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 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:
…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.
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.
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.
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”
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.
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.
Yes it is.
My bad, I got my companies switched around.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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 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).
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
I think you mean Sony.
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?