Marvel Universe stuff

  • Guest, it's time once again for the massively important and exciting FoH Asshat Tournament!



    Go here and give us your nominations!
    Who's been the biggest Asshat in the last year? Give us your worst ones!
Shonuff

Shonuff

Mr. Poopybutthole
5,538
791
This article explains why Sony did it (Spider-Man: Why Sony Spun a Deal With Marvel). Adjusted for inflation, every successive Spiderman movie has gone down in domestic revenue. And this is at a time when less popular characters, but under the Marvel halo, have done well.

1 Spider-Man $403,706,375
2 Spider-Man 2 373,585,825
3 Spider-Man 3 336,530,303
4 The Amazing Spider-Man 262,030,663
5 The Amazing Spider-Man 2 202,853,933
 
Void

Void

BAU BAU
<Gold Donor>
9,813
11,729
I get why Sony did it, I just can't understand why Marvel did, aside from actual smart decision-making which never seems to be a part of any studio's thought process. It seems to me that unless Sony is only getting a small percentage that Marvel might actually make less money on any movie Spider-Man is in vs. if he weren't there at all. I guess someone is looking at a bigger picture than that, and I'm super thankful I have to say.
 
Gavinmad

Gavinmad

Mr. Poopybutthole
43,737
52,285
mkopec_sl said:
Picture major villan battle in NY. The avengers are all there batteling the said villain. Mid fight spiderman swoops in and saves Black Widow which is about to be killed. This is all you need for an introduction.
Click to expand...
Everybody gets one.
 
Shonuff

Shonuff

Mr. Poopybutthole
5,538
791
Vvoid_sl said:
I get why Sony did it, I just can't understand why Marvel did, aside from actual smart decision-making which never seems to be a part of any studio's thought process. It seems to me that unless Sony is only getting a small percentage that Marvel might actually make less money on any movie Spider-Man is in vs. if he weren't there at all. I guess someone is looking at a bigger picture than that, and I'm super thankful I have to say.
Click to expand...
You do realize that Sony owns the movie rights to Spider Man, lock stock and barrel, right? From Marvel's perspective, it would be pretty hard to do a Civil War movie, or even a New Avengers movie (that is supposedly planned). And also, it's not good for Marvel's most popular character to not be in the same universe as everyone else. Supposedly, the deal they did for Spiderman will be the template for bringing The Fantastic Four and X Men back into the MCU. Profit sharing is going to be it. Sorry, but it will be very hard for Disney/Marvel to buy those characters back, and own them 100%. I remember reading an article about how doing a New Avengers movie would be the most expensive movie in the history of the world, as the character rights would be in the billions alone, before they even started shooting.

Shame on Marvel for inking those deals way back when, they are paying for it now.
 
Xarpolis

Xarpolis

Life's a Dream
14,645
16,330
I really hope they aren't doing some stupid 25% profit sharing bullshit. Marvel should "share" based on what % of screen time you have in a given product. If you're in for 5 minutes on a 90 minute movie, your company should only earn 1/18th of the total profit. (5.56%) Probably even less because the other studio isn't fronting ANY money at all to get this free reward.

Damn the free world not being a fair world.
 
Shonuff

Shonuff

Mr. Poopybutthole
5,538
791
Xarpolis_sl said:
I really hope they aren't doing some stupid 25% profit sharing bullshit. Marvel should "share" based on what % of screen time you have in a given product. If you're in for 5 minutes on a 90 minute movie, your company should only earn 1/18th of the total profit. (5.56%) Probably even less because the other studio isn't fronting ANY money at all to get this free reward.

Damn the free world not being a fair world.
Click to expand...
It is a fair world. Marvel sold off the unfettered rights to Spider Man. Everything I heard about the deal was that there was no time limit on it, other than a Spider Man movie has to be made every four years, or the rights revert back to Marvel. No one signs a contract unless they think they got the better of the other party.

Marvel should have written in the contract that those rights were only available for 20 years, and not in perpetuity. Of course, they had no idea back then that they would be bought out by a media company and be able to make their own movies. They were dependent back then on Hollywood to make their movies for them, as Marvel had no experience or acumen to do so by itself.
 
Chukzombi

Chukzombi

Millie's Staff Member
72,970
214,258
when marvel rebooted The Hulk with Ed Norton there was no origin story. they showed all you needed to know in the opening credits and the movie started with Banner as hulk hiding out in some third world country. you can introduce spiderman in an after credit scene for some future marvel film and that would be good nuff. maybe uncle ben can get killed in the alien attack on NYC in The Avengers and boom, theres's your origin.
 
