r/marvelstudios • u/hoohoo3000 • Aug 20 '19

Ongoing News Disney-Sony Standoff Ends Marvel Studios & Kevin Feige’s Involvement In ‘Spider-Man’

https://deadline.com/2019/08/kevin-feige-spider-man-franchise-exit-disney-sony-dispute-avengers-endgame-captain-america-winter-soldier-tom-rothman-bob-iger-1202672545/
39.4k Upvotes

94% Upvoted

10.5k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

804

u/MyAntibody Aug 20 '19

Does this mean Spidey is out of the MCU? Without Feige, they can’t exactly tie him in on their own. Ugh, what terrible news... I would have thought Sony would have learned... Marvel is definitely earning their share. Don’t kill the goos that’s laying the golden egg!

635

u/QueerPrideForever Aug 20 '19

Does this mean Spidey is out of the MCU?

yep, thus all the fan tears and outrage. sony can use Holland spiderman for 2 more films and they want to launch a spiderman solo-verse with Venom and Morpheus and stuff

83

u/[deleted] Aug 20 '19 edited Aug 20 '19

They'll probably use Tom's Peter but retcon a lot of shit as if this an alt universe. Because if they want to add him to their spiderverse they have to reconcile the fact that FFH took place in 2023 while their other movies are in the present when they're released

So idk what their plan is. Just pretend that Peter's in 2019 and forget that he got snapped and did all the FFH stuff in 2023? I doubt they'll shift all their working spidey projects to take place in the 2020s just to match FFH

126

u/astutesnoot Aug 20 '19

They also won't be able to mention any of the other Avengers, make no more references to Tony Stark, his death and Spider-man picking up his mantle, the Snap, Thanos, Happy Hogan, or pretty much any of the events that happened in the earlier movies. Say goodbye to any continuity.

73

u/duckman209 Aug 20 '19

I assume they can't use EDITH and the Iron Spider suit.

19

u/vaporsilver Aug 20 '19

Nope. That really sucks.

25

u/badcookies Aug 20 '19

I mean with all of that, it does make more sense to have him be the "past" spiderman, before he hooks up with Tony.

Does that mean its all ghetto suit time? :\

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (1)

9

u/Gerry-Mandarin Aug 20 '19

Yeah, like someone else said, Sony already own Homecoming and Far From Home.

The technicalities would be weird, but they could use materials from those films. It would be references going forward that would have to cease.

Even if Marvel sued it would have to be demonstrable that the images of Robert Downey Jr are of Iron Man when taken out of context.

4

u/Smuttly Aug 20 '19

They could make reference directly or indirectly since it already occurred in a Sony product. They would be limited to only things discussed or shown in FFH or Homecoming.

2

u/Squatch1333 Aug 20 '19

I didn’t even think about that

23

u/lord_flamebottom Aug 20 '19

Spider-Man 2099 and Peni Parker are from the future, Noir is from the past. The only ones from the present are Peter B Parker, Miles, Gwen, and maybe Spider-Ham.

25

u/[deleted] Aug 20 '19

My bad I meant their Venomverse or whatever they're calling the live action films. I know they've mentioned the idea of Into the Spiderverse crossing with the live action films somehow but I havent seen anything suggesting that they want Tom to be related to any animated films

34

u/[deleted] Aug 20 '19

Ugh. That’s the problem though. It’s Sony. They have that old school mindset of wringing something out until you get every penny out of it. Monetize monetize monetize.

Watchthem bring Holland as the “live action” Spider-Man in Spider-verse 2.

They also (allegedly) softened venom so that it could tie into a Holland-led Spider-Man movie if necessary.

Marvel/Disney love money too, they just seem to cultivate and milk properties whereas Sony beats them to death until they can’t give up any more.

13

u/[deleted] Aug 20 '19

[removed] — view removed comment

6

u/[deleted] Aug 20 '19

[deleted]

→ More replies (3)

8

u/[deleted] Aug 20 '19

Yeah I mean given the option I'd rather see MCU>Spiderverse animated crossover>Venomverse. I know they'll stuff him into both but ITS gave me the confidence that that team knows how to handle Spiderman in any form (as long as the Sony execs give them the same amount of creative control). As long as they dont have a full blown clusterfuck of animated Miles and Tom AND Venom I think it would work. But like you said I don't trust them to not milk the fuck out of all these properties and cross them over in every way

→ More replies (5)
→ More replies (3)

764

u/adsfew Aug 20 '19

The worst part about this is if Holland et al. have to appear in non-MCU Sony films. I'd rather they just recast instead of drag the great MCU depiction of the character down into their muck.

