How Can Sony Pictures Save Spider-Man?

[Silverspetz]

Hey did you know Amazing Spider Man 2 has already made more money than two of Bob's favourite comic films X-men First Class and Captain America the First Avenger.

So why weren't they called problems for Fox and Disney?

Oh right Bob liked those film's.

Funny how if a film does well but Bob's dislikes it, it's either a 'problem or universally panned' when it isn't.

According to wikipedia,
Captain America 2 cost 170 million and earned 681 million- it earned 36 million in its first day (using only American sales), and 95 million in its first week (also only counting sales in America).

X-men first class cost 140-160 million and earned 353 million (minimum). It earned 3.4 million on its first day in America and 55 million over its first week (again, in only counting American sales)

Amazing spiderman 2 is estimated to have cost around 400 million (http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/05/movies/amazing-spider-man-2-makes-92-million-in-north-america.html?_r=0)and earned 92 million in its first weekend in the american markets.

Its certainly doing better than I think Bob gives it credit for, but you need to consider the base cost of the movie. It costs more than both X-men and the winter soldier combined, yet it doesn't look like it is earning as much money as the figure would lead you to believe. That's not to say the move will fail. I omitted all of the foreign box office figures above, and these movies (all three of them) tend to do well there, so it will probably eventually earn its money back.

The 'First Class' and 'Captain America' costs are production budget only figures while your comparing them to production and marketing for Amazing Spiderman 2 which did not cost more than both of them combined.

From the NYTimes

http://artsbeat.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/04/06/captain-america-the-winter-soldier-has-a-huge-opening/

"Strong reviews and premium-price 3-D tickets contributed to the performance of ?The Winter Soldier,? which cost $170 million to make and at least $100 million more to market."

Um, so? That is still way less than what they earned isn't it? The fact remains that even with the marketing cost added in for both of them, CA2 cost way less than ASM2 to make AND had a stronger opening week, AND a better long-term profit. ASM2 still isn't a flop or anything, but you can't deny that it isn't doing as well as other superhero movies.

 

[Lono Shrugged]

Hey did you know Amazing Spider Man 2 has already made more money than two of Bob's favourite comic films X-men First Class and Captain America the First Avenger.

So why weren't they called problems for Fox and Disney?

Oh right Bob liked those film's.

Funny how if a film does well but Bob's dislikes it, it's either a 'problem or universally panned' when it isn't.

Not disagreeing with your general point but there is a term called "underperforming" which is a lot like how the last Tomb Raider made a sack of money, but did not sell as much as hoped. Both those films were not expected to be as popular as they were.

I think that the problem runs deeper than lists. It's not about "No one caring about Peter Parker" or not having Black Cat. (ugh, I had hoped we had gone past this sex appeal shit) Or even Spider-Man's ethnicity. It all misses the main point which is that the script was terrible. You could take the same actors, sets and characters and make a good film. It's all about writing, tone and characters. I guess it doesn't give you a chance to show off your comic book cred as much, but it shows off movie knowledge cred. Give me a good movie first and a good comic book adaptation second.

 

[KazeAizen]

I haven't finished reading it yet and will probably edit the comment after I have, but at this point, I want to say I really don't want Spider-Man and X-Men to be a part of the greater Marvel cinematic universe. For one thing, there are so many better fitting elements of the Marvel universe for them to play with that would have chance of getting in if they had to spend that time working Spider-Man and the X-Men into it.
For another, I don't think either of them would make sense in the context of the MCU. For example, Spider-Man and X-Men are both required to get hate from the general public (Spider-Man because Triple-J turns the city against him with news, the X-Men because of a bigotry metaphor), but in this universe, heroes are established and worshiped. Especially in the case of the X-Men, it makes no sense. I mean, you've got Hulk (A giant monster), Thor (a man with god-like powers) and Captain America (a drug-powered superman). All of these people have powers that are either natural, or in some way a part of who they are and they get to be heroes, but X-Men are hated because their powers are mutations. Honestly, is the average person going to be able to tell the difference between the Hulk's powers and a mutants powers enough to really get some bigotry going, especially when the X-Men are helping save the world alongside the heroes they already worship?
So, yeah, I would rather Spider-Man and X-Men remain in separate continuities to the Avengers.
However, I do wish they'd put somebody competent in charge of Spider-Man.

And now that I've read it all:

I totally agree about Black Cat. It would be nice to see her being made into a more interesting character than she usually is.
Don't know anything black Spider-Man, though, so I can't comment on him as a character. I'm down with the idea if it's executed in an interesting way. But that's why I don't want to see Sony take it on. They clearly have no idea how to make good movies and I don't want to put up with the internet exploding with racist trolls *and* seeing the idea being royally fucked up as well. That's more annoyance than I wish to bother with. On the other hand, I would be all for killing off the current Spider-Man, as he and his stupid Edward Cullen haircut irritates me.

