Characters you'd like to see in future Avengers movies?

[Artistsean]

I want them to end up in the movies too. Certain characters like Scarlet Witch, Quicksilver, and Beast, I always liked more as Avengers than X-Men. But with a different studio owning the concept of Mutants I think it wont happen unfortunately.

[Shikamaru]

I apologize if anyone else here brought this up already but anyone considered the possibility of Spider-Man being in Avengers 2 or 3? We know that Sony and Disney agreed for the Oscorp building from TASM to appear in Avengers in the background during the final fight at the end but the idea was dropped because the design for the Oscorp building wasn't finished by the time Avengers started filming the third act. This doesn't mean they definitely take place in the same universe but it shows that Sony and Marvel are willing to work together and that puts Spidey at a greater probability of showing up in one of the sequels than any mutant.

I know Spidey doesn't naturally work as an Avengers member for the most part but having him in just one Avengers movie wouldn't be too bad. He doesn't even have to officially join. He could just be there to help out, especially since they'll be facing Thanos in at least one of the sequels.

[DrCosmic]

Sony changed their tune about not working with Marvel after Avengers blew up, all of a sudden Spidey on Avengers was a remote possibility, but after ASM didn't light up the charts, their interest in capitalizing on Spidey's success with some sort of Avengers synergy died off, it seems. I doubt we'll see Spidey in Avengers at all. Ever, really.

Originally Posted by cleverusername8

Sure this is probably just me but I don't want to see any witchcraft turning up in the Avengers movies whih is why I've desperately hoped that Dr. Strange would not join the roster (thankfully I don't think he will). Thor is about as much as I can tolerate with magic in the film. They could be more creative than that I think.

I feel you on that, man. Seeing as how Dr. Strange is rumored to be in Thor, they may end up taking a Thor route with Dr. Strange as well, which could be real interesting.

Originally Posted by marcvader

I agree. I don't understand how someone can accept one type of fantasy but not another.

Tastes are a crazy thing. Some people like vanilla and don't like chocolate (how can you like one type of ice cream and not another?). Some people love vanilla and chocolate but hate swirl. Same with Fantasy and sci-fi.

[I'm Venom]

Originally Posted by DrCosmic

Sony changed their tune about not working with Marvel after Avengers blew up, all of a sudden Spidey on Avengers was a remote possibility, but after ASM didn't light up the charts, their interest in capitalizing on Spidey's success with some sort of Avengers synergy died off, it seems. I doubt we'll see Spidey in Avengers at all. Ever, really.

I see little reason for Sony to say no if Marvel offered a deal to use Spider-Man in Avengers 2. I would think they would try to cash in on that.

[Silvermoth]

I actually think it would be more of a question of Disney getting annoyed to be honest more than Sony.

[Shikamaru]

Originally Posted by DrCosmic

Sony changed their tune about not working with Marvel after Avengers blew up, all of a sudden Spidey on Avengers was a remote possibility, but after ASM didn't light up the charts, their interest in capitalizing on Spidey's success with some sort of Avengers synergy died off, it seems. I doubt we'll see Spidey in Avengers at all. Ever, really.

ASM didn't do that bad at the box office. It actually did pretty well. Made about 750 million. That is more than both Iron Man man films, separately of course, and around 75% of what TDK and TDKR did. I also believe it was the top movie at the box office in the first 2 weeks it came out. Definitely not a fail.

[DrCosmic]

Originally Posted by I'm Venom

I see little reason for Sony to say no if Marvel offered a deal to use Spider-Man in Avengers 2. I would think they would try to cash in on that.

I agree, I just see little reason for Marvel to take money out of their billion dollar franchise to get a less successful hero they clearly don't need in order to be successful and tell great stories.

Originally Posted by Silvermoth

I actually think it would be more of a question of Disney getting annoyed to be honest more than Sony.

Zactly.

