Deadline: Disney-Sony Standoff Ends Marvel Studios & Kevin Feige’s Involvement In ‘Spider-Man’

[SunZoo]

Why are you acting as If Sony only made trash Spider-Man movies and venom was a hit and successful movie .
Also mcu was using Sony’s property Sony should have the right to use Spider-Man however they want .

What are you talking about ?? Spider-Man always has been successful with Sony . The only Spider-Man movie to win a Oscar is from Sony . And all his movies including venom made money . Sony will be fine

Sony had to do the deal with Marvel in the first place because of what?

They had to reboot the Spiderman franchise twice, and were even looking to try and squeeze the ASM series into the MCU retroactively. The character was dead in the water before Disney came along and gave them a viable Spider-man.

As for Venom, the movies that killed the previous Spider-man franchises sold plenty tickets and made plenty money. So did the Ninja Turtles reboot and the Transformers flicks, enough to justify making more of them, despite both being trash. Not to mention, MCU's Spider-man is largely the reason why people went to see that movie, Sony went out of their way to try to create false association with the MCU so that it didn't tank.

Nah man, Disney cant be mad at a move like this but wanna negotiate to include whatever spider-man related characters in their movies had that deal actually went through.

Yes they can and should be.

They wanted to negotiate for integration of the rest of the characters because Sony was deliberately creating false association with their iteration of Spider-man. You're not gonna shove Tom Holland into Venom at random and have my franchise associated with these off brand, trash ass movies without any kind of quality control or over-sight for the sake of continuity. Sony leadership has shown they are willing to throw creators under the bus to cut corners and are responsible for devaluing several other Marvel properties.

Disney saying...instead of you having a "Venom verse", confusing the fans into thinking it's connected to the MCU, let's actually connect the shyt to the MCU, go 50/50 on production and make the shyt make sense. While I think a 70/30 split would be more reasonable, Marvel was right to push for more control and oversight as far as integration if Sony were going to publicly claim that their films are connected to the franchise.

Spiderman was a welcome addition to Civil War, Infinity War and Endgame, but they didn't need him for those to be big films. Without the MCU...they would have had either reboot Spider-man AGAIN in less than a 5 year span on their own, or lead off with that bullshyt Venom movie with MCU wave to ride.

 

[23Barrettcity]

Sony had to do the deal with Marvel in the first place because of what?

They had to reboot the Spiderman franchise twice, and were even looking to try and squeeze the ASM series into the MCU retroactively. The character was dead in the water before Disney came along and gave them a viable Spider-man.

As for Venom, the movies that killed the previous Spider-man franchises sold plenty tickets and made plenty money. So did the Ninja Turtles reboot and the Transformers flicks, enough to justify making more of them, despite both being trash. Not to mention, MCU's Spider-man is largely the reason why people went to see that movie, Sony went out of their way to try to create false association with the MCU so that it didn't tank.



Yes they can and should be.

They wanted to negotiate for integration of the rest of the characters because Sony was deliberately creating false association with their iteration of Spider-man. You're not gonna shove Tom Holland into Venom at random and have my franchise associated with these off brand, trash ass movies without any kind of quality control or over-sight for the sake of continuity. Sony leadership has shown they are willing to throw creators under the bus to cut corners and are responsible for devaluing several other Marvel properties.

Disney saying...instead of you having a "Venom verse", confusing the fans into thinking it's connected to the MCU, let's actually connect the shyt to the MCU, go 50/50 on production and make the shyt make sense. While I think a 70/30 split would be more reasonable, Marvel was right to push for more control and oversight as far as integration if Sony were going to publicly claim that their films are connected to the franchise.

Spiderman was a welcome addition to Civil War, Infinity War and Endgame, but they didn't need him for those to be big films. Without the MCU...they would have had either reboot Spider-man AGAIN in less than a 5 year span on their own, or lead off with that bullshyt Venom movie with MCU wave to ride.

Sony didn’t have to do anything that’s where your wrong. People didn’t only go see venom because a false association with the mcu they saw it because Spider-Man and venom are popular characters. Spider-Man 3 made about 900 million like 12 years ago . Sony can do whatever they want with Spider-Man the same way the mcu can make Peter Tony’s little buddy . Your talking dumb though if you think that Sony only made bad Spider-Man movies and unsuccessful movies like the transformers movies and tmnt. Just say you enjoy this Spider-Man the best because while I like the movies I also liked Garfield as well and only the second amazing was flawed and nowhere near as bad as sm3.

 

[SunZoo]

Sony didn’t have to do anything that’s where your wrong.

Then why didn't they reboot Spider-man on their own? Why were they already trying to ride the MCU wave even with Garfield's Spider-man? They had no idea what to do with the character. If they didn't need Marvel they would have moved ahead without them.

Spider-Man 3 made about 900 million like 12 years ago .

Batman V Superman just did a billy 3 years ago, it made plenty money, it was still trash and hurt the future of the franchise, just like Spider-man 3 did.

Sony can do whatever they want with Spider-Man the same way the mcu can make Peter Tony’s little buddy . Your talking dumb though if you think that Sony only made bad Spider-Man movies and unsuccessful movies like the transformers movies and tmnt. Just say you enjoy this Spider-Man the best because while I like the movies I also liked Garfield as well and only the second amazing was flawed and nowhere near as bad as sm3.

I compare Venom specifically to TMNT and Transformers because it's of similar tone, 'success' and quality.

And I was heated when they rebooted Garfield's Spider-Man, he was great in the suit though he was a shyt Peter Parker, I wanted them to give the character a chance to progress from where he was, but Sony gon Sony.

And now Tim Rothman, the man who ran X-Men and the Fantastic Four into the ground is being given the keys to Spider-man.

 

[Bryan Danielson]

What are you talking about ?? Spider-Man always has been successful with Sony . The only Spider-Man movie to win a Oscar is from Sony . And all his movies including venom made money . Sony will be fine

You know..... you and another poster keep on getting hung up on the “bu bu bu bu bu _____ was successful and it made money” thing, taking out of context or misunderstanding what these other posters are saying or meaning when they talking about success/failure. Which it appears everyone else comprehends or gets.

I think for clarity and to finally nip that in the bud, if we gonna stick with the “but it made money so it’s success” narrative then in that case practically EVERY comic book movie that dropped was always successful and made money except for a handful.

Whether they made $5M more over their budgets or Hundreds of Millions more.

Daredevil had a $78M budget, but made $179M at the box office ($102M Domestic) that technically made money and was successful.

 

[Bryan Danielson]

Batman V Superman just did a billy 3 years ago, it made plenty money, it was still trash and hurt the future of the franchise, just like Spider-man 3 did.

BvS didn’t do a billion, only Aquaman made a billion.

Hopefully I can say that without anyone getting mad/triggered

That’s not stanning or talking shyt about DC, that replying to another poster and speaking a fact

Per other posters logic anyway, I couldn’t be a Marvel stan anyway since I actually watch the CWDC shows DC app shows and liked Green Lantern and own DC movies via Blu Ray and dvd

 

[23Barrettcity]

Then why didn't they reboot Spider-man on their own? Why were they already trying to ride the MCU wave even with Garfield's Spider-man? They had no idea what to do with the character. If they didn't need Marvel they would have moved ahead without them.



Batman V Superman just did a billy 3 years ago, it made plenty money, it was still trash and hurt the future of the franchise, just like Spider-man 3 did.



I compare Venom specifically to TMNT and Transformers because it's of similar tone, 'success' and quality.

And I was heated when they rebooted Garfield's Spider-Man, he was great in the suit though he was a shyt Peter Parker, I wanted them to give the character a chance to progress from where he was, but Sony gon Sony.

And now Tim Rothman, the man who ran X-Men and the Fantastic Four into the ground is being given the keys to Spider-man.

B vs S did not do a billy . But despite that it has nothing to do with the Spider-Man movies which are good outside of 1 and a half . And Sony just made the spider verse movie which was the top 2 of all Spider-Man movies to me

You know..... you and another poster keep on getting hung up on the “bu bu bu bu bu _____ was successful and it made money” thing, taking out of context or misunderstanding what these other posters are saying or meaning when they talking about success/failure. Which it appears everyone else comprehends or gets.

