The Rebooted "Keep Hope Alive" (that the rights can revert back to Marvel) Thread - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Part 24

[The Infernal]

We'll eventually have Venom in the mcu. Just not this one.

 

[Shinobi Shaw]

Pretty convenient that since this deal has been established, now we have X-Force returning this december to the comics.

I think they should just do a full on reboot for all the X-books, with redesigns they can use for MCU.

 

[The Infernal]

I don't trust anyone from Marvel to design new looks for characters in their own books at this stage so I wouldn't want to see them designing for the mcu.

 

[Dark Raven]

Get Rob Liefeld to design the MCU costumes and looks.

Everyone will be wearing pouches and jackets and padded bras.

 

[Willie Lumpkin]

I feel like a *****e for wanting it to bomb

For me, as with the FF, it's less about wanting Spidey in the MCU than it is about wanting the characters done properly.

Venom done without Spider-man is not, in my opinion, doing the character properly. If Sony was starting with a proper Spider-man reboot and building their expansive world from the ground up, I'd give them a chance.

But what they're doing is wrong from the start, so I won't support it and don't feel at all guilty for wanting this poorly made foundation to fail and be scrapped before more is built on top of it.

 

[eddy]

So I've been gone from the forums for about a month. Where are all the movie sub forums. Where do we talk about Captain Marvel and Avengers 4 at? I am completely lost.

Ok. Never mind. I figured it out.

 

[wobbly]

Get Rob Liefeld to design the MCU costumes and looks.

Everyone will be wearing pouches and jackets and padded bras.

Everyone will be hideously deformed.

 

[HBarnill]

Get Rob Liefeld to design the MCU costumes and looks.

Everyone will be wearing pouches and jackets and padded bras.

“Liefeld, you’re not an artist!”

 

[Docker2.0]

We'll eventually have Venom in the mcu. Just not this one.

I don't know man. I have the feeling that this Venom is going to end up in the MCU. Especially if it makes more than $150M Dom. I think that after SM:FFH, it will be used as a negotiating tool and some kind of way that Spiderverse will end up being in that small pocket of the MCU like Amy Pascal said.

 

[AndrewGilkison]

The Venom movie is not going to be in the MCU (no matter how successful it is) because it wasn't produced by Marvel Studios, and was the brain child of Avi Arad (who left Marvel and doesn't seem to be on good terms with Kevin Feige). Marvel would rather control their own universe rather than integrating other movies created by other studios into it. They'd rather have their own X-Men and their own Fantastic Four and their own Spider-Man, where they have control over their stories.

 

[Willie Lumpkin]

I can imagine something in which Spidey is mostly on his own at Sony with occasional cross-overs - as long as Sony doesn't do anything really screwy.

Even if Sony decides to go it alone, it makes sense for both sides to continue some form of cooperation. I don't think they should go all-or-nothing.

 

[ADollarADay]

I can imagine something in which Spidey is mostly on his own at Sony with occasional cross-overs - as long as Sony doesn't do anything really screwy.

Even if Sony decides to go it alone, it makes sense for both sides to continue some form of cooperation. I don't think they should go all-or-nothing.

Why would Disney want to continue the status quo?

 

[Marvel united]

Good news

 

[HBarnill]

At least he’s honest. He would’ve been a good choice. I just hope Disney doesn’t get Jared Leto. I know he has Cajun ancestry, but...

 

[Xeno]

At least he’s honest. He would’ve been a good choice. I just hope Disney doesn’t get Jared Leto. I know he has Cajun ancestry, but...

Leto is a bit on the old side for Gambit. He also lacks the easy charm and arresting good looks one would expect from the Cajun charmer. My guess is that Marvel will cast a man in the 25 - 35-year-old range for the role, if and when they use him.

 

[Willie Lumpkin]

Why would Disney want to continue the status quo?

Good Spider-man films mean huge dollars in merchandising to Disney. Unless there's a clear path to Disney getting the rights back (and I think the whole basis of the current conversation is the fear there won't be such a path), it's in Disney's interest to work with Sony, not against them.

 

[Iceman]

Everyone will be hideously deformed.

And what about the feet?

 

[Dark Raven]

Leto is a bit on the old side for Gambit. He also lacks the easy charm and arresting good looks one would expect from the Cajun charmer. My guess is that Marvel will cast a man in the 25 - 35-year-old range for the role, if and when they use him.

Maybe he can play Gambit with some gold teeth and tattoos on his head.

 

[ADollarADay]

Good Spider-man films mean huge dollars in merchandising to Disney. Unless there's a clear path to Disney getting the rights back (and I think the whole basis of the current conversation is the fear there won't be such a path), it's in Disney's interest to work with Sony, not against them.

This is a faulty argument and I have explained why. The leaked documents showed us that classic Spidey merchandise is pretty consistent regardless of whether or not there are movies or not. Movie merch spikes when a new movie is out and that fluctuates depending on the quality of the movie, but even Amazing had healthy merch sales. Furthermore the latest Spiderman video game sold gangbusters with no Spidey movie currently out. That's clear cut proof of the power of Spidey without the movie. The 2015 amendment was a chess move by Iger and he's coming for that check mate in one of two moves.

