Not necessarily true. Even D'Onofrio, who wants to appear in a Spidey film, understands that the Kingpin rights in an MCU is a complicated issue.
You honestly don't believe that introducing the first of the new generation of X-Men in a Spider-Man movie wouldn't be financially beneficial for Sony?
Sony has to give Marvel Studios 25% of whatever the movie makes, so it is only Marvel Studios who benefits from putting a character like Jean - whom they exclusively own and who has zero connections whatsoever to the Spider-Man IP - in it because the more successful the movie is, the more Sony owes them.
At the same time, the more successful the movie is, the more money they make as well. This ain't rocket science.
That's not how math works.
The more money it makes the more money for both parties. That’s how partnerships work.
I've run the numbers...and math disagrees with you.
I'm also reading that Marvel provides 25% of the budget, so 25% of the profit seems fair.
And, yes, that is how math works.
And, yes, that is how math works.
75% of 1 billion or more is more than 100% of 700 million, right?
And that is generously applying Amazing Spider-Man 2 numbers instead of Kraven numbers.
And that is generously applying Amazing Spider-Man 2 numbers instead of Kraven numbers.
Tonight I learned that the Bill Bixby Hulk Earth is Earth-400005. Nice.
I'd love to know why that is actually the case. They say they can't and it's complicated but we didn't get any specific reason. It sounds more like an indirect "we don't want to do that right now".
Marvel Studios can't use Kingpin in Live-Action Film.
Sony can, but have chosen not to.
The only live action theatrical release to date to feature the Kingpin was the Daredevil movie, produced by Fox. Those rights moved over to Marvel Studios.
So, yeah, more complicated than
So, yeah, more complicated than
Fox had Kingpin's film rights when they had Daredevil's film rights, but those would revert to Sony if Fox ever lost Daredevil's film rights. A few years later, Daredevil's film rights reverted back to Marvel, but Sony retained Kingpin's film rights because of that contract.
Where does all this information come from?
It's because Kingpin first appeared as a Spider-Man villain.
"It is known".
Jokes aside, I believe - but cannot confirm right now ' that we learned that the live-action rights ro Kingpin are split between Sony - which has owned them since 1999 but signed a licensing agreement with Fox allowing the character to be used in projects related to Daredevil - and Marvel Studios - who subsumed ownership of the portions of said Sony/Fox licensing agreement that pertained to television when the Daredevil licensing rights were returned to them in 2012 - from the 2014 Sony Leaks scandal.