OT: All things Marvel/MCU (Spoilers)

[Ruck Over]

Most of them, besides Sinister are noted or have already been used (Apocalypse).

Kang could be used in DrStrange because he tries to correct time. Endgame broke all the rules made in DrStrange about time.

I dislike Kang, because it is Franklin Richards, and it's a cluster of a story about a circular self-fulfilling prophecy in which arguably one of the 5 most powerful Marvel characters (up there with Sentry, Living Tribunal, X-Man, Galactus, purposefully excluding The One Above All) just takes up space and sucks, because Power Pack.

Franklin Richards is an example of too many hands in the cookie jar, and too much free acid spiking the milk.

 

[Hollywood Cannon]

When’s Batman gonna join up?

 

[Striiker]

Sony Kills Spider-Man Partnership Deal with Marvel Studios

 

[CapnZin]

This news isn’t that big... it was always thought that if Spider-Man’s new solo does well, Sony will back out. The only reason they did the partnership was due to Garfield’s colossal failure.

Maguire’s Spider-man grossed more than 2.5 billion in the box office and in royalties, however, this would make 0 sense for Sony to do this.

 

[Adam Warlock]

View attachment 250559
This news isn’t that big... it was always thought that if Spider-Man’s new solo does well, Sony will back out. The only reason they did the partnership was due to Garfield’s colossal failure.

Maguire’s Spider-man grossed more than 2.5 billion in the box office and in royalties, however, this would make 0 sense for Sony to do this.

I wonder if it has it occured to them that the success of Holland's spiderman might be because of Marvel's involvement. Theyre going to have a hard time keeping up the momentum without being able to reference anything MCU related that spiderman has been through.

Apparently Disney wanted to up their share to 50%...which I get...but come on. They cant take one for the fans?

I feel like this will get worked out though after the internet loses its shit.

 

[CapnZin]

I wonder if it has it occured to them that the success of Holland's spiderman might be because of Marvel's involvement. Theyre going to have a hard time keeping up the momentum without being able to reference anything MCU related that spiderman has been through.

Apparently Disney wanted to up their share to 50%...which I get...but come on. They cant take one for the fans?

I feel like this will get worked out though after the internet loses its ****.

Nah, Sony released Far From Home, not Marvel. Marvel, I’m not 100%, released Homecoming. Sony raked in all the profits, however, Marvel wants the movie rights in full, where Sony wants half of the split. Marvels involvement was that Fiege (Marvel) produced them.

It may have been Marvels genius which brought Spider-Man over the top, but imo it’s Tom Holland. Again, McGuire’s couple of movies did 1 billion more than Far From Home. It really depends on the actor and story line. What is weird to me is how Sony incorporates the new Spider-Man timeline with Aunt May and the Osborn saga because they own those rights where the villains they were going to use and complimentary characters (She-Hulk, Deadpool, and Venom) belong to Marvel. The structure will definitely change. They’ll have to go the ‘Red Goblin’ route because in that verse, his friend Ned becomes the red goblin. That’s the only way I can see it going forward.

Marvel had 2 movies under contract, but the director is typically employed by Sony AND he doesn’t have a contract at all... they can still use Spider-Man in movies, but just not a solo. This is a leveraged negotiation by Marvel. If they drive out Holland, Sony sinks. This is a good ploy. It will get resolved.

 

[Adam Warlock]

Nah, Sony released Far From Home, not Marvel. Marvel, I’m not 100%, released Homecoming. Sony raked in all the profits, however, Marvel wants the movie rights in full, where Sony wants half of the split. Marvels involvement was that Fiege (Marvel) produced them.

It may have been Marvels genius which brought Spider-Man over the top, but imo it’s Tom Holland. Again, McGuire’s couple of movies did 1 billion more than Far From Home. It really depends on the actor and story line. What is weird to me is how Sony incorporates the new Spider-Man timeline with Aunt May and the Osborn saga because they own those rights where the villains they were going to use and complimentary characters (She-Hulk, Deadpool, and Venom) belong to Marvel. The structure will definitely change. They’ll have to go the ‘Red Goblin’ route because in that verse, his friend Ned becomes the red goblin. That’s the only way I can see it going forward.

