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

 Pages 1 2 NEXT
 

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

spider-man civil war

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 by hackers. The studio has already seen everything from entire feature films to sensitive financial information leaked, and now the list includes - perhaps innevitably - further details of the studio's ongoing difficulties with their troubled, financially-disappointing Amazing Spider-Man franchise.

A new report in The Wall Street Journal reveals that longstanding rumors 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, 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 Spider-Man Universe, which reportedly now includes the possibility of an animated comedy feature from the makers of The Lego Movie.

Source: The Wall Street Journal

image

Permalink

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.

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.

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

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)

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!

P-89 Scorpion:

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.

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.

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.

008Zulu:
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.

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.

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 :D

blackrave:
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 :D

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

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.

P-89 Scorpion:

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.

P-89 Scorpion:

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.

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.

Flatfrog:

P-89 Scorpion:

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.

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.

Thomas Guy:

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.

Flatfrog:

Thomas Guy:

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.

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?

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 :D

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.

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.

Scars Unseen:

Flatfrog:

Thomas Guy:

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.

Well, maybe an unpopular opinion but Spider-Man's part in "Civil War" was painfully stupid...

Tony Stark: "Don't worry all you superheroes, the government will totally protect your secret identities and to prove that to you, here is Spider-Man's secret identity."
Spider-Man: "Hi, I'm Peter Parker"
Everyone remotely knowing Peter Parker: Instantly gets targeted by villains.

I'm kinda glad that this bullshit is gonna stay out of the MCU.

I'm glad it fell through, MCU doesn't need Spider-man. Marvel's got loads of heroes they can use and a lot going on already. We're finally getting Black Panther, Ant-man, Dr. Strange, and Ms. Marvel. I don't need another goddamn Spider-man movie.

Unfortunately for fans, the talks between the two studios "broke down," and Sony returned to it's still-nebulous plans for an in-house Spider-Man Universe, which reportedly now includes the possibility of an animated comedy feature from the makers of The Lego Movie.

An animated feature?! That's the best news from Sony yet. That could work really well. Hopefully they would give it some unique appeal to set it apart from the Disney's animated series, but Spider-Man's sense of humor translates very well to animation.

P-89 Scorpion:

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.

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

Sony is a company in some desperate financial straits right now and between the budget for the film itself and the marketing budget, they didn't even make $300 million in total from Amazing Spider-Man 2. In a world where Marvel is making movies that cost half as much and make anywhere from as much money to more than twice that, not only are they underperforming, but if Sony were to strike a deal with Marvel to share the rights, they'd have a lot less risk, much lower budgets, much better box office performance, and a cut of any Avengers movie Spidey appeared in. To say that the way they're doing things isn't working is absolutely true, whether they make a profit or not.

Why Sony, why?! Nothing you have planned excites me anywhere near as much, and I'm sure you'd have made oodles more money out of the cross promotion!

Guess stuff like this is why they're going down the financial drain.

While Spidey was a part to Civil War comic and would have been nice to have seen him in the movie. He is not as important as Sony think he is to the story. So im guessing it came down to money and Marvel/Disney arent desperate to have Spidey in the movie. Where as having Spidey in that movie (or other marvel movies) would benefit Sony more and their ongoing Spidey universe.

Plus what Spidey would it be? Would Marvel get to make their own Spiderman for the movie or would they be forced to use Sonys Spiderman? I wonder if that was an issue also.

Tumedus:

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 :D

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.

We really don't know do we?
My assumption was based on the fact that no Spider Man movie featured Scarlet Spider
And most probably won't, unless Sony decides to give him different origin story.
But then again I don't have contract on my hands to know for sure.

