The Amazing Spider-Man 2 The Amazing Spider-Man 2 Box Office Prediction Thread - Part 3

[Iceman]

It really does seem like they are throwing all their eggs into this one basket. That ain't exactly smart.

Spidey will always be one of the biggest comic characters of all but I don't think any solo comic character can sustain a film every few years forever. Certainly a film studio shouldn't be relying heavily on a solo character.

 

[Spiderine]

Maybe they should have just let Raimi finish Spider-Man 4.

I think the movies were going to decline regardless after Spiderman 3 left a bad taste. And the studio was going to interfere with SM4 just like they did with SM3. Which is part of the reason he left.

 

[DJ_KiDDvIcIOUs]

Ya it definitely looks like Marvel got the best part of the deal. The problem is all this movies have the Marvel logo to start and the GA isn't going to differentiate between Marvel studios and other companies so it behooves Marvel to get as much control as possible. You dont want people in August going "I liked CA:TWS but the new SM was garbage so I don't know if I want to see GotG" I try and make sure everyone knows that they aren't the same but a lot of people have that misconception because they see a logo.

I see Sony crashing and burning with this franchise since it is basically the only tentpole they have. By 2018 I suspect they will be in negotiations with Marvel to sell the rights back if the current quality and trends continue. And lets face it people, after this film does anyone think they are going to do a sinister six film justice?

 

[metaphysician]

Absolutely. That 55% in the US is an approximation (I think from The Hollywood Economist) that varies from film to film, during the theater run of said films and is most of the time the by-product of negociations between the studios and theater chains/owners.

There's really no way to know precisely how much money studios make out of a film theater run, and no way to create a model that would precisely tell you how profitable a movie is but that 55% seems to be quite accurate "most" of the time.

As for foreign returns, they depend on even more variables but the thumb rule is 40% except for China where it drop to 25%.

Another thing to note is that part of the lower foreign return is the local distributors cut. . . but part of what the local distributor does is local *marketing*. So part of the distributor's calculated cut is actually also part of the calculated marketing budget. Thus, its not quite as big of a relative loss as it looks.

 

[BestGirl]

Maybe they should have just let Raimi finish Spider-Man 4.

Then they'd just be delaying the pain. I haven't seen any indication that Sony knows what to do with Spider-Man without Raimi's involvement.

 

[Spiderine]

Ya it definitely looks like Marvel got the best part of the deal. The problem is all this movies have the Marvel logo to start and the GA isn't going to differentiate between Marvel studios and other companies so it behooves Marvel to get as much control as possible. You dont want people in August going "I liked CA:TWS but the new SM was garbage so I don't know if I want to see GotG" I try and make sure everyone knows that they aren't the same but a lot of people have that misconception because they see a logo.

I see Sony crashing and burning with this franchise since it is basically the only tentpole they have. By 2018 I suspect they will be in negotiations with Marvel to sell the rights back if the current quality and trends continue. And lets face it people, after this film does anyone think they are going to do a sinister six film justice?

I think a lot of people know something is up because Spidey is the only solo marvel superhero not interacting with the other members. Its depressing that he can't be apart of a larger universe with them and even the GA has taken notice. People would like to see this now. Spidey can carry his own weight but his absence is noticed. We are embarking in a new period of comic movies and Spidey looks all alone now.

 

[hippie_hunter]

After the Marvel buyout, Disney was very aggressive about taking back a majority ownership position in their most popular character. With film, animation and 50% of merchandising through the Spider-Man Joint Venture, Sony had effectively owned the character since 2002. Disney was able to take advantage of Sony's weak financial position by selling their small interest in the films along with $278 million to purchase animation rights and Sony's merchandising position.

Though Marvel cut some lopsided cinematic licensing deals, they retained control over merchandise. This likely played a role in Sony's decision to sell. While Marvel was dependent on Spidey merchandise licensing, Disney could afford to pull all of the Spidey merchandise off the shelves unless Sony made the deal.

Disney bought all television rights to Spider-Man from Sony, not just the animation rights. If Disney wanted to, they can make a live-action Spider-Man television show.

