The Amazing Spider-Man Would Spider-Man really be better off at Marvel/Disney?

[spider-neil]

I rate ASM better than every Marvel movie (including Avengers) with the exception of IM and ASM isn't even the best Spider-Man movie (SM2).

 

[Picard Sisko]

Thats debatable
Out of the 6 movies they made,I only consider 2(TA and IM) to be top notch,Thor and CapAm to be average and TIH and IM2 to be plain terrible

While Sony has produced 4 Spider-man movies,2 of which have been top notch(SM1 and SM2),1 Average(TASM-Which is still better than Thor and CapAm imo) and one terrible(I still prefer SM3 over IM2 and TIH)

So 2/4 is a better record than 2/6

Agreed 100%

I rate ASM better than every Marvel movie (including Avengers) with the exception of IM and ASM isn't even the best Spider-Man movie (SM2).

With Joss Whedon looking over the films I think Spidey would be at the best of hands. I think a similar tone to what The Avengers had would be perfect for good ol' Spidey. Spectacular and awesome action (even better than those in Raimi's trilogy IMO), a great deal of personality and humour (without being cheesy) mixed in with seriousness, character growth and a really intimidating villain (Loki was awesome!).

The daylight action would be amazing! Spidey would be wisecracking a great deal and have the perfect personality etc.

^That is, of course, if Whedon would direct the film. But I honestly think that if Spidey would be given back to Marvel Studios, they'd have Whedon write and direct it. Because let's face it, Spider-Man would be worth more than all those other heroes combined.

When I watched The Avengers last time, I imagined having Spidey in the mix. It would be so awesome!

About SHIELD. Marvel Studios could let Spidey have his own films in a trilogy or something and then, when Peter is old enough, SHIELD lets him join the team. Before then they could go the "he's too young" route.

Of course Spidey should appear in an Avengers movie before his own trilogy is done with. It could be like SHIELD wouldn't let him join The Avengers because of his age, but when New York is threatened again Spidey helps them out in the final battle anyway.

I mentioned earlier how the MCU lacks the most important characters, especially Spider-Man. I think Sony should do a deal that lets Marvel somehow include him in one of their movies, but not giving them the film rights entirely. Kind of like a loan.

The Spider-Man they use can be based off the one in TASM, in terms of his personality or w/e, but the whole backstory about his parents or Norman could be saved just for the Sony movies.

 

[Hawkingbird]

Sony
>>
SSM
ASM
SM2

Disney
>>
Ultimate Spider-Man

The defense rests, your honour.

Valid point

 

[Spider-Aziz]

I say be patient, Disney might do better eventually

 

[AF3619]

Sony has beeing doing well with spidey these years nothing really Horrible, except the fact that they had to give the rights for the cartoon,lol

i liked ALL the Spiderman movies, even Spiderman 3 had it´s moments,

i can´t wait for news!

 

[Spider-Aziz]

Sony has being doing well with spidey these years nothing really Horrible, except the fact that they had to give the rights for the cartoon,lol

Saddest thing ever to happen to Spider-Man
I still want to see what happens to Stacy and Spidey, is he going to spill? George obviously knows
Still want to see more of Silver Sable, Hammerhead & Tombstone
What will happen to the symbiote?
What about Liz? Harry & Gwen?
Harry without his dad

I want to see more, now that I saw the show again I want it even more than before

 

[Picard Sisko]

Anyone think its possible for Spectacular Spider-Man to return someday?

 

[Spider-Aziz]

Anyone think its possible for Spectacular Spider-Man to return someday?

I hope it happens
Best Marvel animated show, and we're denied the rest of it

 

[Picard Sisko]

I hope it happens
Best Marvel animated show, and we're denied the rest of it

I'm sorry, but Disney is really getting annoying. The Disney Channel right now has some of the worst kids programming I have ever seen in my life. I remember years ago, the shows were made so that even adults could tune in and enjoy them. That is what Spectacular Spider-Man was. It was a great kids cartoon that even adults or hardcore Spider-Man fans could enjoy.

Ultimate Spider-Man is for kids, and kids only. I felt my brain turning into mush as I attempted to watch.

 

[Spider-Aziz]

I'm sorry, but Disney is really getting annoying. The Disney Channel right now has some of the worst kids programming I have ever seen in my life. I remember years ago, the shows were made so that even adults could tune in and enjoy them. That is what Spectacular Spider-Man was. It was a great kids cartoon that even adults or hardcore Spider-Man fans could enjoy.

