Support NeoGAF

[Cheebo]

The spinoffs might not need Spidey to have a big role and they don't need him unmasked, so it's not an absolute necessity for them to use the same actor.

The new Spidey actor will be under contract with Marvel since he's appearing in Cap CW, so Sony might not even get to use him for anything Marvel's not involved with.

He will clearly be under contract with Sony as well since Sony is releasing the solo Spider-Man movie, not Disney. He can't do that picture without a multi-picture deal with Sony as well.

Sony is not going to be doing spin-offs that don't tie into the mainline Spider-Man films, they want to build a mini-universe. Having Spider-Man spin-off's that aren't connected to the actual Spider-Man films themselves is not something they'd ever do. A Venom movie that is unconnected to the Spider-Man films? A Sinister Six movie with the sinister six different than the ones that will be used in the Spider-Man movies?

That will NEVER happen. This isn't comics, Sony is not going to juggle multiple universes here.

 

[Pai Pai Master]

people seem to be confused by the terms of the deal. Sony is the one casting the actor. he is not going to be under contract with marvel because the deal is for his appearance in Civil War, and a solo movie produced by Sony that will be tied to the MCU. Regardless of whether or not the spin-off films are connected or not, the actor would be contractually obligated to appear in them.

 

[darkhunger]

He will clearly be under contract with Sony as well since Sony is releasing the solo Spider-Man movie, not Disney. He can't do that picture without a multi-picture deal with Sony as well.

I know. My point is that Marvel WILL have a say in what Sony movies he is allowed to appear in, because they are signing that contract first.

people seem to be confused by the terms of the deal. Sony is the one casting the actor. he is not going to be under contract with marvel because the deal is for his appearance in Civil War, and a solo movie produced by Sony that will be tied to the MCU. Regardless of whether or not the spin-off films are connected or not, the actor would be contractually obligated to appear in them.

He is appearing in a MARVEL movie first meaning he's getting his paycheck from Marvel. Sony may have a say in casting him but ultimately his first contract as Spider-Man is with Marvel.

 

[Cheebo]

I know. My point is that Marvel WILL have a say in what Sony movies he is allowed to appear in, because they are signing that contract first.

That is not true, all reports have shown it is Sony who is leading the search for the actor and will be signing him, not Marvel. They will "lease" the actor/character to Marvel on a film by film basis.

He is appearing in a MARVEL movie first meaning he's getting his paycheck from Marvel. Sony may have a say in casting him but ultimately his first contract as Spider-Man is with Marvel.

That is not what was announced. Sony is casting a new Spider-Man and leasing the actor and character for 1 film. Marvel CAN'T cast and sign the character, they don't own the film rights to Spider-Man. Sony is leasing to them on a film by film basis.

Also it is crazy to assume Marvel is somehow caught off guard by Sony's statement about moving forward with the spin-off's, this was obviously discussed at the Spidey summit last month. Marvel wouldn't make the deal if they weren't on board the long-term plan for Spider-Man.

 

[Pai Pai Master]

He is appearing in a MARVEL movie first meaning he's getting his paycheck from Marvel. Sony may have a say in casting him but ultimately his first contract as Spider-Man is with Marvel.

I don't know how you can say that with absolute confidence given the lack of information that has been made publically available. Sony is the one making the casting call and signing the actor. Feige likely has some input, but the decision and contract is going to be with Sony. It's highly unlikely Marvel is going to be signing a contract with this guy for one appearance in their movie. As Cheebs says above, Sony is literally just leasing the character out to Marvel and there is no money involved with his appearances in Marvel's films (which likely means that Sony is paying him separately for the appearance).

 

[darkhunger]

That is not true, all reports have shown it is Sony who is leading the search for the actor and will be signing him, not Marvel. They will "lease" the actor/character to Marvel on a film by film basis.

No one is leasing anything since Marvel isn't paying Sony for this deal. Sony is letting the character appear in MCU and have the final say in casting of the character. Nonetheless he's getting his first paycheck from Marvel. He'll get his second with Sony. Marvel finances Marvel movies, Sony finances Sony movies. He'll have to sign a contract with both companies.

I don't know how you can say that with absolute confidence given the lack of information that has been made publically available. Sony is the one making the casting call and signing the actor. Feige likely has some input, but the decision and contract is going to be with Sony. It's highly unlikely Marvel is going to be signing a contract with this guy for one appearance in their movie. As Cheebs says above, Sony is literally just leasing the character out to Marvel and there is no money involved with his appearances in Marvel's films (which likely means that Sony is paying him separately for the appearance).

