Homecoming Was the 2012 reboot pointless?

[Eddie]

That's what we thought, but I believe a leaked email did in fact confirm that they were thinking about it

IIRC they were contemplating making May a spy in that female team-up film and potentially spinning it off from there.

 

[XtremelyBaneful]

I'm pretty sure it was for the female spin off.
I think they might have when the Ultimate route, with the Gwen clone be imbued with the symbiote.

oh god

I have nothing else to say about those Sony e-mails.

meaning the shock is even worse now?

 

[spiderman2]

Here's a list of everything that was revealed in those emails:
Emma Stone as Carnage
Spidey getting rid of his black suit because the Sinister Six make fun of it.
Female Scorpion aka Scorpia
The Sandman being comic relief
Female Venom
100 ft Sandman going on a rampage in London
Tom Hardy as Sandman
TASM2 only making 66 million in profits
Another Spider-Man reboot adapting Kraven's Last Hunt
Ryan Gosling as Spider-Man

Guys let me know if I missed anything.

and out of those the only good ones would be hardy and kraven's last hunt but even kraven's last hunt would be only half good because I think another reboot would be even worse shape if they did that. Sandman being comic relief sm is supposed to be funny lol.

 

[Venom'sDad]

i have my doubts about that because they did have a conversation about putting an easter egg from the asm series into the mcu...

Hmmm...which if this is TRUE, begs me to wonder, why would Marvel want to place an easter egg amongst the MCU from the "Amazing" series; yet, we hear from fanboys, that Marvel doesn't want the baggage that comes with Andrew & his "Amazing" series?

 

[spiderman2]

Hmmm...which if this is TRUE, begs me to wonder, why would Marvel want to place an easter egg amongst the MCU from the "Amazing" series; yet, we hear from fanboys, that Marvel doesn't want the baggage that comes with Andrew & his "Amazing" series?

While that was before asm2 lol

 

[harryoscop]

Hmmm...which if this is TRUE, begs me to wonder, why would Marvel want to place an easter egg amongst the MCU from the "Amazing" series; yet, we hear from fanboys, that Marvel doesn't want the baggage that comes with Andrew & his "Amazing" series?

Because it was before TASM2.
TASM was a fresh franchise at the time.

 

[Venom'sDad]

No...Marvel was wanting to add the egg after TASM....presumably in TASM2 or 3(had there been a 3), but at some point in the series.

 

[spiderman2]

No...Marvel was wanting to add the egg after TASM....presumably in TASM2 or 3(had there been a 3), but at some point in the series.

Yeah I know but maybe at one point they wanted to have to do with the asm sieras but maybe after how asm2 turned out they changed there mind and want nothing to do with the franchise.

 

[HarryOsborn]

^ Obviously I get everything you're saying, but you don't really seem to get what I am...

It's simple, and I'll use your tent pole example...

Yes, the "tent pole" wasn't as big as Sony hoped it would be, no denying that. And yes, the "tent pole" was supposed to be able to help cover the costs of other productions and issues (and actually, I think what happened to The Interview was by far the best thing that could have happened for Sony. They got way more publicity and possiby even profit.). But, just because your "tent pole" wasn't as big as you hoped doesn't mean that you get rid of it. It's still a "tent pole", just not what you would have liked it to be. Ok, fine, accept that and move on.

The truth is, and any resonable person would have to agree, that the Spider Man name alone is worth a ton! It would be beyond stupid of Sony to give it up for anything less than crazy money coupled with certain levels of control. Disney ain't gonna agree to that. That's why the talks broke down before and everyone walked away from the table and the truth is, Disney doesn't really need Spider Man!

Now just because of the hacking you and others think that Sony will now give up on Spider Man, and sell it back to Disney at what Sony would believe is a discount? That's crazy talk!

