Welcome to the main discussion thread for the Marvel Cinematic Universe! This pinned post is here to establish some basic guidelines. All of the Media Forum rules
still apply.
- This thread is for talking about the live-action films, TV shows, animated works, and related content that use the Marvel brand, currently owned by Disney.
- While mild digressions are okay, discussion of the comic books should go in this thread
. Extended digressions may be thumped as off-topic.
- Spoilers for new releases should not be discussed without spoiler tagging for at least two weeks. Rather, each title should have a dedicated thread where that sort of conversation is held. We can mention new releases in a general sense, but please be courteous to people who don't want to be spoiled.
If you're posting tagged spoilers, make sure that the film or series is clearly identified outside the spoiler tagging. People need to know what will be spoiled before they choose to read the post.
Edited by Mrph1 on Jul 29th 2024 at 3:09:00 PM
I'm Sad Frogerson.
I never heard of any Executive Meddling on Spider-Man 2. All I remember was that there was a period where Sony wanted to replace Tobey Maguire after he injured himself doing a stunt. Nothing to the level of Spider-Man 3 or The Amazing Spider-Man Series. I'd like to hear what happened with the second film.
IIRC Sony wanted the Spiderfilms on a very TIGHT timeline with production on 2 started before everybody was ready for it, and three they were insisting on the intro of Venom over the creative teams objections, basically Sony wanted more 'things' added to the films. Basically falling into the same trap as the later Batfilms (too many villians! too many plot threads!) IIRC the reason why everybody walked is they were flat out exhausted after wrapping 3 and Sony was already trying to get them to commit to 4 and start filming within the YEAR.
You can see this in the reboot where they were planning on 1-2 Spiderfilms a YEAR featuring every possible and viable Spider Charter, Sony wants to churn these out like Penny Candy it seems
Really, it's like they don't believe in long term successes. It always has to be short term...
I might actually end up hating both sides if what the Washington Post says it's true.
Namely how apparently it's Disney choosing to walk away.
Disney, though, seems determined to walk away. Executives have taken the position they don’t need firsthand control of every last property in their stable. Of course, it’s not clear they are doing this happily — or would do so in the future. After all, there was that previous case of X-Men and Fox. In that instance, Disney let its licensing studio do as it pleased. Then it bought the entire company.
That adds up with what we already know. Namely that Disney didn't want Feige working on Spider-Man anymore.
With the Fox acquisition, Disney has a bunch of new toys in their toybox - one of which is grand enough to warrant dozens of movies in its own right. They basically just reacquired, like, a third of the Marvel Universe for filmmaking. There is a lot to work with there.
Spider-Man was a big name acquisition when FOX's properties were still untouchable and the MCU had to be driven exclusively by B- and C-list characters. But now it doesn't really make as much financial sense to be making Spider-Man movies for Sony at almost no gain, just to be able to put him in their own films.
Disney's moved from all their most famous and beloved properties being licensed out to it being just Spider-Man. They have everything but Spider-Man. They've moved from being able to make films about "Some obscure parts of the Marvel Universe you may not have heard of" to being able to make films about "The complete and total Marvel Universe in its entirety (except Spider-Man)".
So I can totally see why, from their perspective, it makes good business sense to just cut the tie and let Spidey be the odd property out; the one thing, out of all the million things in their library, that they're not making billion-dollar movies about. Disney doesn't need Spider-Man anymore. And frankly, it's not like he's really contributed that much to the crossover films he has shown up in.
The only property that's really benefit from Spidey's presence in the MCU is the Spider-Man franchise itself, which got a couple of pretty incredible movies out of it. Which, from Disney's perspective, really just means that Disney's making some great movies for Sony at little actual gain to Disney. But Disney's also making some great movies for Disney at significant actual gain to Disney. So. Like. Screw that? It's not Disney's job to make Sony's movies good.
So. Yeah. It's easy to see why Disney wanted a bigger slice of the pie. But, as I noted before, it's also easy to see why Sony doesn't want Disney to have that bigger slice 'cause if they're just going to take in the same kind of money the get from making their own Spider-Man movies, then why not just make their own Spider-Man movies?
