The "Sony Hack" debacle is the gift which keeps on giving, and the latest chain of emails shed some light on some of the Spider-Man details we've been hearing over the past few days! Based on emails seen by
Mashable, Andrew Garfield's comments about studio interference being responsible for the tepid response to
The Amazing Spider-Man 2 have upset the wrong people, especially as he failed to appear at a Sony corporate dinner in July which would have seen him meet Sony CEO Kaz Hirai and a number of other executives. However,
"His absence (with less than an hour of notice) was seen as an affront and slight by the company's Tokyo bosses,"according to the site. As a result, he's been effectively fired as talk of a new Spider-Man began in October.
"I love introducing pp [Peter Parker] in cap but I know it comes with so many things since we won't give them what they want what will we give them? We can say it's a cameo but I'll bet it's more and will involve some of his world and it will be peter and spidey right," Amy Pascal said in an email to producer Matt Tolmach at one point, questioning how Spider-Man might fit into Marvel's longterm plans. Even more interesting though is a memo Pascal wrote to herself with issues they would need to take up with Marvel Studios if Sony were to agree to their rebooting of the character in
Captain America: The Winter Soldier.
"if we have spiderman in cap 3. what is our fee and our back end. need script approval, casting approval of sm and aunt may and consultation of mays house in queens and any other spiderman locations we may need in future movies. also approval of new spiderman costume> how long is he is the movie? how closely does it follow the civil war story line? does the world find out who spiderman is? are there any other characters from the spiderman universe they are using? can we use one of the marvel characters in our future spiderman movies not produced by marvel.can we use cap to set up ss? can drew work with the russos to get this done? are we renting him out?" Some interesting questions!
As you might imagine, this cameo (at this point, it seems as if they were only talking about lending Spider-Man to Marvel Studios for a single appearance) wouldn't have been free, and Pascal discussed both merchandising rights and taking a cut of the box office for the third
Captain America movie. As for a solo
Spider-Man outing following this appearance, Sony wanted to retain creative control over everything from the casting to script and director, something which may have put Marvel off. In fact, they wanted Marvel to consult on marketing materials (
"because they are really good") but didn't appear to be willing to offer anything more than Spider-Man existing in the Marvel Cinematic Universe. The plan would be to shoot this in 2015/16 for a 2017 release.
Even more questions raised by Pascal give us an idea of where this potential crossover could lead:
_from_Ultimate_Avengers_vs._New_Ultimates_Vol_1_4.jpg)
that Sony didn't want to take the 60/40 deal. Sign on the line, negotiate get a cut of that $300 Million toy revenue and keep it moving. Is it really that difficult?
if I met them in real life. Spider-Man has been foiling supervillain plans for years and talking shyt while doing it....
fuking Sony
I guess he dont give a fukk anyways. it might just be time for sony to give spiderman back. it's not worth all this fukking headache... 