Marvel had 2 movies under contract, but the director is typically employed by Sony AND he doesn’t have a contract at all... they can still use Spider-Man in movies, but just not a solo. This is a leveraged negotiation by Marvel. If they drive out Holland, Sony sinks. This is a good ploy. It will get resolved.

Where are you getting that Marvel wants the rights in full?

From Collider:

Sony, led by Tom Rothman and Tony Vinciquerra, reportedly turned down an offer by Disney of a 50/50 co-financing deal on future Spider-Man projects, a deal that may have stretched into other MCU entries in which the character appeared. Under the current deal, Marvel gets around 5% of first-dollar gross.

Spidey is a Sony property...but in order to rebound after the Garfield movies, they agreed to let him be used in the MCU. So basically Marvel became in charge of the creative end while Sony profited getting 95% from the solo movies. Disney/Marvel now wants to bump up their percentage to 50% from 5, which is a huge ask. Sony owns Spidey so they can walk away from that offer.

 

[CapnZin]

Where are you getting that Marvel wants the rights in full?

—

So basically Marvel became in charge of the creative end while Sony profited getting 95% from the solo movies. Disney/Marvel now wants to bump up their percentage to 50% from 5, which is a huge ask. Sony owns Spidey so they can walk away from that offer.

2 contracts of solo, Tom has 6 total on his deal. 2 of which are already gone. I read that article, but they left out the production procedure which doesn’t necessarily grant the .05¢ on every dollar. Since Fiege produced it, his range was salaried then based on royalties and marketing.

I don’t have a ‘source’, but it’s the same situation as the hulk. Marvel wanted to take hulk and do their own movie, but Universal wouldn’t grant the rights given the negotiation. What did they do- they put tons of man hours to reboot the Thor series and gave hulk a big part in it (Ragnarok). Just read movie notes where Marvel was thinking about cutting Thor and Hulk of Ragnarok did poorly- they had to set up infinity war, though. It’s a ploy by Marvel and they won. Norton was bad as hulk and he required a bigger contract to do it and it hurt Universal.
Marvel could look for the same with Holland. He has 4 movies left as spider man (2 solo and 2 cameo- you can fact check me, I might be wrong).

Using other metrics, post-Avengers introduction, Holland’s Spider-Man is the highest ‘grossing’ superhero for movie, royalties (FX plays, on average, 3 spider man movies per any other avenger related movie). Sony is taking the bet that watts will direct another masterpiece, BUT ON A SONY STORYLINE, not Marvel. That’s a big difference. After that, Holland can restructure his contract after leaving which will hurt Sony.

I work on deals like this for competitors. Usually, the Sony party bets in themselves and they have every reason to. The Marvel party takes the long hedge that the restructuring drives them out of the market- ie: Hulk. Who else owns rights... marvel, just not movie rights. So they can use him given the contracts.

It’s a ploy. It will get resolved. I think we agree a little, but we’re taking the long route to get there.

 

[Rebels57]

I will not be seeing a non-MCU Sony Spiderman movie out of principal. These idiots need to get their heads out of their ass and fix this.

 

[CapnZin]

A top trend on twitter at the moment is '#boycottsony'.

 

[Hollywood Cannon]

Isn’t it Marvel’s fault for making the power play though?

Or am I just too casual?

 

[Captain Dave Poulin]

Isn’t it Marvel’s fault for making the power play though?

Or am I just too casual?

You half-assing it, bro?

 

[Ruck Over]

Isn’t it Marvel’s fault for making the power play though?

Or am I just too casual?

Are these mutually exclusive options?

 

[Hollywood Cannon]

Are these mutually exclusive options?

Just seems like people are blaming Sony and not Marvel cause they’re fan boys.

 

[Hollywood Cannon]

You half-assing it, bro?

Don’t tell Beef.

He will beat me up.

 

[Ruck Over]

Just seems like people are blaming Sony and not Marvel cause they’re fan boys.

