Spider-Man forced out of the MCU due to failed Sony Deal

[KNIGHT OF THE LAKE]

Yes....Raimi was motivated by Spiderman 3! Because he was - his words - "unhappy" with it. That failure motivated him but ultimately he couldn't find a way to continue. I've said, from the outset, that the failure of Spiderman 3 dragged on the ability to continue the series and Raimi himself said as much. Let me be blunt - you are all over the place man. You're propping up strawmen left and right and you just can't keep yourself focused. So I'm going to refocus this a bit to try and help you collect yourself:

1. Spiderman 3 was not a good movie. Coming off of a brilliant Spiderman 2, the quality dip was jarring to people and put the path forward for the franchise on very shaky ground. The director was unhappy with the movie, but ultimately couldn't find a way to right the ship. (Yes, those two are directly linked and we know this because the director tied his motivations for the 4th movie to his feelings about the 3rd) The studio, seeing the jarring reaction by the public to the movie, concurrently started planning a reboot even though it had locked several key players into contracts. Movie studios don't concurrently plan reboots when they feel the last movie is worth building on. They do that when they think the franchise is shaky. Sony's Plan B proved to be a wise movie in principle - Spiderman 3's low quality and the director's frustration with how to continue after it ended the franchise.

2. Unfortunately, Plan B was nothing more than a derivative of the first movie and people soured fast. The second ASM came out too quickly and people really rejected that turd.

3. Sony, recognizing that the ship went from full steam ahead after, arguably, one of the best comic book movies ever made, to a full blown disaster. They (I'll repeat, because you conveniently ignore this) THEY went begging for help.

4. Disney righted their ship after they failed at least 2 times (three if you count Raimi's failure) to right it. They took public perception from "Ugh...another Spiderman movie....do we really need this?" to "This Holland Spiderman is pretty damn fun"

All of your facts can be true and the conclusion you draw can still be incorrect or dubious. Your facts do not directly entail my position or yours is right or wrong. Please knock that crap off. We both have facts to support our position and interpretations of those facts that are reasonable. So, again, please knock off your tone. It's totally unearned and multiple people on the thread keep trying to point it out to you.

It's simple for me: Spiderman the franchise was sailing along until one thing happened - Spiderman 3 was released. After that, everything went south fast. Seems to me the simplest place to put blame is the point at which things turned from "this franchise is brilliant, wow!" to "eh....um...that was jarringly bad"

And that’s your problem, you went for the simplest explanation you could be the least research into or fact gathering in because it was easy regardless of whether it was supported.

The reality is Raimi’s motivation for doing the film was spurned by Spider-Man 3. Very real chance he isn’t involved if he’s satisfied. Especially since he said his goal was to end on a better film. The actors were already complaining about doing the films and wanted out. Spider-Man 3 didn’t change that. Sony was expecting Spider-Man 4 and expecting it to make money and they still were planning on a reboot long before the plan fell through.

Again I have facts and you have assumptions and theories

[KNIGHT OF THE LAKE]

Again, if they really want to make another movie then make it. Tobey alrrady agreed to do another. Get another writer/director who can actually do the job that Raimi obviously couldn't. Marvel has lost directors before, and the show still went on.

You don't necessarily want to reboot if your previous movie did well. Just hire another writer and director and make the movie.

There was a timeline they had to get the film slated for production and off the ground by. When Raimi took to long to get the script done it basically allowed everyone to move on. It’s worth noting the actors we’re famously done with the films, but they famously adored working with Raimi. Without him it was going to be much more difficult to bring them to the table. Also they already kept Tobey waiting for Raimi’s script and now the actor that didn’t want to be there lost his director and had an out.

They were losing their main director who was also a script writer and most of the principle cast had one foot out the door. A reboot was happening sooner or later. It happened sooner.

Again if you don’t want to do the movie you don’t do all the steps they took

[Theleviathan]

And that’s your problem, you went for the simplest explanation you could be the least research into or fact gathering in because it was easy regardless of whether it was supported.

The reality is Raimi’s motivation for doing the film was spurned by Spider-Man 3. Very real chance he isn’t involved if he’s satisfied. Especially since he said his goal was to end on a better film. The actors were already complaining about doing the films and wanted out. Spider-Man 3 didn’t change that. Sony was expecting Spider-Man 4 and expecting it to make money and they still were planning on a reboot long before the plan fell through.

Again I have facts and you have assumptions and theories

Simplest explanations are a good bet. Spiderman 3 sent the franchise's trajectory south. So far south Sony begged Disney to save them.

[XPac]

How many times has Batman gotten a reboot from warner brothers. Sony would be fine with another reboot. I am more worried about the dishonest disney lackeys out there in the media that will purposely tear the reboot down as punishment for spiderman leaving the mcu, its like you said, Only MCU gets protection.

