• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Spider-Man is Entering The Marvel Cinematic Universe

M

Marion Cobretti

Member
Bryan Cranston would've been awesome, but kinda closed minded.

I think Eisenberg is a little inspired.

This weekend, my 3 year old nephew came to visit. He's a massive Spider-Man fan. Was wearing shoes and a shirt.

Couldn't help but think how good he's gonna have it in a couple years.

Who do you think had it better? Him with MCU/Spidey when he's 5? Or me with Batman 89 and TMNT when I was 5?
 
B

Bobby Roberts

Banned
Marion Cobretti said:
Who do you think had it better? Him with MCU/Spidey when he's 5? Or me with Batman 89 and TMNT when I was 5?
Click to expand...

Your nephew is always going to have it better when it comes to this, because when we were kids, adults still had to be convinced that these sorts of trifles could and should be pursued, and that it'd be worth it to them to do so.

He lives in a world where the adults never stopped playing with these particular toys, and so it doesn't even occur to them NOT to pour billions of dollars into that toybox. He'll get to basically have every character he's ever wanted to see running around doing crazy shit, running around and doing it, with the industry sparing no expense to make it look amazing.

So yeah, you getting a TMNT movie and Batman 89 is pretty damn cool. But they're getting entire UNIVERSES to bounce between with a production value that was unimaginable back then.

Your nephew wins.
 
J

jett

D-Member
Garfield didn't even remotely look like a teenager in ASM2.

the-amazing-spider-man-2-andrew-garfield-1.jpg
Click to expand...

Seems they tried to distract us by making his hair increasingly stupidly big.

Mumei said:
And O'Brien:

a17EQ6.gif
Click to expand...

That's hilarious.
 
D

darkhunger

Member
BobbyRoberts said:
No, it doesn't. I've specifically said they CAN do whatever they want, sure. It's just that it runs counter to the entire point of agreeing to the deal in the first place. It's the main contradiction in reasoning I've been poking at the entire time. I've never said they CAN'T do anything else with Spidey outside of Marvel, or that they're not allowed to. I said it makes no sense for them to even really pursue that line of thinking given the actions they've taken.
Click to expand...
The entire point of agreeing to the deal, is, once again, 1) so Spidey is cross-promoted in MCU movies; 2) Kevin Feige is a great producer and can provide the sort of guidance that they need.

Again, neither of these have anything to do with the spinoffs. They can make great Spider-Man movies, and then use the Spider-Man movies as a way to promote their cheaper to produce spinoff movies. Spinoff movies don't need to make nearly the same amount of money nor have the same quality. They don't need Kevin Feige for those.

What they do need, is for a Spider-Man movie that does well, so that they can leverage that success for the spinoffs.

If they wanted to stick to their previous plans, they easily could have. Instead they gave Feige oversight over the character. So obviously, they don't really want to do anything else with the character. They got a sweetheart deal where they don't have to pay the king of Marvel Studios to work on their film, and they don't have to share any profits for those movies with Marvel, in return for Marvel using the character in their guaranteed blockbusters that will do nothing but raise the profile of their character even further.
Click to expand...
Again, nothing to do with the spinoffs. They could have stuck to their previous plans but they realized that Spider-Man in the MCU can make more money for them. Plus they have a great deal where Marvel's basically helping Sony out for no monetary value.

The only reason why they haven't continued with their previous plans is because the Spider-Man universe is once again being rebooted, so there's no sense in making a spinoff without a main movie to spinoff from.

Your argument for why they'd start making plays that run counter to the reasoning behind that decision is "capitalizing on spinoffs" and I'm telling you they're pursuing that playbook with other film series now, and they don't have to "capitalize" on spinoffs because Marvel's going to continue to make Spidey sequels for them. Again, this whole frame of mind seems to depend on the idea that the money they're making from mainline Spidey movies run by Marvel isn't all theirs anyway. Why would they need to further "capitalize" on spinoffs when they're likely going to have a Spidey movie every two years regardless?
Click to expand...
That's a lot of assumptions you're making there.

Marvel has a ton of franchises to juggle around for time and money. While its conceivable that they could continue to help Sony make Spider-Man sequels (which in and of itself is no sure thing), essentially for free, I don't see them doing so in that type of frequency. Every 3 years maybe. But Marvel needs to make money too, and I simply don't see them giving up the chance to continue to develop their own franchises. So if Sony is going to rely on the fact that Marvel's going to continue to do favors for them, then they would be pretty foolish.

More likely, I think the 2017 movie is a way for Marvel to set a direction for the franchise, which benefits them because it's ultimately their property. But in terms of any sequels being developed by them, I think that's probably not set in stone just yet and will probably be based off of how successful the movie will be.

"Capitalizing" on spinoffs isn't that important to them anymore, or they wouldn't have agreed to the deal with Marvel. That's the argument I'm making. It seems pretty obvious to me.
Click to expand...
It's not obvious because of the assumptions you were making that I don't think you stated. But after hearing them I think many of the things you are assuming are not really set in stone. So I think its a bit premature to start ruling things out like you have.
 
B

Bobby Roberts

Banned
darkhunger said:
What they do need, is for a Spider-Man movie that does well, so that they can leverage that success for the spinoffs.
Click to expand...

I've already addressed this and every argument you've put forth. There's no real reason to keep headbutting this brick wall, man. The arguments basically just stand as they are. Time will bear out which direction they actually go.
 
