Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 58

Thread: Spider-Man Out Of The MCU (Thanks To Sony)

  1. #11
    the MCU is not a single universe. it's a multiverse. (its an MCM now; not an MCU).



    the appeal of the MCU was having all these characters in a "single universe" -- but that's not going to happen anyways -- it's not a single universe anymore, so what difference does it make?
    "Is there anyone on this ship, who even remotely, looks like Satan?" -- James Kirk, U.S.S. Enterprise.

  2. #12
    Maybe. All the Multiverse talk in Spidey 2 was bs. The characters have theorized it, but even in Endgame, they established they were not creating an alternate timeline. I'm not sure how ignoring Peter considering everything that happened in Far From Home will be a good thing for Sony or the fans.

    Having a Multiverse won't help them with this problem either. Also Disney took Spidey off the trash heap after those awful films and made them bank. Asking for 50/50 maybe a bit much, but thinking 5 percent was good enough is stupid.
    Last edited by lotjx; 08-21-2019 at 11:39 AM.

  3. #13
    Sony was already "making bank" -- that was never the problem.

    "Spiderman3" made $890million at the world box office (NOT adjusted for inflation); "homecoming" only made $880million *shrug*

    (despite the hype over spidey joining the MCU , Raimi's WORST spiderman film still made MORE than Marvel's first spiderman film -- the hype was unfounded, if strictly from a "make bank" POV)

    https://www.boxofficemojo.com/franch...=spiderman.htm

    I think Sony will still "make bank" for themselves, WITHOUT giving 50% to the house-of-Mouse. LOL




    (and/or : in order for this "50%" deal to make sense for Sony , the Marvel Movies would need to increase the total box office by more than 2x on each film, to justify their share -- and this hasn't happened: "Far From Home" only brought in ~120% of Spiderman3)

    (if I'm Sony , then I'd rather own 100% of spiderman3@890million , vs. 50% of farfromhome@1.1billion -- do the math) LOL
    Last edited by Cobalt60; 08-21-2019 at 01:30 PM.
    "Is there anyone on this ship, who even remotely, looks like Satan?" -- James Kirk, U.S.S. Enterprise.

  4. #14
    Spiderman 3 was at the height of Spiderman this Century. The movie was awful and still made bank. What about Amazing Spiderman 1 and 2, 1 did ok, but they legit thought about canning everything after 2. It was only after the Sony hack revealed that Marvel wanted Spidey for Avengers 1 and the amount they could have made was roughly the same for a five minute cameo. Even then it took the Sony hack to embarrass them to put Spiderman in Civil War. I don't think they also want to pay to make these films, because ILM is probably not an option anymore. They make $600 million, but it will cost $300 million to make another $200 million to market it. When they could just sit by and not do much will making more money.
    Last edited by lotjx; 08-21-2019 at 02:54 PM.

  5. #15
    Read these little tidbits and you'll see yeas Disney wanted more but they had to fix the ******** mess that Sony made because they have NO clue..

    https://nypost.com/2019/04/08/hedgie...ment-division/

    And it would make sense for them to do this but....

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/markhug.../#5a281e9e6b50

    Does anyone think they will do the later and sell for a profit?

  6. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by Cobalt60 View Post
    Sony was already "making bank" -- that was never the problem.

    "Spiderman3" made $890million at the world box office (NOT adjusted for inflation); "homecoming" only made $880million *shrug*

    (despite the hype over spidey joining the MCU , Raimi's WORST spiderman film still made MORE than Marvel's first spiderman film -- the hype was unfounded, if strictly from a "make bank" POV)

    https://www.boxofficemojo.com/franch...=spiderman.htm

    I think Sony will still "make bank" for themselves, WITHOUT giving 50% to the house-of-Mouse. LOL




    (and/or : in order for this "50%" deal to make sense for Sony , the Marvel Movies would need to increase the total box office by more than 2x on each film, to justify their share -- and this hasn't happened: "Far From Home" only brought in ~120% of Spiderman3)

    (if I'm Sony , then I'd rather own 100% of spiderman3@890million , vs. 50% of farfromhome@1.1billion -- do the math) LOL
    Keep in mind that, along with requesting 50% of the gross, Disney was also offering to take on 50% of the marketing and production costs ... something that they currently aren't responsible for. Also, these negotiations were due to the agreement coming to an end. Disney didn't suddenly pull Sony into a room demanding more money on the existing deal.
    I blame both studios, really. Does Disney deserve more than 5% of the gross on a film that they basically have total creative control over? Absolutely ... especially when a large part of that success is due to their ideas and the fact these films tie into the overall MCU. Was Disney being a bit of a **** asking for 50%, even if they take on 50% of the cost as well? Umm, yeah. It's quite a jump. Regardless, the fans lose out on this ... especially considering the cliffhanger that Far From Home ended on. I hope that cooler heads can still prevail. I guess we'll see.

  7. #17
    Honestly it sounds like a lot of B S & in the end Kevin may not be the executive producer anymore but someone from Marvel will be. It’s about how much they are willing to pay & what they want to keep

    either after this blows over
    Spiderman stays on The MCU
    he takes a AoS /Tv approach where he is in the world but not part of the main movie story
    or Sony does their own stuff & we have to hear for the next 2-3 years about how the next spider man movie will suck before anyone even sees it.
    This post was written is the sarcasm font. It looks like a regular font but contains sarcasm.
    Feedback BST
    I love this Bar! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fU3_zzZQzx0

  8. #18
    Kevin not being in charge of Marvel would be worse than losing Spiderman. He is a fan who gets it.

  9. #19
    Honestly?

    I see Spider-Man separate from the MCU in a lot of ways already. Yes he had a nice role in Infinity War and some excellent screen time in Endgame, AND his time in Civil War was pretty much perfect, BUT and this is a big BUT.... now that Stark is gone, what is Spider-Man's connection to the MCU? Fury is in space. Why NOT have Spider-Man go to the Venom-verse (or whatevs) and do the Sinister Six there? Sony can still use all the Spider-Man characters. Do we need any of the MCU heroes in the next couple Spider-Man movies? Don't you want to see Tom Holland vs. Tom Hardy? I sure do. If Sony can do Venom right, and now they have a pretty good template for how to do Spider-Man right.... I see this as a win win.

    The next slate of movies from the MCU does not require a webslinger. Give Sony a couple years to make their universe and then we can talk about Secret Wars

    I'm not 100% sold on this, maybe someone will change my mind.
    Last edited by keknivek; 08-21-2019 at 04:09 PM.
    "The Marvel and Transformers team must share a lunch table.
    Star Wars must have sat with GI Joe team." ~ indysolo007


    http://starwarslists.blogspot.com/

  10. #20
    Quote Originally Posted by Carnor_Jax View Post
    Read these little tidbits and you'll see yeas Disney wanted more but they had to fix the ******** mess that Sony made because they have NO clue..

    https://nypost.com/2019/04/08/hedgie...ment-division/

    And it would make sense for them to do this but....

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/markhug.../#5a281e9e6b50

    Does anyone think they will do the later and sell for a profit?
    this forbes piece is the most logical out there, which means no one will pay attention to it

Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •