• It's the most wonderful time of the year! Make your list and check it twice. The ResetEra Games of the Year 2019 Voting Thread is now live. Voting will be open for the next 6 days, 7 hours, 18 minutes, 49 seconds, and will close on Jan 26, 2020 at 9:00 AM.

Morbius - Official Teaser Trailer

LewieP

Member
Oct 26, 2017
9,702
Sony doesn't give a crap about having Morbius or Venom meet the Avengers or the Eternals or whatever they do next, they want to eventually implement Spider-Man or make MCU Spider-Man films with the inclusion of those characters. They want Tom Holland Spidey, no one else, and by default they would be connected to the MCU.

You are arguing not having rights to show certain MCU things and characters as proof its not part of the MCU, but that is something entirely different.
I'm not sure what your definition of "cinematic universe" is, but for me it means "within the films it exists in the same universe".

If this film is not in the same universe as all the other stuff that exists within the MCU, then in my view it is not in the MCU.

There are minor inconsistencies between MCU films, but for the most part they are extremely consistent. Stuff like the suit totally changing would be a huge continuity snafu for the MCU.

Maybe this film or another film is going to explain where Stark Tower has gone, but I very much doubt it.

I am pretty sure the terms between Marvel and Sony have specifically prevented explicitly making Sony's movies part of the MCU (Feige's language even suggested such), so Sony are just doing as much as they can to imply a connection without breaching the agreement terms.

It could be some kind of parallel universe, offshoot universe or whatever, but it's not the same thing.

Not sure what's so hard to understand about this.

Edit: and yes I am well aware Sony cares little about anything but short term profits. They already poisoned the well twice over, and I doubt going for a hat trick is beyond them.
 

demondance

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,740
so did Disney get to keep using Spidey in exchange for allowing Sony to do the MCU For Dumb Guys line?

Venom was insanely dumb to the point that I enjoyed myself so maybe this is fine
 

Arthands

Member
Oct 26, 2017
5,552
So I guess Michael Keaton is the price for Sony to accept the new Spider-Man deal.
Even the same exact outfit from Homecoming

 

Tavernade

Member
Sep 18, 2018
1,360
I imagine either studio can use anyone the other owns if they ask nice and do adequate profit sharing but both would be thrilled not to have to.

Sony needs it more, since Disney can rest on everyone else. My impression has been Sony kinda hopes one of these films hits it off like GOTG did and they can just focus on that and not deal with Spider-Man's difficult ownership as much.
 

LewieP

Member
Oct 26, 2017
9,702
I imagine either studio can use anyone the other owns if they ask nice and do adequate profit sharing but both would be thrilled not to have to.

Sony needs it more, since Disney can rest on everyone else. My impression has been Sony kinda hopes one of these films hits it off like GOTG did and they can just focus on that and not deal with Spider-Man's difficult ownership as much.
I suspect as part of their agreement, Marvel will not be using Venom or Morbius etc.
 

nnavidson

Member
Dec 16, 2017
242
All this talk about Keaton and I’m willing to bet $5 that he’s in it for less than 2 minutes, probably at the final sequence where Morbius goes to jail. His inclusion in the trailer is an acknowledgment that there’s not much in this movie to get audiences excited.
 

Tavernade

Member
Sep 18, 2018
1,360
I suspect as part of their agreement, Marvel will not be using Venom or Morbius etc.
I'm sure if they wanted to they could work a deal out with Sony to use them, but I don't imagine they would feel the need to, and if they did use them they'd have to use the Sony versions.

I think this is less a solid wall than the Marvel theme park rights are for Disney. They're already in a working relationship with Sony for Spider himself, if for some reason they really wanted to they could probably work out a similar deal for someone else. I don't think the same is true for theme park rights.

Realistically the only way we see Venom/Morbius/etc in an MCU movie is in a Spider-Man centric one. My argument is just that I don't think it's impossible for more cross-over if the studios for some reason want it.
 

Bor Gullet

Member
Oct 27, 2017
7,703
I'm not sure what your definition of "cinematic universe" is, but for me it means "within the films it exists in the same universe".

If this film is not in the same universe as all the other stuff that exists within the MCU, then in my view it is not in the MCU.

There are minor inconsistencies between MCU films, but for the most part they are extremely consistent. Stuff like the suit totally changing would be a huge continuity snafu for the MCU.

Maybe this film or another film is going to explain where Stark Tower has gone, but I very much doubt it.

I am pretty sure the terms between Marvel and Sony have specifically prevented explicitly making Sony's movies part of the MCU (Feige's language even suggested such), so Sony are just doing as much as they can to imply a connection without breaching the agreement terms.

It could be some kind of parallel universe, offshoot universe or whatever, but it's not the same thing.

Not sure what's so hard to understand about this.

Edit: and yes I am well aware Sony cares little about anything but short term profits. They already poisoned the well twice over, and I doubt going for a hat trick is beyond them.
^^^^^
 

F Trump

Member
Jul 12, 2019
821
Why is it confusing?
1) Sony can use MCU Spiderman (and characters) in their movies. Haven't confirmed if other MCU characters can appear/be referenced.
2) Marvel Studios (Kevin Feige) hasn't confirmed if MCU will use Sony characters (Venom, Morbius, etc) in their movies
I wasn’t aware of the first part. Cool thanks.
 

