MCU: The Marvel Cinematic Universe Official Discussion - Part 1

[Dr. Evil]

Sony is not averse to sharing (James Bond).

 

[Tony Stark]

I'm kind of torn on Garfield. I really like his performance as spidey. The joke craking, and care free attitude. The problem is he's way too old for the part. The movies were terrible none the less, but I thought Garfield was good, and for Spider-man, I really liked his performance over Maguire. I thought Maguire was a better Peter, but not a great Spider-man.

Either way, this is a win-win for Sony and Marvel. Sony knows they blew the value on what they had on poorly scripted, poorly directed, TASM films. TASM was a major disappointment, even though it made money. No one wants to see a sinister six film. That will be a bomb of epic proportions.

Putting Spidey in the MCU, brings new life to the character, and seeing him interact with the existing MCU, is something people want to see. Spider-man has been Marvel's flagship character for years, and while stock in other characters like Iron Man may have surpassed Spidey, he's still a critical character for Marvel and people will want to see him in the franchise.

 

[Shikamaru]

^ That's part of why I think it's unlikely. I don't see Marvel giving another studio control of him due to the history he has.

 

[Destructus86]

I didn't like Garfield as Parker. AT ALL. He did alright at Spider-Man though. Honestly, just recast. Marvel Studios can do way better than what Sony puked up.

 

[Chris B]

My hope regarding these Spider-Man rumors would be something where Marvel gains complete creative control while letting Sony have a generous distribution deal.

That said, I'd have to agree that in this scenario, Marvel should just reboot the character again. Garfield isn't bad in the role, but I think its more trouble than its worth trying to incorporate those films into the MCU. Plus, doing so would take things off the table such as Norman Osborn being the Green Goblin or different interpretations of the likes of the Lizard, Electro, and Rhino.

 

[Shoppy]

Has anyone mentioned the real important thing that this could lead to? .....


..... Norman Osborne in a Thunderbolts movie FFS

 

[Moridin]

What if Spidey did feature in a future MCU film but he was masked the whole time? Of course, that would mean it's just a supporting role and not a major one at all, but at least that way Marvel wouldn't have to cast an actor in the role just yet while having the character still appear. It would allow Spidey to feature and show that he's part of the connected universe and audiences could take it or leave it as to whether he's the same Spidey from the Webb movies.

Then later on, once Spidey is established in the MCU, Marvel could cast an actor in the role that they themselves want, rather than having to rely on Garfield and carrying over any baggage from TASM movies.

Of course they'd have to cast someone. Who would voice him and wear the suit? Is he not going to be an actually character with a personality, just a suit with powers?

That's a terribly convoluted idea that serves no purpose at all, and in all likely-hood would just confuse the audience more, dragging up questions of "who is under the mask?", "is it TASM continuity?". If you leave stuff like that ambiguous it just settles into the audiences mind that it's possible. Why on earth would you want that?

Any kind of confusion like that should be quashed immediately, establish a new MCU take on the character with new actor. Nobody drags the baggage of the TASM series in.

 

[Shoppy]

If they're going to use the Sinister Six movie to link Spidey to the MCU then I don't think having it still loosely connected to the TASM movies would be so bad...

...Some of the things hinted at with the OsCorp experiments in those movies are more like the Ultimate Spider-Man version of things than the 616 version, as are element of The Avengers...

...I'd go for a "soft reboot" as has been said, but with familiar characters, possibly recast so as to get on with the story and not be all about villain origins like all the other Spidey films are...

... So with Spidey included in the 6 as in Ultimate 6, then who else?...

...I'd leave out Vulture, Kraven, Mysterio, as I said, To save on telling origin stories...

...Ressurect Norman Osborne as the Green Goblin, hold on to Electro and Rhino from TASM2 (...with Spidey that makes 4 so far...)

...I would put Rhys Ifans' Lizard in there rather than Doctor Octopus as the team's science-y type....

...and finally, I'd put Sandman in there, he's not as complicated a character as Doctor Octopus to play around with, and he's more associated with the Sinister Six than a lot of other villains, besides which, his origin was in Spider-Man 3 so even in an unconnected movie we can assume with a character like him it's pretty much the same...

Spider-Man
Green Goblin
Lizard
Electro
Sandman
Rhino

...that's how I'd do it, with the events of Sinister Six leading to the formation of H.A.M.M.E.R. and an MCU Thunderbolts movie with Osborne in the Iron Patriot suit and maybe Crossbones and Abomination filling in for Bullseye and Scorpion-Venom

It's almost enough to make me pray

 

[Shoppy]

The other thing is ...

...If/when Sony and Disney/Marvel formalize a deal on this, It's going to make whatever crossover movie is to come of it a huge talking point, and a guaranteed box-office success...

...Does anyone else think that could be the point at which Fox get asked to bring Wolverine to the table?