I'm in agreement with you on the X-men bit. Even in the comic universe it doesn't really make sense. I mean The Avengers in the comics are ok but not mutants? I think the rationale was that The Avengers and what not are sanctioned by the government therefore they have the ok while mutants are an anomaly and yadda yadda. However Spider-man being put in the MCU I could see. It'd be tricky but they could do it. You could do the "news makes people hate Spidey arc." but by the end of the film it'd have to be resolved so he is on the same level as The Avengers. Maybe that's how you do it!

Have Spidey and some of his rogues gallery already running around in a city like New York or have them only be there for a little while. People in the city start getting wind of a new super being who is causing crimes. So Triple-J gets wind of this Spider-man character and pins it all on him. Essentially frame the story so that Venom commits crimes and makes it look like the unknown Spider-man does it, have Triple-J get the people in a riot against him, then at the climax have Spidey oust Venom in a big public media brawl that shows Spider-man as a hero and Venom as the real bad guy. In the wake of this Nick Fury or The Avengers get wind of him and invite him into the fold. Boom you now have Spidey in your universe, you get to use the infinitely marketable Venom, and make him interesting, that also allows Spidey to be worshipped as a hero like the rest of The Avengers.....I don't write movies, but I'm kind of pleased with myself for coming up with this idea because I feel like it could work somehow in the MCU.

 

[Trishbot]

Hey did you know Amazing Spider Man 2 has already made more money than two of Bob's favourite comic films X-men First Class and Captain America the First Avenger.

So why weren't they called problems for Fox and Disney?

Oh right Bob liked those film's.

Funny how if a film does well but Bob's dislikes it, it's either a 'problem or universally panned' when it isn't.

Umm, nope, there's also the fact that both of those movies were made on a smaller budget.
And ASM2 is the lowest-rated Spider-Man movie on RottenTomatoes.

'And ASM2 is the lowest-rated Spider-Man movie on RottenTomatoes.'

And? the Transformers and Pirates films from the 2nd on have lower ratings than ASM2 as well as the first in there respective franchises yet made far more money. Using RT is a pointless point.

Not pointless if we're looking at quality, because those films were absolute garbage.
Twilight made money too... but that doesn't mean anybody should be happy to have something terrible rather than nothing at all until they can make it great.

 

[Mr. Q]

As much as I like some of Bob's ideas (would like to see a Miles Morales Spider-Man movie but I'd be more happy with a May "Mayday" Parker Spider-Girl movie), Spider-Man and Sony are taking on water too quickly. The damage is too extensive imo and its high time Marvel/Disney took the property back and keep it on ice until further notice. A good amount of time needs to pass for people to want the webhead back in theaters or in another form (possibly on TV or Netflix). As for Sony, I think that company is destined for failure. Between its lack of profit-making movies and the tech portion of their company suffering greatly, I get the sense that the shroud of bankruptcy is fast approaching. I could be wrong but, given its dire straits lately, things are not looking good for this conglomerate corporation.

Also, thanks for the link in regards to Roberto Orci, Bob. At first, I thought he and his partner in crime, Alex Kurtzman, were nothing more but willfully ignorant hack writers/posers (perhaps the term "Fake Geek Guys" would be more fitting) hired by utterly clueless studio execs. And, after reading that article, now I see him more as a socially-retarded cocksucker with the writing skills of a lobotomized chimpanzee carrying a Speak N Spell.

 

[Razuli]

The 'First Class' and 'Captain America' costs are production budget only figures while your comparing them to production and marketing for Amazing Spiderman 2 which did not cost more than both of them combined.

From the NYTimes

http://artsbeat.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/04/06/captain-america-the-winter-soldier-has-a-huge-opening/

"Strong reviews and premium-price 3-D tickets contributed to the performance of ?The Winter Soldier,? which cost $170 million to make and at least $100 million more to market."

Ah, ok.

Sill, when the budget increases, so does the amount of money required for it to be considered successful.

As for the review arguments above, the ones I have read have been average at best. I personally can't argue either way as I have not actually seen the movie, but from the sounds of the reviews I've read and watched, it was a lot like the first one (which I have seen), and if that's true I don't want waste my time or money to go see it.

 

[faefrost]

Anything you can do with Miles Morales you can do with Miguel O'Hara, Kaine Parker, Ben Reilly, or Flash Thompson. Or do the gender swap thing and have the Spider-woman be Anya Corazon, Julia Carpenter or Jessica Drew, Hell, have it be Gwen Stacy's clone. That's what happened in the Ultimate Universe, the clone took over and no one cared.