Spectacular Spider-Man should be PG13, there's more sex jokes than a children show should have

Ultimate Spider-Man is for kids, and kids only. I felt my brain turning into mush as I attempted to watch.

Ultimate isn't terrible, not a good show, but better than terrible

 

[AF3619]

Saddest thing ever to happen to Spider-Man
I still want to see what happens to Stacy and Spidey, is he going to spill? George obviously knows
Still want to see more of Silver Sable, Hammerhead & Tombstone
What will happen to the symbiote?
What about Liz? Harry & Gwen?
Harry without his dad

I want to see more, now that I saw the show again I want it even more than before

i seriously thought that they were going to do the "Death of Gwen Stacy" i mean how they left the show it could,
first Capt Stacy could die and she starts to hate Spiderman maybe she breaks up with Harry , Harry finds out that Peter is spiderman somehow and then he goes all "Im weak, i need to take control" then he becomes the Green Goblin and he gets revenge on both Killing Gwen Stacy

i know it could never happen in a kids cartoon maybe a direct to DVD feature

 

[Spider-Aziz]

i seriously thought that they were going to do the "Death of Gwen Stacy" i mean how they left the show it could,
first Capt Stacy could die and she starts to hate Spiderman maybe she breaks up with Harry , Harry finds out that Peter is spiderman somehow and then he goes all "Im weak, i need to take control" then he becomes the Green Goblin and he gets revenge on both Killing Gwen Stacy

i know it could never happen in a kids cartoon maybe a direct to DVD feature

I think it was planned as one of 3 DTV's to be released continuing the story after the end of season 5, after Peter graduates high school

 

[AF3619]

I think it was planned as one of 3 DTV's to be released continuing the story after the end of season 5, after Peter graduates high school

oh, Damn you Disney!

 

[Picard Sisko]

I'm so annoyed right now. Why can't Sony make the Direct-to-DVD movies concluding SSM? Is it that they lost the TV rights, or the animation rights as well?

 

[Hawkingbird]

I hope it happens
Best Marvel animated show, and we're denied the rest of it

As a big Avengers fan, I feel your pain. A:EMH was in my opinion one of the best animated Marvel shows (up there with Spectacular Spiderman, X-Men ect). When it was cancelled, a part of me died
Since I'm an X-Men fan, I'm used to it every X-Men show that has been released has been brilliant. WATXM was setting up to be great, and that got cancelled.

 

[Picard Sisko]

Knowing our luck, Ultimate Spider-Man will probably have a really long run. I want it to end!

 

[Spider-Aziz]

As a big Avengers fan, I feel your pain. A:EMH was in my opinion one of the best animated Marvel shows (up there with Spectacular Spiderman, X-Men ect). When it was cancelled, a part of me died
Since I'm an X-Men fan, I'm used to it every X-Men show that has been released has been brilliant. WATXM was setting up to be great, and that got cancelled.

I wish Avengers didn't get canned, that one is great, and had potential to be even better with more stories
Never saw enough of WATXM to form full opinion, what I saw is pretty good

 

[Juicy J]

It really comes down to who you love more? Spider-man individually or all the Marvel characters in general?

Would you really tolerate seeing SHEILD hijacking half of the movie like in Thor and IM2?

Do you know how much screen time SHIELD got in IM2 and Thor?
Seriously. Go look through the movie, count how long Nick Fury, Coulson, SHIELD, etc, appear and tally up the time. I did it a couple years back to refute someone making this exact same claim. Know how much it is in both movies?
Around 9 minutes.
It's around 9 minutes of a 2 hour movie.
Explain to me again how SHIELD 'hijacks half the movie'?
It's fine if you feel that they had a bigger presence in the movies than you would have wanted, that's your opinion. Yet even then I'd disagree with you; SHIELD is the connective tissue that binds these movies and these characters together in the same way they do in the comics. I do not understand the mentality that says that when they appear in one of the characters solo films that it somehow detracts from that movies quality as a whole. Is the same true of the comics? No, it isn't. I have never heard anyone complain about that, so why does it detract from your overall enjoyment of the movies? I am genuinely asking here, because I don't understand this mentality.
So please folks, let's all stop making wild claims that they 'hijacked half the movie'. That clearly is not the case.