No, what is way more likely to happen is that Sony will go forward with their Spider Man franchise and will have to change their expectations of how big of a "tent pole" it will be. They now know that they ain't getting $1 billion net out of Spider Man, but instead they will likely plan/hope/expect $300 million profit. Yes, this means things have changed and they will have to realize that. Sucks for them, but again, as I said before, profit is still profit.

And Sony will hopefully realize that their plans of the spin-offs won't work at this time, and I say thank goodness. That whole Sinister Six redeption movie idea is beyond stupid!!!!! Maybe, as far as us fans, this will be the best thing that could have happened. Hopefully Sony will realize the S6 spin-off won't work and Venom needs to first be done, down the road, in a Spiderman movie, but Spider Man still can work. They will hopefully get back to the basics of making a good, somewhat standalone Spider Man movie in this movie-verse they created, with one main villain (at this time) and all of the things that the fans love about Spiderman (Bugle, College, MJ, Black Cat, more Aun't May, good villains, etc.). Make TASM3, well, amazing, and win some people back. Then do another great TASM4, which could be Venom, which would then lead to TASM5, which could be Maximum Carnage. And you'll notice that no where in there did I mention the Sinister Six!!!

Again, to use your example, what people like you are suggesting is like a family who was expecting a full paycheck and only got half, now giving up all future paychecks (even though they would only be worth half of what they used to be) for the price of maybe 75% of one paycheck. No reasonable person (or company) would accept that!

Look, the truth is that I believe that Marvel would do a much better job at creating Spider Man movies than Sony has and/or will do. But, I'm also an extremely logical and analytical person who is a realist. That means that I look at the evidence and come to the best conclusion, which as far as this discussion goes, is that Sony will want so much to give back Spider Man that Disney will never agree to it, meaning that there will be no deal, meaning that Sony will need to continue making Spider Man movies, which means that they will go forward with this Amazing Spider Man universe of theirs, but more than likely (and hopefully) they will realize that they need to get back to the basics!!!!!

No that family looks for another job so they don't starve. The thing is they did not get the profit they budgeted for. The fact that the interview was not given a mass release devastated the film's profits. It was an 80 million dollar production that has grossed about 30 million, largely because online downloads aren't as popular/expensive, and youtube, xbox, etc get a larger cut of the pay check than the theaters get. So the movie wasn't a total loss, but it was a massive loss none the less on a comedy that was supposed to be (at least) marginally profitable.

The thing is as I said, the movie only made half the profit they needed it to make. They haven't been able to control the budget, despite their best efforts to do so, since SM2. Because of the declining trend they can't even expect to make that 300 million dollars the next go around.

The X-Men franchise was only able to rebound after Fox brought back the old cast, the old director, used the most famous storyline from the comics, and put out one of the largest and most expensive films of all time. Prior to this they couldn't even get fantastic films X-Men: First Class to break 400 million and the Wolverine barely broke 500 million even with the franchise star in the lead and a 3D boost- all because of the disappointments of The Last Stand and Wolverine Origins.

I'll throw out another example, Batman. Batman Forever was a profitable film for the studio, and they expected the film to be able to spawn a series of Spin-Offs and sequels with Batman and Robin. At the global Box Office, Batman and Robin was profitable, however because of the poor reception and lack of interest, Batman Triumphant and the Robin Spin-Off were canceled. Furthermore the reboot of the film Batman Begins, didn't even break the 400 million mark as a result of franchise disinterest.

The next Sony Spider-Man (note I'm saying Spider-Man, not Sinister 6) film will likely not make more than 600 million and may not even be able to break 600 mil at all. The cost of the film, if it wants to compete with Marvels high stakes phase 3 films, Fox's explosion of X-Men films, and DC's massive scale JLA debut, will need to maintain the large scale store and a sizable marketing campaign to show the public the product is different. A spin-off of this franchise about only the villains I wouldn't expect to make more than 500-400 million dollars at the global Box Office tops- if history is any indicator. The thing is Spider-Man isn't the name he used to be and it's in both Marvel and Sony's best interest to make sure he is.