The reboot went so well, they had Marvel reboot it again.

All I'm saying is if they want to make Spider-Man 4, then make Spider-Man 4. Its not the first seeies needing a new director and it won't be the last.

As far as marvel wanting to tear the next Spider-Man novie down ... it bears repeating that Disney gets over a billion dollars in licensing. They get richer from Sony movies suceeding too.

[SpiderClops]

The point went over your head. My point had nothing to do with Marvel creating anything. It was that it’s stupid to slag a studio for not having a bunch of multi billion dollar films non stop when Marvel can only do it with Avengers based properties which is the one unique facet of their franchise that can’t be replicated

Un-freaking-believable.

Who's stopping other studios from making their own unique facet?

By the way, if you really think Iron Man 3, Black Panther, Captain Marvel and even Spider-Man: Far From Home made Billion dollars just because they were connected to Avengers, you are fooling yourself.

[Beaddle]

Un-freaking-believable.

Who's stopping other studios from making their own unique facet?

By the way, if you really think Iron Man 3, Black Panther, Captain Marvel and even Spider-Man: Far From Home made Billion dollars just because they were connected to Avengers, you are fooling yourself.

You would get more from people here if you try and measure the quality of these MCU movies to Spiderman 2 or Spiderverse. This is what matters most to Spiderman fans though.

Iron Man 3, Black Panther, Captain Marvel and even Spider-Man

These are some of the weakest MCU movies either in story (Iron Man 3), Visuals (Black Panther) formulaic (Captain marvel) (FFH)

[Beaddle]

The reboot went so well, they had Marvel reboot it again.

.

Not as well as we all thought. Sony has said bye to the deal, The reboot could not measure up to the old movies. I knew Holland's Spiderman had his haters but I never knew it was to this extent.

All I'm saying is if they want to make Spider-Man 4, then make Spider-Man 4. Its not the first seeies needing a new director and it won't be the last.

They don't have too. They can reboot on their own again, all they have to do is do the right thing. Garfield series was rushed and Sony knows this.

As far as marvel wanting to tear the next Spider-Man novie down ... it bears repeating that Disney gets over a billion dollars in licensing. They get richer from Sony movies suceeding too.

It would be Disney lackeys that will try to do the tear down. Fortunately reviews, hype, box office and reception gets more irrelevant as the day passes.

[KNIGHT OF THE LAKE]

Un-freaking-believable.

Who's stopping other studios from making their own unique facet?

By the way, if you really think Iron Man 3, Black Panther, Captain Marvel and even Spider-Man: Far From Home made Billion dollars just because they were connected to Avengers, you are fooling yourself.

Well contracts are. How many studios own franchises that were designed to be connected universes. Disney (Marvel) and Warner (DC). Everyone else is reaching trying to make a universal horror verse or a Monsterverse, or a Spiderverse with properties not built for that.

And yeah you’re kidding yourself if you think it’s a mere coincidence those films were billed as follow ups or lead ins to
An Avengers flick. It’s just a giant coincidence that it was those 4 in their whole line up

[KNIGHT OF THE LAKE]

Simplest explanations are a good bet. Spiderman 3 sent the franchise's trajectory south. So far south Sony begged Disney to save them.

Your simple explanation is “I didn’t like Spider-Man 3 so that was the problem”. It’s lazy, unsupported and doesn’t reflect reality. Mine does. Every time we’ve engaged you’ve ignored facts that are indisputable that I pointed out. Every time we’ve engaged you made stretches and assumptions. It’s very obvious who has the weaker and less supported argument. Sorry

[Beaddle]

Your simple explanation is “I didn’t like Spider-Man 3 so that was the problem”. It’s lazy, unsupported and doesn’t reflect reality. Mine does.

I had the same runin with Theleviathan, even when I gave a good load down of how a film like black panther did not measure up to X2 as a social commentary movie or even a quality visual movie, he implied people should stop feeding me and we needed real discussions even though I and weblucker were in a real good discussion about black panther and X2, I even had 2000 plus essay supporting my argument, I went as far as to even link the movie scripts to rightfully back up my argument. that weblucker even understood to some extent. it was a good discussion even if weblucker did not fully agree with me, it is still better than the weak arguments of people are feeding me, not to mention it was not true.

It’s very obvious who has the weaker and less supported argument. Sorry

True. Usually the most supported argument about MCU is billion dollar movies. Its such a weak argument, disney makes billion dollar movies. tell us something new. Clearly not even sony is seduced by billion dollars disney movies, they are out.

