Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 08-20-2019, 05:29 PM
Quimby is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: NJ
Posts: 8,423

Spider-Man out of the MCU


Story here:
https://www.ign.com/articles/2019/08...?sf107511944=1

BWHAHAHAHA!!!

Sorry but you can't help but laugh. They just set him up as new center of the MCU...
  #2  
Old 08-20-2019, 05:35 PM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 35,303
Really dumb decision by Sony, if this is really going down like this. The MCU will be fine without Spidey. Spidey probably loses half his box office revenue without the MCU. My wife and I probably wouldn't have seen either of the recent Spiderman movies if they weren't in the MCU, barring absolutely stellar reviews.

Last edited by iiandyiiii; 08-20-2019 at 05:36 PM.
  #3  
Old 08-20-2019, 06:21 PM
Just Asking Questions is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 7,263
Eh, he should be with the mutants over at X-land anyway.*

Don't give me your "a radioactive spider bit me" BS. You're on The List, mutant boy.

*especially if he has biological web spinners

Last edited by Just Asking Questions; 08-20-2019 at 06:22 PM.
  #4  
Old 08-20-2019, 06:22 PM
Little Nemo is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Western New York
Posts: 81,975
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
My wife and I probably wouldn't have seen either of the recent Spiderman movies if they weren't in the MCU, barring absolutely stellar reviews.
I'm the same. I haven't seen any of the non-MCU Spiderman movies. My interest in the character is solely based on his place in the MCU series.
  #5  
Old 08-20-2019, 06:38 PM
Sunny Daze's Avatar
Sunny Daze is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Bay Area Urban Sprawl
Posts: 12,710
Quote:
Originally Posted by Just Asking Questions View Post
Eh, he should be with the mutants over at X-land anyway.*
Yeah, about that...
  #6  
Old 08-20-2019, 07:01 PM
borschevsky is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Canada
Posts: 2,113
There seem to be conflicting reports about how final this decision is, so hopefully this is all just negotiation and things get worked out. Spidey seems like an important character to continue things after Endgame.
  #7  
Old 08-20-2019, 07:02 PM
Dewey Finn is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 28,764
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quimby View Post
Story here:
https://www.ign.com/articles/2019/08...?sf107511944=1

BWHAHAHAHA!!!

Sorry but you can't help but laugh. They just set him up as new center of the MCU...
That article links to one at Deadline.com, which explains the reason, "Sony did not want to share its biggest franchise." Disney has plenty of franchises but Sony does not. Wikipedia lists Sony franchises including, "The Karate Kid, Ghostbusters, Spider-Man, Jumanji, Stuart Little, Men in Black, Underworld, Robert Langdon, The Smurfs (via Peyo), Sniper, Hotel Transylvania, Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs".

Basically a pretty weak selection. So I can well understand that they want to hang onto Spiderman.
  #8  
Old 08-20-2019, 07:14 PM
Ethilrist is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Saint Paul
Posts: 26,918
Tony: "Congratulations, kid, you're an Avenger."

