Can Sony continue to produce Spider-Man films at this rate?

[Mr. Dent]

This is very interesting to me, because this is what they essentially must do to keep the rights. Eon was able to produce Bond movies ever 3-4 years without fail from '62 all the way to '89 before having to take a 6 year break with the character. They were lucky enough that Bond never really suffered audience fatigue until the mid-late 80's and films were simpler back then with far smaller budgets (even comparatively speaking with inflation).

Sony, on the other hand, is in a different environment and a different situation contractually. Starting with the environment, the marketplace is far more competitive now, especially in the space Spider-Man movies are categorized (superhero) and the budgets for their films are required to be astronomical. Audiences have far more options to go see at the movie theatre and while Spider-Man still stands out as one of the most beloved characters and strongest box office pulls, it doesn't sit on an untouchable perch as it used to or Bond did all throughout the 60's and 70's.

Audience fatigue already appears to be kicking in, with them having produced two lukewarmly received movies and continually producing them within a short span of each other. TASM2 doesn't have the same buzz a Spidey film would normally have around this time of the year, partially due to more competition and partially due to the movies being released so frequently over the last decade. Unlike Eon, Sony does not have the luxury of being able to take 4-6 year breaks with the character...they must release a film every 3-4 years or lose the rights. The only reason they were able to take 5 years with TASM is because they gave Marvel the animation rights back. They have nothing to concede anymore, with their stake in the merchandising also being completely gone now as well.

So, Sony has a case of potential audience fatigue and aren't able to give the character a proper break. Eventually this will catch up with them and they will be forced to concede the rights to Marvel.

So for how much longer do you think Sony can continue to produce Spider-Man films like this? Honestly, in my opinion, if TASM2 and TASM3 are just okay movies, and not at least one of them is widely acclaimed, then Sony will be in trouble. Heaven forbid if one is actually bad. By 2018 I think audiences will be far more apathetic to the character's movies, not because there won't still be love for the character, but just because the movies lose their mystique if you produce them constantly nowadays, especially with their plan of a movie every two years. Spider-Man is not Hobbit or Hunger Games, it does not have a finite story, they will have to continue producing these films after the upcoming 3. Personally, I'd after 2018 they will be able to put out another movie or two before hitting a serious iceberg that will force them to concede the rights to Marvel...so I guess I'm basically saying I think the Spider-Man rights will revert to Marvel around 2021-2025.

 

[Shikamaru]

I don't think the GA will ever get tired of Superman, Batman, or Spider-Man. I think these three superheroes have transcended the superhero genre and made such an impact that they will be around long after superhero films are gone.

 

[Project862006]

seeing how they can redo venom done right,mysterio,vulture,carnage,etc.

plenty of more options

 

[random_havoc]

Goodness, I hope you're right Dent. Cuz I'd like to see a Spidey movie by Marvel rather than Sony. The last one was good but not great. Frankly they need better writing and directing on any more Spidey movies.

 

[Mr. Dent]

I don't think the GA will ever get tired of Superman, Batman

What they have before already

As I said in the post, I'm not talking about the audience losing love for the character, I'm talking about them becoming apathetic to his movies because they come out every other year and are mediocre. There's a difference. Spidey is always going to have box office draw, that doesn't mean all his movies are going to be infallible and eventually Sony is going to go through a string where they find themselves backed into a corner due to not being able to give the character more than a 2-3 year break.

What I'm arguing is completely different from what you're talking about. I agree with what you said, but it's not relevant to this thread. I know the post is tl;dr but at least skim it lol.

seeing how they can redo venom done right,mysterio,vulture,carnage,etc.

plenty of more options

Where they can take the story and being able to continue to produce films every other year without the audience becoming desensitized are two different things. My post isn't talking about them running out of story options.

 

[Shikamaru]

What they have before already

As I said in the post, I'm not talking about the audience losing love for the character, I'm talking about them becoming apathetic to his movies because they come out every other year and are mediocre. There's a difference. Spidey is always going to have box office draw, that doesn't mean all his movies are going to be infallible and eventually Sony is going to go through a string where they find themselves backed into a corner due to not being able to give the character more than a 2-3 year break.

What I'm arguing is completely different from what you're talking about. I agree with what you said, but it's not relevant to this thread. I know the post is tl;dr but at least skim it lol.

That's the thing. Don't make them mediocre. I've stated many times that if TASM 2 is just "good" like TASM was as opposed to "great", Spidey will fall behind in the game to Batman, Iron Man, the Avengers, and all the other big guns right now. Sony needs have a Spider-Man film that ends up being the TDK of Spider-Man if they want Spider-Man to maintain his level of popularity.