 

[marcvader]

Any kind of confusion like that should be quashed immediately, establish a new MCU take on the character with new actor. Nobody drags the baggage of the TASM series in.

I agree wholeheartedly and wouldn't mind an actual nerdy looking teenage actor as Peter. Would be a cool contrast against all the other MCU actors.

 

[KDM1986]

The other thing is ...

...If/when Sony and Disney/Marvel formalize a deal on this, It's going to make whatever crossover movie is to come of it a huge talking point, and a guaranteed box-office success...

...Does anyone else think that could be the point at which Fox get asked to bring Wolverine to the table?

Doughtful, it doesn't seem like fox and Disney are on the greatest of terms and sharing characters is always a pain.

 

[Dr. Evil]

Doughtful, it doesn't seem like fox and Disney are on the greatest of terms and sharing characters is always a pain.

Fox and Marvel are not on the greatest terms. Things between Fox and Disney are amicable. Both companies are distributing the upcoming Tom Hanks/Steven Spielberg Cold War drama and both distributed Lincoln.

 

[Mike Murdock]

What if Spidey did feature in a future MCU film but he was masked the whole time? Of course, that would mean it's just a supporting role and not a major one at all, but at least that way Marvel wouldn't have to cast an actor in the role just yet while having the character still appear.

That was part of my idea (even involving Garfield). Since the character would be in mask, you can just sneak him in for some voice acting work. Plus, Spider-Man is a character who works best with his secret identity preserved, so it makes sense not to reveal it. He's got the weight of the world on his shoulders and normally isn't someone who can rely on a team, so he shouldn't unmask and be just like the Avengers.

 

[Johnny-Oh]

They should just cast a 20 year old for Peter, so he's able to do a lot of movies. The last thing I want to happen is what they did with TASM by casting such an old guy to play a teenager.

 

[Aztec]

The way I see the options of Spidey in the MCU:

1) Sony voluntarily gives/sells the rights back to Marvel.
2) Sony stops making Spidey movies and the rights revert back to Marvel.
3) Sony let's Marvel take over Spidey but retains distribution rights and/or back-end deals.
4) Sony lets a rebooted/recast Spidey appear in Marvel event films but retain control of said rebooted Spidey for their own Sony films (which are only loosely connected to the MCU, if at all).
5) Sony lets Spidey appear in Marvel event films but if and only if they use TASM Garfield version.
6) Sony doesn't cut a deal now but waits instead for the box office of Sinister Six. If it tanks then they cut a deal; if it somehow succeeds then they continue with their gameplan.
7) Sony just continues with their gameplan and no deal occurs.

Personally I'd prefer #1 but realistically speaking #4 is quite enticing. I think it is the only true compromise for both sides and truly everyone wins.

With #4 Marvel gets:
-Spider-Man, their top draw character, in major MCU event films...watch out Avatar!
-A closer approximation to their comic universe
-More incentive to support Spider-Man films besides just merchandising money
-Some creative control over the character after Sony's recent failures

With #4 Sony gets:
-A reinvigorated fanbase for the character
-A feeling that his adventures mean something in the large MCU
-To keep the character longer
-A soft reboot to cleanse the audiences pallet from recent failures
-A cut of the insanely profitable MCU

With #4 The fans get:
-Spider-Man in The Avengers and/or The Infinity Gauntlet on the big screen!! 'nuff said

 

[marcvader]

I'll take 1 or 3 and recast. Dont want an Avengers/ Spider-Man film but cameo is cool. I just really want Feige to put his hands on the Spidey franchise.

 

[Johnny-Oh]

The way I see the options of Spidey in the MCU:

1) Sony voluntarily gives/sells the rights back to Marvel.
2) Sony stops making Spidey movies and the rights revert back to Marvel.
3) Sony let's Marvel take over Spidey but retains distribution rights and/or back-end deals.
4) Sony lets a rebooted/recast Spidey appear in Marvel event films but retain control of said rebooted Spidey for their own Sony films (which are only loosely connected to the MCU, if at all).
5) Sony lets Spidey appear in Marvel event films but if and only if they use TASM Garfield version.
6) Sony doesn't cut a deal now but waits instead for the box office of Sinister Six. If it tanks then they cut a deal; if it somehow succeeds then they continue with their gameplan.
7) Sony just continues with their gameplan and no deal occurs.

Personally I'd prefer #1 but realistically speaking #4 is quite enticing. I think it is the only true compromise for both sides and truly everyone wins.

