Hackers Reveal Sony and Marvel Almost Agreed to Share Spider-Man

[MovieBob]

Hackers Reveal Sony and Marvel Almost Agreed to Share Spider-Man

Turns out Spider-Man almost joined Marvel's Civil War... but then didn't.

The big surprise year-end story of Hollywood continues to be the ongoing release of countless emails, private documents and more from the Sony corporation financially-disappointing [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/138906-Sony-Pictures-Entertainment-Security-Breach-Cybersecurity] Amazing Spider-Man franchise.

A new longstanding rumors [http://blogs.wsj.com/speakeasy/2014/12/09/sony-marvel-discussed-spider-man-movie-crossover/] about Sony Pictures (who own the movie rights to Spider-Man) and Marvel Studios (who own everything else about Spider-Man) talking about a potential collaboration between the studios which would've brought Spidey home to the Marvel Cinematic Universe were true - and almost came to fruition.

The hacked emails (mainly attributed to Sony's motion picture chief Amy Pascal and president Doug Belgrad) describe a hypothetical scenario wherein Marvel Studios would've produced a new series of (presumably) MCU-connected Spider-Man films to which Sony would've retained theatrical distribution rights. Pascal's emails further reveal that Marvel was especially keen to have Spider-Man appear in the recently-announced sequel Captain America: Civil War, [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/moviesandtv/columns/moviebob/12459-Captain-America-3-Will-Bring-Civil-War-to-the-Marvel-Cinematic-U] which is based on a famous comics miniseries where Peter Parker played a key role.

Unfortunately for fans, the talks between the two studios "broke down," and Sony returned to its still-nebulous plans for an in-house The Lego Movie. [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/132504-Sony-Expanding-Spider-Man-Universe-To-Produce-One-Movie-A-Year]


Source: The Wall Street Journal [http://blogs.wsj.com/speakeasy/2014/12/09/sony-marvel-discussed-spider-man-movie-crossover/]


[http://www.escapistmagazine.com/movies-and-tv/]

Permalink

 

[Kajin]

Yup. That's disappointing. Once again, Sony continues to squander money and time sitting on the rights to something it can't make money on.

 

[P-89 Scorpion]

Yup. That's disappointing. Once again, Sony continues to squander money and time sitting on the rights to something it can't make money on.

Every Spiderman film Sony has made has made them hundreds of millions of dollars Bob saying otherwise doesn't make it true.

 

[syl3r]

yes amazing spiderman did make money. but not nearly as much as it could have made in the mcu or with proper guidance.

i think the first did a good job of laying groundwork, but asm2 just ruined it with the same mistake of the original trilogies third movie. too many vilains/story pressed into one movie.

they should have left the story about peters parents out of both movies, the first introducing harry and have harry/goblin the main/only antagonist of the second. or better yet, just leave the goblin out till the next one (which would have been difficult since the goblin is the one responsible for gwens death, and that should stay that way)

 

[Vausch]

I kinda hope that when Spider-Man goes back to Marvel (it's a question of when, not if), they don't make a movie for him as a standalone. Or if they do, don't make it an origin. We all know Spider-Man's origin, we all know the Uncle Ben death, great power/great responsibility, etc. etc.

Have him be further inspired by the events of the attacks on New York to take up being a Superhero, have it be that when he gets bitten he has a chance to fulfil it now. Heck, have it go that he was actually helping off-screen during the invasion!

Yup. That's disappointing. Once again, Sony continues to squander money and time sitting on the rights to something it can't make money on.

Every Spiderman film Sony has made has made them hundreds of millions of dollars Bob saying otherwise doesn't make it true.

No one is saying the movies haven't been successful. They just haven't been as successful as Sony wants them to be. They look at Marvel's movies that have all raked in 600+ million and get envious that no matter how much they pump into the ASM universe they can't match it, mostly because after marketing they're nowhere near that budget wise. The marketing budget for ASM 2 was almost as big as the budget for the movie itself, so in total it cost them almost 400 million for the movie to bring in 700 million. Net profit, 300 million. Low by superhero movie standards.

 

[008Zulu_v1legacy]

More than a few people believe that Garfield doesn't want anything more to do with the franchise. Would Sony recast or use it as an excuse to reboot the series, again.

 

[Xerosch]

More than a few people believe that Garfield doesn't want anything more to do with the franchise.

Oh, that would be unfortuante. I liked Garfield as Peter Parker muuuuch more than anything Sam Raimi ever did with Spider-Man.

 

[Darth Marsden]

Garfield is down for a trilogy, I believe. But yeah, once those three are up... he's running and not looking back. And I can't say I blame him.

 

[blackrave]

Guys, guys, guys.... guys.
I've came up with solution
One word: cloning
Yeah, yeah, boo'n'shit, but calm down and hear me out.

I doubt Sony own rights to Scarlet Spider
Make him appear in Civil War movie in place of Spider Man.
Basically continue timeline as if OneMoreDay never happened.
Different costume and different name, while everything else remains quite close.
To piss off Sony even further they could include cameo from Tobey Maguire and Kirsten Dunst as a married couple with a child or two
No names, just a random citizens

 

[Adam Jensen_v1legacy]

I doubt Sony own rights to Scarlet Spider
Make him appear in Civil War movie in place of Spider Man.
Basically continue timeline as if OneMoreDay never happened.
Different costume and different name, while everything else remains quite close.
To piss off Sony even further they could include cameo from Tobey Maguire and Kirsten Dunst as a married couple with a child or two
No names, just a random citizens

This is so devilish. I LOVE IT! Do it Marvel, do it!

 

[P-89 Scorpion]

No one is saying the movies haven't been successful. They just haven't been as successful as Sony wants them to be. They look at Marvel's movies that have all raked in 600+ million and get envious that no matter how much they pump into the ASM universe they can't match it, mostly because after marketing they're nowhere near that budget wise. The marketing budget for ASM 2 was almost as big as the budget for the movie itself, so in total it cost them almost 400 million for the movie to bring in 700 million. Net profit, 300 million. Low by superhero movie standards.

All of Sony's Spiderman films have made more than $700 million. Of the 10 highest grossing Marvel films 5 are Sony made Spiderman, 1 is a Fox X-men and the 4 remaining are Disney.

 

[Vausch]

No one is saying the movies haven't been successful. They just haven't been as successful as Sony wants them to be. They look at Marvel's movies that have all raked in 600+ million and get envious that no matter how much they pump into the ASM universe they can't match it, mostly because after marketing they're nowhere near that budget wise. The marketing budget for ASM 2 was almost as big as the budget for the movie itself, so in total it cost them almost 400 million for the movie to bring in 700 million. Net profit, 300 million. Low by superhero movie standards.

All of Sony's Spiderman films have made more than $700 million. Of the 10 highest grossing Marvel films 5 are Sony made Spiderman, 1 is a Fox X-men and the 4 remaining are Disney.

Actually, ASM 2 is #15 when factoring in all the spending done on it. Factoring in all that, the Raimi trilogy stands above all others except Avengers and Iron Man 3.

 

[Flatfrog]

No one is saying the movies haven't been successful. They just haven't been as successful as Sony wants them to be. They look at Marvel's movies that have all raked in 600+ million and get envious that no matter how much they pump into the ASM universe they can't match it, mostly because after marketing they're nowhere near that budget wise. The marketing budget for ASM 2 was almost as big as the budget for the movie itself, so in total it cost them almost 400 million for the movie to bring in 700 million. Net profit, 300 million. Low by superhero movie standards.

All of Sony's Spiderman films have made more than $700 million. Of the 10 highest grossing Marvel films 5 are Sony made Spiderman, 1 is a Fox X-men and the 4 remaining are Disney.

You keep quoting the gross, but that's not the appropriate figure. ASM2 was a very expensive movie with a production budget somewhere in the 200M+ range and a marketing budget not much less. Also despite its high costs it is still the lowest-performing of all the Spider-Man films, hence disappointing.

Also don't forget, these movies' profits rely almost as much on merchandising sales as on box office. I did some quick research to see if I could track down the merchandising sales figures without any immediate success, but I can't say there was exactly a rush on ASM2 merchandise at my local toy store.

