Would You Rather Sony Lose The Rights To Spider-Man Or Keep Them?

WB did actually approach Bale about continuing but Bale relented out of respect for Nolan’s wishes.

“When they came [to us after ‘Batman Begins’] and said, ‘You want to go make another?’ It was fantastic, but we still said, ‘This is it. We will not get another opportunity,'” Bale said. “Then they came and they said, ‘OK, let’s do the third one.’ Chris had always said to me that if we were fortunate to be able to make three we would stop. ‘Let’s walk away after that,’ he said. Then when they inevitably came to us and said, ‘How about a No. 4?’ I said, ‘No. We have to stick to Chris’ dream, which was always to, hopefully, do a trilogy. Let’s not stretch too far and become overindulgent and go for a fourth.'”
- Christian Bale.

Granted, Bale here is saying they asked him about returning to the role for a potential fourth installment instead of returning for the role long-term for a shared universe, but one can easily imagine his answer would be the exact same if they asked him to return in the role in a similar MCU Iron Man fashion. Nolan views his version of Batman as a stand-alone take with a definitive beginning, middle, and end, told in three movies so Bale wants to honor those wishes. Unless Nolan somehow gives the stamp of approval(which is very unlikely), I don’t see Bale willingly returning to the role under any circumstances; no matter how much money WB offered him. So even the option to continue with Bale in the role after TDKR — be it a fourth film, or for a cinematic universe wasn’t available for WB like you’re making it out to be. Leaving rebooting the character with a new actor as the only possible option for them.
I heard a rumor that Bale was supposed to get paid $50 million for being in BvS but that rumor wasn't substantiated. Well, I didn't know he really was approached for #4 but I'd say he made a terrible mistake walking away. To hell with Christopher Nolan's dream. The only film in his series that was a masterpiece was TDK, BB and DKR are good films but I think they and the trilogy in general is overrated. There is nothing so special about that series that makes me feel like it was better off left alone. On the contrary it would have been better off getting expanded upon and being the real kickstarter to the DCEU, not MoS.


Iron Man is gonna be rebooted eventually. Whether it be new continuity or finding some way to pluck someone out of the multiverse or whatever, there will be a new Iron Man at some point. All these characters will get a reboot at some point. The popular ones at least
Of course he will. But for the time being, audiences have had only one cinematic portrayal of Iron Man for 12 years. And that span of time is longer than the gap between Batman and Spider-Man reboots. Right now, there is still no reboot in sight, only a passing of the mantle. If a Tony Stark shows up in the MCU again via multiverse, then it's still the same ongoing story being told so I wouldn't consider that a reboot. A soft reboot maybe, but it wouldn't meant to disregard RDJ's portrayal since it'd still be in the same continuity. It isn't exactly the same as all the speculation about NwH with the legacy Spider-Man potentially showing up there.
 
I heard a rumor that Bale was supposed to get paid $50 million for being in BvS but that rumor wasn't substantiated. Well, I didn't know he really was approached for #4 but I'd say he made a terrible mistake walking away. To hell with Christopher Nolan's dream. The only film in his series that was a masterpiece was TDK, BB and DKR are good films but I think they and the trilogy in general is overrated. There is nothing so special about that series that makes me feel like it was better off left alone. On the contrary it would have been better off getting expanded upon and being the real kickstarter to the DCEU, not MoS.



Of course he will. But for the time being, audiences have had only one cinematic portrayal of Iron Man for 12 years. And that span of time is longer than the gap between Batman and Spider-Man reboots. Right now, there is still no reboot in sight, only a passing of the mantle. If a Tony Stark shows up in the MCU again via multiverse, then it's still the same ongoing story being told so I wouldn't consider that a reboot. A soft reboot maybe, but it wouldn't meant to disregard RDJ's portrayal since it'd still be in the same continuity. It isn't exactly the same as all the speculation about NwH with the legacy Spider-Man potentially showing up there.
Reboot is a reboot. Daniel Craig has been Bond for 15 years without an existing continuity, so it isn't like you cannot have a lengthy tenure without that. Spider-Man has only been rebooted like he has because the TASM series failed. If those succeeded, Andrew is probably still Spider-Man. They did discuss putting TASM Oscorp in the background in Avengers.

