I will say, if Marvel had the rights in the first place, they may not have bothered fleshing out their other characters as Spidey is such a big cash cowThe_Darkness said:Okay, I do like Venom (especially the most recent incarnation) but...
Sony, just give the reins back to Marvel already. Maybe cut a deal where you get some of the profits for whenever they use a Spiderman related property but just let Marvel Studios make the movies. Okay? Thanks. Now I can look forward to Avengers 3 including Spidey...
Oh, no wait, I can't. Because Sony will never do that.
Yeah, so exactly when do Sony's rights to Spider-Man expire? Or do they continue in perpetuity as long as they keep crapping out product?The_Darkness said:Oh, no wait, I can't. Because Sony will never do that.
Mortal Kombat every year didn't work not because of overexposure but because it's a fighting game, fighting games unlike other games or movies takes time to learn and for player to get used to and when they do it last them for years. I know friends that still play Street fight 2 turbo to this day.Trishbot said:I remember when Midway once claimed "Mortal Kombat every year"!
The result? The series went into quick decline, got overexposed, and practically imploded on itself in rushed, unpolished games until Midway went under, Warner Bros bought them up, and told them "guys, just take your time", and we got the best Mortal Kombat game, and one of the most robust and content-filled fighting games, in recent memory.
Yeah, Sony needs to lose this franchise quick... this might be a GOOD thing.
Unless they reboot it again. With Michael B. Jordan in the lead.
Hence why their plan is - apparently - to just take Spider-Man as FRANCHISE and then take characters from it as the new lead. I mean, a movie with VENOM as the lead instead of Spidey, why the heck not? It would at least something different, that's for sure.SanguiniusMagnificum said:I'm sorry to disappoint you, Sony, but you can't make a yearly-film franchise out of ONE character. The reason why Disney is so succesful right now is because they've got a whole repertoire of heroes and villains to choose from while experimenting with different styles and genres.
You just can't do that with Spider-Man.
When Midway said "Mortal Kombat every year", it wasn't just fighting games. It was also action and adventure games like "Mortal Kombat: Shaolin Monks", and officially endorsed crossovers with games like Unreal Tournament and DC comics. The fighting games themselves were bi-yearly... but the brand was everywhere.ExtraDebit said:Mortal Kombat every year didn't work not because of overexposure but because it's a fighting game, fighting games unlike other games or movies takes time to learn and for player to get used to and when they do it last them for years. I know friends that still play Street fight 2 turbo to this day.
Movies, tv series or some games on the other hand can produce a new series each MONTH if it's done right because it's something we consume once and move on. The walking dead game is a good example, if they give us a new episode once a month we would still be happy to consume more.
TV series like the new Sherlock is practically a mini movie per episode.
So if TV and Games can do it there is no reason why movies can't, they just need to do it right that's all. An example of what they could do is to plan out the whole story arc so that each movie interconnects with each other well like harry potter or the matrix.
Another routh is to do it 007 style to have each story told individually with little connectiveness but tell it well.
What I notice is movies that does well either does one or the other mentioned above, but never half heartedly on one. Which is what most movie studios do, they usually wing it when it comes to sequels. I.E. if it does well they'll make up some story and excuse to make a new one.
I heard a pretty good idea about that the other day. Do a movie about Flash Thompson Venom or Agent Venom as it were. That's an interesting character and storyline. Though now that I think about it... wait until Sony loses the property. They'd just fuck that one up as well.Bindal said:Hence why their plan is - apparently - to just take Spider-Man as FRANCHISE and then take characters from it as the new lead. I mean, a movie with VENOM as the lead instead of Spidey, why the heck not? It would at least something different, that's for sure.SanguiniusMagnificum said:I'm sorry to disappoint you, Sony, but you can't make a yearly-film franchise out of ONE character. The reason why Disney is so succesful right now is because they've got a whole repertoire of heroes and villains to choose from while experimenting with different styles and genres.
You just can't do that with Spider-Man.
Personally, I'm even more pissed that Marvel doesn't own X-Men. They've turned my favourite comic characters into the laughing stock of the Marvel universe Can you imagine if Marvel could do the Civil War storyline? I guess the only way we can get there is to stop seeing non-Marvel/Disney made Marvel movies... Once those properties aren't profitable they'll stop making them and the rights will go back to where they belong. Like Daredevil.Adam Jensen said:God damn it. I am so pissed that Marvel doesn't own the rights for Spidey movies. Can you imagine what a high quality Spider-man movie we could have if Disney/Marvel was in charge?
That's pretty much what I've heard. As long as Sony uses the property, they get to keep it. A certain amount of time has to pass without them making any use of the rights before they revert back to Marvel (that's how Daredevil and Ghost Rider back).Mortuorum said:Yeah, so exactly when do Sony's rights to Spider-Man expire? Or do they continue in perpetuity as long as they keep crapping out product?The_Darkness said:Oh, no wait, I can't. Because Sony will never do that.
You joke, but if they really do dole out a Spidey film each year then eventually they're going to get to the death of Peter Parker and his replacement as Spider-man by Miles Morales. Especially given how much of an Ultimate universe slant the rebooted films have had so far.Trishbot said:Unless they reboot it again. With Michael B. Jordan in the lead.
You didn't read it properly. They want to make movies with characters from the spider-man franchise without spider-man himself. Comicsalliance has an article on what could be.rhizhim said:<spoiler=this news in a nutshell> <youtube=8HGRTVip9ws>
next spider-man flick:
spider-man cant believe that its not dr. butter! part 2!
spider-man in the curse of procrastination. one more day!