Would You Rather Sony Lose The Rights To Spider-Man Or Keep Them?

[XtremelyBaneful]

I actually prefer Sony keeps the rights... for now at least.

I feel a character like Spiderman, Batman, and Superman, need to be redone and rebooted for each new generation , and that there needs to be a clean slate for each new telling of the Parker legend.

I tend to think with an exclusively owned Disney/ MCU Spiderman, it would basically be the same Holland version of the character going on and on for years to come, and while that may work for Thor, I'd like to see a different version of the of The Spiderman/ Peter Parker myths after Holland is done with the part.

I'd like to see a clean slate, and with Sony, that's what I feel we would get.

If Marvel Disney were willing to do that , i.e. start a new or tell new stories which aren't bound to the MCU continuity, I'd be fine with them keeping the Spiderman rights.

If not, I'd prefer Sony just keeps the rights and eventually tell a new take on the legend that isn't bound to the infinity saga, The MCU, and a decades long continuity.

But that's just me ,and that's how I feel about Spiderman as opposed to some other MCU characters.

to each their own, but that's not necessarily why I want Sony to keep the rights. I definitely don't want to see Spider-Man get rebooted over and over again and that's something I kinda hated with Batman. I think WB should've paid Christian Bale an offer he couldn't refuse to continue being Batman in the DCEU.

but I want Sony to keep the rights because I don't think it's necessary for Disney to own the rights as the only way for good Spider-Man movies to be produced. I already don't like a lot of the output from the MCU even though the general consensus is that it's fantastic and generally speaking for myself I do love the MCU. But it isn't without its shortcomings in my opinion.

What I'd prefer is the Spider-Man saga to continue. I want Peter Parker's arc to continue and then eventually have Miles Morales be introduced and take Peter's place as the young and fresh superhero. And while we have that, we could finally have some better college aged Peter Parker who's also a mentor to Miles.

 

[Frodo]

to each their own, but that's not necessarily why I want Sony to keep the rights. I definitely don't want to see Spider-Man get rebooted over and over again and that's something I kinda hated with Batman. I think WB should've paid Christian Bale an offer he couldn't refuse to continue being Batman in the DCEU.

but I want Sony to keep the rights because I don't think it's necessary for Disney to own the rights as the only way for good Spider-Man movies to be produced. I already don't like a lot of the output from the MCU even though the general consensus is that it's fantastic and generally speaking for myself I do love the MCU. But it isn't without its shortcomings in my opinion.

What I'd prefer is the Spider-Man saga to continue. I want Peter Parker's arc to continue and then eventually have Miles Morales be introduced and take Peter's place as the young and fresh superhero. And while we have that, we could finally have some better college aged Peter Parker who's also a mentor to Miles.

Fair enough. We have a difference in philoshpy on that.
Batman , Spiderman, and Superman have all been rebooted several times, so I'm not totally on board with one continuity of Spiderman going on and on and on.

Eventually I'd like to see a new version, but as I stated that's after Holland is done.

I wouldn't want to see his version recast and to just go on and on with a different actor in the same continuity. Not saying you do, but I like the fact that different filmmakers tackle these characters over time.

I wouldn't want a single version of Spiderman to last 15 years because it would get stagnate imo.

 

[Frodo]

Why does this read "Sony has a better chance of rebooting Spider-Man because out of the two, its the studio that would likely mess up and press the reboot button". Okay.

I made it clear what I meant by a reboot, i.e. not connect to venom or the Sonyverse.
You clearly want to read into it what you want to.

Clearly you don't really want to address my argument about why I would want a reboot and why I would want Sony to keep the rights from a creative POV.

When you're ready to talk about the merits of creative visions of connecting to a shared universe or rebooted universe with Spiderman, then I'll talk to you.

 

[psylockolussus]

I made it clear what I meant by a reboot, i.e. not connect to venom or the Sonyverse.
You clearly want to read into it what you want to.

Clearly you don't really want to address my argument about why I would want a reboot and why I would want Sony to keep the rights from a creative POV.

When you're ready to talk about the merits of creative visions of connecting to a shared universe or rebooted universe with Spiderman, then I'll talk to you.

The fact that you aren't even including VenomVerse into the equation tells me, that you don't think the current VenomVerse would last. It is important to acknowledge the state of Marvel movies coming out from Sony right now, as that would effect their handling of the rights in the future. And really how many failures from Sony handling the rights is enough?

But if you want the rights to remain with a studio that you know that has a bigger chance of failure when it comes to Marvel movies, okay. Have fun getting reboot #3 and #4, those are gonna happen eventually after momentous mistakes from Sony that would just abruptly end the predecessors of those reboots....