Because its business 101. You think Sony is going to pay his salary for his appearance in Captain America?

 

[Cheebo]

I don't know how you can say that with absolute confidence given the lack of information that has been made publically available. Sony is the one making the casting call and signing the actor. Feige likely has some input, but the decision and contract is going to be with Sony. It's highly unlikely Marvel is going to be signing a contract with this guy for one appearance in their movie.

Yes, the announcement made it very clear it was Sony who is signing the actor for the character. And leasing him to Marvel for one film. Marvel legally can't cast and sign the contract on their own prior to Sony. They have no ownership over Spider-Man. Sony is just leasing it to them on a film by film basis.

No one is leasing anything since Marvel isn't paying Sony for this deal. Sony is letting the character appear in MCU and have the final say in casting of the character. Nonetheless he's getting his first paycheck from Marvel. He'll get his second with Sony. Marvel finances Marvel movies, Sony finances Sony movies. He'll have to sign a contract with both companies.

The press release point blank said Sony is doing the casting on this. They are the first to make a deal. What movie comes first has nothing to do with it at all. The contract is being signed as a overall deal initially with Sony. The single movie deal with Marvel is after this.

Marvel has no control over what movies Sony puts the actor in.

And yes it is being referred to as leasing: http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/marvel-deal-sony-opts-lease-772251

 

[Pai Pai Master]

No one is leasing anything since Marvel isn't paying Sony for this deal. Sony is letting the character appear in MCU and have the final say in casting of the character. Nonetheless he's getting his first paycheck from Marvel. He'll get his second with Sony. Marvel finances Marvel movies, Sony finances Sony movies. He'll have to sign a contract with both companies.

you can't sign a contract with an actor for a character you don't have the film rights for. everything related to the actor is going to be handled through Sony.

 

[George Oscar Bluth II]

I'm guessing Marvel will give Sony the money so they can pay him for the MCU appearance?

 

[AgentChris]

I'm guessing Marvel will give Sony the money so they can pay him for the MCU appearance?

No money is being exchanged. Free promotions I guess.

 

[darkhunger]

I'm guessing Marvel will give Sony the money so they can pay him for the MCU appearance?

I think the Variety article indicated very clearly that there is no exchange of money here. It's not a lease.

And yes it is being referred to as leasing: http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/marvel-deal-sony-opts-lease-772251

The reporter is misusing the word lease. In the same article:

Sources say no money changed hands between the two studios in the deal and it is instead seen as a quid pro quo transaction. Sony benefits from the free exposure of a younger, rebooted Spider-Man in a film from red-hot Marvel, while Marvel gets its hands on the most prized superhero in its lucrative universe. Also, since Marvel controls the merchandising rights to Spider-Man, the effect this move will have on sales could be worth more than any cut they would have seen.

 

[Pai Pai Master]

I'm guessing Marvel will give Sony the money so they can pay him for the MCU appearance?

I think it's more likely that his contract with Sony will come with an included amount for his provisional MCU appearance(s) or maybe it would be rolled up in his pay for his solo film. I doubt we'll ever really know for sure because that's all back-end stuff that doesn't often get made public.

Or maybe Marvel will just pay him on a case-by-case basis for his appearances, but there would likely not be a contract involved and we know there is no money being exchanged between Marvel and Sony for this thing.

 

[Cheebo]

I think the Variety article indicated very clearly that there is no exchange of money here. It's not a lease.

Lease doesn't mean money. Even variety as well as hollywood reporter called it a lease. What is being exchanged is a character+actor, not money. And it is on a film by film basis. Marvel can only use the character in one film and has to ask Sony for permission if they want to again after that. Sony can do whatever they want and put the actor/character in any movie they want.

Marvel can't dictate the terms of Sony's contract at all. Read the Hollywood Reporter link above, it is called a lease. Rights is just as valid form of payment as money.

I think it's more likely that his contract with Sony will come with an included amount for his provisional MCU appearance(s) or maybe it would be rolled up in his pay for his solo film. I doubt we'll ever really know for sure because that's all back-end stuff that doesn't often get made public.

Or maybe Marvel will just pay him on a case-by-case basis for his appearances, but there would likely not be a contract involved and we know there is no money being exchanged between Marvel and Sony for this thing.

