go to the same place.

Marvel Comics and Marvel Entertainment/Studios are two completely unconnected beasts finance-wise; one does not fund the other, the money never swaps hands. A deficit in comics is never filled with a surplus from the films.

Marvel Comics wants to make as much money as they can from Comics.

People at Disney may not want to give Fox free advertising for their films but it doesn't mean they'll risk their comics publishing arm to do so.
This is shown by the high volume of Disney books starring Marvel characters there has been since the buy-out; they aren't just interested in the films.

[Phil]

Actually, Phil, the 'whole thing' came from this thread, originally.

http://community.comicbookresources....e-to-the-X-Men

Which came from
http://www.bleedingcool.com/2014/05/...r-to-snub-fox/
http://www.bleedingcool.com/2014/05/...ur-characters/
http://www.bleedingcool.com/2014/05/...rtainment-fox/
http://www.bleedingcool.com/2014/06/...antastic-four/
http://www.bleedingcool.com/2014/06/...-2015-but-how/
http://www.bleedingcool.com/2014/06/...can-ascertain/

And I'm not quick to dismiss this as mere fiction.

No, instead you're promoting it as likely happening and creating ways to defend it.

And, X-Titles without the word "X" in them are still X titles?!? That makes very little sense.

I'm pretty sure 'X-Factor' has an X in it.
The point is that it's the word "X-Men" that is supposedly the issue as Fox currently own the film rights to "X-Men"
But titles starring X-Men characters are clearly still X-Titles.

It may not make sense from a comics viewpoint, but from a Financial viewpoint, big-picture? Considering that another movie company is getting filthy rich off of Marvel's mutant characters? Yeah, it makes a Lot of sense.

Again, the two are not connected and no it doesn't make sense.
While Marvel Studios/Disney wish they were getting the film money from the "X-Men" films they're not going to cut their publishing profits just to spite Fox.
The comics get a small spike when the films come out, at least in trades/collections etc. - Fox's films help Marvel Comics to an extent.
If Marvel get rid of the X-titles now they'll be destroying the fan-base that watches the films and then the films will be worthless when they regain the rights.

[Tawmis]

Which is the job of any company, surely?
Do you work for free?

No. And that's my point. Why would Disney sit on making an X-Men movie, because Fox has the rights to Marvel's mutants?
As a way to get around it, they're making Scarlet Witch and Quicksilver Inhumans in Avengers.
We have seen already that the Terigan Mist or whatever - has restored mutant powers to MANY mutants who lost their powers thanks to Scarlet Witch's "No More Mutants."
Is it a far stretch to say - the mist restored these powers - because they were mutants? And those humans, who have recently gained powers, did so because they had the "X" factor in their genes (let's not call it the Mutant Gene). And the Mist simply awakened their powers.
And thus, couldn't we logically say, that all "mutants" are indeed Inhumans?
Is that such a far leap?
I think not.

[MistressMerr]

No. And that's my point. Why would Disney sit on making an X-Men movie, because Fox has the rights to Marvel's mutants?
As a way to get around it, they're making Scarlet Witch and Quicksilver Inhumans in Avengers.
We have seen already that the Terigan Mist or whatever - has restored mutant powers to MANY mutants who lost their powers thanks to Scarlet Witch's "No More Mutants."
Is it a far stretch to say - the mist restored these powers - because they were mutants? And those humans, who have recently gained powers, did so because they had the "X" factor in their genes (let's not call it the Mutant Gene). And the Mist simply awakened their powers.
And thus, couldn't we logically say, that all "mutants" are indeed Inhumans?
Is that such a far leap?
I think not.

No, but it would still be completely pointless. Retroactively calling them Inhumans isn't going to magically let Marvel Studios make movies about X-Men characters, that's not how licensing works. They can use Quicksilver specifically because he's an Avengers character every bit as much as he's an X-Men character and so fell into a tricky grey area regarding who can and can't use him. They're not allowed to use the twins BECAUSE they're not calling them mutants, mutantdom is just the one PART of them that Fox inextricably owns. Just because you say "turns out Gambit was an Inhuman all along" doesn't make him eligible for Avengers 3, he's still an X-Men character and Fox still owns the movie rights to him.

So no, while it wouldn't be IMPOSSIBLE for Marvel to rebrand the entire X-Men line (not even remotely close to 'cancelling' it, as this thread starting out by saying), it would be completely pointless and would only serve to hurt their sales by completely altering a flagship property, in name if nothing else. If all McDonalds changed all their signs to Burgerville overnight, it probably wouldn't go so well. Branding counts for a lot. It's never gonna happen.

[Phil]

No. And that's my point. Why would Disney sit on making an X-Men movie, because Fox has the rights to Marvel's mutants?

Because of the legal contracts signed before Disney were on the scene, that Marvel made to stop them going bankrupt.
Marvel Studios will not risk getting sued.