 

[Erzengel]

Lose the rights. Spider-Man is always going to be an A-list character but in the realm of live action media, there's only so many times you can reboot something for the next generation. The fact that Spider-Man was rebooted three times in 14 years is silly. This isn't Pride and Prejudice or a Star is Born.

And let's be honest, Spider-Man movies are being made by Sony every few years to keep their license. And aside from Jumanji, they really don't have anything else. I can understand why they want to keep them but their ideas are finite.

 

[Spider-Fan83]

give the rights back to Mtv ....

 

[Spider-Fan]

And who says they are going to keep the same continuity until the 2050s or 2060s though?

Their actors are aging, and they've already retired Steve,Natasha and Iron Man. Spider-Man could be retired as well and if that happens he won't be creatively stuck. You are stating it like the continuity that started in 2008 would be around for Infinity.

Who says Marvel is keeping the same continuity going until 2060? There will be a point when the MCU needs it. It won't be around for Infinity.

As for the question of this thread, I honestly have no beef with where we are now. But if all these spinoffs they make just get worse and worse, then the answer is obviously give it to Marvel. I am actually curious to see what Sony does here.

I guess my response for the poll would be I am fine either way, lol

 

[Frodo]

give the rights back to Mtv ....
View attachment 49328

Neil Patrick Harris as Spidey huh?

 

[Bayne]

I can certainly understand the idea of preferring a more creatively open studio that might be more willing to take a chance on something more unique. And I would be entirely happy for there to be more fully stand-alone SM movies somewhere in the future.

However, speaking realistically, neither studio even remotely fits that claim right now and right now I'm quite happy with Tom Holland and I think it would be by far the best thing for the character and the IP itself that he be allowed to continue for a long time still, so that we can see his version of Peter grow up and slowly grow into all the other aspects of the character he hasn't reached yet. And I suspect if that were allowed to happen, he would be arguably the most definitive version ever done of any superhero. So right now, Sony doing anything to threaten that would be terrible. Marvel getting the rights back would be good, but not per se necessary.

As for the future? Frankly, my answer doesn't change. I see no logical reason whatsoever why Marvel getting the rights back would automatically mean SM would never ever have a fully solo film series again. Sooner or later it will happen. And I would far prefer it happen under Marvel Studios than Sony since I haven't actually liked *any* of Sony's live action movies very much. And as for creativity, literally everything Sony made except Spider-verse (which, imo, simply slipped through the cracks of executive interference) has been basically the *same* story over and over, just with diferrent villains and different levels of (in)competence. The MCU movies are the ones showing some genuine creativity, whatever their flaws.

 

[Frodo]

As for the future? Frankly, my answer doesn't change. I see no logical reason whatsoever why Marvel getting the rights back would automatically mean SM would never ever have a fully solo film series again. Sooner or later it will happen. And I would far prefer it happen under Marvel Studios than Sony since I haven't actually liked *any* of Sony's live action movies very much

That's fair. I can see why it wouldn't be your preference for Sony to handle another reboot or have the rights .

As I said earlier in the thread, if Marvel rebooted The Spiderman franchise , i.e. with a new team that has different vision and continuity from The MCU , I'd be fine with Marvel keeping the rights.

My preference is that when ever Holland is done with the series (which may be a couple years or several years or more), that we get a new version of the Spiderman myths as opposed to continuing on with the current MCU version.

I'd want it to be good regardless which studio holds the rights.

If Marvel would do that , I'd be fine with that. If Sony could do that, I'd be fine with that.

But I get the distrust of Sony holding onto the rights and rebooting the series on their own.
I've liked SM1, SM2, ASM and SMITSV, but didn't like ASM2 and SM3.

All the while, I've liked all of the Marvel/Sony Spiderman films , though I would mark Holland's leaving the role as the end of that version of the character, and as a point to move on.

That doesn't mean that Disney wouldn't recast or continue on with another actor as Peter in that continuity. They could if they wanted if that's how both parties want to handle it.

But for the sake of argument since we're talking about our own preferences ,I would want there to be a new version of Spiderman and a new take on the Peter Parker story in whatever form that takes .

It's a 60 year old character , so it doesn't have to be another origin take or whatever, but It'd be interested in a new continuity and a new vision whether that was Disney or Sony.

Now if both studios decided to keep the status quo but reboot Spiderman together, it'd be fine with that, though I'd want a fresh pair of eyes on the series as opposed to those, who worked on the home series.

It'd still want Feige to shepherd it if possible, but it'd want to see some new creative voices on the project.

 

[MarvelFan]

As Marvel fan of course I want all characters to be under Marvel Studios.

But on the other hands, even with all of their missteps, Sony proved that they can make a good Spider-Man story even without Marvel (SM 2, Into the Spider verse) and the recent PS4 incarnation (though it was more Insomniac than Sony). So it proves to make a good Spider-Man story, it doesnt have to be with Marvel.

