SONY Edges MARVEL Out of Future SPIDER-MAN Movies - Report

rhcooprhcoop Knoxville, Tn
https://www.newsarama.com/46597-sony-edges-marvel-out-of-future-spider-man-movies-report.html?utm_source=notification

This could have massive effects on the MCU moving forward if this isn't sorted out.

I think that this is all negotiating moves by Sony to get a sweeter deal and this will get handled eventually and life will move on. 

However, if they don't, its going to be awfully hard to sell an Avengers franchise with its biggest stars/characters (Cap, IM and Thor) MIA without Spider-Man to anchor it.  

I don't think subs for those characters will work long term for Avengers films. It never has in the comics, but that is just my opinion.  

Marvel might want to think about speeding up those X-Men and FF reboot plans and possibly face the idea of recasting the big 3. 

It will be interesting to follow. 
«13

Comments

  • HunkuleseHunkulese Québec, Canada
    Just more proof that Disney really is the evilest company in the entertainment world.
    rhcoopkojiattwoodnstinsonABevs
  • I don't care who's to blame.  Personally, I don't like this version of Spiderman so I'm all for booting him out of the ongoing MCU.  If for nobody else in the world, for me this is good news :)
    nstinsoniMatty94
  • Seems like everyone on a twitter is blaming Sony but I personally say good on them for standing up to the mouse. 
    darwinfeeshykojiattwoodnstinson
  • rhcoop said:
    However, if they don't, its going to be awfully hard to sell an Avengers franchise with its biggest stars/characters (Cap, IM and Thor) MIA without Spider-Man to anchor it.  

    I don't think subs for those characters will work long term for Avengers films. It never has in the comics, but that is just my opinion. 
    Spiderman, at least, has only very recently been a member of the Avengers, so the team works without him.  And while, in the comics, the team always reverts to form, I think film audiences are vocally disinterested in reboots and have proven willing to go along for the ongoing MCU macro-story.  There are still a ton of characters from Avengers history that haven't been introduced, like Gorilla-Man, lol.  It's not about the characters on screen but the actors who portray them.  Remember, nobody cared about Iron Man before RDJ, and nobody really expected any of these characters to endure on screen like they have.  Frankly, I think the MCU is better off and way more interesting without Spiderman, or the Xmen, but that's just me. Fantastic Four, I think would work better in the MCU.  Ok, done with the hot nerd takes.
  • JaimieTJaimieT Atlanta, GA
    Grace Randolph (Beyond the Trailer, YouTube) said that negotiations are still going on and one side probably leaked this headline to apply pressure on the other. I've followed her industry talk for a while and I'm inclined to believe she's exactly right.
    hisdudeness915stevenduran1240
  • JaimieTJaimieT Atlanta, GA
    Worth watching if anyone is interested.


    darwinfeeshy
  • if i read it correctly it seems Sony just wants to keep the same deal as is. Marvel is getting greedy saying its success its based on the MCU so it should get a bigger share. if Sony is just wanting to keep the same deal then im siding with them. 
    rhcoop
  • HunkuleseHunkulese Québec, Canada
    Hatorian said:
    if i read it correctly it seems Sony just wants to keep the same deal as is. Marvel is getting greedy saying its success its based on the MCU so it should get a bigger share. if Sony is just wanting to keep the same deal then im siding with them. 
    It's 100% Disney being a giant asshole and ruining something that was great for everyone. It still blows my mind that Disney does heinous stuff with pretty much everything they touch, yet everyone still seems to love them. It's baffling how many people are mad at Sony over this.

    The deal they had was still super sweet for Disney. They were basically getting free money and creative control over a license they didn't have and have no chance of getting, and they got to throw him in their movies.
    rhcoopkojiattwood
  • If I’m Sony I’d pull out if Disney goes too far. You got Tom Holland and I’m sure there’s plenty of quality writers and directors out there that now have 30+ Super hero movies of experience to draw on. They don’t need Disney. Spidey’s villian catalogue is probably the best marvel set of villains so it’s not like they even need the MCU. 