It wouldn't include multiple MCU movies in the contract, the press release states there is only a deal for one Marvel film, and any further appearances will have to be negotiated with Sony. The Sony deal will likely be a traditional multi-picture deal for films released by Sony. A contract for Sony can't include provisions for films not released by Sony. Anything for Marvel is a case by case situation depending on whether Sony oks it or not.

 

[Razgriz-Specter]

Im kinda hoping that Sony's female lead spinoff movie will be Spider-Gwen,
It would allow them to do something completely different/unrelated yet also turns the 3 separate Spiderman series into a multiverse type thing.

I can just picture an after credit scene with this playing https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9dt8maD3FXE
Raimi Spider-man swinging through the city, lands behind someone(Gwen comes into focus) and says he has something to discuss with her.

 

[peanutbutterlatte]

If they kept anything, anything from the Raimi films apart from JJ, it'd have to be the theme music. That music promised so much more than the movies ever gave us.

 

[Sephzilla]

Sony still having their grubby fingers on this still makes me nervous

 

[E the Shaggy]

How does the budget of the solo Spidey flick work?

It can't be that Marvel puts front the money and Sony gets all the profit right?

 

[Pai Pai Master]

How does the budget of the solo Spidey flick work?

It can't be that Marvel puts front the money and Sony gets all the profit right?

it will be produced by Sony, paid for by Sony, and Marvel doesn't get any of the revenue. Sony does not get any of the revenue from Civil War despite Spidey appearing.

 

[darkhunger]

Lease doesn't mean money. Even variety as well as hollywood reporter called it a lease. What is being exchanged is a character+actor, not money. And it is on a film by film basis. Marvel can only use the character in one film and has to ask Sony for permission if they want to again after that. Sony can do whatever they want and put the actor/character in any movie they want.

Marvel can't dictate the terms of Sony's contract at all.

Then why bring this up? The actor needs to get paid in salary - Marvel will sign a contract with him to act in Captain America. Bottom line.

Or maybe Marvel will just pay him on a case-by-case basis for his appearances, but there would likely not be a contract involved and we know there is no money being exchanged between Marvel and Sony for this thing.

He still needs to sign a employment contract regardless of whether it's one movie or multiple. Marvel will be his employer however brief it is, which is when they can write in protective clauses to ensure Sony doesn't screw with MCU by hiring him for a spinoff...

it will be produced by Sony, paid for by Sony, and Marvel doesn't get any of the revenue. Sony does not get any of the revenue from Civil War despite Spidey appearing.

The Variety article did mention they might get some performance based compensation for their production credit though.

 

[Cheebo]

He still needs to sign a employment contract regardless of whether it's one movie or multiple. Marvel will be his employer however brief it is, which is when the write in protective clauses to ensure Sony doesn't screw with MCU.

Marvel can't put in anything dictating what Sony can or can't do in their contract with the actor. They don't own the character and legally have no say in what Sony does.

There is NOTHING Marvel can do to tell Sony what to do, they have no legal standing on the character. Sony is letting Marvel use the character, it is not the other way around. Technically Sony can go and have Spider-Man into a mass murderer in a Sinister Six movie if they wanted, they wouldn't do that obviously but Marvel can't tell them what they have to do. Marvel has no ownership over the character.

 

[SuperEpicMan]

Heres how I would like to see things happen:

Introduce Spider-Man in Civil War. Introduce him by having him bump into Cap whilst investigating the murder of his parents. They could both be trying to track down Winter soldier or something.

Spider-Man solo movie where he returns to New York after the events of CW. Kraven has seen Spidey on the news during CW and tracks him down to new york. Have a flashback here and there to show a little bit of his origin, but not spend too much time on it.

In Phase 4 it would be cool to see the Masters of Evil with Mandarin and Osborn possibly.

 

[darkhunger]

Marvel can't put in anything dictating what Sony can or can't do in their contract with the actor. They don't own the character and legally have no say in what Sony does. Sony will be the first studio with the contract regardless. The press statement clearly indicated Sony is picking the actor and signing the contract and then will let Marvel use who they cast in Civil War.

Marvel is the employer when he's acting in Captain America, so they definitely CAN specify what the employee does during and after the duration of employment contract.

 

[Cheebo]

Marvel is the employer when he's acting in Captain America, so they definitely CAN specify what the employee does during and after the duration of employment contract.

Only what he does within the movie they are contracting him on. They can't dictate terms for the Sony movies. There is literal no legal basis for this at all. Studios can't dictate how other studios use actors they hire, period. Not to mention Sony is the one signing the contract first. That isn't even up for debate, it is clearly stated that Sony is casting the actor first. When they are cast a contract is signed then. Civil War contract comes after this.

