The Marvel Cinematic Multiverse | Oh, this is nice

Pachimari

Member
Oct 25, 2017
10,786
I could honestly see February 18 2022 be Deadpool. And July 29 2022 be Ant-Man 3, that would be four years since Ant-Man and the Wasp. And let's say they'll do post-production on The Suicide Squad up until July 2021, I don't see them getting GotG3 ready in a year, although their productions are really quick. So GotG3 for 2023, and we still got Ghost Rider, Nova, Blade and the Fantastic Four. I think we should get used to slow turnarounds for sequels, so four years till a Captain Marvel sequel seems right. Treasure of riches.

2022: Deadpool, Black Panther II, Ant-Man 3
2023: Blade, GotG3, Captain Marvel 2
2024: Ghost Rider, Nova, Fantastic Four
 

Blader

Member
Oct 27, 2017
10,601
My guess is either Deadpool or Blade for that February spot, Captain Marvel 2 for July, and then a new November date added for GOTG3.
 

Chaos Legion

Member
Oct 30, 2017
3,340

Thoughts? I think Sony would be nuts to sell Spidey, but who knows. I'm sure there's an amount of money they'd sell him for, but is that 5 billion?
Sony Pictures is estimated to be worth around $15 billion.

If Disney is willing to pay Sony $5bn for the rights of Spider-Man, they should take it and run. Also, everyone at Disney who signed off on that offer should be fired immediately. Sony could take that $5 billion and buy MGM, gain Epix, Bond and Rocky as well as MGM's library of over 4,000 films.

I don't think it's anything more than clickbait. What return will Disney make from Spider-Man when they already own the merchandise rights and cannot possibly pump out an MCU Spider-Man universe of films annually enough to justify paying more for his film rights than all of Marvel.
 
Oct 31, 2017
3,906

Thoughts? I think Sony would be nuts to sell Spidey, but who knows. I'm sure there's an amount of money they'd sell him for, but is that 5 billion?
I saw this earlier from yahoo. I take it with a huge grain of salt. The source is Mikey Sutton from facebook. I don't know his track record, but this would be insane. Yes, for a variety of reasons you can't compare the value of the license, which has gone up, to what Disney paid for Marvel in 2009 or Lucas in 2012, but I don't think the board or Iger would pay that much for it. I would ask them why that's a better spend of capital than deleveraging, which they need to right now. Or buying back stock. Or creating a second resort in China, a 1st one in India, or a 3rd in the US. Or a plethora of other ways to use that capital.

Sony Pictures is estimated to be worth around $15 billion.

If Disney is willing to pay Sony $5bn for the rights of Spider-Man, they should take it and run. Also, everyone at Disney who signed off on that offer should be fired immediately.
Pretty much this.
 

Neoxon

Community Resettler
Member
Oct 25, 2017
27,781
Houston, TX
Wasn't there a rumor that Apple was interested in buying out Sony Pictures to bolster their Apple TV+ service? Wouldn't it be more beneficial for Disney to wait & see what happens with that, seeing as the Spider-Man film rights would default back to Disney in that scenario? Plus, as others have said, they'd have to do 4-5 Spidey films to make up the $5 billion mentioned in the rumor. And while the MCU is definitely still printing money, buying the film rights outright now seems like a bad move when they could get it back by default depending on how the Apple thing plays out.

Either way, the current sharing arrangement looks to be a winner on all fronts. And given that Tom Holland will be up for contract renewal once the existing sharing arrangement ends, Disney's in a good position to re-up the deal for even longer if Tom chooses to leverage his eligibility for renewal to keep the MCU deal going long-term (which, given how instrumental he was in keeping Spidey in the MCU, I definitely foresee him doing). As I've said before, whoever agreed to the 2 films made a smart play.
 
Last edited:
Oct 31, 2017
3,906
Wasn't there a rumor that Apple was interested in buying out Sony Pictures to bolster their Apple TV+ service? Wouldn't it be more beneficial for Disney to wait & see what happens with that, seeing as the Spider-Man film rights would default back to Disney in that scenario?
Unless it changed in 2015 or later then the rights are transferable. This FUD BS that the rights revert in the case of a sale is annoying. They even have a section for Gardner vs Nike to ensure that the rights transfer.

