Status
Not open for further replies.

Deleted member 8901

Account closed at user request
Banned
Oct 26, 2017
2,522
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.

lmao. Dude, they're just movies.
 

Cyclonesweep

Banned
Oct 29, 2017
7,690
I forgot how many Disney haters there are here. I should bow out before they come at me with how Disney ruins everything
 

PlanetSmasher

The Abominable Showman
Member
Oct 25, 2017
125,025
You know Disney/Marvel is sitting there thinking that they were able to make GotG and other B tier Marvel properties into a huge success without paying anyone else.

They already have too many characters and not enough movies planned. I'm sure they figured out that they don't really need Spiderman.

Spidey is and always will be a far more popular and recognizable hero than dorks like the Eternals.
 

Jam

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
7,150
The one where Black Panther's first solo film out performed Spider-Man.

What planet you posting from?

To be fair a large part of Black Panther's success was being a cultural landmark, not just being "look at how popular niche comic character films are because of Feige" - that domestic run was insane.

I don't agree that the MCU "needs Spider-Man" btw.
 

Tace

Avenger
Nov 1, 2017
38,152
The Rapscallion
I've calmed down ever so slightly...no way this sticks. It's a bad move for both companies. I think they'll renegotiate

They fuckin better. Hate Spider-Man is locked in this custody battle
 

8byte

Attempted to circumvent ban with alt-account
Banned
Oct 28, 2017
9,880
Kansas
Brink of madness? I'm saying it's funny watch everybody bitch at sony for not giving up 50% of their most valuable film asset, when they can EASILY make that money putting out trash. As pointed out time and time again, sony made nearly a billion with that trash venom movie and nearly 800 million with those trash TASM movies. a 50/50 cut even at 1.2 billion like far from home made, is 600 million. It's very very basic math. I would assume this also means sony gets merchandising rights back for their future movies, so that's even more profit. This is a no brainer for sony, stop laying it at their feet when disney tried to bend them over.

Co-financing isn't the same as a profit split. We have no idea what the split would have been. The only thing we know is that this was a move for Disney to invest heavily into the Spider-Man IP, which was almost certainly a play for them to wiggle in and potentially buy the IP in the future. Disney likely wanted to fund them to get exclusive rights on things like Disney + along with future crossover events.

We can lay anything at Sony's feet when their track record is hot dogshit. We at least know that Marvel Studios at least *cares* about the IP and the source material.

lmao. Dude, they're just movies.

I'm just being snide because I'm always irritated by people who use the english language poorly to make a mockery of people for being upset that something they enjoy may fundamentally change for the worst. Using language like "watching these fanboys is hilarious" is a fast track to let everyone know you're kind of a jerk, lol.
 

Josh5890

I'm Your Favorite Poster's Favorite Poster
The Fallen
Oct 25, 2017
25,295
I suspect this is just a form of aggressive negotiation, Sony is just posturing to get a better deal I would think, since a third MCU Spidey might be a ways off, they have a little bit of time to reneg their deal, albeit in public, I can't imagine it's going to be worst case scenario here, Sony's just using its newly gained truckloads of money to squeeze Marvel a bit, hopefully there's a compromise.

I can't wait to read the retraction thread where Disney and Sony make a deal to keep Spidey in the fold.
 
Oct 25, 2017
8,155
Seems like a case of Disney wanting to be super greedy (who would have thunk it?) and Sony just saying "Nope, we can do it ourselves again."

I don't care how much each of the mega corporations make off of a movie. I just want Spider-Man to be in good movies, and if Sony's version of "we can do it ourselves" is something like Venom, then it's not worth seeing.

Sony is capable of making good Spider-Man movies, but unless the team behind the animated one is involved, I don't really see it happening.
 

msdstc

Member
Nov 6, 2017
7,093
Love all the "Disney was being greedy!!" replies, as if anyone should just as much give a shit about how much money Sony makes off these movies.

Won't someone think of Tom Rothman!

I don't really give a shit about the pockets of billionaires, but from a basic business standpoint sony would've been incredibly stupid to accept this deal. Accepting this deal they lose hundreds of millions when they can create their own "venom/spiderman" universe now and make just as much by putting out trash.

Also why are we acting like it's physically impossible for sony to put out a good spiderman? The raimi spidermans are outstanding and spiderverse was the best spiderman movie overall arguably.
 

Jeffram

Member
Oct 29, 2017
4,151
The MCU is the most profitable film franchise in history.

So yes, the price to be a part of that is going to be steep. Far From Home is the highest-grossing film to ever come out of Sony studios so you'd think they'd be willing to pay the toll and keep Spidey in the MCU.

And yes, Disney is greedy.

So is Sony.

The difference is one of them makes mega-hit after mega-hit and the other is Sony.

Regardless, I'm bummed. I loved the MCU Spider-Man.
How is wanting to keep the deal they had being greedy? The had a plan when they made the deal and executed on it, it's not like sony surprised them and made spider-man a huge mcu character under disney's Noses. Everyone was happy with how things were working. Disney is the one trying to change things.