 

[metaphysician]

Disney bought all television rights to Spider-Man from Sony, not just the animation rights. If Disney wanted to, they can make a live-action Spider-Man television show.

Maybe. The Mutant X case does leave some ugly precedent ( yes, Marvel won the initial suit, but it also was not a literal X-Men TV show, either ). I doubt Marvel would want to tread that path, even if the budget were practical.

 

[TheVileOne]

Just doesn't seem practical at all to do a Spider-Man show for TV. Unless it was specifically around a lower-tier or villain character that was easier to do than Spider-Man.

 

[hippie_hunter]

Maybe. The Mutant X case does leave some ugly precedent ( yes, Marvel won the initial suit, but it also was not a literal X-Men TV show, either ).

Except they're two completely different things. Typically when studios make deals to license properties, when it comes to live action rights, the studio will try to get both the television and film rights. It's why 20th Century Fox had a leg to stand on when they tried to sue Marvel for Mutant X. In the deal between Sony and Disney/Marvel, Disney got all the television rights to Spider-Man.

So unlike with Mutant X where 20th Century Fox was able to make a legitimate complaint over it being a blatant X-Men rip-off, if Disney wanted to make a live-action Spider-Man film, there is nothing they can do to stop them. It's sorta like how both 20th Century Fox and Marvel Studios can use Quicksilver in the X-Men and Avengers franchises. They can't stop each other from using them.

I doubt Marvel would want to tread that path, even if the budget were practical.

We're living in an era where studios are putting in $40 - 60 million per season and the production quality of shows like Game of Thrones, Breaking Bad, the Walking Dead, and House of Cards. I think that if Spider-Man were treated on par with high-end television shows like what Netflix, AMC, and HBO are doing Spider-Man can be done right. It can't be treated like a typical sitcom budget on ABC, CBS, NBC, and Fox.

 

[hippie_hunter]

Just doesn't seem practical at all to do a Spider-Man show for TV. Unless it was specifically around a lower-tier or villain character that was easier to do than Spider-Man.

If they based Spider-Man more around more grounded action and focus more on character interactions, like Spider-Man: Blue in tone, it can be done. Going over the top the way Amazing Spider-Man 2 did in terms of action, absolutely not.

Spider-Man is just better suited for TV IMO than film.

 

[jmc]

Spidey will always be one of the biggest comic characters of all but I don't think any solo comic character can sustain a film every few years forever. Certainly a film studio shouldn't be relying heavily on a solo character.

I fully admit to being misguided in thinking Spider-Man was immune to falling off the top of the superhero film perch, I just thought the character was too big to ever lose its appeal. He's always seemed like the one comic character that not only appealed to everybody outside the comic community, but the one character that seemed to transcend the Marvel/DC divide within the community. I know plenty of DC fans who don't care much for Marvel stories but like Spider-Man. As such if the last two films has shown anything is that even the biggest of names can't always stay on top. We're at a point now whereby we're flooded with new superheroes stamping their mark meaning Spider-Man can no longer rest on name recognition alone to get it across the line, and what's worse is that the studio handling the character isn't focusing enough on the quality of the films. As a Batman guy there's a real strong sense of deja vu with what's happening at the moment with Spider-Man, it feels like a train wreck is coming the character's way.

 

[TheVileOne]

We're living in an era where studios are putting in $40 - 60 million per season and the production quality of shows like Game of Thrones, Breaking Bad, the Walking Dead, and House of Cards. I think that if Spider-Man were treated on par with high-end television shows like what Netflix, AMC, and HBO are doing Spider-Man can be done right. It can't be treated like a typical sitcom budget on ABC, CBS, NBC, and Fox.

Regardless, it's clearly not happening for the foreseeable future. It's SHIELD, Agent Carter, and the Netflix/Defenders shows for now.

Plus, and this is just my guess, Marvel/Disney would only want to introduce Spider-Man as their film franchise character. I just can't see them wanting to open up a can of worms by doing live Spidey series like that.

Also, as impressive as some TV shows have gotten, I don't think you could get a TV's visuals to look comparably as good as the movie versions.

