The Avengers Would Marvel have put Spider-Man in the Avengers if they owned him?

[Dark Raven]

Now I'm not one for just pigeon holing characters into movies just for the sake of it when they shouldn't be there at all, but do people think that if Marvel Studios actually owned Spider-Man instead of Sony (and those Raimi movies or TAS had been made under Marvel) they would have put him into the Avengers film?

He definitely wasn't a founding member and I personally don't think he should even be in the Avengers because he works better as a solo charater, but purely for commercial reasons, would Spider-Man have been forced into the film as one of the founders? Or would Marvel have remained true to the character and kept him separate?

I could see, from a commercial perspective, why they might want to have him in there because the very concept of having all those characters in this poster plus Spider-Man would be a huge draw and would represent the ultimate team up/ comic book movie:

But would Marvel have the courage not to use him?

What do people think?

 

[Mysteryman]

I would hope that they wouldnt use him .
He would overshadow the others.

 

[Silvermoth]

I must admit I'm dying to see Andrew Garfield's Spider-man team up with Robert Downey Jnr's Iron Man.

But it's probably for the best Spider-man would be involved. Otherwise it might become "Spider-man and his amazing friends" rather than "The Avengers".

 

[Troy_Parker]

Possibly in a later movie, I can't see them putting him in this.

I'd love to see Garfield's Spidey and RDJ's Iron Man wisecracking at each other. xD

 

[dony2012]

I would hope that they wouldnt use him .
He would overshadow the others.

Yup, both him and Wolverine (if they would have used him too) would have overshadow the others.

Mainly because they are Marvel's two most popular superheroes.

 

[dony2012]

He definitely wasn't a founding member and I personally don't think he should even be in the Avengers because he works better as a solo charater, but purely for commercial reasons, would Spider-Man have been forced into the film as one of the founders? Or would Marvel have remained true to the character and kept him separate?

I could see, from a commercial perspective, why they might want to have him in there because the very concept of having all those characters in this poster plus Spider-Man would be a huge draw and would represent the ultimate team up/ comic book movie

Yeah, I think they would have put him in it (and make him the central character).

And without him, it doesn't REALLY feel like the ultimate team up/comic book movie that Marvel could have had if Spider-Man was in it.

The only hero in the group that sort of reaches his level of popularity is Iron Man.

He's the only real A-lister on that team when it comes to box office draw and success.

The other movies in the MCU didn't made that much (especially in the U.S.).

So without him I could even see a situation next year where Batman alone will make more money than all of those heroes that are together in The Avengers.

The Avengers doesn't have the A-list power that a film like Justice League could have with heroes like Superman and Batman.

I'm sorry. I'm not really a DC fan, but that's the cold truth.

I'm still excited for the film though, especially since I'm a HUGE fan of Joss Whedon's work!

 

[Spider-Vader]

I definitely think they would of used him EVENTUALLY. I'm not sure if they would of used him in the first movie, but he would definitely be in any sequels. I could see Hulk leaving & Spider-Man filling his spot.

I'm pro Spidey as an Avenger, so I'd be okay with it.

 

[Dark Raven]

I wonder if the general audience know which studio owns which character. I bet some don't even know that Batman and Superman belong to different publishers - DC instead of Marvel. Maybe some of the GA might think that all these comic movies (X-Men, Spider-Man, FF, Ghost Rider, Iron Man, Hulk, Thor, Cap) are just made by Marvel. After all, they all have that Marvel logo and flicking comic pages at the start.

With that in mind, I wonder if some of the GA will wonder why Spider-Man isn't in the Avengers. Heck, even some comic fans here on this board sometimes bring up the question why Spider-Man isn't in the Avengers and have to be told that Sony own the rights.

 

[Liam_H]

Most of the GA don't realize who belongs to which company. They know there are different ones but don't know specifically who belongs to where. They don't expect Spider-Man in an Avengers movie more than they do in a Fantastic Four movie.