And yes, eventually that point will come when Sony will find themselves backed into a corner and the rights go back. But unless the quality of their Spider-Man films stays the same as TASM's quality or it goes down, I don't see that happening anytime soon. Not this decade.

 

[Mr. Dent]

^ That's sort of my point.

Honestly, in my opinion, if TASM2 and TASM3 are just okay movies, and not at least one of them is widely acclaimed, then Sony will be in trouble. Heaven forbid if one is actually bad. By 2018 I think audiences will be far more apathetic to the character's movies, not because there won't still be love for the character, but just because the movies lose their mystique if you produce them constantly nowadays, especially with their plan of a movie every two years. Spider-Man is not Hobbit or Hunger Games, it does not have a finite story, they will have to continue producing these films after the upcoming 3. Personally, I'd after 2018 they will be able to put out another movie or two before hitting a serious iceberg that will force them to concede the rights to Marvel...so I guess I'm basically saying I think the Spider-Man rights will revert to Marvel around 2021-2025.

That's from the end of the OP. TASM2 has to be amazing...and honestly I'm not completely sure it will be. It looks like another Spider-Man movie. It looks like it's going to be good, but it also doesn't even look like it will be able to compete with DOFP, Cap 2, and especially not GOTG.

So that's what the thread is asking, how much longer do you think Sony can keep this up? I think they barely have another 10 years. And they will be looking extremely long in the tooth on the tail end of that.

 

[Shikamaru]

^ That's sort of my point.


That's from the end of the OP. TASM2 has to be amazing...and honestly I'm not completely sure it will be. It looks like another Spider-Man movie. It looks like it's going to be good, but it also doesn't even look like it will be able to compete with DOFP, Cap 2, and especially not GOTG.

So that's what the thread is asking, how much longer do you think Sony can keep this up? I think they barely have another 10 years. And they will be looking extremely long in the tooth on the tail end of that.

That's pretty much what I said. I see we are on the same page.

What are you referring to when you talk about it "competing" with the rest? Box office wise, those other films won't give TASM 2 problem. Quality wise, that remains to be seen. Guardians looks like a complete mess to me so far. DOFP has days when I'm thinking "What the hell are they doing?!" then days where I think it looks great. Cap 2 looks great so far.

Am I worried about TASM 2 not being on the same level of quality as one or more of those films next year? Yes. I've stated this many times. I do think the film looks great so far but I think that applies to Cap 2 and DOFP as well (for the most part). As I said before, I think it will be embarrassing for Spidey if he doesn't have the best film next year since it is an all-Marvel competition (2012 was an exception because TASM was a reboot and was redoing the origin). That being said, we'll just have to wait and see.

Also, what do you mean by TASM 2 looking like "just another Spider-Man movie"? That's really irrelevant to the overall quality of the film. I could say the same thing about TDK. It is your standard Batman vs. Joker story. There is almost nothing that film does that wasn't done in the comics before when it comes to the main themes, yet the film is considered to be the best superhero film so far.

 

[psylockolussus]

Of course they can! $750million worldwide gross is pretty good for a reboot. If the box-office gross goes lower than that, then Sony will just have to save money and make better films.

 

[Mr. Dent]

That's pretty much what I said. I see we are on the same page.

What are you referring to when you talk about it "competing" with the rest? Box office wise, those other films won't give TASM 2 problem. Quality wise, that remains to be seen. Guardians looks like a complete mess to me so far. DOFP has days when I'm thinking "What the hell are they doing?!" then days where I think it looks great. Cap 2 looks great so far.

Am I worried about TASM 2 not being on the same level of quality as one or more of those films next year? Yes. I've stated this many times. I do think the film looks great so far but I think that applies to Cap 2 and DOFP as well (for the most part). As I said before, I think it will be embarrassing for Spidey if he doesn't have the best film next year since it is an all-Marvel competition (2012 was an exception because TASM was a reboot and was redoing the origin). That being said, we'll just have to wait and see.

Also, what do you mean by TASM 2 looking like "just another Spider-Man movie"? That's really irrelevant to the overall quality of the film. I could say the same thing about TDK. It is your standard Batman vs. Joker story. There is almost nothing that film does that wasn't done in the comics before when it comes to the main themes, yet the film is considered to be the best superhero film so far.

I'm not sure how you perceive it as a mess. The cast seems to have great chemistry already and the footage from comic-con stole the show. Not to mention it's just a new and fresh concept. And I'm not talking about BO wise, or even necessarily the quality, just the freshness of the films. That has a lot to do with audience fatigue. If TASM2 comes out and it's just another decent Spider-Man film, which it seems like that's what it will be, then it would have been a failure in comparison to the other films that are all trying new things to their formula (or doing something completely new in the case of GOTG).

My point is TASM2 is going to need to be more than just another feel good Spider-Man movie to make a lasting impact and it just doesn't look to be that to me. I think it will be good, but it won't be transcendent. And Sony needs a big hit with either TASM2 or TASM3 to keep this going long.

Of course they can! $750million worldwide gross is pretty good for a reboot. If the box-office gross goes lower than that, then Sony will just have to save money and make better films.

It's not that simple.

 

[Raiden]

I can see Sony holding on to the Spider-Man rights for at least another 10 years. But once this current reboot has ran its course, then what will they do then? Another reboot by a new director? I think if the quality doesn't improve after ASM the GA may get a little bit tired of ol Webhead, but I don't see Sony ever stop making Spidey movies unless they're forced to, like the closure of Sony Pictures.

 

[Shikamaru]

I'm not sure how you perceive it as a mess. The cast seems to have great chemistry already and the footage from comic-con stole the show. Not to mention it's just a new and fresh concept. And I'm not talking about BO wise, or even necessarily the quality, just the freshness of the films. That has a lot to do with audience fatigue. If TASM2 comes out and it's just another decent Spider-Man film, which it seems like that's what it will be, then it would have been a failure in comparison to the other films that are all trying new things to their formula (or doing something completely new in the case of GOTG).

My point is TASM2 is going to need to be more than just another feel good Spider-Man movie to make a lasting impact and it just doesn't look to be that to me. I think it will be good, but it won't be transcendent. And Sony needs a big hit with either TASM2 or TASM3 to keep this going long.

I haven't been keeping up with the film but everything I've seen and heard of so far doesn't look too good. I won't go into that here though.

I don't think it will be another decent Spider-Man film. It already looks to be much better than the first, and I would consider the first to be pretty good. Not great but good. Plus TASM 2 is already doing a lot of new things. People have awaited years to see Spider-Man lifting cars, quipping and cracking jokes (Spidey didn't have a lot of screen time in TASM 1 in comparison so it looks like there will be far more wisecracking jokes this time around), and even a Times Square battle. I remember people saying they want an awesome epic-in-scale Times Square battle in a Spidey film for as long as I remember being on the internet. Marc Webb even referred to Electro as being a "god" in power and in scale. From the way I see it, TASM was the first Spider-Man film to fully be a Spider-Man film in characterization and essence. However, it was stuck in origin territory and covered a lot of the same ground. It looks like we'll get the same thing this time minus the origin and covering a lot of the same ground. That is what I think will make it fresh and unique from the other Spider-Man films.

Even if TASM 2 doesn't end up being just that, there is no way TASM 3 won't be that as long as they don't kill off Gwen in TASM 2 and play their cards right. Doing the Green Goblin and the Death of Gwen Stacy in the third film would be huge. Gwen's death is arguably the most iconic Spider-Man ever told and was a major factor in the ending of the Silver Age. It has never been done before in live-action either and would take people by surprise (Rachel's death in TDK doesn't count because was wasn't anywhere as memorable or likeable or as iconic as Gwen is).

 

[Heretic]

I see them completing the Amazing Spider-Man story in a few films...then rebooting the franchise with Spectacular Spider-Man with Peter back in high school getting his powers again, so we can build up to yet another Green Goblin and Harry Osborn confrontation. By then, the public will be sick of seeing the same story told over and over again, and the box office will dry up for the character.

Had they actually taken the property seriously to begin with and planned for a nice long run of stories, they could have built each film naturally on top of those that came before, keeping audience interest for a few decades at least.

 

[Shikamaru]

I see them completing the Amazing Spider-Man story in a few films...then rebooting the franchise with Spectacular Spider-Man with Peter back in high school getting his powers again, so we can build up to yet another Green Goblin and Harry Osborn confrontation. By then, the public will be sick of seeing the same story told over and over again, and the box office will dry up for the character.

Had they actually taken the property seriously to begin with and planned for a nice long run of stories, they could have built each film naturally on top of those that came before, keeping audience interest for a few decades at least.

That's what they are doing now. Sony won't build a massive Spider-Man universe just to discard it in a few years. They probably won't reboot again and will James Bond the franchise.

 

[Green Goblin]

Well the only mixed received film was SM3...
They said that they would James Bond the franchise from now on.

