No Way Home Spider-Man: No Way Home General News & Discussion Thread (TAG SPOILERS)

[InCali]

Really, No Way Home has shown that Sony actually could do a Cinematic Multiverse for Spider-man. Then you could actually pull off an avengers style crossover that could rival even the MCU. That includes various characters and various versions of Spider-man.

Infact that probably would be more beneficial to Sony than just doing SM4,5 and 6. While Marvel are breaking out The Avengers movie. Although it sounds like "The Avengers" movies ended with Endgame.

The point is that Sony needs Marvel a lot more than Marvel needs Sony. Marvel without Spider-Man isn’t quite as cool. Sony only has Spider-Man. Plus, Sony doesn’t have the superhero genre dialed in to the extent that Marvel does. They have far, far fewer characters and far, far less capable movie makers. Imagine a Sony verse team movie. Lol

Sony will be milking Spider-Man as long as they possibly can. Marvel has way more depth and far more characters to milk.

 

[Venom 1988]

Really, No Way Home has shown that Sony actually could do a Cinematic Multiverse for Spider-man.

No...all NWH did was show how inadequate Sony is on their own.

 

[GuestStar2004]

No...all NWH did was show how inadequate Sony is on their own.

The majority of what NWH was, is references to previous Spider-man movies. NON-marvel might i add. Now take them out, and i doubt it would had the same hype. It was a hype machine in the template of the MCU and not the other way round.

3 Spider-man came close to making the money a 10 hero MCU character movie did. Thats basically the power of Spider-man. Now looking at what they did with Into the Spiderverse, Which was also successful. Id say the spiderverse is actually a good source of hype and material to work with.

 

[Arachnerd]

You're conveniently forgetting the fact that creative decisions in NWH were still mostly done and executed by Kevin Feige and the MCU at large, so no, it does not prove Sony is fully capable of tackling their own Spider-Man universe. Morbius proved this tenfold, especially with that stupid af post-credits sequence.

I don't count the animated movies because: 1, they don't take place in the same universe (so far anyway), and 2, pretty sure they were much more lenient on the executive meddling hence why ITSV turned out great.

Sony has not learned anything since TASM 2 or SM3 in regards to interfering with live-action Spider-Man related properties. They also very much intend on keeping up with their plans from the old leaked e-mails.

 

[Venom 1988]

The majority of what NWH was, is references to previous Spider-man movies. NON-marvel might i add. Now take them out, and i doubt it would had the same hype. It was a hype machine in the template of the MCU and not the other way round.

3 Spider-man came close to making the money a 10 hero MCU character movie did. Thats basically the power of Spider-man. Now looking at what they did with Into the Spiderverse, Which was also successful. Id say the spiderverse is actually a good source of hype and material to work with.

You're conflating 2 different points. NWH being good by referencing previous Sony movies =/= NWH being good because of Sony. If NWH was made solely by Sony and they used the same Multiverse concept, I guarantee it would not be as good as what we got.

The Raimi movies were good despite Sony not because of Sony. Into the Spider-Verse was good despite Sony not because of Sony.

 

[InCali]

Spider-Man will do fine but that’s it for Sony.

 

[The Caped Knight]

 

[Iceman]

Sony were doing fine up to Spider-Man 2 but then started losing their way at executive level. I mean what kind of idiot chooses to hire Tom Rothman?

 

[GuestStar2004]

You're conflating 2 different points. NWH being good by referencing previous Sony movies =/= NWH being good because of Sony. If NWH was made solely by Sony and they used the same Multiverse concept, I guarantee it would not be as good as what we got.

The Raimi movies were good despite Sony not because of Sony. Into the Spider-Verse was good despite Sony not because of Sony.

Well there is no evidence either way to suggest how much involvement sony had. Technically they did not just hand to marvel and walk away. They had to be a big part of it.

All that is currently known is that Sony = bad, Marvel = good. And if you like it, well its thanks to marvel. But if you hate it... blame Sony. When its probably not as simple as that.

Sony were doing fine up to Spider-Man 2 but then started losing their way at executive level. I mean what kind of idiot chooses to hire Tom Rothman?

SM2 was back when comic book movies were not seen as a long term business venture. Now these movies are seen as very profitable cinematic universes.

