Sony cast Tom Holland when Disney didn't want him. Please explain how this is their fault when we've already explained that its Disney's?
No they didn't Feige cast Tom Holland. He even said it on Jon Favreau's netflix show.
Sony cast Tom Holland when Disney didn't want him. Please explain how this is their fault when we've already explained that its Disney's?
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.I haven't seen Disney do anything like that with contracts that are the length of time that Game Contracts require. And the production time required for Games would suggest that the deal wasn't for a one off game. Especially in Insomniac's case as the head of Marvel Games specifically talked about how not giving previous games enough time hurt their quality which was something they looked to avoid going forward. Marvel's creative control in terms of games wouldn't extend to the ability to alter the contract on the spot without some pretty big repercussions.
It just doesn't make sense that Disney would push to cancel Spidey's best game in years (if not ever) to leverage a completely different division that doesn't need the help. The relationship between Disney and Sony isn't anywhere near as contentious as the one between Disney and Fox had become.
D23 is going to be awkward as hell this weekend during the Marvel panel.
No they don't.I'd actually be very curious if it is. Disney still retains TV rights and everything else non-film with regards to Spider-Man. But, their may be something regarding the film contract they penned with Disney that prevents this.
I don't see why you'd think superhero movies only compete with superhero movies I guess.
SM3 made boat loads of money.
Yes, I think Arad is harmful to the brand, and Feige adds to the brand, but the Spider-Man brand still had huge value back when the deal was done. That's why Disney asked for so little in the first place. Because they knew Spider-Man would bring in more viewers to the MCU.
Ah sorry, I thought we were talking about the next ones. Yeah they didn't finance those, although I would argue that Marvel Studios producing a movie of another studio's IP for miniscule profit instead of working on a project fully owned by Marvel does have a cost. Marvel Studios potentially lost hundreds of millions of dollars by working on Sony IP instead of a new MCU film.
They could potentially offer them billions of dollars for those rights, an offer Sony would actually be dumb to refuse.True but Sony has to be willing to relinquish those rights and currently, they want to continue making comic book films. Even without the MCU Spider-Man can generate hundreds of millions of dollars in potential revenue (or more) and Sony knows that even if they aren't an official part of he MCU they can piggyback off it indirectly and reap the benefits.
Personally, I don't think Sony would sell the rights back unless they were in such dire financial straights that they had no other choice.
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.
Just a reminder that the poor small underdog indie company Sony is actually a much larger company than Disney.
Just a reminder that the poor small underdog indie company Sony is actually a much larger company than Disney.
Actors acting childish with these social media unfollows 🤦🏾♂️
Holding it hostage? They have the film rights. Are they supposed to just give it away?
What? Source on that?
Disney Revenue: $59.43 billion USD
Sony Revenue: $37.45 billion USD
lol. Sorry, wrong thread!
I didn't say that's its wrong, every company does it. They rely on marketing and word of mouth to get people to consume a product. The problem is once fans stop realizing that they are being taken advantage of.
I think it's still a rumor for all we know?
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.
They could potentially offer them billions of dollars for those rights, an offer Sony would actually be dumb to refuse.
What? Source on that?
Disney Revenue: $59.43 billion USD
Sony Revenue: $37.45 billion USD
Sony signs their cheques at the end of the day 🤷🏾♂️ they knew it was a potentially volatile situation.How is that childish?
These actors were part of the biggest, most profitable cinematic franchise in history. Being removed from that - especially in this day and age when franchise trumps personal celebrity branding - would be quite disconcerting.
When you get down to it though it sucks for Disney but Sony is going to take the big hit here. Marvel can just ignore anything that happened in FFH and keep right on trucking. We really weren't expecting to see Spiderman in a cross over until at least Phase 5 anyway so that's a pretty easy ignore. Sony is going to struggle though because their Spiderman is so ingrained into the MCU and they've pissed off all of the MCU faithful that went out to see FFH. They're back to Amazing Spiderman 2 levels of goodwill which is a really bad thing for them.
What year are you looking at? Sony made $81 billion USD in revenue in fiscal 2019.
Imagine being part of the MCU as a leading lady only to be downgraded to the Sony Spider-Man universe. I would be extremely disappointed.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.
If this goes back to Sony, I imagine it's going to be a recasting and not Tom Holland.I thought ASM1 was deadly dull and skipped ASM2, but I will be there day one for the next Holland Spidey movie, MCU or not.
The MCU connections have been the worst aspects of the the Holland movies by a mile.
What year are you looking at? Sony made $81 billion USD in revenue in fiscal 2019.
Calm down, it's just some movies.Fuck everything.
Get Disney's and Sony's stuffed shirts back in a room and lock them in it until they reach a deal.
It could also be the fact they love working Marvel Studios and don't want to work just with Sony.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.
If this goes back to Sony, I imagine it's going to be a recasting and not Tom Holland.
Just a reminder that the poor small underdog indie company Sony is actually a much larger company than Disney.
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.
Again, no fault of it lies with Sony when Disney are the ones attempting to strong arm.Imagine being part of the MCU as a leading lady only to be downgraded to the Sony Spider-Man universe. I would be extremely disappointed.
I love people who don't care about the money and follow their heart
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.
Animated movies don't count because reasons I suppose.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.
I thought ASM1 was deadly dull and skipped ASM2, but I will be there day one for the next Holland Spidey movie, MCU or not.
The MCU connections have been the worst aspects of the the Holland movies by a mile.
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 manIt's scary how many people think that Disney homogenizing the entire entertainment industry is a good thing.
Fuck everything.
Get Disney's and Sony's stuffed shirts back in a room and lock them in it until they reach a deal.
How is that childish?
These actors were part of the biggest, most profitable cinematic franchise in history. Being removed from that - especially in this day and age when franchise trumps personal celebrity branding - would be quite disconcerting.
From 2011 (it's possible things have changed since then, but I don't believe it's public knowledge if they did change): https://wikileaks.org/sony/docs/07/... Deal Points/Executive Summary (Creative).pdfSource?
We know Marvel has animated TV rights to Spider-Man, but I don't know about live action.
RIGHTS: SPE has the exclusive right to utilize the "Spider-Man" character and the other Creative Elements listed in Paragraph 1 above to (a) develop and produce live action or animated theatrical motion pictures (each, a "Picture") and live-action television series (and also animated television series with episodes longer than 44 minutes), during the Production Term, and (b) distribute, advertise and otherwise exploit in perpetuity any motion picture or television series that commenced production during the Production Term.
How would that be possible when the fiscal year of 2019 isn't over? The annual fiscal report for 2019 would not be released yet.
They don't have to reboot. They can and will likely still use Holland and whoever else. They just won't mention MCU stuff, or hint at it like the Netflix shows.SM3 made boat loads of money riding the hype and goodwill from SM1+2. SM3 actually did LESS domestically than SM2 and only achieved higher profitability due to the rising international market, most of which they receive a lesser cut from.
Yes, the SM brand has and almost always will be valuable, but there's such a thing as brand damage and opportunity cost. You're right, Disney/Feige knew that if they could get SM in the MCU it would be a huge draw and why they did it for a pittance. It makes complete sense that Disney would want to renegotiate the terms after proving their worth by making Far From Home the highest grossing Sony movie ever. It's just silly because this MCU Spider-Man is beloved by the fans, they've proven to be a draw for both companies, and I highly doubt another reboot would go over well with audiences.