But as for Iron Man, the entire MCU continuity will reset someday. I cannot tell you when that will be, but it is going to happen.
 
Reboot is a reboot. Daniel Craig has been Bond for 15 years without an existing continuity, so it isn't like you cannot have a lengthy tenure without that. Spider-Man has only been rebooted like he has because the TASM series failed. If those succeeded, Andrew is probably still Spider-Man. They did discuss putting TASM Oscorp in the background in Avengers.

But as for Iron Man, the entire MCU continuity will reset someday. I cannot tell you when that will be, but it is going to happen.

Wait, really?
 
Wait, really?

Yes, Marvel and Sony did and it I guess it fell apart at the 11th hour. But yes, the TASM universe was very close to being MCU canon. If TASM2 didn't disappoint, more than likely if a Spider-Man deal happened, Andre Garfield is still Spider-Man.
 
Reboot is a reboot. Daniel Craig has been Bond for 15 years without an existing continuity, so it isn't like you cannot have a lengthy tenure without that. Spider-Man has only been rebooted like he has because the TASM series failed. If those succeeded, Andrew is probably still Spider-Man. They did discuss putting TASM Oscorp in the background in Avengers.

But as for Iron Man, the entire MCU continuity will reset someday. I cannot tell you when that will be, but it is going to happen.
What do you mean by "reboot is a reboot"? Because not all reboots are meant to accomplish the same things. Some people describe X-Men: First Class as a soft reboot, as it is still somewhat canon to the previous trilogy of X-Men movies before it. Where as Batman Begins has none to Batman & Robin.

I am sure the MCU will be rebooted someday, but that isn't even on Disney's radar. For at least the next 10 years, they have film and television IPs planned for this one continued telling of the MCU. And that was my point. In the span of time that Iron Man has appeared on film, there have already been reboots for Batman, Spider-Man, and even Superman, in a shorter span of time. And there is still no reboot in sight because Disney has their sights instead on passing the mantle of the Iron hero instead.

By the time the MCU will be rebooted, most of the stories told about each superhero will be far more developed than any other superhero series outside of it.
 
What do you mean by "reboot is a reboot"? Because not all reboots are meant to accomplish the same things. Some people describe X-Men: First Class as a soft reboot, as it is still somewhat canon to the previous trilogy of X-Men movies before it. Where as Batman Begins has none to Batman & Robin.

I am sure the MCU will be rebooted someday, but that isn't even on Disney's radar. For at least the next 10 years, they have film and television IPs planned for this one continued telling of the MCU. And that was my point. In the span of time that Iron Man has appeared on film, there have already been reboots for Batman, Spider-Man, and even Superman, in a shorter span of time. And there is still no reboot in sight because Disney has their sights instead on passing the mantle of the Iron hero instead.

By the time the MCU will be rebooted, most of the stories told about each superhero will be far more developed than any other superhero series outside of it.

But again, you are entirely ignoring popularity in this argument. Yes, Batman, Superman, Spider-Man, etc will all have been rebooted while Iron Man hasn't. Why is that? It is because Iron Man in his current form was overwhelmingly popular. Henry Cavill, Andrew Garfield, etc were not. Christian Bale is a bit different because he chose to not return for future installments or a Justice League. But Ben Affleck? Not popular. If Iron Man wasn't the MCU's most popular character, then RDJ would have been more replaceable.

