Superhero Cinematic Civil War - Part 56

[MadVillainy]

I was all for a teenage Spidey. Because around when TASM was announced I was deep into watching Spectacular Spider-Man. Great balance of teen drama, that even back then I was a bit beyond, but they made it interesting to someone like me who wasn't in high school. But then they fumbled that, so when the MCU was doing teenage Spidey I thought it'd be great. Even tho I think Civil War is kinda trash, I liked Holland's performance in it. But in the solo movies they still haven't got the teen stuff right. In any teen hero movie actually. Shazam I don't think handled it that well either.
I don't need a teen superhero film but it would be an interesting thing to explore at least to do something with the genre. Idk do it with Danny Phatom or Static Shock.

I kinda don't wanna see a "adult" Peter. I mean I wouldn't be against it but I'd prefer to watch a movie with the 16-26 yr old Peter. We have enough "adult" heroes. And after Spider-Man PS4, I wouldn't mind a 23 or so old Peter movie.

 

[Infinity9999x]

I was all for a teenage Spidey. Because around when TASM was announced I was deep into watching Spectacular Spider-Man. Great balance of teen drama, that even back then I was a bit beyond, but they made it interesting to someone like me who wasn't in high school. But then they fumbled that, so when the MCU was doing teenage Spidey I thought it'd be great. Even tho I think Civil War is kinda trash, I liked Holland's performance in it. But in the solo movies they still haven't got the teen stuff right. In any teen hero movie actually. Shazam I don't think handled it that well either.
I don't need a teen superhero film but it would be an interesting thing to explore at least to do something with the genre. Idk do it with Danny Phatom or Static Shock.

I kinda don't wanna see a "adult" Peter. I mean I wouldn't be against it but I'd prefer to watch a movie with the 16-26 yr old Peter. We have enough "adult" heroes. And after Spider-Man PS4, I wouldn't mind a 23 or so old Peter movie.

I loved the teen stuff in HC. But then, I also can’t see how anyone thinks Civil War is trash, so we probably just won’t see eye to eye on this one.

 

[MadVillainy]

It's likely Sony Studios will be sold off at some point during that time, which may open a window for Disney/Marvel obtaining the rights outright. I'm holding out hope that, even if Sony pulls Spidey after FFH, we could potentially see Tom Holland playing adult Peter at a later point in time.

I don't see Sony taking Spidey away.
Especially if what I read about the deal is true. From what I read, SONY still makes most of the creative decisions and they then get most if not all of the profits from any solo Spidey movie. Plus they can make their own Spider-Man related movies like Venom or Spider-Verse and get all of the money from that.
Basically all Marvel gets is the ability to use Spider-Man in their movies, which helps boost their box office. And that helps Sony when they circle back to a solo Spider-Man movie.

But, again this isn't confirmed so far as I know, it seems to me like Sony takes the biggest W out of the deal.

I don't see why they would change that

 

[Infinity9999x]

I don't see Sony taking Spidey away.
Especially if what I read about the deal is true. From what I read, SONY still makes most of the creative decisions and they then get most if not all of the profits from any solo Spidey movie. Plus they can make their own Spider-Man related movies like Venom or Spider-Verse and get all of the money from that.
Basically all Marvel gets is the ability to use Spider-Man in their movies, which helps boost their box office. And that helps Sony when they circle back to a solo Spider-Man movie.

But, again this isn't confirmed so far as I know, it seems to me like Sony takes the biggest W out of the deal.

I don't see why they would change that

I had read Disney has full creative control over Spider-man, not Sony.

 

[Erzengel]

I don't trust Arad with the Spider-Man franchise, but hey for every TASM, TASM2 & Venom we get a Into the Spider-Verse? At least something comes out of his involvement.

 

[MadVillainy]

I had read Disney has full creative control over Spider-man, not Sony.

Never heard anything like that.

EDIT: The official press release even said that Sony had final creative control It’s Official: ‘Spider-Man’ Will Enter The Marvel Cinematic Universe, Sony/Disney Deal Is Done

 

[Infinity9999x]

Never heard anything like that.

EDIT: The official press release even said that Sony had final creative control It’s Official: ‘Spider-Man’ Will Enter The Marvel Cinematic Universe, Sony/Disney Deal Is Done

Marvel Has Spider-Man: Homecoming Creative Control

Feige said a while back they had creative control over Homecoming. He phrases it in a very diplomatic way,
“Well, I’ve known all those people for a very long time. Amy Pascal, Tom Rothman, who runs Sony now, I’ve known for years. So, it’s been great. They really are supportive in allowing us to make the creative decisions to make [Spider-Man: Homecoming], but they’ve been great partners. So far so good on that movie.”

