• Light/Dark
  • Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
  • We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.

Disney-Sony Standoff Ends Marvel Studios & Kevin Feige’s Involvement In ‘Spider-Man’

Status
Not open for further replies.
Tace

Tace

Avenger
Nov 1, 2017
35,516
The Rapscallion
Regulus Tera said:
these are the same people who later go into other threads talking about how big business has completely upended politics and how capitalism exploits the average man

but god forbid they touch their super hero films because then all semblance of social welfare goes out the window
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Marvel OWNS Spider-Man. Disney owns Marvel. The only claim Sony has to Spidey is through movies because Marvel almost went under in the 90s

This ain't homogenization. This is them trying to get more from a character they already own. When they start trying to buy DC, then y'all can start with that.
 
Blader

Blader

Member
Oct 27, 2017
26,620
Ocarina_117 said:
Sony signs their cheques at the end of the day 🤷🏾‍♂️ they knew it was a potentially volatile situation.

They're just perpetuating the narrative the Disney are the victims here.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
"stop sucking up to Disney and remember who your REAL corporate bosses are!"

Regulus Tera said:
these are the same people who later go into other threads talking about how big business has completely upended politics and how capitalism exploits the average man

but god forbid they touch their super hero films because then all semblance of social welfare goes out the window
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

These are not at all the same thing. Good god. We're talking about whether or not a studio produces most or all of Marvel superhero movies. Who has financial stakes in a Spider-Man movie is not remotely the same as maintaining a social safety net!
 
MrJohnSherry

MrJohnSherry

Member
Jan 4, 2018
373
kiguel182 said:
I would like if Marvel had control of the characters they created. I don't think there's anything wrong with that and if the company hadn't sold those assets years ago it would be the reality.

That said, the idea that it's okay for Disney to own half the movie industry just because of Marvel is ridiculous. Yes those characters should be in control of Marvel since those are their characters in the end but losing Fox and trying to screw Sony Pictures to get there is not worth it.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I mean, it's not Sony's fault they mismanaged their finances and found themselves in hot water.
 
Ash735

Ash735

Banned
Sep 4, 2018
907
It feels like all of this was orchestrated to make Sony look bad and force them into selling the Spider-Man rights to Disney. Especially since there's MCU actors getting in on this and pointing the finger at Sony.
 
LGHT_TRSN

LGHT_TRSN

Member
Oct 25, 2017
7,133
Tace said:
Marvel OWNS Spider-Man. Disney owns Marvel. The only claim Sony has to Spidey is through movies because Marvel almost went under in the 90s

This ain't homogenization. This is them trying to get more from a character they already own. When they start trying to buy DC, then y'all can start with that.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

There are literally people in this thread saying Disney should buy Sony because their superhero character might not end up in a franchise they like...
 
Tetra-Grammaton-Cleric

Tetra-Grammaton-Cleric

user requested ban
Banned
Oct 28, 2017
8,958
Ocarina_117 said:
Again, no fault of it lies with Sony when Disney are the ones attempting to strong arm.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Disney only receiving 5% first dollar gross is a bullshit deal and Disney has every reason to want and expect more given how much buoyancy the MCU lends to Spider-Man.

Far From Home was the first MCU film after Endgame. Just take a moment to consider the propellant of that fact and how it directly affects box office revenue.

You think it's Sony's highest grossing film by coincidence?
 
Kreed

Kreed

The Negro Historian
Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,109

captainuwu

Member
Aug 14, 2019
132
If this means the Holland films become interesting beyond Peter Parker quipping more than Tobey's version and Iron Man taking the spotlight then I'm fine with it.
 
Aadiboy

Aadiboy

Member
Nov 4, 2017
3,652
I don't know, it seems pretty obvious to me that if Disney wants Spider-Man, they should just pay up. If the deal was already good enough for them for two movies, then it should be good enough for two more. Unless that money is more valuable to them than having Spider-Man in the MCU, in which case why did they agree to the 5% deal in the first place?
 
hodayathink

hodayathink

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,055
Alexandros said:
Thanks, I already read that. I thought there was confirmation from a trusted source.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Deadline is a trusted source. As one of the three primary Hollywood trades, they're not publishing something unless they got it from a studio or got a studio's okay to report it (in this case, their leak more than likely came from Disney themselves). And it's highly unlikely that Disney was looking to finance half the movie and take less than that as a share of the profits.
 

