Marvel Cinematic Universe

It seems like the Nano-Gauntlet Tony built sacrificed protection for versatility. The original Infinity Gauntlet was custom made for Thanos and forged by an Ultimate Blacksmith with access to a star-powered legendary forge. The Nano-Gauntlet was something Tony built in a hurry using his nano-tech.

Tony wasn't even using the Nano-Gauntlet in his last moments. Instead, he had integrated the Infinity Stones into his own suit which was not specifically designed to withstand that much gamma radiation output.

Edited by M84 on Sep 23rd 2019 at 2:41:15 AM

I'm gonna need you to never, ever mention Quill and Rawdogging ever again.

@slim: Turns out Endgame is nothing but a giant Jo Jo's' reference.

Fair argument. Then again, Far From Home came and outgrossed Venom later down the line.

Then again again, the fact that Venom got as much as it did in the first place was probably the flashing (if glitchy) neon sign that Sony interpreted as saying "Hey look! We can do this without Marvel!" So...darn it.

It just feels like Sony (or Amy Pascal)'s comments of Venom having some tangential connection with the MCU was the only reason it reeled in more than $800 million. Because it got people thinking "Hmmm, maybe I'll see it in case they do make some nods to the MCU."

And given the nonexistent hype for Morbius, it feels like it'll be the Dark Universe fiasco all over again once that movie drops.

But I said enough.

Ok, well, if Venom wasn't the reason Sony split with Disney, then what was?

(I'm honestly asking, because I'm feeling like we're on two different pages here.)

Saying this as someone who has repeatedly had to defend the film on this forum despite being only so-so on it, Venom probably was a contributing factor. I was in the "Give it a chance" camp leading up to it, and even I wasn't prepared for just how successful it actually wound up being. Venom f*cking rocked the box office in a way nobody could have anticipated.

Now, it was not the only factor, mind you. There are a lot of different things that led to the Sony-Disney split. Another factor was Disney wanting a more reasonable take of the film's earnings. Disney wanted to replace the existing 95-5 Sony-Disney split with something else. Early reports claimed it was 50-50, then later reporting said 70-30.

Had Venom not been the box office smash that it was, then Sony's bargaining position would have been much weaker. An argument could have been made that they need Disney to make these films work. But they were hot off the successes of Venom and also Into the Spider-Verse. This makes for a much more complicated negotiation.

Spider-Man: Far From Home is a billion-dollar film. But 70% of a Spider-Man: Far From Home-equivalent movie is $790m. Venom made $856m on its own. That changes the equation. There is a logic to the question, "If I can already make the kind of money you're offering on my own WITHOUT Spider-Man, what could I be doing WITH Spider-Man?"

I think it might also have helped if Venom had been accepted in the MCU. Amy Pascal tried to say at one point that Venom would be in-continuity with the MCU films. Kevin Feige's response to that was basically, "LOL no it's not, get out of here with that nonsense." He made pretty clear that their relationship flows in only one direction. Disney gets to use Sony's characters, but Sony stays the hell away from Disney's universe. That kind of thing can easily cause hurt feelings in a business relationship.

For their part, Disney is having phenomenal success. Not only are they able to make super-profitable franchises out of relative unknowns like the Guardians of the Galaxy, Captain Marvel, and Doctor Strange, but they also just reacquired X-Men and the Fantastic Four. They have a ton of material to work with, and no compelling reason to maintain a business relationship over just one IP that's not actually doing much for them.

We've been told that one of the factors in this decision was Feige himself. He's pretty much the number one guy at Marvel, and he's been very enthusiastic in working on the Spider-Man films. But that's a problem, because Disney doesn't get money from those. So Disney wants their top Disney producer to stop making Spider-Man movies for Sony and to refocus his efforts on making X-Men movies for Disney.

So, end of the day, the decision was made to break from Disney. Sony decided they'd rather walk away and see what they can do with the IP than accept the more reasonable split Disney was offering. Disney, meanwhile, doesn't really need Spider-Man and was entirely willing to let Sony walk. This decision is the product of a lot of factors on both Sony and Disney's parts, any one of which being different might have prevented the negotiation from falling through.

Edited by TobiasDrake on Sep 23rd 2019 at 8:57:48 AM

So we've confirmed that Disney wanted a more reasonable deal and Sony just said no?

And also that, essentially Venom's success is the fault of the fandom for watching it and making it successful.

Because if that's the case, then nice job breaking it fandom.

Yes, people going to watch a movie they like is the height of sinful, morally reprehensible behavior.

By Zeus’s thigh-child, dude.

Edited by fredhot16 on Sep 23rd 2019 at 8:11:33 AM

The fandom just went out and watched a movie that they liked. They're not the bad guys here. Neither are Sony or Disney. In fact, the most toxic and pervasive piece of discourse surrounding the split is the idea that there even has to be a bad guy. A lot of people are angry and just looking for someone to stick blame to. Someone to hate.

