Spider-Man no longer in the MCU.

[JABing]

....aaaaaand it turns out this probably isn't the case, at least not yet. I hope it doesn't happen, but it appears to be on the table (which stinks).

[RoxasOnFire]

4 hours ago, danceswithsloths said:

Well shit. Now we're gonna be back to getting shitty solo Spidey films like "The Amazing Spider Man 2". Movie was so bad that it didn't even make it's budget back in domestic sales, and Sony wants to go back to that? wow.

Sony bought Insomniac so if they keep the IP we are good.

[majob]

3 minutes ago, RoxasOnFire said:

Sony bought Insomniac so if they keep the IP we are good.

Sony has the film rights to Spider-Man, not the gaming rights. Part of the reason Sony relented in bringing Spiderman to the MCU was because they wanted the green light to their Spiderman game from Disney and the PlayStation is their bread and butter compared to their movie division

[RoxasOnFire]

Just now, majob said:

Sony has the film rights to Spider-Man, not the gaming rights. Part of the reason Sony relented in bringing Spiderman to the MCU was because they wanted the green light to their Spiderman game from Disney and the PlayStation is their bread and butter compared to their movie division

True true, I have faith in the console version of spidey. The mcu one can suck it. The film studios make nothing from the console variant anyways.

[starcrunch061]

3 hours ago, Varhur said:

So how will they explain this in the movies? FFH had this whole

  Hide contents

"everyone now knows Spiderman's identity"

and now they can't build from that?

 

Sony will just reboot. Disney will probably pretend he doesn't exist again.

 

3 hours ago, KainDMD said:

WTF is this comment supposed to be? What don't you understand about my comment? I hate that cringy ass spiderman and now there is no more spiderman S FUCKING YES!

 

LOL. Of course Sony isn't getting rid of a cash cow. The last Spider-man movie was the highest grossing film in their history.

 

32 minutes ago, majob said:

Sony has the film rights to Spider-Man, not the gaming rights. Part of the reason Sony relented in bringing Spiderman to the MCU was because they wanted the green light to their Spiderman game from Disney and the PlayStation is their bread and butter compared to their movie division

 

I don't think Sony and Disney ever really wanted to work together. I think they tried with this experiment, but it's clear from their "negotiations" that neither side really wanted to work together.

Edited August 21, 2019 by starcrunch061

[Lance_87]

I'm quite sure it's not "no longer in the MCU". I mean, not yet, negotiations will continue. The original news and the thread are misleading. Don't celebrate anything guys.

[starcrunch061]

12 minutes ago, Lance_87 said:

I'm quite sure it's not "no longer in the MCU". I mean, not yet, negotiations will continue. The original news and the thread are misleading. Don't celebrate anything guys.

 

Maybe, but I remain of the opinion that neither side is all that serious about these negotiations. And honestly, neither side has much to lose. Disney's MCU will more than survive without Spider-Man. And Sony? Well, hell - people went to see Venom in droves. They'll watch whatever slop Sony puts out, apparently.

 

5 hours ago, danceswithsloths said:

Well shit. Now we're gonna be back to getting shitty solo Spidey films like "The Amazing Spider Man 2". Movie was so bad that it didn't even make it's budget back in domestic sales, and Sony wants to go back to that? wow.

 

Why wouldn't they? Even if it didn't make back its budget domestically, it still made a ton of money for them globally.

 

If all else fails, reboot. Of course, United Airlines will have to rethink their whole safety video then. 

Edited August 21, 2019 by starcrunch061

[majob]

22 minutes ago, starcrunch061 said:

I don't think Sony and Disney ever really wanted to work together. I think they tried with this experiment, but it's clear from their "negotiations" that neither side really wanted to work together.

Sony was getting a raw deal overall to begin with. Profits were split 50/50 but Sony still paid all production costs for the two movies and they received NONE of the merchandise revenue. The deal was solely for the game which was a huge success.

Edited August 21, 2019 by majob

[starcrunch061]

Just now, majob said:

Sony was getting a raw deal overall to begin with. Profits were split 50/50 but Sony still paid production costs for the two movies and they received NONE of the merchandise revenue. The deal was solely for the game which was a huge success.

 

I don't really like taking sides in a corporate war, but I'll always side with a company that stands up to Disney in entertainment (just like I'll side with a company that stands up to Sony in gaming). 