Void

Void

BAU BAU
<Gold Donor>
9,813
11,729
Lyrical_sl said:
You do realize that Sony owns the movie rights to Spider Man, lock stock and barrel, right? From Marvel's perspective, it would be pretty hard to do a Civil War movie, or even a New Avengers movie (that is supposedly planned). And also, it's not good for Marvel's most popular character to not be in the same universe as everyone else. Supposedly, the deal they did for Spiderman will be the template for bringing The Fantastic Four and X Men back into the MCU. Profit sharing is going to be it. Sorry, but it will be very hard for Disney/Marvel to buy those characters back, and own them 100%. I remember reading an article about how doing a New Avengers movie would be the most expensive movie in the history of the world, as the character rights would be in the billions alone, before they even started shooting.

Shame on Marvel for inking those deals way back when, they are paying for it now.
Click to expand...
Yeah I know all of that, and I would argue they probably could have made a great Civil War movie without him (just not THE Civil War movie). I'm just saying that, as Xarpolis touched on, from a financial standpoint it doesn't make a ton of sense for Marvel unless they got a great deal going. I'm happy they are looking past the financial aspect though, and are focusing on bringing him back into the fold, as you mentioned, and maybe the long-term financial benefits as well, instead of a typical corporation that doesn't look beyond the next quarter. Because I can totally see Sony demanding some ridiculous amount like 25% for 5 minutes because they think they have Marvel over a barrel. Which they shouldn't.
 
Royal

Royal

Connoisseur of Exotic Pictures
15,077
10,643
Xarpolis_sl said:
I really hope they aren't doing some stupid 25% profit sharing bullshit. Marvel should "share" based on what % of screen time you have in a given product. If you're in for 5 minutes on a 90 minute movie, your company should only earn 1/18th of the total profit. (5.56%) Probably even less because the other studio isn't fronting ANY money at all to get this free reward.

Damn the free world not being a fair world.
Click to expand...
This would only give Sony even more motivation to meddle creatively.
 
Lanx

Lanx

<Prior Amod>
65,259
147,128
Lyrical_sl said:
Marvel should have written in the contract that those rights were only available for 20 years, and not in perpetuity. Of course, they had no idea back then that they would be bought out by a media company and be able to make their own movies. They were dependent back then on Hollywood to make their movies for them, as Marvel had no experience or acumen to do so by itself.
Click to expand...
Marvel was on deaths door when all those deals were made, also this was the only way to even get a spiderman movie since it was in rights limbo, with carolco pictures, james cameron directing and scripting the movie with a cursing mutherfucker peter parker jizzing spider fluid wet dreams and banging MJ cosplay style overlooking ny.

plus marvel never made a movie, there was no marvel studios, no track record, they're a comic book company that creates IP, they should just license out their IP and try to make bank that way.

What were they in the 90's? they were shit, along with every other comic book company cuz they all produced shit upon shit and tanked their own industry.
 
A

a_skeleton_03

<Banned>
29,948
29,763
Maester Chuk_sl said:
when marvel rebooted The Hulk with Ed Norton there was no origin story. they showed all you needed to know in the opening credits and the movie started with Banner as hulk hiding out in some third world country. you can introduce spiderman in an after credit scene for some future marvel film and that would be good nuff. maybe uncle ben can get killed in the alien attack on NYC in The Avengers and boom, theres's your origin.
Click to expand...
Why does Spider-Man need an origin explanation?
 
Xexx

Xexx

Vyemm Raider
7,742
1,810
I miss Ed Norton as Hulk, i really loved that stand alone film especially after the abortion of a first attempt.
 
T

The Ancient_sl

shitlord
7,386
16
Maester Chuk_sl said:
i dunno, i can see ed norton saying "my secret is, i am always angry" a lot more effectively than ruffalo, who was completely fine, just not ed norton awesome.
Click to expand...
It's unfair to compare the two really, Ruffalo was playing an older banner who wasn't fighting the Hulk as much. That said, I disagree with your statement.
 
T

The Ancient_sl

shitlord
7,386
16
Norton didn't have a scene like this. It's not to say he couldn't manage it, he's a very capable actor, but he wouldn't have done it any better.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.