With #4 Marvel gets:
-Spider-Man, their top draw character, in major MCU event films...watch out Avatar!
-A closer approximation to their comic universe
-More incentive to support Spider-Man films besides just merchandising money
-Some creative control over the character after Sony's recent failures

With #4 Sony gets:
-A reinvigorated fanbase for the character
-A feeling that his adventures mean something in the large MCU
-To keep the character longer
-A soft reboot to cleanse the audiences pallet from recent failures
-A cut of the insanely profitable MCU

With #4 The fans get:
-Spider-Man in The Avengers and/or The Infinity Gauntlet on the big screen!! 'nuff said

I completely disagree with the bolded part, I know you were not making a statement but that's just impossible. Every single person who saw TASM also watched The Avengers, by including Spider-Man they would barely increase their box office profit(if at all) so this is the main reason why I think Marvel isn't very interested in the character.

Of your options I think #3 is the best although I would switch it to Sony producing the films(Kevin Feige having some creative control) and Marvel/Disney distributing them, that way Marvel would still make 2 films a year without counting Spider-Man sorta like we had this year GOTG and TWS by Marvel and TASM 2 by Sony except now it would all 3 be in the same universe. Option #1 is cool too but then we wouldn't have Spidey films as often unless Marvel decides to priority over other characters.

 

[bbjeg]

Honestly, I think the Spider-Man ship has long sailed.

It may have looked like a more likely outcome during Phase 1, or even as early as last year, but I don't think we'll see Spidey in the MCU at this point until the rights revert.

First, I don't think Marvel would want to associate themselves with a dying franchise. TASM2 was the least successful Spider-Man film, both critically and monetarily. This could have a big affect on TASM3. Then there's the fact Sony wants to release 2 villain spinoffs prior to it, a very risky shot in the dark at this point that even Webb fans are skeptic of, and if those fail that puts TASM3 at greater risk.

Second, I think the MCU's need for Spider-Man has reached its lowest. That's not to say they wouldn't need him at all, just that he isn't as much of a necessity today as he was in the MCU's previous history. The gap between Iron Man and their other properties is shrinking. Cap is almost up there, Guardians became a top franchise, Doctor Strange is on his way. Marvel is turning more and more of their characters into A-lists.

Third, and this kind goes in hand with the second point, I feel like Marvel is at a point where they want full creative control over their properties, and would prefer starting fresh than using another studio's version of their characters. Judging from their recent films and the way Phase 2's been structured, I think that's the case.

Fourth, the rumor overall seems preposterous. "Soft" reboot or not, there's no way Sony would reboot again so soon, for obvious historical reasons. Plus Garfield's performance is also generally well received, despite the franchise's reception as a whole. So why would they replace him with a new actor that would be a complete wild card and with no setup?
...

Agreed. To those who would rather see a different Spider Man in the MCU, I don't think Sony would lend him to the MCU while maintaining his own solo version. It's just bad business to have two competing Spider Men. I'm sure there will be viewers who don't like Sony's version and will only watch the MCU version (or vice versa). If there is only one version, it will deter that from happening.

 

[R_Hythlodeus]

Agreed. To those who would rather see a different Spider Man in the MCU, I don't think Sony would lend him to the MCU while maintaining his own solo version. It's just bad business to have two competing Spider Men. I'm sure there will be viewers who don't like Sony's version and will only watch the MCU version (or vice versa). If there is only one version, it will deter that from happening.

why? I don't like the Sony version anyway and don't watch it (legally). So having a MCU version that might be better is just a win since at least one version will be see. Sony doesn't lose money with me just because I watch a different version when I didn't plan to see future Garfield movies anyway

 

[justanotherguy]

Maybe I've just read the wrong comics, but Garfield version is pretty spot on, regardless of his films. Superior to Tobey in every way.

 

[justanotherguy]

as far as the age issue, Garfield is a much younger 30 than Tobey was, imo

 

[Johnny-Oh]

as far as the age issue, Garfield is a much younger 30 than Tobey was, imo

lol this isn't a matter of opinion, Andrew is 31 and Tobey was 28 when Spider-Man 2 was released.

Marvel should just cast a 20 year old so they don't have to worry about the actor getting too old for the role which is the exact problem they have with RDJ

 

[BobJM]

Should Spider-Man really pop in the MCU (or Sony's Sinister Six for that matter), I don't see the harm in hiring an no-name gymnast to play the role in costume and using Garfield (or whoever) for a voiceover performance.

I don't need to see Peter Parker's life played out in a crossover film, therefore I don't need to see a face. Just have Spidey involved.

 

[Heretic]

RDJ is not a problem. Its very easy to argue that without RDJ, we wouldnt be talking about an Iron Man 4 at all. Most of his action should be CGI anyway.

But for Spider-Man...yeah...cast young enough that you can have a few movies in high school. You should be able to do a good 10 films without a reboot (though clearly you'd have to change actors...but a change in actors does not mean you have to start over).

 

[Dark Raven]

Apparently on November 4th there's a prime time special on ABC: “Marvel 75 Years: From Pulp to Pop" hosted by Emily Van Camp. I'm guessing it will be more comics based but I'm sure it will include some stuff from the movies and TV shows.