Homecoming What should they do with the Spidey franchise? - Part 2

[Comicbookguy339]

You know, I get that Spider-Man was a big part of the Civil War storyline but do we really need to add Spidey to Cap 3 on top of Tony, Black Panther and Winter Soldier?

 

[spider-neil]

I want see what is Sony's problem. They aren't earning anything for the merchandising. They are experiencing diminishing returns. The 60/40 deal is a way of salvaging THEIR franchise, earning more and spending LESS. Okay, they lose creative control but Marvel aren't going to **** up their commercial cash cow.

Sony need to THINK about this logically. They have no problem with this sort of deal for Bond.

 

[spider-neil]

You know, I get that Spider-Man was a big part of the Civil War storyline but do we really need to add Spidey to Cap 3 on top of Tony, Black Panther and Winter Soldier?

It would in all likelihood be a cameo and I'm glad about that because removing the mask set Spider-Man back years and Marvel knows it.
Spider-Man would probably just be one of the heroes who side with cap ut doesn't do a whole lot in the movie.

 

[bapi]

I want see what is Sony's problem. They aren't earning anything for the merchandising. They are experiencing diminishing returns. The 60/40 deal is a way of salvaging THEIR franchise, earning more and spending LESS. Okay, they lose creative control but Marvel aren't going to **** up their commercial cash cow.

Sony need to THINK about this logically. They have no problem with this sort of deal for Bond.

As long as they own rights there's still a chance to make great movies which could earn over 1 billion (like Skyfall). Any deal with Marvel and this chance's gone.

 

[spider-neil]

As long as they own rights there's still a chance to make great movies which could earn over 1 billion (like Skyfall). Any deal with Marvel and this chance's gone.

Profits were shared with MGM. A Marvel/Sony deal would be no different.

 

[spider-neil]

Also, there is nothing stopping Sony making a solely funded big screen Lego movie at the same time as Marvel makes a big screen live action movie. I would watch both movies, no question.

 

[bapi]

Profits were shared with MGM. A Marvel/Sony deal would be no different.

Well, James Bond is a MGM franchise but they had to find co-financer. It was the same with The Hobbit.

 

[bapi]

Also, there is nothing stopping Sony making a solely funded big screen Lego movie at the same time as Marvel makes a big screen live action movie. I would watch both movies, no question.

Well, I think WB owns rights for LEGO movies and video-games so we won't see a LEGO Spider-Man movie...

 

[spider-neil]

Well, I think WB owns rights for LEGO movies and video-games so we won't see a LEGO Spider-Man movie...

So why is there a Marvel Lego game?

 

[Venom Spectre]

It would in all likelihood be a cameo

Indeed. This is Marvel we're talking about. Cameos are like their thing man.

 

[Donut]

It looks like MARVEL is smart enough 2 say no 2 Sony for Sony wanting any type of say with Spider-Man in the MCU. Give Spidey back or suffer the consequences of more failed Spidey & Spidey spin of movies Sony. We dont need Sony ruining the MCU like they did with Spidey

 

[harryoscop]

Guys check this out: Miles.. oh Miles, speak of the original and he shall appear

 

[Donut]

So why is there a Marvel Lego game?

Because another company owns Lego Game rights. Two different thigns

 

[spider-neil]

Because another company owns Lego Game rights. Two different thigns

You said WB own the rights for Lego movies and games.

 

[Donut]

You said WB own the rights for Lego movies and games.

That was not me that said that & no WB owns the Lego movie rights & not the Lego game rights

 

[spider-neil]

That was not me that said that & no WB owns the Lego movie rights & not the Lego game rights

Sony pictures has an animation decision. Didn't they make 'Cloudy'? Which was written by the Lego guys. Maybe Sony animation (rather than Lego) was the plan all along

 

[bapi]

So why is there a Marvel Lego game?

That game was published by "Warner Bros. Interactive Entertainment"

 

[Jumpin' Jack]

I'm annoyed, someone as good as Garfield (and Webb, so many expectations when he was announced), with so much enthusiasm for Spider-Man, the look, and the acting range (maybe he was a bit mopey as Peter, but films like Never Let Me Go and The Social Network prove he's good) was involved in these movies, and now he's getting blamed for a lot of the negative feedback... I kinda wish they keep him, it would be easier for the GA and if they just start a new franchise after a few years: start after Gwen's death, introduce MJ... allow people to forget about the ASM franchise.

 

[Donut]

I'm annoyed, someone as good as Garfield (and Webb, so many expectations when he was announced), with so much enthusiasm for Spider-Man, the look, and the acting range (maybe he was a bit mopey as Peter, but films like Never Let Me Go and The Social Network prove he's good) was involved in these movies, and now he's getting blamed for a lot of the negative feedback... I kinda wish they keep him, it would be easier for the GA and if they just start a new franchise after a few years: start after Gwen's death, introduce MJ... allow people to forget about the ASM franchise.

The problem is they can't rest him for long & I doubt the mouse would give Sony an extension. They want him back

 

[Jumpin' Jack]

The problem is they can't rest him for long & I doubt the mouse would give Sony an extension. They want him back

I didn't make it overly clear in my post, I was wanting Garfield at Marvel basically.

 

[spider-neil]

It blows my mind that Marvel/Disney made 1.3 billion from Spider-Man merchandise in 2014 (with Christmas not included yet) and Sony only made 700m from the movie.

 

[GR8GODZILLAGOD]

It blows my mind that Marvel/Disney made 1.3 billion from Spider-Man merchandise in 2014 (with Christmas not included yet) and Sony only made 700m from the movie.

With Sony most likely just breaking even on the film.

 

[spider-neil]

With Sony most likely just breaking even on the film.

And THAT is why Spider-Man is front and centre in Marvel marketing whilst FF and X-Men are hardly featured and FF and Wolverine being cancelled.

 

[Donut]

It blows my mind that Marvel/Disney made 1.3 billion from Spider-Man merchandise in 2014 (with Christmas not included yet) and Sony only made 700m from the movie.

Yogurt said it best

[YT]oNZove4OTtI[/YT]

 

[Raiden]

And THAT is why Spider-Man is front and centre in Marvel marketing whilst FF and X-Men are hardly featured and FF and Wolverine being cancelled.

It's the same reason why you see Batman in marketing more than any other DC superheroes, including Superman.