>>7952867They made their Ang Lee Hulk movie after Marvel sold them the rights, then struck a deal with Marvel studios to have RDJ Tony Stark appear in their reboot, almost assuredly because no one knew how big it would get.
Remember, the reason Hulk was recast was because Norton showed up to discuss script changes with Marvel execs, probably even Feige himself, and they kicked his ass to the curb. Presumably Paramount didn't give a shit about some dumb movie and let Norton do more or less whatever he wanted with his Hulk movie.
The rights are at this point still partially owned by Paramount, in so far as if Disney-Marvel made any kind of film with "Hulk" in the title, they'd still get a cut, hence why he's been a side character ever since.
Namor is in a similar limbo which is why it's likely that he'll be introduced in Black Panther 2, rather his own movie. As are all the Netflix characters, since those contracts still apparently span a number of years of inactivity before those rights go fully back to Disney-Marvel and Netflix obviously wants to squat on those for as long as possible so Disney+ doesn't get more shit to draw people in.
>>7952897>The common thought is that Hulk can’t really hold up a solo movieWhich is bullshit, because the 2008 (?) movie made a hefty profit and people love the character and Thor Ragnarok should've basically been called Hulk & Thor, and there was no reason for Marvel to assume that movie would hit as big as it did after a 7/10 (at best) intro to Thor and a sequel that nobody even remembers.
"Hulk can't carry a solo movie" is just their go-to so they don't have so say "we're being cheap so you'll only get a half-ass planet Hulk movie, sorry". The same way they'd say "oh we got plans" about the Black Widow movie since like even before Avengers 1 hit.