But it was pretty clear they had the creative control. And I imagine they made part of the deal that “this is essentially our movie” but put out that Sony has approval to let them save face.

 

[MadVillainy]

Marvel Has Spider-Man: Homecoming Creative Control

Feige said a while back they had creative control over Homecoming. He phrases it in a very diplomatic way,
“Well, I’ve known all those people for a very long time. Amy Pascal, Tom Rothman, who runs Sony now, I’ve known for years. So, it’s been great. They really are supportive in allowing us to make the creative decisions to make [Spider-Man: Homecoming], but they’ve been great partners. So far so good on that movie.”

But it was pretty clear they had the creative control. And I imagine they made part of the deal that “this is essentially our movie” but put out that Sony has approval to let them save face.

It's funny because I found this article that makes a clear point about that quote

Hey U Guys has taken this to mean that Marvel has full creative control over Spider-Man — a glaring contrast to the original announcement. Other websites, such as Comic Book Movies, have followed their lead. However, look closely at Feige's comment. He says that the Sony team are "really supportive in allowing... creative decisions." In other words, it sounds as though the creative control still sits with Sony, but they're wisely giving Marvel a lot of room to maneuver. It's a sensible approach, and it follows with the wording in the original announcement: that Sony has "final creative control" over Spider-Man.

And that seems true to me going by Feige's words.
1)If you're in control you do't have to be "allowed" to do anything.
2) And then there's the original announcement which states that Sony has creative control.
3) And the fact that I can't see why would any studio would finance a major movie, have their name put all over it, and then they don't have the final say.
And then Feige even said today, that if Spidey and Venom crossover that it's up to Sony. He could've said there are no plans or that he didn't know. If Marvel has full creative control they could've just shut it down.

I agree with the Geeks article speculation, Sony has probably has control but they're letting Marvel do the thing or it's 50/50 or some other kind of split

 

[Infinity9999x]

It's funny because I found this article that makes a clear point about that quote

And that seems true to me going by Feige's words.
1)If you're in control you do't have to be "allowed" to do anything.
2) And then there's the original announcement which states that Sony has creative control.
3) And the fact that I can't see why would any studio would finance a major movie, have their name put all over it, and then they don't have the final say.
And then Feige even said today, that if Spidey and Venom crossover that it's up to Sony. He could've said there are no plans or that he didn't know. If Marvel has full creative control they could've just shut it down.

I agree with the Geeks article speculation, Sony has probably has control but they're letting Marvel do the thing or it's 50/50 or some other kind of split

The logic goes both ways. Why would Disney allow Spider-man into their incredible valuable IP, and allow his films to be in the MCU, which they’ve taken immense care to cultivate to the level of quality it has, if they didn’t have creative control? Especially if they don’t get the box office numbers from the solo films?

I’m sure that Feige made it clear in some way that the solo films and obviously the films where Spidey just appears in, they have creative control. They may have some kind of arrangement for the solo films, where Sony gets some, or at least some kind of honorary “sure you get approval of what we’re doing,” but you can bet that If they tried to butt heads with Marvel creatively the deal would be done. I think Disney was helping Sony save face by giving them an honorary “yeah you have creative control” but it just doesn’t make sense for Disney to risk letting Sony have full creative control of the solo Spidey film set in their universe. There’s no benefit to them in that scenario.

 

[MadVillainy]

The logic goes both ways. Why would Disney allow Spider-man into their incredible valuable IP, and allow his films to be in the MCU, which they’ve taken immense care to cultivate to the level of quality it has, if they didn’t have creative control? Especially if they don’t get the box office numbers from the solo films?
Because they
I’m sure that Feige made it clear in some way that the solo films and obviously the films where Spidey just appears in, they have creative control. They may have some kind of arrangement for the solo films, where Sony gets some, or at least some kind of honorary “sure you get approval of what we’re doing,” but you can bet that If they tried to butt heads with Marvel creatively the deal would be done. I think Disney was helping Sony save face by giving them an honorary “yeah you have creative control” but it just doesn’t make sense for Disney to risk letting Sony have full creative control of the solo Spidey film set in their universe. There’s no benefit to them in that scenario.

There's no proof of Disney doing anything to help Sony save face. So that's just baseless speculation that doesn't mean anything.