Sony explicitly cannot do the gender swap thing. All of the female "Spider heroes" are completely isolated licenses that Sony does not have. Spider Woman and She Hulk were specifically created by Marvel to prevent a third party licensor from going that route and having a toehold on their IP's.

And there are some questions as to how much of Ultimate Spider Man Sony has rights to as well. My understanding is they can only use those characters who are A. Covered under the Spider Man license, and B. Are not unique to the Ultimate books, which were created well after Sony negotiated the rights. They can kind of borrow or be influenced by the Ultimate stories with characters that exist in both Ultimate and the Main comics. But I do not think their current license would allow for Miles Morales specifically. Miles is an Ultimate only character. Just as I do not think it would allow the future Mae "Day" Parker Spider Girl.

 

[RealRT]

Hey did you know Amazing Spider Man 2 has already made more money than two of Bob's favourite comic films X-men First Class and Captain America the First Avenger.

So why weren't they called problems for Fox and Disney?

Oh right Bob liked those film's.

Funny how if a film does well but Bob's dislikes it, it's either a 'problem or universally panned' when it isn't.

Umm, nope, there's also the fact that both of those movies were made on a smaller budget.
And ASM2 is the lowest-rated Spider-Man movie on RottenTomatoes.

'And ASM2 is the lowest-rated Spider-Man movie on RottenTomatoes.'

And? the Transformers and Pirates films from the 2nd on have lower ratings than ASM2 as well as the first in there respective franchises yet made far more money. Using RT is a pointless point.

Yes there is a point: ASM2 is not just disliked by Bob, it is panned across the board.

 

[faefrost]

Hey did you know Amazing Spider Man 2 has already made more money than two of Bob's favourite comic films X-men First Class and Captain America the First Avenger.

So why weren't they called problems for Fox and Disney?

Oh right Bob liked those film's.

Funny how if a film does well but Bob's dislikes it, it's either a 'problem or universally panned' when it isn't.

Here's the problem. ASM2 will be a profitable film. It has and will make money. It may even come close to what X Men and Captain America make. But that isn't the issue. Disney and Fox are cash flush studios. There are no underlying business problems for them. Heck Disney is coming off several billion dollar movies. A movie like Captain America bringing in 10-20 points ROI is at that point just a steady stable money printing machine. They are sitting at a position of net positive. The big tent pole movies are just more positive.

But Sony is in a rather high degree of financial trouble. ASM2 does not just need to make its own money back. It needs to cover other major losses. Sony is in the negatives. And their entertainment and movie division especially so. They don't need a 10-20 point ROI movie when their negatives start at 40. They might be able to do it with a full roster of dependable strong performers each doing ing a piece of that. But they don't have that. They keep hoping for the out of the park blockbuster. (An example of which would be Frozen over at Disney.)

I think there is one less apocalyptic option that Bob didn't cover. He talked about Spider Man falling back to Marvel by reason of license default or failure. Their is a softer option. Stockholders have been urging Sony to consider spinning off or divesting themselves of their movie business for awhile now. Spider Man is most likely the most valuable asset they have should that occur. But third party buyers might be leery of it. It could be considered over valued and have a strong possibility of any transfer triggering a legal fight with Disney Marvel. Plus it doesn't come with merchandising rights so no side money. It is however a valuable property for Disney to either buy back, or to prompt a deal whereby Disney buys the whole operation.

Stranger things have happened in the land of Darth Mickey.

 

[Sanunes]

You know Moviebob, Sony doomsaying isn't a new thing, people have been decrying the end times since the PS3 didn't sell half as well as Sony hoped. Now eight years later they have the most successful console on the market (despite launching without any exclusive worth a damn... again) and are still steadily chugging along. They have shown remarkable resilience, they'll get over a movie that sells less than they hoped but didn't even come close to bombing.

I haven't taken a lot of the comments as "the end of Sony", but that "Sony is in trouble" if my memory is correct they took a loss of $1.3 billion in 2013. Of course that can change especially with the restructuring they have been doing and the PS4 hasn't hurt them too much. I think of Sony like Nintendo, they have been successful in the past enough to be able to survive a catastrophe. The real question is can they learn from their mistakes and rebound from it, I just wonder if at the end of all this restructuring how much of the original Sony is going to be left.

The real question about Amazing Spider-Man 2 isn't how much it actually makes at the box office it will be if it makes what Sony forecasted the movie to actually make for no matter what anyone says if a movie makes or exceeds those numbers its going to be considered a success. Its why they are making so many changes to "Batman/Superman" because they were expecting Man of Steel to be a billion dollar movie and it did make money, just not enough. If ASM2 doesn't meet projections expect a bunch of changes to the third movie.