Originally Posted by Shikamaru

ASM didn't do that bad at the box office. It actually did pretty well. Made about 750 million. That is more than both Iron Man man films, separately of course, and around 75% of what TDK and TDKR did. I also believe it was the top movie at the box office in the first 2 weeks it came out. Definitely not a fail.

Hmm... I forgot how well ASM did overseas, even if all those movies beat it out domestically. Still, I didn't say it failed, I said it didn't light up the charts, even as well as previous Spidey films. It got its budget back. Good on them.

[I'm Venom]

Originally Posted by DrCosmic

I agree, I just see little reason for Marvel to take money out of their billion dollar franchise to get a less successful hero they clearly don't need in order to be successful and tell great stories.

Spend money to make money.

[cherokeesam]

Originally Posted by DrCosmic

I agree, I just see little reason for Marvel to take money out of their billion dollar franchise to get a less successful hero they clearly don't need in order to be successful and tell great stories.



Zactly.



Hmm... I forgot how well ASM did overseas, even if all those movies beat it out domestically. Still, I didn't say it failed, I said it didn't light up the charts, even as well as previous Spidey films. It got its budget back. Good on them.

TASM is #44 in the Top 50 box-office grossers of all-time. Even though domestically, it made less than Hunger Games, worldwide totals exceed Katniss and Company by over 100 mil. It's still in the Top 10 All Time Superhero movies, and even exceeded the WW totals of either Iron Man movie.

It's Spider-Man. He is, and always will be, the "flagship" of Marvel Comics, and is instantly recognizable and beloved by kids of all ages around the world. Both Marvel Studios *and* Sony would profit immensely from adding him to the MCU; that's a no-brainer.

Whether or not Marvel Studios has any interest in doing so is another matter entirely.

[DrCosmic]

Originally Posted by I'm Venom

Spend money to make money.

They're already doing that very well, Spidey doesn't offer any better leverage.

Originally Posted by cherokeesam

TASM is #44 in the Top 50 box-office grossers of all-time. Even though domestically, it made less than Hunger Games, worldwide totals exceed Katniss and Company by over 100 mil. It's still in the Top 10 All Time Superhero movies, and even exceeded the WW totals of either Iron Man movie.

It's Spider-Man. He is, and always will be, the "flagship" of Marvel Comics, and is instantly recognizable and beloved by kids of all ages around the world. Both Marvel Studios *and* Sony would profit immensely from adding him to the MCU; that's a no-brainer.

Whether or not Marvel Studios has any interest in doing so is another matter entirely.

For fun. How much box office do you estimate would have been added to Avengers if Spider-Ma had been included? How much box office would have been added to TASM if he had been included? How much money do you think Sony would have asked for from the Avengers take if had been included? Do you think they would have offered any of TASM's take to Marvel? Give me some ballpark numbers for this no-brainer.

[Chewy]

This Spidey stuff again.

[I'm Venom]

Originally Posted by DrCosmic

They're already doing that very well, Spidey doesn't offer any better leverage.

For fun. How much box office do you estimate would have been added to Avengers if Spider-Ma had been included? How much box office would have been added to TASM if he had been included? How much money do you think Sony would have asked for from the Avengers take if had been included? Do you think they would have offered any of TASM's take to Marvel? Give me some ballpark numbers for this no-brainer.

Avengers 2 gets the potential to outgross the original with the addition of Spider-Man, and The Amazing Spider-Man 2 picks up that much more hype as well. Everyone stands to benefit from it. I don't think it's a given that it will happen, but there's an incentive on both sides to work out a deal, and Sony gets a cut of the gross. There aren't Spider-Man movies every year, so why not? It just seems like it would be free advertisement for Sony.

[Chewy]

Originally Posted by I'm Venom

and Sony gets a cut of the gross.

Do you not understand that every time you post about this, you yourself are typing out the #1 reason it will never happen? I've singled it out for you, since you seem to want to gloss over it

Avengers already sold an absurd amount of tickets without Spidey, and I sincerely doubt that many of the people who did not buy tickets were Spider-Man fans. Adding Spidey to Avengers 2 does not guarantee an increased gross. It does, however, guarantee that Sony would net a large chunk of the profits, without footing a large chunk of the bill.