I think for clarity and to finally nip that in the bud, if we gonna stick with the “but it made money so it’s success” narrative then in that case practically EVERY comic book movie that dropped was always successful and made money except for a handful.

Whether they made $5M more over their budgets or Hundreds of Millions more.

Daredevil had a $78M budget, but made $179M at the box office ($102M Domestic) that technically made money and was successful.

spider man movies were successes all of them . They weren’t 5 mill above the budget either movies , the worst of the Spider-Man movies made like 900 mill years ago . And creatively most of the Spider-Man movies are received well by fans and critics . The amazing spider man 2 actually has worse reviews than Spider-Man 3 which is insane but whatever

 

[Bryan Danielson]

Also we gotta stop hating on and shytting Transformers movies based off the same criteria to protect and support the Spidey movies and _ _ movies that only I can’t mention cuz it upsets certain folks.

ALL the Transformers movies made bank and 2 of them made a billion. They are HIGHLY successful. Even the latest

Oh if you’re hating on Transformers you’re stan (I always wanted to say that)

 

[Bryan Danielson]

spider man movies were successes all of them . They weren’t 5 mill above the budget either movies , the worst of the Spider-Man movies made like 900 mill years ago . And creatively most of the Spider-Man movies are received well by fans and critics . The amazing spider man 2 actually has worse reviews than Spider-Man 3 which is insane but whatever

I’m not disagreeing or saying that it didn’t make money, but if we keep spinning our wheels on that to claim “success”

Well then pretty much all these movies were a success and GOTDAMN why do we hate on Transformers franchise, Thor 1&2, IM3, A2?

 

[head shots101]

Then why didn't they reboot Spider-man on their own? Why were they already trying to ride the MCU wave even with Garfield's Spider-man? They had no idea what to do with the character. If they didn't need Marvel they would have moved ahead without them.



Batman V Superman just did a billy 3 years ago, it made plenty money, it was still trash and hurt the future of the franchise, just like Spider-man 3 did.



I compare Venom specifically to TMNT and Transformers because it's of similar tone, 'success' and quality.

And I was heated when they rebooted Garfield's Spider-Man, he was great in the suit though he was a shyt Peter Parker, I wanted them to give the character a chance to progress from where he was, but Sony gon Sony.

And now Tim Rothman, the man who ran X-Men and the Fantastic Four into the ground is being given the keys to Spider-man.

Please tell me this is not true

 

[Bryan Danielson]

What's the alternative? Pretend Spider-man doesn't exist? let Sony take him at the height of his popularity and shoehorn him into shytty movies that people will think are associated with Marvel proper?

I HIGHLY doubt FFH ended the way it did with the intentions to leave it as is, they're not that dumb to paint themselves into a corner like that knowing how desperate Sony is. You can say they made it hard for Sony to take the reins with how much the character is tied to the MCU as an insurance policy, but that obviously didn't guarantee they would play ball.

If what they do next basically amounts to going I would be very surprised.

Like I said before, there is precedent set for this, past and present. With the Mutant X show and now with the Universal owned Hulk properties that kept them from making a stand alone movie in the MCU becoming Disney + shows, I would think they could at the very least wrap up the story with something animated.

As far as what’s next? I think it goes like this.
Disney would indeed ideally LOVE to have Spider-Man still with the MCU.

But at this point the landscape has dramatically changed. 11 years ago, SDMN was bigger than ANYTHING they had in the MCU. But now you can’t say he is the biggest character.

They’ve done an EXCELLENT job introducing and presenting so many characters over these 11 years and many still have journeys that fans are going to be flocking to see, not to mention there are new characters on the horizon that are about to be introduced and who knows who is going to be the next big successful thing that’s going to blow the fukk up.

Then the fact they reclaimed X-men and FF???

Man life without Spidey really ain’t gonna be that bad of a hit and they better off now than they were before they had him.

Spidey just now become Agent Coulson statuss

 

[Chris Cool]

Sony had to do the deal with Marvel in the first place because of what?