 

[Kinokohatake]

No one is saying the movies haven't been successful. They just haven't been as successful as Sony wants them to be. They look at Marvel's movies that have all raked in 600+ million and get envious that no matter how much they pump into the ASM universe they can't match it, mostly because after marketing they're nowhere near that budget wise. The marketing budget for ASM 2 was almost as big as the budget for the movie itself, so in total it cost them almost 400 million for the movie to bring in 700 million. Net profit, 300 million. Low by superhero movie standards.

All of Sony's Spiderman films have made more than $700 million. Of the 10 highest grossing Marvel films 5 are Sony made Spiderman, 1 is a Fox X-men and the 4 remaining are Disney.

You keep quoting the gross, but that's not the appropriate figure. ASM2 was a very expensive movie with a production budget somewhere in the 200M+ range and a marketing budget not much less. Also despite its high costs it is still the lowest-performing of all the Spider-Man films, hence disappointing.

Also don't forget, these movies' profits rely almost as much on merchandising sales as on box office. I did some quick research to see if I could track down the merchandising sales figures without any immediate success, but I can't say there was exactly a rush on ASM2 merchandise at my local toy store.

If I remember correctly, merchandising rights were still retained by Marvel. So with every Sony film, Marvel is making money on the toys.

 

[Flatfrog]

If I remember correctly, merchandising rights were still retained by Marvel. So with every Sony film, Marvel is making money on the toys.

I didn't know that - if it's true that seems like quite a big concession by Sony. Anyway - the rest remains true, ASM and ASM2 did make money, but they were still relatively disappointing and show a worrying downward trend so it isn't surprising Sony are concerned.

 

[Scars Unseen]

If I remember correctly, merchandising rights were still retained by Marvel. So with every Sony film, Marvel is making money on the toys.

I didn't know that - if it's true that seems like quite a big concession by Sony. Anyway - the rest remains true, ASM and ASM2 did make money, but they were still relatively disappointing and show a worrying downward trend so it isn't surprising Sony are concerned.

It's not a concession. That would imply that the rights were theirs to cede.

 

[Scarim Coral]

I still wonder how the Civil Wars film is going to work since it involved superheroes and pretty much most superheroes were involved in it one way or another and the MCU has only got several superheroes at most or will there be alot of cameos in the film?

 

[Tumedus]

Guys, guys, guys.... guys.
I've came up with solution
One word: cloning
Yeah, yeah, boo'n'shit, but calm down and hear me out.

I doubt Sony own rights to Scarlet Spider
Make him appear in Civil War movie in place of Spider Man.
Basically continue timeline as if OneMoreDay never happened.
Different costume and different name, while everything else remains quite close.
To piss off Sony even further they could include cameo from Tobey Maguire and Kirsten Dunst as a married couple with a child or two
No names, just a random citizens

Actually, chances are that Sony does own the rights to Scarlet Spider. While we don't know the specific details (unless the hackers have it on file somewhere), we do know in the general sense that these picture deals include the rights to all related characters and villains. And being the clone of Parker, he is most definitely a related character.

The thing we don't know is whether their specific deal has enough loophole to get a Scarlet Witch/Quicksilver situation (both studios have rights) or if its more like the Silver Surfer scenario (locked to FF and Marvel Studios cannot use). However, I'd be inclined to think that he is locked into the Sony deal since his power set and origins are inextricably tied to the Spider-Man character, his introduction preceded their acquisition of the property, and he hadn't any appearances (to my knowledge) in other comics before then.

 

[Redlin5_v1legacy]

Sony, you could have let people who know what to do with Spidey do it. You just had to not Sony it up!

*sigh*

Back to ignoring Spiderman on the silver screen.

 

[Flatfrog]

If I remember correctly, merchandising rights were still retained by Marvel. So with every Sony film, Marvel is making money on the toys.

I didn't know that - if it's true that seems like quite a big concession by Sony. Anyway - the rest remains true, ASM and ASM2 did make money, but they were still relatively disappointing and show a worrying downward trend so it isn't surprising Sony are concerned.

It's not a concession. That would imply that the rights were theirs to cede.

Pedantic point accepted, but you know what I mean. At the negotiating table, you'd have to assume Sony would really have wanted to obtain those rights and would have offered top dollar for them.