Spider-Man Joining the Marvel Cinematic Universe - Update

[Kahani]

I always held the assumed to be controversial opinion that the X-men should remain seperate from the rest of the marvel universe in all its forms. The "Powered people as stand ins for marginalized groups" metaphor works better when there aren't a whole ton of other powered people running around...

I tend to agree they should be separate, but more just for narrative reasons than anything else. The thing is, superheroes are supposed to be special. Sure, there are quite a few of them around, but they're rare compared to ordinary humans and there tends to be a unique reason they are super - bitten by radioactive spider, hit by lighting in a lab, hit by radiation in a different lab, absorbed alien power, found magic ring, and so on. The problem with mutants is there are too many of them and they're all basically the same. Different powers, sure, but everything boils down to "I'm yet another mutant with whatever powers the author happened to want" rather than "I'm superfast because I was hit by lighting while sciencing and lighting is fast so it's all perfectly logical and different from other heroes who didn't get hit by lighting".

Basically, the X-Men spoil all other superheroes and villains by being too common. There's nothing special about having powers when there are hundreds of other people in any given town with exactly the same powers, and a bunch more with others. When it comes to film in particular, note that the X-Men films have very much focussed on mutants being extremely common and the issues that raises for society, while the MCU has focussed on superheroes being very rare - there are only two heroes with actual superpowers (Hulk and Thor; Tony Stark is a regular guy who builds robots and Cap is supposedly just the peak a regular human can reach), and one of them doesn't even live on Earth. Even if they can come up with a way to introduce mutants as a new thing (cosmic event causes mutants to suddenly start appearing or whatever), there are two mutually contradictory approaches to superpowers.

 

[Elader]

Agreeing with all of this. I could wait on a new Spiderman movie. I've been spidered out. His inclusion in this line up feels so forced. They are literally pushing back four movies just for this character. Why?

Probably part of the agreement to use Spiderman. It wouldn't make any business sense to anyone to have a potential conflict in two big budget superhero films coming out from the (now essentially) same franchise. It's not like if Marvel and Sony refused to share that a Spiderman film wouldn't have come out around that time anyway. This way, Marvel does the best that they can do with it, and Sony gets to ride Marvel's coattails. It appears Marvel still doesn't have control of much if anything that Sony does with Spiderman on their own, other than offering to help integrate with the MCU a bit.

 

[Eclipse Dragon]

Why does Sony want "final creative control" so much?

Who looks at the Avengers or Captain America 2 or Guardians of the Galaxy and thinks "Yeah, I want a less successful film."

My guess is saving face. We know from the leaks that Sony wasn't in a good position coming into this deal. This way Sony gets a piece of the MCU pie, but it's important to note the new spiderman debuts in an MCU film, which probably gives Disney miles worth of red tape if Sony wants to use MCU assets in their standalone movies. Sony may continue to own Spiderman, but this way, they won't own most of the universe he's going to live in.

If their deal with Square is anything to go by in regard to playing nice with others, Disney absolutely loves red tape.

Finaland & FFDream: With the acquisition of Marvel and Lucas Arts by Disney, could you imagine adding some kind of stuff from these licenses in the game ?

Tetsuya Nomura: (laughs) Of course it would be great if we could add those licenses as well. But there are lots of rules and restrictions by disney so we can?t actually put everything people want, so it?s a quite difficult decision but we?re gonna prepare some surprises for you so, just wait for the informations.

Finaland & FFDream: Because you know that Kitase-san (Yoshinori Kitase) is a big fan of Star Wars ! So you have to do that !

Tetsuya Nomura: (laughs) We?re not going to decide it whether Kitase-san likes Star Wars or not but we?ve been talking about Star Wars itself since it became Disney?s content recently. When I eared the news I was like ?Wow ! Wow !?. Yeah obviously it?s gonna be great if we could add it, but like I said there are a lot of restrictions and rules by Disney so we don?t know what?s gonna happen but yeah, we?ll see.

source [http://finaland.com/?rub=site&page=news&id=4865]

Disney is also not shy about suing the shit out of anyone who so much as sneezes on their assets without asking permission first. There's a reason why printing companies absolutely won't print anything with Disney imagery on it.

 

[Zipzip the Penguin]

Well, I guess we know what the next The Big Picture episode is going to be on.
Also, WHOOOOOOOOOOO!

 

[templar1138a]

About time. Though I wish Sony would give it up entirely. Still, hopefully they'll have Peter Parker be an actual nerd again, instead of some skater douche bag.

 

[Beetlebum]

Meh, I liked that the marvel films were taking their less-popular heroes (As in, the ones whose rights they hadn't sold) and made them big. And that they were taking some risks like destroying S.H.I.E.L.D. and doing Guardians of the Galaxy.

I've had my fill of spider-men, now if they get Emma Stone to be Spider-Gwen (Which I know nothing about) I would be way more hyped.