 

[Shikamaru]

I see them completing the Amazing Spider-Man story in a few films...then rebooting the franchise with Spectacular Spider-Man with Peter back in high school getting his powers again, so we can build up to yet another Green Goblin and Harry Osborn confrontation. By then, the public will be sick of seeing the same story told over and over again, and the box office will dry up for the character.

Had they actually taken the property seriously to begin with and planned for a nice long run of stories, they could have built each film naturally on top of those that came before, keeping audience interest for a few decades at least.

That's what they are doing now. Sony won't build a massive Spider-Man universe just to discard it in a few years. They probably won't reboot again and will James Bond the franchise.

 

[Green Goblin]

That's what they are doing now. Sony won't build a massive Spider-Man universe just to discard it in a few years. They probably won't reboot again and will James Bond the franchise.

Exactly

 

[Heretic]

That's what they are doing now. Sony won't build a massive Spider-Man universe just to discard it in a few years. They probably won't reboot again and will James Bond the franchise.

They made three blockbuster Spider-Man films and then chucked them aside for a reboot after just a few years. When looking at those films, and their rush to throw characters in and out quickly, there doesn't appear to have been any long-term thinking there. There is no evidence that they aren't above doing the same thing again, especially if box office slips.

 

[Shikamaru]

They made three blockbuster Spider-Man films and then chucked them aside for a reboot after just a few years. When looking at those films, and their rush to throw characters in and out quickly, there doesn't appear to have been any long-term thinking there. There is no evidence that they aren't above doing the same thing again, especially if box office slips.

There were reasons as to why this reboot happened. Mainly three:

1) Raimi and Sony could not agree on a story.
2) Raimi believed he couldn't put full effort into the film by the due date since he also had other projects on the side so he walked away.
3) Sony believed that they grew up Peter Parker way too fast in the first three films and skipped over a lot of his important stories (his high school years, Gwen Stacy, etc.). They even admitted this in an interview with Webb. They rebooted it to age Peter Parker slower and for more story possibilities.

The third point is the key. They can now do Gwen's death, the symbiote saga, the Sinister Six, etc. These are all things they can do now because they are slowing things down more and are setting up more things for the future as opposed to following the episodic formula of the Raimi films and killing off most of their villains like the Raimi films did. Sony has even said that they want to map out a massive Spider-Man universe much like the MCU. That's the main thing that studios are aiming for right now, from Marvel to Sony to Fox to WB. There is no way Sony plans to do this only to discard everything in a few years. There is far too much potential and too much at risk to reboot again. Even if the rights go back to Marvel, the chances of seeing a complete reboot are still low.

No offense to you, but the logic that they will reboot again in 10 years just because they rebooted now screams of Raimi/MCU fanboyism to me. You have to take a look at all the factors as to why the reboot happened and as to why it is unlikely for it to happen again anytime soon.

 

[Heretic]

There were reasons as to why this reboot happened. Mainly three:

1) Raimi and Sony could not agree on a story.
2) Raimi believed he couldn't put full effort into the film by the due date since he also had other projects on the side so he walked away.
3) Sony believed that they grew up Peter Parker way too fast in the first three films and skipped over a lot of his important stories (his high school years, Gwen Stacy, etc.). They even admitted this in an interview with Webb. They rebooted it to age Peter Parker slower and for more story possibilities.

The third point is the key. They can now do Gwen's death, the symbiote saga, the Sinister Six, etc. These are all things they can do now because they are slowing things down more and are setting up more things for the future as opposed to following the episodic formula of the Raimi films and killing off most of their villains like the Raimi films did. Sony has even said that they want to map out a massive Spider-Man universe much like the MCU. That's the main thing that studios are aiming for right now, from Marvel to Sony to Fox to WB. There is no way Sony plans to do this only to discard everything in a few years. There is far too much potential and too much at risk to reboot again. Even if the rights go back to Marvel, the chances of seeing a complete reboot are still low.

No offense to you, but the logic that they will reboot again in 10 years just because they rebooted now screams of Raimi/MCU fanboyism to me. You have to take a look at all the factors as to why the reboot happened and as to why it is unlikely for it to happen again anytime soon.

On your points...
1. Raimi and Sony couldn't agree on a story? Great...fire Raimi and hire someone else to do Spider-Man 4. We shouldn't reboot a franchise just because a director quits. Rami is over-rated anyway (I'm not exactly a Raimi fanboy...I don't even like the Evil Dead films).

2. Again...replace him. When the Harry Potter franchise hired a new director to do part 3, they didn't give up and start over with part 1. In fact, it is stupid to do that. Had they cared enough to have a long term plan in place, there would have been no need to reboot just because they got a new director.

