The Amazing Spider-Man 2 The Amazing Spider-Man 2 Box Office Prediction Thread - Part 5

[Erzengel]

Back in the day Marvel sold the movie rights to many of it's titles. Obviously not the character. DS is right. Sony can't sell the rights to Fox or WB and just like how some of the other characters have been reverted back to Marvel except for FF, Spidey and X-Men if enough time goes by, rights will go back to Marvel/Disney.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

They cannot put up as they know its BS. Sony have made money on the past two movie. Maybe nowhere near as much as they had hoped. Hopefully they will learn from the mixed reviews and box office returns and get the ship back on course.

Something which should also be taken into account is that studios source finance so they do not take 100% of the risk.

If you want a look at typical distribution for films this size as of last year, here.

http://www.deadline.com/2014/03/despicable-me-2-2013-most-profitable-movie-universal/

These numbers don't include marketing, which deadline confirmed at between $180-190m. As a big MOS fan, it hurts. But I know why we are BvS, and not MOS2.

Do you not see this as trolling that other poster and being childish? What reaction are you expecting?

I am expecting spider-neil to continue to dig his heels in the ground because he is this film's #1 fan on this forum.

 

[spider-neil]

Back in the day Marvel sold the movie rights to many of it's titles. Obviously not the character. DS is right. Sony can't sell the rights to Fox or WB and just like how some of the other characters have been reverted back to Marvel except for FF, Spidey and X-Men if enough time goes by, rights will go back to Marvel/Disney.

Do you know this for a fact or are you speculating? Fox and Sony were making so much there was no need to sell the rights on.
Fox run out of time to make Daredevil and so the rights reverted, but did Fox have the option to sell on the rights to another studio?

 

[Angryfantasyfan]

I've read this twice and it still doesn't make sense.

Theaters get a cut of the gross.

Also where are your figures to back up this second claim?

Disney is making all of the money off of merchandise without having to shoulder any of the film making cost. Sony is essentially making giant commercials for Disney.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Sony own the movie rights for Spidey outright unless they fail to make a Spider-Man movie within 5 years. Marvel can't even MENTION the name of Spidey in a big screen movie. If this isn't the case then show me that Sony aren't allowed to move those same rights onto someone else.

This right here shows you they can't sell the film rights. Dude, seriously. They revert. Disney now owns the character. It is just like how WB couldn't see Superman rights, because he is still technically apart of the creator's estate, even though they own DC.

They can put it on the back boiler for a number of years. I did not say indefinitely.

They can. And if they reboot again, expect even worse returns.

Back in the day Marvel sold the movie rights to many of it's titles. Obviously not the character. DS is right. Sony can't sell the rights to Fox or WB and just like how some of the other characters have been reverted back to Marvel except for FF, Spidey and X-Men if enough time goes by, rights will go back to Marvel/Disney.

It is so obvious, it hurts. That is why the rights revert back. How could they "revert back" if they aren't actually owned by Marvel/Disney.

 

[spider-neil]

If you want a look at typical distribution for films this size as of last year, here.

http://www.deadline.com/2014/03/despicable-me-2-2013-most-profitable-movie-universal/

These numbers don't include marketing, which deadline confirmed at between $180-190m. As a big MOS fan, it hurts. But I know why we are BvS, and not MOS2.


I am expecting spider-neil to continue to dig his heels in the ground because he is this film's #1 fan on this forum.

I'm the number 1 fan of this movie on this entire forum? Or is the truth more that the people who enjoyed this movie have better thing to do with their time than come on here daily to defend it. If I am the number 1 fan of this movie I wear that badge with pride.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Do you know this for a fact or are you speculating? Fox and Sony were making so much there was no need to sell the rights on.
Fox run out of time to make Daredevil and so the rights reverted, but did Fox have the option to sell on the rights to another studio?

Why would they not sell them and make money if they could? Think about what you are writing. And you think I am trolling?