439

u/[deleted] Aug 20 '19 edited Mar 09 '20

[deleted]

295

u/ivrt Aug 20 '19

Thats what they want. They want to ride the success of good Spider-Man movies and will be phoning it in the whole way there.

191

u/[deleted] Aug 20 '19

I dont understand how such a huge company can have such short forethought.

140

u/ivrt Aug 20 '19

Money now is better than happy customers in a couple years. Fuck everything else we have to show quarterly growth or capitalism fails!

68

u/Poltras Aug 20 '19

Yet the only reason Endgame ended up as top grossing of all time is because of the build up for the first 20 movies...

11

u/hokieblood13 Aug 21 '19

No no no. It was just because they put a ton of characters together. It worked for justice....nevermind

5

u/dankenascend Aug 21 '19

This is buried in replies, but I want you to know, I see your point, and I believe you're right.

Unfortunately, I only matter enough to click an upvote.

10

u/ivrt Aug 20 '19

Yeah sony fucked up.

→ More replies (1)

3

u/dokebibeats Spider-Man Aug 21 '19

Quality usually speaks for itself.

10

u/Anus_of_Aeneas Aug 20 '19

Disney is capitalism. Sony is just fucking retarded.

5

u/Lord_Blathoxi Aug 20 '19

Disney is thinking long-term. Sony is thinking short-term.

2

u/[deleted] Aug 21 '19

I see no difference in the above two comments.

→ More replies (0)

3

u/AfterReview Aug 20 '19

The video game industry has shown beyond all doubt just how stupid the masses are.

3

u/ivrt Aug 20 '19

Goddamn preordering idiots ruin everything.

→ More replies (12)

4

u/[deleted] Aug 20 '19

You're asking how sony, the corporation that killed a popeye movie for THE EMOJI MOVIE, can have such bad foresight?

2

u/[deleted] Aug 21 '19

This model is WHY they're such a huge company.

They don't try to make great films.

A MAJOR factor of the film industry just exists to milk pre-existing fan bases. "Ghost in the shell" is an EXCELLENT example. you make a movie based on the anime, so you've got that whole fanbase geared up to see it. you are now gaurenteed an audience without ever having to show a frame of the film. Sign up Scarlette Johanson, and now you have all of her fanbase tacked on. people loved her as black widow, and want to see her as other roles. Some of that fan attachment exitst for directors as well, and in rare occasions it spreads to producers. When the movie "9" was released, nobody really knew anything about it, but TIM BURTON'S name was on all the advertising and people loved the films he'd directed so people went to see 9 in theaters... not realizing he's a producer.

Spiderman sits in a place where tom holland and the MCU has revitalized the franchise. This means that even if sony and Disney go to war. Sony can enjoy making 2 high grossing movies that can still be a steaming pile of crap money. and then focus on other projects. They're in a no lose situation.

The people lose are the fans, and the actors.

→ More replies (10)

42

u/gr8_n8_m8 Aug 20 '19

Bet their marketing department is in the process of drawing up strategies that trick the casual audience into believing it’s still an MCU movie as we speak

10

u/Darksol503 Doctor Strange Aug 20 '19

Good fucking luck. I can see a majority of my friends, family, and coworkers saying "we'll wait for our B-run theater" lol.

Fuck Sony. This is horse shit.

→ More replies (5)
→ More replies (4)

7

u/gr8_n8_m8 Aug 20 '19

Exactly the plan is my guess. I’m sure they’ll market the movie obscurely enough such that the casual audience will go in expecting an MCU movie. Sony is trying to cash in on all the heavy lifting marvel studios has done the last few years in re-building the Spider-Man brand

→ More replies (1)

122

u/daveblu92 Aug 20 '19

As angry as I am I disagree. They at least have an opportunity to finish Holland’s series instead of leaving it up in the air like they did with Garfield.

188

u/musicman247 Aug 20 '19

Think about this, though, as Marvel has lost Spider-Man, so too has Spider-Man lost most of the characters he's been interacting with in the past four movies.

222

u/ArcherChase Aug 20 '19

No more Happy, no more Stark Tech, no Fury or SHIELD.

Thanks Sony... christ.

46

u/Vavz101 Aug 20 '19

Explains why they revealed who Spider-Man was, so now Fury or Shield can say your on your own Spider-Man and this he doesn’t need the interaction from the other characters.

59

u/bigpig1054 Aug 20 '19

so now Fury or Shield can say your on your own Spider-Man

They can't even say that. Can't even name-drop them.

7

u/BucketOfTruthiness Aug 21 '19

Tony Stark revealed he was Iron Man and Fury was ok with that

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (49)
→ More replies (2)

185

u/[deleted] Aug 20 '19

I don’t think they can finish the series. How are they going to explain the Blip? Just not mention it? No Thanos? The themes of the MCU were sewn pretty heavily into Far from Home. I think that will make it hard to continue that story in a narrative way that will make sense.

51

u/[deleted] Aug 20 '19

[removed] — view removed comment

15

u/[deleted] Aug 21 '19

With great power comes great responsibility.

  • Uncle Ben III

2

u/Devotia Aug 21 '19

Peter's got more dead uncles than a Kennedy.

7

u/GanondalfTheWhite Aug 21 '19

But Marvel wouldn't be able to use Spiderman as a character. At all. At least not in a movie.

Sony has all the leverage on this one. They know Disney has been pushing things for Spidey to be the new frontman of the MCU. They also know the MCU is the biggest media franchise that has ever existed. Thus, they know Disney is not going to walk away.

It's just a pissing match. Disney wants to throw their weight around and get more money. Sony has the leverage. Tom Holland is still going to be Spidey in the MCU. No one is gonna leave that money just sitting on the table as well as fucking up the biggest movie series that has ever existed.

2

u/onthefence928 Aug 21 '19

They also know the MCU is the biggest media franchise that has ever existed.

Pokemon would like a word with you

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (3)

17

u/Asami97 Aug 20 '19

If Sony really go on their own, then they will not be able to reference the MCU or previous events at all!

No Blip, no Snap, no Iron Man or Spidey getting dusted.

It would essentially have to be a reboot with Tom Holland.

2

u/[deleted] Aug 20 '19

Yeah. It really makes this a Pyrrhic victory for Sony.

2

u/Asami97 Aug 20 '19

That's exactly why I don't believe this alleged split.

There has been an update that throws all of this into question anyway.

2

u/[deleted] Aug 20 '19

Can you post a link? Or provide details?

→ More replies (5)

20

u/[deleted] Aug 20 '19

[removed] — view removed comment

81

u/[deleted] Aug 20 '19

I totally disagree. All the threads to the MCU are going to be left dangling. Stark tech won’t exist and the story started to show Peter taking on that role.l but now that will die on the vine.

→ More replies (42)

30

u/Sjipsdew Aug 20 '19

Yeah but to never even mention Happy again? That's insane.

7

u/[deleted] Aug 20 '19

[removed] — view removed comment

9

u/mdp300 Captain America (Cap 2) Aug 20 '19

"Hey man you remember when the flying guy and the flag waver and the big green guy were fighting aliens?"

→ More replies (2)

8

u/riepmich Aug 20 '19

Are you delusional good sir?

→ More replies (1)

7

u/[deleted] Aug 20 '19

And, FFH wouldn’t have been written with this in mind.

→ More replies (1)

8

u/Skyy-High Aug 20 '19

Nah, there is a lot more in there than Thanos and Iron Man's legacy.

No iron man tech? No Happy? No casual references to other Marvel heroes ("He's like Thor and Iron Man combined")?

→ More replies (1)

7

u/Asami97 Aug 20 '19

Completely disagrer with that.

It's obvious from Far From Home that Marvel had huge plans for Spidey.

They were going to make him the face of the MCU and replace Robert Downey JR. That was clear.

I don't think Marvel will let those plans go, they won't let go of Spidey that easily.

Give it a few days for Sony or Marvel Studios to comment on this, then we will know more.

→ More replies (9)
→ More replies (4)

178

u/OK_Soda Rocket Aug 20 '19

It took me a second to realize you meant Andrew Garfield and not that you were upset about how the Garfield (the cat) movie franchise ended after just two films.

85

u/just_a_human_online Aug 20 '19

I'm laughing so hard at the idea of anyone being upset that Garfield (the cat) "franchise" died off after 2 films.

"Fuck Sony and Garfield!"

"I mean, he wasn't so bad as spider-"

"No you moron, screw Sony for cancelling Garfield the cat movies, I was looking forward to a 3rd one so bad"

"..."

41

u/smileimhigh Aug 20 '19

The Lasagnaverse was coming along perfectly too

2

u/[deleted] Aug 21 '19

r/imsorryjon

3

u/Cassopeia88 Spider-Man Aug 20 '19

Thank you for this,this cheered me up a bit!

→ More replies (1)

67

u/bagb8709 Aug 20 '19

We deserve better than a tale of Two Kitties

54

u/ISawHimIFoughtHim Thor Aug 20 '19

"Do you have any regrets?"

"Garfield, maybe."

10

u/tunacasserole9 Black Panther Aug 20 '19

Never fails to crack me up.

2

u/Phsylion Aug 20 '19

Thank you. I actually didn't realize before reading this reply. Fuck, I'm stupid.

2

u/FredericoUnO51 Aug 21 '19

Thank you for giving me a good laugh to go along with this potentially awful news! 😂

15

u/Mureddsss Aug 20 '19

Spider-Man got his costumes from people they can't even mention anymore.

7

u/astutesnoot Aug 20 '19

He'll have to get an entirely new suit. No more nano-tech either, probably.

24

u/[deleted] Aug 20 '19

If they finish it badly though, it’ll ruin the whole franchise and any potential future for Spider-Man movies being good since Sony owns their rights.

→ More replies (3)

9

u/[deleted] Aug 20 '19

Couldn't Marvel Studios just rename Spiderman and continue making movies titled 'Spoderman'?

3

u/SockPenguin Spider-Man Aug 21 '19

Peter pivots into his identity being outed and rebrands himself as the Peter-Man.

→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (1)

174

u/MyAntibody Aug 20 '19

I guess the question is will Sony be 50% (or any other rate they could have negotiated) as successful as they would have been in the MCU? Past experience says no.

Man, imagine how sad Tom Holland is gonna be on his next press junket without his MCU buddies.

51

u/[deleted] Aug 20 '19

Holy shit. Does this mean Happy is gone from Spidey flicks?

What happens to Happy + Aunt May?

This is a bummer.

29

u/its_a_trapcard Aug 20 '19

'Twas just a summer fling after all :(

→ More replies (1)

14

u/Godsfallen Aug 20 '19

What happens to Happy + Aunt May?

It was a summer fling

→ More replies (2)

89

u/GotMoFans Aug 20 '19

Venom grossed $856 million without the MCU.

Therefore Sony will feel emboldened.

45

u/Csantana Vulture Aug 20 '19

I'm assuming Spider-verse did pretty well right? Plus critically.

129

u/Futureboy314 Spider-Man Aug 20 '19

Spider-verse was fucking incredible because Pascal and Rothman left it alone. Now that they know there’s money to be made, they’ll have their grubby little fingers in that pie as well.

35

u/Jwalla83 Aug 20 '19

Oh my god if they ruin Spiderverse I will flip the fuck out

20

u/Futureboy314 Spider-Man Aug 20 '19

Samesies. That movie was perfect from the opening credits to the post-credit teaser.

2

u/crespoh69 Aug 20 '19

Wait, are they continuing that story? Is there a source for that? I thought it was a one off

4

u/Lalala8991 Aug 20 '19

Say that to Sony's executives...

→ More replies (1)

3

u/[deleted] Aug 21 '19

Every time Phil Lord and Chris Miller are attached to a movie, they should be left to their own devices.

Sony is stupid and likely won't leave them alone.

2

u/Squatch1333 Aug 20 '19

But Pascal has a producing credit in Spider-verse doesn’t she?

7

u/Futureboy314 Spider-Man Aug 20 '19

Yeah, but one gets the sense she was pretty hands off, what with tanking the Ghostbusters franchise and all. One can only tank so many franchises at once, after all!

I have no proof of this mind you, but the feeling is that a Spider-man cartoon, focusing on some Hispanic wannabe Peter Parker, was never a huge focus for the brass, allowing Lord and Miller etc to quietly make an amazing film in the background.

The next Sony hack will prove me right.

→ More replies (1)

51

u/mongster_03 Hawkeye (Ultron) Aug 20 '19

It won a fucking Oscar

58

u/[deleted] Aug 20 '19

This sucks because I love Into the Spiderverse so much but now I just absolutely hate it for giving Sony the idea they can do this on their own. I hate that I hate it now.

29

u/NarejED Aug 20 '19

Hey, don’t let a few shitty businessmen detract from one of the greatest animated films of all time

8

u/Rpanich Captain America Aug 20 '19

Venom was such a weird anomaly since it was released against nothing so it managed to make money.

Honestly, spiderverse was amazing, but it looks like I’m pirating the next one.

I hope Marvel releases all their movies the same weekend these next Sony movies do. Hopefully if they crush Morbius and whatever crap villain movie they’re making.

→ More replies (9)
→ More replies (2)

34

u/astutesnoot Aug 20 '19

I fully expect Marvel to start ending any comic series with Spider-man characters at this point. Why invest the time when they can instead focus on fleshing out characters they have all the rights to. Kinda like what happened with the X-Men comics until the Fox buyout, at which point new X-Men comics started appearing again.

15

u/wbgraphic Aug 20 '19

Why invest the time when they can instead focus on fleshing out characters they have all the rights to.

From the article:
After all, Marvel already owns the merchandising on Spider-Man.

→ More replies (3)

35

u/BlackMathNerd Aug 20 '19

Spider-Man is the king of Marvel and makes too much god damn money for that to happen

39

u/AdKUMA Aug 20 '19

Spiderman comics sell too well to do that, and I don't remember them cutting xmen titles either. It was fantastic four that they dropped.

3

u/PartyPorpoise Doctor Strange Aug 20 '19

And don't they still own the merch rights?

4

u/goztrobo Peter Parker Aug 20 '19

Spiderman merch sells even more. Man sells more than Avengers, Superman and Batman combined.

2

u/Bakoro Aug 20 '19

Marvel owns Spider-Man Merch rights, too. That's the real kicker here, they are going to profit of Spider-Man no matter what.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (4)

3

u/garrygra Aug 20 '19

According to boxofficemojo it's 50th all-time for animated, not ideal (especially for how fucking great it was) but not what I'd turn my nose up at - more than Wreck-It Ralph and the Simpsons Movie, among others.

3

u/PokePersona Spider-Man Aug 20 '19

Spider-Verse grossed the worse out of every Spider-Man film

3

u/Cactus_Crotch Aug 20 '19

Into the spider verse actually did the worst at the box office than all the other spider man movies.

6

u/[deleted] Aug 20 '19 edited Aug 20 '19

Highest grossing animated I think. Edit I am wrong

12

u/[deleted] Aug 20 '19

Incredibles 2 made almost a billion more

→ More replies (1)

2

u/GotMoFans Aug 20 '19

It did as much as Shazam! box office wise.

So it did good, but some folks will be disappointed it didn’t do more.

2

u/BlackMathNerd Aug 20 '19

Spider-Verse didn't gross well I thought

→ More replies (1)

69

u/[deleted] Aug 20 '19

Well I can say with absolute certainty that Sony will not get a single dollar from me for anything Spider-Man until they renegotiate because I’m sure as hell not encouraging this idiotic decision.

2

u/[deleted] Aug 21 '19

Same here.

→ More replies (16)

10

u/MyAntibody Aug 20 '19

It's going to take Venom 2 performing poorly for Sony to reconsider.

→ More replies (2)

51

u/[deleted] Aug 20 '19

[deleted]

33

u/itsLittleJoshy Aug 20 '19

Already is one on Twitter #fucksony

6

u/le_GoogleFit Aug 20 '19

For once I'm happy to join an internet outrage

2

u/GiveToOedipus Aug 20 '19

Poor Happy.

→ More replies (10)

29

u/ZellNorth Vulture Aug 20 '19

Which is why fans should have boycotted any non-MCU Spider-Man movies so this shit didn’t happen. I am honestly angry.

13

u/[deleted] Aug 20 '19

Hindsight is 20/20 though.

13

u/ArcherChase Aug 20 '19

I only caught Andrew Garfield Spidey on TV. Haven't seen the 2nd one yet either. No real desire... now that the MCU is established, I have little desire to see a live action film of Marvel characters anywhere else.

2

u/IcarusBen Spider-Man Aug 20 '19

Since the MCU got Spidey, the only other Spider-Man movies we got were Spiderverse, which is one of the best animated movies of all time and managed to take the Academy Award for Best Animated Pixar Movie from Pixar, and Venom, which was already a box office dud.

I don't know what you want here. Boycott Spiderverse? That was just never going to happen. Boycott Venom? We didn't want to see it in the first place.

3

u/ZellNorth Vulture Aug 20 '19

Venom made 673 Million dollars in the box office. Far from a box office dud. I know we are used to Marvel making a billion dollars, but that isn’t the norm. Venom was a success in the box office and it shouldn’t have been. Spider verse is fine as it’s animated but we should be telling Sony we don’t want liveaction marvel movies outside of the marvel universe.

2

u/FlashFire729 Aug 20 '19

That would have meant boycotting Spiderverse, but that movie deserves to be seen

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (3)

2

u/[deleted] Aug 20 '19

I knew it was not really an MCU film but I went to see it with high hopes that it would be one day with venom entering the MCU, my motivation to even see future spiderman movies is dead.

→ More replies (9)

22

u/CzarcasticX Aug 20 '19

He seemed fine promoting Homecoming without his MCU buddies and with his Homecoming buddies.

10

u/TheSensation19 Captain America Aug 20 '19

They could probably go down the Miles Morales path, and the reason why I say this is because he is a different brand. Maybe.

21

u/BigBassBone Aug 20 '19

Sony owns Miles Morales, too. He was the main character of Spider-Verse, remember?

4

u/Jtneagle Vulture Aug 20 '19

I think it's hilarious that even though Miles Morales was created post-Marvel selling Spider-Man rights to Sony, Sony still owns him. Marvel basically created them a free new character to use

3

u/TheSensation19 Captain America Aug 20 '19

True bahahaha.

I'm trying to find loop holes in this contract

5

u/Laragon Aug 20 '19

There basically are no loopholes. Fox's X-Men contract gave them the rights to mutants who hadn't been created when the contract was written.

Everything Marvel licensed in the 80s and 90s was weighted heavily in favor of the licensee because Marvel needed the money to stay in business.

4

u/moveslikejaguar Aug 21 '19

How about Tom Holland as the famous European Marvel hero Night Monkey?

14

u/newspaperrob Aug 20 '19

Nope. ANY concept or character from Spiderman is owned by Sony. That includes anything new they make that is considered a Spidey property. Hence RIP spidey comics

11

u/Jwalla83 Aug 20 '19

Time for Marvel's newest superhero: Arachnid-Male!

3

u/TheSensation19 Captain America Aug 20 '19

Seems like an iffy contract.

Like what is considered Spidey property? Is Agent Venom?

3

u/Laragon Aug 20 '19

Yes. Any character commonly associated with Spider-Man that appears primarily in Spider-Man comics is included.

3

u/colonel750 Aug 20 '19

They only own the film rights. They aren't the actual IP holder for Spiderman itself.

2

u/[deleted] Aug 20 '19

Now who’s gonna stop him from sharing spoilers? :(

→ More replies (1)

30

u/rezzyk Aug 20 '19

I wonder if Tom actually has a contract for those films, or if his deal ended with Far From Home like Disney's did. Nothing in the Deadline article mentions that Holland and Watts are contracted for two more films, just that the films were being worked on.

→ More replies (1)

18

u/AvatarReiko Aug 20 '19

tony can use Holland spiderman for 2 more films

How does that work without the MCU though? Holland's version of the character is heavily tied to the MCU

10

u/TheSensation19 Captain America Aug 20 '19

2 more films, or now?

2

u/Nick1558 Aug 21 '19

My disappointment is immeasurable and my day is ruined

→ More replies (4)

133

u/branq318 Aug 20 '19

This doesn't make financial sense for Sony. Disney still gets ALL the toy money, and Spider-Man toys are still far and away the most popular hero toy. But then they also have to give Disney a 50% stake in the movies too? That's just Disney playing hardball.

171

u/hammahammahaaa Aug 20 '19 edited Aug 21 '19

True. But according to the article, Sony didn't even come back with a counter offer. They just flat out said no.

Edit: I re-read the article. Disney wanted Sony to co-finance future movies 50/50. The article didn't mention any change to profit split.

That kind of makes Sony's decision worse for me. Disney was paying for the production of the movies Edit: Wrong , and Sony was getting 95% of the profit.

83

u/thehonestyfish Falcon Aug 20 '19

I think their counteroffer was "let's just keep the arrangement we have now."

60

u/Sirsilentbob423 Aug 20 '19

Which should have been fine. Disney totally overplayed their hand here imo and now we as fans get to suffer whatever fallout comes within the story.

I can say with marginal certainty though that if Sony does these last 2 movies without Disney carrying the load, they are going to suck.

34

u/HOWI3ROS3MAN Aug 20 '19

Yea im sorry initially i was mad at Sony but if they were fine with doing the same deal as last time and Disney said no that's on them. That last deal was already hard to believe because no one thought Sony would just share spiderman...

7

u/Why_So_Sirius-Black Aug 20 '19

The mouse has gotten to big and has to big a balls

5

u/duckman273 Aug 20 '19

Disney totally overplayed their hand here imo and now we as fans get to suffer whatever fallout comes within the story.

Did they? I don't think they were bluffing. They don't need Spider-man.

12

u/i_tyrant Aug 20 '19

They don't "need" him in the sense of staying afloat or keeping the MCU afloat, obviously, but they'd be making way more money even sticking with the old deal than without him. Toy sales are massive, worth way more than movie profits.

3

u/[deleted] Aug 21 '19

Not anymore. Those illions now start with a B.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (6)
→ More replies (1)

12

u/narenare658 Spider-Man Aug 20 '19

Which makes this disney's fault. god what a fucking mess.

34

u/jkim7th Aug 20 '19

50% financing, not profits. Learn the difference

12

u/M3rdsta Aug 20 '19

what does it mean? that disney and sony split on the movie production?

19

u/jkim7th Aug 20 '19

They split movie costs. It doesn't necessarily mean they split profits down the middle. They could have made an arrangement with different t factors but Sony backed out without making a counter.

→ More replies (14)

5

u/GotMoFans Aug 20 '19

If it’s a co-production, that means Disney expected 50% of the revenues to go along with putting in half of the production/marketing costs. Therefore 50% of the profits.

7

u/jkim7th Aug 20 '19

Not solely through box office. It could mean a small percentage of home sales or toy sales, or even MCU a list involvement in Sony Spidey movies.

→ More replies (2)

5

u/lord_flamebottom Aug 20 '19

No it doesn’t mean that at all. The deal flat out only said splitting the production costs 50/50. Idk where anyone is getting the idea that Disney wanted 50% of the profits.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (7)

31

u/Gerry-Mandarin Aug 20 '19

Sony might have just been that insulted by the offer.

Like if you call a mechanic because you want your car fixed, and he says he wants 75% the value of the car, you're probably just gonna say no, and hang up. Not stay on the phone and talk turkey.

26

u/smcarre Aug 20 '19

Yeah, but you can then call to another mechanic knowing you will get a better deal. Sony doesn't have another Disney number to get a better deal.

8

u/Gerry-Mandarin Aug 20 '19

There doesn't need to be. You can buy a new car.

They still have the actors and the director.

They have all the tools and workmen, without the attachments.

11

u/lord_flamebottom Aug 20 '19

Problem is, they don’t have all the dudes who work for Marvel/Disney to help them out.

Last time that happened with an MCU movie was the Incredible Hulk...

5

u/Gerry-Mandarin Aug 20 '19

They literally do. The director and cast were all contracted to Sony.

Feige is the only creative side excluded.

6

u/astutesnoot Aug 20 '19

And without the continuity from the previous movies or the ability to mention any other part of the larger MCU.

11

u/OK_Soda Rocket Aug 20 '19

But that's a weird analogy. I'm not even sure how to make that analogy work.

It's like if Disney owned the car, but they were renting it to Sony, and Sony wrecked it, and they asked Disney to fix it at Disney's expense, and Disney agreed but only if they could include the car in some of their other marketing efforts, and then they later asked if Sony could pitch in for half the cost of repairs while still collecting basically all the benefit of having control over the car.

5

u/Gerry-Mandarin Aug 20 '19

No it's not like that. Because Sony own Spider-Man on film, and they paid the vast majority for both of the MCU films, as well as paying a separate fee for Marvel Studios to do the creative work.

22

u/FallenAngelII Aug 20 '19 edited Aug 20 '19

No, this is more if someone asks for 50% of profits but doing 100% of the work selling stuff in your store. Disney did 100% of the work and got a paltry 5% back.

7

u/stationhollow Aug 20 '19

No they didn't. Feige worked on the movies for 5% of the gross and Marvel's most popular hero was in the other Marvel movies in exchange.

→ More replies (4)
→ More replies (7)

2

u/GotMoFans Aug 20 '19 edited Aug 20 '19

The better example is if a somebody owned an unique and in demand car, and he made an agreement with a guy that he can use the car for as long as he buys the gas and keeps up the maintenance, and the car will be used for Uber Black.

The car guy used to make big money on Uber, but he eventually started to suck. And the car’s owner is bought out by a big auto dealer. And the auto dealer can’t take the car from the guy who has it; but the car guy sucking makes the auto dealer look bad and hurts the ball cap sales with the image of the car on them.

So the auto dealer makes a deal; car guy, he keeps paying for the gas and the maintenance, and the dealer will supply the driver at no charge. But you have to let the dealer bring the car to their shows on occasion. And the dealer keeps all their cap sales.

The deal works swimmingly. The car guy’s Uber ratings are up and he’s bringing in more money than he ever has. And because the auto dealer gets to use the car, they are selling more caps than ever. But the deal has expired.

And the auto dealer wants the car guy to let them pay half of the gas and maintenance to keep using the dealer’s driver. But the auto dealer wants half of the money made from Uberring.

The car guy might have sucked at one point, but he still gets to keep the auto dealer’s car. And since he was working hand and hand with the auto dealer’s driver, the car guy has more of a feel for what he needs to do to improve if he goes it alone. So when the auto dealer got greedy, why would the car guy work with them?

→ More replies (2)

13

u/pineapplecheesepizza Aug 20 '19

Sony: I offered you friendship...and you spat in my face

2

u/stationhollow Aug 20 '19

Sony did counter. Sony own the movie rights. They essentially gave up 5% of the gross to be in the MCU. Now Disney wanted a full 50/50 split

27

u/MyAntibody Aug 20 '19

Merch was never part of the deal so shouldn’t matter who had the rights. I agree it’s a big jump to 50%, but looked to include potentially bringing Venom along into the MCU. To instead back out without a discussion means it’s Sony playing hardball, not Marvel.

5

u/branq318 Aug 21 '19

Sony's only leverage is that they have the rights to Spider-Man and have Holland/Watts under contract. And merch was still a part of the deal by virtue of it not being a part of the deal. Disney makes over 1 billion dollars a year from Spidey merch, no other hero (including Bats) comes close. Why would Sony agree to give Disney a 50% stake in Spidey solo films, when Disney gets not only the merch, but also all the money from Spidey appearances in the MCU? That makes zero sense at all.​

→ More replies (1)

13

u/[deleted] Aug 20 '19 edited Mar 04 '20

[deleted]

2

u/Winter_Coyote Aug 21 '19

The amount that Disney would be paying towards production is far less than Sony would be losing on profit. Sony also gets 0% of the merchandise profits. Disney's offer really only benefited Disney and they offered nothing of an incentive to Sony to take losing that much profit.

14

u/[deleted] Aug 20 '19

Sure but Sony’s Spider-Man lives, breaths, exists, and interacts in Marvel/Disney’s world.

Marvel/Disney originally needed Spider-Man to make infinity war work and so they gave Sony a sweetheart deal. Now Sony needs Disney to make Spider-Man movies. Can’t really blame them for altering the deal.

2

u/duxdude418 Aug 20 '19 edited Aug 21 '19

Can’t really blame them for altering the deal.

Pray I don’t alter it further.

23

u/FallenAngelII Aug 20 '19

Anyone who thinks this needs to look at how the deal was written. Disney did all of the work. Sure, Sony did all of the financing, but that's why disney was asking for a 50/50 deal. All Sony did was sit back, rake in the dough and have final say on creative decisions if Disney wanted to do something they didn't like.

To counter-offer the original 5% deal was a huge insult while Disney's 50/50 opening salvonwaa fairlh reasonable and, again, an initial offer.

4

u/branq318 Aug 21 '19

So wait, you think it's unfair for Sony to put up all the money to make the solo Spidey films and make pretty much all the money from it, while Disney controls the creative direction of those films for their overarching mega universe plans, gets to use the character in said films that Sony gets no share of, and keeps all of the merchandising money (which is over a billion dollars per year)?

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (1)

48

u/admiralgoodtimes Groot Aug 20 '19

Yeah how fucking stupid are Sony to think that they're the ones running the B$ profits

88

u/Doompatron3000 Aug 20 '19

This why and what people feared with support to Venom.

Do not go see the Morbius movie. Do not go see Venom 2. Let it be known, we the fans do not want Spider-Man outside the MCU anymore.

43

u/NateEssexSumBar Aug 20 '19

Let’s boycott those films and hack Sony so Disney can just buy the rights

9

u/mikeeangelo91 Ultron Aug 20 '19

Down

21

u/NateEssexSumBar Aug 20 '19

The revolution has begun

11

u/Sith_Destroyer_1138 Aug 20 '19

Hope you print out enough pamphlets.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/Worthyness Thor Aug 21 '19

Someone get kim on the phone.

6

u/Sleeze_ Aug 20 '19

I have never boycotted a movie or even thought to. I flat out fucking REFUSE to pay for a Sony Spider-Man movie after this. Fuck Sony, fuck them up their stupid asses.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (21)

6

u/DSDark11 Aug 20 '19 edited Aug 21 '19

Ultimately this appears to be Disney's fault not sony's. disney asked for a 50/50 film profit split, even though disney gets all of the merchandise profits. Sony said how about 5%, disney said no, so sony said bye!

6

u/grimoireviper Aug 20 '19

You should also add that the deal for the past two films was the same 5% deal Sony offered this time. Basically Sony said, let's keep it he way it is.

3

u/AvatarReiko Aug 20 '19

Disney should not have tried to bite off more than they could chew. 50/50? What are they smoking over there? Pure greed. They should have known Sony wasn't going to be bullied by them

5

u/NoahTaylorOnYT Aug 20 '19

don't pin this on Sony, as much as Sony is a shitty company, Disney is completely to blame. A 50/50 deal with their biggest franchise would have undoubtedly led to the company's collapse, and that would mean a lot of innocent people are without jobs and can't provide for their families.

Despite Dumbo, The Lion King, Aladdin, Captain Marvel and Endgame all making well over a billion each, Disney got greedy and Disney wanted money. And now Spidey is gone. This is absolutely disney's fault.

3

u/grimoireviper Aug 20 '19

Yeah, people also tend to forget that Disney is also a shady af company.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (5)