[FireFoxie]

Well, I'm hoping Disney and Sony can work this out. I don't blame Sony if they said no to Disney wanting 50% of the movie profits if what I'm reading is true. That's ridiculous, I'm sorry. Disney is already rolling in so much cash from End Game and those horrible life action reboots. So they're just being greedy for the sake of it which really isn't surprising. 

I just hope both companies can see what they're going to lose if they can't come to an agreement on this. 

[M1138147]

man. are people up in arms over everything theses days.one day its one thing, the next day its another. how many video will be made bitching about another issues. its quite tiresome and draining to be honest. the internet is really becoming a den of overshared information.as if an opinion matters to mass corporation. too much knowledge is a true sanity killer. on this issue its just a film.sharing everything is not always the best answers.the line are there for a reason.

[danceswithsloths]

26 minutes ago, starcrunch061 said:

Why wouldn't they? Even if it didn't make back its budget, it still made a ton of money for them. 

 

If all else fails, reboot. Of course, United Airlines will have to rethink their whole safety video then. 

Because the new Spidey movies are performing much better. LIke I said in my other comments, I figured the percentage of profits they did receive, combined with the other benefits like the Spider Man Game, the Crossover films, and the general hype that the MCU has would be enough to outweigh the money made off of ASM 2. I assumed that the original profit split was something like 60/40, or 70/30, in favor of Sony, which is why they are now refusing to go 50/50. If Spider-Man FFH has made 1.1 bil, and Sony only gets 60% of that, then they still made 660 million off that movie, almost as much as TASM 2 made in it's entirety. And FFH is coming back to theaters, which will almost definitely push the profits over the 700 million Sony made from TASM 2. Not to mention whatever money Sony got from Spidey being in Civil War and Avengers, which was surely a good amount. I just don't see how going back to poorly performing, poorly reviewed Spidey movies is somehow better for them just to get an extra 50 mil in the box office sales. An amount that can easily be made up with crossover films, video games, and other stuff.

 

And yeah, they could reboot again, it didn't go so well the first time, but maybe they could do it better this time.

 

20 minutes ago, majob said:

Sony was getting a raw deal overall to begin with. Profits were split 50/50 but Sony still paid all production costs for the two movies and they received NONE of the merchandise revenue. The deal was solely for the game which was a huge success.

Wait, the split was already 50/50? i thought the whole reason for this breakdown was because Disney was now requesting a 50/50 split when it was originally a deal that favored Sony, am I misinformed?

Edited August 21, 2019 by danceswithsloths
meant to say Far From Home, not Homecoming

[starcrunch061]

4 minutes ago, danceswithsloths said:

Because the new Spidey movies are performing much better. LIke I said in my other comments, I figured the percentage of profits they did receive, combined with the other benefits like the Spider Man Game, the Crossover films, and the general hype that the MCU has would be enough to outweigh the money made off of ASM 2. I assumed that the original profit split was something like 60/40, or 70/30, in favor of Sony, which is why they are now refusing to go 50/50. If Spider-Man FFH has made 1.1 bil, and Sony only gets 60% of that, then they still made 660 million off that movie, almost as much as TASM 2 made in it's entirety. And FFH is coming back to theaters, which will almost definitely push the profits over the 700 million Sony made from TASM 2. Not to mention whatever money Sony got from Spidey being in Civil War and Avengers, which was surely a good amount. I just don't see how going back to poorly performing, poorly reviewed Spidey movies is somehow better for them to get an extra 50 mil in the box office sales. An amount that can easily be made up with crossover films, video games, and other stuff.

 

And yeah, they could reboot again, it didn't go so well the first time, but maybe they could do it better this time.

 

Yeah, but...they have to work with Disney. I don't know - I think it does fine without Disney or the MCU, and I think Sony and Disney know that.

[danceswithsloths]

8 minutes ago, starcrunch061 said:

 

Yeah, but...they have to work with Disney. I don't know - I think it does fine without Disney or the MCU, and I think Sony and Disney know that.

I guess we're gonna have to agree to disagree on that one then. The Amazing Spider Man films are the two lowest grossing live action Spidey films ever made, and with 2 making even less money than 1, it certainly felt like a sinking ship to me. I always felt that the deal Sony signed with Marvel was partially because the reboot had gone poorly, but idk maybe it was just an experiment and they think the ASM movies were fine or whatever. I personally thought they were garbage, which I thought was the general consensus but I guess I might be in the minority on that one. Bummer.

