Far From Home Spider-Man: Far From Home General Discussion and Speculation - Part 2

[Jordanstine]

Answers a lot of questions.

#SaveTomHollandFromTomRothman

 

[TheVileOne]

A lot of misinformation probably is being reported probably from both sides trying to sway the public for their hardball negotiations through the media.

 

[Frodo]

A lot of misinformation probably is being reported probably from both sides trying to sway the public for their hardball negotiations through the media.

I think the truth is probably somewhere in the middle, though at this point, I think there are alot of fanboys who don't really care what the truth is, and are just upset about the whole situation in general.

It seems to me, if either studio really had the incentive to work things out and keep the deal going , they would. This is Disney and Sony studios. Its not as if they couldn't reach a deal if they really wanted to.

For all the fan outcry , Disney really doesn't seem to be fighting all that hard for Spiderman to go back in, Sony is insisting on going it alone.

That's a sign right there that neither studio see's Spiderman in the MCU as a priority . That's the reality that fanboys have been unwilling to face.

 

[TheVileOne]

I think the truth is probably somewhere in the middle, though at this point, I think there are alot of fanboys who don't really care what the truth is, and are just upset about the whole situation in general.

It seems to me, if either studio really had the incentive to work things out and keep the deal going , they would. This is Disney and Sony studios. Its not as if they couldn't reach a deal if they really wanted to.

For all the fan outcry , Disney really doesn't seem to be fighting all that hard for Spiderman to go back in, Sony is insisting on going it alone.

That's a sign right there that neither studio see's Spiderman in the MCU as a priority . That's the reality that fanboys have been unwilling to face.

They made a deal several years ago when Sony was in a real bind and coming off the internet leaks and the Amazing Spider-Man franchise was a failure and they were looking to do spinoffs of a franchise that was in the toilet with Sinister 6 and Venom that made no sense at the time. It worked for them at that time.

Now that Marvel helped them re-establish Spider-Man they are ready to cut bait and do it on their own when they've pretty much proven they can't.

And you know what? Outside of angry fandom, they really have no obligation to work with Marvel. They still control the film rights. They fulfilled the contractual obligations with Marvel Studios for the five movies. Now they can pretty much do whatever they want as long as they keep making movies. I don't like it but that's the reality.

I mean look, this is the deal Marvel made way back in the 1990s. Now, Disney has to figure it out and deal with it.

 

[Scarlet Spider]

 

[fan4stic]

What most don’t see is that this Disney & Sony negotiation isn’t JUST for Spider-man.

Its much BIGGER: It’s for all Sony’s Spider-verse to be considered part of the MCU.

That’s what Sony wants.

Can’t expect Feige to do all that work for the same rate without a producer’s fee.

Does that mean they should get 25 percent of it? If say, Morbius, Venom 2, Kraven, and another 4th movie all crack a billion, Disney would get a billion dollars from it by that structure.

Sony may be playing looser with the situation, but I think giving that much for what I think amounts more or less to being popular by association and having Fiege as a creative consultant (if that's what's happening) is a bit overboard for this, I think maybe.

 

[DyeLorean]

For all the fan outcry , Disney really doesn't seem to be fighting all that hard for Spiderman to go back in, Sony is insisting on going it alone.

That's a sign right there that neither studio see's Spiderman in the MCU as a priority . That's the reality that fanboys have been unwilling to face.

Disney/Marvel Studios have already used Spider-Man in at least three of their biggest crossovers and they have tons of other properties to explore in the upcoming years, so it might be safe to assume there's not another crossover event film for them to use Spider-Man.

In an ideal world, Spidey outside the MCU means more Spider-Man-focused stories (which in itself it's a great thing), but in this world is in Sony's hands, which I don't trust one bit.

 

[TheWallCrawler]

In an ideal world, Spidey outside the MCU means more Spider-Man-focused stories (which in itself it's a great thing), but in this world is in Sony's hands, which I don't trust one bit.

