Disney-Sony Standoff Ends Marvel Studios Involvement In ‘Spider-Man'

[Derek Metaltron]

I dont get why so many people are vocally hating the peter and stark relationship so much. Spiderman came about during the civil war and a lot of the same things happened in the movies that happened in the comics. Peter looked up to tony and wanted his approval, this relationship made him unmask in front of the world against his better judgment and better knowledge.

It’s just a vocal minority that has existed on the fringes that’s been empowered by the current situation. I think they seem to forget we had two movie series with a stand-alone Peter and another with the Spider characters collectively together, so there’s no harm in having a Peter who can mature and learn from others, just as Far From Home was showing. We’re not gonna have the Peter who can stand alongside the Avengers or be friends with Johnny Storm, and that makes me a little bit sad.

[Revolutionary_Jack]

I dont get why so many people are vocally hating the peter and stark relationship so much. Spiderman came about during the civil war and a lot of the same things happened in the movies that happened in the comics. Peter looked up to tony and wanted his approval, this relationship made him unmask in front of the world against his better judgment and better knowledge.

That's not what happened.

1) Peter joined the New Avengers at Captain America's recommendation, he did so without pay (when historically Avengers members get salaries).

2) After Peter's house got blown up by Charlie Wiederman, Stark offered Peter and his family to move in at Avengers Towers, a fact that Peter was both grateful and uncomfortable about. Especially with Wolverine creeping on his wife.

3) Stark coerced Peter into supporting him in Civil War.

4) Stark showed off Peter his Negative Zone Gulag that he constructed with Reed Richards.

5) Peter backed the f--k up and joined Team Cap right away. Then came to blows with Tony Stark.

So it's not an accurate depiction of all Peter's relationship with Stark during Civil War at all.

[Dangerous]

Ok, let's...

Yes, let’s…

Is Uncle Ben referenced in every single Spider-Man comic in order to constantly remind readers about Spidey's origin? No. Does the lack of constant references mean that he "may as well have never existed?" No. Just as the vast majority of Spider-Man comics don't feel the need to refer back to Uncle Ben, so too can the movies assume that viewers are already familiar with Spidey's origin and not belabor the point.

The key difference being that whilst Uncle Ben is not referenced in ‘every single Spider-Man comic’, his prior existence, relationship to Peter & key importance to Spider-Man’s origin and his continued influence on Peter’s life (through occasional references AT LEAST every couple of years) are firmly established in the mainline comics. So your comparison does not stack up. My point stands. In the MCU the KEY motivating factor that sets the 616 Spider-Man on his path and keeps him on it, may have well never existed.

Again, in the comics, Peter is not shown to be constantly suffering inner pain or guilt over the past. Typically, he's guilty, confused or angst-ridden over current problems relating to his love life, or school or work. The Holland Spider-Man films have followed suit with that.

The entire root of Peter’s inner angst in High School / Ditko era is due to Uncle Ben and this casts a shadow over all his other problems and the comic itself. As for Holland conveying any hint of genuine guilt, angst or confusion…. Can we just be honest here and call MCU Spidey what it is- a Mickey Mouse club house version of Spidey? Compare the tone / supporting cast / plot lines of the Raimi films to Far From Home…
The Raimi films were Action/drama films. Scenes featuring James Franco, Kirsten Dunst & Rosemary Harris relating to love triangles, guilt and responsibility had genuine weight, tension and great acting. … Far From Home feels like a National Lampoon’s film in terms of its tone and features such ridiculous scenarios as ‘Ned Leeds’ and ‘Betty Brant’ becoming romantically involved during a school trip (off screen might I add) which is then dissolved by the end of the trip and is played entirely for laughs. Do you honestly think this is good storytelling? Again, my point stands.

The Daily Bugle doesn't play much of a part in the current comics either.

The MCU is not dealing with a 30 yr old Peter, in the MCU he is 16 yrs old. And I was comparing the defining characteristics of classic era Spider-Man vs how he is portrayed in the MCU.

In case you hadn't heard, newspapers are not the most cutting edge thing anymore.

In case you haven’t heard, newspapers still exist in 2019;- they are still printed daily and still employ freelance photogs. I never claimed them to be cutting edge. The bigger point that the absence of the Bugle and JJJ relates to- is the mistrust of half the populous and superheroes towards PP/SM of classic era Spidey. If a modern studio/audience is so opposed to a newspaper, then why did we not get a Spidey bashing JJJ podcast (similar to the PS4 game) in the MCU films? Or how about having Jonah as the anchor of a fake news style TV broadcast that helps trash Spidey’s public image? Either of those would be a more ‘cutting edge’ and a contemporary way to update this KEY characteristic of the Spidey mythos. Once again, my point stands.