 

[InCali]

Well, let's just look at the quality of Sony SH movies with and without Marvel's involvement. That's fair. I liked SM 1 and 2 and it doesn't matter whether or not CBMs were seen as a long term business venture, but those were 20 years ago and it doesn't really speak to what's going on today. If you hire iffy execs, it's going to have a negative effect. As @Iceman stated, after SM2, there was a sharp drop off in quality and TASM2 was one of the worst CBMs I can think of. It wasn't until Marvel got involved with Holland's current SM that the quality went up. Spider-Verse was considered good. That's fine.

Now........let's look at that non-SM characters that Sony made about without Marvel's involvement. Venom made money and that's ALL you can say about it. Carnage was a (edit: pretty popular) disaster and so was Morbius (only not popular). Are we starting to see a pattern? I agree that it's too simple to say "Sony bad, Marvel good" because even a broken clock is right twice a day (unless it's a digital clock, but you get my point). By and large, Marvel has made pretty good CBM movies if you look at the overall opinion and Sony just has not. Sony has "proved" nothing when it comes to making decent CBMs without Marvel's help. Had Venom and Morbius been well received, that would have gone a long way towards offering "proof", but, to any unbiased observer, that just wasn't the case. Marvel, on the other hand, HAS shown they can make movies that are consistently well received has developed a detailed universe that includes, now, a multiverse. Those are pretty much the facts.

Add to it the fact that Sony just doesn't have depth when it comes to new characters. Compare characters like Kraven, Morbius, etc. to characters like Dr. Strange, Hulk, Thor, CA, IM, BW, FF, X-Men, etc. and it is easy to see exactly why Sony will be very, very challenged to create a universe that will be successful in an ongoing way. Even without the recently purchased IPs from Fox, Marvel had much more depth of characters. Add to it the executives at each studio and that only adds to my take on the 2 studios. Sony, frankly, has a LOT to prove. Marvel does not. Does that mean Marvel will not start making a bunch of stinkers? No, but not many people are putting money on it.

 

[GuestStar2004]

I do think audiences are far more forgiving of Marvel than any other studio. And i think thats what id call You Ain't My Real Dad syndrome. And yes i made that up. My point is that when Fox made movies and when Sony movies, there is always this feeling of do it the way we want it or we will cry that you ain't our real dad and we wish we lived with our REAL dad!. But the moment you live with your real dad, aka Marvel, You kinda have to do what you are told. You have too accept not getting what you want because your real dad told you that you ain't getting what you want. So don't argue!

I think a fair amount of Marvel stuff is overrated personally. Half of it i enjoy and half i don't quite understand the hype for. Even sticking to Spider-man with Far From Home. i enjoyed it in the theater, but i don't really have the desire to rewatch it. It was a little forgettable in my opinion because it was so heavy and dependent on the comedy. And sometimes i wonder, if it was another studio that made it and not marvel... would it still be highly rated? Would it then suddenly be this film that does spider-man wrong and Marvel should get the rights back and do it right?

When people say that the end credit scene for Morbius doesn't make sense. Well neither does alot of the logic from No Way Home. But everyone is making a fuss because Sony are pretending to be our real dad when we know they ain't.

 

[InCali]

I do think audiences are far more forgiving of Marvel than any other studio. And i think thats what id call You Ain't My Real Dad syndrome. And yes i made that up. My point is that when Fox made movies and when Sony movies, there is always this feeling of do it the way we want it or we will cry that you ain't our real dad and we wish we lived with our REAL dad!. But the moment you live with your real dad, aka Marvel, You kinda have to do what you are told. You have too accept not getting what you want because your real dad told you that you ain't getting what you want. So don't argue!

I think a fair amount of Marvel stuff is overrated personally. Half of it i enjoy and half i don't quite understand the hype for. Even sticking to Spider-man with Far From Home. i enjoyed it in the theater, but i don't really have the desire to rewatch it. It was a little forgettable in my opinion because it was so heavy and dependent on the comedy. And sometimes i wonder, if it was another studio that made it and not marvel... would it still be highly rated? Would it then suddenly be this film that does spider-man wrong and Marvel should get the rights back and do it right?

When people say that the end credit scene for Morbius doesn't make sense. Well neither does alot of the logic from No Way Home. But everyone is making a fuss because Sony are pretending to be our real dad when we know they ain't.