Well, at least until the end of the next movie...
  #9  
Old 08-20-2019, 07:20 PM
Chronos's Avatar
Chronos is offline
Charter Member
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The Land of Cleves
Posts: 84,771
How many movies were included in the previous deal?
  #10  
Old 08-20-2019, 07:22 PM
DigitalC is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Obamatopia
Posts: 11,134
They'll be back to negotiating in a week or two.
  #11  
Old 08-20-2019, 07:36 PM
cmkeller's Avatar
cmkeller is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: New York, NY, USA
Posts: 13,433
According to CBR.com, negotiations are in fact still ongoing. Reports of the death of Spider-Man in the MCU have been greatly exaggerated.
__________________
"Sherlock Holmes once said that once you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the answer. I, however, do not like to eliminate the impossible. The impossible often has a kind of integrity to it that the merely improbable lacks."
-- Douglas Adams's Dirk Gently, Holistic Detective
  #12  
Old 08-20-2019, 08:35 PM
E-DUB's Avatar
E-DUB is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 4,759
Suits ruin everything.
  #13  
Old 08-20-2019, 08:47 PM
Terminus Est's Avatar
Terminus Est is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: The tropics
Posts: 7,573
I guess the next film will be entitled Spider-Man: Home Alone.
  #14  
Old 08-20-2019, 08:53 PM
2ManyTacos is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 946
Honestly, I am kinda glad. Disney owns almost everything now so it's a little heartening to see them not own something substantial. And Sony is coming off of Into the Spider-Verse, which got them a friggin Oscar, so they probably figure they can handle the character fine on their own.
  #15  
Old 08-20-2019, 08:54 PM
Little Nemo is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Western New York
Posts: 81,975
Quote:
Originally Posted by borschevsky View Post
Spidey seems like an important character to continue things after Endgame.
Sony shouldn't kid themselves that Spider Man is irreplaceable. The MCU was going strong before he entered it. And it would only take Disney one Prowler origin movie to recover from his loss.
  #16  
Old 08-20-2019, 09:02 PM
Dewey Finn is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 28,764
Of course the character isn't irreplaceable. The point is that Sony can write and produce stand-alone Spider-man stories without needing anything else from the MCU. And remember Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse was a successful movie independent of the MCU.
  #17  
Old 08-20-2019, 10:54 PM
Jophiel's Avatar
Jophiel is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Chicago suburbia
Posts: 19,355
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dewey Finn View Post
And remember Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse was a successful movie independent of the MCU.
It was and it was a great movie. It wouldn't have worked as live action, though.
  #18  
Old 08-21-2019, 04:04 AM
Jonathan Chance is offline
Domo Arigato Mister Moderato
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: On the run with Kilroy
Posts: 22,875
And Venom, while it did ok overseas, was a terrible movie.
  #19  
Old 08-21-2019, 06:02 AM
AK84 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 16,330
Good. Now that Tony's dying delusion from from being killed in Afghanistan has reached its conclusion, Spidey ain't needed/
  #20  
Old 08-21-2019, 06:14 AM
Grrr!'s Avatar
Grrr! is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 16,428
I wasn't all that impressed with Spidey in End Game. Pretty sure I saw him shoot his web into thin air (and hoist himself up) at least once.

Dude is worthless unless he's fighting someone downtown.
  #21  
Old 08-21-2019, 06:35 AM
Quimby is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: NJ
Posts: 8,423
Leaking the story was almost 100% a Disney negotiating tactic to get public opinion to hammer Sony. I hope it doesn't work. I can live with seeing a Spider-Man movie that doesn't spend 40% of its dialogue talking about Iron Man.
  #22  
Old 08-21-2019, 06:51 AM
Odesio is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Posts: 11,556
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quimby View Post
Leaking the story was almost 100% a Disney negotiating tactic to get public opinion to hammer Sony. I hope it doesn't work. I can live with seeing a Spider-Man movie that doesn't spend 40% of its dialogue talking about Iron Man.
I've enjoyed the Holland Spider-Man movies but as a long time Spidey fan I've been a bit disappointed by how reliant they've made him on Iron Man. Spider-Man is a great character to team up with a variety of heroes but he's also been fairly independent and I didn't like that his suit came from Stark. But that's the direction producers chose to take Spider-Man in and it's too late to change that now I think.
__________________
I can be found in history's unmarked grave of discarded ideologies.

Last edited by Odesio; 08-21-2019 at 06:52 AM.
  #23  
Old 08-21-2019, 08:33 AM
Jophiel's Avatar
Jophiel is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Chicago suburbia
Posts: 19,355
Quote:
Originally Posted by Odesio View Post
Spider-Man is a great character to team up with a variety of heroes but he's also been fairly independent and I didn't like that his suit came from Stark. But that's the direction producers chose to take Spider-Man in and it's too late to change that now I think.
I think it was part of making Spider-Man younger where Parker making high tech suits (or even a professional looking non-tech suit) in Aunt May's apartment went against the "Kid learning his depth" theme.

Far From Home stuff:
SPOILER:
...and then we see him design his own suit using his own parameters that he has decided on through experience. Using Stark's gifted tech, he always seemed inexperienced and unsure since he was learning how it worked (plus they were laden with non-Spidey feeling tricks and toys); now his suit is truly his -- and probably lacks a "Kill Everything" protocol.

Granted, I'm seeing this as someone who mainly knows Spider-Man via the films and newspaper comics. I might have a different view on the growth arc if I was invested in the comic books.