As for Peter's suits, we've seen his homemade costume, it was what he wore in the climax of Homecoming and it was glimpsed in Civil War so "all his suits/tech" aren't made by Stark or Stark Tech.

Red & Blue PJs with swimming goggles do not constitute a Spider-Man costume.

It's just that it makes more in-story sense for costumes that look the way his comic costume looks to come from another place.

It was a contrived decision to more closely tie Spider-Man to Iron Man than he should have been. And- only serves to denigrate the character in that he is not even the one to create his iconic costume.

And there is precedent in the comics with Peter's Iron Spider suit to use Stark tech so it's not completely a fabrication of the movies.

That is not a valid comparison as that was a one off suit provided to Peter well into adulthood as a firmly established legend. Not as an adolescent starting his career in the MCU version- where he’s given his most iconic and defining costume that was arguably even designed by Stark.

As we saw in Far From Home, it looks like we were moving towards Peter being more hands on with the creation of his suits and tech.

After 5 films Peter might finally be moving towards being Spider-Man? Sorry dude, but that should have happened in Homecoming. My points stand.

Mentoring someone isn't "belittling" them. There's lives at stake, including Peter's own. If Tony has to be stern when the consequences of mistakes could be catastrophic, so be it. And Peter does make many decisions on his own. That some of those decisions come back to bite him is only being true to the character.

And again all of that was an inversion of classic era Spidey where he did everything by himself the hardway and this was a big part of what made him such a formidable and legendary Hero in the long run. That part in Homecoming where he said ‘I’m nothing without the suit’ .. Something the Spider-Man of the comics would never say or EVEN think.

He still lives in Queens with May. It's not like Stark moved them into Avengers Mansion or bought them a house.

The effect is the still the same- money struggles, another key characteristic of Spider-Man is absent from the MCU version.

MJ knows who Peter is in the comics and has always known (even if that was a retcon)

Yea, when that was revealed after #257 issues or whatever it was,.. It felt out of place as she had barely shown any prior sign of knowledge.

and while she was smart enough to figure it out for herself in the movies, how is that a bad thing? Should she be an idiot who can't see what's right in front of her?

Just Michelle knowing would be one thing, but with Ned & May knowing from the first film onward and all of his Avenger friends knowing, it again inverts one of the key characteristics of Spider-Man- neurotically guarding and worrying about his secret identity being revealed for fear of reprisals on his friends and family. It’s just yet another factor that detracts from these films capturing the essence of Spidey in anyway at all. Not only that but it really takes away from the whole childhood/adolescent power fantasy of being a Superhero and having a secret identity which on a psychological level, is one of the reasons that many young people initially bond with such characters.

And as for being "an attractive middle age woman", people age much differently than they once did. Back in the '60s, May was probably meant to be a woman in her 50s and no one would find it odd that she looked that decrepit. Today, Jennifer Lopez and Jennifer Aniston are in their 50s. May would have to be pushing 80 to look like the frail old woman she used to be depicted as.

OK, you have a point there. I could possibly accept this portrayal if Marisa Tomei’s version if she did not know Peter is Spidey, and was actually used for more than just flirting with Happy and jokes about Larb. She’s yet another paper thin character, with no believable bond between her and Peter and Tomei is actually a great actress, but with the terrible scripts and abysmal direction of the two solo films she is wasted.

Watts clearly knows the character quite well.

He may, but in moments like the DC Monument scene- when Spidey falls down the elevator shaft after making his rousing big save (and it’s done purely for the sake of a cheap laugh at the characters expense), not only does it kill all dramatic tension, but as stated- it shows he does not respect the character in the same way The Russo’s and co do.

[Derek Metaltron]

[Spider-Chan]

Please stop giving views to Midnight's Edge. Inaccurate, biased, and a comicgater to booth.

[Derek Metaltron]

Please stop giving views to Midnight's Edge. Inaccurate, biased, and a comicgater to booth.

You can trust or believe whoever you want to, but they’ve accurately followed Sony’s and the Pascal crews plans for Spider-Man for years, not to mention revealing the alternate Star Trek license and production on films like Ghostbusters and Fan4stick. No one should be told to accept censorship.

[Dangerous]

Delete. .

[CosmicGoji]

The people celebrating for this split have no idea what they're really in for...