Sony has had the property and done little with it. Akin, but not as bad, as the previous Fantastic Four movies. I didn't bother with the Garfield* movies, they were not good, he was not a good Spider-Man. I wax poetic about the Maguire** movies because they brought the character to life, but they have not aged well. Holland was a baby-faced 20 year old when he first appeared on screen (he's 23 now and still baby faced). Marvel (Disney) has done it best, and as such are the default care-takers, content creators, most fans want Spider-Man to reside with.

It's comical how dead the comic book industry was in the late 90s, early 00s. Marvel was scrambling to find any source of revenue they could and sold their library piecemeal to any interested buyers. Marvel was lucky Disney swooped in when they did before any more collections of characters were sold to a more diverse group of studios. Money is in the movies, and that's where the creative direction is as well. I doubt Marvel (Disney) would punish the book version of Spider-Man for movie right shenanigans, but they did it to the X-Men and Fantastic Four. Sony may not be wrong, but they sure aren't right either.


* Garfield was 29 in his first S-M movie. The best Spider-Man was always the kid Spider-Man.
** Maguire was 27 in his first S-M movie. While young'ish looking, nah, not like that yo.

 

[youthoftoday]

Sony has had the property and done little with it. Akin, but not as bad, as the previous Fantastic Four movies. I didn't bother with the Garfield* movies, they were not good, he was not a good Spider-Man. I wax poetic about the Maguire** movies because they brought the character to life, but they have not aged well. Holland was a baby-faced 20 year old when he first appeared on screen (he's 23 now and still baby faced). Marvel (Disney) has done it best, and as such are the default care-takers, content creators, most fans want Spider-Man to reside with.

It's comical how dead the comic book industry was in the late 90s, early 00s. Marvel was scrambling to find any source of revenue they could and sold their library piecemeal to any interested buyers. Marvel was lucky Disney swooped in when they did before any more collections of characters were sold to a more diverse group of studios. Money is in the movies, and that's where the creative direction is as well. I doubt Marvel (Disney) would punish the book version of Spider-Man for movie right shenanigans, but they did it to the X-Men and Fantastic Four. Sony may not be wrong, but they sure aren't right either.


* Garfield was 29 in his first S-M movie. The best Spider-Man was always the kid Spider-Man.
** Maguire was 27 in his first S-M movie. While young'ish looking, nah, not like that yo.

Marvel wasn't selling any more characters off at that point. They took a big risk starting their own studio, but hit big with Iron Man. Incredible Hulk, not so much, but they had already set a plan in place to introduce Cap and Thor after that then build to Avengers. Disney saw the potential and came in with the offer to buy them. I'm sure there was no way anyone at Marvel would have turned down the offer, but if they had held out a few more years imagine the price tag may have might higher than $5 billion. That's a pretty big bargain 10 years later.

You are right, Marvel publishing wouldn't do to Spider-man what they did to FF. I don't think they ever really punished X-Men. The Avengers titles overtook X-Men in popularity once New Avengers was launch in like 2005. While there was no FF book on the stands for a short time, they were still putting over 100 x-books a month.

Spider-man is my favorite Marvel character and I still have never seen the Garfield movies. Once I saw that it was a complete reboot and doing an original story again, I was out.

 

[Ruck Over]

Marvel wasn't selling any more characters off at that point. They took a big risk starting their own studio, but hit big with Iron Man. Incredible Hulk, not so much, but they had already set a plan in place to introduce Cap and Thor after that then build to Avengers. Disney saw the potential and came in with the offer to buy them. I'm sure there was no way anyone at Marvel would have turned down the offer, but if they had held out a few more years imagine the price tag may have might higher than $5 billion. That's a pretty big bargain 10 years later.

You are right, Marvel publishing wouldn't do to Spider-man what they did to FF. I don't think they ever really punished X-Men. The Avengers titles overtook X-Men in popularity once New Avengers was launch in like 2005. While there was no FF book on the stands for a short time, they were still putting over 100 x-books a month.

Spider-man is my favorite Marvel character and I still have never seen the Garfield movies. Once I saw that it was a complete reboot and doing an original story again, I was out.

The story lines about the Inhumans were X-Men replacements, the whole Terrigen Mist being posion to mutants. That was a long good bye that was averted due to push-back.

