Sony's Spider-Man 3 (Out of the MCU, Back In Again, and BEYOND)

[AquaParade]

Originally Posted by Andrew NDB

That's not all it means. It means absolutely 0 quality control from Marvel/Disney... and we saw how that goes with Spider-Man 3, the Spider-Man 4 they tried to rush Raimi into, Amazing Spider-Man, and Amazing Spider-Man 2. As in the Hot Garbage Express™.

If it comes to it, it'll be a bit sad watching Sony destroy a thing that's been built up over the last two movies. Though it wouldn't be the first time they've torn a thing they've had success with in the third movie.

Right, it also means 0 quality control from Marvel, which is arguably a bigger change than the characters they are able to use, if you want to parcel it out.

And yeah, I totally understand the sentiment that it's a bad thing for Marvel to no longer be involved. It scares me too. But, why do you leave out "Into The Spider-Verse" as proof that Sony can produce good films? I know the animation medium is different, but I don't believe that is reason to discount it as a well made Spider-Man film produced by Sony. The producer's role is largely the same in both instances.

And I'm not saying "all praise Into the Spider-Verse" either. It's not even my favorite Spider-Man movie, but I honestly found it way more entertaining then Captain Marvel, Guardians of the Galaxy 2, Ant-man & The Wasp, or Dr. Strange. All which are recent Marvel films, which bored me to tears.

That right there leads me to believe that Marvel is plenty capable of delivering boring films and Sony is capable of delivering great ones.

Marvel is the safe bet. The much safer bet. I hope a deal is worked out. But don't you get a at least a little excited about the possibility of Sony pulling a Fox Studios and bringing in an awesome director to give us a film to the caliber of "Logan" (something I don't think the MCU has been able to do yet, as wonderful as it is)?
Imagine an A-list director coming in, with a slightly smaller budget, slightly less sutido interferrance, and delivering a moody vision of "Kraven's Last Hunt"? That's just one possibility, but there are doors that open, with Marvel stepping aside.

Anyway, I don't mean to nag at your position. I'm just picking your brain a bit.

[Andrew NDB]

Originally Posted by AquaParade

But, why do you leave out "Into The Spider-Verse" as proof that Sony can produce good films?

Because nobody had to work with actors on an actual set and most importantly there was no pressure from Sony to setup 30 other movies in it, as there was with every single one of the last 4 (yes, I'm including the Spider-Man 4 that Sony was trying to bully Raimi into making) live action Spider-Man movies.

Marvel is the safe bet. The much safer bet. I hope a deal is worked out. But don't you get a at least a little excited about the possibility of Sony pulling a Fox Studios and bringing in an awesome director to give us a film to the caliber of "Logan" (something I don't think the MCU has been able to do yet, as wonderful as it is)?

No. There is nothing about Sony Pictures that remotely inspires hope or trust, not for a long time.

[AquaParade]

Originally Posted by Andrew NDB

Because nobody had to work with actors on an actual set and most importantly there was no pressure from Sony to setup 30 other movies in it, as there was with every single one of the last 4 (yes, I'm including the Spider-Man 4 that Sony was trying to bully Raimi into making) live action Spider-Man movies.



No. There is nothing about Sony Pictures that remotely inspires hope or trust, not for a long time.

I think there was pressure from Sony to setup 30 other movies in Spider-Verse. Just look at the concept, and the television live-action Spider-Verse shows and movie sequels they have already announced. The film is crammed full of spin-off potential and set-up, despite being able to keep it all streamlined into a coherent story. But if your point is that Into the Spider-Verse was better off for not having pressure from Sony to set up 30 movies, than why not give the film it's due credit for that? Why not give Sony their due credit for that? Your point is that they did something good...

Fair enough about Sony not inspiring any faith at all in you though.

What did you think of Spider-Man: FFH?

I think I felt really disappointed by it - the outlandish comedy that involved Peter calling in drones on a classmate, the somewhat sterile action scenes against the Elementals, the lack of tragedy in Peter's life - but I'm hesitant to speak too soon, because I often need to see these films more than once to form a strong opinion. There were things I liked about it, but until I see it again, I'm inclined to think the MCU isn't really doing anything extra special with their version of Spider-Man, at this point, now that we have seen what it's like for him to team up with the Avengers.

[Sumac]

Originally Posted by CyberCubed

Why would they do that when Far from home grossed the most amount for a movie they had? Sony has no intention of rebooting, this deal was just about Marvel getting the profits and to keep using him in MCU movies.

Sony has been building up their spiderman universe with Venom and other spinoffs and will continue using Holland as long as possible. If anything they’re probably jumping at the chance to do the Spider-Man Vs Venom movie they wanted now.

What Andrew had said - no quality control from Marvel.
Sony once killed Raimi's Spider-Man, which was their golden goose. There is no way to be sure, that they won't do the same mistake again. And by all accounts, they most likely will.

[ZariusTwo]

Originally Posted by Sumac

What Andrew had said - no quality control from Marvel

Marvel rarely has "quality control" over itself

[AquaParade]

Originally Posted by Sumac

What Andrew had said - no quality control from Marvel.
Sony once killed Raimi's Spider-Man, which was their golden goose. There is no way to be sure, that they won't do the same mistake again. And by all accounts, they most likely will.