The facts are there from multiple reports
1) The official press release said Sony had creative control
2) Feige's words at least seemed to indicate that he has to be "allowed" to do stuff with Spidey from Sony and/or Pascal. That's not control.
3) Feige's words about Venom/Spidey meeting being "up to Sony"
4) Sony is financing and distributing the movie. If the movie fails, it all blows back on them. There won't be layoffs or money loss at Disney. But there will be at Sony. Why would any studio allow for someone else that doesn't have any financial stake in the game to have complete creative control. If Spidey fails, the MCU doesn't take any major hit. They have billion dollar grossers like CM, BP, etc.
5) Marvel didn't want Spidey coming so soon after EG, but Sony did . If the Marvel/Disney had control why couldn't they stop the production from starting and the release happening?
Marvel And Sony Clashed Over 'Spider-Man: Far From Home'

People can twist the narrative and claim that Disney is just being nice to Sony, but there's no evidence of that. We have to go by the facts we're given otherwise there's no point in discussing it. Off the press release alone, this shouldn't even be a real discussion.
Again I think Pascal trusts Feige/Disney and let's them do their thing, but if there's something that Sony/Pascal really wants they will get it ie. releasing FFH so soon.

 

[Infinity9999x]

There's no proof of Disney doing anything to help Sony save face. So that's just baseless speculation that doesn't mean anything.

The facts are there from multiple reports
1) The official press release said Sony had creative control
2) Feige's words at least seemed to indicate that he has to be "allowed" to do stuff with Spidey from Sony and/or Pascal. That's not control.
3) Feige's words about Venom/Spidey meeting being "up to Sony"
4) Sony is financing and distributing the movie. If the movie fails, it all blows back on them. There won't be layoffs or money loss at Disney. But there will be at Sony. Why would any studio allow for someone else that doesn't have any financial stake in the game to have complete creative control. If Spidey fails, the MCU doesn't take any major hit. They have billion dollar grossers like CM, BP, etc.
5) Marvel didn't want Spidey coming so soon after EG, but Sony did . If the Marvel/Disney had control why couldn't they stop the production from starting and the release happening?
Marvel And Sony Clashed Over 'Spider-Man: Far From Home'

People can twist the narrative and claim that Disney is just being nice to Sony, but there's no evidence of that. We have to go by the facts we're given otherwise there's no point in discussing it. Off the press release alone, this shouldn't even be a real discussion.
Again I think Pascal trusts Feige/Disney and let's them do their thing, but if there's something that Sony/Pascal really wants they will get it ie. releasing FFH so soon.

The End Game issue is a good point. Though I do think it would be far different if Sony had a much different creative vision for Spider-man than Marvel did. That’s where I don’t see the partnership continuing, because Marvel definitely doesn’t want a lackluster product diluting their brand. I don’t even think they want a situation like Venom where it made money but got panned critically.

I think you’re right in that Sony does have the final say, but I also don’t think Disney makes the deal if Sony doesn’t agree to essentially let them make the creative decisions with the character. Because otherwise there’s is simply no benefit to them in the deal.

 

[Spider-Fan]

I think Sony has a lot more say on these Spider-Man films than fans want to think they do.

 

[Infinity9999x]

I think Sony has a lot more say on these Spider-Man films than fans want to think they do.

I think all the business stuff is Sony for sure. Scheduling release dates, marketing, advertising etc. I just think that, even if it’s just a handshake agreement, creatively Marvel gets most of the reins, otherwise the deal doesn’t make sense for them. They’ve been incredibly careful in cultivating their film brand, and I don’t see them risking a TASM2 level film just to get Spidey back in the fold.

 

[Spider-Fan]

I think all the business stuff is Sony for sure. Scheduling release dates, marketing, advertising etc. I just think that, even if it’s just a handshake agreement, creatively Marvel gets most of the reins, otherwise the deal doesn’t make sense for them. They’ve been incredibly careful in cultivating their film brand, and I don’t see them risking a TASM2 level film just to get Spidey back in the fold.

I see it as Sony gives Marvel a lot of rope, but ultimate final say goes to Sony. In past interviews it was stated that for CW, IW, and Endgame, Sony had final approval on all Spider-Man elements of those scripts. Why would it be any different on Spider-Man based solo movies? Granted, it appears like Sony has granted them a lot of freedom but I don't think they really "have" to if they want to start dictating stuff. Though they have no reason to do that since letting Marvel work made them money with Homecoming and surely will with Far From Home. But we'll see how the agreement operates moving forward.

 

[Infinity9999x]

I see it as Sony gives Marvel a lot of rope, but ultimate final say goes to Sony. In past interviews it was stated that for CW, IW, and Endgame, Sony had final approval on all Spider-Man elements of those scripts. Why would it be any different on Spider-Man based solo movies? Granted, it appears like Sony has granted them a lot of freedom but I don't think they really "have" to if they want to start dictating stuff. Though they have no reason to do that since letting Marvel work made them money with Homecoming and surely will with Far From Home. But we'll see how the agreement operates moving forward.