    Tell Disney to fuck off. Make the next Spider-Man without them and ONLY have Venom. (Act like the venom movie never happened). Then easy sequel is maximum Carnage. Then you spend the next 10 years building up the sinister 6 and boom. You have your own mini spider universe with at least a good 5-6 movies in 10 years. And you get an epic climax of Spider-Man battling the Sinister 6. All probably making a billion if done right. 
  • rhcooprhcoop Knoxville, Tn
    ken hale said:
    Spiderman, at least, has only very recently been a member of the Avengers, so the team works without him.  And while, in the comics, the team always reverts to form, I think film audiences are vocally disinterested in reboots and have proven willing to go along for the ongoing MCU macro-story.  There are still a ton of characters from Avengers history that haven't been introduced, like Gorilla-Man, lol.  It's not about the characters on screen but the actors who portray them.  Remember, nobody cared about Iron Man before RDJ, and nobody really expected any of these characters to endure on screen like they have.  Frankly, I think the MCU is better off and way more interesting without Spiderman, or the Xmen, but that's just me. Fantastic Four, I think would work better in the MCU.  Ok, done with the hot nerd takes.
    I think if you want a successful MCU you can survive for a while without the core Avengers, but you eventually need at least Cap and Thor (I think Iron Man as well) back if they are going to build towards another major storyline like Secret Wars, Secret Invasion or AvX.   

    Spider-Man was most likely planned to be the POV and anchor character for the next major storyline like Cap and Tony where for the first 20 plus movies.  Without him, they really need to go ahead and cast Wolverine and introduce him into the MCU sooner rather than later.   I like the FF, but I don't know if they have as much star power as the X-Men characters do. 

    Black Panther is very popular, but I don't know if he can pull the rest of the MCU along with him and I don't see Carol Danvers or Falcon/Bucky as great answers either.  Neither of the actors playing Bucky or Falcon have proven they can carry a movie or they would have by now with all the exposure the MCU movies have provided.

    I get what you are saying about them having lots of characters, but I don't know if anyone is excited about seeing a Great Lakes Avengers movie headlined with C or D list characters for more than one movie.  GofG was a surprise, but you can't expect to catch lightning in a bottle consistently. 

    I just think you'll have increasingly diminished stakes the more you move away from the important main characters, but that is just me.  

    If they lose Spiderman for good (which I seriously doubt really happens, Disney will cave in), they should consider rebooting after this next phase and recast the core avengers and start from scratch with the Avengers, FF and X-Men all together from the beginning IMO. 
    ken hale
  • Doctor_NickDoctor_Nick Terminus
    edited August 21
    Hunkulese said:
    Hatorian said:
    if i read it correctly it seems Sony just wants to keep the same deal as is. Marvel is getting greedy saying its success its based on the MCU so it should get a bigger share. if Sony is just wanting to keep the same deal then im siding with them. 
    It's 100% Disney being a giant asshole and ruining something that was great for everyone. It still blows my mind that Disney does heinous stuff with pretty much everything they touch, yet everyone still seems to love them. It's baffling how many people are mad at Sony over this.

    The deal they had was still super sweet for Disney. They were basically getting free money and creative control over a license they didn't have and have no chance of getting, and they got to throw him in their movies.
    I don't know 5% of the gross sounds pretty bad for making you a Spider Man movie that wasn't sucking wind...  The movie makes a billion dollars and Disney gets 50 million dollars for producing?  I can see why a renegotiation is necessary as Sony is bringing 0 to the table other than a well negotiated licensing agreement.  
    JaimieT
  • rhcoop said:

    I get what you are saying about them having lots of characters, but I don't know if anyone is excited about seeing a Great Lakes Avengers movie headlined with C or D list characters for more than one movie.  GofG was a surprise, but you can't expect to catch lightning in a bottle consistently. 

    I just think you'll have increasingly diminished stakes the more you move away from the important main characters, but that is just me.  


    I think Ironman, Captain America, and Thor were C-lister's until MCU. GoG likely the D-lister characters. Not long ago nobody was excited about movies with those characters, let alone huge 10-year 20-movie story arcs. If they can transform them into the characters that we feel we have to have in the movies/plot going forward than they can do it with any character. I remember after being blown away by Ironman they announced that they were making Captain America and Thor movies next. At the time I thought "well, that sounds kinda dumb, so much for that..."