So to your thesis on the Sony rights and them rebooting Spider-Man again....the issue here is Sony has no incentive to do so. Why? Popularity. Tom Holland is popular. It is not in Sony's best financial interest to drop Tom Holland at this point. When they dropped Andrew Garfield, it was the right time. Now, like I said one day there will be a new Spider-Man. But for that to happen, one of 2 things needs to occur: Holland's Spider-Man has to start bottoming out at the BO in future appearances (showing a popularity decline) or he has to pull a Christian Bale and just not want to do it anymore. Signs point to he still does, so the latter is unlikely. So I don't see this really as a valid concern.

The MCU will reboot when the popularity starts bottoming out. Right now in its current popularity, that seems impossible to us. But people thought the same of Westerns or Noirs, so it isn't impossible. But again....who knows when that will occur. Could be 10 years, could be more, could even be less. Nothing in life is a guarantee except death and taxes.
 
But again, you are entirely ignoring popularity in this argument. Yes, Batman, Superman, Spider-Man, etc will all have been rebooted while Iron Man hasn't. Why is that? It is because Iron Man in his current form was overwhelmingly popular. Henry Cavill, Andrew Garfield, etc were not. Christian Bale is a bit different because he chose to not return for future installments or a Justice League. But Ben Affleck? Not popular. If Iron Man wasn't the MCU's most popular character, then RDJ would have been more replaceable.

So to your thesis on the Sony rights and them rebooting Spider-Man again....the issue here is Sony has no incentive to do so. Why? Popularity. Tom Holland is popular. It is not in Sony's best financial interest to drop Tom Holland at this point. When they dropped Andrew Garfield, it was the right time. Now, like I said one day there will be a new Spider-Man. But for that to happen, one of 2 things needs to occur: Holland's Spider-Man has to start bottoming out at the BO in future appearances (showing a popularity decline) or he has to pull a Christian Bale and just not want to do it anymore. Signs point to he still does, so the latter is unlikely. So I don't see this really as a valid concern.

The MCU will reboot when the popularity starts bottoming out. Right now in its current popularity, that seems impossible to us. But people thought the same of Westerns or Noirs, so it isn't impossible. But again....who knows when that will occur. Could be 10 years, could be more, could even be less. Nothing in life is a guarantee except death and taxes.

That's why Hollywood is very much a "If it ain't broke don't fix it" industry.

Yes, they'll take risks with a filmmaker, or try to change things up, but they aren't rebooting these properties for the fun of it.

These reboots aren't as arbitrary as alot in fandom tend to think they are.

We as a fans always have to remember, that despite our personal feelings about whether they should or shouldn't reboot a film series, that show business is a business, and they'd prefer not to rock the boat unless they have to.

If they've got a successful and popular iteration of a series of films, they aren't just gonna pull the plug or reboot it for kicks or because they're lazy.

There's a reason why got Tom Holland and Spiderrman in the MCU.
There's a reason why we got the Nolan Films to begin with, see Batman and Robin.

Reboots are made in a context .
Again, we may not agree with the discussion to reboot a given series, but ultimately, these studios don't just give up easily and say " Let's reboot it since we like to reboot".
 
But again, you are entirely ignoring popularity in this argument. Yes, Batman, Superman, Spider-Man, etc will all have been rebooted while Iron Man hasn't. Why is that? It is because Iron Man in his current form was overwhelmingly popular. Henry Cavill, Andrew Garfield, etc were not. Christian Bale is a bit different because he chose to not return for future installments or a Justice League. But Ben Affleck? Not popular. If Iron Man wasn't the MCU's most popular character, then RDJ would have been more replaceable.

So to your thesis on the Sony rights and them rebooting Spider-Man again....the issue here is Sony has no incentive to do so. Why? Popularity. Tom Holland is popular. It is not in Sony's best financial interest to drop Tom Holland at this point. When they dropped Andrew Garfield, it was the right time. Now, like I said one day there will be a new Spider-Man. But for that to happen, one of 2 things needs to occur: Holland's Spider-Man has to start bottoming out at the BO in future appearances (showing a popularity decline) or he has to pull a Christian Bale and just not want to do it anymore. Signs point to he still does, so the latter is unlikely. So I don't see this really as a valid concern.