 

[SupahEwok]

Don't know why folks are complaining and asking why Marvel's pushing their movies back. Pretty obvious that that's Sony's part of the bargain. Their movie division has been underperforming for years, Sony HQ is probably breathing down their neck to get out a megahit. Sony can't afford to wait for Marvel to fit in Spiderman in 4-5 years time. They probably came to Marvel with a "Now or Never" deal, and although Marvel could afford to wait them out, why would they want to? Their creatives probably want Spidey just for the fun of making a Spidey film. He's THE posterchild for Marvel comics.

And as for Sony retaining final creative control? That's just a safeguard. They know Marvel will make them money, they've seen Marvel beat their own films enough times. But you don't make this sort of deal with this much money flying around without making sure you have the on-paper authority to save yourself and your property from malfeasance or incompetence. What if Marvel, with full control of the film but not its profits, decide to deliberately sabotage it in order to pressure Sony into giving up on the rights entirely? It would hurt the reputation of the MCU as a whole, sure, but what if they thought they could afford the momentary hit? You just don't give someone else carte blanche to do as they wish with something you've invested hundreds of millions or maybe billions into. Sony isn't actually going to utilize it, at least in this first round, not when a chunk of their executive staff is on HQ's chopping block and they need something to save themselves.

 

[tzimize]

It's about time. I hope they keep Garfield on, and tie the other Amazing Spider-Man films events in.

Not sure if serious.

If serious:

What is this blasphemy?

Andrew Garfield is terrible, and the amazing spiderman movies are ANYTHING but amazing.

If not serious:

Well played sir, well played.

About time. Though I wish Sony would give it up entirely. Still, hopefully they'll have Peter Parker be an actual nerd again, instead of some skater douche bag.

Yes! Thank you!

 

[babinro]

As someone who places the first Amazing Spider-Man among the best of all the comic book movies (higher than all the Marvel standalone hero movies but under The Avengers/The Dark knight) I'm curious to see if this will actually be an improvement.

With luck, we'll end up with a mix of the best of what both companies have to offer.

 

[Trishbot]

It's a long-shot, but can we rehire J.K. Simmons as J. Jonah Jameson? If Judi Dench can survive a reboot, we can bring back THE man born to play this role.

... While we're at it, would it be too weird to recast Emma Stone as Mary Jane Watson?

 

[Mr. Q]

Well, it sounded like this was going to happen, based on various rumors over the last few weeks.

MovieBob is going to have a field day with this one.

He already is having a field day with this. Just check his twitter account.

https://twitter.com/the_moviebob

Can't blame him, really. I could barely sit through the last two movies on cable. Imagine what its like seeing them in theaters.

Still, I wonder if this song is currently playing through Bob's head right now...

 

[Mr. Q]

It's a long-shot, but can we rehire J.K. Simmons as J. Jonah Jameson? If Judi Dench can survive a reboot, we can bring back THE man born to play this role.

... While we're at it, would it be too weird to recast Emma Stone as Mary Jane Watson?

Not too sure about Emma Stone as MJ, but I vote YES to J.K. Simmons reprising his role as everyone's favorite snarky newspaper publisher.

 

[Story]

Urgh, I'm kinda really tired of Spider-Man...as well as most super hero movies these days.
Ah well, at least those that do care are super happy about it so this news doesn't not apply to me.

 

[The Great JT]

Well we knew the Marvel Universe needed one stinker, going by the Amazing Spider-Man flicks' track record.

 

[Caffeine_Bombed]

It's too soon for me to get too excited about this. I enjoyed the "Amazing" movies and I would have like to see the series continue, but at least Spidey's home...sort of.
If this was "Marvel now has complete and utter control and ownership of Spider-Man" then it would be a different story.

Business stuff aside, I'm very unsure about Civil War being his first appearance (if that turns out to be the case). That is a big story arc, in an already well-established universe, to start throwing in major characters because "he's in the comic". As much as it would piss some people off, I do feel it would be necessary to give him another origin story to establish him as part of the MCU before they start pretending he was there all along. Revealing his identity in Civil War? That wouldn't even have the proper impact in his "first" film.
It seems to me that 'Captain America: Civil War' is becoming less and less a Captain America film day by day...

 

[Mr.Mattress]

This is all fine and dandy (And something I look forward to), but now I'm just curious if Sony is really going to make a Mario movie now! That's what I'm really excited for...

 

[coheedswicked]

I hope the "Sony will retain final creative control" clause is mainly there for insurance to Sony that Marvel won't kill him off or otherwise make him unusable at any point and that they basically just listen to Kevin Feige, because that's worked out pretty well for everyone so far.

 

[Mr. Q]

I think this sums up the reaction from the Internet regarding the news.


God, this was out of left field but, at the same time, not surprising given Sony's run of bad luck since last year. On the one hand, its a good sign that Marvel Studios/Disney is getting the chance to co-produce Spider-Man. However, having Sony still attached to this makes me leery plus it might be too soon for people after the last two abysmal movies. Plus there are reports that the Sinister Six movie is still in development with Spidey to debut in Captain America: Civil War but its up in the air at this time.

http://www.superherohype.com/news/329523-sinister-six-still-in-development-spider-man-to-debut-in-captain-america-civil-war

Right now, the news is still fresh and coming in. Still, I'd like to offer a wish list of what I'd like to see from this development.