It. Will. Not. Happen.

[OB12]

Do you not understand that every time you post about this, you yourself are typing out the #1 reason it will never happen? I've singled it out for you, since you seem to want to gloss over it

Avengers already sold an absurd amount of tickets without Spidey, and I sincerely doubt that many of the people who did not buy tickets were Spider-Man fans. Adding Spidey to Avengers 2 does not guarantee an increased gross. It does, however, guarantee that Sony would net a large chunk of the profits, without footing a large chunk of the bill.

It. Will. Not. Happen.

I don't think you can say that definitively. You are forgetting that Marvel now owns all of the merchandising rights to Spider-Man. You see Avengers merch everywhere nowadays. Spidey stuff is still very popular but adding him into some of the variations of the Avengers merchandise could certainly increase sales.

I'm not saying that it will happen, but too many people totally dismiss it like there is no possibility of SM being in the MCU. There is incentive on both sides, especially considering Sony is still a struggling production company despite whatever success ASM had.

[Chewy]

A deal to get Spider-Man in Avengers would include Sony getting a percentage of the related merchandising, as well. They wouldn't allow their IP to benefit a corporate rival without leveraging it to benefit themselves in an equal capacity. The whole thing is actually a nightmare logistically.

It makes more financial sense for Disney, in both the short-term and the long-term, to use Avengers' current, massive surge in popularity to launch another unknown character to stardom in an Avengers sequel, and reap the resulting merchandising benefits.

[marcvader]

Originally Posted by Chewy

A deal to get Spider-Man in Avengers would include Sony getting a percentage of the related merchandising, as well. They wouldn't allow their IP to benefit a corporate rival without leveraging it to benefit themselves in an equal capacity. The whole thing is actually a nightmare logistically.

It makes more financial sense for Disney, in both the short-term and the long-term, to use Avengers' current, massive surge in popularity to launch another unknown character to stardom in an Avengers sequel, and reap the resulting merchandising benefits.

Let me guess. Ms.Marvel?

[Chewy]

That would be my choice , but I'm talking any character, really.

Looks like they're gearing up to do it with Falcon.

[OB12]

No, Sony already made their bed. They sold the rights for $250M, they can't come back and say they want more. Remember part of the deal, according to the Disney CEO, is that they get more input in making Spider-Man movies.

I do agree that Disney would be smart to take advantage of their current popularity and launch new characters like Dr. Strange, Heros for Hire, etc. However, a deal to leave Spidey at Sony, though included in the MCU, if just loosely, means they benefit from merch sales while not incurring movie production costs.

[Chewy]

During the fourth quarter of fiscal 2011, the Company completed a two-way transaction to simplify our relationship with Sony Pictures. In this transaction, the Company purchased Sony Pictures participation in Spider-Man merchandising, while at the same time, Sony Pictures purchased from the Company our participation in Spider-Man films. This transaction will allow the Company to control and fully benefit from all Spider-Man merchandising activity, while Sony Pictures will continue to produce and distribute Spider-Man films.

http://www.dailyfinance.com/2012/07/...-not-for-sony/

Which part of that deal grants Disney greater participation in the creation of the Spider-Man flicks?

They would at least attempt to negotiate for a percentage of the profits from Spidey-in-Avengers merch. Sony isn't going to let their IP appear in a rival corporation's film without it benefiting them equally. Their stockholders would not exactly be happy seeing the Disney stocks soaring thanks to Sony IP. Which again proves that it is not as simple as the fans who desperately want Spidey in the Avengers seem to believe it is.

It's something that is not going to happen. Saying that it benefits both parties and then giving vague, not-really-accurate reasons why isn't going to change that.

[OB12]

You are being dismissive with equally vague sentiments. The article that you linked is precisely why something like this COULD happen.

The message? Disney, a master licensor in its own right, just gave away the equivalent of an iron pit (i.e., meager Spidey box-office participation) for the rights to a gold mine (i.e., exclusive Spidey merchandising rights).