 

[TheVileOne]

If they based Spider-Man more around more grounded action and focus more on character interactions, like Spider-Man: Blue in tone, it can be done. Going over the top the way Amazing Spider-Man 2 did in terms of action, absolutely not.

Spider-Man is just better suited for TV IMO than film.

Yeah got to disagree with that.

I mean regardless of the dregs and doldrums right now, this is still one of the biggest movie franchises of all time. So to say it's more suited to TV doesn't really make any sense.

 

[DJ_KiDDvIcIOUs]

I fully admit to being misguided in thinking Spider-Man was immune to falling off the top of the superhero film perch, I just thought the character was too big to ever lose its appeal. He's always seemed like the one comic character that not only appealed to everybody outside the comic community, but the one character that seemed to transcend the Marvel/DC divide within the community. I know plenty of DC fans who don't care much for Marvel stories but like Spider-Man. As such if the last two films has shown anything is that even the biggest of names can't always stay on top. We're at a point now whereby we're flooded with new superheroes stamping their mark meaning Spider-Man can no longer rest on name recognition alone to get it across the line, and what's worse is that the studio handling the character isn't focusing enough on the quality of the films. As a Batman guy there's a real strong sense of deja vu with what's happening at the moment with Spider-Man, it feels like a train wreck is coming the character's way.

New heroes should have nothing to do with Spidey, he is timeless. If they played their cards right they don't even have to follow the comics and he makes them money. But they did in the worst way possible and it affected their bottom line and now Sony is scared because they see it is not a viable future.

Yeah got to disagree with that.

I mean regardless of the dregs and doldrums right now, this is still one of the biggest movie franchises of all time. So to say it's more suited to TV doesn't really make any sense.

To say it is TV good is all that is left in this series. Marvel is killing it right now and Spider-Man can't even keep #1 after 2 weeks. The brand is falling and it's all because Sony doesn't know how to handle him. The next thing they want to do is a S6 film?! Their character can't even do a normal film! They will be selling the rights back very soon since they have no other tentpoles to fall back on

 

[TheVileOne]

I think that's way too optimistic DJ.

The film is still about to cross $500 million worldwide this weekend, and that number will likely continue to climb.

 

[Zarex]

Disney bought all television rights to Spider-Man from Sony, not just the animation rights. If Disney wanted to, they can make a live-action Spider-Man television show.

Per the initial ruling on the "Mutant X" lawsuit Marvel retained TV rights to the X-Men as well. However, FOX had a "lock out" provision in the 1993 agreement that prevented an X-Men TV show being developed without the sign off of FOX.

It would certainly be interesting if Marvel has unencumbered live action TV rights to Spidey. I'd love to see a deal with Sony by which Spidey has a presence in the Marvel Netflix shows and the NYC Defenders fight alongside Web-Head when he faces off against the Sinister Six. I think that would be easier to do, could benefit both studios, and would be more interesting than an Avengers crossover.

 

[Iceman]

I fully admit to being misguided in thinking Spider-Man was immune to falling off the top of the superhero film perch, I just thought the character was too big to ever lose its appeal. He's always seemed like the one comic character that not only appealed to everybody outside the comic community, but the one character that seemed to transcend the Marvel/DC divide within the community. I know plenty of DC fans who don't care much for Marvel stories but like Spider-Man. As such if the last two films has shown anything is that even the biggest of names can't always stay on top. We're at a point now whereby we're flooded with new superheroes stamping their mark meaning Spider-Man can no longer rest on name recognition alone to get it across the line, and what's worse is that the studio handling the character isn't focusing enough on the quality of the films. As a Batman guy there's a real strong sense of deja vu with what's happening at the moment with Spider-Man, it feels like a train wreck is coming the character's way.

I think it's very difficult for any solo superhero to keep up the momentum long term. It's never been done even by the other most popular guys, Superman & Batman. The films would probably need to keep getting better as if they were equally good some level of fatigue would gradually set in, especially with the US audience (although if this wasn't too huge it could be supported by gains in the overseas market). But the fact is they haven't improved and to me they've been a very mixed bag since 2 with more wrong than right and this last one has the most crap of all, even though the Spidey parts are the best in any of the films.