Jest

Member
Oct 28, 2017
4,565
Dierce said:
They've already established the Sony Marvel Universe.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

A single Venom film does not a Universe make.

fiendcode said:
Creative control isn't about altering or canceling contracts, it's about exercising creative authority and yes it can hobble or even sink projects. Ask Capcom about it.

And this is assuming there even is a contract for SM2 and Insomniac's already in production, neither of which are known so it's conjecture anyway. I mean I'd assume SEI got a multigame contract (I'd assume the same for Nintendo with MUA too) but then I'd have also thought Marvel and SP had worked out a multifilm deal already (like a trilogy) and apparently that didn't happen. Until we know this for sure you can't really keep repeating "contract!" as if that insulates everything on Sony's end. As always with contracts, if there's a contract, it's more complicated than that.

And making sense isn't relevant with Disney hardball. Perlmutter will cut off his nose to spite his face, that's exactly how it went with the X-Men/FF ban that resulted in Marvel sinking licensing that they took 100% on for years. It's all about devaluing the brand competitively and using that for leverage. We've seen it happen and it could easily happen again.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

You need to stop beating the Capcom dead horse as if Capcom has had strong direction or creative decisions of their own recently.

Statement's from the head of Marvel Games, Jay Ong suggest that the Insomniac deal wasn't a one off.

www.gamesindustry.biz

Spider-Man leads Marvel's "epic" new console strategy

On Monday night, Sony closed out its E3 press conference with the announcement that Ratchet and Clank developer Insomni…
www.gamesindustry.biz www.gamesindustry.biz

So assuming Marvel always tried to find talented developers to bring its characters to games, how does the new strategy really differ from the old strategy? Ong explained that one big change was that the company used to create games based on movie IP, or at least tied to movie releases.

"It was difficult to succeed with that one, often times there wasn't enough time to come out with something truly terrific," Ong admitted.

...

"We've had a long history of success with Activision, and we still have a great relationship with them," Ong said. "But the future of the Spider-Man console games is with Sony and Insomniac. We're delighted about this partnership, and that's something that's going to continue forward. With [regard to] other console partners, stay tuned. There's many more interesting additional things to come. But Activision is in the past, with regards to Spider-Man."
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Bold is mine.

Making sense is absolutely relevant and Perlmutter's decisions absolutely are not. He's not even in any active control at Marvel right now and is essentially acting as a figurehead chairman while he focuses on other things that aren't relevant to this discussion. Disney makes the final call on this things, so if anyone is going to be at the crux of this type of decision it's going to likely be Iger.
 
kiguel182

kiguel182

Member
Oct 31, 2017
9,441
I mean, when Marvel regained control for Spidey animation we lost Spectacular Spider-Man. I'm not over that.
 
abellwillring

abellwillring

Member
Oct 25, 2017
8,937
Austin, TX
viskod said:
I don't think asking to go in 50/50 on the Spider Man franchise, when the current success of Spider Man is 100% because of your efforts and the other company has basically just been holding your flagship character hostage for money.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
It is Sony's character. Marvel is asking to use Sony's character. Repeat, Marvel is asking to use Sony's character. 50/50 is never going to happen. I think some of you are just ignoring economies of scale as well -- if you get a much, much smaller piece of a bigger pie, then a smaller pie that you get more of is a better pie. Marvel has zero rights to use Spider-Man in a movie. They are the party to a deal here -- not Sony. You don't get to dictate terms of an agreement when you're the one who is asking to come into it. Sony is Marvel's boss here.

I am struggling to understand why this is so difficult for some people to understand. Sony should not and will not allow Marvel/Disney to bully them. For the good of the film industry and the entertainment industry in general, there needs to be companies who are willing to not just bow before Disney.
 
