Yeah, but M Night Shyamalan was excited about the comic book connections and was told to downplay them because they didn't think it would track with a general audience.
But man, the early 2000s were just a weird time by modern standards. Marvel didn't plaster their name all over BLADE's marketing because they thought it would be a liability too.
I just think it's weird that some fans are creating this narrative where Sony is the villain and Disney the savior of comic book films, when if it had been up to them, they'd never have even existed. It was SONY and FOX that took the first steps toward the superhero's dominance of the cinematic landscape.
Last edited by David Walton; 08-29-2019 at 06:33 AM.
Yes, Fox and Sony started this wild ride, but it was ultimately Disney which perfected it. The older style of superhero movies was unsustainable and even now feels quite dated. Had Disney not put in the work, I'm not sure where the genre would be.
That being said, I'm not a die-hard Disney fan and I think Disney was being rather unreasonable with this deal, especially when they know that the IP is basically all Sony really has.
It seems like a deal that was, frankly, designed to monopolize the industry even further by taking the controlling stake of another character that is the biggest IP that another studio owns, while also getting around regulators on the issue. I'm not the one crying "MONOPOLY!" about Disney (mostly because I think entertainment is a versatile space that could have other studios fill in gaps that are left by consolidation and the like, at least a lot easier than other industries), but enough has to be enough.
With Great Power, Comes Great Responsibility
Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.
I honestly think there痴 more to the story than this because, quite frankly, when the stake is what has been the most success you致e seen in your franchise when what you致e been doing with it hasn稚 been working, you may not take a bum deal, but you sure as hell try to negotiate to something better fitting both sides. There is definitely more to the story than what we致e been getting especially with how much this story has been twisted.
Yeah, Sony is making a serious power play. I think it's bigger than just Spider-Man. We also have to see that their game division just purchased Insomniac Games, the developer behind Spider-Man PS4. That's not a coincidence. My personal thinking is that they are going to make a play to get Spider-Man totally: the full multimedia rights to the character including movies, animated movies and shows, games, merchandise, etc.
No, Sony literally can't make such a play. The rights are between them and Disney, and Disney ain't giving up what portion is theirs. I don't fully know how the games and merchandise works out, probably something to do about whether it's based on the film versions or not. But I know there's no power play move Sony has here.
You may be right, but Sony is definitely making a play for what's theirs. It seems like, from what I see, they want the full film and TV rights. I know the rights are currently split up, but as we saw, these companies will negotiate, spin, and do whatever it takes to retain/use the IP. I honestly wouldn't put it past either Disney or Sony.
I really don't see any negotiations or spin happening, I just see them more fully utilizing the rights they already have. Everything they're allowed to do in film and television, they're now going to pursue. Which frankly is a good thing, they should have put out some Spidey TV content well over a decade ago.
While it is always good to try to have as much established IP as possible behind you, I don’t think Sony is “making a power play”. I think the gaming division bought Insomniac Games because they made an excellent game that sold well and they can be counted on to do that again, even when they move away from Spider-Man. The deal isn’t perpetuity. But Insomniac Games is clearly contracted to develop future Spider-Man games and Sony was obviously going to be the publisher of these games. Them buying the studio seems to have more to do with a talent race against gaming competitors than monopolizing Spider-Man as a character, given things can always be different after the initial deal ends.
Sony didn’t seem to have any real interest in asking for more of a share of Disney’s merchandising rights. This is probably because they know they wouldn’t get anything back. As of right now, Disney makes the $1.5 billion a year in revenue from the character’s merchandising rights alone. They aren’t giving those back up.
Sony may want to make shows but that ends a nearly ten year period where Sony had no real interest in pursuing television rights for the character. After Into the Spider-Verse proved to be a huge commodity, I think Sony saw an opportunity. The best I think they can realistically hope for is Disney to individually negotiate with them on each individual show. I doubt they are expecting much more.
As for movies, the ball is firmly in Disney’s court. Sony only wanted to renew the deal. Even the most friendly explanations of Disney’s position state they wanted, nay expected, at least a six-fold increase in revenue share and that same share in financing to get some controlling interest back in the character. Sony isn’t making a power play here. If they were, there would’ve been reports of Sony asking for merchandising kickbacks and Venom crossovers in order to re-up the deal. They didn’t. They were happy. Disney clearly saw vulnerability in that and tried to extort more money out of a property that is among the last they don’t own entirely in Marvel’s catalogue.
With Great Power, Comes Great Responsibility
Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.
Very rational look at the planned Tom Holland cameo for Venom and the reasons behind its removal (but by all means let a precious few freak out that it’s Midnight Edge again)...
It was the Batman and Robin butterfly effect on the genre.
It was a weird time but looking back now , its a time you have to appreciate. The old standard required comic movies to be Aristotle, things were more difficult back then for comic films to get amazing reviews unlike now, back then, comic movies had to earn it. Comic movies had to be more than what we see them now as the old standard expectation was high.But man, the early 2000s were just a weird time by modern standards. Marvel didn't plaster their name all over BLADE's marketing because they thought it would be a liability too.
No comic movie back then would ever have gotten great reviews because they were fun. The modern standard is low compared to when X-Men 2000 or Spiderman 2002 was out.
The narrative has been going on for a long time, Not only are Sony being portrayed as the villains, some people want to pretend sony has never made any good spiderman film.I just think it's weird that some fans are creating this narrative where Sony is the villain and Disney the savior of comic book films, when if it had been up to them, they'd never have even existed. It was SONY and FOX that took the first steps toward the superhero's dominance of the cinematic landscape.
Single simple truth.It was SONY and FOX that took the first steps toward the superhero's dominance of the cinematic landscape.
That honestly goes both ways. People speak of the Raimi movies, but not only do you hardly see them mention the ASM movies but they also ignore that the movies tended to go bad as a result of Sony getting too involved and messing with the movie. So while it’s not a case of them never making a good movie, their ambitions tend to cause them to fumble things badly.
Bingo. That's my take. I have little issue of Sony owning the full movie rights, but Sony's track record is far from spotless. The narrative that Sony is a saint and Disney is an evil greedy company needs to go away as well. In my opinion, they're both hoarding this character. That said, if Sony makes a good movie, then that's that. I take each movie as its own thing, not as a company over another.
Jay Washington had seemingly nothing to do with the production of Spider-man or Venom. Why would he know this information???
He's the guy who claims that Tom Holland filmed a cameo for Venom that Marvel Studios had cut out of the film.