3. Yes...they went too fast with Peter's story in the first three films...PROVING that they had no long-term plan for the character nor did they even think that there was long-term money in the character. Had they cared AT ALL about the character, they would have realized that you could have 10 movies or more based on Spider-Man...and they could have built an outline that made sense.

Talking about points 1 and 2...what happens when they replace the current director?? I mean...that was 2 of your points! Doesn't a new director mean a reboot??? It did this time!

 

[psylockolussus]

It's not that simple.

And its not as easy as you think that Sony will be handing out the rights to Marvel if the upcoming Spider-Man films don't live up to the studio's expectations. Spider-Man is still Sony's #1 movie franchise.

 

[Shikamaru]

On your points...
1. Raimi and Sony couldn't agree on a story? Great...fire Raimi and hire someone else to do Spider-Man 4. We shouldn't reboot a franchise just because a director quits. Rami is over-rated anyway (I'm not exactly a Raimi fanboy...I don't even like the Evil Dead films).

2. Again...replace him. When the Harry Potter franchise hired a new director to do part 3, they didn't give up and start over with part 1. In fact, it is stupid to do that. Had they cared enough to have a long term plan in place, there would have been no need to reboot just because they got a new director.

3. Yes...they went too fast with Peter's story in the first three films...PROVING that they had no long-term plan for the character nor did they even think that there was long-term money in the character. Had they cared AT ALL about the character, they would have realized that you could have 10 movies or more based on Spider-Man...and they could have built an outline that made sense.

Talking about points 1 and 2...what happens when they replace the current director?? I mean...that was 2 of your points! Doesn't a new director mean a reboot??? It did this time!

For points 1 and 2, both Tobey Maguire and Kirsten Dunst said they refuse to come back if Raimi didn't come back. They were signed for only three films prior to SM4. They would have signed for SM4 but didn't do so after Raimi walked away. Basically, not just the director walked away. The main two stars of the franchise did as well.

Yes, they had no long-term plan for the character. But that was back then. They rebooted because now they do have some long-term plan for the character, which is why they've planned all the way up to 2018 already. Plus, I wouldn't point only fingers at Sony for not planning ahead. The truth is that prior to Batman Begins and the MCU, the vast majority of studios did not plan ahead their films and were way too episodic. This applies to Sony, Fox, and WB (Marvel Studios didn't exist at that time). Stuff like the MCU and Batman's two part character arc (BB and TDK respectively) is what turned that into the norm. By that time, Fox started planning ahead their X-Men films and their universe more as well. By early 2010, Sony was the only studio left (of the big ones) still following too close to the episodic formula with their Spider-Man films. Now they've caught up with the rest of the studios when it comes to that.

Sony pretty much felt that a reboot was the best decision to take, both financially and narratively. SM4 wasn't looking any better than SM3 with the ideas being thrown around by both Sony and Raimi, and basically felt like they ran into a corner due to growing up Peter too fast and skipping a lot of opportunities (i.e. Death of Gwen Stacy, Sinister Six (wouldn't have been possible to do by the sixth film in that franchise), etc.).

 

[rayc1971]

they will reboot after this trilogy anyway Garfield is already 30 he will be in the toby situation by 2018

 

[Mr. Dent]

And its not as easy as you think that Sony will be handing out the rights to Marvel if the upcoming Spider-Man films don't live up to the studio's expectations. Spider-Man is still Sony's #1 movie franchise.

I never said that. :/

 

[Mr.M]

they will reboot after this trilogy anyway Garfield is already 30 he will be in the toby situation by 2018

You consistently want a young actor playing Parker. Nobody is going to want to see a bearded Peter with three kids still juggling the superhero lifestyle. Now maybe they tackle that story down the line, Spidey: The Later Years, or whatever. What this means is that the actor has to be replaced every so often like Bond, which is still running strong as a franchise.

So can this franchise be akin to Bond? No. Spidey plays out in the modern world and doesn't really evolve much in that limited time unlike Bond. He cannot constantly be updated or modified and reintroduced to the same generation. There is only so much variablity in the character. You need to let the character rest for a while.

I don't see any more Spidey movies for another 15-20 years post ASM 4. Or maybe the current franchise makes it to ASM 6, and they pick up with a different actor if Garfield gets too old. Spidey may show up in crossovers, but not solo movies in the current continuity or any continuity really. Spidey could also appear in full feature animations for a more kid friendly take. You still need to wait for the next generation to come of age before reintroducing him to audiences. The superhero fad will probably be dead by then, so maybe it will be another 40-50 years before they start making more Spidey films. We'd have gotten at least 7 films by 2018, possibly 9 by the mid 2020's if they make ASM 5/6.