The average critical reception (RT) for Sony's Spider-man movies is about 80% while that of Marvel's is 81%

Sony has made an adjusted 4 Billion from 4 movies while marvel has made 3.9 Billion from 6 movies

I would still say Sony is better in the business

Well even right there you're saying the Spider-man films and all the Marvel Studio films have around the same amount of critical reception, with Marvel having the advantage ever so slightly. But no, I'd say to properly compare the two studios you need to include the two Ghost Rider films they made. We are discussing how they handle Marvel Super movies, after all. How greatly do you think that would effect the average critical reception for their movies?
And no, you are incorrect about those box office figures. Check those numbers again. Marvel has made 3.8 billion from 6 movies while Sony has made 3.2 billion from 4. Even including the Ghost Rider movies (which, as I said, we should be doing) it doesn't come close to the bank marvel's making. Not to mention the fact that Marvel has Iron Man 3, Cap 2, Thor 2, Guardians of the Galaxy, Avengers 2, and Ant-man coming down the pipe. They are going to be raking in the cash like no one's business for at least another three years.
Still say Sony is the better business?

Thats debatable
Out of the 6 movies they made,I only consider 2(TA and IM) to be top notch,Thor and CapAm to be average and TIH and IM2 to be plain terrible

While Sony has produced 4 Spider-man movies,2 of which have been top notch(SM1 and SM2),1 Average(TASM-Which is still better than Thor and CapAm imo) and one terrible(I still prefer SM3 over IM2 and TIH)

So 2/4 is a better record than 2/6

What about the two complete and utter failures Sony had in Ghost Rider? Why aren't those being counted here, since we're talking about the business of marvel superhero movies?
By your own standards, Sony is now at a 2/6 as well. And which would you rather do, sit down and watch all the Spider-man and Ghost Rider films or all the Marvel Studio films? Once again this is all subjective, but its real dang tough to argue that Sony is the clear winner here with a better record.

 

[Spider-Aziz]

Knowing our luck, Ultimate Spider-Man will probably have a really long run. I want it to end!

Typical Parker luck is our heritage

 

[Picard Sisko]

Do you know how much screen time SHIELD got in IM2 and Thor?
Seriously. Go look through the movie, count how long Nick Fury, Coulson, SHIELD, etc, appear and tally up the time. I did it a couple years back to refute someone making this exact same claim. Know how much it is in both movies?
Around 9 minutes.
It's around 9 minutes of a 2 hour movie.
Explain to me again how SHIELD 'hijacks half the movie'?
It's fine if you feel that they had a bigger presence in the movies than you would have wanted, that's your opinion. Yet even then I'd disagree with you; SHIELD is the connective tissue that binds these movies and these characters together in the same way they do in the comics. I do not understand the mentality that says that when they appear in one of the characters solo films that it somehow detracts from that movies quality as a whole. Is the same true of the comics? No, it isn't. I have never heard anyone complain about that, so why does it detract from your overall enjoyment of the movies? I am genuinely asking here, because I don't understand this mentality.
So please folks, let's all stop making wild claims that they 'hijacked half the movie'. That clearly is not the case.


Well even right there you're saying the Spider-man films and all the Marvel Studio films have around the same amount of critical reception, with Marvel having the advantage ever so slightly. But no, I'd say to properly compare the two studios you need to include the two Ghost Rider films they made. We are discussing how they handle Marvel Super movies, after all. How greatly do you think that would effect the average critical reception for their movies?
And no, you are incorrect about those box office figures. Check those numbers again. Marvel has made 3.8 billion from 6 movies while Sony has made 3.2 billion from 4. Even including the Ghost Rider movies (which, as I said, we should be doing) it doesn't come close to the bank marvel's making. Not to mention the fact that Marvel has Iron Man 3, Cap 2, Thor 2, Guardians of the Galaxy, Avengers 2, and Ant-man coming down the pipe. They are going to be raking in the cash like no one's business for at least another three years.
Still say Sony is the better business?


What about the two complete and utter failures Sony had in Ghost Rider? Why aren't those being counted here, since we're talking about the business of marvel superhero movies?
By your own standards, Sony is now at a 2/6 as well. And which would you rather do, sit down and watch all the Spider-man and Ghost Rider films or all the Marvel Studio films? Once again this is all subjective, but its real dang tough to argue that Sony is the clear winner here with a better record.

We are not talking about Ghost Rider though. Its not like Sony set up a cinematic universe where these two franchises are somehow connected. We are talking about Spider-Man and Spider-Man only when it comes to Sony.

To be honest, I think the Marvel Studio films are overrated. Of course, I am referring to Thor, Cap, and IM2. I think its too early to judge whether or not they are the "best in the business."

Marvel made so much money mostly because of the Avengers. They have enough characters to build up to a giant superhero crossover movie, where Sony doesn't. Its really not a fair to compare their profits.

I am really just looking at the MCU solo movies compared to the Sony Spider-Man films.