 

[Shuu]

The Ice Age series has concluded?
...I have some bad news for you Bob... Ice Age 5 is totally a thing.
Also, Bob. I know you don't like taking requests for Big Picture episodes, but I always get confused by all this talk of investors, and sales projections, and share holders, and all this doo-hikey about how the entertainment industry works.
But I'm always curious. And I know somebody who could surely make an entertaining five minutes out of explaining it;D

 

[008Zulu_v1legacy]

I'm surprised Sony haven't pulled the "Piracy" card as the reason for why they haven't made their money back yet.

The question shouldn't be "Can Sony save Spiderman?" Rather, "Do we want them too?"

Casting, plot and scripting for their latest movies have been "less than encouraging". Compared to Marvel/Disney's casting, plot and scripting for their movies, they are considerably better. Shouldn't the movies go to people who know how to actually make good movies?

 

[Ashley Blalock]

I guess the big question is would Sony be bold enough to make the changes they need to make to get Spiderman back to the big box office bucks? They could very well fear changing things because they fear losing any of the ticket buyers they have right now. My guess is Sony will keep down the same bad path instead of dropping the bad ideas like a hot potato.

Sometimes it's easier for a studio to blame everything else instead of owning up to picking the wrong people for the production team. The suits are normally quick to take the blame over hiring the wrong writers for a movie.

Really isn't helping Sony that there are so many superhero choices now. If people think Spiderman isn't going to be good people can just skip Spiderman and wait for one of the other superhero movies that summer. When people have choices it makes it harder to get people to settle for something that doesn't feel like the best offered that summer.

 

[DoctorM]

The real problem for Sony is that the Miles Morales version of Spider-man was created AFTER Sony bought the rights from Marvel.

I don't think Sony would be able to use him without new negotiations with Disney/Marvel.
Besides Sony unlikely to throw good money after bad, I seriously doubt Disney would do anything that would help Sony retain the rights at this point.

That said, skipping an origin, I could easily see Miles Morales Spider-man getting dropped right into an Avengers film to see how audience like him. Then the franchise wouldn't NEED to sit on the shelf when the rights return to Marvel.

 

[HemalJB]

While i agree to the Miles Morales part, a very simple fix would be to make it an animated movie.
Seriously, Spiderman has a lot of goofy villains and side characters that would look silly in live-action, but would absolutely fit in animation. It would also give a lighter softer kid-friendly tone that can make itself unique in the realm of comic book movies. Sure, the serious tone may be lost, but considering how few live-action superhero movies can actually handle a serious tone well, it's not that great a loss.

 

[maninahat]

They need Spiderman in his own fully fledged world. Look at the Joker in The Dark Knight, he was already committing crimes and didnt need a back story. Just seems like if Peter Parker committed suicide, there would be zero super villians killing innocents. Maybe they need to add villians that are already around like news paper/TV stories with "mystery flying criminal calling himself The Vulture strikes again" for instance. If he is a secondary villian then we dont have to have a backstory for now.

There are even easier methods than that, such as a police line up (as with Guardians of the Galaxy movie). Within a couple of sentences, a cop can exposit what each guy does, what their history is, and you can even get a quick reaction shot from each guy to demonstrate their personality. Bang. A prison scene easily justifies how all these crooks get together too; individually, they have been captured by Spiderman, but now meeting in jail, they can band together to organise a breakout and get revenge.

 

[RA92]

You know Moviebob, Sony doomsaying isn't a new thing, people have been decrying the end times since the PS3 didn't sell half as well as Sony hoped. Now eight years later they have the most successful console on the market (despite launching without any exclusive worth a damn... again) and are still steadily chugging along. They have shown remarkable resilience, they'll get over a movie that sells less than they hoped but didn't even come close to bombing.

Sony's console division might do well, but its other divisions are real money sinks. They have recently shut down VAIO due to poor sales. Sony TV has been unprofitable for 10 years now. They have been operating in the red for years (last year it was over a billion dollars in losses).

I do want them to pick themselves up, though. Sony has always been an engineer-oriented company. They make good stuff. The Cell processor was always a ***** to work with, but it was the way it was because their engineers took custom processor design to new limits instead of the XBox's x86 general PC archtecture. Their Walkman series lost out to iPod because the people in Sony didn't like the compression quality of MP3. There's something admirable about that kind of attitude, but they need restructuring.

 

[faefrost]

While i agree to the Miles Morales part, a very simple fix would be to make it an animated movie.
Seriously, Spiderman has a lot of goofy villains and side characters that would look silly in live-action, but would absolutely fit in animation. It would also give a lighter softer kid-friendly tone that can make itself unique in the realm of comic book movies. Sure, the serious tone may be lost, but considering how few live-action superhero movies can actually handle a serious tone well, it's not that great a loss.

I think Marvel has the animated rights. That's why they put out the Ultimate Spider Man series on TV. I think animation merchandise and television all have reverted to Marvel. It is just live action motion pictures that Sony still has.