We agree more than we disagree. But Marvel got lucky with their studio because Iron-Man, Thor, Hulk, etc. weren't as desirable back then. That the tide has turned is just a credit to the movie department to bring hype and recognition to the printed side.

 

[Striiker]

I'm excited for the next Spiderman movie by Sony.

 

[pit]

Marvel could look for the same with Holland. He has 4 movies left as spider man (2 solo and 2 cameo- you can fact check me, I might be wrong).

I don't know contract status but I know Holland has 3 cameos - Civil War, Infinity War, and Endgame.

 

[Hollywood Cannon]

I'm excited for the next Spiderman movie by Sony.

That’s Manspider to you.

 

[CapnZin]

I don't know contract status but I know Holland has 3 cameos - Civil War, Infinity War, and Endgame.

He signed a Robert Downey Jr. contract with less usage, but over a similar time frame.

Cameos don’t count, but I think Infinity War and Endgame counted as a Marvel movie with him. He should have 2 solos left. I could be mistaken. He could also be used in cameos, however, Sony’s contract is a go hard or go home. The contract is in FULL rights- marketing, movie, and so on. Since MCU backed out of the deal Holland can’t appear in any movies.

Jeremy Renner, Ryan Reynolds, and another have already contacted Sony telling them to take the deal.

As I stated before. This was a good ploy by Marvel. They’re going to back Sony into a corner because Sony can’t use Venom, Maximum Carnage, She-Hulk, or most other villains after the merger. She-Hulk isn’t a villain.

They really only have 1 route that could hold 2 movies- Red Goblin (which is his friend Ned from Homecoming and Far From Home). However, that goes back to the old timeline where the Osborn’s are back in it, but we know what happened to them, lol.

 

[Deadpool8812]

He signed a Robert Downey Jr. contract with less usage, but over a similar time frame.

Cameos don’t count, but I think Infinity War and Endgame counted as a Marvel movie with him. He should have 2 solos left. I could be mistaken. He could also be used in cameos, however, Sony’s contract is a go hard or go home. The contract is in FULL rights- marketing, movie, and so on. Since MCU backed out of the deal Holland can’t appear in any movies.

Jeremy Renner, Ryan Reynolds, and another have already contacted Sony telling them to take the deal.

As I stated before. This was a good ploy by Marvel. They’re going to back Sony into a corner because Sony can’t use Venom, Maximum Carnage, She-Hulk, or most other villains after the merger. She-Hulk isn’t a villain.

They really only have 1 route that could hold 2 movies- Red Goblin (which is his friend Ned from Homecoming and Far From Home). However, that goes back to the old timeline where the Osborn’s are back in it, but we know what happened to them, lol.

Don't think that's true. Sony has exclusive rights to those characters.

 

[CapnZin]

Don't think that's true. Sony has exclusive rights to those characters.

Nope. Venom, Carnage, and Deadpool are all under Marvel.

Previous to this mess, there’s a comic line where Venom fights Carnage (ass seen in the post credit scene as a build up for Venom 2), however, Carnage first gets ahold of Spider-Man. Venom is a wild card because sometimes he helps Spider-Man and sometimes he fights him. There’s a line where Deadpool and Spider-Man fight the symbiotes. That’s where it looked like it was heading. If you did notice too, Eddie Brock, from Spider-Man 2 or 3, left NYC and went to SF where the story line was built for Venom.

Namor has a granulated contract which I don’t understand. Universal and Sony have the rights for Hulk/She-Hulk, but not Carnage or Venom anymore.

***Also, I noticed a mistake I made. I kept saying Ned is the red goblin. Ned is hobgoblin. Red goblin is Norman Osborn with Carnage injected into him.

 

[Adam Warlock]

Isn’t it Marvel’s fault for making the power play though?

Or am I just too casual?

Disney, not Marvel. I don't think Feige cares about the money...he just wanted Spidey in the MCU.

Disney is going to ruin the MCU. We are lucky that people like Fiege and the Russos fought off their influence during the Infinity Saga, but it seems like Disney wants to call the shots now. Disney is forcing them to produce these shows to boost their streaming service, Disney wants to censor deadpool, Disney ran Spidey out. I am sure we will still get plenty of good content, but I don't think we will see the well oiled machine we are used to.