Last edited by Jophiel; 08-21-2019 at 08:34 AM.
  #24  
Old 08-21-2019, 11:06 AM
Quimby is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: NJ
Posts: 8,423
Something I think is interesting: my fiance is not a super hero fan (her comic book tastes are of the Donald Duck variety) and did not grow up in the US so didn't absorb a lot of the Spider-Man mythology through osmosis. She went with me to see Far From Home (and had seen Homecoming but didn't play close attention). She didn't even realize Spider-Man had powers. She assumed from the movie, she saw that he was a guy in a suit like Iron Man. Far From Home had him in one scene do stuff without one but it was easy to miss.
  #25  
Old 08-21-2019, 12:50 PM
MrAtoz is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 1,596
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jophiel View Post
I think it was part of making Spider-Man younger where Parker making high tech suits (or even a professional looking non-tech suit) in Aunt May's apartment went against the "Kid learning his depth" theme.

Granted, I'm seeing this as someone who mainly knows Spider-Man via the films and newspaper comics. I might have a different view on the growth arc if I was invested in the comic books.
I feel similar to Odesio, in that the biggest thing that I dislike about MCU Spider-Man is how he essentially became Iron Man's gosh-wow teen sidekick. Spider-Man, for most of his comics career, was very much a loner, and developed his costume, his web-shooters, and his crime-fighting style all on his own. And yeah, he did most of it in his Aunt May's house when he was sixteen years old. Does that strain credibility? Sure, but what in comics doesn't?

Apparently the relationship between Peter and Tony is something that eventually happened in the comics. Tony was impressed by Peter's scientific knowledge, they became friends, and Tony helped upgrade Peter's gadgets. But in the comics, it happened much later, after Peter was an adult and had years of successful crime-fighting experience behind him. That feels to me like something fundamentally different than Tony taking this naive kid under his wing, showering him with expensive technology (comic-book Spidey was always teetering on the edge of poverty), and treating him as almost a surrogate son. I feel like it really hamstrings Spider-Man as a hero in his own right.
  #26  
Old 08-21-2019, 01:50 PM
glee is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Obama country
Posts: 15,546

Have I got this right?


Sony have the rights to Spiderman Solo movies.

So DIsney / Marvel can feature Spiderman (of course played by the excellent Tom Holland) in a 'team' superhero feature, no?
__________________
Arnold Winkelried:
'glee, I take my hat off to you.... at first I thought you were kidding with your cite but I looked it up and it was indeed accurate. (Still in awe at the magnificent answer)'
  #27  
Old 08-21-2019, 01:52 PM
Sir T-Cups is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 8,758
Quote:
Originally Posted by glee View Post
Sony have the rights to Spiderman Solo movies.

So DIsney / Marvel can feature Spiderman (of course played by the excellent Tom Holland) in a 'team' superhero feature, no?
Nope, he's completely out.

The original agreement was Sony would lend Spider-Man the movie rights to Marvel so he could appear in the MCU and its movies for a pretty high cut of the profits (of which there were plenty).

Now, because the profits were so high, Sony is asking more and Disney is saying "nah"
__________________
Want to see more of my adventures in Orlando? Follow Mrs. Cups and me @theorlandoduo on Instagram. And check out our blog too: TheOrlandoDuo.com
  #28  
Old 08-21-2019, 02:03 PM
Inner Stickler's Avatar
Inner Stickler is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 15,111
Sounds like it's more the reverse. Spiderman has been such a hit, Disney wants 50% of the take on future Spidey films and Sony prefers to keep the 5% first-day dollar they used on previous films. I rather think it makes sense. Spiderman belongs to Sony after all.
  #29  
Old 08-21-2019, 02:19 PM
Jophiel's Avatar
Jophiel is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Chicago suburbia
Posts: 19,355
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inner Stickler View Post
I rather think it makes sense. Spiderman belongs to Sony after all.
But Disney/MCU is doing the work.

I'm sure their view is that they have umpteen other characters they can make billion dollar movies with so why should they make Sony that money instead? Sony/Spider-Man (the film IP) needs MCU more than MCU needs them, both narratively and financially.
  #30  
Old 08-21-2019, 02:19 PM
Sir T-Cups is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 8,758
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inner Stickler View Post
Sounds like it's more the reverse. Spiderman has been such a hit, Disney wants 50% of the take on future Spidey films and Sony prefers to keep the 5% first-day dollar they used on previous films. I rather think it makes sense. Spiderman belongs to Sony after all.
Yes it is.