 

[spider-neil]

It is so obvious, it hurts. That is why the rights revert back. How could they "revert back" if they aren't actually owned by Marvel/Disney.

That is an agreement for the rights reverting back, who is to say there isn't an agreement for selling the rights on? You have no idea what's in the contract, you're speculating.

 

[spider-neil]

Why would they not sell them and make money if they could? Think about what you are writing. And you think I am trolling?

Because they would have to go out and find a buyer (which could take years) and then draw up complex contracts that would include rights reverting to Marvel if they didn't make a movie on time (which would take months). Do you know for a FACT that Fox couldn't sell the rights on? Unless you were privy to the Daredevil contract (and you aren't as much you try to make out that you are) then you don't know the ins and out of the contract.

 

[TheWallCrawler]

I think you are just as clueless as I am to be honest with regards to the sale of the movie rights. You know for a fact Sony HAS to tell back the rights to Disney? If so, provide something that back these claims up.

well actually the simple well known fact that Sony was on a time limit for making a Spider-man movie after SM3 is the proof that Sony doesn't own Spider-man's movie rights, it's more like a "licence rent" of sorts. they can't sell it forward just like you can't sell a rented dvd forward, Spider-man movie rights still very much connected by a thread to Marvel/Disney

Also you just said it yourself, Sony gave the merch rights back in order to keep Spider-man. It's not technically even a favor since "a favor" is a voluntary deed, when Sony more so involuntarely had to sell the merch rights back being forced to do that by circumstance. The Sony executive used the word "favor" because that's the ol' producer/executive way of keeping good company image for the public. It's not like the companies are friends with each other doing favors back and forth, Sony's ownership of the Spider-man movie licence was threatened and they had to make a move

 

[Raiden]

Because they would have to go out and find a buyer (which could take years) and then draw up complex contracts that would include rights reverting to Marvel if they didn't make a movie on time (which would take months). Do you know for a FACT that Fox couldn't sell the rights on? Unless you were privy to the Daredevil contract (and you aren't as much you try to make out that you are) then you don't know the ins and out of the contract.

Fox doesn't own the movie rights of X-Men and F4; they are just leasing it and they can continue to hold on to the rights if they oblige the terms of the contract by making a movie before the lease is up. How can they sell something that they do not own?

 

[Erzengel]

That is an agreement for the rights reverting back, who is to say there isn't an agreement for selling the rights on? You have no idea what's in the contract, you're speculating.

Marvel sold the movie rights to their movies because they were in bad shape. If Sony could sell off the movie rights to other studios, Marvel would never see it back. It wouldn't make sense for anyone with a viable product to sell it without putting a clause to protect themselves.

But that's why you see "revert back to Marvel" and not sell it off to another Studio. In a rush right now, but I can try and find some information.

 

[spider-neil]

Also you just said it yourself, Sony gave the merch rights back in order to keep Spider-man. It's not technically even a favor since "a favor" is a voluntary deed, when Sony more so involuntarely had to sell the merch rights back being forced to do that by circumstance. The Sony executive used the word "favor" because that's the ol' producer/executive way of keeping good company image for the public. It's not like the companies are friends with each other doing favors back and forth, Sony's ownership of the Spider-man movie licence was threatened and they had to make a move

To be honest, the more I think about the execs words, 'curry favor' sounds a hell of a lot better than 'we're broke and need the money'. Disney didn't refute his interview though.

 

[Bullseye1]

Theaters get a cut of the gross.

I know but the studio still makes a profit.

Disney is making all of the money off of merchandise without having to shoulder any of the film making cost. Sony is essentially making giant commercials for Disney.

Where is the accounts to show Disney is making more money off merch? Or are you assuming merch for this movie will exceed box office returns? Still not proof. Unless we have someone from the studios confirming all these wild claims they are just that.

 

[Green Goblin]

It amazes me that some actually think Sony will give up their best property without having a bad movie.