D

darkhunger

Member
BobbyRoberts said:
I've already addressed this and every argument you've put forth. There's no real reason to keep headbutting this brick wall, man. The arguments basically just stand as they are. Time will bear out which direction they actually go.
Click to expand...

Read again. I don't think you have. But like you said, it's too early to tell what will happen. But to rule out the spinoffs as "dead" like some have is premature, which is essentially my point.
 
B

Blader

Member
darkhunger said:
Eh, Marvel's not doing anyone favors. They've wanted to play with Spidey and they were the ones who approached Sony about the deal in the first place. Sony was the one dragging their feet on the deal, and considering how many concessions Marvel gave up based on the original proposals from the leaked emails (originally Marvel was supposed to have co-production and co-financing rights to the 2017 Spidey movie), I'd venture to say that you are absolutely wrong about this.
Click to expand...

Sticking your biggest character -- who's currently performing worse and worse at the box office and with critics -- into what is currently the biggest franchise on the planet (but owned by someone else) is a huge fucking favor for Sony. You said it yourself: the point is to give Spider-Man maximum exposure to audiences. They're achieving that through another company's property. How is that not a big get?

Sony was "dragging their feet" on the deal because they originally had other plans for a follow-up to ASM2. Why? Because it's their franchise, they want to expand it under their control. It's no coincidence that after news of that rejected deal leaked they immediately went back to the negotiating table, and suddenly, things worked out this time. That's not a sign they're in complete control and looking to keep spinning characters off indefinitely. That quick reversal, and the dropping of Avi Arad and Matt Tolmach as producers, is a huge giveaway that Marvel is running this show.
 
D

darkhunger

Member
Blader said:
Sticking your biggest character -- who's currently performing worse and worse at the box office and with critics -- into what is currently the biggest franchise on the planet (but owned by someone else) is a huge fucking favor for Sony. You said it yourself: the point is to give Spider-Man maximum exposure to audiences. They're achieving that through another company's property. How is that not a big get?

Sony was "dragging their feet" on the deal because they originally had other plans for a follow-up to ASM2. Why? Because it's their franchise, they want to expand it under their control. It's no coincidence that after news of that rejected deal leaked they immediately went back to the negotiating table, and suddenly, things worked out this time. That's not a sign they're in complete control and looking to keep spinning characters off indefinitely. That quick reversal, and the dropping of Avi Arad and Matt Tolmach as producers, is a huge giveaway that Marvel is running this show.
Click to expand...

It's a win-win scenario for both. I'm not saying there's no gains for Sony in this.

But dropping Avi Arad and Matt Tolmach as producer is peanuts compared to Marvel dropping the part that they would be entitled to 40%-60% of the box office revenues versus the tiny percent that they are now getting as producer's performance bonus.

Patriots7 said:
Make 1 blockbuster every 3-4 years.
Or make 1 blockbuster every 2 years.

Seems fairly logical.
Click to expand...

Sony would be totally down for the latter, but would Marvel be down with that too?
 
B

Bobby Roberts

Banned
Zulithe said:
Heh!

I saved a copy this time. In the event that he does become Spidey... this will come in very useful for gifs :p
Click to expand...

I doubt he's going to be Spidey - I really think it's more that he doesn't want to have to eat shit from a bunch of people that video was never intended for, as a result of his trying out for a job he probably won't get.

"I auditioned for Spider-Man and all I got was this homophobic YouTube comments thread."
 
J

J10

Banned
I kinda feel like if Sony were to forge ahead with their spider-verse bullshit (and I don't think they will), it becomes the X-Men of the MCU and all the botched nonsense Sony cranks out is just gonna get ignored by the rest of the universe.
 
M

Marion Cobretti

Member
BobbyRoberts said:
Your nephew is always going to have it better when it comes to this, because when we were kids, adults still had to be convinced that these sorts of trifles could and should be pursued, and that it'd be worth it to them to do so.

He lives in a world where the adults never stopped playing with these particular toys, and so it doesn't even occur to them NOT to pour billions of dollars into that toybox. He'll get to basically have every character he's ever wanted to see running around doing crazy shit, running around and doing it, with the industry sparing no expense to make it look amazing.

So yeah, you getting a TMNT movie and Batman 89 is pretty damn cool. But they're getting entire UNIVERSES to bounce between with a production value that was unimaginable back then.

Your nephew wins.
Click to expand...

Damn dude, why you have to put it like that.

Well, at least I'm able to get in on it and excited to do so.
 
F

flkraven

Member
According to latino-review, I recently auditioned for the Spider-Man role. I don't remember doing it, but they can't be making it up...
 
P

plainr_

Member
Thanks guys. I have a few more scenes but they need some cleaning up and I won't have time to finish those anymore.

What little free time I have goes to bloodborne now. :)
 
F

Father_Brain

Banned
I can easily believe that Marvel/Sony want to cast younger than O'Brien, but I'd still be surprised if they cast anyone who's currently a minor.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Spider-Man 2 - 2h Trial - now on PS+ Premium
News
11
939
nial replied
Nicholas Cage to play Spider-Man Noir in live-action series (MGM+ and Prime Video)
29
2K
jason10mm replied
Robert Downey Jr. Being paid over $80 million dollars to play Dr.Doom
News 2 3
120
4K
clarky replied
Spider-Man 4: Thomas Haden Church Believes Sam Raimi and Tobey Maguire Will Return
Rumor
38
3K
bitbydeath replied
Nic Cage In Talks For “Spider-Man Noir”
17
2K
Valedix replied
Top Bottom