The MCU will reboot when the popularity starts bottoming out. Right now in its current popularity, that seems impossible to us. But people thought the same of Westerns or Noirs, so it isn't impossible. But again....who knows when that will occur. Could be 10 years, could be more, could even be less. Nothing in life is a guarantee except death and taxes.
No, I never ignored popularity in this argument. In fact I focused on popularity. When did I ever say popularity wasn't a factor? This thread is about Spider-Man and his film rights, where they belong. Then it sprung into a conversation about reboots depending on what Sony and Disney decide to do next and that is all about popularity. Then I went on to say a reboot is the last thing a Spider-Man IP needs anytime soon. The current iteration of cinematic Spider-Man we have right now is also part of the MCU, just like Iron Man is.

You said the MCU will be rebooted once its popularity starts to diminish, and my point is that its diminishing popularity will not happen anytime soon and on the contrary from this year alone we've seen that its popularity is only getting bigger and bigger. And that probably means there is less and less of a chance of a conversation about reboots happening with Marvel Studios executives. The MCU Spider-Man is the most popular and most successful live action version of the character we have seen yet, and in the MCU which is currently Hollywood's biggest and ongoing franchise. After NwH, there will be at least one more MCU film that Tom Holland is going to appear in, and he's already the Spider-Man actor we've seen portraying the character the most times. When and if Miles Morales is introduced, that character deserves to be as well known as the Peter Parker in that franchise and story. The only way to do that is to have him have as many appearances as Peter Parker did and have it all be in the same continuity.

I'm not terribly concerned about it, but I know it's a possibility because as you said nothing in life is a guarantee. I don't want a continued rehash of Peter Parker's stories, it's time for other Spider-Men to get their fair share of cinematic glory.
That's why Hollywood is very much a "If it ain't broke don't fix it" industry.
Except when it comes to Batman, I'd say. The Nolan series was the biggest that Batman ever was in cinema. It wasn't broke, but they "fixed" it by recasting and rebooting Batman. Sure they had no choice but I still think it was a terrible mistake.
 
No, I never ignored popularity in this argument. In fact I focused on popularity. When did I ever say popularity wasn't a factor? This thread is about Spider-Man and his film rights, where they belong. Then it sprung into a conversation about reboots depending on what Sony and Disney decide to do next and that is all about popularity. Then I went on to say a reboot is the last thing a Spider-Man IP needs anytime soon. The current iteration of cinematic Spider-Man we have right now is also part of the MCU, just like Iron Man is.

You said the MCU will be rebooted once its popularity starts to diminish, and my point is that its diminishing popularity will not happen anytime soon and on the contrary from this year alone we've seen that its popularity is only getting bigger and bigger. And that probably means there is less and less of a chance of a conversation about reboots happening with Marvel Studios executives. The MCU Spider-Man is the most popular and most successful live action version of the character we have seen yet, and in the MCU which is currently Hollywood's biggest and ongoing franchise. After NwH, there will be at least one more MCU film that Tom Holland is going to appear in, and he's already the Spider-Man actor we've seen portraying the character the most times. When and if Miles Morales is introduced, that character deserves to be as well known as the Peter Parker in that franchise and story. The only way to do that is to have him have as many appearances as Peter Parker did and have it all be in the same continuity.

I'm not terribly concerned about it, but I know it's a possibility because as you said nothing in life is a guarantee. I don't want a continued rehash of Peter Parker's stories, it's time for other Spider-Men to get their fair share of cinematic glory.

Except when it comes to Batman, I'd say. The Nolan series was the biggest that Batman ever was in cinema. It wasn't broke, but they "fixed" it by recasting and rebooting Batman. Sure they had no choice but I still think it was a terrible mistake.