Just being able to place Spider-Man next to IM and Cap on t-shirts and lunchboxes would increase already sizeable merchandising revenues. What we don't know is the exact nature of their agreement from last November. However, I'm betting that Disney is pretty smart and forward-thinking. I'm betting that deal included contingencies for Spidey being in the MCU, which was well underway at the time. To think differently would be underestimating the Mouse.

I will say though, that I'm not one who thinks Spidey will be featured in an Avengers movie. At most we would get a cameo. The part of the deal where Disney participates in SM movies, says they may push the MCU into the Spidey universe, allowing Sony to capitalize on Avengers popularity.

[Chewy]

That's looking at the situation from the Disney side: they give Sony a percentage (say, 7%) of whatever the net income from the theatrical and home media sales end up being. Let's say it's about 7% of a billion dollars, $70M. In return, they sell more Spidey merchandise. (Placing Spidey next to IM and Cap on lunchboxes doesn't sell more lunchboxes. What sells more lunchboxes is Spidey, on his own lunchbox, being more relevant. The number of "team" lunchboxes sold would stay roughly flat.)

From the Sony side, the character that you've paid hundreds of millions for is making Disney an extra billion. The movie that you spent a few hundred million on ended up being mostly a marketing tool for a massive Disney movie. You're getting a measly 7% of the profits from a movie that uses a character you spent hundreds of millions on, and years and years establishing. You have to explain to your stockholders why they shouldn't jump ship and invest in Disney.

Ultimately it's a lose/lose situation. Either Disney pays too much for a character they don't actually need in their movie (Spidey merch moves regardless, and there is no actual story-driven reason to include him in a sequel), or Sony comes out looking like chumps.

[OB12]

That's looking at the situation from the Disney side: they give Sony a percentage (say, 7%) of whatever the net income from the theatrical and home media sales end up being. Let's say it's about 7% of a billion dollars, $70M. In return, they sell more Spidey merchandise. (Placing Spidey next to IM and Cap on lunchboxes doesn't sell more lunchboxes. What sells more lunchboxes is Spidey, on his own lunchbox, being more relevant. The number of "team" lunchbox sales would stay roughly flat.)

Yes and no. Increasing the number of permutations for a specific item creates more opportunity for sales, but also keeping SM as a popular character in the public's eye is equally important.
I get what you are saying. Where is the incentive from Sony's standpoint? They put all of this money and Disney is reaping the benefits. In all honesty that may just be the reality of the situation for Sony. They are a struggling company and are looking for ways to stay afloat. You don't think partnering with Disney and the immensely popular Avengers has a residual effect on box office receipts for Sony? That could be their last ditch effort.

You are talking about this as if Spidey is an active, contributing member of the Avengers. I'm not taking that viewpoint at all. Spidey in the MCU to me is using the Daily Bugle and Oscorp Tower and probably a Spidey cameo at best, maybe rescuring some civillians or something. I am more thinking that Spidey gets some involvment down the road from some of the Marvel-owned characters.

[marcvader]

Isn't Spidey next to IM and Cap on t-shirts and lunchboxes already?

[OB12]

Not TASM version. I mean I have t-shirt with SM, Cap, Thor and Hulk, but it is more comicbook artwork than the movie versions of each. Right now there is a bunch of Avengers movie promotional merchandise out there, that is kinda what I am talking about adding TASM to.

[Chewy]

Originally Posted by OB12

You are talking about this as if Spidey is an active, contributing member of the Avengers. I'm not taking that viewpoint at all. Spidey in the MCU to me is using the Daily Bugle and Oscorp Tower and probably a Spidey cameo at best, maybe rescuring some civillians or something. I am more thinking that Spidey gets some involvment down the road from some of the Marvel-owned characters.

Haha then what's the point of the discussion? They obviously aren't going to pay Sony so they can stick a Daily Bugle newsstand in the background of a scene

A few years from now Sony Pictures may not even be around.