The Watts movies with Disney Marvel's involvement were safe entertaining products but they were bland. Also they had a lot of cheap humor that sometimes undermines dramatic potential.
Sony is a wild-card. They might absolutely screw up royally. Or, they could have matured enough to know that this next movie has to be actually good. If memory serves, Morbius was very far in production before Spider-verse became a hit and there was any sign that Disney would cut Spiderman out. So even if it sucks (who are we kidding, it will), I have faith in Sony's Spiderman now. And I would rather take the risk of a potential flop than see more safe mediocre Marvel films

 

[ironwez20]

I rather take “safe marvel films” than the brand being damaged again

 

[The Infernal]

There's a lot wrong when it comes to mcu Spider-man movies, like the terrible supporting cast for one and turning his villains into Iron-man villains, but they're still good movies overall and they get Spider-man as a character right.

Nothing I've seen from Sony makes me think they can deliver a more authentic Spider-man at this point. Venom only makes me more worried how they will handle him.

 

[DyeLorean]

The Watts movies with Disney Marvel's involvement were safe entertaining products but they were bland. Also they had a lot of cheap humor that sometimes undermines dramatic potential.
Sony is a wild-card. They might absolutely screw up royally. Or, they could have matured enough to know that this next movie has to be actually good. If memory serves, Morbius was very far in production before Spider-verse became a hit and there was any sign that Disney would cut Spiderman out. So even if it sucks (who are we kidding, it will), I have faith in Sony's Spiderman now. And I would rather take the risk of a potential flop than see more safe mediocre Marvel films

Maybe I'm wrong and I'm just guessing here, but I doubt Sony had anything to do with Spider-Verse. That was all Lord and Miller's and the directors, and my guess is Sony stayed away and let that creative team do the movie they wanted. Like it doesn't feel like a "studio" movie but a proper movie led by its creative team.
At the same time, the success of that movie probably made them go "humm... maybe we can do that in live action?".

 

[Herofan]

Looks like I won't be seeing their films then, especially if they force in Venom, Morbius, and/or any attempt to force multiple villains into a film for no reason other than for spectacle.

Marvel Studios sure isn't averse to having multiple villains in a film for spectacle.

 

[DyeLorean]

The Winter Soldier is full of villains: Bucky, Alexander Pierce, Brock Rumlow, Batroc, Zola. It's the way you use and integrate them that makes it work.
Sony's version of multiple villains is Spider-Man 3 and The Amazing Spider-Man 2, probably the two worst ones.

 

[Frodo]

Ultimately, the GA is gonna make or break the next Spiderman film, not fandom. For all the anger and rage of fanboys , at the end of the day, its gonna have to take the GA to reject what Sony serves up in order for Sony to change course and fly right.

Unfortunately, that may not happen for another 2 or 3 years, and if or when that happens, that means damage to this iteration of the franchise. But that's the only way studios learn. They monitor fan response of course, and they aren't crazy about the PR, but their bottomline is truly what governs their behavior.

Fans forget , Sony was going to make Spiderman 4 with Raimi , Maguire, John Malcovich, and Anne Hathaway ,despite the fan polarization over SM3 because the film was a hit with GA's moneywise. They only rebooted to ASM films because Raimi wasn't ready to make it. Had ASM 2 been huge with general audiences , there wouldn't have been a Marvel deal to begin with.

In this case, post SMFFH, its hard to tell the studio which has just made a billion dollars, an Oscar winning film cartoon or not, and a hit with the GA in Venom that they " don't know what they're doing", even though Disney helped Sony revive the Spiderman film franchise.

They've gotten too big for their britches , and its gonna have to take the GA to turn their noses up at the next offering to consider making a change.

 

[shinlyle]

Ultimately, the GA is gonna make or break the next Spiderman film, not fandom. For all the anger and rage of fanboys , at the end of the day, its gonna have to take the GA to reject what Sony serves up in order for Sony to change course and fly right.

Unfortunately, that may not happen for another 2 or 3 years, and if or when that happens, that means damage to this iteration of the franchise. But that's the only way studios learn. They monitor fan response of course, and they aren't crazy about the PR, but their bottomline is truly what governs their behavior.

Fans forget , Sony was going to make Spiderman 4 with Raimi , Maguire, John Malcovich, and Anne Hathaway ,despite the fan polarization over SM3 because the film was a hit with GA's moneywise. They only rebooted to ASM films because Raimi wasn't ready to make it. Had ASM 2 been huge with general audiences , there wouldn't have been a Marvel deal to begin with.

In this case, post SMFFH, its hard to tell the studio which has just made a billion dollars, an Oscar winning film cartoon or not, and a hit with the GA in Venom that they " don't know what they're doing", even though Disney helped Sony revive the Spiderman film franchise.

