So, in case anyone was (unlikely) unaware, this just happened:
https://deadline.com/2019/08/kevin-f...er-1202672545/
How much will this blow hurt the MCU? How much damage to will it end up doing?
Also, is there any way WB/DC and the DCEU can capitalize on this?
T'Challa
A.K.A. The Black Panther
King of Wakanda
King of the Dead and The Champion of Bast
Two-Time Time Magazine "Person Of The Year"
Six-Time People Magazine "Sexiest Man Alive"
The articles always talk about Feige as if that's the only thing that's being negotiated. They never talk about the merchandising or Spider-Man's presence at the Disney theme parks. If it was just about a producer not being involved with a movie--and thus not getting paid for his involvement--that would be one thing--but surely there's much more at stake for Sony and for Disney. It would have been stupid for Sony to give away half of its only big property, just to get a producer to work for them, without any quid pro quo. Disney could offer a share of the theme park gate and the merchandising to Sony--but they probably don't want to, because that's what makes the most money. Yet Sony owns Spider-Man--what are they going to do, roll over and let Disney take everything? That would be the end of Sony Pictures.
Grace's thoughts on the New Gods
also just found out what the BOP plot was. at this point DC should just say they enjoy failing
"I love mankind...it's people I can't stand!!"
- Charles Schultz.
The MCU was already an extremely successful billion dollar franchise for years even before Spider-Man entered the universe, and they will continue to be successful even if they do end up losing the character.
And DC won’t capitalize on anything. They couldn’t even make a Justice League film that could outgross Marvel’s film about a C-list property like a tree and talking raccoon, and Marvel’s former B-list characters like Black Panther and Captain Marvel still made more than any DC film ever released(including the Nolan Batman films). So Marvel will be just fine without Spider-Man. More than fine in fact. Marvel isn’t Warners back then, when the only comic book properties they could make successful was Batman and Superman. Spider-Man added little to the MCU’ and Marvel never needed him as much as Warners/DC needs Batman.
Last edited by Amadeus Arkham; 08-22-2019 at 08:56 AM.
"I love mankind...it's people I can't stand!!"
- Charles Schultz.
Given how successful Warner Bros. have been with their movies--not to mention all the other stuff they own--they probably never banked that much on the super-heroes. That was just an extra bonus. And even though they never sold the rights to another company, they seem to have always made deals with other companies to produce the movies. And those deals don't last for just one movie--they're tied into those contracts for a length of time. It was the combined blow of super-heroes suddenly becoming the most profitable properties for movies and Disney having market dominance that threw all the other big motion picture companies for a loop.
I think she raises some valid concerns. Hopefully someone will be paying attention to this and listen to what she says.
(And on a side note, I really think if Shazam had been released later in the summer it would've performed better. It was a good film that I think got lost in the CaptainMarvel-A:Endgame shuffle. Really dumb timing on the studio's part).
I’ll never understand Grace Randolph’s appeal.
"I love mankind...it's people I can't stand!!"
- Charles Schultz.
A Static Shock film would be nice, and I’d like him to be DC’s first black lead superhero film over Cyborg.
Last edited by Amadeus Arkham; 08-22-2019 at 11:31 PM.
"I love mankind...it's people I can't stand!!"
- Charles Schultz.