As a way to get around it, they're making Scarlet Witch and Quicksilver Inhumans in Avengers.
We have seen already that the Terigan Mist or whatever - has restored mutant powers to MANY mutants who lost their powers thanks to Scarlet Witch's "No More Mutants."

We haven't seen that at all.
The Phoenix Force and Hope Summers un-did Scarlett Witch's hex at the end of AvX.

The Terrigan Mist had absolutely nothing to do with it.

All the Terrigan bomb did, at the end of Infinity a year after AvX & a year after new mutants, was re-awaken the hidden Inhumans.

And they're not making them Inhumans in the films as far as we know so far - they were clearly called 'Miracles'

Is it a far stretch to say - the mist restored these powers - because they were mutants? And those humans, who have recently gained powers, did so because they had the "X" factor in their genes (let's not call it the Mutant Gene). And the Mist simply awakened their powers.

Yes it's a complete stretch in the Marvel mythology.

And thus, couldn't we logically say, that all "mutants" are indeed Inhumans?
Is that such a far leap?

It really is though.

It's the IP and branded trademark of the character/series that's the problem; not the word mutant. The word mutant isn't copyrighted. There are varying films with mutant in the title and there still can be.
The mutant gene isn't the problem it's the trademarked character names under the X-Men umbrella.

The agreement between Disney and Fox for Scarlett Witch & Quicksilver so that both companies and universes can freely use the characters is that they're not referred to as mutants in MCU films so as not to cash in on each other's films - a fair compromise and one that certainly doesn't stop X-Men comics being created.

[Le Messor]

You're the only one that's used the word stupid though.

He never said those things were stupid - only that they sounded that way on the surface.

The X-titles won't be cancelled.
Changed, is a possibility; and I've never disagreed with that.

Agreed.
Mutatis mutandis... or something. Mutancy is about change.

Well, isn't it possible that Marvel has come up with a plan of action that has some big cosmic character coming along, The Collector or The High Evolutionary or Thanos, or whomever, and this character then reveals that "mutants" were never any such thing.

Hasn't this already happened? Aren't they the result of Celestial tampering?

Marvel doesn't make much money on comics, they are MUCH more concerned with movies and other merchandising where they make the real bucks.

"Moichandising! Moichandising! Where the real money for the film is made!"
~ Yogurt

It may not make sense from a comics viewpoint, but from a Financial viewpoint, big-picture?

I've never known Marvel (or DC, for that matter) to be big-picture thinkers.

~ Le Messor
Dr Evil: "We punch a hole in what I call" (air quotes) "the Ozone layer."
#2: (cough) "Sir... That, too, has already happened."

[Tawmis]

We haven't seen that at all.
The Phoenix Force and Hope Summers un-did Scarlett Witch's hex at the end of AvX.
The Terrigan Mist had absolutely nothing to do with it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrigen_Mist

It is also shown in this series that depowered mutants, if exposed to the Terrigen Mists, gain an uncontrollable version of their former powers. For example, the Mists restore the hyperacute senses of Callisto, but all the amplified stimuli cause her to fall into a coma. However, the effect is only temporary as powers fade after a short while. As shown with Quicksilver, the bodies of those exposed to the mists for extensive periods begin to produce their own Terrigen Crystals with the same mutagenic effects. At the end of the Son of M series, the U.S. government confiscates the Terrigen Crystals dropped by Quicksilver, which leads Black Bolt to declare war on the United States.

[Phil]

Emphasis on the temporary part.
And even then, that wasn't 'many'
Plus:

Use on X-Cell depowered mutants provided moments of renewed powers but then caused them to explode

Plus that was 8 years ago.

[Tawmis]

Emphasis on the temporary part. And even then, that wasn't 'many'
Plus that was 8 years ago.

It was temporary, sure. But if you're saying "It was 8 years ago..."
Can I just bring up Vulcan? The third Summers brother (ugh).
And what they did with Giant Size X-Men #1, which was over 30 years ago?
Or Bucky to Winter Soldier?
Marvel has no problem jumping back to reference some event many years ago.
And make it work for some random event.

[Phil]

Sorry, my fault for not explaining myself.

I mean that since that storyline 8 years ago, they have undone the Scarlet Witch's 'No More Mutants' without the 'Mists and destroyed all the Terrigan Crystals with the Terrigan Bomb, dissipating all the remaining mists into the Earths atmosphere, so there are no more mists.

Currently anyway. I'm sure it'll be changed in an equal amount of years.

[Flightpath07]

Look, I'll just say this, and then sit back and let this thread go into oblivion, before I get too frustrated (what can i say? i write passionately.).