They've gotten too big for their britches , and its gonna have to take the GA to turn their noses up at the next offering to consider making a change.

Preach.
If fandom had determined what won the day, the live action Transformers films would have never seen a third film...or a second GIJOE movie, for that matter.

 

[Spider-Gnome]

Answers a lot of questions.

#SaveTomHollandFromTomRothman

Thanks for that. That seems to make sense.

I am firmly on the side of Marvel Studios (NOTE: I'm not siding with Disney over Sony, I'm siding with Marvel). I've enjoyed Marvel's take on Spider-Man/Peter Parker. Tom Holland is easily my favorite live action version of the character.

I have zero faith in Sony at this point. Yes, they gave us Raimi's Spider-Man and Spider-Man 2 (like fifteen years ago) and Spectacular Spider-Man (which I think Sony's film division had nothing to do with), but Sony's meddling gave us Spider-Man 3, Amazing Spider-Man, and Spider-Man 2 which were horrible (in my opinion) (Into the Spider-Verse was good, but, I think, highly overrated). They look like they have learned nothing by evidence of rushing to get a Venom movie out, instead of setting the character up properly and going back to their big shared universe we made fun of before the Marvel/Disney deal. Avi Arad and Tom Rothman being in full charge of Spider-Man should be concerning for fans.

I know I will not go see Morbius or Venom 2, even if they cram Tom Holland's Spider-Man in them. As for Spider-Man: Home Alone (or whatever they call the third solo Holland film), I don't know. My only hope is Feige and Marvel, are playing the long game and that Feige had already talked to Jon Watts and the writers on the direction of the third film, so they can finish up the high school trilogy properly and then hopefully, down the road get back into the MCU.

The other bad part of this is we won't get to see Tom Holland interact with the Fantastic Four, who are finally back in the MCU, and we won't get Norman Osborn and the Dark Avengers/Dark Reign storyline that we've been hearing rumors about.

#SaveSpiderMan

 

[fan4stic]

Thanks for that. That seems to make sense.

I am firmly on the side of Marvel Studios (NOTE: I'm not siding with Disney over Sony, I'm siding with Marvel). I've enjoyed Marvel's take on Spider-Man/Peter Parker. Tom Holland is easily my favorite live action version of the character.

I have zero faith in Sony at this point. Yes, they gave us Raimi's Spider-Man and Spider-Man 2 (like fifteen years ago) and Spectacular Spider-Man (which I think Sony's film division had nothing to do with), but Sony's meddling gave us Spider-Man 3, Amazing Spider-Man, and Spider-Man 2 which were horrible (in my opinion) (Into the Spider-Verse was good, but, I think, highly overrated). They look like they have learned nothing by evidence of rushing to get a Venom movie out, instead of setting the character up properly and going back to their big shared universe we made fun of before the Marvel/Disney deal. Avi Arad and Tom Rothman being in full charge of Spider-Man should be concerning for fans.

I know I will not go see Morbius or Venom 2, even if they cram Tom Holland's Spider-Man in them. As for Spider-Man: Home Alone (or whatever they call the third solo Holland film), I don't know. My only hope is Feige and Marvel, are playing the long game and that Feige had already talked to Jon Watts and the writers on the direction of the third film, so they can finish up the high school trilogy properly and then hopefully, down the road get back into the MCU.

The other bad part of this is we won't get to see Tom Holland interact with the Fantastic Four, who are finally back in the MCU, and we won't get Norman Osborn and the Dark Avengers/Dark Reign storyline that we've been hearing rumors about.

#SaveSpiderMan

why does who we think makes the better spiderman movies have to be the deciding factor? I think Marvel isn't owed Spider-Man.

I don't see spiderman and his characters being, what I think is, diminishingly written, to be mixed in with MCU things or other characters as a big issue.

I don't see why Spider-Man needs to be saved.

 

[ironwez20]

why does who we think makes the better spiderman movies have to be the deciding factor? I think Marvel isn't owed Spider-Man.

I don't see spiderman and his characters being, what I think is, diminishingly written, to be mixed in with MCU things or other characters as a big issue.

I don't see why Spider-Man needs to be saved.

