Marvel Cinematic Universe

It just dawned on me today that Miles Morales can brag about being the son of an Eternal. Hello, page-topper!

Edited by AyyItsMidnight on Sep 23rd 2019 at 10:19:44 AM

Self-serious autistic metalhead who goes by any pronouns. (avvie template source)

No Citation but just looking at past history of what Sony has done, they rushed the first three Spider-Films, after being told that it might effect quality (there was an interview about it with Raimi where he cites this was a reason why 2-3 were lacking compared to the first one) and even after being assured they would have a break after three they were trying to get people to sign up and start 4 within a year of wrapping 3. Everybody walked.

Similar to the ASM films after the success of the first one, they rushed into 2 and then planned many more...before checking with the cast to see if they COULD handle the schedule.

My guess is they are going to do that path...again... There's a chance they could learn from the past...but highly unlikely

Disney might have been justified here since Sony isn't the best at executing potential ideas. I mean, they did egg Raimi to add Venom into Spider-Man 3. And they did have plans to do movies on Nightwatch and Jackpot, which gives way to "wait, who were those guys?" And while GOTG worked because Marvel had faith in James Gunn, I doubt Sony would have that same faith in whoever they'd get for those movies.

For what, the claim that Sony wants a billion dollars a year? I think that chalks up to history. Rothman really likes to cut costs so the loss is kept to a minimum, so it's not quite far-fetched that guys like him would want a billion dollars on a yearly basis.

EDIT: What said.

Aaaaaand we already changed the subject. Darn.

But anyway, Dan "Legion" Stevens being in that group selfie is interesting. Maybe he's a dimensional traveling Legion? (Not sure if that's something Legion can do.)

Edited by TargetmasterJoe on Sep 23rd 2019 at 1:24:08 PM

Dan Stevens also played the Beast in the Beauty and the Beast remake which means he has an established starring credit with a Disney film and lends credibility to these rumors IMO.

That Disney is generally better at handling creative control does not equal justification to get it for free. Asset worth is a completely different subject from reception.

The original deal was: 100 percent of the profits to Sony, in exchange for 100 percent of the creative control to Disney. By dropping this to a 70/30 money split, but retaining 100 percent creative control, Disney would quietly remove 30 percent of creative control from monetary exchange. And that opens the door for lopsiding the partnership even further. Don’t take a deal where someone takes some of the cards off the table and acts like the game is still fair.

Edited by Tuckerscreator on Sep 23rd 2019 at 10:44:32 AM

Never seen such a deal talked about anywhere, tucker.

That actually wasn't the deal. Sony retained all creative control, they just allowed Marvel into the creative process as well. It's well known that Feige didn't want Tom Holland as Spider-Man at first, but Amy Pascal insisted and Feige later admitted that he was wrong. So, really, when Marvel made the movie, that was Sony standing back and basically allowing them creative control, even though Sony could have vetoed anything or insisted on other things.

This.

End of the day, it was a weird, unexpected, kind of groundbreaking moment when the Sony-Disney deal was originally struck. Deals like this don't happen.

But there's a reason for why they don't happen. There's usually a reason for why certain things don't happen, and this thing is no exception: there's not really enough to go around in terms of sharing profits or creative control from a single IP. Someone is inevitably getting screwed. When the decision was struck, that someone was Disney. They wanted Spider-Man, Sony was screwing up with Spider-Man, so a deal was made that was financially bad for Disney but gave them Spider-Man.

That was only going to last so long, though, before Disney started pushing for an arrangement that wasn't totally unfair to them. But an arrangement that isn't totally unfair to Disney is one that doesn't provide Sony with much reason to accept. See above, re: there isn't enough to go around, and that's why these sorts of shared-IP deals don't happen.

My Tumblr. Currently liveblogging Haruhi Suzumiya and revisiting Danganronpa V3.

If Sony had all creative control, wouldn't Sony have been able to muscle a Venom cameo into Far From Home regardless of Marvel's wishes? They were pretty open about wanting to do it.

Edited by Tuckerscreator on Sep 23rd 2019 at 11:03:24 AM

At the end of the day, Sony could have done that and forced a Venom cameo (I actually think it was a Spider-Man cameo in Venom). They would have gone against the wishes of Marvel, though, which is why they didn't, because Marvel was the one making the film and, you know, pissing them off would have been a bad thing.

Here's the thing: Marvel Studios was the one making the film, so they made a lot of the decisions. But final creative control was always retained by Sony — it was just that Sony liked what they saw Marvel doing, so rarely changed things about the film.

It was like Into the Spider-Verse — Sony put Lord and Miller in charge and then pretty much sat back and didn't interfere.

Edited by alliterator on Sep 23rd 2019 at 11:11:03 AM

Back up, I thought the deal was that Marvel would have creative control over the movie while Sony would be getting final creative say, financing the movie, and getting to say it's theirs.

And furthermore, Sony would get 95% of the profits while Disney would have 5% of first ticket sales or something.

Edited by TargetmasterJoe on Sep 23rd 2019 at 2:13:58 PM

Marvel Studios would make the film, but Sony would retain creative control. See right here: Sony wanted Marvel Studios to produce a new trilogy of Spider-Man films while Sony retained "creative control, marketing and distribution".