And again, even if a new deal isn't made with Marvel Studios, Sony has no reason to not bring Tom Holland back for more movies. Marvel Studios involvement or not. So where is this Spider-Man rehashing you're worried about? Again, unless Tom Holland doesn't want the truck load of Sony's money anymore, he will be Spider-Man for the foreseeable future. So I don't think that concern has any merit.

I am not really into speculating how long the MCU will continue or whether it is more popular now than ever. Things like that can change on a dime, and the pandemic is hurting Marvel at the BO. Yes, Shang-Chi is doing well....but that is relative to the pandemic era. If compared to prior Phase films, it is on the lower end and we still have to see how people react to all the new characters and changes and such. Again, I am not a person spouting doom and gloom. I am confident they will be fine, but as with anything there are no guarantees.
 
And again, even if a new deal isn't made with Marvel Studios, Sony has no reason to not bring Tom Holland back for more movies. Marvel Studios involvement or not. So where is this Spider-Man rehashing you're worried about? Again, unless Tom Holland doesn't want the truck load of Sony's money anymore, he will be Spider-Man for the foreseeable future. So I don't think that concern has any merit.

I am not really into speculating how long the MCU will continue or whether it is more popular now than ever. Things like that can change on a dime, and the pandemic is hurting Marvel at the BO. Yes, Shang-Chi is doing well....but that is relative to the pandemic era. If compared to prior Phase films, it is on the lower end and we still have to see how people react to all the new characters and changes and such. Again, I am not a person spouting doom and gloom. I am confident they will be fine, but as with anything there are no guarantees.
Well like I said, I am not terribly concerned about it but like you said, nothing in life is a guarantee. If there is an eventual Spider-Man vs. Venom movie that bombs and flops in all of the senses of the words it might make Sony do what they did after Spider-Man 3 even though that movie was financially successful. The pandemic isn't hurting Marvel any more than it is hurting any other conglomerate in the world. It's not going to force them to reboot the MCU sooner than they would want to. Everything to come out of Marvel during the pandemic have been the biggest things in the entertainment industry, outside of some notable exceptions.

At some point the studios will decide to start production on a brand new continuity and that's goin to mean starting with a brand new Peter Parker, again. Once that reboot comes, there is absolutely no way they would consider starting the reboot with Miles Morales as the main character like they did with Scott Lang in the MCU.
 
Well like I said, I am not terribly concerned about it but like you said, nothing in life is a guarantee. If there is an eventual Spider-Man vs. Venom movie that bombs and flops in all of the senses of the words it might make Sony do what they did after Spider-Man 3 even though that movie was financially successful. The pandemic isn't hurting Marvel any more than it is hurting any other conglomerate in the world. It's not going to force them to reboot the MCU sooner than they would want to. Everything to come out of Marvel during the pandemic have been the biggest things in the entertainment industry, outside of some notable exceptions.

At some point the studios will decide to start production on a brand new continuity and that's goin to mean starting with a brand new Peter Parker, again. Once that reboot comes, there is absolutely no way they would consider starting the reboot with Miles Morales as the main character like they did with Scott Lang in the MCU.

Okay, and? Again, Sony has no incentive to start a new right now. Neither does Marvel Studios. Once something becomes unpopular, yeah that becomes a threat. But that is a threat regardless which studio is involved. If Marvel Studios owned Spider-Man and his movies started declining in popularity, do you think Marvel Studios would keep pumping out Spider-Man content without doing something new? Marvel Studios hasn't been in that place anytime recently, but if Shang-Chi had flopped, guess who you wouldn't see nearly as much as you are now likely too because the movie succeeded? That is just life. Example, if TIH had been a huge billion-ish dollar film, the mouse would have found a way to get Hulk back. But instead, he is an occassional supporting character who usually is like one of the least important Avengers. And I would say he only gets what he does is because they rebooted the character and the reboot was popular enough to be a glorified side character
 