Vivi22:
Sony is a company in some desperate financial straits right now and between the budget for the film itself and the marketing budget, they didn't even make $300 million in total from Amazing Spider-Man 2. In a world where Marvel is making movies that cost half as much and make anywhere from as much money to more than twice that, not only are they underperforming, but if Sony were to strike a deal with Marvel to share the rights, they'd have a lot less risk, much lower budgets, much better box office performance, and a cut of any Avengers movie Spidey appeared in. To say that the way they're doing things isn't working is absolutely true, whether they make a profit or not.

That is what I don't understand as well, since the MCU movies have been proven to cost less and make more money and with the trouble Sony is in I am surprised they didn't leap at that chance. I think they are too attached to trying to make Spider-Man into an Avenger's style franchise because Marvel could do it with their "B-Team".

I really don't think Sony even made that much money with ASM2 just because there are a lot of people that need money and if all their are getting are the profits from the movie itself that is a lot of ground to cover. If the rumors are true the movie itself cost between $200 and $250 million to make plus an additional $100 to $150 million for advertising. The rule of thumb is that you need twice of those two totals combined to start seeing a profit. It used to be lower, but from what I have been told theaters are getting a larger opening week cut then before because of the amount of theaters that couldn't stay open otherwise and internal theaters might have a different payment scheme as well. Not have the merchandising rights I think are hurting their bottom line. What I am hoping with the next ASM movie is that Sony will have learned their lesson (I highly doubt it) and let the director's do their thing for it sounds like Sony has been meddling in every Spider-Man movie since Spider-Man 3.

MovieBob:
Unfortunately for fans, the talks between the two studios "broke down,"

Why do I imagine it went down like 2 kids arguing:

"Captain America could so whoop Spiderman!"
"Nuh-uh!"
"COULD SO!"
"FINE! I'm taking my Spiderman and going home!"

SmugFrog:

MovieBob:
Unfortunately for fans, the talks between the two studios "broke down,"

Why do I imagine it went down like 2 kids arguing:

"Captain America could so whoop Spiderman!"
"Nuh-uh!"
"COULD SO!"
"FINE! I'm taking my Spiderman and going home!"

Close, I think its more of Sony going "We want our Spider-Man franchise to be incorporated into the MCU" followed with a "are you nuts? from Marvel"

I honestly still have a hard time believing this, not just because the continuity issues would be insane, (when did he get his powers? Where was he when Loki showed up? Is Osbourne involved and how hasn't Tony heard of him?), but that a deal like this would be, unless something else like this has happened, the most humiliating thing to happen to a major studio in the history of cinema.

Also: "animated comedy from makers of Lego Movie"

....Spider-Ham?!

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 :D

Probably won't happen...
... But considering my MASSIVE hate for OMD, I would pay good money to see "Peter and Mary Jane" with a kid as background characters in a movie or two.

It seems like modern companies have forgotten a very simple foundation of capitalism. If you give the consumer what they want... THEY WILL BUY IT! I don't know who is to blame for the talks breaking down... I assume it was a little of both, but seriously both companies would benefit from the crossover.

Ugh, so close to having a legitimate spider man movie made right. Oh well, some day... some day...

vid87:
I honestly still have a hard time believing this, not just because the continuity issues would be insane, (when did he get his powers? Where was he when Loki showed up? Is Osbourne involved and how hasn't Tony heard of him?), but that a deal like this would be, unless something else like this has happened, the most humiliating thing to happen to a major studio in the history of cinema.

Also: "animated comedy from makers of Lego Movie"

....Spider-Ham?!

That made me laugh more than I care to admit, especially since it reminded me of that disastrous spidey musical from a few years back.

OT: Honestly, I think the smart move for Disney is simply to wait it out: Sony's repeated failures with Spidey and continuing financial issues will push them into selling the franchise sooner or later. Sony will only get more desperate, which will probably make it easier for Disney to buy back the rights at a later date. In the meantime, Disney is doing just fine and Sony's blunders only make their movies look better by comparison. It's basically free advertising for Marvel, especially since it keeps spidey at the front of pop culture even as the butt of many a joke.

 Pages 1 2 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here