They had to reboot the Spiderman franchise twice, and were even looking to try and squeeze the ASM series into the MCU retroactively. The character was dead in the water before Disney came along and gave them a viable Spider-man.

As for Venom, the movies that killed the previous Spider-man franchises sold plenty tickets and made plenty money. So did the Ninja Turtles reboot and the Transformers flicks, enough to justify making more of them, despite both being trash. Not to mention, MCU's Spider-man is largely the reason why people went to see that movie, Sony went out of their way to try to create false association with the MCU so that it didn't tank.



Yes they can and should be.

They wanted to negotiate for integration of the rest of the characters because Sony was deliberately creating false association with their iteration of Spider-man. You're not gonna shove Tom Holland into Venom at random and have my franchise associated with these off brand, trash ass movies without any kind of quality control or over-sight for the sake of continuity. Sony leadership has shown they are willing to throw creators under the bus to cut corners and are responsible for devaluing several other Marvel properties.

Disney saying...instead of you having a "Venom verse", confusing the fans into thinking it's connected to the MCU, let's actually connect the shyt to the MCU, go 50/50 on production and make the shyt make sense. While I think a 70/30 split would be more reasonable, Marvel was right to push for more control and oversight as far as integration if Sony were going to publicly claim that their films are connected to the franchise.

Spiderman was a welcome addition to Civil War, Infinity War and Endgame, but they didn't need him for those to be big films. Without the MCU...they would have had either reboot Spider-man AGAIN in less than a 5 year span on their own, or lead off with that bullshyt Venom movie with MCU wave to ride.

You're making it seem like the mcu is all top notch. The majority of their movies are mediocre as fukk and in the same vein as venom.

 

[Bryan Danielson]

You're making it seem like the mcu is all top notch. The majority of their movies are mediocre as fukk and in the same vein as venom.

Hmmmmm, now this an interesting take.

What exactly is mediocre though in comparison to what?

And I’m not coming at you, I’m not trynna defend one thing over another.

Just curious like what is the baseline you’re using to judge that

 

[Chris Cool]

Hmmmmm, now this an interesting take.

What exactly is mediocre though in comparison to what?

And I’m not coming at you, I’m not trynna defend one thing over another.

Just curious like what is the baseline you’re using to judge that

Not in comparison to anything. Just judging them as movies. Most the of them are Cs at best, but people act like marvel is just churning out A+ movies. Took a decade for them to even have a decent villain.

 

[23Barrettcity]

Also we gotta stop hating on and shytting Transformers movies based off the same criteria to protect and support the Spidey movies and _ _ movies that only I can’t mention cuz it upsets certain folks.

ALL the Transformers movies made bank and 2 of them made a billion. They are HIGHLY successful. Even the latest

Oh if you’re hating on Transformers you’re stan (I always wanted to say that)

No last knight lost like 100 plus million even though it made like 600 mill . But I agree with you. I liked most of them despite the shenanigans and crazy plots . Making money or not doesn’t mean a movie is good or bad . I love sinister 1 and 2 and watchmen but they Aren’t huge successes or the best reviewed movies . wait agreeing with a post of yours did my brain just explode by the fact you were rationale don’t even know what to say anymore ..

 

[Bryan Danielson]

Not in comparison to anything. Just judging them as movies. Most the of them are Cs at best, but people act like marvel is just churning out A+ movies. Took a decade for them to even have a decent villain.

Fair enough..... I think what’s happening is “people” who are acting like that are comparing them to COMIC BOOK films like Daredevil, Batman & Robin, Fantastic 4: Rise of Silver Surfer, Green Lantern and etc previous and current other “comic book movie” that isn’t MCU.

Also the villain thing is a little overrated cuz at worst all their villains were already decent. The problem was many weren’t really as mainstream and familiar as Joker (who had the most amount of shine outside of Lex and Magneto and no one considers them the greatest)

Since the Nolan trilogy, there really hasn’t been a great villain coming out that camp and don’t recall anyone calling high praise to the villains in Xmen franchises (Wolverine included), Deadpool, Ghostrider, and the pre MCU Spider-Men movies.

Also, they only been in existence a decade, not 2-4 like everyone else, but I feel you