NinjaScooter

NinjaScooter

Member
Oct 25, 2017
54,163
It's amusing that some people are playing the "marvel deserves the characters they created" card considering the history of the actual creators of these characters.
 
Tiago Rodrigues

Tiago Rodrigues

Attempted to circumvent ban with alt account
Banned
Nov 15, 2018
5,244
Arthands said:
a shame that Sony is remaining greedy despite them having 0 capability of making a profitable good Spider-Man movie. For the sake of everyone they should return Spider-Man movie to Marvel.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Yeah Sony, the studio responsible for the movies, the one that retains the brand, is the greedy one for not wanting a 50/50 split lol . Disney wanting to go from 5% to 50% was laughable to say the least.

Also..."0 capacity for making a profitable good Spider-Man movie"? Check last decade's trilogy. All of them almost got to 1B US dollars. Those numbers barely ever happened 15 years ago. Rotten Tomatoes have the first 2 movies at 90 and 92%. Even the 3rd one is at 62 or 63%. They were critically and commercially huge hits.

Into The Spider-Verse from last year had a budget of $90M, got over $375M, got them an Oscar, surpassing even Disney who usually gets them, stand at 97% on rotten tomatoes.

They also have the biggest super hero videogame of all time.

The only thing Sony failed with the Spider-man brand was the Amazing Spiderman movies. But that doesn't erase everything else they ever did for the franchise.
 
MrJohnSherry

MrJohnSherry

Member
Jan 4, 2018
373
kiguel182 said:
We still shouldn't celebrate that or push for them to get screwed. Same as Fox. A company owning so much of the movie industry is bad for the art form and for our culture too.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I'm not celebrating that, I love Spider-man - he's my one of my favourite super heroes (beside Nightcrawler, Hawkeye and Wolverine). Sony have all the power here, I would love for them to share it with Disney just to keep this good thing going but I am really uncomfortable with Disney trying to use vitriol and hatred on social media to try and put pressure on Sony. If Disney want it, then pay the piper. They won't though, so Sony can do whatever they want with the IP.

The comments by Jeremy Renner and such show exactly what Disney's plan here is. They want the IP, but they want it to get it as cheaply as possible - which I can't begrudge, but fuck monopolies.
 
Surakian

Surakian

Avenger
Oct 27, 2017
10,871
Aadiboy said:
I don't know, it seems pretty obvious to me that if Disney wants Spider-Man, they should just pay up. If the deal was already good enough for them for two movies, then it should be good enough for two more. Unless that money is more valuable to them than having Spider-Man in the MCU, in which case why did they agree to the 5% deal in the first place?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

They likely did it as a show of good faith initially.

abellwillring said:
It is Sony's character. Marvel is asking to use Sony's character. I think some of you are just ignoring economies of scale as well. If you get a much, much smaller piece of a bigger pie, then a smaller pie that you get more of is a better pie. Marvel has zero rights to use Spider-Man in a movie. They are the party to a deal here -- not Sony. You don't get to dictate terms of an agreement when you're the one who is asking to come into it. Sony is Marvel's boss here.

I am struggling to understand why this is so difficult for some people to understand. Sony should not and will not allow Marvel/Disney to bully them. For the good of the film industry and the entertainment industry in general, there needs to be companies who are willing to not just bow before Disney.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Marvel owns the character. The only thing Sony owns is the film rights.
 
TyraZaurus

TyraZaurus

Member
Nov 6, 2017
4,457
If Tom and Zendaya unfollowed anything related to Sony, then that's their right. You can't simultaneously champion Sony standing up to the big overlord that is Disney and then simultaneously disparage two of the actual actors for being unhappy with their employers.
 
excelsiorlef

excelsiorlef

Bad Praxis
Member
Oct 25, 2017
73,326
It's really disappointing to see this hit 93 pages. Why can't people care more about the real important issues in the world today like getting the Snyder Cut released
 
Tetra-Grammaton-Cleric

Tetra-Grammaton-Cleric

user requested ban
Banned
Oct 28, 2017
8,958
ElephantShell said:
It's scary how many people think that Disney homogenizing the entire entertainment industry is a good thing.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

That's a straw man as far as I'm concerned.

