You're giving Avi Arad and Tom Rothman too much credit. They suck.its still under Sony. Might be a different studio, but these entities aren't that far removed from another that they can't learn from the positives others do.
When people start seriously arguing that co-financing a film 50/50 doesn't mean that Sony and Disney would split the profits 50/50 is when I bail out of this thread.
Cheers.
After how badly Disney fucked over Spectacular Spider-Man I hope this shit sticks and ruins the MCU as hard as possible.
No, it's perfect.
With Marvel a lot can be.Who knows. I expect the general audience isn't hip to the studio politics, so it'll still make bank, but if there's that quality drop off, I feel like people will smarten up when part 4 rolls around.
At the same time, that Marvel Studios name means everything now. Not having that seal of quality might turn some people off.
its still under Sony. Might be a different studio, but these entities aren't that far removed from another that they can't learn from the positives others do.
There's no next big crossover movie announced for the near future, nor any Spider-man solo movie. It really seems like they've already announced a line up that can move on without Spider-man.Kevin and co have made Spider-Man a major part of their slate. Sony will sit on this long enough for Disney to realize they're not budging and Disney will move accordingly unless they want to rejigger their future film plans.
No, it's perfect.
"Who the hell are you?"
".........................Spider.........man"
*does completely lifeless roundhouse kick*
Yeah. Sony made those movies and made bank. The only way Sony takes that deal is if the 50/50 cofinance deal works for them. Disney isn't going to offer that just for publicity. My guess is they wanted an amount that made no sense math wise for Sony. Sony would need to see at minimum $400 million from a 60/40 split to make a venom 2 cofinanced perspective. They could do that or fund 100 million for 800 million. The deal doesn't work unless Disney wants a smaller cut, but Disney isn't going to offer 50/50 cofinance for a small amount as their investment must makes sense for a return. Sony sees they can get 700+ million movies, and that is OK for a studio."Disney asked that future Spider-Man films be a 50/50 co-financing arrangement between the studios, and there were discussions that this might extend to other films in the Spider-Man universe."
Sounds like Disney was willing to help out Sony outside of Spider-Man as well. Probably with their Morbius and Venom films. Is it really that greedy?
It wasn't a sweetheart deal. Disney got the right to use Spider-Man, which is something it very much wanted. And they have the merchandising rights, so the movies generate huge additional profits for them.
This whole thread.
"Disney got greedy"
"Stupid Sony"
"Co-financing isn't about profits"
"It was MCU dreck anyways"
"Tobey is back"
"Andrew is back"
"What about the Playstation games"
"Doesn't anyone care I'm hungry?"
Is it really "hilarious"? I mean, are you genuinely sitting at your computer laughing to the brink of madness because fans of Spider-Man are upset that future films will be trash (this is based on Sony's track record with the IP). I'm really trying to see the punchline here. You know, the "hilarious" part.
Because from where I'm sitting, it looks like Sony desperately holding onto an IP that they continue to mismanage time and time again. It's only a matter of time before Spider-Man ends up like Dark Phoenix if it's left exclusively up to Sony.
How dare they try to obtain more control of a character that's there's.Er, yes, because that's Marvel trying to get more control over the Spider-Man license and the profits from it.
So does this mean Happy is definitely breaking up with Aunt May?
MCU doesn't need Spider-Man, but I think this current iteration of Spider-Man needs the MCU. With that said, Disney is out of their fucking minds asking for 50% co-financing. The math makes zero sense for Sony to entertain that.
Yes but only one company has a history of making shitty Spiderman films and has tom rothman and avi Arad in charge.
People can shit on Disney, that's fair. But to think that spidey will be better with sony? Nah son
Oh my god
This exactly. It's only a matter of time before Sony fucks it upNobody gives a shit if Disney is "greedy," fans are ultimately the ones who are going to lose when Sony tries to go it alone on a SCU.
Truly, integrating him so hard into the MCU was a bad bad move.Disney fucked up here big time.
This doesn't effect me directly but my condolences to the fans.
Spiderverse was good because it had competent people in charge of it and Sony let them do their thing because it was animated, and therefore was not a very big deal in their eyes.
Any live-action Spider-Man movie coming from Sony is going to be complete crap made by morons and filled with executive meddling.
You always go in high with negotiating.MCU doesn't need Spider-Man, but I think this current iteration of Spider-Man needs the MCU. With that said, Disney is out of their fucking minds asking for 50% co-financing. The math makes zero sense for Sony to entertain that.
Can you tell me how much you think Disney is asking for the gross? Do you really think that a 50/50 split in cost won't make them ask for a similar split in revenue?
If he has a nice butt that's all I care about
Yeah, the only thing I feel comfortable commenting on is the end result and its eventual repercussions.Let's not act like this entire thread ain't a bunch of people bickering over something none of us have any real context or insight into based mostly on which company they like better. People are shitting on Sony and acting "salty"'just as much as they are with Disney, and in both cases it's probably based on nothing substantial.
I see. It's still a bad deal for Sony. Why relinquish control and potential revenue to Disney who is already making more from merchandising?They weren't talking about splitting profits, they wanted a 50/50 co-financing deal.