Tobey Maguire as Spider-Man wasn't really looking like a golden goose after the reception to Spider-Man 3. Tom Holland is still loved by the fan base, younger, still has films left in his contract, and we are in an age where an on-going universe is much more desirable.

Signs point to Sony keeping Tom Holland.

I think Disney still has a lot of incentive to make this deal work, and that is why I am optimistic they will reach an agreement. Disney will want to make sure their most profitable character is not driven into the ground. They also don't want Sony to potentially release a terrible Spider-Man sequel with Tom Holland that casual audiences confused with the MCU. A couple bad Sony Spider-Man movies, that are virtually indistinguishable from the MCU films, to casual audiences, could really stink up the MCU's image.

[CyberCubed]

The time for Tobey Maguire to make his triumphant return as a middle-age Spiderman is here!







It's inevitable, even if its another Spider-verse type movie just in live action.

[TigerClaw]

[Vegita-San]

why don't they just buy it out right if they are so rich?

no idea why they are playing ball like this.
they got FF and Xmen back after all.

[AquaParade]

Originally Posted by Vegita-San

why don't they just buy it out right if they are so rich?

no idea why they are playing ball like this.
they got FF and Xmen back after all.

Well it’s not entirely up to them. Sony has to want to sell.

[CyberCubed]

Originally Posted by Vegita-San

why don't they just buy it out right if they are so rich?

no idea why they are playing ball like this.
they got FF and Xmen back after all.

You expect Disney to get away with a hostile takeover?

[Coola Yagami]

Originally Posted by CyberCubed

You expect Disney to get away with a hostile takeover?

I mean... it's Disney.

[Andrew NDB]

I'm not too worried about that. Disney barely was able to acquire only certain Fox assets. If they come back to the table about Sony (remember, we're talking PS4s and sh**) there will be blowback.

Don't have a whole lot of faith that anything would happen to that end, though. More likely is that they will just deal at some point. And am I stupid, or is in none of this actually anything saying that Spider-Man will be forcibly removed from the MCU? I see about Feige being not a part of new solo Spider-Man movies as producer... but nothing saying some kind of handshake still doesn't exist? I mean, I'm reasonably certain Feige having a producer credit on the last two Spider-Man movies (and keep in mind, he even had one on ASM2) has little to do with what universe it is in.

[CyberCubed]

Sony is a Japanese company, pretty sure American companies cannot forcibly buyout Sony. Microsoft considered something similar buying Nintendo in the Gamecube/Xbox era way back in 2001 and it was laughed off back then too.

[Andrew NDB]

Originally Posted by CyberCubed

Sony is a Japanese company, pretty sure American companies cannot forcibly buyout Sony. Microsoft considered something similar buying Nintendo in the Gamecube/Xbox era way back in 2001 and it was laughed off back then too.

IF anything it would be Disney buying Sony Pictures. It's not like Disney would be allowed to acquire their whole hardware/TV/Playstation empire.

[AquaParade]

Originally Posted by Andrew NDB

IF anything it would be Disney buying Sony Pictures. It's not like Disney would be allowed to acquire their whole hardware/TV/Playstation empire.

Or to take it further, just the Spider-Man catalog itself. Would be slightly cheaper, less of a headache to acquire, and the cream of the crop. The incentive lingers because of the shadow Spider-Man casts over Marvel, so it seems more likely than any other type of buyout.

[Vegita-San]

Originally Posted by AquaParade

Well it’s not entirely up to them. Sony has to want to sell.

TRUE.

But, pony enough money up and selling would seem like the easier option. especially, one would think, to a japanese company that generally doesn't like headaches...

[Andrew NDB]

The failure of "Dark Phoenix" may be to blame for this:

https://comicbook.com/marvel/2019/08...Tx8kY6G7I-KVWM

[AquaParade]

Originally Posted by Vegita-San

TRUE.

But, pony enough money up and selling would seem like the easier option. especially, one would think, to a japanese company that generally doesn't like headaches...

It would appear that way. Disney comes across as filthy rich, even if they did probably just spend an uncomfortable amount on Fox.

And it would definitely seem like less of a headache, right? Not only would it change the game in terms of freedom allowed to MCU Spider-Man films, but they wouldn't have to worry about Sony screwing it all up and destroying Marvels Spider-Man merch sales.

[CyberCubed]

https://ew.com/movies/2019/08/24/tom...mpression=true

Tom Holland:

“Basically, we’ve made five great movies,” Holland told EW. “It’s been five amazing years. I’ve had the time of my life. Who knows what the future holds? But all I know is that I’m going to continue playing Spider-Man and having the time of my life. It’s going to be so fun, however we choose to do it. The future for Spider-Man will be different, but it will be equally as awesome and amazing, and we’ll find new ways to make it even cooler.”

Well there you have it, Tom Holland will still be playing Spiderman for the few who had any doubts. Just hope the movies stay good.