Okay, and? Again, Sony has no incentive to start a new right now. Neither does Marvel Studios. Once something becomes unpopular, yeah that becomes a threat. But that is a threat regardless which studio is involved. If Marvel Studios owned Spider-Man and his movies started declining in popularity, do you think Marvel Studios would keep pumping out Spider-Man content without doing something new? Marvel Studios hasn't been in that place anytime recently, but if Shang-Chi had flopped, guess who you wouldn't see nearly as much as you are now likely too because the movie succeeded? That is just life. Example, if TIH had been a huge billion-ish dollar film, the mouse would have found a way to get Hulk back. But instead, he is an occassional supporting character who usually is like one of the least important Avengers. And I would say he only gets what he does is because they rebooted the character and the reboot was popular enough to be a glorified side character
And what? I never said Sony or Disney have the incentive to reboot. My point from the beginning has been I'd prefer they stick to this continuity especially because it's so popular, and eventually retire the character as the protagonist Spider-Man and give Miles Morales the spotlight. The only way to do that is by giving the latter character more due attention. In the future if they favor a reboot with Peter Parker instead then it's back to square one and waiting for a Miles Morales down the line all over again. And again, when it comes time for that reboot, I really cannot see them starting it with Miles at the center of it.
 
And what? I never said Sony or Disney have the incentive to reboot. My point from the beginning has been I'd prefer they stick to this continuity especially because it's so popular, and eventually retire the character as the protagonist Spider-Man and give Miles Morales the spotlight. The only way to do that is by giving the latter character more due attention. In the future if they favor a reboot with Peter Parker instead then it's back to square one and waiting for a Miles Morales down the line all over again. And again, when it comes time for that reboot, I really cannot see them starting it with Miles at the center of it.

Neither company would. Sony is going to stick to their continuity for as long as they can. Marvel Studios involvement or not. At this moment, that is where the money is. Even if Holland for a hypothetical legal reason would end up in the Venomverse instead of the MCU, this version will continue. So again, regardless of who has the rights I don't see how this effects your desired Miles Morales. Honestly, given lower quantity of IP, Sony are more likely to do him in live action sooner than Marvel would
 
Neither company would. Sony is going to stick to their continuity for as long as they can. Marvel Studios involvement or not. At this moment, that is where the money is. Even if Holland for a hypothetical legal reason would end up in the Venomverse instead of the MCU, this version will continue. So again, regardless of who has the rights I don't see how this effects your desired Miles Morales. Honestly, given lower quantity of IP, Sony are more likely to do him in live action sooner than Marvel would
I just told you how. You said earlier in the thread that nothing in life is guaranteed so a reboot will happen eventually and going by that logic whenever Spider-Man is rebooted it's going to be another rehash of Peter Parker most likely - highly unlikely they'd start the reboot with Miles in the forefront. And I also acknowledged that right now a reboot itself is highly unlikely given the popularity of the MCU Spider-Man. What I would want for the Spider-hero character in this continuity is the same thing that is happening with the Iron hero character, and that's passing the mantle down. Sure maybe a multiverse Tony Stark will show up in the future too but right now what we know for certain is that the character is retired and the Iron hero mantle is being passed down to Ironheart. That is exactly what I want to see for Spider-Man.
 
I just told you how. You said earlier in the thread that nothing in life is guaranteed so a reboot will happen eventually and going by that logic whenever Spider-Man is rebooted it's going to be another rehash of Peter Parker most likely - highly unlikely they'd start the reboot with Miles in the forefront. And I also acknowledged that right now a reboot itself is highly unlikely given the popularity of the MCU Spider-Man. What I would want for the Spider-hero character in this continuity is the same thing that is happening with the Iron hero character, and that's passing the mantle down. Sure maybe a multiverse Tony Stark will show up in the future too but right now what we know for certain is that the character is retired and the Iron hero mantle is being passed down to Ironheart. That is exactly what I want to see for Spider-Man.