All I am trying to do here is cause people to see that there is more than one way of looking at this. - Ironically, i thought Phil would be the one to do this, since he always plays devils' advocate. Further ironically, Phil has been the greatest detractor of what i am saying, when i thought he would be the detractor of this threads' detractors, and... *head explodes*

There's people here Insisting that any significant change to X-Titles won't happen. People are fans of certain books, I get it; they're passionate about books, creators, and characters. Which often means they don't think as rationally as they ought to, however. Words like Ludicrous, and No WAY (two words, but you see what i am getting at) have been tossed around, and i encapsulated those phrases and passionate words into the word Stupid, for which i now apologize as that seems to have gotten some people's gruff - to me, that was a way of summing up words and feelings, i saw people as thinking this whole idea of change coming to X-Titles, and mutants (or X books) possibly being cancelled/stopped/momentarily-ceased/completely-changed, whatever, by Marvel, as being a Stupid idea, as in, Not Going To Ever Happen.

From there on, my only point was to point out that this wasn't as stupid or as unlikely as some people seem to think.

Whether you agree or not...meh, people are people, we all have our own opinions. To me, it makes no friggin' difference what Marvel does, I don't care if they make Iron Man a cross-dresser or if they put Deadpool in Star Wars comics. I Don't Care, because I don't regularly buy any Marvel products. Which means, as a Not Fanboy, I tend to look at things differently. I'm not campaigning for these changes in Marvel, because i don't care, I have absolutely no vested interest in any of this.

Again, i don't care so much what your opinions are, we are all different and that is good. But there is no point in stirring this conversation up anymore, people just seem to be getting upset, so it isn't worth it.

Peace.

[MistressMerr]

Well, I guess that's the end of that.

[Mokole]

Marvel has made mistakes in the past, like making Sasquatch a mutant, Puck, both avoiding Sentinels who can detect the x-factor, which neither character has.

[Phil]

(what can i say? i write passionately.)

Always a good thing.

Ironically, i thought Phil would be the one to do this, since he always plays devils' advocate.

When it's based on fact, not the speculation of one anonymous poster.

Further ironically, Phil has been the greatest detractor of what i am saying

Not on purpose, I promise.

There's people here Insisting that any significant change to X-Titles won't happen.

Speaking personally I haven't done that.
I fully agree 100% with you that there will be significant change and soon.
Just not a complete cancellation - as the anonymous poster put and Bendis referenced, as seen in the thread title.
Had the word 'Cancelling' not been used I'd possibly never have posted in this thread.

People are fans of certain books, I get it; they're passionate about books, creators, and characters.

That's the thing; I wouldn't be especially bothered if they did cancel all the X-books; I'd just read something else instead.

Which often means they don't think as rationally as they ought to, however.

Here's where I disagree; my points are completely rational as they're financial based and I'm looking at them from the point of a profit making company.
You have mentioned that you write with passion, and there are times when your passion appears to be taking pleasure in Marvel's downfall. That may not be the case in the slightest but it sometimes comes across that way, in many threads.
Then again I probably come across as a heartless corporate robot; them's the breaks.

Words like Ludicrous, and No WAY (two words, but you see what i am getting at) have been tossed around, and i encapsulated those phrases and passionate words into the word Stupid, for which i now apologize as that seems to have gotten some people's gruff - to me, that was a way of summing up words and feelings

Ludicrous and No Way were both mine, and again meant from a financial position.
If I misunderstood your use of stupid that's my issue and certainly not one for you to apologize for.

i saw people as thinking this whole idea of change coming to X-Titles, and mutants (or X books) possibly being cancelled/stopped/momentarily-ceased/completely-changed, whatever, by Marvel, as being a Stupid idea, as in, Not Going To Ever Happen.

Again, had it just ended at changed I could have agreed with you.

To me, it makes no friggin' difference what Marvel does

The problem is that it clearly does.

I don't care if they make Iron Man a cross-dresser or if they put Deadpool in Star Wars comics. I Don't Care, because I don't regularly buy any Marvel products. Which means, as a Not Fanboy, I tend to look at things differently. I'm not campaigning for these changes in Marvel, because i don't care, I have absolutely no vested interest in any of this.

If you don't have a horse in the race then why are you always betting?
You clearly do care and you clearly are a fanboy (in a non-derogatory way that covers all of us here, myself included) if only because you WANT to enjoy what Marvel puts out and you WANT to care, if only out of nostalgia for what Marvel used to be and could/should be today.
Whenever Marvel does something stupid, and they do - I'm in no way saying they're perfect, you're the first person to be calling for Marvel's head on a chopping block.
Like it or not that's caring.
If you didn't care you wouldn't have an opinion.
If you had no interest in Marvel at all you wouldn't post the things you do.

Again, i don't care so much what your opinions are, we are all different and that is good. But there is no point in stirring this conversation up anymore, people just seem to be getting upset, so it isn't worth it.

Well if at any point I've given the impression I'm upset I apologize, that's genuinely not the case.

Peace.

Always bro, always.