My bad, I got my companies switched around.
__________________
Want to see more of my adventures in Orlando? Follow Mrs. Cups and me @theorlandoduo on Instagram. And check out our blog too: TheOrlandoDuo.com
  #31  
Old 08-21-2019, 02:31 PM
Inner Stickler's Avatar
Inner Stickler is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 15,111
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jophiel View Post
But Disney/MCU is doing the work.
Are they? I don't know what the breakdown on Homecoming and Far From Home were but my understanding was that Sony had ultimate creative and financial control of those films.
  #32  
Old 08-21-2019, 02:35 PM
Quimby is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: NJ
Posts: 8,423
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jophiel View Post
But Disney/MCU is doing the work.
I am pretty sure that isn't correct. I read that Sony was paying all the costs to make the movies and Disney was getting 5%. Now Disney wants half but will contribute some to the cost of the movies (not clear how much). Sony was doing the "work". What they got for their 5% was to place the story in the MCU.
  #33  
Old 08-21-2019, 02:45 PM
enalzi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 8,089
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inner Stickler View Post
Sony had ultimate creative and financial control of those films.
Kevin Feige (Master of the MCU) was the executive producer on the Spider-Man films. Sony's statement today said he will no longer be the producer of them.
  #34  
Old 08-21-2019, 02:52 PM
Inner Stickler's Avatar
Inner Stickler is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 15,111
I understand that. I am not sure that his being an executive producer necessarily means that Sony didn't have creative and financial control. When they had an agreement, Feige was necessary to ensure the Spiderman films meshed with the larger MCU. If Spiderman is not going to be part of the MCU now, his oversight is not required.
  #35  
Old 08-21-2019, 04:04 PM
Declan is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Barrie , Ontario
Posts: 5,411
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dewey Finn View Post
Of course the character isn't irreplaceable. The point is that Sony can write and produce stand-alone Spider-man stories without needing anything else from the MCU. And remember Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse was a successful movie independent of the MCU.
The folks that made the spiderverse had more control over making the movie, than the sony helmed solo spiderman movies since it was animated and not expected to make very much.

Spidey will remain in the mcu, this is just two studios going through some foreplay before actually making a deal. Spidey is Sony's big cash cow and its investors are not just going to let it go for pennies, now that the mcu has positioned spidey to be the next generation avenger.

At the end of the day one of those studios is gonna be smoking a cigarette and the other studio is going to be thinking they just got fucked.
__________________
What would Bugs Bunny say
  #36  
Old 08-21-2019, 04:08 PM
E-DUB's Avatar
E-DUB is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 4,759
What are the odds of ever seeing a Spiderman/Superman flick? I know the comics companies aren't getting along these days, but what about the studios?
  #37  
Old 08-21-2019, 04:13 PM
kenobi 65's Avatar
kenobi 65 is offline
Corellian Nerfherder
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Brookfield, IL
Posts: 15,420
Quote:
Originally Posted by E-DUB View Post
What are the odds of ever seeing a Spiderman/Superman flick? I know the comics companies aren't getting along these days, but what about the studios?
Marvel and DC have done crossover comic books with each other in the past, but those were often treated as being non-canon. So, "never say never," but I'm more skeptical about a non-canon crossover film (and, if Marvel still retains any editorial control over what Sony does with Spider-Man, I would expect them to exert veto power).
  #38  
Old 08-22-2019, 10:51 AM
Sir T-Cups is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 8,758
I think it's an interesting notion that, like myself initially, most of the blame on this is being laid at the feet of FOX, when it's really Disney who's being selfish about it.

The (probably not-so-false) conspiracy theory that Disney released all this to rile up the masses against FOX so Disney can get what they want seems to be working
__________________
Want to see more of my adventures in Orlando? Follow Mrs. Cups and me @theorlandoduo on Instagram. And check out our blog too: TheOrlandoDuo.com
  #39  
Old 08-22-2019, 10:51 AM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 35,303
I think you mean Sony.
  #40  
Old 08-22-2019, 12:00 PM
Jophiel's Avatar
Jophiel is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Chicago suburbia
Posts: 19,355
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir T-Cups View Post
I think it's an interesting notion that, like myself initially, most of the blame on this is being laid at the feet of FOX, when it's really Disney who's being selfish about it.
Heh, I've seen at least three memes today telling me how Disney is the real monster.

Personally, I figure that they're both bajillion dollar megacorporations. I don't need to worry which one is the hero and which is the villain. Oh no, which company with more money than God will get to keep more money and which will keep less money while still having giant piles of money?
  #41  
Old 08-22-2019, 12:02 PM
Sir T-Cups is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 8,758
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
I think you mean Sony.
Good Lord I'm really bad at names in this story.