Deals like this almost never happen. This is why. Either it's unfair to Disney, or there's no financial incentive for Sony to agree. There's not really a middle ground. And Disney is no longer desperate enough for big-name A-list material to accept an unfair agreement.
There isn't a bad guy in all this. It's just business.
Edited by TobiasDrake on Aug 23rd 2019 at 12:35:21 PM
My Tumblr. Currently side-by-side liveblogging Digimon Adventure, sub vs dub.It's like somebody wished for the X-Men to join the MCU using a Monkey's Paw. You got what you wished for, it just led to Disney gaining one step towards becoming a monopoly, the cancellation of many interesting projects over at Fox, and Spider-Man leaving the MCU.
4 seconds of the Black Widow footage from D23
.
Also the upcoming Marvel rides section at Disneyland is going to be called Avengers Campus.
Edited by Tuckerscreator on Aug 23rd 2019 at 12:12:14 PM
Fine then.
Burn Disney burn (na na naaa! na na na na naaaa!)
Glad I know who to hate.
One Strip! One Strip!RE: TobiasDrake:
So. The MCU will just forget Spidey ever existed and be fine with people (especially kids) asking "what about Spider-Man?"
Meanwhile, Sony gets to have their own Spider-Man, but he inevitably won't be the one who...
- fought The Falcon and Winter Soldier in an airport and came up with a plan to beat Giant-Man.
- saved Tony's stuff from the Vulture.
- fought Thanos with Iron Man, Doctor Strange, and 3 of the Guardians of the Galaxy.
- got turned into dust by Thanos.
- became the motivation for why Tony joined in the Time Heist.
- fought aliens with instant kill mode, got to fly around with Mjolnir, got surrounded by superhero ladies in the rematch against Thanos, and attended Tony's funeral.
- fought Mysterio (and subsequently got framed and outed by Mysterio).
No, when Sony reboots him, he'll be back to being a social outcast who accidentally gets his beloved uncle killed, who doesn't know any other superheroes, and whatever Sony did before the MCU thing. Because that's what Sony thinks we want to see that again at this point.
...
What else can I say but...
Edited by TargetmasterJoe on Aug 23rd 2019 at 4:11:20 AM
![]()
Pretty much, yeah. The MCU will move on and spend the next decade making thirty more billion-dollar films that aren't about Spider-Man, and they'll all be critically successful and people will talk about them for ages.
And Sony will be off presumably doing the same thing DC does: making okay superhero films that everyone on the internet hates and critics deplore, but that make a lot of money at the box office anyway.
Both companies will survive just fine, people will move on, and the world will continue to turn.
And never making any movies because they're bankrupt?
Edited by TobiasDrake on Aug 23rd 2019 at 2:16:06 AM
My Tumblr. Currently side-by-side liveblogging Digimon Adventure, sub vs dub.I'm just p*issed at the possibility that Marvel/Disney would probably just toss Spidey under the bus and we'll be stuck with Sony having Spidey who, let's be honest, will just half-ass everything because they think it won't matter if it's good or not so long as they get money.
Edited by TargetmasterJoe on Aug 23rd 2019 at 4:16:04 AM
I'm still sort of suspicious of the idea that they ever really fired James Gunn at all but that's neither here nor there.
Edited by LordVatek on Aug 23rd 2019 at 4:28:15 AM
This song needs more love.![]()
The sale of the Spider-Man rights to Columbia Pictures/Sony gave Marvel Comics a second wind after bankruptcy following The Great Comics Crash Of 1996.
Eh, my ideal would be public domain laws be relaxed to what they used to be and then anybody gets to make Spider-Man stories, instead of having to settle for ancient stuff from 1923
.
Edited by Tuckerscreator on Aug 23rd 2019 at 1:25:45 AM
x4 I think they "fired" him but they always had every intention of rehiring him once people stopped talking about his old tweets.
Edited by LordVatek on Aug 23rd 2019 at 4:28:25 AM
This song needs more love.