The film industry is going through a radical shift and I personally dislike that a storied, historical studio like Fox was absorbed by them but I also think you have to consider the reality that many of these studios aren't making money and at least some of that is due to ineptitude and the squandering of IP's.

I don't want Disney to own everything (nor do most sane, rational people) but I do think Disney having complete control over their Marvel properties is a good thing given how poorly managed they've been in the hands of others.
 
MouldyK

MouldyK

Prophet of Truth
Banned
Nov 1, 2017
10,118
Mod Edit: Removed inflammatory content

So do we think Disney are actually using bots?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Alice

Alice

Banned
Nov 2, 2017
5,867
This "50/50 Profits split" bullshit REALLY needs to stop. The only 50/50 split that was ever reported on, was a 50/50 split of production costs, and that's in FAVOUR of Sony, who had the 100% for the last two films.

The confirmation bias of some people is driving me up a wall.
 
Principate

Principate

Member
Oct 31, 2017
11,186
Alice said:
This "50/50 Profits split" bullshit REALLY needs to stop. The only 50/50 split that was ever reported on, was a 50/50 split of production costs, and that's in FAVOUR of Sony, who had the 100% for the last two films.

The confirmation bias of some people is driving me up a wall.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
It's a logical conclusion unless you honestly think Sony decided to cancel their agreement with marvel purely because Disney wanted to share more of the risk?

The production budget ratio lined up with the first profit split for the intial agreement.
 
HibbySloth

HibbySloth

One Winged Slayer
Member
Oct 25, 2017
6,166
Aadiboy said:
I don't know, it seems pretty obvious to me that if Disney wants Spider-Man, they should just pay up. If the deal was already good enough for them for two movies, then it should be good enough for two more. Unless that money is more valuable to them than having Spider-Man in the MCU, in which case why did they agree to the 5% deal in the first place?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

They can't purchase what isn't for sale, especially since it took half their total worth to purchase Fox.
 
Alice

Alice

Banned
Nov 2, 2017
5,867
Raguel said:
Or it could be a deranged fan. Using bots is not particularly hard.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Or a copy/paste campaign some fans started. Wouldn't be the first time.


Principate said:
It is pretty childish to burn bridges like that, who knows what will happen in 10 years time.

It's a logical conclusion unless you honestly think Sony decided to cancel their agreement with marvel purely because Disney wanted to share more of the risk?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

No it's not a "logical conclusion", it's an assumption being sold as fact. Everyone who's peddling this drivel is actively spreading misinformation.
 

captainuwu

Member
Aug 14, 2019
132
NinjaScooter said:
It's amusing that some people are playing the "marvel deserves the characters they created" card considering the history of the actual creators of these characters.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
People like to think of the corporations making the pop culture they consume as people deserving of properties. Once Fox was gobbled up they put aside the thousands of jobs being lost.
 
VeePs

VeePs

Prophet of Truth
Member
Oct 25, 2017
17,369
NinjaScooter said:
It's amusing that some people are playing the "marvel deserves the characters they created" card considering the history of the actual creators of these characters.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

People talking here like "this is what Disney deserves!" When they didn't even give Jack Kirby/his family what they deserved.
 
Tetra-Grammaton-Cleric

Tetra-Grammaton-Cleric

user requested ban
Banned
Oct 28, 2017
8,958
Aadiboy said:
I don't know, it seems pretty obvious to me that if Disney wants Spider-Man, they should just pay up. If the deal was already good enough for them for two movies, then it should be good enough for two more. Unless that money is more valuable to them than having Spider-Man in the MCU, in which case why did they agree to the 5% deal in the first place?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

That 5% deal is actually a holdover from the Sony acquisition of the film rights decades ago, back when Disney didn't own Marvel and Marvel was worth a tiny fraction of what it is today.

Also by your logic, RDJ shouldn't ask or expect to get any more money for playing Iron Man in Endgame than he received when he did the original Iron Man.

Things change and Sony is reaping the fruits of the MCU and they should most certainly pony up more than 5%.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.