-
[QUOTE=inisideguy;5491668]I doubt it. Keeping Spidey in the MCU is beneficial to both companies. But I will bet there is a lot of slamming of fists and throwing of things that's for sure.[/QUOTE]
Truthfully though, he was a want more than a need. The company was making ridiculous money without him. He's just Marvel's "Mickey Mouse", so from that standpoint I guess he was a "need."
-
[QUOTE=Lou_Kayge;5494394]Truthfully though, he was a want more than a need. The company was making ridiculous money without him. He's just Marvel's "Mickey Mouse", so from that standpoint I guess he was a "need."[/QUOTE]
Those dudes high up probably grew up with Spider-Man and couldn't stop themselves.
He was shoehorned into CW because they loved him so much.
-
[QUOTE=MindofShadow;5494399]Those dudes high up probably grew up with Spider-Man and couldn't stop themselves.
He was shoehorned into CW because they loved him so much.[/QUOTE]
That "8 years ago" thing in the beginning voiceover from Toombs-referring to the Chitauri battle in 2012, when Spider-Man:Homecoming occured in 2017(18?) totally lost me for the rest of the movie. The workaround I used to preserve my sanity was that Toombs sucked with dates and the FIRST major job his company got was cleaning up after the Hammeroids/Whiplash attack at the Stark Expo in Queens in IM2(2010). Funny, the day I saw 'Homecoming' in the theater, I saw a matinee of 'Baby Driver' first, and saw 'Homecoming later with a friend. I enjoyed 'Baby Driver' more.
-
[QUOTE=Lou_Kayge;5494406]That "8 years ago" thing in the beginning voiceover from Toombs-referring to the Chitauri battle in 2012, when Spider-Man:Homecoming occured in 2017(18?) totally lost me for the rest of the movie. The workaround I used to preserve my sanity was that Toombs sucked with dates and the FIRST major job his company got was cleaning up after the Hammeroids/Whiplash attack at the Stark Expo in Queens in IM2(2010). Funny, the day I saw 'Homecoming' in the theater, I saw a matinee of 'Baby Driver' first, and saw 'Homecoming later with a friend. I enjoyed 'Baby Driver' more.[/QUOTE]
I didn't like that moment either, but that really sank the whole movie for you?
-
[QUOTE=Mik;5494421]I didn't like that moment either, but that really sank the whole movie for you?[/QUOTE]
I wouldn't say "sank", but I couldn't shake it. I'm a continuity wonk like that...in all shows and movies.
-
[QUOTE=MindofShadow;5494399]Those dudes high up probably grew up with Spider-Man and couldn't stop themselves.
He was shoehorned into CW because they loved him so much.[/QUOTE]
Which is kind of ironic when you see how Iron Man-focused the Spider-Man movies end up being.
-
[QUOTE=Lou_Kayge;5494394]Truthfully though, he was a want more than a need. The company was making ridiculous money without him. He's just Marvel's "Mickey Mouse", so from that standpoint I guess he was a "need."[/QUOTE]
Yea the Mickey Mouse comparison is apt. I am sure it probably drives Disney executives insane that they don't have full control of this character. Now that I am thinking about it, maybe it would have been better to just let Sony run spidey into the ground so they could eventually buy him. But then again Sony did into the spider-verse. So they would have never given him up.
-
[QUOTE=Lou_Kayge;5494568]I wouldn't say "sank", but I couldn't shake it. I'm a continuity wonk like that...in all shows and movies.[/QUOTE]
Ok. I thought it was a stupid error, and I like continuity too, but it was brief enough for me to ignore.
-
[QUOTE=Frontier;5494628]Which is kind of ironic when you see how Iron Man-focused the Spider-Man movies end up being.[/QUOTE]
I sometimes wonder how much of that was Sony.
-
[QUOTE=MindofShadow;5494741]I sometimes wonder how much of that was Sony.[/QUOTE]
I can see Sony wanting to emphasize the MCU aspect by having a marketable "team-up" factor in the movie, but then MCU creative team ran with it.
-
[QUOTE=CTTT;5492935]So, with what you're saying, I'm guessing SM is going to be both in the MCU and VENOMVERSE? Spidey being owned by Sony complicates things with the MCU. Because I hope continuity doesn't get blurred.[/QUOTE]
I think acknowledging previous Sony movies as part of the multiverse means the current ones like Venom will also be another universe (or timeline) acknowledged in the MCU. And if Sony wants to use him on their movies, they can say is MCU Spidey hopping through universes, kinda like how we have Spider-Gwen often showing up in the 616 universe.
-
[QUOTE=inisideguy;5494668]Yea the Mickey Mouse comparison is apt. I am sure it probably drives Disney executives insane that they don't have full control of this character. Now that I am thinking about it, maybe it would have been better to just let Sony run spidey into the ground so they could eventually buy him. But then again Sony did into the spider-verse. So they would have never given him up.[/QUOTE]
That's kinda funny to think of the Disney execs being driven insane that they don't have the full SM rights. I don't think so. The MCU was doing just fine before SM was introduced in Civil War.
-
[QUOTE=CTTT;5495126]That's kinda funny to think of the Disney execs being driven insane that they don't have the full SM rights. I don't think so. The MCU was doing just fine before SM was introduced in Civil War.[/QUOTE]
Oh sure it was. Not arguing that. But spidey is part of Marvel. And a massive character worldwide. So I'm sure it bugs them. No pun intended.
-
[QUOTE=inisideguy;5495137]Oh sure it was. Not arguing that. But spidey is part of Marvel. And a massive character worldwide. So I'm sure it bugs them. No pun intended.[/QUOTE]
Well, I think Tom Holland said recently that they've worked out some kind of deal. But i'm sure we won't know if that's the case until SM 3 is released.
-
[QUOTE=CTTT;5495126]That's kinda funny to think of the Disney execs being driven insane that they don't have the full SM rights. I don't think so. The MCU was doing just fine before SM was introduced in Civil War.[/QUOTE]
Spider-Man merch outsells every other hero. Including Superman and Batman.