Excerpt from the 2011 contract:

23. ASSIGNMENT.

23.a. SPE’s Right to Assign. Subject to Section 23.b hereof, SPE shall be free to assign or license any or all of its rights hereunder, and/or to delegate any or all of its duties, obligations and liabilities, at any time and from time to time, to any person or entity. Upon such assignment, SPE shall be released and discharged of and from the delegated duties, obligations and liabilities if such assignment and/or delegation is to: (i) a person or entity into which SPE merges or is consolidated; or (ii) a person or entity which acquires all or substantially all of SPE’s business and assets and which assumes such obligations in writing; or (iii) a financially responsible entity which is controlled by, under common control with, or controls SPE which assumes such obligations in writing; or (iv) a “Major Studio“ (i.e., and expressly defined as limited to: Warner Bros., Fox, Disney, Paramount, Universal, or DreamWorks) or United States television network, which assumes such obligations in writing. Any purported assignment by SPE in violation of this Section 23 shall be void ab initio.

23.b. Limitations. SPE may not assign this Agreement in its entirety except to (i) a person or entity into which SPE merges or is consolidated, or (ii) a person or entity which acquires all or substantially all of SPE’s business and assets and which assumes such obligations in writing, or (iii) a person or entity which is controlled by, under common control with, or controls SPE, or (iv) a Major Studio which assumes such obligations in writing. SPE may not assign its right to produce any Production to, or enter into a co-production agreement with, any entity except (i) any of the entities described in Section 23.b(i) - (iv) hereof, or (ii) in connection a transaction pursuant to which (A) SPE has creative control over the applicable Production, and (B) SPE initially controls all United States distribution rights with respect to the applicable Production and either controls or has the right to obtain (e.g., through the exercise of one or more options) such United States distribution rights for the entire term of copyright. Upon any assignment or delegation permitted under Section 23.b(i) - (iv) above, SPE shall be released and discharged of and from the delegated duties, obligations and liabilities.

23.c. Gardner v. Nike. Notwithstanding any contrary provision of this Agreement, SPE shall have the unrestricted right to assign or license to any person or entity, on either an exclusive or non-exclusive basis, or otherwise exploit, any or all rights, licenses or privileges with respect to each and every Production produced hereunder by such manner and means and on such terms and conditions as SPE deems appropriate, including without limitation the assignment or licensing of any exhibition, performance, broadcasting, or distribution rights to exhibitors, broadcasters, subdistributors, consumers, end-users and other Persons and the granting to other Persons of the right to further license or assign the rights granted to them by SPE. Nothing contained in this Agreement is intended to limit or restrict in any manner the full and unrestricted exercise by SPE (and its licensees) of the Productions as SPE deems appropriate, and this Section 23.c is intended by the parties to be a specific consent by Marvel to such licensing and assignment (and further licensing and assignment by SPE and its assignees and licensees) and to overcome any restrictions on such licensing or assignment arising under the case Gardner v. Nike.
 

Neoxon

Community Resettler
Member
Oct 25, 2017
27,781
Houston, TX
Unless it changed in 2015 or later then the rights are transferable. This FUD BS that the rights revert in the case of a sale is annoying. They even have a section for Gardner vs Nike to ensure that the rights transfer.

Excerpt from the 2011 contract:
Thanks for the correction. I guess that would explain Disney's potential desire to buy the rights wholesale.
 

UnderSiege

Member
Mar 5, 2019
296
I don't see why the BW movie has to set up stuff for the future of the MCU to be interesting. I mean, I get it, it's a big part of why the MCU thrives, but a movie should merit its own existence. Natasha may be dead, but a good movie about her is still a good movie. Regarding already knowing the outcome.. I mean, you could predict the outcomes of most MCU movies before seeing them. Doesn't make them any less engaging.
 

jph139

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,395
Massachusetts
I've been pretty down on Taskmaster so far from set pics and all, but if he skews close to that concept art in the final film I can fuck with it.