However, that was what they wanted prior to the deal, so we really don't know what was in the actual deal. All we know is that in the initial deal, Marvel agreed to produce the Spider-Man films and Sony agreed to let Marvel use Spider-Man in team-up films and no money was exchanged. (Later on, Sony paid a licensing fee, while Marvel bought back the merchandising rights.)

Edited by alliterator on Sep 23rd 2019 at 11:17:46 AM

Me and a couple friends were talking how the next Spidey film that Sony tries to do with Holland should be a prequel film, showing hiw Holland's Peter Parker got his powers (different take then what we've seen before of course). We thought this would be a good idea since it means Sony still gets a Spider Man movie, we still have Tom Holland, and we have a fulm that really wouldnt need to be a part of the MCU, since the film is covering a part of Parker's life before joining the MCU.

Knowing the business, Sony likely won't do this, but what do you all think of a prequel film?

With all the memes about women choosing a bear over a man, Hollywood might wanna get on an 'East of the Sun and West of the Moon' adaptation

I mean, we've gotten at least two films detailing Spidey's origins, that last one not even a decade old at this point.

Peter's introduction in Civil War established that he was pretty green. He'd simply been focused on rescues and stopping minor thugs, didn't have a proper costume, had no experience fighting supervillains, etc.

Having the Sony make a prequel would just take away even more of what makes Holland's Spider-Man unique, such as how much of his supporting cast know of his secret identity and help him throughout. A prequel would just be a step backwards, not forwards.

I think a prequel would be really confusing because it would be minus all the elements that would normally be in a spiderman origin story,like the absence of Uncle Ben,you'd still have radioactive spider bite somewhere

New theme music also a box

I'm against a prequel film because that would mean we don't get to move forward with the awesome Peter/MJ romance from Far From Home.

Or the earthshattering cliffhanger from Far From Home, for that matter.

So far as I knew, Sony's plan was to just keep on truckin' with Holland's series, but conspicuously never mention the MCU or its particular elements again. Guess Happy really was more invested in May than vice versa after all.

Edited by TobiasDrake on Sep 23rd 2019 at 2:40:08 AM

My Tumblr. Currently liveblogging Haruhi Suzumiya and revisiting Danganronpa V3.

I really hope that they come to a deal again, because I really want Matt Murdock to be Peter Parker's lawyer in his libel lawsuit against the Daily Planet.

That would be great, I agree.

But if they don't, silver lining, this means the villain for Spider-Man 3 needs to figure out a motivation other than "Tony Stark sucks and by fighting Spider-Man, I'm sticking it to him by proxy!"

My Tumblr. Currently liveblogging Haruhi Suzumiya and revisiting Danganronpa V3.

Which is rather head-scratching, because the Vulture and Mysterio's origin stories involved Tony Stark unknowingly screwing them over.

Or better yet, She-Hulk (depending on whether or not she gets established via her Disney+ show by then). Peter Parker getting represented by She-Hulk? Don't act like you don't want that now.

Edited by TargetmasterJoe on Sep 23rd 2019 at 4:43:40 AM

Look, all I want is to see this scene right here on the big screen.

You people think too small.

Have Phoenix Wright represent Spidey on court!

Edited by HailMuffins on Sep 23rd 2019 at 5:50:00 AM

...I, uh, I wouldn't hold my breath on that one.

It's a funny page, don't get me wrong. I cracked the f*ck up when I first read that. Years ago. As a privileged white dude.

But that was back when I was still under the delusion that racism was solved. Today, I, uh. I wouldn't want to be the guy who had Tom Holland claim to be an ethnic minority so that he could play the "Race Card" against Jameson. Even with the "LOL J/K" at the end of it, that's still not going to go over as well as you might think it will.

Especially given how tense race relations are right now, having a white dude literally go, "He hates me 'CAUSE I'M BLACK!" is a one-way ticket to Gigantic Controversy Station. The verbal equivalent of blackface doesn't need to be in an MCU film.

Edited by TobiasDrake on Sep 23rd 2019 at 2:53:30 AM

My Tumblr. Currently liveblogging Haruhi Suzumiya and revisiting Danganronpa V3.

x4 Next time, we're going back to everything being connected to Oscorp in some way, shape, or form, and also making Peter an experimental super-test tube baby, because we have learned nothing from TASM1 and 2's missteps!

Edited by TrashJack on Sep 23rd 2019 at 4:55:04 AM

Also on the "Because I'm black" bit, it might also come across as insult to injury for all the people still waiting to see Miles Morales make his live-action debut.

When Homecoming was first announced, there were a lot of people who were sore that we're getting yet another Peter Parker reboot while Miles Morales continues to get the shaft. Having Miles's best friend Ganke straight-up stolen and given Ned Leeds's name to play the exact same role for Peter that he does for Miles was salt in that wound.

The last thing Holland's Peter should be doing is making jokes about being black.

Edited by TobiasDrake on Sep 23rd 2019 at 2:59:47 AM

My Tumblr. Currently liveblogging Haruhi Suzumiya and revisiting Danganronpa V3.

Of course, the Jewish card is still on the table.

Edited by Blueace on Sep 23rd 2019 at 5:59:28 AM

Wake me up at your own risk.