Marvel can't put into a contract "Oh btw in the movies you do with another studio you can't do this this and this". That is not possible. Marvel has no legal say over how to dictate what Sony can do with material Sony has 100% ownership of.

 

[jon bones]

Heres how I would like to see things happen:

Introduce Spider-Man in Civil War. Introduce him by having him bump into Cap whilst investigating the murder of his parents. They could both be trying to track down Winter soldier or something.

Spider-Man solo movie where he returns to New York after the events of CW. Kraven has seen Spidey on the news during CW and tracks him down to new york. Have a flashback here and there to show a little bit of his origin, but not spend too much time on it.

In Phase 4 it would be cool to see the Masters of Evil with Mandarin and Osborn possibly.

I like what you're saying except for this bit. I didn't like that plot thread in ASM and I don't think it's smart to tie into those movies at all if they're trying to branch away from it.

 

[PsychBat!]

For you.

Nice.

 

[darkhunger]

Only what he does within the movie they are contracting him on. They can't dictate terms for the Sony movies. There is literal no legal basis for this at all. Studios can't dictate how other studios use actors they hire, period.

Employers can dictate what their employees are allowed to do after their employment. Otherwise non-compete clauses won't exist.

 

[Cheebo]

Employers can dictate what their employees are allowed to do after their employment. Otherwise non-compete clauses won't exist.

Are you serious? They never do that in modern Hollywood though. Ever. No actor would sign a contract liek that. It is never done. Studios don't dictate what actors are allowed to do at other studios. Sony would never let Marvel use the character if Marvel would do an absurd 1930s move like that.

Also by this logic Sony can then dictate the terms of what he does in the Marvel movies first anyway since Sony is signing the initial contract and paying him first (which will be a multi-picture contract, the Marvel one is only for one picture), not Marvel.

Marvel does not control what Sony does with the character, Sony is just letting Marvel use the character for a single film (more potentially down the road on a film by film basis). That is it.

 

[numble]

you can't sign a contract with an actor for a character you don't have the film rights for. everything related to the actor is going to be handled through Sony.

They will have a license to use the rights to use Spider-Man in their movies. Technically the film rights to Fantastic Four belong to Constantin Films, but they have licensed it to Fox. If you want to be uber-technical, the film rights to all these properties belong to Marvel, but they are under perpetual licenses to other parties. The film rights to Hulk still belonged to Universal when they licensed his rights to Marvel (and they later allowed the rights to revert).

 

[darkhunger]

They never do that in modern hollywood though. Ever. No actor would sign a contract liek that.

It's a special case. Pretty much unprecedented, where two studios share a character and actor.

And I'm sure that, for certain characters in the public domain, actors might have certain clauses preventing them from performing as those characters for rival studios. Otherwise it's a big risk for the studios. For example, if you hire an actress as Snow White and the movie becomes a huge hit, what's to prevent a rival studio from hiring that actress and making a sequel to your own movie?

Just an example where these clauses are useful.

Also y this logic Sony can then dictate the terms of what he does in the Marvel movies first since Sony is signing the initial contract, not Marvel.

Of course they can. But it would be redundant since Sony already has final approvals for Spider-Man's appearances in the MCU.

 

[Loxley]

If they kept anything, anything from the Raimi films apart from JJ, it'd have to be the theme music. That music promised so much more than the movies ever gave us.

Well, see, now I have to post it. Elfman's score for the first two Spidey films are some of the most under-rated super hero movie scores out there. Next to Michael Kamen's score for the first X-Men film.

 

[WooHooAlex]

What villains are you guys hoping for?

I definitely want Sandman in there. Open up with Spidey taking down Flint Marko after he escaped from prison, again. Jon Bernthal as Sandman would be perfect. Opening with something like that would be ideal. It keeps us far, far away from any origin story and it establishes that villains already exist in thi world. Which is exactly what you want with Spider-Man.
For the main villain, I'm kind of feeling Vulture or Mysterio.

 

[ratcliffja]

I think Vulture and Mysterio would be good for the first movie. I really want them to use Scorpion at some point, but I think they need to establish the hatred of JJJ for Spider-Man in the MCU first.

 

[Anth0ny]

Marvel can't put in anything dictating what Sony can or can't do in their contract with the actor. They don't own the character and legally have no say in what Sony does.

