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

[SUPERECWFAN1]

Or , this allows them to approach again another negotiation deal. Sony could still make spin-off films etc. But they obviously worked this deal out while telling press it was over. The same situation more than likely will play out again.

[Hypestyle]

who knows what will happen- especially in this age of semi-monopolies in media ownership and distribution, it may "make more sense" for these companies-- nominal competitors notwithstanding-- to collaborate on future films.

For Sony's part, they need competent, progressive creatives involved at the production end of things. It would not be a good look to fast-track a bunch of characters for "tentpole" projects and then for the results to be middling. Venom skated by, perhaps on novelty alone- and the global take. It would be a mistake to go campy, but also a mistake to think that some of these characters deserve a "Joker" style format.

[Bloxer]

Spiderman 3 will get the exact same reviews as mcu spiderman if it was in the MCU.

Once you take out the media implanted superficial mcu adoration, Holland spiderman is not well liked. according to the source material, he is the weakest live action spiderman so far.




Inflation is not dumb, more importantly, Spiderman 3 did not have the entire backing of a massive disney empire like the MCU. Spiderman 3 was all down to sam raimi, the usual standard for movies that were director driven than manufactured made.

It really speaks volumes when your argument for why Holland's Spider-Man is allegedly not well liked boils down to "because I said so"

[TheDarman]

It is worth noting that Sony really seems to want to hitch their wagon 100% to the MCU. After all, according to Deadline, Sonyverse projects will be able to "call and answer" the MCU, creating what is loosely being described as a "shared detail universe".

[wjowski]

I doubt it was a wrestling angle. It was more a fact that negotiations was still happening behind the scenes. Also it was damaging Sony's reputation had it dragged on longer and they have plans for spin-off films like Morbius and Venom 2 ahead. Plus Silk , Silver Sable etc. So they didn't want bad press approaching this.

Obviously not literally. What I'm saying is this is starting to sound intentional to generate buzz for the next Spiderman movie.

[Farealmer]

It is worth noting that Sony really seems to want to hitch their wagon 100% to the MCU. After all, according to Deadline, Sonyverse projects will be able to "call and answer" the MCU, creating what is loosely being described as a "shared detail universe".

Which would be really smart on there part. Others have tried and failed to create a shared universe. The smart thing is instead of building your own time share with the one that was done right.

[The Cool Thatguy]

Which would be really smart on there part. Others have tried and failed to create a shared universe. The smart thing is instead of building your own time share with the one that was done right.

Yeah, but I don't see Marvel letting them do that, without strict conditions.

[XPac]

Yeah, but I don't see Marvel letting them do that, without strict conditions.

I imagine Sony just has to keep their universe vague enough to the point where you don't know for SURE it's not the MCU. They obviously can't use MCU characters or names or specific places....but if they don't do anything to directly conflict with the MCU universe, the casual movie goer probably won't know the difference.

The Net Flicks shows for example BARELY reference the MCU, and even when they do it's often in very vague terms. Those obviously are in the MCU universe, but the point being if the Spider-verse takes a similar approach they can probably get away with creating the illusion it's still the same place.

[TheDarman]

Yeah, but I don't see Marvel letting them do that, without strict conditions.

I think that Disney/Marvel didn’t really have too much choice in the matter. If they wanted some revenue for any Spider-Man film they produce, they had to give something up. According to Deadline, the 75/25 deal is the one Sony sat on for months. Disney upped the deal to 50/50 after Far From Home came out, because I think they thought they might be able to get more out of Sony than that. Sony obviously rejected it and that led to the debacle we got. In order to get Sony to come to terms on a co-financing deal that saw Disney get some of that money, the probably had to give Sony something they wanted—namely Holland’s Spider-Man in their films and the ability to reference back to the MCU. It was probably worth it to Disney to let them be ancillary to the MCU, like the Netflix shows. They won’t give them characters they own to put in their films, but they can reference the MCU and use Holland’s Spider-Man.

This isn’t to mention that it is really good for Disney if Sony sees the value of keeping Spider-Man in the MCU and keeping their other projects as adjuncts. It allows for Disney to not directly acknowledge them as part of the MCU, but it means they can renew a deal with future Spider-Man movies where they continue to get revenue for a character they didn’t have to purchase the IP rights.

[WebLurker]

It really speaks volumes when your argument for why Holland's Spider-Man is allegedly not well liked boils down to "because I said so"

Yeah, I tend to walk away at that point, unless something I can't resist passing up happens.

Yeah, but I don't see Marvel letting them do that, without strict conditions.

I'm guessing in practice that the Sony movies will be able to borrow stuff of some kind but that they're be officially non-canon to the MCU (a bit like how modern Star Wars media borrows stuff from the non-canon tie-ins made before Disney).

[ComicJunkie21]

It makes me wonder if the rumors last week regarding Marvel and Disney's lack of faith in Captain Marvel leading the franchise going forward has any truth to it. Because part of the rumors were that they wanted captain Marvel to be paired with spiderman for one film to increase her likability. This agreement seems as though Disney and Marvel came back to the table first and were more willing to compromise this go around and I wonder if that's why.

[Kirby101]

It makes me wonder if the rumors last week regarding Marvel and Disney's lack of faith in Captain Marvel leading the franchise going forward has any truth to it. Because part of the rumors were that they wanted captain Marvel to be paired with spiderman for one film to increase her likability. This agreement seems as though Disney and Marvel came back to the table first and were more willing to compromise this go around and I wonder if that's why.

What rumors (link?) Captain Marvel made over $1 billion. I doubt Marvel or Disney has lost any faith in going forward with a movie that made more than any of the Thor movies or Iron Man 1 & 2.

[ComicJunkie21]

What rumors (link?) Captain Marvel made over $1 billion. I doubt Marvel or Disney has lost any faith in going forward with a movie that made more than any of the Thor movies or Iron Man 1 & 2.

Here's the link:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/wegotth...in-marvel/amp/

Again this was just a rumor, I just find it interesting that a few days later Sony and Disney/Marvel strike a deal.

Although Captain Marvel earned $1 billion, maybe Disney and Marvel were unsure if it was because people wanted to see the character or because people thought they had to watch it because it was going to tie in heavily to endgame. My opinion is the latter is more true. Many people who I know that watched the film thought that it wasn't that great and that it was just okay. Maybe they have plans to make her more appealing in future films that involve pairing her up with Marvel's most popular character spiderman.

[Star_Jammer]

If by "rumor" you mean "purely concocted BS" then...yeah...sure.

[ComicJunkie21]

If by "rumor" you mean "purely concocted BS" then...yeah...sure.

Tbh I didn't think anything of it at the time either and thought the same. Just the timing of the sony deal seemed odd to me. There very well be absolutely no correlation between the two. I was just looking at it from a business perspective and even without the rumor I can definitely see Disney/Marvel having concerns over her popularity. Again, I don't think she is resonating with their target audience as well as they had hoped. Pretty sure they were hoping for the next wonder woman. Do I think it's a rumor, yes, but do I also see Disney/Marvel being concerned about the future of the character, yes.