Would the Spider-Man movies be better if they were done by Marvel?

[Ceebiro]

good news according to this (assuming it's true)

http://moviepilot.com/stories/2013/0...-960934#!IPNkS


looks like disney/marvel bought back the live action tv rights to spiderman. But that still sucks because it seems like the xmen arcs and fantastic 4 arcs are more epic in nature than spidermans arcs. So a live action tv series featuring him would necessarily be more small ball. I'd still like to see a miles morales spinoff, that could be less jarring and comparable to sonys movies since they are different universes and different versions of spiderman.

Speaking of Miles Morales, I'm still disappointed that Ultimate Spider-man the animated series isn't about him. They had a perfect opportunity for some cross-media synergy and they just did nothing with it.

[Mr. Mastermind]

And that's a bad thing how???

When did I say it was?

I said that if your goal is to just make movies off of one genre, you'll make more movies in that genre than studios who make movies in all kinds of genres.

The cake shop is going to sell more cakes than the general food shop. That's not the food shop's fault.

And your argument still doesn't make much sense when Marvel has been teasing us about films for years that never show up. Black Widow, War Machine and now Dr Strange. Ant-Man will have taken a decade to have gotten made by the time it gets out.

Are we to believe that Marvel with nix other films to focus on Spider-man when Iron Man 3 made more than the last Spidey and Wolverine films combined. Yet there's nothing even on the table for another Iron Man film. There are GOTG, Antman and Dr Strange either releasing soon or in production. So where's this alarm that they'd gum up the works if they did have Spider-man?

Marvel aren't going to release another Iron Man movie because RDJ has enough money and doesn't want to do any more.

And Spider-man with MCU ties would be great in moderation. Who says Marvel would overdo it when they've clearly tried to spread the love in the last Avengers film. Sure there wasn't a lot for Hawkeye but come on...It's Hawkeye. Give him a mask, some cool dialog and some great action pieces and I'm cool with that.

Hawkeye is the best Avenger, so no, the film needed more Hawkeye.

[Arfguy]

So where's this alarm that they'd gum up the works if they did have Spider-man?

And Spider-man with MCU ties would be great in moderation. Who says Marvel would overdo it when they've clearly tried to spread the love in the last Avengers film. Sure there wasn't a lot for Hawkeye but come on...It's Hawkeye. Give him a mask, some cool dialog and some great action pieces and I'm cool with that.

I have to agree with this sentiment. Nothing Marvel Studios has done shows that they'd over-do one character. They stopped at 3 Iron Man, when RDJ as Iron Man is clearly a big draw. When RDJ's 6 picture deal ran out, he signed on to do 2 more Avengers movies, only...which is what Marvel Studios has planned out. 3 individual movies of the characters that have worked out and 3 Avengers. So far, that's meant 3 Captain America, 3 Iron Man movies, and most likely 3 Thor movies.

They have had a plan since the success of the first Iron Man movie and that plan hasn't changed in the 4 years it took to culminate into the Avengers. I don't know how things would have been if Marvel Studios had the rights to Spider-Man when it began, but as I said before...if Spider-Man were to revert back to Marvel Studio's control today, I do not think it would alter their plans prior to the conclusion of Phase 3.

[BeastieRunner]

The movies could be worse but if they were under the MCU umbrella, they'd magically be better to 75% of the internet.

[YoungThanos]

When did I say it was?

I said that if your goal is to just make movies off of one genre, you'll make more movies in that genre than studios who make movies in all kinds of genres.

The cake shop is going to sell more cakes than the general food shop. That's not the food shop's fault.

And your argument still doesn't make much sense when Marvel has been teasing us about films for years that never show up. Black Widow, War Machine and now Dr Strange. Ant-Man will have taken a decade to have gotten made by the time it gets out.

Okay which one is it???
Do you agree that Marvel studios has made leaps and bounds with regards to the CBM genre or are you going to nip pick about Marvel for not making solo Black Widow films. Never mind that she's been in 3 films so far while currently shooting a 5th film while PREGNANT. Putting a pin in that is warranted. Keep in my the MCU is only 6 years old so demanding a War Machine solo film sounds just sounds spoiled minor and impatient to me.

Ultimately it sounds like you're getting full off of your "cake shop" analogy while whining about cookie crumbs so not to give full credit where it belongs. If that's your argument then fine but it's not fooling me. And it's not changing the fact that people aren't as interested in Sony's Spider-man as they use to be.

Marvel aren't going to release another Iron Man movie because RDJ has enough money and doesn't want to do any more.

Feige spoke on life after RDJ, but to be honest after what they did with IM3 I don't really care if they make another one anytime soon. For me it would be a rental anyway. I'm fine with him just being in the Avengers films.

[Flash Gordon]

You surely don't think MARVEL will just stop making AVENGERS films after number 3, right?

[dupersuper]

The plots may be a little smoother, but I'd hope for the same cast.

[BeastieRunner]

Spider-Man works better as a serial, in my mind. When Marvel gets the rights back, I'd hope they just put him on TV and then show up in movies as a cameo or team-up from time-to-time. Maybe have a season lead to a big movie at one point.

IMHO.

[Ceebiro]

The plots may be a little smoother, but I'd hope for the same cast.

Yeah. I really like the current cast they have in place particularly Garfield and Stone.