|
Post by thebayharborbutcher on Aug 21, 2019 16:04:39 GMT
I just want to preface this by saying at best I'm a moderate Marvel fan, so I don't have much stake in all this. However, the way I see this whole Disney, Sony, Spider-Man thing is that Sony used Disney. They saw how much success Disney has had building their Cinematic Universe, so they turned to them to work their magic on Spider-Man. It obviously worked because they got the last film to gross over a billion. As far as I'm concerned Disney did the majority of the leg work to make these past two films hits. I think they rightfully deserve a greater stake in terms of what they are getting back financially. Yes, I know they are super dominate right now and don't necessarily need the money. However, I don't think that's the point. They did the work, so they deserve the rewards. Anyway, I think Sony was just using Disney anyways to build up their brand. Now that they have Spider-Man back on track they will likely just take him and build their own Spider-Man universe along with Venom.
|
|
|
Post by scabab on Aug 21, 2019 16:12:34 GMT
I was never overly familiar with the deal but I was under the impression that when it came to the three solo Spider-Man movies, Sony got all the money.
In return Spider-Man got to appear in three other Marvel movies of which Disney got all that money.
I thought that was supposed to be their reward, that they could shove Spider-Man in movies like Captain America and Avengers and get that added benefit from his appearance and get to keep all of that money.
So with Disney saying they want half the money from the solo Spider-Man movies...ain't it like Sony saying they want half the money from the Marvel movies with Spider-Man in it?
But like I said I'm not overly sure how it all worked.
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Aug 21, 2019 16:22:31 GMT
I was never overly familiar with the deal but I was under the impression that when it came to the three solo Spider-Man movies, Sony got all the money. In return Spider-Man got to appear in three other Marvel movies of which Disney got all that money. I thought that was supposed to be their reward, that they could shove Spider-Man in movies like Captain America and Avengers and get that added benefit from his appearance and get to keep all of that money. So with Disney saying they want half the money from the solo Spider-Man movies...ain't it like Sony saying they want half the money from the Marvel movies with Spider-Man in it? But like I said I'm not overly sure how it all worked. Basically yeah, but Marvel (Disney) got 100% of the merchandising profits. I don't think Sony 'used' Disney any more than the other way around. It seemed like a good compromise. Sony has no idea what to do with the property on their own, but I don't blame them for balking at Disney's offer if what we heard is true. Why should they split the revenue 50/50 when they own the cinematic rights to the character? Look at it in retrospect. They paid for the rights to the character back in the day. No matter how much you assist them during production, why would they give you half the profits from the character they bought from you in the first place?
|
|
|
Post by Lord Death Man on Aug 21, 2019 18:53:03 GMT
I was never overly familiar with the deal but I was under the impression that when it came to the three solo Spider-Man movies, Sony got all the money. In return Spider-Man got to appear in three other Marvel movies of which Disney got all that money. I thought that was supposed to be their reward, that they could shove Spider-Man in movies like Captain America and Avengers and get that added benefit from his appearance and get to keep all of that money. So with Disney saying they want half the money from the solo Spider-Man movies...ain't it like Sony saying they want half the money from the Marvel movies with Spider-Man in it? But like I said I'm not overly sure how it all worked. Basically yeah, but Marvel (Disney) got 100% of the merchandising profits. I don't think Sony 'used' Disney any more than the other way around. It seemed like a good compromise. Sony has no idea what to do with the property on their own, but I don't blame them for balking at Disney's offer if what we heard is true. Why should they split the revenue 50/50 when they own the cinematic rights to the character? Look at it in retrospect. They paid for the rights to the character back in the day. No matter how much you assist them during production, why would they give you half the profits from the character they bought from you in the first place? If you split the financing, you should split the profits. Disney isn't being greedy, they know the value of their asset. Let's be clear here. Kevin Feige is the most successful producer in the entire history of Hollywood. If you had him in your employ, would you pimp him out to other studios for a paltry five percent? The man just gave Sony Pictures the kiss of life with the biggest grossing movie in the history of that studio. The price is the price. If you can't afford it, just say that instead of spinning bullshit all the livelong day. Sony Pictures leadership has no vision and no foresight and, eventually, they'll have no future.