See Disney/Marvel makes more money off of tie-in merch from the films than Sony makes from the Box Office. A better, more popular movie, means better sales of merch- thus more money for Disney. This is why Disney/Marvel has been more cooperative with Sony than they have been with Fox, and why they've maintained Spidey as the label's flagship character. Sony is desperate for a cut of this money.

Sony is going under, they've lost a large amount of money from the leaks (yes The Interview got more publicity, but as I addressed earlier, it still lost the studio 10s of millions), and it already reported a billion + dollar loss during 2014 and is teetering on bankruptcy. It's one thing for Man of Steel to under perform when WB has Harry Potter films in the works and the Billion dollar Batman character (which they utilized in the sequel), and it's another thing for a studio that's already struggling to over budget (read overspend) hundreds of millions of dollars. Sony actually acquired the rights to Spider-Man (as Fox did with X-Men) when Marvel was going under and needed a quick boost to avoid bankruptcy. Marvel knew Spider-Man, X-Men, FF, etc had massive box office potential (Batman was huge at this time), but they needed the money so holding onto a potential golden goose just wasn't something they could afford to do.

Sony is in this predicament now. Like you said, profit is profit, and if the studio wants to make profit they will likely try to negotiate a deal with Marvel where they keep most of the Box-Office revenue + a piece of the tie-in merch. This is a deal where Sony sees the massive returns and Marvel does as well, also saving money by potentially replacing RDJ with Peter Parker (a move Fox is being trying to do with Ryan Reynolds and Channing Tatum for Hugh Jackman).

All in all you are right Sony would be stupid to up and give up the rights, but looking where the studio stands a deal of some sorts would be in their best interest- especially if they're still hoping to make money from Sinister Six.

 

[chaseter]

Did I already answer yes to the thread? If not, yes the reboot was pointless. Good thread.

 

[XtremelyBaneful]

Hmmm...which if this is TRUE, begs me to wonder, why would Marvel want to place an easter egg amongst the MCU from the "Amazing" series; yet, we hear from fanboys, that Marvel doesn't want the baggage that comes with Andrew & his "Amazing" series?

it is true man. there was a conversation about putting oscorp in avengers, that's the key thing here. but it was never close to happening.

http://screenrant.com/marvel-crossover-event-movies-eventually/

While that was before asm2 lol

right but let's say they DID put the easter egg, and everything else still happened unchanged.

Because it was before TASM2.
TASM was a fresh franchise at the time.

right but let's say they still did it. that would've made the asm series unofficially part of the mcu, whether disney liked it or not.

No...Marvel was wanting to add the egg after TASM....presumably in TASM2 or 3(had there been a 3), but at some point in the series.

no. harryoscop and sm2 were right. it was before asm2.

 

[Venom'sDad]

OK...thanks

 

[JOE]

Sony couldn't fight the inevitable... The inevitable being Disney.

Sony executives go back in time and sell Spidey to Disney before the Avengers and TASM happened and get way more money than they're probably going to get... Plus we get Spidey in Civil War with a solo movie already present beforehand, possibly two.

 

[chaseter]

The inevitable is Sony would destroy Spider-Man themselves, which they did three times in a row.

 

[JOE]

The inevitable is Sony would destroy Spider-Man themselves, which they did three times in a row.

What happens if Marvel's reboot on Spidey isn't well recieved? We're all just assuming it's going to be an amazing movie that does well critically and in the box office. There's always a possibility it suffers in both departments. It's easy to just say, "it won't" cause it's Marvel, but there's always that chance. This is pretty much the last straw for Spidey, if they don't get it right the character deserves to be shelved for a long period of time.

 

[degraves93]

What happens if Marvel's reboot on Spidey isn't well recieved? We're all just assuming it's going to be an amazing movie that does well critically and in the box office. There's always a possibility it suffers in both departments. It's easy to just say, "it won't" cause it's Marvel, but there's always that chance. This is pretty much the last straw for Spidey, if they don't get it right the character deserves to be shelved for a long period of time.