[Spider-Chan]

You can trust or believe whoever you want to, but they’ve accurately followed Sony’s and the Pascal crews plans for Spider-Man for years, not to mention revealing the alternate Star Trek license and production on films like Ghostbusters and Fan4stick.

He takes sources from everywhere from his videos. Some accurate, some not, but he disregards accurate ones if they don't fit his own narrative. At some point point he has "cited" random tweets and youtube comments, super accurate sources, as I imagine. The most recent example was one of his most recent videos about why Marvel changed the appearance of various Spider-Man characters, which has been fairly debunk by now.

Heck, without clicking the video, I can tell how biased he is on this matter just looking at that thumbnail and the title, since he seems to blame Sony for the end of the partnership, but now we know that it's more complicated than it looks, and Sony was willing to keep sharing Spider-Man.

No one should be told to accept censorship.

I legitimately have no idea what are you referring about. What censorship? When did I said anything regarding to censorship?

[Vortex85]

The people celebrating for this split have no idea what they're really in for...

Hopefully good Spider-Man films again.

[Derek Metaltron]

I legitimately have no idea what are you referring about. What censorship? When did I said anything regarding to censorship?

Telling people to stop giving views to a video series you happen to dislike is still a form of attempted censorship. Also if you actually bothered to watch that video you would discover the current understanding of the situation about Sony and Disney is more complicated than the one sided Sony good, Disney Bad rhetoric.

The 25% thing is something originating from the effects of the Star Trek alternative license (Kelvin Universe, Discovery) where everything must be roughly that different to the original license and they don’t get cash for anything too close to the other license. I can’t speak for the apparent suggestions that Marvel has had something similar with Spider-Man but that’s the real origins of that business philosophy with CBS at least. (Though the merger with Viacom might resolve that.)

[Spider-Chan]

Telling people to stop giving views to a video series you happen to dislike is still a form of attempted censorship.

That's... that's not what censorship is... like at all....

And if that's censorship, you're literally endorsing a guy who endorses a group that also commits censorship, harrassing and trying to silence women, poc, and queer voices within the comic industry.

Heck, for that matter, if what I did is censorship, ME has been committing censorship since he tells people to stop watching Sony movies!

Also if you actually bothered to watch that video you would discover the current understanding of the situation about Sony and Disney is more complicated than the one sided Sony good, Disney Bad rhetoric.

Good to know, and yet ME went for the clickbait thumbnail and title that only names Sony. You want better break downs of the deal, go to legitimate sources, don't watch some guy's video that is the heavily biased tl;dr version of those and who also happens to support a group that has a bad track.

[Kurolegacy]

Hopefully good Spider-Man films again.

The fact that this is the same company that has fumbled it twice now, it's honestly astonishing that anyone thinks this. It's literally a matter of how many chances can you give a company that keeps messing up? Where is the line drawn between them actually having some kind of real plan and they're just pushing these out so they don't lose the license and milk it for all the money they can because one common thread seems to keep popping up with them; they get too ambitious and it costs them every time. far as I'm concerned, I have no reason to trust them with this property because they keep proving incompetent with it by the end of the day.

[CosmicGoji]

The fact that this is the same company that has fumbled it twice now, it's honestly astonishing that anyone thinks this. It's literally a matter of how many chances can you give a company that keeps messing up? Where is the line drawn between them actually having some kind of real plan and they're just pushing these out so they don't lose the license and milk it for all the money they can because one common thread seems to keep popping up with them; they get too ambitious and it costs them every time. far as I'm concerned, I have no reason to trust them with this property because they keep proving incompetent with it by the end of the day.

Especially now that Tom Rothman is the new head of Sony Pictures. I mean, WTH happened? Is it desperation? Has all of this complaining towards Disney made people suffer from amnesia or brain damage, whether it be about them becoming a monopoly or how they've handled Spider-Man?

[Vortex85]

The fact that this is the same company that has fumbled it twice now, it's honestly astonishing that anyone thinks this. It's literally a matter of how many chances can you give a company that keeps messing up? Where is the line drawn between them actually having some kind of real plan and they're just pushing these out so they don't lose the license and milk it for all the money they can because one common thread seems to keep popping up with them; they get too ambitious and it costs them every time. far as I'm concerned, I have no reason to trust them with this property because they keep proving incompetent with it by the end of the day.

Spider-Man Homecoming and Far From Home are my least favorite Spider-man moives with the exception of Spider-Man 3 which was right on their level for different reasons. Far From Home was mediocre and Homecoming made me feel disgusted at multiple points. I also really liked the Amazing Spider-Man movies, so to each their own.

Oh and I liked Venom too, so I'm happy about him going back to Sony.