The Amazing Spider-Man Would Spider-Man really be better off at Marvel/Disney?

[Picard Sisko]

Please SONY! PLEASE!

I don't think Spider-Man will be in the Avengers 2, unless they are doing a deal right now. It would have to be before production begins. I think they are still working on the script, not sure.

 

[Picard Sisko]

Spider-Man doesn't necessarily have to appear in the Avengers 2. It could be one of the solo films for all we know. Heck, imagine if it was Captain America: TFA? It comes out shortly before TASM2.

Anyways, I think if Spider-Man did appear in an MCU film, it wouldn't be until Phase Three.

 

[AF3619]

Oscorp tower in Avengers?, i don´t know is just too good to be real,but Sony could really need the money and the marketing

 

[Picard Sisko]

Oscorp tower in Avengers?, i don´t know is just too good to be real,but Sony could really need the money and the marketing

Well it was confirmed that the Oscorp tower was going to be in the Avengers. In Item 47, someone wore an ESU t-shirt. That is also a very big deal. Sony initially refused to let Marvel Studios use it for TIH in 2008. But years later, Sony was going bankrupt, and sold the marketing and TV rights to Marvel, who possibly saved them. I guess they gave in and let Marvel use ESU in their short film that ties into the MCU. I wouldn't be surprised if there was another deal being made that would allow for them to use Spider-Man in their movies, too.

That target commercial with Iron Man and the Marc Webb Spider-Man really was amazing... it makes me wonder about what could be going on behind closed doors.

 

[GENERAL RAAM582]

All you have to do is put The Daily Bugle in TA.

 

[GENERAL RAAM582]

Well it was confirmed that the Oscorp tower was going to be in the Avengers. In Item 47, someone wore an ESU t-shirt. That is also a very big deal. Sony initially refused to let Marvel Studios use it for TIH in 2008. But years later, Sony was going bankrupt, and sold the marketing and TV rights to Marvel, who possibly saved them. I guess they gave in and let Marvel use ESU in their short film that ties into the MCU. I wouldn't be surprised if there was another deal being made that would allow for them to use Spider-Man in their movies, too.

That target commercial with Iron Man and the Marc Webb Spider-Man really was amazing... it makes me wonder about what could be going on behind closed doors.

Yeah, I noticed that too. Is that giant tree thing in TA too?

 

[Picard Sisko]

All you have to do is put The Daily Bugle in TA.

And have a newspaper cover on the wall with Spider-Man on it. That would be so awesome IMO.

 

[GENERAL RAAM582]

Or do what X-Men TAS did. Have Spidey rescue someone, and quickly disappear. lol

 

[Picard Sisko]

Or do what X-Men TAS did. Have Spidey rescue someone, and quickly disappear. lol

If Spider-Man were to appear in a solo film, which one should it be?

I think if they ever made a Daredevil movie, it would make sense to have Spider-Man make an appearance, since both heroes live in New York.

 

[GENERAL RAAM582]

Hulk and Spidey would really be something. Kraven could hunt them both down.

 

[Picard Sisko]

I could see Spider-Man being in a solo film for Captain America, Daredevil, or Iron Man.

 

[GENERAL RAAM582]

Yeah, he could go with just about anyone.

 

[Picard Sisko]

I don't think he would fit in a Thor or Hulk film IMO.

 

[GENERAL RAAM582]

Thor no, but then again I don't like Thor. I wouldn't mind Hulk. Parker and Banner are very smart people.

 

[Picard Sisko]

True. Perhaps Banner is another one of Peter's mentors?

 

[GENERAL RAAM582]

I think Ruffalo and Garfield could have good, dare I say, chemistry?

 

[Picard Sisko]

I think Ruffalo and Garfield could have good, dare I say, chemistry?

I could definitely see it.

 

[GENERAL RAAM582]

Yeah. Kraven would want to hunt the big beast too.

 

[Picard Sisko]

If Marvel had the film rights to the Fantastic 4, I'd say that they would be perfect to share the same movie with Spider-Man. Imagine if Fox did a deal with Sony to make that happen...

 

[GENERAL RAAM582]

New Year wish is that Marvel Studios, Sony, and Fox become very good friends for their and our benefit.

 

[pr0xyt0xin]

voted "Other"

mainly because yeah, Sony has done some decent stuff with Spidey. Therefore I can't say "Yes, without a doubt" Marvel studios should get the rights back. Not to mention, without the big hitters like Spidey and X-Men, Marvel is free to focus on their lesser known franchises and we are finally gonna get an Ant-Man movie AS WELL as another Andrew Garfield as Spider-Man movie.

But then again, Marvel has made amazing movies left and right since the MCU was established and the MU is nothing without Spidey, so its almost difficult to watch knowing Spidey isn't there somewhere. I guess that's where my imagination comes into play.

Thing is, I'd like to see what happens with ASM2 before I decide "Spidey should return home." ASM gave me a lot of hope for the potential Sony has with the character. And assuming they give us a nod in the MCU or ASM2 that the worlds could be interconnected, well i'll be a happy camper.