    With the arguably A-list characters on the way in the form of X-men and FF I now have little doubt Marvel studios can keep our attention. As mentioned by others, it's not the characters as much as the casting of the right actor and the right story/material. So far Marvel has mostly nailed it to perfection.
    ken hale
  • Fantastic Four, Silver Surfer and Galactus slot right into Kree-Skrull War / Captain Marvel/ Nova / GoTG.....

    Not to mention someone needs to get Doctor Doom up and running, talk about A#1 villains.  
    DoubleA_Ron
  • edited August 21
    Hunkulese said:
    Hatorian said:
    if i read it correctly it seems Sony just wants to keep the same deal as is. Marvel is getting greedy saying its success its based on the MCU so it should get a bigger share. if Sony is just wanting to keep the same deal then im siding with them. 
    It's 100% Disney being a giant asshole and ruining something that was great for everyone. It still blows my mind that Disney does heinous stuff with pretty much everything they touch, yet everyone still seems to love them. It's baffling how many people are mad at Sony over this.

    The deal they had was still super sweet for Disney. They were basically getting free money and creative control over a license they didn't have and have no chance of getting, and they got to throw him in their movies.
    I don't know 5% of the gross sounds pretty bad for making you a Spider Man movie that wasn't sucking wind...  The movie makes a billion dollars and Disney gets 50 million dollars for producing?  I can see why a renegotiation is necessary as Sony is bringing 0 to the table other than a well negotiated licensing agreement.  
    Sony was fully financing the solo Spider-Man MCU films and paying for the marketing of them. So they weren't bringing 0 to the table and 5% is more than fair. Plus under what was their deal, Disney got all the money from merchandising which obliterates the money Sony was making off Homecoming or Far From Home. And more Sony doesn't get any box office grosses from any other MCU film that features Spider-Man. So yeah sounds to me like Disney is being a little greedy here.

    I don't deny that I am concerned that if this completely falls through that Sony will muck up the live action Spider-Man films but I also don't blame them for not taking the deal even though Disney was also offering to pay 50% of the production costs of future solo entries.
    Hatorian
  • rhcooprhcoop Knoxville, Tn
    redlancer said:
    rhcoop said:




    I think Ironman, Captain America, and Thor were C-lister's until MCU. GoG likely the D-lister characters. Not long ago nobody was excited about movies with those characters, let alone huge 10-year 20-movie story arcs. If they can transform them into the characters that we feel we have to have in the movies/plot going forward than they can do it with any character. I remember after being blown away by Ironman they announced that they were making Captain America and Thor movies next. At the time I thought "well, that sounds kinda dumb, so much for that..."

    Iron Man and Thor were B list, but Cap has always been A list and one of Marvel's oldest and most popular characters.  That's why Kirby and Stan brought him back way back in Avengers 4, they needed more star power on the team.  Don't forget Cap had a long running golden age comics from back in the 40's like Superman and Batman. 

    Spider-Man, FF, Hulk and Cap were always their most recognizable heroes until the Clairmont/Byrne era X-Men and then those characters took off. 
  • Teresa from ConcordTeresa from Concord Concord, California
    I liked Spider Man better before they started to Iron Man him up. If that was Disney's idea, then I'm all for Spider Man going 100% back to Sony.
    rhcoopAww_PHuuCkken hale
  • I liked Spider Man better before they started to Iron Man him up. If that was Disney's idea, then I'm all for Spider Man going 100% back to Sony.
    Based on the direction the character has taken the last decade or so in the comics, that was Marvel’s doing. I don’t really trust them with their own character, sadly. Sony did a much better of understanding what drives him in Spiderverse. 

    Again, I hope this news is real and not just a public negotiation. I really think it’s win-win for both franchises. 
    Teresa from ConcordAww_PHuuCk
  • HunkuleseHunkulese Québec, Canada
    edited August 21
    Hunkulese said:
    Hatorian said:
    if i read it correctly it seems Sony just wants to keep the same deal as is. Marvel is getting greedy saying its success its based on the MCU so it should get a bigger share. if Sony is just wanting to keep the same deal then im siding with them. 
    It's 100% Disney being a giant asshole and ruining something that was great for everyone. It still blows my mind that Disney does heinous stuff with pretty much everything they touch, yet everyone still seems to love them. It's baffling how many people are mad at Sony over this.

