The Marvel Studios Double-Standard

You are not being delusional in the slightest. There is definitely a double standard when it comes to the Marvel films. Any Marvel film that is not being made by Marvel gets attacked whilst all the other Marvel films that are made by Marvel are accepted, no matter what the changes.

Great Article ! This should be on main !

First time writing for this site, thanks for the positive comments.

I KNOW YOUR PAIN...IM2 PISSED ME OFF FOR ALL THOSE REASONS YOU STATED. I CAN FORGIVE HIM NEVER DATING POTTS BEFORE. THAT CHANGE IS...PASSABLE. THE ABOMINATION THING I AGREE I WAS MAD ABOUT BUT I LOVE HULK SO MUCH I TRIED TO "MAKE IT" PASSABLE B/C OF MY LOVE OF HULK AND MY HATRED OF A.L'S VERSION. DIDNT KNOW ABOUT CAP (THOUGHT BUT WASNT SURE) NEVER A FAN. THE BIGGEST THING THAT PISSED ME OFF WAS ELBA I KNOW PEOPLE SCREAM RASCIST BUT, HE IS THE "WHITE" GOD. LOOK IT UP. THAT IS TOTALLY THE OPPOSITE OF HOW HE WAS REPRESENTED.

PEOPLE BITCH THEY DONT RESEARCH!

Well Done...

Reasons:
- Everyone is always gonna hate something (mine are snakes)
- Immaturity - infantile and churlish at best, kinda like "my dad can beat your dad/ my dad is cool, yours isn't ". Marvel studios is their sports team and they would rather die/hurl insults defending New York Jets, i mean Marvel studios.
- Rebellion; some fans just wanna be cool that they hate what others don't like OR their taste is not the same as the "masses".
- For some of these poor souls, it's SERIOUS BUSINESS.
AND

"Is it simply because the MCU films are produced my Marvel Comic's own independent film Studio" <- BINGO. There's the answer right there. Like returning a child to their rightful parent. Great Article, BTW. Kinda interesting to read two opposing articles within minutes of each other.

@Equinox
Damn, you just made me realize there was a typo in that sentence. Unfortunately, I'm unable to edit the article because it isn't appearing under my account/article information.

And I agree, some take these things far too seriously. If entire childhood memories are ruined because of alterations made to characters and stories you read about in comics, your childhood probably sucked rather badly.

@Just1Superguy
I'm pretty sure if Marvel, in the comics, decided to suddenly make Iron Man a rapist when he got drunk, or gave Hawkeye the backstory of a former psychopathic serial killer, it would be considered bastardization, as opposed to Marvel doing what they felt like with their properties.
Marvel sold their characters to Fox and Sony. It was a fair, legal transaction. Marvel is technically making changes to their own characters for film profit, and Fox and Sony are making whatever changes they see necessary to characters whose film rights they own for profit. That's how the film industry works. It's not like Fox and Sony have an obligation to give Marvel their characters back now that they're making their own movies, that would be one of the single most idiotic business decisions in Hollywood history.

The thing is they preserve the heart of the characters. As long as you keep that, the changes made to continuity aren't a big dal as they are still the characters we know and love

Agree with Just1Superguy. Nice article

The article made it to main, I just want to say thank you to everyone who took time out of their day to read it.

I agree about preserving the heart of the characters, but The Amazing Spider-Man appears to be doing that, and it can't seem to catch a break on this site.

I've been saying this for years. Even Marvel Studios takes liberities with the source material.

So glad to see an article like this on main, most of people's arguements are so stupid. The only thing that the MCU benefits from that the other studio produced films dont is the shared universe. I agree that I'd love to see Spider-Man, The Fantastic 4 and others on screen with Iron Man, Cap, Thor, Hulk, etc, but I'm not going to bitch and moan about them not belonging to Marvel. The Amazing Spider-Man looks like it'll be the best Spider-Man film ever made, and it certainly reminds me of X-Men First Class in the sense that aspects were, and some of the tone was, changed, but that it'll be a fantastic movie nonetheless.
The only ones I would really like to see go back to Marvel now would be Fantastic Four and Daredevil, because they've been idle for so long now that Marvel could probably do more with them than Fox (same for Ghost Rider's awful history with Sony).

In a perfect scenario, Marvel would regain all the rights, and continue from The Amazing Spider-Man and X-Men First Class series', integrating them into the MCU instead of rebooting them, so we could see some amazing cross-over stories. But it's not vital to the quality of those films, their success is derived from the creativity behind them, not the studio they belong to. And I'm perfectly fine watching them no matter who they belong to, as long as they're continually great movies. That's the most important thing.