You don’t see why? Jeez it’s like 2012-2014 doesn’t exist anymore to some of you. Does nobody remember the state Spider-Man was in and the idiots behind the movies bringing the character down and dragging him through the mud? It needs to be saved because Sony is a horrible company with zero direction that is run by hacks who don’t know a thing about the character

Come on. Captain America and gotg were bigger movies than Spider-Man. That’s a big no no in my book.

 

[fan4stic]

You don’t see why? Jeez it’s like 2012-2014 doesn’t exist anymore to some of you. Does nobody remember the state Spider-Man was in and the idiots behind the movies bringing the character down and dragging him through the mud? It needs to be saved because Sony is a horrible company with zero direction that is run by hacks who don’t know a thing about the character

Come on. Captain America and gotg were bigger movies than Spider-Man. That’s a big no no in my book.

Us getting what I think is disappointing movies doesn't mean I think the character needs to be saved. I haven't gotten an MCU Spider-Man movie I've been crazy about either. Maybe not to the same degree as TASM's, but I don't hold MCU's to a high standard, so I don't see this as a strong loss.

 

[Spider-Fan]

Quite honestly, I see both pros and cons to this whole mess. The obvious con being Sony being creatively in charge, but there are Pros such as a stronger emphasis on the Spider-Man universe without being so dependent on Iron Man and things like that. I completely agree that The Amazing Spider-Man series was garbage, but we're not in the Andrew Garfield era. Much of the heavy lifting of establishing the Tom Holland Spider-Man has already been done. They pretty much just have to keep going with it

 

[Schlosser85]

Quite honestly, I see both pros and cons to this whole mess. The obvious con being Sony being creatively in charge, but there are Pros such as a stronger emphasis on the Spider-Man universe without being so dependent on Iron Man and things like that. I completely agree that The Amazing Spider-Man series was garbage, but we're not in the Andrew Garfield era. Much of the heavy lifting of establishing the Tom Holland Spider-Man has already been done. They pretty much just have to keep going with it

And I have zero faith in them not to drop the ball the first chance they get, because shooting themselves is all they know how to do.

 

[Spider-Fan]

And I have zero faith in them not to drop the ball the first chance they get, because shooting themselves is all they know how to do.

Which is possible. But I am not assuming that will happen just by default. I am giving them a chance.

 

[shinlyle]

why does who we think makes the better spiderman movies have to be the deciding factor? I think Marvel isn't owed Spider-Man.

I don't see spiderman and his characters being, what I think is, diminishingly written, to be mixed in with MCU things or other characters as a big issue.

I don't see why Spider-Man needs to be saved.

The opening to Amazing Spider-Man 2 was 8 minutes of them dealing with Peter Parker's parents...who were the focus of the first movie. It took them almost 10 minutes to show Spider-Man or Peter Parker, and they had JUST (re)done his origin the first film. Then, they copied Jim Carrey's Riddler with Jamie Fox's Electro. They then attempted to introduce the Sinister 6. Sony, left to it's own devices is like sending a 5 year old kid into Gamestop with $3000, and expecting them to make wise decisions.

They got Spider-Man 1 and 2 right, they struck absolute GOLD with Spider-Verse, and they got lucky (money-wise) with Venom. Now they think they are the best of the best...

...Venom will fight Spider-Man and Carnage in a sequel, mark my words. Then they will have the Sinister 6 fight Spider-Man in the next movie, and they will figure out a way to trip up any Spider-Verse sequels, and the next thing you know, we'll have gotten 3 BAD to MEDIOCRE Spider-Man films in the span of a year, as opposed to 3 GREAT ONES in the span of a year....

...and the character will be damaged again. It's Sony. It's what they do.

 

[DyeLorean]

Venom is the perfect example of how Sony is (at least) ten years behind from the current golden era of superhero films. Venom felt like a mediocre and awful mid 00's Ghost Rider type of film.
And the worst thing is that it made TONS of money, which will make them go "Aha! so this works!".

 

[Herofan]

The other bad part of this is we won't get to see Tom Holland interact with the Fantastic Four, who are finally back in the MCU, and we won't get Norman Osborn and the Dark Avengers/Dark Reign storyline that we've been hearing rumors about.

#SaveSpiderMan

It would be pretty weird to suddenly have Norman and him be a big deal, at least close to the comics, after no mention or indication of him in all the movies so far, he would probably have to be a quite different character.