Well, consider the weakest MCU films, which, to me, are IM2, IM3 and TDW. None of those three movies are god-awful though, just lacking in comparison to the rest of Marvel's roster. Spider-Man is their flagship character, so I would think that they'd make damn sure he gets the on screen treatment he deserves.

 

[JOE]

Well, consider the weakest MCU films, which, to me, are IM2, IM3 and TDW. None of those three movies are god-awful though, just lacking in comparison to the rest of Marvel's roster. Spider-Man is their flagship character, so I would think that they'd make damn sure he gets the on screen treatment he deserves.

Again, it was just a hypothetical. I have all the confidence in the world in Marvel to hire the best writers and director out there. Having two different Spider-Men already out there, there's a lot of pressure for them. I hope they show up with their "A" game. If they do, they'll have the face of their franchise for the next 10 years.

 

[Doctor Octopus]

The inevitable is Sony would destroy Spider-Man themselves, which they did three times in a row.

Two films really. Spider-Man 3 was more successful for them at box office than TASM movies, and critics liked Spider-Man 3 more than TASM2.

 

[Flint Marko]

Did I already answer yes to the thread? If not, yes the reboot was pointless. Good thread.

Lol, true
I'll say this though, if the rumors are true and Spider-man comes back into to the MCU, then the ASM franchise is my favorite just for failing and going back to where it belongs.

 

[XtremelyBaneful]

OK...thanks

OK...you're welcome

 

[HarryOsborn]

Well, consider the weakest MCU films, which, to me, are IM2, IM3 and TDW. None of those three movies are god-awful though, just lacking in comparison to the rest of Marvel's roster. Spider-Man is their flagship character, so I would think that they'd make damn sure he gets the on screen treatment he deserves.

Fans like to cite Iron Man 3 as a failure, but it was very successful at the box office and more successful with critics than TASM was. A better way to look at it is this way- of 5 films, Sony has put out 2 that were rated below a 70% (SM3/TASM2) on rotten tomatoes. Of 10 films Marvel has put out 2 that were rated below 70& on rt (TIH/T:TDW). Marvel has also put out two films rated above 90%, with CA:TWS at an 89%, while Sony has only managed to reach this acclaim for SM2, over a decade ago.

No studio goes out trying to make a bad movie, but based on the track record of the two studios, Spidey stands a better chance over at Marvel than with Sony.

 

[degraves93]

Fans like to cite Iron Man 3 as a failure, but it was very successful at the box office and more successful with critics than TASM was. A better way to look at it is this way- of 5 films, Sony has put out 2 that were rated below a 70% (SM3/TASM2) on rotten tomatoes. Of 10 films Marvel has put out 2 that were rated below 70& on rt (TIH/T:TDW). Marvel has also put out two films rated above 90%, with CA:TWS at an 89%, while Sony has only managed to reach this acclaim for SM2, over a decade ago.

No studio goes out trying to make a bad movie, but based on the track record of the two studios, Spidey stands a better chance over at Marvel than with Sony.

I'm aware of IM3's positive reception, but to me, it's still on the weaker side of the MCU spectrum. I wanted to slap RDJ during that movie.

 

[XtremelyBaneful]

I'm aware of IM3's positive reception, but to me, it's still on the weaker side of the MCU spectrum. I wanted to slap RDJ during that movie.

haha

 

[degraves93]

haha

Seriously. "Fathers leave, no need to be a ***** about it"? The fact that a billionaire was callously saying this to a working class kid really made me angry.

 

[XtremelyBaneful]

Seriously. "Fathers leave, no need to be a ***** about it"? The fact that a billionaire was callously saying this to a working class kid really made me angry.

I've seen it only once, I should probably go back and see it again. But I'm one of those people who didn't like the mandarin twist.