There is NOTHING Marvel can do to tell Sony what to do, they have no legal standing on the character. Sony is letting Marvel use the character, it is not the other way around. Technically Sony can go and have Spider-Man into a mass murderer in a Sinister Six movie if they wanted, they wouldn't do that obviously but Marvel can't tell them what they have to do. Marvel has no ownership over the character.

You are crazy if you think Sony is going to make a deal like this and not take advice from Marvel and Feige. A lot of advice.

They are working together now. It's in everyone's best interest to follow the creative direction of Marvel. Sony is the company that drove the Spider-Man brand into the dirt with these shitty movies, meanwhile Marvel is hitting homeruns with Captain America and fucking Guardians of the Galaxy. If Sony was happy and successful with their own creative control, this deal doesn't happen.

The whole "Sony will retain complete creative control" schtick in the press release is just a formality, I think. I wouldn't be surprised if Marvel was calling most, if not all of the shots behind the scenes. And why not? If you're Sony, why wouldn't you want Marvel making the decisions for this character? It's just more money for everyone.

 

[Neoxon]

You are crazy if you think Sony is going to make a deal like this and not take advice from Marvel and Feige. A lot of advice.

They are working together now. It's in everyone's best interest to follow the creative direction of Marvel. Sony is the company that drove the Spider-Man brand into the dirt with these shitty movies, meanwhile Marvel is hitting homeruns with Captain America and fucking Guardians of the Galaxy. If Sony was happy and successful with their own creative control, this deal doesn't happen.

The whole "Sony will retain complete creative control" schtick in the press release is just a formality, I think. I wouldn't be surprised if Marvel was calling most, if not all of the shots behind the scenes. And why not? If you're Sony, why wouldn't you want Marvel making the decisions for this character? It's just more money for everyone.

This, basically. There's a reason why Sony made the deal in the first place, they ran Spider-Man into the ground creatively. They know damn well that Kevin Feige & the Marvel Studios crew can save the web-head, & Sony would be idiots not to listen to them. Yes, Sony has the final say, but it would be a bit on the foolish side if Sony didn't follow Marvel's creative decisions. They know their shit, they've carefully constructed a box office juggernaut that has maintained its popularity since 2008. Marvel's not gonna let Sony screw it up.

 

[Cheebo]

Oh I agree 100% my point was just that his statement that Marvel will write terms of how the actor/character can be used is false. Sony will follow Marvels wishes but it's in good faith and to help their franchise, not because it was put in some sort of contract Marvel makes an actor sign.

 

[darkhunger]

Oh I agree 100% my point was just that his statement that Marvel will write terms of how the actor/character can be used is false. Sony will follow Marvels wishes but it's in good faith and to help their franchise, not because it was put in some sort of contract Marvel makes an actor sign.

It's a deal between two multi-billion corporations regarding two multi-billion franchises. EVERYTHING will be legally bound in contracts and other documents. Good faith only works so well.

 

[SuperEpicMan]

I like what you're saying except for this bit. I didn't like that plot thread in ASM and I don't think it's smart to tie into those movies at all if they're trying to branch away from it.

Heres an idea:

I would have the Peter Parker be a young, clever, but impressionable kid who looks up to Captain America and takes a huge interest in him. When he gets his powers he tracks down Captain America at the start of CW and thinks he will be able use his powers to get some great pictures for his photography job (part time job during school), but also wants to try and understand his powers and how to be a hero. He travels to Washington and finds Cap whilst he is tracking down Bucky. Spidey then gets caught in the cross fire and sees heroes/villains all around him. Cue the end of the movie where presumably Cap dies, and in doing so shows Spidey what it takes to be a hero. Iron Man would also be a contrasting type of hero, showing spider man that there is more than way to be a hero and make a difference to people.

At the end of the movie he is inspired by Caps sacrifice/death and goes back to New York to be a hero and protect the people of new york. Cue the solo movie.

 

[E the Shaggy]

What villains are you guys hoping for?

I definitely want Sandman in there. Open up with Spidey taking down Flint Marko after he escaped from prison, again. Jon Bernthal as Sandman would be perfect. Opening with something like that would be ideal. It keeps us far, far away from any origin story and it establishes that villains already exist in thi world. Which is exactly what you want with Spider-Man.
For the main villain, I'm kind of feeling Vulture or Mysterio.

I know its only a matter of time, but man do I hate Kraven. He's just so ridiculous and I feel like he's never fit with Spider-Man.

