Marvel Studios President Confirms Black Panther Movie Is In Development

Optimus Prime

#AGGIEPRIDE
Supporter
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
19,764
Reputation
5,010
Daps
98,969
Reppin
NC A&T SU, Hornets, Panthers, North Carolina
and they
GL's cartoon got canceled tho and Black Panther was on the Avengers show, He headline the Ultimate Avengers animated movie, had a show on BET

of course some people knew there is more than one GL but majority of the general public didn't
So Black Panther is more popular and known than Green Lantern? You really believe that?
 

Mic-Nificent

I didn't eat nobody
Joined
May 17, 2012
Messages
10,380
Reputation
650
Daps
18,986
Reppin
NULL
Get on your shyt DC! :damn: Beat Marvel to the punch with Static.

I keep telling you they don't own Static, and trust you wouldn't want to see a Static film by WB. If you saw what they did to his last comic book series you'd never want to see that shyt brought to live action.
 

Mic-Nificent

I didn't eat nobody
Joined
May 17, 2012
Messages
10,380
Reputation
650
Daps
18,986
Reppin
NULL
So if people were so easily confused by a movie about a pretty big DC character white or black, why are these same people(white) going to automatically turn out for a comic book movie, probably called "Panther", with a no name black actor as the lead and without as much of a fan base?

Because it's a Marvel studios film.

Same shyt you saying about Black Panther basically applied to Thor.
 
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
65,274
Reputation
28,066
Daps
389,283
Reppin
Ft. Stewart, Ga
So if people were so easily confused by a movie about a pretty big DC character white or black, why are these same people(white) going to automatically turn out for a comic book movie, probably called "Panther", with a no name black actor as the lead and without as much of a fan base?


Number 1). because it would be part of the already established Marvel Cinematic Universe. Nobody outside of comic book enthusiast knew who the fukk the Guardians Of The Galaxy or Thor was but the latter is on movie 2 and the former is scheduled to be a big budget space epic. Black Panther would be receiving the same treatment.

2). Green Lantern bombed because it sucked and bad word of mouth spread like wildfire. There also was no connected DC cinematic universe to tie it too.
 
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
65,274
Reputation
28,066
Daps
389,283
Reppin
Ft. Stewart, Ga
I keep telling you they don't own Static, and trust you wouldn't want to see a Static film by WB. If you saw what they did to his last comic book series you'd never want to see that shyt brought to live action.


I was under the impression that DC does indeed now own static and that his character has been folded into the main DC continuity
 
Joined
May 16, 2012
Messages
10,718
Reputation
624
Daps
23,720
Reppin
Latveria
and they

So Black Panther is more popular and known than Green Lantern? You really believe that?
when did I ever say that all I said is GL isn't that known outside comics beside his horrible movie

all I said is they both have the same chance of being hits or flops GL is Superman level popular either
 

Mic-Nificent

I didn't eat nobody
Joined
May 17, 2012
Messages
10,380
Reputation
650
Daps
18,986
Reppin
NULL
Number 1). because it would be part of the already established Marvel Cinematic Universe. Nobody outside of comic book enthusiast knew who the fukk the Guardians Of The Galaxy or Thor was but the latter is on movie 2 and the former is scheduled to be a big budget space epic. Black Panther would be receiving the same treatment.

2). Green Lantern bombed because it sucked and bad word of mouth spread like wildfire. There also was no connected DC cinematic universe to tie it too.

shyt Green Lantern was doomed from the moment they debuted footage at ComicCon. They showed that footage to die hard comic book fans and most of them didn't like what they saw. six months later they debuted a trailer for everybody and most folks knew that shyt was gonna be a disaster.
 
Joined
May 16, 2012
Messages
10,718
Reputation
624
Daps
23,720
Reppin
Latveria
I keep telling you they don't own Static, and trust you wouldn't want to see a Static film by WB. If you saw what they did to his last comic book series you'd never want to see that shyt brought to live action.

That shyt was horrible

DC are idiots for not putting him in Teen Titans
 

Mic-Nificent

I didn't eat nobody
Joined
May 17, 2012
Messages
10,380
Reputation
650
Daps
18,986
Reppin
NULL
I was under the impression that DC does indeed now own static and that his character has been folded into the main DC continuity

They've never owned the character, they were just given rights to publish stories based on him. Milestone Media owns everything related to Milestone comics.
 
Joined
May 16, 2012
Messages
10,718
Reputation
624
Daps
23,720
Reppin
Latveria
Number 1). because it would be part of the already established Marvel Cinematic Universe. Nobody outside of comic book enthusiast knew who the fukk the Guardians Of The Galaxy or Thor was but the latter is on movie 2 and the former is scheduled to be a big budget space epic. Black Panther would be receiving the same treatment.

2). Green Lantern bombed because it sucked and bad word of mouth spread like wildfire. There also was no connected DC cinematic universe to tie it too.

A lot of Comic heads didn't even know of Guardians of the galaxy before the movie was announced
 

Optimus Prime

#AGGIEPRIDE
Supporter
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
19,764
Reputation
5,010
Daps
98,969
Reppin
NC A&T SU, Hornets, Panthers, North Carolina
Number 1). because it would be part of the already established Marvel Cinematic Universe. Nobody outside of comic book enthusiast knew who the fukk the Guardians Of The Galaxy or Thor was but the latter is on movie 2 and the former is scheduled to be a big budget space epic. Black Panther would be receiving the same treatment.

2). Green Lantern bombed because it sucked and bad word of mouth spread like wildfire. There also was no connected DC cinematic universe to tie it too.
So why did Hulk/Thor/CA do lackluster business? They are Marvel Studio movies, they made their money back but why weren't that as successful as Iron Man?
 

Mic-Nificent

I didn't eat nobody
Joined
May 17, 2012
Messages
10,380
Reputation
650
Daps
18,986
Reppin
NULL
So why did Hulk/Thor/CA do lackluster business? They are Marvel Studio movies, they made their money back but it wasn't Iron Man success?

You need to stop with the bullshyt. Hulk, Thor, and Captain America did NOT do lackluster business. Just because they didn't do Iron Man numbers (which few films do) doesn't mean they failed by any measure.

Captain America cost $140 million to make and brought in $365 million.

Thor cost $150 million to make and brought in nearly $450 million

Incredible Hulk cost 150 million to make and brought in $260 million

Every one of those films turned a significant profit. They made back their budget and then some (and that's not counting the merchandise sales)
 

Optimus Prime

#AGGIEPRIDE
Supporter
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
19,764
Reputation
5,010
Daps
98,969
Reppin
NC A&T SU, Hornets, Panthers, North Carolina
You need to stop with the bullshyt. Hulk, Thor, and Captain America did NOT do lackluster business. Just because they didn't do Iron Man numbers (which few films do) doesn't mean they failed by any measure.

Captain America cost $140 million to make and brought in $365 million.

Thor cost $150 million to make and brought in nearly $450 million

Incredible Hulk cost 150 million to make and brought in $260 million

Every one of those films turned a significant profit. They made back their budget and then some (and that's not counting the merchandise sales)
You need to stop with the bullshyt. Where did i say they FAILED
 
Top