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Aug 21, 2019 19:19:07 GMT
If you split the financing, you should split the profits. Disney isn't being greedy, they know the value of their asset.Let's be clear here. Kevin Feige is the most successful producer in the entire history of Hollywood. If you had him in your employ, would you pimp him out to other studios for a paltry five percent? The man just gave Sony Pictures the kiss of life with the biggest grossing movie in the history of that studio. The price is the price. If you can't afford it, just say that instead of spinning bullshit all the livelong day. Sony Pictures leadership has no vision and no foresight and, eventually, they'll have no future. I don't disagree with anything you said except this: it isn't their asset. They're lucky Sony is even playing ball with them. Sony could've continued making shit Spider-Man movies until the cows came home and made a profit. It's a shame because Sony is clueless but at the end of the day, I can't blame them for not wanting to buy a product from someone and then give that company half the proceeds from their use of said product. To your point though, if Disney is footing half the bill for the production (and letting Sony use their engineer to design a usable model), they deserve more compensation than what they're getting. I see where both sides are coming from here, but I wouldn't go 50-50 on anything if I were Sony. Disney already gets 100% of the merchandising, so it isn't like they're being shut out. I sincerely hope they can work something out, because while Homecoming and FFH aren't among my favorite MCU films, they're still enjoyable and do justice to the character (for the most part). Sony put out hot garbage like the ASM films and Venom, so I shudder to think what they'll do without Feige's input from here on out.
|
|
|
Post by Lord Death Man on Aug 21, 2019 19:45:42 GMT
If you split the financing, you should split the profits. Disney isn't being greedy, they know the value of their asset.Let's be clear here. Kevin Feige is the most successful producer in the entire history of Hollywood. If you had him in your employ, would you pimp him out to other studios for a paltry five percent? The man just gave Sony Pictures the kiss of life with the biggest grossing movie in the history of that studio. The price is the price. If you can't afford it, just say that instead of spinning bullshit all the livelong day. Sony Pictures leadership has no vision and no foresight and, eventually, they'll have no future. I don't disagree with anything you said except this: it isn't their asset. They're lucky Sony is even playing ball with them. Sony could've continued making shit Spider-Man movies until the cows came home and made a profit. It's a shame because Sony is clueless but at the end of the day, I can't blame them for not wanting to buy a product from someone and then give that company half the proceeds from their use of said product. To your point though, if Disney is footing half the bill for the production (and letting Sony use their engineer to design a usable model), they deserve more compensation than what they're getting. I see where both sides are coming from here, but I wouldn't go 50-50 on anything if I were Sony. Disney already gets 100% of the merchandising, so it isn't like they're being shut out. I sincerely hope they can work something out, because while Homecoming and FFH aren't among my favorite MCU films, they're still enjoyable and do justice to the character (for the most part). Sony put out hot garbage like the ASM films and Venom, so I shudder to think what they'll do without Feige's input from here on out. Sony doesn't own Spider-Man. They are a licensee - admittedly in perpetuity so long as they keep cranking out films based on the property. They're just like any other bunch of assholes who plaster Spider-Man's face on a lunchbox for a buck. The legend of Sony's "ownership" stake in Spider-Man has been greatly exaggerated over the decades. I get that licensees aren't in it for the hugs and giggles but, Sony is heading down a very slippery slope. Disney can hit or miss. Sony can't miss once. Two year ago the studio was staring down the barrel of $1 B write-down. Nobody is teflon, every other studio besides Disney is just one or two FANT4STICs away from absorption.
|
|
|
Post by politicidal on Aug 21, 2019 22:20:42 GMT
Like an expensive escort. Then kicked them aside like a common call girl.
|
|
|
Post by darkpast on Aug 21, 2019 22:47:16 GMT
Disney are white slavers
|
|
|
Post by Lord Death Man on Aug 21, 2019 22:53:00 GMT
Disney are darkpast slavers.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 22, 2019 6:38:28 GMT
Nobody knows who the bad guys are right now.
Did Sony refuse to budge on 50%?
Or did Disney refuse to budge on 50%?
Sony shouldn't take that deal. Get it down to like 20-25%.
All that matters is what studio is more greedy?
I want Spider-Man in the MCU too but Sony has the right to decline.
|
|
|
Post by merh on Aug 22, 2019 11:21:15 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Aug 22, 2019 11:59:48 GMT
TL;DR The short answer is they can put out absolute garbage like Venom and it'll still make money. Once they realized this, the era of watchable Spider-Man movies was over.
|
|
|
Post by Hauntedknight87 on Aug 22, 2019 13:09:39 GMT
Probably.
If another attempt at a deal with Sony falls through I fully expect Disney to go to war with Sony.
Remember that Spider-Man game exclusive to the ps4? We probably won't get a sequel to it.
I can see Disney doing everything in their power to hurt Sony.
|
|
|
Post by ThatGuy on Aug 22, 2019 13:59:35 GMT
I was never overly familiar with the deal but I was under the impression that when it came to the three solo Spider-Man movies, Sony got all the money. In return Spider-Man got to appear in three other Marvel movies of which Disney got all that money. I thought that was supposed to be their reward, that they could shove Spider-Man in movies like Captain America and Avengers and get that added benefit from his appearance and get to keep all of that money. So with Disney saying they want half the money from the solo Spider-Man movies...ain't it like Sony saying they want half the money from the Marvel movies with Spider-Man in it? But like I said I'm not overly sure how it all worked. Basically yeah, but Marvel (Disney) got 100% of the merchandising profits. I don't think Sony 'used' Disney any more than the other way around. It seemed like a good compromise. Sony has no idea what to do with the property on their own, but I don't blame them for balking at Disney's offer if what we heard is true. Why should they split the revenue 50/50 when they own the cinematic rights to the character? Look at it in retrospect. They paid for the rights to the character back in the day. No matter how much you assist them during production, why would they give you half the profits from the character they bought from you in the first place? It's not just splitting the revenue, but also the cost. Sony was putting up the production for the movies while Disney did all the work. What Disney wanted was to put up half the production and take half the money. Sony wants the 95% of it without doing any real work for it. Sony pretty much used Disney to make the character popular again.
|
|
|
Post by ThatGuy on Aug 22, 2019 14:04:48 GMT
Probably. If another attempt at a deal with Sony falls through I fully expect Disney to go to war with Sony. Remember that Spider-Man game exclusive to the ps4? We probably won't get a sequel to it. I can see Disney doing everything in their power to hurt Sony. Well, Sony is buying Insomniac.
|
|
|
Post by ThatGuy on Aug 22, 2019 14:07:09 GMT
Nobody knows who the bad guys are right now. Did Sony refuse to budge on 50%? Or did Disney refuse to budge on 50%? Sony shouldn't take that deal. Get it down to like 20-25%. All that matters is what studio is more greedy? I want Spider-Man in the MCU too but Sony has the right to decline. Disney wants to go half on both production and revenue. They don't just want to take 50%. They want to put in 50%, also.
|
|
|
Post by Hauntedknight87 on Aug 22, 2019 14:21:20 GMT
Probably. If another attempt at a deal with Sony falls through I fully expect Disney to go to war with Sony. Remember that Spider-Man game exclusive to the ps4? We probably won't get a sequel to it. I can see Disney doing everything in their power to hurt Sony. Well, Sony is buying Insomniac. Exactly! A Sequel is a PS4/5 exclusive no matter what. Sony doesn't have the game rights to Spider-Man, so Marvel is not obliged to do a Spider-Man game for the PlayStation.
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Aug 22, 2019 15:33:27 GMT
Basically yeah, but Marvel (Disney) got 100% of the merchandising profits. I don't think Sony 'used' Disney any more than the other way around. It seemed like a good compromise. Sony has no idea what to do with the property on their own, but I don't blame them for balking at Disney's offer if what we heard is true. Why should they split the revenue 50/50 when they own the cinematic rights to the character? Look at it in retrospect. They paid for the rights to the character back in the day. No matter how much you assist them during production, why would they give you half the profits from the character they bought from you in the first place? It's not just splitting the revenue, but also the cost. Sony was putting up the production for the movies while Disney did all the work. What Disney wanted was to put up half the production and take half the money. Sony wants the 95% of it without doing any real work for it. Sony pretty much used Disney to make the character popular again. I agree, but again I don't blame them for not wanting to split the profits for a character they paid for fair and square decades ago. It does seem shortsighted on their part to simply walk away. I think they're banking on foreign markets not knowing the difference between a Marvel character and the MCU proper. Maybe after diminishing returns (which are inevitable with the shit they churn out) they'll give up and sell Spidey to Disney in a few years. There's no way Disney will ever agree to help them again unless the deal heavily favors them. Oh well, we had an enjoyable Spidey for a few years there. Now it's back to the Sony shitshow. That Venom movie looked like a generic 'evil alien' movie from the 1990s. The ASM films were an insult to the character and his fans. Looking forward to the future of the MCU even without Spider-Man. I haven't watched a strictly Sony Spidey movie in theaters since Spider-Man 3, won't be that hard to avoid them in the future.
|
|
|
Post by ThatGuy on Aug 22, 2019 20:14:22 GMT
It's not just splitting the revenue, but also the cost. Sony was putting up the production for the movies while Disney did all the work. What Disney wanted was to put up half the production and take half the money. Sony wants the 95% of it without doing any real work for it. Sony pretty much used Disney to make the character popular again.I agree, but again I don't blame them for not wanting to split the profits for a character they paid for fair and square decades ago. It does seem shortsighted on their part to simply walk away. I think they're banking on foreign markets not knowing the difference between a Marvel character and the MCU proper. Maybe after diminishing returns (which are inevitable with the shit they churn out) they'll give up and sell Spidey to Disney in a few years. There's no way Disney will ever agree to help them again unless the deal heavily favors them. Oh well, we had an enjoyable Spidey for a few years there. Now it's back to the Sony shitshow. That Venom movie looked like a generic 'evil alien' movie from the 1990s. The ASM films were an insult to the character and his fans. Looking forward to the future of the MCU even without Spider-Man. I haven't watched a strictly Sony Spidey movie in theaters since Spider-Man 3, won't be that hard to avoid them in the future. Why are people still saying they only wanted to split the profits? Disney wanted to pay half the bill. It was going to be 50/50 on production and revenue. It's Sony that wants all the money with no work involved on their part.
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Aug 22, 2019 20:17:40 GMT
I agree, but again I don't blame them for not wanting to split the profits for a character they paid for fair and square decades ago. It does seem shortsighted on their part to simply walk away. I think they're banking on foreign markets not knowing the difference between a Marvel character and the MCU proper. Maybe after diminishing returns (which are inevitable with the shit they churn out) they'll give up and sell Spidey to Disney in a few years. There's no way Disney will ever agree to help them again unless the deal heavily favors them. Oh well, we had an enjoyable Spidey for a few years there. Now it's back to the Sony shitshow. That Venom movie looked like a generic 'evil alien' movie from the 1990s. The ASM films were an insult to the character and his fans. Looking forward to the future of the MCU even without Spider-Man. I haven't watched a strictly Sony Spidey movie in theaters since Spider-Man 3, won't be that hard to avoid them in the future. Why are people still saying they only wanted to split the profits? Disney wanted to pay half the bill. It was going to be 50/50 on production and revenue. It's Sony that wants all the money with no work involved on their part. I didn't say they only wanted to split the profits. But they did want to split the profits, and I don't blame Sony for passing on that. I still think they could've come to a compromise. Hell, they still might and all of this will be irrelevant.
|
|