I just want Venom done right.

 

[peanutbutterlatte]

What villains are you guys hoping for?

I definitely want Sandman in there. Open up with Spidey taking down Flint Marko after he escaped from prison, again. Jon Bernthal as Sandman would be perfect. Opening with something like that would be ideal. It keeps us far, far away from any origin story and it establishes that villains already exist in thi world. Which is exactly what you want with Spider-Man.
For the main villain, I'm kind of feeling Vulture or Mysterio.

I just can't get invested with a petty thief made out of metamorphizing sand without the sick kid angle

 

[Sephzilla]

Villains I'd want

• Dafoe Green Goblin
• Venom (done right this time)
• Mysterio (played by Bruce Campbell)
• Black Cat (not really a villain but she needs to be in a movie)

 

[Blader]

What villains are you guys hoping for?

I definitely want Sandman in there. Open up with Spidey taking down Flint Marko after he escaped from prison, again. Jon Bernthal as Sandman would be perfect. Opening with something like that would be ideal. It keeps us far, far away from any origin story and it establishes that villains already exist in thi world. Which is exactly what you want with Spider-Man.
For the main villain, I'm kind of feeling Vulture or Mysterio.

lol, people have asked for this kind of opening for years, it finally happens in ASM2, and everyone immediately hates it.

 

[Freedom = $1.05]

Sony still having their grubby fingers on this still makes me nervous

If it wasn't for sony's first couple of decent spiderman movies (and arguably fox's first xmen movie) you wouldn't have the comic film era of today. So ya gotta give some props to where it's due.

 

[BeatResetsTheWorld]

If it wasn't for sony's first couple of decent spiderman movies (and arguably fox's first xmen movie) you wouldn't have the comic film era of today. So ya gotta give some props to where it's due.

Yeah, except Spiderman 1 and 2 were without much intervention because that was before he was big. If you want to look to a movie where Sony completely fucked things up (as the director has said in many interviews) look to Spiderman 3

 

[peanutbutterlatte]

I think I want Aaron Paul as Eddie Brock...

*Parker once again manages to out-do his blurry, potato shots of Spider-Man*

 

[Freedom = $1.05]

Yeah, except Spiderman 1 and 2 were without much intervention because that was before he was big. If you want to look to a movie where Sony completely fucked things up (as the director has said in many interviews) look to Spiderman 3

Doesn't change the fact that those first 2 films helped to launch the last decade and a half of fantastic comic movies. You can argue they screwed the pooch after the fact but let's not shit on what they've done recently and ignore what they did in the past.

the sad irony is that their recent mistakes came from trying to emulate Marvel's great success, something that might not have been possible if it weren't for sony's own major blockbuster hits with those spiderman films.

 

[BLACKLAC]

I think I want Aaron Paul as Eddie Brock...

*Parker once again manages to out-do his blurry, potato shots of Spider-Man*

http://img.pandawhale.com/post-26847-he-cant-keep-getting-away-with-2bPg.gif[IMG][/QUOTE]

Jack O'Connell would be better.

[IMG]http://www.cinemablend.com/images/news_img/40634/star_wars_40634.jpg

 

[CitizenVectron]

Only what he does within the movie they are contracting him on. They can't dictate terms for the Sony movies. There is literal no legal basis for this at all. Studios can't dictate how other studios use actors they hire, period. Not to mention Sony is the one signing the contract first. That isn't even up for debate, it is clearly stated that Sony is casting the actor first. When they are cast a contract is signed then. Civil War contract comes after this.

Marvel can't put into a contract "Oh btw in the movies you do with another studio you can't do this this and this". That is not possible. Marvel has no legal say over how to dictate what Sony can do with material Sony has 100% ownership of.

I think we all need to calm down, because we don't know what this guy's contract will be. For all we know it will be a joint contract with Sony and Marvel and will give both rights over his performances depending on the movie. It might say something like 3 Sony standalone movies and 5 Marvel movie appearances, or something like that. Sony and Marvel can do whatever they want if they have agreed on it, so no need to get worked up when we have no idea what they are doing behind the scenes.

 

[Anoregon]

Ryan Kwanten is clearly the only Eddie Brock option

 

[peanutbutterlatte]

Jack O'Connell would be better.

Is his American accent on par though?

But yeah actually, if so, I'd be fine with that too.

"I'M FOOKIN VENOM"

Spoiler

/Skins reference

 

[jackissocool]

Jack O'Connell would be better.

DmC Dante?