Sony just need to pick the right creative people who really gets and respect Spider-Man mythos.

So for now...if the hope of Marvel taking full control of Spidey is still long way, then I am willing to give Sony one more chance if they ever decide to break up with Marvel (but once again, with the right creative people driving the franchise....means no more Avi Arad or Amy Paschal and bring the ones who has clear visions and love for Spider-Man world, like what Raimi did, Lord and Miller did, and the team of Insomniac did).

 

[Venom 1988]

As Marvel fan of course I want all characters to be under Marvel Studios.

But on the other hands, even with all of their missteps, Sony proved that they can make a good Spider-Man story even without Marvel (SM 2, Into the Spider verse) and the recent PS4 incarnation (though it was more Insomniac than Sony). So it proves to make a good Spider-Man story, it doesnt have to be with Marvel.

Sony just need to pick the right creative people who really gets and respect Spider-Man mythos.

So for now...if the hope of Marvel taking full control of Spidey is still long way, then I am willing to give Sony one more chance if they ever decide to break up with Marvel (but once again, with the right creative people driving the franchise....means no more Avi Arad or Amy Paschal and bring the ones who has clear visions and love for Spider-Man world, like what Raimi did, Lord and Miller did, and the team of Insomniac did).

The thing you have to keep in mind is that Sony Pictures is a separate company than Sony Interactive. Sony owns both companies under their umbrella but they are run entirely separate from one another, with different people in charge. So we can't really credit Sony Pictures for the PS4 Spidey game when they really had nothing to do with it.

 

[psylockolussus]

Yeah different divisions, different people in charge.

 

[Frodo]

So for now...if the hope of Marvel taking full control of Spidey is still long way, then I am willing to give Sony one more chance if they ever decide to break up with Marvel (but once again, with the right creative people driving the franchise....means no more Avi Arad or Amy Paschal and bring the ones who has clear visions and love for Spider-Man world, like what Raimi did, Lord and Miller did, and the team of Insomniac did).

Which is where I'm at as far as creative teams go for either a Sony or Marvel reboot of Spiderman.
I can't speak for Insomniac vision of Spiderman , since I haven't seen it other than some stills.

But certainly, a new version of Spiderman, when ever that is, should have a creative team with a love and reverence for the Spiderman character, and world ,who is also able to tell good , new stories with their own vision of the myths, the way Raimi had he his own vision of the myths.

For me as a Spiderman fan, that would be ideal .
Ultimately, I'm about good Spiderman films and stories , regardless of who tells them.

 

[MarvelFan]

The thing you have to keep in mind is that Sony Pictures is a separate company than Sony Interactive. Sony owns both companies under their umbrella but they are run entirely separate from one another, with different people in charge. So we can't really credit Sony Pictures for the PS4 Spidey game when they really had nothing to do with it.

Hi thanks for the clarification.
I always thought that they were both still under Sony as a whole so I added the PS4 Spidey into the mix. Haha.
Thanks to clearing up that they are run by two separate companies.

The point still same though...that it proves that even without Marvel direct involvement, with the right creative team behind (who understand and respect the Spider-Man myth), we can have a very good Spider-Man story (PS4 incarnation I think is tied with SM2 as the best Spider-Man story ever told outside comics).

As I am not really fond of the current MCU version of Spidey.

 

[psylockolussus]

We can say right creative team to every IP and just assume good faith and in reality, studios still get it wrong. Based on track record of Sony Pictures, they really cannot be trusted handling Marvel movies. Spider-Man 3, Ghost Rider, Spider-Man 4, Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance, The Amazing Spider-Man 2, Venom and soon to be in that group - Venom Let There Be Carnage, Morbius and Kraven.

Its the same argument people had when wanting the Mutants to stay with 20th Century FoX.

 

[Filmfreak]

And they were right. Fox and Sony had been very uneven but the first two Raimi Spider-Man movies are better than Watts' and good luck to Disney making better mutant films than X2, First Class and Days of Future Past.

Again, it's a matter of perspective. I prefer watching director-driven movies than producer-driven ones. I want to see the creator's imprint even if it means it could turn out trash. I prefer having a unique tone for each superhero rather than a generic one that fits the whole universe. And while we're at it, I don't care much for shared universes and crossovers anymore, particularly with Spider-Man who works better as a loner, whereas his whole existence in the MCU is way to dependent on others.

But that's what I like and don't like, as an individual. I totally understand people who want Disney to own all heroes even if I completely disagreed from the start.

 

[TheVileOne]

And they were right. Fox and Sony had been very uneven but the first two Raimi Spider-Man movies are better than Watts' and good luck to Disney making better mutant films than X2, First Class and Days of Future Past.