Good article Viltrumite.

I agree with most of it. I do think any change will be greeted with "some" resistance from people that are hard liners. and those are the people that will post more often than others.

also, I agree with the point being made that people really do want to see all of the Marvel universe go back to Marvel.

But they would not have had the money to do all that they are doing now if they didn't loan out Spiderman, and the X-men.. It helped them get together their studio for Iron Man.

[shrugs]

I am just glad to see, up on the screen, my heroes from print. In Real Life. These new movies have made me as excited as I was when I first got my first comic book. That means alot.

The answer is simple. Marvel fanboys are ASSHOLES!

I am not one of those who complain about creative changes-- Disney, Sony, Fox, Warner Brothers-- I let the filmmakers have liberty of reinterpretation. However, I believe fans are more loose towards Disney's Marvel Studios because they are approaching their films as a new medium of telling their stories. They're less adaptations and more comic books told on film. Plus, Marvel appears to operate differently-- they don't hand off projects to a production team-- Marvel makes the movies-- they're 100% involved, creatively. And aren't most of the screenwriters and story-developers experienced comic book writers? Joss Whedon is a solid example.

Long story short-- Marvel Studios makes Comic Book Movies-- not movies based/inspired by Comic Book characters.

Although, when DC gave Batman to Nolan for a trilogy-- that's the greatest decision/move they've ever made.

@Viltrumite Great article! I think that fans are sometimes less critical of the changes made by marvel studios because they can tell how passionate they are about the characters that they're making movies out of. That's not to say that the directors and producers working with/for other studios aren't passionate about their characters/movies, but I think the fact that they were purchased by another studio makes some hardcore fans have a "built in" suspicion about the studios' intentions. Where as when they're with Marvel, fans tend to have a "built in" assumption that the people working on it are passionate about the source material (which may not always be true).

Personally I don't think you can base a movies success or failure soley on the fact that it was or was not made by marvel studios. Great movies have been made by other studios. At the end of the day, I think some fans who are disappointed just need a faceless organization to blame, and the hope that Marvel studios would handle the property better is comforting.

P.S. -Cool pic/username. I freaking love Invincible! When are we gonna get an Invincible movie huh? Haha.

Marvel is brand that people want to be associated with.

Marvel has a better track record, but who cares as long as the movies are good?

When a movie works and is entertaining the fanboys don't complain quite as much. When they suck we squeal. The first two spidey's, the first two x-men were hailed as successes. The 3's of both series sucked and they were attacked from all directions. FF, please. Daredevil, please. Attacked from all angles including innecessarry changes in the source material.

To date, Marvel Studios hasn't made a stinker. IM2 could have been better but was still an entertaining move that held together. When Marvel makes changes they explain themselves and, ya know, it's thier material and they understand and respect it. Other studios make changes because they neither understand or respect the source material and they screw it up. All we want is a Galactus who is a huge guy with a funny looking helmet. Respect the source. who cares who is sctupping who, as long as the relationship works.

Marvel get's a pass because it is making good movies. Others get the knife when they screw it up.

ACira we wouldnkt have gotten crimson dynamo anyway. We basically got him but with a different suit and having somebody that similar to IM again would have been stupid. The way I looks at it we got crimsn dynamo with a cooler suit.

While Marvel studios makes changes to fit movies, it's because it's their property and they are very vocal in pleasing the fans. They market themselves as a studio very well.. Always expressing gratitude to the fans etc.

Changes are made to Nolan's bat films but those are written off because it's "Nolan"

Bottom line is.. If a movie is successful, no one bitches about changes. If it bombs, people are quick to point fingers at the studio.. Whether they deserve it or not.

Great article. I've been saying this from the get go! That yes, there is DEFINITELY a double standard with fans (and fanboys)

"Marvel studios respects the source material, more so than the likes of fox and sony" .....there's the exact point, to this article. The writer pointed out FACTS that shows Marvel, too strays from source material. And long behold, it's still argued and still granted a pass. M'oh well.

marvel comics created the characters its up to them if they want change them slightly for the movies.

they keep it faithful to the comics more than any other studio.

@marvel72
True, and I understand where you're coming from with that argument, but the fact remains that they sold the film rights of certain characters to other studios. Those studios become the stewards of those characters stories on film, and they have the right and obligation to change the characters or source material in any way they see fit, and it can work out and give us something wildly inaccurate but high-quality like X-Men: First Class.
Although, yes, sometimes those changes are exercises in "What the [frick] where they thinking, why would they do something like that, was this script written by a baboon?" and we end up getting trash like X-Men Origins: Wolverine.