It's not Spider-man himself who people are tired with. They still love him. But they also love for eg Han Solo. Imagine 5 Han Solo films in the next 12 years though! The unfortunate rights situation in combination with Sony's lack of top blockbuster material and financial situation has likely forced them to churn this property more than they would have. I think it would have been fine with a bit more of a gap for the reboot and more quality control.

 

[Mr.M]

Count me in as a fan who decided to burn a discounted ticket on a Seth Rogen comedy instead of Spidey. Never thought I'd see the day. I always knew Sony was over extending themselves, but did I think it would happen this quickly? Absolutely not. I guess the next film has to be Sinister Six vs Spidey, and then Sony will call it a wrap I suppose. Maybe Venom in 2021 to extend the rights? I can't see them making it to ASM4 at this rate.

What is the plan right now? Are they really going to be doing ASM 3/4 by 2018? Or a separate Sinister Six film? The latter (without Spidey as the feature character) sounds like a joke at this point.

 

[Donut]

Maybe Sony should just sell the rights back to Disney & get something for the rights while they still can before the Spider-Man move franchise gets weaker

 

[Donut]

Syfy could do a World Wide Theater Release for Sharknado 3. Ben Affleck could do a sequel to Gigli & these all can be released on the same day as The Amazing Spider-Man 3 & the results would be The Amazing Spider-Man 3 coming in third place or lower on opening weekend

 

[Iceman]

Maybe Sony should just sell the rights back to Disney & get something for the rights while they still can before the Spider-Man move franchise gets weaker

I wonder how much the rights are worth. Probably still absolutely loads as the character hasn't been burned that much long term at this point and I'm sure there's no intention of giving up the rights, but if TASM3 & 4 were of the same quality as 2 the landscape could change. Anything's possible as I don't think most (obviously including Sony) expected TASM2 to be bad (I don't actually know as I didn't follow the build up much). I was expecting to really enjoy it but I only liked the Spidey parts and the Gwen Stacy parts.

 

[Donut]

I wonder how much the rights are worth. Probably still absolutely loads as the character hasn't been burned that much long term at this point and I'm sure there's no intention of giving up the rights, but if TASM3 & 4 were of the same quality as 2 the landscape could change. Anything's possible as I don't think most (obviously including Sony) expected TASM2 to be bad (I don't actually know as I didn't follow the build up much). I was expecting to really enjoy it but I only liked the Spidey parts and the Gwen Stacy parts.

Well Sony can not let Spider-Man take any time off. If they even took a year or two off. Im sure Disney would start having their lawyers look for any loop holes to get the rights back in the contract. It might be best to can the spin off movie ideas. Fire everyone involved crew wise with these movies. Start fresh with a completely new behind the scenes crew & they got to fix their release date strategy as well. That two week wait played a part in this mess

 

[Iceman]

Well Sony can not let Spider-Man take any time off. If they even took a year or two off. Im sure Disney would start having their lawyers look for any loop holes to get the rights back in the contract. It might be best to can the spin off movie ideas. Fire everyone involved crew wise with these movies. Start fresh with a completely new behind the scenes crew & they got to fix their release date strategy as well. That two week wait played a part in this mess

Yep, this is the main problem they face. I'd be fearful for the potential of any spin off movies for now but if it helps them keep the rights while giving Spidey a break it might be worth throwing in some low budget films with less risk. Very difficult situation nevertheless but the one thing they can control is the quality of these films and whoever is monitoring that should have told them TASM2 was overall a mess (in spite of the good stuff it had).

 

[Donut]

Yep, this is the main problem they face. I'd be fearful for the potential of any spin off movies for now but if it helps them keep the rights while giving Spidey a break it might be worth throwing in some low budget films with less risk. Very difficult situation nevertheless but the one thing they can control is the quality of these films and whoever is monitoring that should have told them TASM2 was overall a mess (in spite of the good stuff it had).

The question is though how can a Spider-Man movie with the bad guys he faces work without Spider-Man ? If the General Audience did not see a movie with Spider-Man in it. Why would they see a movie without him in it ?