 

[SpideyFan866]

I rate ASM better than every Marvel movie (including Avengers) with the exception of IM and ASM isn't even the best Spider-Man movie (SM2).

This.

 

[Juicy J]

We are not talking about Ghost Rider though.

My original point was that Marvel Studios is the best in the business in terms of superhero movies. People, yourself included, refuted that and said Sony had a better record. That's where I feel bringing up Ghost Rider is relevant, since that is their handling of a marvel superhero property and you can't just pick and choose which properties you want to reflect on the company...

We are talking about Spider-Man and Spider-Man only when it comes to Sony.

...but no matter then. Enough with the ghost rider talk.

To be honest, I think the Marvel Studio films are overrated. Of course, I am referring to Thor, Cap, and IM2.

I think that the fact you say they are 'overrated' says all I could ever say. People love their movies, they are garnering immense critical and commercial acclaim. That much is undeniable. I am taking that a step further and saying they are the ones to beat in the superhero game; that's my entire point here, and I still have seen nothing to prove me wrong. At all. Sony hasn't done anything with the Spider-man property that I think Marvel couldn't do and couldn't do better.

I think its too early to judge whether or not they are the "best in the business."

Personally I feel having made 6 successful movies is enough to cement their place, but this time next year with the release of Iron Man 3 and Thor 2, and with Cap 2 and Guardians of the Galaxy on the rise in 2015, my point will be further solidified.

Marvel made so much money mostly because of the Avengers. They have enough characters to build up to a giant superhero crossover movie, where Sony doesn't. Its really not a fair to compare their profits.

This is where you're wrong, actually; it is more than fair to compare their profits. They are both huge, multi-million dollar superhero franchises.
But the main difference is: everyone knew Spider-man before there was a Spider-man movie. The character was already a brand. Making a Spider-man movie is WAY safer than, say, an Iron Man movie, then trying to build towards the first giant superhero crossover movie. As I said, back in 2008 no one in hollywood wanted to even touch Iron Man. It was a HUGE risk that could have potentially bankrupt Marvel once again; they took out a 528 million dollar loan to fund their own movies starting with Iron Man, and if they failed it would have been a devastating loss for the company.
But no, in 6 short years they took several B and C list comic characters, a majority of which were unknown to the public at large, and turned their brand into the fourth highest grossing movie franchise of all time.
So in summary, Sony took something proven to be profitable and made a good profit. Marvel took something unproven and risky and turned an even bigger profit. So saying 'Marvel made so much money because of the Avengers' is missing the point entirely because that is basically where they proved their mettle as a movie studio, and, as I'm trying to say, cemented themselves as the cream of the crop in superhero cinema.

 

[Picard Sisko]

The Avengers made $1,511,757,910 in the box office.

Iron Man - $585,174,222
Iron Man 2 - $623,933,331
The Incredible hulk - $263,427,551
Thor - $449.3 million
Captain America: The First Avenger - $368,608,363

*Just to list the individual box office results*

I don't think Marvel Studios could really do that much better with Spider-Man. Their movies are generally B rated films, and just aren't that good IMO. As for Sony, we are not counting Ghost Rider. Within all honesty, I don't see how you could really make a good Ghost Rider movie either. Seems to fit the comics only IMO. With Spider-Man, Sony had done a great job with 2 movies, messed up with SM3, and did pretty darn well with TASM.

While Marvel has taken secondary characters and successfully put them on the big screen, I feel that other than Iron Man, they only work in a team (The Avengers). The solo movies are poorly done IMO.

 

[spider-neil]

I don't know what it is about Marvel movies but when I watch them (with the exception of IM) they don't 'move' and if I'm not moved by a movie I forget about it pretty quickly. I have my problems with the SOny Spidey movies but 3 of the 4 Spidey movies I've seen have moved me.

SM1
Uncle Ben's death
Peter missing his uncle because he wasn't at the graduation
My gift my curse

SM2
Peter tells may he is responisble for Ben's death
Harry slaps Peter at the party
'am I not supposed to have what I want'

ASM
Uncle Ben's death
'put the mask on'

Genuine heartfelt moments in massive summer blockbuster moments.
IM absolutely gets the balance right but all the other Marvel movies feel they are moving from set piece to set piece only slowing down because they feel they 'have to' not because it feels central to the story. When I watch a Spider-Man I could watch Peter Parker and the supporting cast the whole movie because (imho) they are so engaging when I watch Marvel movies I check out when the action stops.

 

[Hawkingbird]

This.

Got to disagree with this I don't think ASM was better than any Marvel film.