Yeah. Which is basically where I think the “handshake agreement” comes in. Because the second I see Disney and Marvel having big differences creatively is when I think we see Disney ending this partnership.

And I think Sony knows that. They know they benefit from Spidey being in the MCU, and Disney knows they also benefit from having their flagship character back home. So they both have reason to want to work together.

 

[kguillou]

All i know is, lucrative box office aside, over Feige’s dead body is he gonna let Hardy’s Venom into the MCU.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Phase 3 has massively upped the villain game with Vulture, Killmonger, and Thanos. I’d love to see Mysterio on that tier too.

You forgot Ego and Hela

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

I think Sony has a lot more say on these Spider-Man films than fans want to think they do.

I think there are certain things that Marvel isn't allowed to do with the character, but it is still largely Feige's show and his vision. Not Avi Arad's. More like a set of rules that Marvel has to follow.

The issue is that Disney has leverage. Sony needs Disney more than Disney needs them. If Sony gets too pushy, Disney can just take their ball and go home.

 

[Infinity9999x]

I think there are certain things that Marvel isn't allowed to do with the character, but it is still largely Feige's show and his vision. Not Avi Arad's. More like a set of rules that Marvel has to follow.

The issue is that Disney has leverage. Sony needs Disney more than Disney needs them. If Sony gets too pushy, Disney can just take their ball and go home.

Yeah, that’s how I feel. Disney gets a benefit sure, but Sony needs it far more than Disney does.

 

[RomanticPenguin]

I think that has to do more with the era of MCU than the fact that they were first sequels. All the films you mentioned were in the 2010-14 era, and post Winter Soldier (Ultron being the only exception) the quality of all the films has seen a marked increase.

"you mentioned"

/s

we'll find out soon enough though

 

[Infinity9999x]

"you mentioned"

/s

we'll find out soon enough though

No idea what that means. But funny pic I guess?

 

[The Joker]

All i know is, lucrative box office aside, over Feige’s dead body is he gonna let Hardy’s Venom into the MCU.

Good. Don't want that trash tainting the MCU.

 

[I Am The Knight]

You guys have no idea what Feige likes or doesn't like even if he thought the movie was bad, he might think a Hardy Venom under his leadership would be an even bigger goldmine.

 

[kguillou]

You guys have no idea what Feige likes or doesn't like even if he thought the movie was bad, he might think a Hardy Venom under his leadership would be an even bigger goldmine.

True....but i think its pretty safe to say he’s not gonna want Sony’s critically panned creation in his universe.

 

[MadVillainy]

I think there are certain things that Marvel isn't allowed to do with the character, but it is still largely Feige's show and his vision. Not Avi Arad's. More like a set of rules that Marvel has to follow.

The issue is that Disney has leverage. Sony needs Disney more than Disney needs them. If Sony gets too pushy, Disney can just take their ball and go home.

I don't think it's Arad's show, but I don't think Arad has had anything to do with anything since TASM2. I think a better person to bring up is Amy Pascal, at least for the recent Spidey movies.

I don't understand why people are so opposed to admitting that Marvel/Disney might not have complete creative control. I mean if Feige has some rules on what he can and can't do, then that's not his full vision. And again I don't think that Pascal or whoever is over Feige's shoulder and being annoying, but if they want something then Sony will get it. THey said Sony has control in the press release, clearly Disney wouldn't release FFH so soon...none of this seems like someone has full creative control. And, if you want to entertain what Jeff Sneider said that Holland was Sony's top choice and not Marvel's...this doesn't seem like full creative control

Anywho, how does Disney have leverage when Sony is paying for everything and has rights to the character?
It's a mutually beneficial relationship, but I don't think Disney has much. What can they do?
-Disney: If you don't do what we want, we'll take away Spider-Man. Sony: Uh well no you can't do that. We have the rights
-Disney: Well, we'll stop paying for it. Sony: We're the ones paying for it
-Disney: We won't let Spider-Man be in the Avengers.
Not letting Spidey being in the Avengers is pretty much all they have. Which is still a big thing, but compared to what Sony has I don't think it's as much.
Especially with Sony probably getting cocky after the financial success of Venom and the critical success of Spider-Verse. I think Sony has most, if not all, the cards.

You guys have no idea what Feige likes or doesn't like even if he thought the movie was bad, he might think a Hardy Venom under his leadership would be an even bigger goldmine.

Ah ignore them. SOme people are still really in their feelings because Venom was a success