Homecoming All the technical details of this deal

[DigificWriter]

Here's what Sony gets out of the deal:
1) They keep full control of the Spider-Man license
2) They get Kevin Feige working for them pro-bono on the development of the first film in a rebooted Spider-Man Cinematic Universe that will be affiliated with the Marvel Cinematic Universe, thus allowing them to piggyback on the established mythology of said universe (with or without the ability/option to include MCU characters in their films)
3) They keep 100% of the profits from the 2017 MCU Spidey film and anything else that they choose to do with the character
4) They have final approval on all creative decisions made with regards to the casting and 'look' of the MCU Spider-Man

 

[XtremelyBaneful]

^the spiderman cinematic universe=mcu now. it is the same universe.

my question was if sony can use marvel characters for free. if not, then this deal is in marvel's favor more than sony's.

 

[DigificWriter]

^the spiderman cinematic universe=mcu now. it is the same universe.

Technically, you're correct, but I was drawing a distinction because Marvel may not have any direct involvement in Sony's MCU-set/affiliated Spider-Man spinoff films.

 

[XtremelyBaneful]

Technically, you're correct, but I was drawing a distinction because Marvel may not have any direct involvement in Sony's MCU-set/affiliated Spider-Man spinoff films.

they'll definitely want to, because since it is all the same universe, they're not gonna want a film in their universe that doesn't fit with the narrative they're trying to push.

 

[DigificWriter]

It may not be necessary for MS to have any direct involvement with Sony's half of the MCU beyond the 2017 Spider-Man film, since I don't think it's likely that Sony would do anything that would negatively impact the MCU as a whole.

 

[Webhead2006]

Digic the thing is we don't really know 100% how much control one way or another really is. Also logically all of sony spinoff plans probably where off the table once deal is made. No way marvel wouldn't have at least 50% say in the creative and what not. Since this spidey is a part of mcu now. And I am sure they don't want sony folks mucking around with mcu. But that's the deal we know so little on the real details.

 

[XtremelyBaneful]

It may not be necessary for MS to have any direct involvement with Sony's half of the MCU beyond the 2017 Spider-Man film, since I don't think it's likely that Sony would do anything that would negatively impact the MCU as a whole.

marvel would definitely want to be in the know of any live action spiderman projects because they are a part of the mcu. the mcu is marvel's narrative.

 

[DigificWriter]

@Webhead: Everything I mentioned above was taken directly from the initial reporting on the specifics of the deal.

@XtremelyBaneful: Based on what we know about the deal, I feel fairly certain that both studios will put a set of guidelines in place governing what can and can't be done, which may be enough of a 'safeguard' for Marvel Studios against Sony doing anything with the Spider-Man license, narratively, that would have a negative impact on the MCU as a whole that they won't feel that having direct involvement in Sony's Spider-Man spinoff projects is necessary.

 

[XtremelyBaneful]

what did the original report say about any potential spinoffs might do like venom or sinister six?

 

[DigificWriter]

what did the original report say about any potential spinoffs might do like venom or sinister six?

That the specifics of the deal had no effect on their status insofar as Sony's ability to proceed with them. Sony did later reveal that they'd postponed the already-announced release date for Sinister Six in order to retool it based on their deal with Marvel having come to pass, but neither the initial reporting or the subsequent reveal that SS was being retooled made any mention whatsoever of Marvel Studios having any direct involvement in SS's development or the development of Sony's other already-announced Spidey spinoff projects.

 

[XtremelyBaneful]

That the specifics of the deal had no effect on their status insofar as Sony's ability to proceed with them. Sony did later reveal that they'd postponed development on Sinister Six in order to retool it based on their deal with Marvel having come to pass, but neither the initial reporting or the subsequent reveal that production on SS was being retooled made any mention whatsoever of Marvel Studios having any direct involvement in SS's development or the development of Sony's other already-announced Spidey spinoff projects.

I just skimmed the article and I saw practically no mention of sony's planned spinoffs.

 

[Webhead2006]

Ya but hasn't there been other reports that said spinoff where pretty much off right now. There is no reason sony should be doing any spin offs yet. Since we don't even know where or what this new spidey story will be. And again no way marvel wouldn't have a say in them. Since its part of the rights and with it being shared and all. Marvel would have to be invovled.

 

[DigificWriter]

@XtremelyBaneful: I'm not sure what article(s) you may have read, but here's one from IGN that clarifies the specifics of the deal:
http://www.ign.com/articles/2015/02/10/it-cost-marvel-zero-dollars-to-get-spider-man

Towards the bottom of the article, it mentions that Sony's spin-off films are (were) still in development and that Kevin Feige is (was) "not expected" to have any involvement with them.

@Webhead: Sony did reveal that they were backing away from their previously announced release date for Sinister Six in order to 'retool' the project as a result of the deal with Marvel Studios having come to pass (as I noted earlier), but, as far as I'm aware, there has been no subsequent news regarding whether or not plans to proceed with its development entirely or any of the other already-announced spinoff projects have (had) changed.

 

[XtremelyBaneful]

@XtremelyBaneful: I'm not sure what article(s) you may have read, but here's one from IGN that clarifies the specifics of the deal:
http://www.ign.com/articles/2015/02/10/it-cost-marvel-zero-dollars-to-get-spider-man

Towards the bottom of the article, it mentions that Sony's spin-off films are (were) still in development and that Kevin Feige is (was) "not expected" to have any involvement with them.

@Webhead: Sony did reveal that they were backing away from their previously announced release date for Sinister Six in order to 'retool' the project as a result of the deal with Marvel Studios having come to pass (as I noted earlier), but, as far as I'm aware, there has been no subsequent news regarding whether or not plans to proceed with its development entirely or any of the other already-announced spinoff projects have (had) changed.

I was reading the original from marvel...
http://marvel.com/news/movies/24062..._studios_into_the_amazing_world_of_spider-man

 

[DigificWriter]

^ That article was more of a press release announcing both the deal and the new 2017 Spider-Man film, and really didn't go into the nitty-gritty specific details of exactly what was agreed to and who got what out of what was agreed to, whereas subsequent articles from other sources, including IGN, did.

 

[Webhead2006]

I still doubt sony will move forward with any of there original plans and idras. I bet they will leave live action spidey in marvel hands. And do the movie and possible series themselfs. And sony reaps the benefits of marvel doing it.

Since we know there is this animated film and likely if success a series of animated films. Which sony has full control over. I bet alot of there original ideas before sony marvel deal could be here. Like with avi and matt as folks in charged here. Vs getting just name only credits with live action.

 

[DigificWriter]

^ Live-action Spider-Man isn't IN Marvel's hands, though. It's in Sony's. Kevin Feige is simply working for them (pro bono, I might add) to relaunch the franchise in a fashion that integrates it with the MCU in exchange for being able to incorporate Spider-Man into Civil War and other MS movies.

IOW, Feige and MS get to 'rent' Spider-Man, whereas Sony gets to continue to 'own' him and any and all characters associated with him.

 

[Webhead2006]

I just mean it favors marvel more thst it is in the mcu and they have a creative hand in things. Again we really don't know how things will play iut. But I still feel for the live action end. Sony will pretty much let marvel do there thing. As we know sony had no clue what to do with spidey any mire. So let marvel do the hard work for them. And sony reaps off marvel work.

All there whacky ideas could be left for animated film. No need to go and try to do a aunt may movie or there original s6 plan or a female verse character live action.

 

[XtremelyBaneful]

^ Live-action Spider-Man isn't IN Marvel's hands, though. It's in Sony's. Kevin Feige is simply working for them (pro bono, I might add) to relaunch the franchise in a fashion that integrates it with the MCU in exchange for being able to incorporate Spider-Man into Civil War and other MS movies.

IOW, Feige and MS get to 'rent' Spider-Man, whereas Sony gets to continue to 'own' him and any and all characters associated with him.

this is going to be a joint venture between sony and marvel, even if it is sony owning the character. sony isn't doing spiderman without marvel being heavily involved.

 

[DigificWriter]

Aside from 'renting' the character and Feige helping produce the 2017 Spider-Man reboot, MS has no real say in what Sony does with the Spider-Man license according to the original tenets of the deal. They will most likely be giving Sony some guidelines as to what they CAN'T do with the license (as Sony will likely be doing as well relative to MS' use of the character), but that's a far cry from determining or having a direct hand in shaping what does happen with the license.

 

[XtremelyBaneful]

considering the fact that any spiderman spinoff will be in the mcu, i'd say sony needs to stay in contact with them for any spiderman project they do. as well, it is still unclear whether or not sony gets to use marvel characters for free or not.

 

[Zarex]

Here's what Sony gets out of the deal:
1) They keep full control of the Spider-Man license
2) They get Kevin Feige working for them pro-bono on the development of the first film in a rebooted Spider-Man Cinematic Universe that will be affiliated with the Marvel Cinematic Universe, thus allowing them to piggyback on the established mythology of said universe (with or without the ability/option to include MCU characters in their films)
3) They keep 100% of the profits from the 2017 MCU Spidey film and anything else that they choose to do with the character
4) They have final approval on all creative decisions made with regards to the casting and 'look' of the MCU Spider-Man

No question it's a good deal for Sony, though I question the pro-bono aspect of Feige's involvement. If he's producing the film he's going to get paid by whoever is financing. I don't think there is any legal way out of that.

And I believe Marvel has a bit more control than what has been disclosed. Recent interviews with Feige certainly give the impression that Marvel Studios is driving the Spidey bus going forward.

 

[DigificWriter]

^ Except it was made clear that he won't be (see the IGN article I linked to).

 

[Zarex]

^ Except it was made clear that he won't be (see the IGN article I linked to).

We may be looking at a "telephone game" situation. Neither of the two sources cited in the IGN article mentioned Feige doing charity work for a multi billion dollar multinational corporation. Marvel Studios isn't getting a BO cut, and this may have been interpreted as Kevin Feige not being compensated for what will surely be hundreds of hours of work. That makes absolutely no sense, and is almost certainly not allowed under Producer work rules.

 

[DigificWriter]

We may be looking at a "telephone game" situation. Neither of the two sources cited in the IGN article mentioned Feige doing charity work for a multi billion dollar multinational corporation. Marvel Studios isn't getting a BO cut, and this may have been interpreted as Kevin Feige not being compensated for what will surely be hundreds of hours of work. That makes absolutely no sense, and is almost certainly not allowed under Producer work rules.

After IGN's report was posted, other articles - which referenced the same articles that were sourced by IGN - also mentioned that Feige would not be financially compensated for his work on the 2017 film.