But Sony is just doing what they think is best for Sony. Disney, meanwhile, is just doing what they think is best for Disney. And the fans just saw an okay movie 'cause they wanted to see a cool-looking movie.

It's just business.

x5: Ugh...you're right. At the end of the day, both sides are kinda being selfish.

When you put it like that, that does sound hurtful. (Even if Disney was worried Sony would make changes Disney would probably need to retcon later.)

I mean, in-universe, losing Peter was what influenced Tony in helping with the Time Heist, but I guess you meant in real life.

I guess the ballistic knee-jerk reaction was because we REALLY don't want to see another reboot that tells the same tired origin story and either half-bakes its ideas, gets angsty, stuffs too much too fast, or butters up their future ideas at the expense of the story they're telling at the moment.

That's kinda why we all fell in love with MCU!Spidey. They didn't bother with the origin story, they just assume you know it (and you know you do) and just power through onto the here and now.

Edited by TargetmasterJoe on Sep 23rd 2019 at 11:20:18 AM

Also, I will said another factor in M Cspidy is that....well, is spiderman finally in extended universe, even if you take out the origin story people are kinda tired of spiderman no interacting with other supers, here he finally show.

Granted is kinda hilarious is first showing as super is fighting against capitan and other super he never really get to know, or that he die and come back to life before he second movie.

He is the guy who got to late.

That too. We got so used to seeing Spidey in his own little bubble that seeing him with other superheroes was a breath of fresh air.

EDIT: And also the heads at Sony Pictures are infamous for their micro-managing. Forgot that part in my last post.

Edited by TargetmasterJoe on Sep 23rd 2019 at 11:40:11 AM

Awwww come on what’s wrong with a little judgement to people for watching particular movies?

I judge people who like Micheal Bay movies, now is that so morally bad?

It's kinda dickish so yes. Yes, it is. Your joke's not funny.

Edited by fredhot16 on Sep 23rd 2019 at 9:01:54 AM

I was going to quote Divine from Pink Flamingos (you know, the "Condone first degree murder" speech), but that might have been a bit too much.

What's the difference between degrees of murder, again?

Well it is Bay, he doesn't deserve the good jokes. (Shrugs)

We all have our weird contrarian takes. Likely mixed in with takes that aren't as spicy as we'd think.

It wasn’t a more reasonable deal. By demanding a profit portion without any exchange of the creative control that was the reason for the split in the first place, Disney was slowly reducing the value of the creative control so as to eliminate it as a negotiating stake.

And of course, Disney’s not hurting for money.

Edited by Tuckerscreator on Sep 23rd 2019 at 9:57:42 AM

My feelings on the Sony/Disney breakup is both are being selfish but Sony is the one that's going to get burnt IMO.

Sony has a bad habit of micromanaging and trying to churn out films like Penny Candy. This mindset is what eventually led to the Raimi led films crashing and burning, the team was willing to do more...but Sony wanted them RIGHT NOW when the crew needed a few years off to recharge before the next set, not to mention the executive meddling in the 2nd and 3rd films, evidently Kirsten agreed to be MJ in the other two films IF she wasn't the damsel in distress AGAIN. Welp we saw how that one went...

After the 2nd ASM film Sony announced HOW MANY possible Spider-Verse films within a few years? IIRC they wanted 1-2 A YEAR or something to that effect, Disney can do that because they have SO MANY characters with many crews so each character has a few years break before they show up again letting people take breaks, with such a small pool of characters and an even SMALLER pool of main characters your going to exhaust your people right quick...hence why those films fell apart.

Now they have Venom under their belts they think they can do it again...and it remains to be seen if they can. They don't want a billion dollar film every few years...they want one EVERY YEAR.

Can they do that? In theory and on paper they can, they got the money and the resources to do it but the track record says otherwise...I say they got a 50/50 shot of NOT falling on their faces completely, and a lesser shot of getting that annual billion dollar payday.

Probably rude but citation needed?

@Tuckers Creator The problem with the "Disney isn't hurting for money" is that Sony really isn't, either. Sure, Sony's vastly smaller than Disney, but we're not talking some little guy being screwed over-we're talking two very large megacorps.

Changing the subject:

Kumail Nanjiani recently released an Instagram photo of him, his wife Emily V. Gordon, and Eternals co-star Bryan Tyree Henry, alongside Legion's Dan Stevens, which has caused some speculation that Stevens is part of the Eternals cast. And you know what? Stevens would make a pretty great Brian Braddock. Perhaps both the Black Knight and Captain Britain are going to be in the movie? Or maybe he's playing the villain?