[Theleviathan]

Your simple explanation is “I didn’t like Spider-Man 3 so that was the problem”. It’s lazy, unsupported and doesn’t reflect reality. Mine does. Every time we’ve engaged you’ve ignored facts that are indisputable that I pointed out. Every time we’ve engaged you made stretches and assumptions. It’s very obvious who has the weaker and less supported argument. Sorry

It was a terrible movie. I'm not alone in thinking that. Spiderman 3 has a lower audience score on RT than X-men Last Stand. Only 6% higher than Green Lantern. 14% lower than X-men Apocalypse. 13% lower than Amazing Spiderman 2. Fans hated this movie. It's own director didn't like the movie. Sony felt so good about it they started planning a reboot.

It's much like X-men Last Stand: yes, it made good money. Yes, it had 57% positive review on RT. But the dip in quality was so jarring to audiences that their studios knew they couldn't continue on unless everything went right. Since "everything going right" is nearly impossible in film-making, it's no surprise that those turds forced their studios to shift directions. So just like Fox, Sony opted to go the reboot route.

That path was forged by the reaction to Spiderman 3 and the fallout from audience disappointment.

[XPac]

Not as well as we all thought. Sony has said bye to the deal, The reboot could not measure up to the old movies. I knew Holland's Spiderman had his haters but I never knew it was to this extent.



They don't have too. They can reboot on their own again, all they have to do is do the right thing. Garfield series was rushed and Sony knows this.



It would be Disney lackeys that will try to do the tear down. Fortunately reviews, hype, box office and reception gets more irrelevant as the day passes.

Given the reboot was the most successful Sony movie if all time, I'd say marvel making movies for Sony works out pretty well.

And sure, they don't HAVE to do Spider-Man 4. All I'm saying is I'd that's what they wanted to do, then do it.

[XPac]

There was a timeline they had to get the film slated for production and off the ground by. When Raimi took to long to get the script done it basically allowed everyone to move on. It’s worth noting the actors we’re famously done with the films, but they famously adored working with Raimi. Without him it was going to be much more difficult to bring them to the table. Also they already kept Tobey waiting for Raimi’s script and now the actor that didn’t want to be there lost his director and had an out.

They were losing their main director who was also a script writer and most of the principle cast had one foot out the door. A reboot was happening sooner or later. It happened sooner.

Again if you don’t want to do the movie you don’t do all the steps they took

See, this is why many are actually HAPPY that marvel is making these movies ... they can actually get it done. No reboots, no excuses ... the movies are simply made.

Why is it exactly that marvel can put out more movies than its peers with greater sucess and a whole lot less drama? Yeah, they might lose a director but they simply get another and the show goes on. The other guys are just a mess with Tranks and the Snyders and the Raimis generating more conversation about what's going on behind the camera than in front of it.

[Jokerz79]

Your simple explanation is “I didn’t like Spider-Man 3 so that was the problem”. It’s lazy, unsupported and doesn’t reflect reality. Mine does. Every time we’ve engaged you’ve ignored facts that are indisputable that I pointed out. Every time we’ve engaged you made stretches and assumptions. It’s very obvious who has the weaker and less supported argument. Sorry

The Director didn't like Spider-Man 3 so it was a problem how's that for a fact.

Spider-Man 3 made money but it was coming off one of the best Superhero films ever Spider-Man 2. But it has not been remembered well even by it's creators and the biggest issue was Sony meddling and shoving characters into it same story as Amazing Spider-Man 2 and I will be dollar of donuts it will happen with Holland's 3rd Spidey film as Sony is hellbent on creating their Spiderverse.

[KNIGHT OF THE LAKE]

It was a terrible movie. I'm not alone in thinking that. Spiderman 3 has a lower audience score on RT than X-men Last Stand. Only 6% higher than Green Lantern. 14% lower than X-men Apocalypse. 13% lower than Amazing Spiderman 2. Fans hated this movie. It's own director didn't like the movie. Sony felt so good about it they started planning a reboot.

It's much like X-men Last Stand: yes, it made good money. Yes, it had 57% positive review on RT. But the dip in quality was so jarring to audiences that their studios knew they couldn't continue on unless everything went right. Since "everything going right" is nearly impossible in film-making, it's no surprise that those turds forced their studios to shift directions. So just like Fox, Sony opted to go the reboot route.

That path was forged by the reaction to Spiderman 3 and the fallout from audience disappointment.

I’m sorry but you are a liar who makes things up and doesn’t use facts. Your opinions aren’t facts.

YOU said Spider-Man 3 was panned. It has a fresh rating on RT, it has far more positive than negative reviews, the audience score that is split right down the middle. So no you are factually wrong. I don’t care that you didn’t like it. It means nothing standing against reality.

This is your problem. You don’t know how to objectively look at the reality of the situation so you defer to your own opinion and conjecture. Again you are wrong, every objective metric and statement backs up that you are wrong. You rambling and shouting your opinion doesn’t change that.

It’s a waste of time. The facts are not on your side and you transparently avoid them. You’re creating a made up fantasy narrative to justify your opinion.

Everything in your last post was made up opinion that you can’t substantiate