Sony will hold on to this property as hard as they can.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

That is an agreement for the rights reverting back, who is to say there isn't an agreement for selling the rights on? You have no idea what's in the contract, you're speculating.

Because Marvel comics own the rights to the character of Spider-Man. You think they put that agreement in the contract? Really? Or are you just trying to defend your original statement?

Because they would have to go out and find a buyer (which could take years) and then draw up complex contracts that would include rights reverting to Marvel if they didn't make a movie on time (which would take months). Do you know for a FACT that Fox couldn't sell the rights on? Unless you were privy to the Daredevil contract (and you aren't as much you try to make out that you are) then you don't know the ins and out of the contract.

You can continue to write this nonsense, but don't be mad when I call you out on it.

No, none of us know the "facts". But unlike you I am using deductive reasoning, and not going straight fanboy fantasy because I am upset that TASM2 box office shows that TASM series is nose diving in the public eye.

 

[spider-neil]

I know but the studio still makes a profit.




Where is the accounts to show Disney is making more money off merch? Or are you assuming merch for this movie will exceed box office returns? Still not proof. Unless we have someone from the studios confirming all these wild claims they are just that.

I want someone to show me Sony's money OUT with regards to;
film production,
marketing and advertising,
distribution,

and then match it to Sony's money IN;
ticket sales,
DVD/Blu ray sales,
TV syndication (for every major TV network on the planet)
and then residuals years down the line.

Unless someone can do that and show Sony's money 'OUT' is more than Sony's money 'IN' (I.E. Sony is LOSING money on the Spidey franchise) then I am absolutely calling bull****.

 

[TheWallCrawler]

To be honest, the more I think about the execs words, 'curry favor' sounds a hell of a lot better than 'we're broke and need the money'. Disney didn't refute his interview though.

indeed. Disney didn't refute his interview because that would be insanely unnecessary conflict between the companies, or they don't even care. Even though Sony's statement is mildly self-contridicting it still wasn't lying in that their motive for their action was the extention of their Spider-man movie licence

 

[LizardMan07]

Don't forget sponsorship, big one.

 

[spider-neil]

Because Marvel comics own the rights to the character of Spider-Man. You think they put that agreement in the contract? Really? Or are you just trying to defend your original statement?


You can continue to write this nonsense, but don't be mad when I call you out on it.

No, none of us know the "facts". But unlike you I am using deductive reasoning, and not going straight fanboy fantasy because I am upset that TASM2 box office shows that TASM series is nose diving in the public eye.

You keep saying fanboy fantasy. What the **** are you going on about?!
I'll admit that is unlikely that Sony are allowed to sell on the rights for Spidey but I can't claim that as a fact as I haven't seen the contract and there has been zero reason for Sony to move the franchise on especially see as it is one of (if not 'THE') most profitable in their stable.
I'll concede the point though.

As for 'nose diving' the movie is on course to cross the 700m mark. That's nose diving?

 

[DarthSkywalker]

I want someone to show me Sony's money OUT with regards to;
film production,
marketing and advertising,
distribution,

and then match it to Sony's money IN;
ticket sales,
DVD/Blu ray sales,
TV syndication (for every major TV network on the planet)
and then residuals years down the line.

Unless someone can do that and show Sony's money 'OUT' is more than Sony's money 'IN' (I.E. Sony is LOSING money on the Spidey franchise) then I am absolutely calling bull****.

You can call anything you like. Doesn't change it.

It amazes me that some actually think Sony will give up their best property without having a bad movie.

Sony will hold on to this property as hard as they can.

I never said otherwise. The potential is what makes Spider-Man so valuable. The problem is Sony has squandered that potential. If Disney had him, I would beat he would be a billion dollar franchise right now. They did it with Iron Man. Iron Man.

 

[Ms. Marvel]

You keep saying fanboy fantasy. What the **** are you going on about?!
I'll admit that is unlikely that Sony are allowed to sell on the rights for Spidey but I can't claim that as a fact as I haven't seen the contract and there has been zero reason for Sony to move the franchise on especially see as it is one of (if not 'THE') most profitable in their stable.
I'll concede the point though.