Grunge_Hamster

The Fallen
Oct 27, 2017
5,282
All this talk about Keaton and I’m willing to bet $5 that he’s in it for less than 2 minutes, probably at the final sequence where Morbius goes to jail. His inclusion in the trailer is an acknowledgment that there’s not much in this movie to get audiences excited.
He's surely the postcredits scene or something.

Sony do the "trailer reveals everything in the movie thing" every time.
 

LewieP

Member
Oct 26, 2017
9,702
Tom Holland is coming too. He will probably be the post-credits tease for Venom 2.
I kinda thought the end of his last MCU appearance was going to be him welling up with tears and falling into a dimensional portal (maybe bringing MJ and Aunt May or whoever with him), then in the next Sony movie he'll appear through a portal.
 

Shingi_70

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,073
I kinda thought the end of his last MCU appearance was going to be him welling up with tears and falling into a dimensional portal (maybe bringing MJ and Aunt May or whoever with him), then in the next Sony movie he'll appear through a portal.
that was never gonna happen. It’s all in the same universe but it’s not.

Just like comics
 

LewieP

Member
Oct 26, 2017
9,702
that was never gonna happen. It’s all in the same universe but it’s not.

Just like comics
I dunno I could have seen it leading into to Spider-Verse shenanigans.

I don't even want Sony to make any more live action marvel movies, but a Tobey Maguire/Andrew Garfield/Tom Holland team up would be pretty hype.
 

Sandstar

Member
Oct 28, 2017
4,198
Y'all forget about what happened to Spidey last summer?

Sony had more leverage to renegotiate the Sony/Marvel Studios agreement to their favour with the financial success of Vemon and Into the Spider-verse.

This is the fruition of the new deal.
Um, Sony owns everything that's being used in the trailer. What exactly did they negotiate away from Marvel?
 

Alpha Baymax

Member
Dec 3, 2019
686
Um, Sony owns everything that's being used in the trailer. What exactly did they negotiate away from Marvel?
I never denied what Sony owned, I just said that the revised licensing of Spider-Man gave Sony more leverage to sample the MCU more directly with the new agreement as oppose to just relegating that partnership solely to Marvel Studios developed Spider-Man movies.
 

Sandstar

Member
Oct 28, 2017
4,198
I never denied what Sony owned, I just said that the revised licensing of Spider-Man gave Sony more leverage to sample the MCU more directly with the new agreement as oppose to relegating that partnership to Marvel Studios developed Spider-Man movies.
What part of the MCU that Sony doesn't own outright (which they could always use, contract with Disney or not) appears in the trailer?
 

LewieP

Member
Oct 26, 2017
9,702
The lesser amount of money they're getting, because Disney now gets 25% of the total profits, instead of the 5% of the first day profits? Wow, that's a great deal for Sony. Is Trump their negotiator?
My guess is it's less money but more leeway to pretend their films are in the MCU. And probably a bunch of other stuff too.
 

LewieP

Member
Oct 26, 2017
9,702
Again, what part of the MCU, that Sony doesn't already own outright, appears in that trailer?
I don't know what you think they own. They don't own any of it. They have a license to produce films based on Marvel ip.

I don't know any of the details of the contracts between Sony and Marvel beyond what has been released publicly.

I do know that these contracts exist though. It's why Spider-Man characters appeared in films like Civil War, Infinity War and End Game.

Edit: and there were no posters of Spider-Man in Venom, nor did they use the Tom Holland cameo that was shot but not included due to Feige not approving it (despite them having a license to use Spider-Man). These are the types of restrictions that I imagine were renegotiated.
 

Alpha Baymax

Member
Dec 3, 2019
686
What part of the MCU that Sony doesn't own outright (which they could always use, contract with Disney or not) appears in the trailer?
Michael Keaton's Vulture. That's an iteration of Vulture that originated from Marvel Studios.

Prior to the revised agreement, if Sony wanted to have Vulture for their Sony Marvel Universe, they would have had to recast and re-create their own version.
 

Sandstar

Member
Oct 28, 2017
4,198
I don't know what you think they own. They don't own any of it. They have a license to produce films based on Marvel ip.

I don't know any of the details of the contracts between Sony and Marvel beyond what has been released publicly.

I do know that these contracts exist though. It's why Spider-Man characters appeared in films like Civil War, Infinity War and End Game.
You know what I meant, and you're dodging the question because you don't have an answer. but, if you like:

What about the MCU, that Sony doesn't already have the rights to use as a result of them buying the rights to all spiderman properties in the 90's, is in the morbius trailer?

Michael Keaton's Vulture. That's an iteration of Vulture that originated from Marvel Studios.

Prior to the revised agreement, if Sony wanted to have Vulture for their Sony Marvel Universe, they would have had to recast and re-create their own version.
Sony owns the rights to a character created for them, using their money, in a movie released by them, using the rights to a comics character they own. Sorry, try again.
 
Last edited:

LewieP

Member
Oct 26, 2017
9,702
You know what I meant, and you're dodging the question because you don't have an answer. but, if you like:

What about the MCU, that Sony doesn't already have the rights to use as a result of them buying the rights to all spiderman properties in the 90's, is in the morbius trailer?
Did you see my edit?

I'm not particularly sure why you seem to think that these agreements that have been highly publicised don't exist. Yes Sony could do whatever they want with the Spider-Man film ip, but they decided to partner with Marvel, and of course there has been a degree of give and take from both sides as part of those negotiations. Sony would have put Tom Holland as Spider-Man in Venom if they had not agreed to any terms restricting what they do with the ip otherwise.