    The deal they had was still super sweet for Disney. They were basically getting free money and creative control over a license they didn't have and have no chance of getting, and they got to throw him in their movies.
    I don't know 5% of the gross sounds pretty bad for making you a Spider Man movie that wasn't sucking wind...  The movie makes a billion dollars and Disney gets 50 million dollars for producing?  I can see why a renegotiation is necessary as Sony is bringing 0 to the table other than a well negotiated licensing agreement.  
    Sony was financing 100% of the Spider-Man movies and they were doing fine without Marvel. Every Spider-Man movie they've made besides Spider-Verse has made at least 700 million. Of course Sony was benefitting from Disney's involvement, but definitely not to the extent that they should be agreeing to a new deal where they'd be making hundreds of millions less than if they just went back to making their own movies.

    From Disney's side, they were getting 50 million in basically free money and getting to use an extremely popular character that they don't own the rights to in their most important movies. It doesn't get much more greedy than that.
    rhcoopHatorian
  • Sony had just released the disappointing second Garfield Spiderman movie and were in danger of heading into Fox X-Men territory, that's why they turned to Marvel in the first place.  And Disney is more than happy to put up the money for the films.  Sony's contribution to these movies has been.... superfluous.    
    JaimieTBloodyTaco
  • HunkuleseHunkulese Québec, Canada
    Sony had just released the disappointing second Garfield Spiderman movie and were in danger of heading into Fox X-Men territory, that's why they turned to Marvel in the first place.  And Disney is more than happy to put up the money for the films.  Sony's contribution to these movies has been.... superfluous.    
    Not sure what any of that has to do with anything. The disappointing Spider-Man movie still made over 700 million. Sony also didn't come to Marvel, it was the other way around as was revealed in the hacked emails. Of course Disney would be happy to put up money for the films, anyone would be, but they don't own the rights to Spider-Man.

    I don't know how you can say their contribution is superfluous. The movies were made by Sony, the movies were financed by Sony, the movies were distributed by Sony, and Sony had complete creative control. 
    rhcoop
  • These are big companies trying to do what’s best for themselves. I trust Marvel to make better movies consistently based on past performance so this is a risk for Sony, but if they can build this property out with good writing/directing/casting/production then good for them.

    Marvel will figure out how to use their other characters to make entertaining movies so it’s not like it’s the end of the MCU or anything. MCU has brought in >$22billion in worldwide box office since 2008 so Marvel certainly brings something of value to the table. Association with the MCU also pays dividends in DVD/digital and broadcast/streaming revenue as well especially with the new Disney+ platform coming. Big risk for Sony to go it alone, but potential big reward if they can treat the property right.
  • to disney:



    as others mentioned Disney is getting a hell of a deal. being able to put Spiderman into the MCU was huge. all they had to do was provide the story while Sony picked up everything else. And honestly the story for both Spidey's sort of sucked. the first one fucked the timeline up and the second was a horrible villian reveal. 
    rhcoop
  • HunkuleseHunkulese Québec, Canada
    LordBy said:
    These are big companies trying to do what’s best for themselves. I trust Marvel to make better movies consistently based on past performance so this is a risk for Sony, but if they can build this property out with good writing/directing/casting/production then good for them.

    Marvel will figure out how to use their other characters to make entertaining movies so it’s not like it’s the end of the MCU or anything. MCU has brought in >$22billion in worldwide box office since 2008 so Marvel certainly brings something of value to the table. Association with the MCU also pays dividends in DVD/digital and broadcast/streaming revenue as well especially with the new Disney+ platform coming. Big risk for Sony to go it alone, but potential big reward if they can treat the property right.
    It's not a risk by Sony at all. They still have Tom Holland and Jon Watts. Tom Holland's Spider-Man is also at the perfect spot in Spider-Man's career that they could pretty much do any Spider-Man story they want. If they took the safest possible route and just did another Green Goblin movie, it would be a huge success.

    Ending the partnership with Disney might mean the next movie doesn't get to a billion, but it'll still have a shot. There's also pretty much zero chance it makes less than 700 million with the momentum Spider-Man has right now. So even if it's the worst-case scenario and it only makes 700 million, that's much, much better than doing a 50/50 partnership with Disney. Spider-Man is by far Sony's most profitable franchise and it would be silly to split it. It'd be like Disney agreeing to a 50/50 split with someone else for the next Star Wars trilogy.
    Hatorianrhcoop
  • Agree the next movie should be fine for Sony from a profitability perspective. The risk is the next 5-10 movies. Spider-Man would have been in at least that many in the next couple of phases of the MCU. If the next movie isn’t great, then Sony will have rapidly diminishing returns without a production partner or the cushion of other MCU characters/goodwill.