Edited August 21, 2019 by danceswithsloths

[TugaSonic]

2 minutes ago, danceswithsloths said:

Because the new Spidey movies are performing much better. LIke I said in my other comments, I figured the percentage of profits they did receive, combined with the other benefits like the Spider Man Game, the Crossover films, and the general hype that the MCU has would be enough to outweigh the money made off of ASM 2. I assumed that the original profit split was something like 60/40, or 70/30, in favor of Sony, which is why they are now refusing to go 50/50. If Spider-Man homecoming has made 1.1 bil, and Sony only gets 60% of that, then they still made 660 million off that movie, almost as much as TASM 2 made in it's entirey. And homecoming is coming back to theaters, which will almost definitely push the profits over the 700 million Sony made from TASM 2. Not to mention whatever money Sony got from Spidey being in Civil War and Avengers, which was surely a good amount. I just don't see how going back to poorly performing, poorly reviewed Spidey movies is somehow better for them to get an extra 50 mil in the box office sales. An amount that can easily be made up with crossover films, video games, and other stuff.

 

And yeah, they could reboot again, it didn't go so well the first time, but maybe they could do it better this time.

 

Wait, the split was already 50/50? i thought the whole reason for this breakdown was because Disney was now requesting a 50/50 split when it was originally a deal that favored Sony, am I misinformed?

Not 100% sure since the info is all over the place and some of it, like the new deal info, is supposedly from an insider so not all that trustworthy but from what I read.

 

Previous deal:

• Sony footing the bill for MCU version of spider-man
• Sony gets 95% of the revenue while Disney gets 5%
• Disney gets all merchandise rights.

 

New deal:

• Profit is split 50/50 when it comes to MCU version of spider-man
• Disney still has all merchandise rights
• Disney pays half of the bill while Sony pays the other half (again only for MCU version of Spider-man)
• Disney apparently also wanted money from non-MCU spiderman movies like Venom while Sony still had to pay the full bill for those.

[danceswithsloths]

10 minutes ago, TugaSonic said:

Not 100% sure since the info is all over the place and some of it, like the new deal info, is supposedly from an insider so not all that trustworthy but from what I read.

 

Previous deal:

• Sony footing the bill for MCU version of spider-man
• Sony gets 95% of the revenue while Disney gets 5%
• Disney gets all merchandise rights.

 

New deal:

• Profit is split 50/50 when it comes to MCU version of spider-man
• Disney still has all merchandise rights
• Disney pays half of the bill while Sony pays the other half (again only for MCU version of Spider-man)
• Disney apparently also wanted money from non-MCU spiderman movies like Venom while Sony still had to pay the full bill for those.

yeesh, wow. Well I can certainly see why the new deal is much less appealing to Sony, but I'm still not sure if it's better to go back to the way things were or just bite the 50/50 bullet with Disney. A 50/50 split is definitely unappealing compared to a 95/5 split in favor of Sony, but does that outweigh everything else? who knows.

 

That means Sony made basically 1 billion dollars off of Far From Home, while Disney got less than 100 mil though. Goodness.

Edited August 21, 2019 by danceswithsloths

[majob]

1 minute ago, danceswithsloths said:

yeesh, wow. Well I can certainly see why the new deal is much less appealing to Sony, but I'm still not sure if it's better to go back to the way things were or just bite the 50/50 bullet with Disney. A 50/50 split is definitely unappealing compared to a 95/5 split in favor of Sony, but does that outweigh everything else? who knows.

 

That means Sony made basically 1 billion dollars off of Far From Home, while Disney got less than 100 mil though. Goodness.

Don't underestimate the revenue of merchandise. George Lucas created his Star Wars empire off the back of merchandise, not the movies. Disney effectively got 5% from movies they didn't spend a dime on while also collecting all of the profits off the merchandise. And to pay half production costs is a hollow offer when the movie gross from a Spiderman movie would more than cover them and to top it off wanting a piece of the pie from non Spiderman movies as well? I can see why Sony said no

[KainDMD]

52 minutes ago, M1138147 said:

man. are people up in arms over everything theses days.one day its one thing, the next day its another. how many video will be made bitching about another issues. its quite tiresome and draining to be honest. the internet is really becoming a den of overshared information.as if an opinion matters to mass corporation. too much knowledge is a true sanity killer. on this issue its just a film.sharing everything is not always the best answers.the line are there for a reason.

Let me tell you exactly what opinion you should have in the world and if you refuse then you are an enemy of everyone!