 

[Spider-Aziz]

I want to see a Marvel Universe free of Spidey, this film universe is ideal for that

 

[Spiderdevil]

Do you know how much screen time SHIELD got in IM2 and Thor?
Seriously. Go look through the movie, count how long Nick Fury, Coulson, SHIELD, etc, appear and tally up the time. I did it a couple years back to refute someone making this exact same claim. Know how much it is in both movies?
Around 9 minutes.
It's around 9 minutes of a 2 hour movie.
Explain to me again how SHIELD 'hijacks half the movie'?
It's fine if you feel that they had a bigger presence in the movies than you would have wanted, that's your opinion. Yet even then I'd disagree with you; SHIELD is the connective tissue that binds these movies and these characters together in the same way they do in the comics. I do not Qqunderstand the mentality that says that when they appear in one of the characters solo films that it somehow detracts from that movies quality as a whole. Is the same true of the comics? No, it isn't. I have never heard anyone complain about that, so why does it detract from your overall enjoyment of the movies? I am genuinely asking here, because I don't understand this mentality.
So please folks, let's all stop making wild claims that they 'hijacked half the movie'. That clearly is not the case.

That fact that they had more time than the villian Vanko is enough to say they had too much,Black widow imo was needlessly squeezed in.And the whole your-father-was-founder and he wants you to discover a new element sob story sounded ridiculous.Had they used that time to develop Vanko/hammer instead of giving it to shield and black widow,we would have seen a great movie.And the exact time period isnt an indicator,the whole story arc needs to be changed to accomodate SHIELD
To make myself more clear,I dont want Shield to be part of a spidey movie,at the most 30 seconds to 1 minute(like IM1)

Well even right there you're saying the Spider-man films and all the Marvel Studio films have around the same amount of critical reception, with Marvel having the advantage ever so slightly. But no, I'd say to properly compare the two studios you need to include the two Ghost Rider films they made. We are discussing how they handle Marvel Super movies, after all. How greatly do you think that would effect the average critical reception for their movies?

Fiar enough but Sony never took Ghost rider seriously in the first place,everythong starting from the lead actor is wrong,Spidey is their baby and they would never treat him like
On the other hand,now marvel has tasted the success a movie like Avengers can have,they will make them an ever bigger part in upcoming solo movies,you mark my words

no, you are incorrect about those box office figures. Check those numbers again. Marvel has made 3.8 billion from 6 movies while Sony has made 3.2 billion from 4. Even including the Ghost Rider movies (which, as I said, we should be doing) it doesn't come close to the bank marvel's making. Not to mention the fact that Marvel has Iron Man 3, Cap 2, Thor 2, Guardians of the Galaxy, Avengers 2, and Ant-man coming down the pipe. They are going to be raking in the cash like no one's business for at least another three years.
Still say Sony is the better business?

What part of 'adjusted for inflation' did you not understand ?
And imo marvel are getting ahead of themselves,no one is interested in seeing a GOG or antman movie

What about the two complete and utter failures Sony had in Ghost Rider? Why aren't those being counted here, since we're talking about the business of marvel superhero movies?
By your own standards, Sony is now at a 2/6 as well. And which would you rather do, sit down and watch all the Spider-man and Ghost Rider films or all the Marvel Studio films? Once again this is all subjective, but its real dang tough to argue that Sony is the clear winner here with a better record.

The only marvel movies I can bear to watch is IM and TA
And since you are insisting on adding Ghpst rider,we might aswell count on the TSSM cartoon which is one of thebest superhero cartoon to date created by sony which marvel cancelled and replaced with a farce

 

[Spiderdevil]

As I said, back in 2008 no one in hollywood wanted to even touch Iron Man. It was a HUGE risk that could have potentially bankrupt Marvel once again; they took out a 528 million dollar loan to fund their own movies starting with Iron Man, and if they failed it would have been a devastating loss for the company.
But no, in 6 short years they took several B and C list comic characters, a majority of which were unknown to the public at large, and turned their brand into the fourth highest grossing movie franchise of all time.
So in summary, Sony took something proven to be profitable and made a good profit. Marvel took something unproven and risky and turned an even bigger profit. So saying 'Marvel made so much money because of the Avengers' is missing the point entirely because that is basically where they proved their mettle as a movie studio, and, as I'm trying to say, cemented themselves as the cream of the crop in superhero cinema.

How easily you forget that sony was successful with spidey a time when the genre wasnt even famous and was considered a kids genre,they made the genre famous in the first place.Spider-man was in development hell since ages and sony took him and made him a hit on the big screen
And a character being famous doesnt mean his movies will automatically do well,look at movies like Batman and Robin,Batman Begins,Superman returns.Even the X men movies never put the box office on fire with their earning,Orgins was panned everywhere despite having a top superhero like wolverine as the main character.

I always give marvel credit for being successful with B grade characters but that doesnt take away the enormous success sony has with spidey

 

[SpiderMarvelite]

Hulk vs Spider-Man, know that would be insane.