I addressed this concern already. Sony has limited franchise IP options. Less than Marvel does with with characters. Miles they know can support an animated film. So they have incentive to test that in live action. So again, Sony is far more likely to get there than Marvel at this point in time.
 
I addressed this concern already. Sony has limited franchise IP options. Less than Marvel does with with characters. Miles they know can support an animated film. So they have incentive to test that in live action. So again, Sony is far more likely to get there than Marvel at this point in time.
I don't know what you mean by "addressing this concern." Do you think by having this discussion, that my belief of starting a new Spider-Man series with Miles on the backend of the pipeline has just evaporated? We've seen Miles in an animated film, we've seen Miles in a video game, but we haven't seen him in live action. I'm sure we will and when we do, it's gonna be awesome. But will he be given as much time, development, and importance to the franchise that Peter got? Will Spider-Man be rebooted before Miles' time in the franchise was at least as long as Peter's? That's what we haven't seen yet and that's why I'm saying Miles deserves to be in one telling of the Spider-Man story and for at least long as Peter's was as a main character.
 
I don't know what you mean by "addressing this concern." Do you think by having this discussion, that my belief of starting a new Spider-Man series with Miles on the backend of the pipeline has just evaporated? We've seen Miles in an animated film, we've seen Miles in a video game, but we haven't seen him in live action. I'm sure we will and when we do, it's gonna be awesome. But will he be given as much time, development, and importance to the franchise that Peter got? Will Spider-Man be rebooted before Miles' time in the franchise was at least as long as Peter's? That's what we haven't seen yet and that's why I'm saying Miles deserves to be in one telling of the Spider-Man story and for at least long as Peter's was as a main character.

The answer to your question is entirely driven by box office. If they make movies starring Miles and they are big hits and it stays that way for as long as Tom Holland's, then no reason it cannot. If they make less money, it will be shorter. Regardless if Sony or Marvel Studios, that is the answer.
 
The answer to your question is entirely driven by box office. If they make movies starring Miles and they are big hits and it stays that way for as long as Tom Holland's, then no reason it cannot. If they make less money, it will be shorter. Regardless if Sony or Marvel Studios, that is the answer.
that's for when Miles introduced into the MCU sure. but that isn't always the case when the studio is prompted for a reboot. In 2012, they could have skipped the origin stories and went with Miles Morales as the Amazing Spider-Man instead of Peter Parker. Maybe they thought it was too big of a gamble or too early, or whatever. It is of my opinion though as I said earlier on in this thread that Miles Morales deserves to be just as household of a name as Peter Parker is.
 
that's for when Miles introduced into the MCU sure. but that isn't always the case when the studio is prompted for a reboot. In 2012, they could have skipped the origin stories and went with Miles Morales as the Amazing Spider-Man instead of Peter Parker. Maybe they thought it was too big of a gamble or too early, or whatever. It is of my opinion though as I said earlier on in this thread that Miles Morales deserves to be just as household of a name as Peter Parker is.

Back then Sony wasn't trying to do a cinematic universe. All that stuff came later in the process. So the comparison isn't exactly identical.

Also, Peter Parker is possibly most famous comic book character. No offense to Miles, but I doubt he ever is as famous. That doesn't mean he cannot also be popular. Plenty of popular superheroes out there not as famous as Peter Parker
 
Back then Sony wasn't trying to do a cinematic universe. All that stuff came later in the process. So the comparison isn't exactly identical.

Also, Peter Parker is possibly most famous comic book character. No offense to Miles, but I doubt he ever is as famous. That doesn't mean he cannot also be popular. Plenty of popular superheroes out there not as famous as Peter Parker
Wait, do you mean Sony wasn't trying to do a cinematic universe with the ASM series? I thought they were, I'm pretty sure ASM2 was setting up a Spider-Man cinematic universe for years to come without the help of Marvel Studios but it failed because the film failed which is how the crossover deal was born.

Peter Parker is definitely the most famous but in my opinion, Miles deserves that level of recognition too. Putting him in a high budget film as part of Hollywood's biggest franchise would certainly help catapult him to that position.
 
Wait, do you mean Sony wasn't trying to do a cinematic universe with the ASM series? I thought they were, I'm pretty sure ASM2 was setting up a Spider-Man cinematic universe for years to come without the help of Marvel Studios but it failed because the film failed which is how the crossover deal was born.

Peter Parker is definitely the most famous but in my opinion, Miles deserves that level of recognition too. Putting him in a high budget film as part of Hollywood's biggest franchise would certainly help catapult him to that position.

When they did TASM2, they absolutely were. But TASM was being made before Marvel Studios dominated the box office. Different era. That is why they crammed all that crap into TASM2, to play catch up. TASM was released in 2012, so it was filmed 2011, and that was the summer of The Avengers. That was when the cinematic universe idea blew up.
 
When they did TASM2, they absolutely were. But TASM was being made before Marvel Studios dominated the box office. Different era. That is why they crammed all that crap into TASM2, to play catch up. TASM was released in 2012, so it was filmed 2011, and that was the summer of The Avengers. That was when the cinematic universe idea blew up.
I remember the whole conundrum about Oscorp Tower being in the Avengers though. That means that Sony and Disney were already having that discussion about a crossover beforehand. So Sony should have had some sort of idea of what Disney was doing with all of their Marvel film IPs before the films released and Sony almost joined in back then.
 
I remember the whole conundrum about Oscorp Tower being in the Avengers though. That means that Sony and Disney were already having that discussion about a crossover beforehand. So Sony should have had some sort of idea of what Disney was doing with all of their Marvel film IPs before the films released and Sony almost joined in back then.

But that wasn't part of a master plan. Sony and Marvel didn't know if that would lead to anything like a crossover in the future. It was going to be an Easter egg in the Avengers. There is a difference between the 2 things. Had that happened, the TASM movies would probably have crossed into the MCU at some point. But they didn't have that road mapped or anything. That also came mid production. Not something they planned in advance. The TASM script was developed when SM4 was being prepped for filming. So at that point, they didn't have Sinister Six movies and such all planned out. TASM2 was the launch of all that, and that was in response to The Avengers. The Phase 1 films did well, but the highest grosser pre Avengers was IM2. TASM made more than IM2 for example. Avengers is what made people in Hollywood lust for cinematic universes
 
But that wasn't part of a master plan. Sony and Marvel didn't know if that would lead to anything like a crossover in the future. It was going to be an Easter egg in the Avengers. There is a difference between the 2 things. Had that happened, the TASM movies would probably have crossed into the MCU at some point. But they didn't have that road mapped or anything. That also came mid production. Not something they planned in advance. The TASM script was developed when SM4 was being prepped for filming. So at that point, they didn't have Sinister Six movies and such all planned out. TASM2 was the launch of all that, and that was in response to The Avengers. The Phase 1 films did well, but the highest grosser pre Avengers was IM2. TASM made more than IM2 for example. Avengers is what made people in Hollywood lust for cinematic universes
I know it was meant to be an easter egg, but having Oscorp tower in the Avengers would not be any ordinary easter egg. That would have basically been confirmation (if it happened) that everything in the MCU up to that point also happened in the world of ASM. It would have been proof that ASM was in that same universe. Sony and Disney wouldn't have been able to do a reboot without some major retcon or explanation
 
I know it was meant to be an easter egg, but having Oscorp tower in the Avengers would not be any ordinary easter egg. That would have basically been confirmation (if it happened) that everything in the MCU up to that point also happened in the world of ASM. It would have been proof that ASM was in that same universe. Sony and Disney wouldn't have been able to do a reboot without some major retcon or explanation

Right, but that also has no bearing on our current discussion about how they were developing their universe at that point and why they didn't do Miles.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"