That's fair enough and there's probably some truth to what you are saying, but MAYBE part of that is because Marvel has a guy like Feige who understands the material and treats the characters in a way that a "majority" of comic book fans want them treated. Add to it that the movies are accessible, though not always "logical", to the average movie going public and you have a formula for success. Are they ever going to be compared to The Godfather? No, but that's not the point of the genre in general. My point is that maybe there's a reason Marvel is considered the "real dad". They weren't the first ones taking a crack at CBMs, but got it right (enough) and have built a lot of trust in the movie going public.

 

[Pfeiffer-Pfan]

At work on Friday, we had a presentation for our year 8 pupils (11-12 year olds) and as an ice-breaker the speaker asked the classes if they had seen No Way Home and who was their favorite Spider-Man of the three in the film.

At that age, I was expecting a Holland landslide, but to my surprise, Tobey was far and away the victor. Most of the classes voted for Maguire and the rest for Holland. They did describe him as ''very old but cool''.

Amazing that this movie has introduced a whole new generation to the Raimi films now. I wonder what it is that made Tobey so appealing to them. Just an interesting tidbit

 

[Arachnerd]

I also think a good factor could be Spider-Man fans who grew up with the Raimi movies showing them to their kids now. There was that one viral video a while back of this kid doing the Bully Maguire dance which just tells me he's going to grow up to become quite cultured.

 

[Detective Conan]

As we did we all, Mr. Molina. As did we all.

 

[Arachnerd]

Tobey's apparently been spotted vibing at a Billie Eilish concert.

 

[metaphysician]

Really, No Way Home has shown that Sony actually could do a Cinematic Multiverse for Spider-man. Then you could actually pull off an avengers style crossover that could rival even the MCU. That includes various characters and various versions of Spider-man.

Infact that probably would be more beneficial to Sony than just doing SM4,5 and 6. While Marvel are breaking out The Avengers movie. Although it sounds like "The Avengers" movies ended with Endgame.

Eh. . . I would say its proof that *Marvel* could do a crossover movie with Spider-man, and the Spider-man characters which Sony has. It is far from proof that *Sony* could do the same. They, to put it bluntly, have no demonstrated nearly that level of competence.

 

[kguillou]

Blu ray just came in the mail

 

[InCali]

Eh. . . I would say its proof that *Marvel* could do a crossover movie with Spider-man, and the Spider-man characters which Sony has. It is far from proof that *Sony* could do the same. They, to put it bluntly, have no demonstrated nearly that level of competence.

The bottom line is that Marvel has had a slew of very, very financially and critically successful CBMs without Sony and the opposite is just not the case; at least not recently. So, when there is a collaboration that ends up being very successful, you can draw your own conclusions as to why that is.

 

[The Joker]

As we did we all, Mr. Molina. As did we all.

Especially with that Raimi theme playing in the background while they were talking. It was all too much

 

[Arachnerd]

I love looking at that scene in a meta sense as well since we were all either kids or teenagers when the Raimi movies came out. Just a really beautiful moment all around.

 

[Gothamsknight]

Why did they CGI all 3 of them landing? Would've been cool for it to be practical haha. Plus a cool look at the Raimi suit with the mask on! They really did add some updates the suit, but they look good.

 

[Arachnerd]

I think it would have looked too stilted, so I don't mind the change there.

 

[kguillou]

I didnt know this but on walmart’s website the back cover details still shows “90 minutes of extras including extended and deleted scenes.” And people are getting pissed at the false advertising. Wuh oh, Sony.

 

[mclay18]

Sony were doing fine up to Spider-Man 2 but then started losing their way at executive level. I mean what kind of idiot chooses to hire Tom Rothman?

Amy Pascal made some questionable green lights (like TASM2), but to replace her with Tom Rothman aggravates the situation in some ways. Sony should've hired Fox's Jim Gianopoulos (since the quality of Fox's movies went up when Rothman left) or WB's Jeff Robinov.

Rothman needs to wise up and let Feige run ALL the Sony Spidey stuff (including spinoffs) -- and rake in the dough and critical praise. Marvel Studios is a proven brand and Morbius proves Rothman can't do it solo.