Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: Spider-Man probably out of the MCU

  1. #1
    Scooby Gang DanSlayer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    773
    Thanks
    456
    Thanked 1,042 Times in 414 Posts

    Default Spider-Man probably out of the MCU

    https://deadline.com/2019/08/kevin-f...er-1202672545/

    Disney only got 5% of the income from the solo Spider films and wanted half. That was too high for Sony that already does the marketing and such; though script-writing, the costumes, CGI etc all fell under Disney. With Venom making over 850 million, Sony thinks it can sustain itself and go back to making a Spider-Man film every 3/4 years so the rights don't revert back to Disney. They have Holland for two more films despite Disney being the ones whom cast him and expect Director John Watts back though apparently he might not be locked in. FFH recently became Sony's most profitable film ever.

    Obviously fans are hating this and expect the brand to crash given Sony's past attempts at it and how so much of Holland's character revolved around Stark and others of the MCU. The supporting cast like Tomei and Peter's classmates, Keaton and Gyllenhaal is unclear, though Happy Hogan is likely still at Disney.

    It's known Sony hired the guys behind Spiderverse to oversee live-action shows based on the Spider characters, and they recently said they want to announce something in a few months. But I'm hearing conflicting things on whether they can do that without Disney or if Disney just has animated-under 44 minute shows rights. (For context had Disney wanted to kill Fox's shows Legion and The Gifted they could have in early development but allowed them; and both has Leob in the room, Head of Marvel TV for SHIELD, Netflix shows and more).

    There's some talk they're still at the table and this is all just a stunt to show Sony how unpopular this is, apparently their stock took a small hit too.
    Last edited by DanSlayer; 21-08-19 at 05:27 AM.

  2. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to DanSlayer For This Useful Post:

    MikeB (21-08-19),Silver1 (22-08-19)

  3. #2
    Library Researcher Lostsoul666's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    218
    Thanks
    450
    Thanked 242 Times in 104 Posts

    Default

    As a Spider-Man fan who grew up reading 90's comics with an adult Spider-Man I really don't like the MCU teenage version of the character so I really don't care ether way.
    Personally I'd love to see an adult version of the character married to Mary Jane on the big screen.
    Last edited by Lostsoul666; 21-08-19 at 11:55 PM.

  4. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Lostsoul666 For This Useful Post:

    DanSlayer (21-08-19),Priceless (21-08-19)

  5. #3
    Sunnydale High Student Nebula1400's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    NJ/Phila, USA
    Posts
    62
    Thanks
    63
    Thanked 53 Times in 33 Posts

    Default

    As a Spider-Man fan who grew up reading 60's & 70's comics with teenage Peter Parker, I can tell you that the MCU version is true to the comics of the era. The Tom Holland movies are almost exactly like the original Spider-Man comics, except that Aunt May was not young and hot.

  6. The Following User Says Thank You to Nebula1400 For This Useful Post:

    Silver1 (22-08-19)

  7. #4
    Library Researcher Lostsoul666's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    218
    Thanks
    450
    Thanked 242 Times in 104 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nebula1400 View Post
    As a Spider-Man fan who grew up reading 60's & 70's comics with teenage Peter Parker, I can tell you that the MCU version is true to the comics of the era. The Tom Holland movies are almost exactly like the original Spider-Man comics, except that Aunt May was not young and hot.
    In the comics Spider-Man was only in high school for the first 28 issues. He's been an adult for most of his existence. There's way more stories with an adult Spider-Man then teenage Spider-Man.

  8. #5
    Sunnydale High Student Nebula1400's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    NJ/Phila, USA
    Posts
    62
    Thanks
    63
    Thanked 53 Times in 33 Posts

    Default

    The original plan was to have Spider-Man grow up as Tom Holland matures. I think the adult Spidey would have been done well under the MCU (and there could have been continued crossovers between the MCU and the Sony pics). Also, 28 issues was dragged out over a few years. Peter Parker was in high school from 1962 - 1968 or '69 (if not later), because I was reading the comics back then (actually starting in 1966).

    I dread Sony dragging Spidey back to Amazing Spiderman or Spider-Man 3 mode.

  9. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Nebula1400 For This Useful Post:

    DanSlayer (21-08-19),Silver1 (22-08-19)

  10. #6
    Scooby Gang DanSlayer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    773
    Thanks
    456
    Thanked 1,042 Times in 414 Posts

    Default

    Heh. Now Sony is trying to make it sound like Fiege is too busy to work on a non-Disney film which is transparently wrong since FFH had a cliffhanger set up and no Fiege means no MCU connections to begin with. Some are saying Sony leaked this to try and make Disney seem like the bully but Disney is the ones with all the goodwill. https://io9.gizmodo.com/spider-man-s...men-1837438904

    Holland's character is so wrapped up with Stark's and he looks pretty young as well. It'd be a bit of a stretch to have him suddenly in adult focused arcs with no past connection, assuming they can even get his supporting actors back, the past two villains are motivated by Stark so they'd make no sense. He's typically a reporter but Sony already has Eddie Brock in that role and any science-career is again, probably too much like Stark's.

    Outside of Marvel properties and Jumanji, Sony Picturs has been struggling for a while and there are occasional rumblings the Japanese home-base may sell that division which would trigger the rights going back to Disney regardless of buyer. The PS5 is going to be hit by tariffs pretty hard which hurts their main brand as well.

    Disney/Marvel has most of it's stuff back, just waiting for the 2 year clock to run out on the Netflix character rights. And they have the film rights but not distribution rights to Hulk characters, so Universal cannot make their own films like Sony is but Hulk is a guest star in other films rather then his own solo ones for the foreseeable future. Then there's Namor but apparently the rights are split between multiple companies so nobody can do anything by themselves- trapping him in development hell.

    D23 is this weekend with Marvel expected top announce stuff Friday and Saturday so expect Fiege to have to dodge questions soon.
    Last edited by DanSlayer; 21-08-19 at 09:25 PM.

  11. The Following User Says Thank You to DanSlayer For This Useful Post:

    Nebula1400 (23-08-19)

  12. #7
    Slayer MikeB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Los Angeles, Calif.
    Posts
    2,582
    Thanks
    3,488
    Thanked 634 Times in 376 Posts

    Default

    All caught up.

    All said regarding writers, producers, actors, directors, viewers, readers, etc. are what I remember, my opinions, etc.





    * This is all simply negotiation. Sony's had a bit of a revival within the past year. They now arguably make the best noise-cancelling headphones and they now arguably make the best 4K TV. The new Playstation is soon to come out.

    Sony has no good reason to give half the profits of Spider-Man movies to Marvel. Even Spider-Man 3 made a bunch of money: ( https://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=spiderman3.htm ).

    With inflation, Spider-Man 3 made about as much or more as Spider-Man: Far From Home : https://www.usinflationcalculator.com/ . https://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies...omecoming2.htm

    And in 2007 A.D. there wasn't IMAX, 3D, etc. to 'inflate' ticket prices.

    In addition, remember that Marvel felt it needed Spider-Man in "Avengers 3" aka Captain America: Civil War . https://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=marvel2016.htm


    From a business standpoint, Marvel--and perhaps really Disney--has become somewhat delusional. Sony doesn't need Marvel to make profit from Spider-Man. Disney isn't going to take NetFlix down.
    Last edited by MikeB; 21-08-19 at 09:36 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •