The Amazing Spider-Man 2 Sony's claiming their quarterly profits benefitted from the film's success...

[Miken Ayers]

However if you read the article it looks like the majority of the profits came from selling off their shares of Square Enix. "Let's liquidate what we own of a gaming company then give ASM 2 the credit!"

http://www.techtimes.com/articles/1...pider-man-2-success-asset-and-stake-sales.htm

 

[Andrew Lucas]

You guys have to twist things..

 

[Miken Ayers]

You guys have to twist things..

Me, or Sony? The article even says 149 million of the 261 million of the profits was from selling their piece of SE.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

I have no doubt that Sony will eventually make money from DVD sales and television rights but if all went as planned part 3 wouldn't have been delayed until an unspecified 2018 date. Everybody expected a year delay but a two year delay means re-evaluation. And personally, as a Spider-Man fan, I think they should rethink this current series so the delay is fine by me.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

I have no doubt that Sony will eventually make money from DVD sales and television rights but if all went as planned part 3 wouldn't have been delayed until an unspecified 2018 date. Everybody expected a year delay but a two year delay means re-evaluation. And personally, as a Spider-Man fan, I think they should rethink this current series so the delay is fine by me.

Get out of here with your logic. They delayed the film because everything is going exactly how they want it to.

 

[Andrew Lucas]

Isn't because they are going to release three spin offs that won't do much of money as their main franchise

 

[GuestStar2004]

I think the sinister 6 will be the re-evaluation aswell as a bridge to TASM3 since I am certain they will have it in mind what spider-man is doing during the events of the sinister 6 movie and by the end of the sinister 6 they may have a few pre-planned ideas for once

But You have to remember they already knew they were making these spin off movies either way and they also said they wanted to go back and forth between spider-man movie and spin off and it seems like that's what we are getting

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

Sony had actual release dates for TASM 3 and 4 before TASM 2's release. The simple fact that they so drastically changed their plans shows that the film didn't do well as they expected.

A studio does not delay it's sequel release by 2 whole years (and the release date is still really vague because we don't have a day and month) and outright take it's planned forth film off the calendar completely if everything went okay money wise with TASM 2.

 

[Andrew Lucas]

Maybe the route that S6 took during scripting made the movie be released early than TASM3? Because it's not like a single change. If it was after TASM3 then it would be another story. I don't think money is the problem here or else ASM2 would take a long time to release.

 

[GuestStar2004]

John campea at AMC believes Sony probably profited around $193 mil and says the high claimed marketing costs have been proven to be false and was actually much lower

In the end it may not have been about money since no one has enough information to back that up, it indeed could have been a re-evaluation that pushed the film back since it's not like they delayed the movie 4 years with nothing inbetween (the sinister 6 in 2016)

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

Of course the re-evaluation was about the money. I don't care what John Campea says, he's a crude idiot.

You think Sony is happy that they spent more and made less and that the reception of the film was tepid at best? It's common sense to deduce that a less than expected box office performance, with an assist from the tepid response to the picture, caused Sony to rethink their strategy.

Sinister Six is a last ditch effort project if there ever was one. Sony is grasping at straws (like all non Marvel Studios studios to be fair) with that project and are trying to save the next Spider-Man film from falling even farther. I'm skeptical but good luck to them.

 

[LizardMan07]

In all honesty ISS, you're grasping at straws mate.

You start fine, its about money. They rethink their strategy.

S6 is not last ditch, I can assure you they'd rather run the franchise into the ground then give S6 a shot and then give up, that's your personal bias coming in to think that.

 

[Angryfantasyfan]

In all honesty ISS, you're grasping at straws mate.

You start fine, its about money. They rethink their strategy.

S6 is not last ditch, I can assure you they'd rather run the franchise into the ground then give S6 a shot and then give up, that's your personal bias coming in to think that.

I don't follow your logic. Unless you think they never tried to make this a successful franchise, they would try a risky move before settling on milking the franchise for all they can. A last ditch effort is the final attempt to succeed, not necessarily the last play of the game.

 

[GuestStar2004]

The sinister 6 isn't a last ditch effort since we don't know if one of marvels most loved characters (spider-man) is even in it and if he is it will be a small glorified role probably

So if the sinister 6 doesn't do well They are still gonna attempt to make the amazing spider-man 3 with one of marvels most loved characters (spider-man) either way

And If anything the sinister 6 feels more like am attempt at something new while giving spidey a breather and possible rejuvenation, and giving how well crossing over characters does these days it's not at all surprising

So In the end it's probably better the sinister 6 comes before TASM3 because we would either have got a rushed film of introductions and villains coming together while trying to give Peter his story or it would have been another teaser movie like TASM2, and while many feel the sinister 6 is gonna flop I think it stands a fine chance of doing ok

 

[XtremelyBaneful]

http://www.superherohype.com/news/3...o-cuts-hurt-the-amazing-spider-man-2#/slide/1

 

[Frodo]

Sony is in kinda a bind I think. I'm by no means excusing they're meddling, because the last three films are so weak imo due to their efforts to "improve" the stories . In an ideal world they really would have let the franchise rest for 10 years at least after SM3.

If for nothing else , the long gaps between reboots give a new generation of filmmakers , writers, to come at the stories in a new way and work with a clean slate. However, they legally have to keep trucking , even though creatively they really kinda in a rut. As long as Sony is constantly trying to play the role of "storyteller" and " narrator" to these films with their hands on approach, we're gonna keep getting mediocre to bad Spiderman films.

While I understand their un ease with just letting a director go hog wild and do whatever they please with their money maker ala"Joel Schumacer circa 1996" , they ultimately seem to be hurting their own films with there constant meddling. While I don't think Webb is a Nolan or a Donner, the talent, save Roberto and Orci, is there. They have the director and they have an actor who get the characters, and the deleted scenes from both films demonstrate to me that they are at least trying to tell a story. They can only do so much when Sony execs think they can do it better and we end up with the cut and paste jobs which feel like unfinished stories and repeated bits that were done better in the Raimi films.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

Sony has nothing to lose by allowing a filmmaker more freedom. No the filmmaker shouldn't get Andrew Stanton on John Carter levels of freedom but a decent amount couldn't bring us something much more divisive than what we are getting now. It's worth a shot.

 

[Doctor Octopus]

Sony's problem is they think they know what's best and they have been proven wrong in the last three Spider-Man movies.

 

[webhead731]

Amazing Spider-Man 2, success.....?? ROFL

 

[GuestStar2004]

Amazing Spider-Man 2, success.....?? ROFL

Let's get Away from the bias for a moment as it doesn't decide whether its a success or not and look at the fact that TASM2 could be considered a success if not obviously is a success since it made over 700 mil

And no studio is gonna cry about that

 

[W/ Great Power]

Let's get Away from the bias for a moment as it doesn't decide whether its a success or not and look at the fact that TASM2 could be considered a success if not obviously is a success since it made over 700 mil

And no studio is gonna cry about that

Not to take sides here, but that's something I've always wondered when looking at the numbers.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

Not to take sides here, but that's something I've always wondered when looking at the numbers.

1. It didn't make $700 million. It grossed $700 million. There is a big difference there. The actual profit is far less. Sony reportedly spent $255 million on the production budget and $150 million+ on promotion. Investors don't spend $400 million on something just to make a small profit.

2. In practically every market save China (which increased for reasons outside of the film), the gross dropped considerably from TASM (which itself did a lot worse than SM3).

3. In the most important market, the US (and Canada which is included in the domestic gross) the film barely grossed $200 million, which was a whopping $50 million less than the production budget. This is important not only because it is the largest market, but because it is the market in which the studio keeps the largest percentage of the gross (approximately 50-55%). The worst market? That would be China, the one major market where the gross increased. There the studio only keeps 20-25% of the gross. This means for every dollar a film doesn't make in the US, it needs to make two to two and a half dollars in China to keep even. It didn't do that.

4. The film had mediocre reviews and poor legs at the box office (a higher than normal percentage of the gross was made on the opening weekend). This shows that the film was not all that well liked. These means that the downward slide of box office receipts from one film to the next is likely to continue to at least the next installment. Some people (not all or even most, but enough to cause a problem) will not see the next film because they didn't like this one.

5. Sony wanted to use (and still is) using TASM2 to launch a series of spinoffs to support a larger universe. To do that properly, Sony needed a massive success and while TASM2 isn't going to actually lose money, it certainly wasn't that. Now the spinoffs are going to be a much harder sell.

So yeah, it wasn't a bomb, but it was a massive disappointment. Unfortunately Nikki Finke ran into legal problems before she was able to post her writeup detailing the backstage problems at Sony in the aftermath of this film. I was really looking forward to reading it.

 

[Doctor Octopus]

Agreed. That's why Sinister Six is last ditch effort for them.

 

[GuestStar2004]

Agreed. That's why Sinister Six is last ditch effort for them.

Lol it's not a last ditch effort, TASM3 could be a last ditch effort but the sinister 6 won't be one because with the lack of spider-man in a big role it won't be enough evidence to suggest what another actual spidey film could do

 

[webhead731]

Yeah it made the least out of any Spidey movie and it even had higher ticket prices and 3D going for it...then it did poor critically and the audience rating drops as we speak. The movie came out on DVD three months after release where as the others were around the holiday season.

This is no success. This is a rapidly declining franchise that has been butchered by the current team behind it and Sony. If they keep making sequels and spin-offs in this direction it will get worse.
They need to let it rest and maybe Marvel can get it and someone who knows what the **** they're doing can have a go.