There's no reason they can't make better than those X-Men films. There's room for improvement.

 

[Filmfreak]

There's no reason they can't make better than those X-Men films. There's room for improvement.

Sure there's room for improvement on many aspects, mainly in action, team dynamic and source material fidelity, but the core thing that made those movies stand out from the rest of the superhero films at the time, for me, was the character drama and emotional connection, something I find the MCU severely lacking in general. Again, a matter of personal preference.

 

[psylockolussus]

And they were right. Fox and Sony had been very uneven but the first two Raimi Spider-Man movies are better than Watts' and good luck to Disney making better mutant films than X2, First Class and Days of Future Past.

I loved those films but there's already a handful of mcu films that are more critical acclaimed than those movies.

As for character drama and emotional connection... Infinity War and Endgame already got this covered. Or else you won't have the casuals sobbing when they killed off Tony/Spider-Man/Black Widow. Also if we use boX office numbers, the audience are more invested with mcu films. Thats impossible to get without emotional connection or else MCU would have longevity like the Transformers movies. The audience practically didn't care about Apocalypse and that movie came out after DOFP....

Marvel Studios have also accomplished more with Black Panther with just 2 movies than foX with Storm in 19 years.... maybe those fans were right for a handful of X-Men characters.

 

[InCali]

I guess I'd rather Marvel have the rights. They just seem to do a better job overall than does Sony. What's interesting to me is what MCU will look like in 5-10 years. I believe they are going to use the Multiverse to reboot their characters rather reboot the MCU and it'll be interesting to see how that works out. We could, and probably will, see another Steve Rogers in the current MCU. If that's right, Spiderman, and a lot of other characters, are going to have a lot of breathing room.

 

[Filmfreak]

I loved those films but there's already a handful of mcu films that are more critical acclaimed than those movies.

Sure, I would even say the majority is. But that has nothing to do with individual preferences in movies.

As for character drama and emotional connection... Infinity War and Endgame already got this covered. Or else you won't have the casuals sobbing when they killed off Tony/Spider-Man/Black Widow.

Good for them. Those specific scenes didn't work for me at all. They felt forced within the story narrative and that they only happened because their contracts were ending along with the Infinity saga. It's very difficult for me to get emotionally attached to a universe that emphasises so much in comedy and has barely any stakes and character development.

Also if we use boX office numbers, the audience are more invested with mcu films. Thats impossible to get without emotional connection or else MCU would have longevity like the Transformers movies. The audience practically didn't care about Apocalypse and that movie came out after DOFP....

Success is objective but personal taste is subjective and popularity, as always, doesn't equal quality. The question of the thread is whether we personally want the rights to go to Disney and what would be a better scenario for us. So bringing a general preference of the audience in this conversation doesn't mean much to me or the point of the dilemma.

Marvel Studios have also accomplished more with Black Panther with just 2 movies than foX with Storm in 19 years.... maybe those fans were right for a handful of X-Men characters.

Well, Storm is a member of an ensemble and was introduced at very different times in Hollywood so it's an unfair comparison. But, yeah, they could have done much more with her.

 

[psylockolussus]

Well, Storm is a member of an ensemble and was introduced at very different times in Hollywood so it's an unfair comparison. But, yeah, they could have done much more with her.

Thats not really a good eXcuse as Black Panther was also introduced in an ensemble. FoX had two decades and half of that time, Marvel Studios was already producing their own films. Storm, Jean and Cyclops were reintroduced in Apocalypse as their younger selves, and it should have been the right moment to redeem them. Then Dark PhoeniX turned out to be the worst film in the franchise.

 

[psylockolussus]

Good for them. Those specific scenes didn't work for me at all. They felt forced within the story narrative and that they only happened because their contracts were ending along with the Infinity saga. It's very difficult for me to get emotionally attached to a universe that emphasises so much in comedy and has barely any stakes and character development.

Success is objective but personal taste is subjective and popularity, as always, doesn't equal quality. The question of the thread is whether we personally want the rights to go to Disney and what would be a better scenario for us. So bringing a general preference of the audience in this conversation doesn't mean much to me or the point of the dilemma.

Yeah well I was referring to audience perception as that is more important in the big picture. I'm sure there are people out there that didn't strike an emotion (aside from frustration/indifference) watching the X-Men movies as well.

 

[TheVileOne]

Sure there's room for improvement on many aspects, mainly in action, team dynamic and source material fidelity, but the core thing that made those movies stand out from the rest of the superhero films at the time, for me, was the character drama and emotional connection, something I find the MCU severely lacking in general. Again, a matter of personal preference.

I don't think that's an insurmountable task. I even thing Shang-Chi had some decent emotional weight to its plot. And while there are a lot of things I think the X-Men movies did well, there are a lot of things that haven't aged well about those movies either.