1) Ditch the Last Two Spider-Man Movies: If Marvel/Disney really wants to do this right, it needs to distance itself from Amazing Spider-Man 1 & 2. While not all of their movies have been 100% perfect (Iron Man 2 is a good example), Marvel's Cinematic Universe has had a fair amount of quality control to them while building trust with its audience. Having them make a new Spider-Man movie that is connected to the major disappointments that led to this development would undermine any and all good intentions. Also...

2) Shut Down Sinister Six, Venom, and All of Sony's Spin-Off Plans: See item 1. We knew these spin-offs were a bad idea and I hope to God Marvel/Disney feels the same way. If Sony wants to save itself further trouble, it needs to cut its losses and let Marvel Studios take the wheel. Which leads to my next item...

3) All Creative Control to Marvel/Disney (I.E. Fire Avi Arad and those responsible for screwing the pooch the last two times): I don't think this needs a long explanation. Between Avi, Alex Kurtzman & Roberto Orci (aka the biggest douche-bag hacks in screen writing history), and all involved with the last two fiascoes, Marvel/Disney needs to put its foot down, bring in its own staff, and handle this property the right way. Sony shouldn't just be thankful its still making some money out of this deal, it should be fucking grateful.

4) No Need For An Origin Story: I'm pretty sure America and the rest of planet Earth knows the origin of Spider-Man at this point. There's no need to bring it up again in the new movies. This was one of Amazing Spider-Man's many stumbling points and the fact that they botched it so badly did not help them at all. If some origin/motivation needs to be brought up, do it briefly and quickly so it doesn't slow the movie down. Blade and The Incredible Hulk did just that with their origins without dragging the film to a screeching halt. The same can be done with this new version of Spider-Man.

5) Do Not Fully Adapt The Comic Version of Civil War: Does anyone need to remind geek culture that revealing Spidey's identity was the second worst idea Marvel did, which also led to THE worst move they made aka One More Day? No? Good, lets move on.

I'd add more ideas like bringing back J.K. Simmons as J. Jonah Jameson or deciding which version of Spider-Man (Peter Parker or Mile Morales) should Marvel/Disney go with, but this is speculation at this point and its gonna be some time before we find out all the details of this deal. Right now, lets just breath a sigh of relief and keep our fingers crossed that this new chapter in the wall crawler's cinema career turns out for the best.

 

[P-89 Scorpion]

Don't know why folks are complaining and asking why Marvel's pushing their movies back. Pretty obvious that that's Sony's part of the bargain. Their movie division has been underperforming for years, Sony HQ is probably breathing down their neck to get out a megahit. Sony can't afford to wait for Marvel to fit in Spiderman in 4-5 years time. They probably came to Marvel with a "Now or Never" deal, and although Marvel could afford to wait them out, why would they want to? Their creatives probably want Spidey just for the fun of making a Spidey film. He's THE posterchild for Marvel comics.

And as for Sony retaining final creative control? That's just a safeguard. They know Marvel will make them money, they've seen Marvel beat their own films enough times. But you don't make this sort of deal with this much money flying around without making sure you have the on-paper authority to save yourself and your property from malfeasance or incompetence. What if Marvel, with full control of the film but not its profits, decide to deliberately sabotage it in order to pressure Sony into giving up on the rights entirely? It would hurt the reputation of the MCU as a whole, sure, but what if they thought they could afford the momentary hit? You just don't give someone else carte blanche to do as they wish with something you've invested hundreds of millions or maybe billions into. Sony isn't actually going to utilize it, at least in this first round, not when a chunk of their executive staff is on HQ's chopping block and they need something to save themselves.

Please tell me were you get that Sony's movie division has been underperforming for years? as according to Sony's financials it's been either their 2nd biggest or one of their only profit makers for years.

Sony's financial year ends 31st of March

year ending 31st of March 2014 - Sony Pictures 2nd most profitable out of 8
http://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/IR/financial/fr/13q4_sonypre.pdf

year ending 31st of March 2013 - Sony Pictures 2nd most profitable out of 8
http://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/IR/financial/fr/12q4_sonypre.pdf

year ending 31st of March 2012 - Sony Pictures 3rd most profitable out of 8
http://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/IR/financial/fr/11q4_sonypre.pdf

year ending 31st of March 2011 - Sony Pictures 3rd most profitable out of 6
http://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/IR/financial/fr/10q4_sonypre.pdf

year ending 31st of March 2010 - Sony Pictures 2nd most profitable out of 7
http://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/IR/financial/fr/09q4_sonypre.pdf

year ending 31st of March 2009 - Sony Pictures 1st out of 4
http://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/IR/financial/fr/08q4_sonypre.pdf