Not only does Disney want the spider-man money, they want the venom money and the morbius money too. It's kind of absurd to think just how much of Sony movie profits Disney is trying to take.
 

OnPorpoise

Avenger
Oct 25, 2017
1,338
The moment Venom randomly made bank despite itself, I figured this would happen.

Good luck Tom Rothman and Sony, you're going to need it.
 

jett

Community Resettler
Member
Oct 25, 2017
45,096
and Sony fans be like

source.gif
The only movie studio fanboys that exist in any kind of meaningful quantity are Disney ones.
 

Deleted member 18400

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
4,585
the current mcu released a movie last year starring a hero that made more money than any spider-man film on his first try

the current mcu released a movie this year starring a hero that made more money than any spider-man film on her first try

i think they'll be ok
What the hell does this have to do with anything? Marvel has proven they can make money with any MCU character. Ok cool.

Just like Spider-Man, if you pull Captain Marvel and Black Panther from the MCU with no explanation it is going to be horrible. You can't just remove characters who have become so important to the main story.

And despite your argument that the box office take means anything, Marvel was OBVIOUSLY banking on Spider-Man having a pretty big role in the next phase of Avenger movies. Unless you were watching different movies than me.....
 

janusff

The Fallen
Oct 25, 2017
18,526
Austin, TX
Um, did Sony not produce/publish the last two spider films? The only involvement Disney had was to let them share a universe? Why are spelling doom and gloom for the next spidey film again? What am I missing?
 

Arta

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
8,445
So is this just public posturing by companies trying to get a better deal, or is Spidey's involvement in the MCU really in jeopardy?
Stupid.

What if Disney, in retaliation, pulls the video game license from Sony? I mean Sony Pictures doesn't really give two shits about SIE. That would be a pretty hard pill to swallow after spending a (presumably) large chunk of cash on Insomniac. I have no idea how that license is worked out, but I could see Marvel/Disney saying "You don't want to work with us, we're not going to work with you" to Sony as a whole.
I don't know the legalese or plausibility about this, but it would be crazy if right after Sony bought Insomniac to work on more Spider-man games, the license gets pulled.
 

Deleted member 8579

Oct 26, 2017
33,843
I doubt even Disney thought Sony would agree to that new deal, they'll might get back together but a bigger slice than the first deal. Start high negotiation tactic.

Maybe Disney also wanted to make their own films with Holland without Disney oversight if that was ever a thing, I doubt Disney would like that Sony brand of Spider-man films in an audiences mind connected to the MCU.

Sony have upset the mouse.....watch your back.
 

Randdalf

Member
Oct 28, 2017
4,273
The MCU doesn't need Spider-Man (look how well it did before the character turned up) but the last Spider-Man film positioned him pretty clearly as the successor to Iron Man, which makes him pretty important in the whatever grand schemes Marvel were concocting. Schemes which now unravel and need to have the character written out.
 

Cyclonesweep

Banned
Oct 29, 2017
7,690
You don't make a lowball offer on your first try



And Marvel pulls Feige's time (maybe others) when they could be planning the next FF4, X-Men films.

MCU is what pulled Spidey out of the garbage after ASM2
People seem to forget this. You always ask for more and negotiate down, Sony just said no.

Outside of Spiderverse only Spiderman 2 was any good. Most of their comic movies have been straight trash and are being lead by mister "see Deadpool's mouth shut".

Greed by both but because Sony didn't want to negotiate, Spiderman is back to shit again
 

tazmin

Member
Oct 30, 2017
1,552
Sony got an Oscar nominated Spider-Man film and made a villain film which made $800+ million. Oh I'm sure they'll be more than fine

Meanwhile, the MCU/Disney shills have a collective meltdown and I have my popcorn ready
 
Oct 28, 2017
3,345
With Captain Marvel and Black panther making a billion they don't.

They can make a new face for the MCU in a minute.

Wakanda is kind of an isolated world/theme though, and works better in that non-MCU world. It resonates in a different way than any Marvel character.

But Holland's Spiderman is absolutely what Marvel wanted to build on for future phases, and losing him means losing arguably the most recognisable and beloved Avenger.

Their plans are up in the air.
 

Deleted member 17388

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
12,994
This deal isn't just Disney saying "bruh let us pay half of production and give logistical benefits to production." And Sony laughing and saying no. It's only logical to assume Disney has tried to strong arm them into a 50/50 partnership deal from start to finish.
Well, Sony Pictures is not known to be the best at dealing with the Spider-Man IP as a business. Specially when those leaks happened.

But right, probably the 50/50 co-financing was going to arrive with a strongly worded suggestions about how/where/why/which/what they can use/license/buy in terms of cost. Probably even at BO splits, but that part is only speculation by ourselves, and we aren't Sony shareholders anyway...

What we really have right now is: Exhibit A) Venom, Exhibit B) The Amazing Spider-Man 1 & 2, Exhibit C) Spider-Man 3
to be widely skeptical about what Sony can do about a future Spider-Man live-action film solo :'v
 
Status
Not open for further replies.