    I wish them the best and I hope they don’t fall into the hole that X-Men, and to some extent DC, has worked themselves into. Holland is great, no actor can carry substandard scripts/direction or carry a franchise through inconsistent creative direction.
  • Under the original deal, Disney got 5% of opening weekend, not gross box office numbers and had creative control while 95% went to Sony, but Sony finance the whole movie. 
    The proposed deal was 50/50 split both profit wise and cost wise. Disney would still own the merch rights, which they own when they brought Marvel as a whole. Sony opt out of these rights for some reason when they brought Spiderman.
    I don't think Spiderman movie without Disney would do well in the box office due to fan backlash. There will be consist reminder that Spiderman isn't in the MCU with 3 MCU Movies a year and Disney+ shows. MCU won't be able to reference Spiderman and vice-versa. I think it's irresponsible from storytelling to come up with a deal. MCU has plan for Spiderman from the ending to Far From Home, making him one of the core avengers characters, and introducing 2/6 sinister six members. There is speculation that Miles Morales will be introduce later in the MCU due to Donald Glover's character in Homecoming and that Mysterio didn't really die.
  • I don't think this is true at all.  Given Hollywood accounting I think Sony comes out at best equal owning all of a 700 million dollar movie versus splitting on a 1 billion dollar movie.  And the real risk is if they head into an X-Men downward spiral and get caught having to make a movie every few years just to keep the license again.  

    Hunkulese said:
     There's also pretty much zero chance it makes less than 700 million with the momentum Spider-Man has right now. So even if it's the worst-case scenario and it only makes 700 million, that's much, much better than doing a 50/50 partnership with Disney. Spider-Man is by far Sony's most profitable franchise and it would be silly to split it. It'd be like Disney agreeing to a 50/50 split with someone else for the next Star Wars trilogy.

  • HunkuleseHunkulese Québec, Canada
    edited August 22
    It seems like the 5% number that's going around is actually from their 2004 agreement. It looks like their last agreement in 2015 let Marvel use Spider-Man in their movies for free and Marvel wouldn't get anything from Sony's Spider-Man movies.

    https://variety.com/2015/film/news/details-spider-man-appear-in-sony-and-marvel-movies-1201429039/

    Something about their disagreement doesn't make a lot of sense. Considering how prominently they've been building Spider-Man up to be a focal point of the new MCU, including rumours that Norman Osborne could be the next big bad, it doesn't really make sense for Disney to try and strong-arm Sony at this point when they already had an amazing deal. Besides the fans, Disney is by far the biggest loser in the breakdown of the partnership.

    If I had to guess, I bet Disney wanted Spider-Man and the Spider-Man villains to be a major part of the MCU and were looking to take over production of everything Spider-Man and wanted to relegate Sony to nothing more than an investor.

    rhcoop
  • It’s very simple. If you own the IP you bet on yourself. I would put all my savings on the line saying even the worst Spider-Man movie hasn’t lost money. There’s no reason to give it up. And there’s no reason not to risk betting you can make a billion dollar movie and get 100% profit than handing it over to someone else and only getting 50% of that profit. 
    rhcoop
  • rhcooprhcoop Knoxville, Tn
    Hatorian said:
    It’s very simple. If you own the IP you bet on yourself. I would put all my savings on the line saying even the worst Spider-Man movie hasn’t lost money. There’s no reason to give it up. And there’s no reason not to risk betting you can make a billion dollar movie and get 100% profit than handing it over to someone else and only getting 50% of that profit. 
    Correct, here is the thing. I'm sure this will all get worked out and Disney is going to have to settle for not getting exactly what they want in a deal for once.

    Or they can give it a go w/o a major tentpole hero to build their other characters around until they get the X-Men going.

    I am very sure this will all get settled and frankly, it's not a bad thing that Disney isn't in complete control of everything.  
  • JaimieTJaimieT Atlanta, GA
    I don't think Disney expects 50/50. You ask for more, negotiate down. Even getting 10/90 is a win. 
Sign In or Register to comment.