 

[dony2012]

I wonder if the general audience know which studio owns which character. I bet some don't even know that Batman and Superman belong to different publishers - DC instead of Marvel. Maybe some of the GA might think that all these comic movies (X-Men, Spider-Man, FF, Ghost Rider, Iron Man, Hulk, Thor, Cap) are just made by Marvel. After all, they all have that Marvel logo and flicking comic pages at the start.

With that in mind, I wonder if some of the GA will wonder why Spider-Man isn't in the Avengers. Heck, even some comic fans here on this board sometimes bring up the question why Spider-Man isn't in the Avengers and have to be told that Sony own the rights.

So you disagree with me? Or agree?!

 

[The Infernal]

If I could I would have both Spider-man and Wolverine in an Avengers film, but not this one (if it were possible). I'd maybe have them in Avengers 3 at the earliest.

Although I really want to see a Spider-man & the X-men film crossover before that ever happens.

 

[Franklin Richards]

No. You save him for...

 

[misjuevos]

i don't think they would have used him for an avengers origin, they are trying to push the other characters. he has had his moments, this is the other guys turn now. plus the more characters that become known to the public the better for marvel overall. spider-man is doing fine as is. personally i wouldn't like spider-man in the avengers, i just don't like the character that much. i don't hate him, just don't care for him either way. adding him wouldn't really do anything for me personally.

 

[The Infernal]

In reply to the Secret Wars suggestion. I dunno. Not my personal taste. I don't see the point of taking everyone out of their element to fight an alien's war game. I'd much rather have a crossover where you show the various heroes lives and conflicts crossing over with one another. To me that's more interesting and has better opportunities for character interaction.

 

[Franklin Richards]

I guess you didn't read Secret Wars because they never finish the contest. It becomes a character piece with cool superhero battles in the background.

That and the rise and fall of Doom.


I'll take that scenario over a let's get the band back together movie.

 

[The Infernal]

No, I haven't read the original. Also, I don't really get your "band back together movie" comment. I just think a crossover where they meet without being taken out of their respective worlds would serve for some far more natural and interesting character interactions and probably make for a simpler movie.

 

[Superhero 101]

i think if a avengers movie would have wolverine and spidey the movie would be way overcrowded with all the other superheroes. but i think if a movie like that would be ever made... imagine all the money that movie could make

 

[Marvel]

I get the distinct feeling that Andrew Garfield's Spider-Man will be like saying George Lazenby's James Bond in the future. General audience are NOT going to embrace his portrayal. So, Sony will be scrambling sooner then they thought to hold these rights. They may just sell it back to Disney HUGE or lease it back to them for something like Secret Wars in 2018 or so.

 

[cherokeesam]

I get the distinct feeling that Andrew Garfield's Spider-Man will be like saying George Lazenby's James Bond in the future. General audience are NOT going to embrace his portrayal. So, Sony will be scrambling sooner then they thought to hold these rights. They may just sell it back to Disney HUGE or lease it back to them for something like Secret Wars in 2018 or so.

Glad your crystal ball works *so* much better than anyone else's....

Here's the thing: some franchises are all about the title character, *not* the actor portraying him. Just like Bond, whom you mentioned, and Batman as well. Connery, Lazenby, Moore, Dalton, Brosnan, Craig --- the Bond name continues to sell, no matter WHO plays him. Same with Batman --- nobody really gives a **** whether it's Keaton under the cowl, or Kilmer, or Clooney, or Bale: Batman will *always* sell on the name alone.

And I hate to inform you, but Spidey falls under that category, too. Hell, they could get Carrot Top to play Spidey and the movie would *still* make billions.


As to the topic at hand: I don't see any reason Marvel would choose to leave Spidey out of the Avengers if they owned the rights. Even though it's not "canonical" in any sense, neither is the movie we're getting (no Wasp or Ant-Man as founders; Hawkeye and Widow as founders is way off the mark; Fury/SHIELD never organized the team; Hulk is not an actual Avenger, etc.) Plus, they could justify Spidey (and Wolverine, for that matter) as official "New Avengers." Hell, New Avengers *might* be their eventual plan, anyway, what with rumors of Cage and Doc Strange getting movies soon....now all we need is Sentry and Spider-Woman.

