Plenty of people in this thread will believe it, yes.
This has become a cesspool of people wanting to shit on Sony and people celebrating another excuse to shit on the MCU.
-
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.
Disney-Sony Standoff Ends Marvel Studios & Kevin Feige’s Involvement In ‘Spider-Man’
- Thread starter Chaos Legion
- Start date
- Status
Plenty of people in this thread will believe it, yes.
This has become a cesspool of people wanting to shit on Sony and people celebrating another excuse to shit on the MCU.
Super reliable source also says that disney was buying out empty theaters for Captain Marvel showings to increase grosses.
He under contract with them to be Spiderman and to be Nathan Drake. He isn't going to torpedo his career. People need to get a grip.
That twitter account is known for pushing conspiracy theories about Star Wars and Captain Marvel and complaining about SJWs and their control over media.
Someone is using bots but they have no proof or legitimate sources that it's Disney.
I'm talking Spider-Man, which as far as I know was made as it exists today entirely by Stan and Steve. Seems like you're trying to make this into something else.
A 50% co-finance means they'd get 50% of the receipts. That's how those deals work. I don't think anyone is misreading that.
I mean there's only one reason in the world you put in half the costs. So you own half the movie which means...half the profits.
That's what a cofi deal is.
Contracts can be broken. Wouldn't suprise me if this put a dent into his relationship with Sony and the Uncharted movie.
Can you confirm this?
Articles I read position Disney as demanding 50% of the B/O returns. I've been harsh on Disney but I'm open to being wrong.
It's Marvel's character and Sony's Film Rights. Neither is anyone's boss. This has no implications on the greater film industry at all. Sony also has more Entertainment divisions, even if Disney is a larger company overall.
This is my understanding as well. I thought it was 50/50 on the production cost.
Do you have a source on this? Or is it just gonna stay baseless "it's obviously this you guys!" Co-Finance is ALL about costs.
Show me those articles. The one in the OP doesn't claim that at all. Every single article I read is about Co-Financing, and NOT 50% of the box office returns. The article in the OP even EXPLICITLY mentions that it's unknown what Disneys actual demands were.
Hell, even Sony themselves don't confirm this, THEIR reason for the split was "Feige doesn't have time for this project", why would they be quiet about an outrageous offer like that if that would put them instantly back on the goodwill of fans?
It's a reasonable assumption far more reasonable than thinking disney were offering to take half the risk but only partake in something like 20% of the profit. There's no logical reason why 1) diseny would do that and 2) Sony would disagree if it was wildly in their favor.
The initial deals production budget split lined up with first budget split
It means hopefully Marvel owns the rights to Night Monkey 'cause Tom Holland really really liked being part of the MCU.
Royalties, I'd imagine. A lot of royalties.
Fox going under sucked but it was going to happen either way.
I'm glad that at the very least they were able to consolidate some of their IP's in the process.
Asking to go in 50/50 on the Spider Man franchise is not bullying. Marvel is making these movies for Sony and Sony is getting all the profits from them. It's not bullying to want to just go all in together on the Spider Man franchise including other Spider Man characters.
They were created by actual people, not whatever faceless corporation Marvel is now. So if we are playing the card of who "deserves" what, let's hand these characters back to the men and women who actually created them, and their families. But we don't. Their creations became property of Marvel due to the nature of business and contracts. Just like the movie rights became property of Sony. Deserves gots nothing to do with it.
It was in the original article posted here. It was 50/50 cofinancing that could potentially spread to other Sony Marvel films outside of Spider-Man
Hitching their damaged brand to a more successful one.
Inclusion in the MCU, which is worth potentially billions.
I completely agree. I don't like what Disney is doing at all.
Even if I think that makes sense for Marvel to have the rights to use him since he is a Marvel character I don't like monopolies and trying to bully Sony using the audience is gross.
I mean, if they didn't sell. Would Marvel still be here in this way? On the one hand yeah, they can' t use all the characters they'd want to, however like they got this far and are basically a cultural icon. Unfortunately, it had, and will continue having a price.
Yall killimg me with this. It's not "Sony's" anything. It's Marvels character. Everything story wise and character wise comes ftom Marvel, which is owned by Disney.
Remember that Fandom Menace video thread we had a few days ago?
Yeah this account is a part of that.
If we're going to play that game you could do that with almost any property under the sun. Like, that's a problem not exclusive to this one situation lol. But sure, take deserve out of the equation. When it comes to who I think will do a better job with the property?
Disney and Marvel Studios full stop. I think it's better for the character
I agree. Marvel isn't suffering because of it, far from it.
What I'm saying is, in principle, it makes sense for Marvel to own the rights to their characters. Of course things are more complicated than that and they aren't suffering from not having the film rights to Spider-Man so whatever.
It's nothing but an assumption people are peddling as a fact. Alternate Facts if you so will. Sony said nothing about Disney wanting too much of the shares, their statement is out there. Stop making things up.
Plus isn't he doing unchartered, also Sony?
Would be biting the hand that feeds him
Fox was selling their shit anyway. Your choice was them selling to Comcast or Disney.
Neither were great options but one would have resulted in a company seizing both the means of producing a large percentage of entertainment while also controlling the means of distributing it.
That would have resulted in what is ACTUALLY A MONOPOLY.
Neither were great options but one would have resulted in a company seizing both the means of producing a large percentage of entertainment while also controlling the means of distributing it.
That would have resulted in what is ACTUALLY A MONOPOLY.
Don't bend the knee, Sony.
70/30 in renegotiations or you walk again, all the while reminding the Mouse that this is all Marvel's fault. :DDD
70/30 in renegotiations or you walk again, all the while reminding the Mouse that this is all Marvel's fault. :DDD
Thread worthy, it's creepy how companies try to manipulate people. Amazon does the same thing.
Oh it's fake? I fell for it haha, the amazon thing was real though right?
For movies, it is their character. Marvel has absolutely no say in the matter.
It's Sony's character in films. Doesn't matter outside of film.
This is soooo unbelievably wrong that it isn't even funny. If Disney again makes another major player in the film industry just kowtow to them because they can, it has no implications on the industry at large?
We should not be cheering on bullies. Ever.
Lol right? As if Disney was like "hey, we want to cover half the cost of the movie for no reason, oh what, you dont want that deal Sony cause it only benefits you? Well F you then!"
You should probably read the other replies to this post and realize it's not that hard for anyone to have bots do this.
Yeah, that account sure is legit and not some anti-SJW nut job posting conspiracies about Captain Marvel or Star Wars
Thread worthy with a borderline Alt-Right twitter source? IIIII don't know about that, yo.
I'm not arguing about who would do a better job with the property. I'm referring to people both in this thread and on twitter over the last day who have been whining about how it's not fair that Marvel doesn't have control over their own character. Just like it's not fair that the actual creators of these characters haven't been able to reep the rewards of their creations being turned into billion dollar IPs. If they wanted control they shouldn't have sold the rights away. It's either business or it isn't.
Take a look at that twitter account, it's super unreliable.
Are we sure Disney did this, and not an angry fan who really doesn't want Spider-Man out of the MCU? I wouldn't be surprised either way.
An even more popular brand. Obviously Spider-Man isn't popular because of the MCU, but he's even more popular and relevant now because of it. Which means the brand is worth more money to Sony now, but at the cost of being more tied to the rest of Marvel's brands in the public conscience now as opposed to being standalone like before.
- Status