As for 'nose diving' the movie is on course to cross the 700m mark. That's nose diving?

You are ignoring context. TASM made $750+ M, the budget for TASM2 was bigger, it's not doing well domestically which is a problem for the studios, the implication is that TASM3 will drop even harder domestically and this is the lowest the franchise has ever been.

Is 700m a big deal for Spidey though? Because now even Cap A is making that kind of money and he's only started to become popular in the public eye. Both movies are making similar money, but Cap's rising while Spidey is falling.

 

[Bullseye1]

if Marvel/Disney have first refusal to buy back the property but do not have the money to meet Sony's valuation would they legally have a right to then refuse another company buy it? Maybe someone with legal knowledge can chime in. If Marvel refuses to buy back the property I cannot see how they could then block Sony selling it on. That would seem ludicrous.

 

[Angryfantasyfan]

if Marvel/Disney have first refusal to buy back the property but do not have the money to meet Sony's valuation would they legally have a right to then refuse another company buy it? Maybe someone with legal knowledge can chime in. If Marvel refuses to buy back the property I cannot see how they could then block Sony selling it on. That would seem ludicrous.

Disney owns the property. What you are asking is can Sony sell the property they lease.

What is most likely to happen is Disney will offer financial compensation to end their agreement with Sony, but Sony can't sell something they don't own.

Marvel owns Spider-Man, but it has a long-term agreement with Sony Corp. SNE -0.43% that allows Sony Pictures Entertainment to make movies based on the character, in exchange for royalties. Similarly, News Corp.'s nwsa -0.47% Twentieth Century Fox makes the movies starring Marvel's "X-Men."

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB125172509349072393

Today, the stakes are higher because Sony no longer gets a cut of merchandising tied to its Spider-Man movies. Why? A late 2011 deal in which Disney traded Marvel's producer fee for new Spider-Man movies for the exclusive right to profit from all merchandise with the Spidey imprint. Practically, what this means is the Amazing Spider-Man franchise is no longer burdened by Sony having having to pay a hefty percentage of the theater gross to Marvel and Disney. But it also means less residual revenue for Sony Pictures, the company's third-largest source of operating profit in fiscal 2013.

http://www.fool.com/investing/gener...estion-for-sony-can-the-spider-man-movie.aspx

 

[DarthSkywalker]

You keep saying fanboy fantasy. What the **** are you going on about?!
I'll admit that is unlikely that Sony are allowed to sell on the rights for Spidey but I can't claim that as a fact as I haven't seen the contract and there has been zero reason for Sony to move the franchise on especially see as it is one of (if not 'THE') most profitable in their stable.
I'll concede the point though.

As for 'nose diving' the movie is on course to cross the 700m mark. That's nose diving?

You are saying nonsensical things to defend the film. That is fanboy fantasy. The first time you took a step back was in this post, when you conceded that it is probably unlikely that they can just sell the rights to someone other then Disney.

I get you like it, but I have confronted this for 10 years these boards. It is clear as day. All of us who frequent the box office threads on all the forums, (Myself, I See Spidey, Spider-Fan, etc.) see this over and over again. We go over the numbers for all these releases, that we get. This is time tested.

But you will deny what we are saying, not because of "facts", but because you want this film franchise to succeed. I have no dog in this hunt. You clearly do. Heck my fanboy character is Superman, and I gave the hard truths on MOS over there.

And yes, it is nose-diving. $700m with 3D and IMAX? It is most likely selling $600m worth of tickets without the large formats. Probably less. It is going to make less then half of what the first Spider-Man film did domestically, without inflation. The original series would be a billion dollar franchise adjusted for inflation. Way more with 3D and IMAX. TASM2 is making less then TASM.

The only thing working for TASM series right now is global expansion.

That is nosediving imo.