 

[Hawkingbird]

QUOTE=Troy_Parker;21317781]Possibly in a later movie, I can't see them putting him in this.
I'd love to see Garfield's Spidey and RDJ's Iron Man wisecracking at each other. xD[/QUOTE]


Oh yes! EPIC BROMANCE... aaanddd something went wrong with the quoting. Great....

 

[Dark Raven]

So you disagree with me? Or agree?!

Well I wasn't doing either with my post. I wasn't even referencing yours really but making a different point.

But to some extent I agree with you. However, I would say that, although he isn't a big box office draw, the Hulk is a huge pop culture icon and it's no coincidence that he's put in this movie and the A:EMH cartoon (apart from the fact that he was a founding member). Hulk was never such a prominent member but I'm sure he's been given this kind of prominence because he is well known and it adds something to the mix that he's included as part of the lineup in this movie. Audiences who haven't been paying any attention to these comic movies might casually glance at the film poster and see that there are a number of iconic heroes they recognise: Iron Man, Cap, Thor and Hulk. I think Hulk's inclusion adds a certain gravitas to the cast, just as a well known actor (who isn't necessary big anymore) would do the same for a film cast.

So I think Marvel may well have been tempted to use Spider-Man even if he isn't part of the original line up as he's even more of a pop icon than Hulk and a big box office draw too. It would be a movie version of the Avengers, so they wouldn't necessarily go with the actual origin. It almost seems too much of an opportunity to pass up. If they did, hopefully Marvel would have the sense not to let him overshadow the rest.

No. You save him for...

Well it's not about what you would like or what you think Marvel SHOULD do. The topic is about what people think Marvel WOULD do if they had Spider-Man.

 

[dony2012]

Audiences who haven't been paying any attention to these comic movies might casually glance at the film poster and see that there are a number of iconic heroes they recognise: Iron Man, Cap, Thor and Hulk. I think Hulk's inclusion adds a certain gravitas to the cast, just as a well known actor (who isn't necessary big anymore) would do the same for a film cast.

Well, I don't think Thor is a well-known superhero even after he had his own movie this year.

That movie barely even managed to make over 200 million in the U.S.!

Cap name is well-known but I don't think that that many people have much interest in him - again - even after he had his own movie this year.

Both Cap and Thor made something like 400 million worldwide, and most of the people who saw them were probably the same people who saw Iron Man.

So I would say that the Hulk and Iron Man are the only two A-lister on this team, and even then Iron Man is the only one of them that would really make a lot of people to want to see the movie. The Hulk might bring a few more people but that's it.

So for the GA The Avengers is basically Iron Man 2.5

But because Marvel is trying to publish it as "Captain America and Friends", which is a BIG mistake, it will not bring as much people as needed.


I'm not even sure it will make more than a billion. Still successful, but not as it could/should have been. So Batman alone could make more money than this movie.

But if both Spider-Man and Wolverine were in it (or just Spidey)... now that would have been a different story. Just think HOW much money that movie would have made...

 

[misjuevos]

thor made the most foreign out of all the others, TIH, iM, and Cap. so he may not be as big in the US but he is in the rest of the world and i think there are more people in the world than in the US

 

[dony2012]

thor made the most foreign out of all the others, TIH, iM, and Cap. so he may not be as big in the US but he is in the rest of the world and i think there are more people in the world than in the US

LOL!

Really now?

...


Thor Foreign Box Office Results: $267 million (With 3D Advantage).

Iron Man/Iron Man 2 Foreign Box Office Results: $266/$311 million (Without The 3D Advantage).


So more people saw the two Iron Man films than they did Thor.

And most of the people who saw the Iron Man films were the people who saw Thor, it's the same audience.

And $267 million isn't really that much. Especially for foreign box office results.

So no, Thor isn't really that big in the rest of the world either.

 

[Marvel]

And I hate to inform you, but Spidey falls under that category, too. Hell, they could get Carrot Top to play Spidey and the movie would *still* make billions.

Amazing Spider-Man will not make half of what Spider-Man 3 made, wait and see. I know it's budget isn't as large either but this reboot is NOT sitting well with most non-fanboys. Trust me on this one.