[GoldenShaka]

Bad mouse, bad mouse 

[danceswithsloths]

42 minutes ago, majob said:

Don't underestimate the revenue of merchandise. George Lucas created his Star Wars empire off the back of merchandise, not the movies. Disney effectively got 5% from movies they didn't spend a dime on while also collecting all of the profits off the merchandise. And to pay half production costs is a hollow offer when the movie gross from a Spiderman movie would more than cover them and to top it off wanting a piece of the pie from non Spiderman movies as well? I can see why Sony said no

Honestly I don't think movie merch is as huge of an industry as it was in the late 70's/early 80's when Star Wars was happening, but I don't know really. So fair enough, Disney definitely made more money than that deal sounds like they made. I'm not seeing how paying half of production is exactly a hollow offer though, just because the gross of the movie will cover production costs. I mean isn't that the goal of every movie? to have the gross at least cover the production costs? That doesn't nullify any talks about production costs or how they should be split. The want for a cut of other Spider-verse films is definitely a brutal request, but I'm just not sure if it outweighs the benefits of Video Games and Crossovers and such.

Edited August 21, 2019 by danceswithsloths

[TheLakota]

8 minutes ago, danceswithsloths said:

Honestly I don't think Movie merch is as huge of an industry as it was in the late 70's/early 80's when Star Wars was happening, but I don't know really.

 

You're right for being sceptical of your initial belief as it is incorrect. 

 

A number of film franchises turned into powerhouses based off merchandising include not just Star Wars, but Harry Potter, Toy Story, and yes, Marvel films.

 

Per Disney CEO Bob Iger, in 2013 Disney made $41 Billion (that's with a capital B) off licensing.

 

As @majob mentioned, do not underestimate the power of merchandising/licensing. Disney has created a monopolistic juggernaut, and I support any endeavor to curtail their shady practices. 

[starcrunch061]

1 hour ago, danceswithsloths said:

I guess we're gonna have to agree to disagree on that one then. The Amazing Spider Man films are the two lowest grossing live action Spidey films ever made, and with 2 making even less money than 1, it certainly felt like a sinking ship to me. I always felt that the deal Sony signed with Marvel was partially because the reboot had gone poorly, but idk maybe it was just an experiment and they think the ASM movies were fine or whatever. I personally thought they were garbage, which I thought was the general consensus but I guess I might be in the minority on that one. Bummer.

 

The ASM movies suck. We can find agreement there. But I think Sony tried out working with Disney, and it wasn't to their liking. And I think Sony will just reboot it all again, and see where it leads them.

 

And honestly, with some of Disney's practices, I can see it. Yeah, I'm sure that other big studios do the same shit, but the shit I know about it from Disney.

[AJ_-_808]

16 minutes ago, danceswithsloths said:

The want for a cut of other Spider-verse films is definitely a brutal request, but I'm just not sure if it outweighs the benefits of Video Games and Crossovers and such.

 

Is it though? They are still marvel characters in origin.  Disney now owns Marvel, are they not entitled to something?  The question is, how much are they asking for, and how much is reasonable?

Edited August 21, 2019 by AJ_-_808

[TheLakota]

15 minutes ago, danceswithsloths said:

I'm not seeing how paying half of production is exactly a hollow offer though, just because the gross of the movie will cover production costs.

 

Simple math really. It's hollow because Sony more than breaks even on their production costs and nets a healthy profit. Disney now wants to alter the deal, meaning their profits will be cut in half. If they were to agree to such terms, their net profits would be lower than they were initially. They are making a sound business decision by rejecting this shite. 

2 minutes ago, AJ_-_808 said:

Disney now owns Marvel, are they not entitled to something?

 

No, because they don't own the character. 

 

See: Age of Ultron vs DoFP. 

[danceswithsloths]

13 minutes ago, TheLakota said:

 

Simple math really. It's hollow because Sony more than breaks even on their production costs and nets a healthy profit. Disney now wants to alter the deal, meaning their profits will be cut in half. If they were to agree to such terms, their net profits would be lower than they were initially. They are making a sound business decision by rejecting this shite. 

They would be lower than the initial deal with Disney, definitely, my argument is that they would still probably be higher than the profits made from shit movies like TASM 2, which is what they will now be forced to return to. 

 

And personally, I have no problem with Disney/Marvel getting the merch profits. Marvel was selling Spidey merch years and years before Sony even thought about making the movies.

Edited August 21, 2019 by danceswithsloths