I should probably give up on trying to talk about it, huh?
__________________
Want to see more of my adventures in Orlando? Follow Mrs. Cups and me @theorlandoduo on Instagram. And check out our blog too: TheOrlandoDuo.com
  #42  
Old 08-22-2019, 12:12 PM
Ike Witt's Avatar
Ike Witt is offline
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Lost in the mists of time
Posts: 14,782
Quote:
Originally Posted by Declan View Post
The folks that made the spiderverse had more control over making the movie, than the sony helmed solo spiderman movies since it was animated and not expected to make very much.
If all this (Sony taking the character back) has to happen, the smartest thing that Sony could do is give Lord and Miller the reins of Spider-Man property, in full.
  #43  
Old 08-22-2019, 03:17 PM
Declan is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Barrie , Ontario
Posts: 5,411
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ike Witt View Post
If all this (Sony taking the character back) has to happen, the smartest thing that Sony could do is give Lord and Miller the reins of Spider-Man property, in full.
I think it has more to do with sony investors, regardless of sale or deal they want full value. Sony is just one bad movie year away from selling spidey at firesale rates. Even if spidey is a cash cow for sony, by itself it cannot carry the full studio.
__________________
What would Bugs Bunny say
  #44  
Old 08-22-2019, 03:47 PM
Dewey Finn is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 28,764
Of course it can't carry the full studio, but that's no reason to sell it. They need to exploit it as best they can, while at the same time trying to develop other franchises. (Since the current model seems to be based on having franchises. I'm not sure if that's a new thing.)

Last edited by Dewey Finn; 08-22-2019 at 03:47 PM.
  #45  
Old 08-22-2019, 04:28 PM
Little Nemo is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Western New York
Posts: 81,975
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ike Witt View Post
If all this (Sony taking the character back) has to happen, the smartest thing that Sony could do is give Lord and Miller the reins of Spider-Man property, in full.
Sony's problem is that even a great Sony Spider Man movie won't be as good as an MCU Spider Man movie. The MCU has spend years building up a background to set Spider Man movies in. Sony is going to have to make their movies without all of this background.

Disney, meanwhile, now has the Fantastic Four and the X-Men warming up in the bullpen. If they lose Spider Man, they have plenty of other characters they can bring into the MCU movies to replace Captain America, Iron Man, and Thor.
  #46  
Old 08-22-2019, 05:24 PM
Trancephalic's Avatar
Trancephalic is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 982
I don't think having that background matters; Spiderverse was built on notion everyone already knows the broad strokes. It just let the audience hit the ground running. The texture was seeing the contrasts between the variants.
  #47  
Old 08-22-2019, 05:30 PM
The Tooth is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Calgary, Alberta
Posts: 4,750
Quote:
Originally Posted by Little Nemo View Post
I'm the same. I haven't seen any of the non-MCU Spiderman movies. My interest in the character is solely based on his place in the MCU series.
That's a shame, because the best of the lot is The Amazing Spider-Man. It ends with a CGI slugfest as all of these movies do, but other than that it shines. I really buy into the joy Peter Parker feels at being able to do all the cool things he can do.
__________________
"It would never occur to me to wear pink, just as it would never occur to Michael Douglas to play a poor person." - Sarah Vowell
  #48  
Old 08-22-2019, 05:41 PM
Chronos's Avatar
Chronos is offline
Charter Member
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The Land of Cleves
Posts: 84,771
Quote:
Quoth kenobi 65:

Marvel and DC have done crossover comic books with each other in the past, but those were often treated as being non-canon. So, "never say never," but I'm more skeptical about a non-canon crossover film (and, if Marvel still retains any editorial control over what Sony does with Spider-Man, I would expect them to exert veto power).
For that matter, Warner Bros and Disney have also done at least one crossover. But it involved an incredible amount of negotiation and wrangling (both rodents had to have exactly the same amount of screen time, lines, and words of dialog, and the same for both ducks), and I don't think either party is eager to repeat the process.
  #49  
Old 08-23-2019, 07:25 AM
Ike Witt's Avatar
Ike Witt is offline
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Lost in the mists of time
Posts: 14,782
This one YouTube video says that Sony and Marvel have reached a new deal with regards to Spider-Man. There is no other confirmation that I can find but the terms seem pretty reasonable to me.
  #50  
Old 08-23-2019, 11:47 AM
Sir T-Cups is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 8,758
Here is the source the Youtube video used if you'd rather read than watch
__________________
Want to see more of my adventures in Orlando? Follow Mrs. Cups and me @theorlandoduo on Instagram. And check out our blog too: TheOrlandoDuo.com
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:11 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright 2018 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017