IMO that is really really not enough to keep Disney wanting the status quo. They know they'll still get a healthy number and revenue from Spidey merch regardless.

I don't see a middle ground in this. Disney wants the full rights back, Sony wants the status quo. Middle ground is Sony giving up a lot, i.e.

- Annulment of rights to assign (section 23) -> Basically if Sony gets sold the rights don't transfer
- Fox Kingpin characters fully reverse and are not available to SPE (schedule 7B, section 4f)
- Further revision to the fee (i.e. go back to Sony paying Marvel 5% of the BO gross. Section 7) -> Currently Disney pays 3.5% of the BO gross of the movie. That percentage goes down if the movie exceeds 750MM WW. It's unknown if that's the case for the spin offs, but I assume that it is.
- Changes to the reversion dates (i.e. three within eight removed, section 6b)
- Live action television production (section 6e)

Among others and if they haven't been changed in 2015 already. It's a lot to ask especially now that SPE let the MOTU and Barbie license expire. Giving up Spider-man license would mean they would be also better off selling Columbia and Tristar (basically the non TV side of SPE). That is something I want as an investor, but others disagree with me. Sony execs will have to make a decision soonish on this because it's clear waht Disney will do IMO.

 

[Willie Lumpkin]

This is a faulty argument and I have explained why. The leaked documents showed us that classic Spidey merchandise is pretty consistent regardless of whether or not there are movies or not. Movie merch spikes when a new movie is out and that fluctuates depending on the quality of the movie, but even Amazing had healthy merch sales. Furthermore the latest Spiderman video game sold gangbusters with no Spidey movie currently out. That's clear cut proof of the power of Spidey without the movie. The 2015 amendment was a chess move by Iger and he's coming for that check mate in one of two moves.

IMO that is really really not enough to keep Disney wanting the status quo. They know they'll still get a healthy number and revenue from Spidey merch regardless.

I don't see a middle ground in this. Disney wants the full rights back, Sony wants the status quo. Middle ground is Sony giving up a lot, i.e.

- Annulment of rights to assign (section 23) -> Basically if Sony gets sold the rights don't transfer
- Fox Kingpin characters fully reverse and are not available to SPE (schedule 7B, section 4f)
- Further revision to the fee (i.e. go back to Sony paying Marvel 5% of the BO gross. Section 7) -> Currently Disney pays 3.5% of the BO gross of the movie. That percentage goes down if the movie exceeds 750MM WW. It's unknown if that's the case for the spin offs, but I assume that it is.
- Changes to the reversion dates (i.e. three within eight removed, section 6b)
- Live action television production (section 6e)

Among others and if they haven't been changed in 2015 already. It's a lot to ask especially now that SPE let the MOTU and Barbie license expire. Giving up Spider-man license would mean they would be also better off selling Columbia and Tristar (basically the non TV side of SPE). That is something I want as an investor, but others disagree with me. Sony execs will have to make a decision soonish on this because it's clear waht Disney will do IMO.

Couldn't a variation of this argument have been applied to say Disney would have never gone with the agreement that led to Homecoming etc.?

If they hadn't propped Sony up and reinvigorated Spidey, they'd be a lot closer to getting everything now. Maybe Disney has learned their lesson, but I think it's more reasonable to assume Disney's past actions help predict their future actions, and their past actions indicate a flexible willow, as opposed to brick wall, when it comes to dealing with Sony and Spidey.

But perhaps the FF/X-Men situation changes Disney's approach. But now that they have nearly everything, do they become more aggressive in trying to attain the last bit... or now that they have nearly everything, does that make Spider-man less important to them?

I think the whole situation is too complex to predict with any accuracy (we don't even have any idea yet how Venom will do), but I don't see any solid reason to believe Disney will do a 180 from their current cooperative relationship with Sony to zero cooperation with Sony.

 

[Lilbaz]

This is a faulty argument and I have explained why. The leaked documents showed us that classic Spidey merchandise is pretty consistent regardless of whether or not there are movies or not. Movie merch spikes when a new movie is out and that fluctuates depending on the quality of the movie, but even Amazing had healthy merch sales. Furthermore the latest Spiderman video game sold gangbusters with no Spidey movie currently out. That's clear cut proof of the power of Spidey without the movie. The 2015 amendment was a chess move by Iger and he's coming for that check mate in one of two moves.

IMO that is really really not enough to keep Disney wanting the status quo. They know they'll still get a healthy number and revenue from Spidey merch regardless.

I don't see a middle ground in this. Disney wants the full rights back, Sony wants the status quo. Middle ground is Sony giving up a lot, i.e.

- Annulment of rights to assign (section 23) -> Basically if Sony gets sold the rights don't transfer
- Fox Kingpin characters fully reverse and are not available to SPE (schedule 7B, section 4f)
- Further revision to the fee (i.e. go back to Sony paying Marvel 5% of the BO gross. Section 7) -> Currently Disney pays 3.5% of the BO gross of the movie. That percentage goes down if the movie exceeds 750MM WW. It's unknown if that's the case for the spin offs, but I assume that it is.
- Changes to the reversion dates (i.e. three within eight removed, section 6b)
- Live action television production (section 6e)

Among others and if they haven't been changed in 2015 already. It's a lot to ask especially now that SPE let the MOTU and Barbie license expire. Giving up Spider-man license would mean they would be also better off selling Columbia and Tristar (basically the non TV side of SPE). That is something I want as an investor, but others disagree with me. Sony execs will have to make a decision soonish on this because it's clear waht Disney will do IMO.