And I'm vaguely interested in Black Widow but it's a definite "wait for streaming" movie for me, like Ant-Man and the Wasp.
 

Sandstar

Member
Oct 28, 2017
2,871
I don't see why the BW movie has to set up stuff for the future of the MCU to be interesting. I mean, I get it, it's a big part of why the MCU thrives, but a movie should merit its own existence. Natasha may be dead, but a good movie about her is still a good movie. Regarding already knowing the outcome.. I mean, you could predict the outcomes of most MCU movies before seeing them. Doesn't make them any less engaging.
I'm not saying that it *has* to, to be interesting. I'm interested in it simply to find out what Widow was up to between Civil War and IW. That's compelling enough for me. But it's not compelling enough for others, and I guess i understand that.. But if they don't find BW to be compelling, they could find the universe compelling, and it almost certainly sets up stuff in for the future MCU, as well as maybe finally telling us what happened in Bucharest. I agree with everything you said. A good movie is a good movie.
 

JayCB

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,126
Wales
Tasky is the selling point for Black Widow for me honestly. I really hope he's done well - and more importantly not killed off. I can't really think where else he could pop up in the current MCU schedule mind..but still.

Maybe in one of the shows? Could work in Falcon/Winter Soldier?

edit - actually is Black Widow out before or after that? I'm sick atm and my brain can't fathom dates.
 

Sandstar

Member
Oct 28, 2017
2,871
Tasky is the selling point for Black Widow for me honestly. I really hope he's done well - and more importantly not killed off. I can't really think where else he could pop up in the current MCU schedule mind..but still.

Maybe in one of the shows? Could work in Falcon/Winter Soldier?

edit - actually is Black Widow out before or after that? I'm sick atm and my brain can't fathom dates.
before, may 2020 versus fall 2020. be nice if they set up US Agent, too. Maybe Taskmaster turns out to be USAgent.
 
Last edited:

Darlinggirl05

Member
Aug 14, 2019
74
The Aniston and Martin interviews really have me hollering, Endgames numbers really got people in their feelings huh? Lmao niggas going wild and doing their darnest to make J*ker this untouchable masterpiece compared to the mcu when it's ok at best just like everyother goddamn mcu film....

They really need to ask themselves why they're losing it over some nerd shenanigans I-

Chile anyways black widow coming for 1 billion + ETERNALS 800+ milli hihihi
 

Alecs27

Member
Dec 23, 2017
76
Random bed thought. What if Spiderman 3 has Octopus as enemy (to set him up as the leader of S6) and the last movie on the contract of Holland is a New Avengers vs the Sinister Six?
Kraven could be a villain in Black Panther 2 to return in the New Avengers. I Imagine the Sinister 6 to be the likes of Mysterio, Vulture, Octopus, Scorpion, Kraven and shocker, against the group of the new avengers, with Doctor Strange, Captain America (Falcon), Spiderman, Black Panther and Ant Man and Wasp.
 

mreddie

Member
Oct 26, 2017
13,259
The Aniston thing is so funny because she was in like 20 rom coms in 10 years? Only 3-4 Marvel films a year (next year 2!) and suddenly she draws a line? DC had 2 this year.
 

Trup1aya

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,757
$4-5 billion is right where I imagine Sony would value the Spider-Man IP. But I can't imagine why Disney would be willing to pay that much. It'll take forever to be able to recoup that amount via spider-man films - even if they committed to doing 1 additional film a year.

There’s a lot of things they could spend $4-5 billion on that would offer better margins than these films.
 

Pachimari

Member
Oct 25, 2017
10,786

"Now I'm going with a Marvel movie. I'm going on to play a superhero, which is cool. I don't know what I can say about it, I'm scared to sort of even mention it," Harington said at first before detailing a play he wanted to join. "I'm trying to choose things as far away from Jon Snow as possible, but I'm playing a superhero and he's got a sword."
I also didn't know how much Jon Favreau and Robert Downey Jr actually improvised a huge part of the first Iron Man, so much as to call the writers in their trailers to come up with something, and for RDJ to act out Jeff Bridges' scenes. Kinda puts it in a slightly different perspective for me now, incredible how they pulled it off.