Spideys merch doesn't have immunity. Disney needs him to be kept in the spotlight either through film, cartoons or games. If not his merch sales will drop.

It suits both sony and disney to have good spiderman films made. Although cartoons are probably more important. He-man and transformers in the 80's show what regular cartoons can do. Whoever came up with the idea of making cartoons just to sell toys was a genius.

 

[Iceman]

How did merch sales for Spidey do before the films started?

 

[ADollarADay]

Couldn't a variation of this argument have been applied to say Disney would have never gone with the agreement that led to Homecoming etc.?

If they hadn't propped Sony up and reinvigorated Spidey, they'd be a lot closer to getting everything now. Maybe Disney has learned their lesson, but I think it's more reasonable to assume Disney's past actions help predict their future actions, and their past actions indicate a flexible willow, as opposed to brick wall, when it comes to dealing with Sony and Spidey.

But perhaps the FF/X-Men situation changes Disney's approach. But now that they have nearly everything, do they become more aggressive in trying to attain the last bit... or now that they have nearly everything, does that make Spider-man less important to them?

I think the whole situation is too complex to predict with any accuracy (we don't even have any idea yet how Venom will do), but I don't see any solid reason to believe Disney will do a 180 from their current cooperative relationship with Sony to zero cooperation with Sony.

It could have and I argued that. The 2015 deal is undoubtedly one sided. Sony had long term plans

I disagree on your reading of past actions from Disney. Disney is a brick wall and a flexible willow, whatever suits them at the time. It's all business.

They were a flexible willow in 2015 and I don't think that will be the case when the contract expires. They did try to buy Spidey out right in 2015 and Sony wouldn't buck even though they were in dire need. Disney saw the opportunity to be flexible and sacrifice a rook to win the game later. No one wants another Spidey reboot and Spidey outside of the bigger Marvel Universe. All parties involved know it. Sony would struggle to sell such another reboot and the movie would underperform.

Yes, FF/XM makes SM even more of a commodity and less of a requirement for the bigger universe. Again, would CW or IW do much worse, if at all without Spidey? I don't think so. Would SM:H do worse without the MCU? Undoubtedly. I think it could have been the first Spidey under 700MM at the BO. The deal heavily favored Sony and it's a calculated move by Disney to get the rights back IMO.

Disney can afford to be tougher and request more. Sony will either have to give or make a very risky move.

Spideys merch doesn't have immunity. Disney needs him to be kept in the spotlight either through film, cartoons or games. If not his merch sales will drop.

It suits both sony and disney to have good spiderman films made. Although cartoons are probably more important. He-man and transformers in the 80's show what regular cartoons can do. Whoever came up with the idea of making cartoons just to sell toys was a genius.

We have data from Sony to back up what I'm saying regarding Spidey merch sales. The game is a major hit, the cartoon is a hit, the movies will have to keep coming or return to Marvel. Sales won't falter.

 

[Lilbaz]

It could have and I argued that. The 2015 deal is undoubtedly one sided. Sony had long term plans

I disagree on your reading of past actions from Disney. Disney is a brick wall and a flexible willow, whatever suits them at the time. It's all business.

They were a flexible willow in 2015 and I don't think that will be the case when the contract expires. They did try to buy Spidey out right in 2015 and Sony wouldn't buck even though they were in dire need. Disney saw the opportunity to be flexible and sacrifice a rook to win the game later. No one wants another Spidey reboot and Spidey outside of the bigger Marvel Universe. All parties involved know it. Sony would struggle to sell such another reboot and the movie would underperform.

Yes, FF/XM makes SM even more of a commodity and less of a requirement for the bigger universe. Again, would CW or IW do much worse, if at all without Spidey? I don't think so. Would SM:H do worse without the MCU? Undoubtedly. I think it could have been the first Spidey under 700MM at the BO. The deal heavily favored Sony and it's a calculated move by Disney to get the rights back IMO.

Disney can afford to be tougher and request more. Sony will either have to give or make a very risky move.



We have data from Sony to back up what I'm saying regarding Spidey merch sales. The game is a major hit, the cartoon is a hit, the movies will have to keep coming or return to Marvel. Sales won't falter.

Just saying that if there were no films/cartoons/games spidey merch sales would soon start dropping and would keep on going down as kids move onto other things.

 

[ADollarADay]

Take this with a grain of salt as I am not familiar with the source, but apparently Brazil has approved the deal. The link takes you to a Brazilian .gov site.

Manalo LLP - Deal timeline of Twenty-First Century Fox/Comcast

Just saying that if there were no films/cartoons/games spidey merch sales would soon start dropping and would keep on going down as kids move onto other things.

Those will keep coming and it's a non issue.