I know, I know, I was trying to make a funny.Not if they kept churning out B-movies about Spidey villains, which is probably the only reason those movies exist.

I know, I know, I was trying to make a funny.Not if they kept churning out B-movies about Spidey villains, which is probably the only reason those movies exist.

And wasn't there at least one case where a show could only use a character in their superhero identity because they didn't have the rights to their civilian identity?I'd think that for trademark and cross-promotional reasons, superhero names are the last thing they'd want to change. I think that at least sometimes, the rights to a superhero character are attached more to the superhero name than the civilian name. (E.g. in the weird case where TV productions like Young Justice list Nightwing as created by Marv Wolfman and George Perez, even though he's Dick Grayson, a character created by Bill Finger, Bob Kane, and Jerry Robinson.)
I'm not sure if i'd count that since it was just a for a little while and wasn't an actual, official name change.Night Monkey?
It was very brief but it had a story purpose.
They changed Falcon to Captain America.![]()
Which the comics did first, so it doesn't count.
If Sony trying to create its own Shared Universe were truly only about keeping their license to Spider-Man, the straightforward option would have been to just put Spider-Man himself (not Tom Holland)in as many projects as possible.
When the relationship between Marvel and Sint broke down after Far From Home, I thought it would have been cool if Sony went to Warners about making a Batman/Spider-Man film. Of, course, given how long it's taken to get The Batman Part II off the ground, Siny's Spider-Man rights would've probably ended up lapsing.![]()
Norman Osborn would make a fantastic Batman villain, imho. As Norman, his Oscorp would be a business rival of Wayne Industries. As Green Goblin, he would be a real threat to Batman. I might start there.I am not sure if Gunn would be down for that.... but this COULD be the only way (it seems) to finally do a LIVE ACTION Marvel-DC team-up. So if Feige or Disney ain't willing, Sony surely would see the $$$ in this, and find a way to make it happen.

Honestly, same. Ra's al Ghul is, essentially, a Bond villain. Talia is the Bad Bond Girl, though now she's a Bond villain in her own right.I’ve always thought a James Bond/Batman crossover would rock
Honestly, same. Ra's al Ghul is, essentially, a Bond villain. Talia is the Bad Bond Girl, though now she's a Bond villain in her own right.
Now that I think about it, the KGBeast is a Bond henchman, too.
The Hong Kong sequence in The Dark Knight is a Bond setpiece.
I don't know if Dynamite still has the James Bond comics rights, but they've done some other crossovers with DC. A Batman/Bond comic might be possible.
She put out serious Bond villain vibes in Inception.Talia is the Bad Bond Girl, though now she's a Bond villain in her own right.
I think since Tom Holland's character is so integrated into the MCU, it might be really hard to do something that can put in him something without it affecting the MCU.
The biggest reason for Beyond's delay is to allow the animators enough time to do their jobs without feeling overworked, which was a massive issue for Across (and the current animation film industry as a whole). I'm all for the film production taking its time for precisely this reason.Just to get back on subject.... while i am EXTREMELY annoyed that Lord & Miller did NOT have at least a good draft of the 3rd SPider Verse movie in place (since the 2nd movie was clearly the first of a 2 part deal), if they did Project Hail Mary as a creative diversion in between the Spiderverse films, they did an excellent job of it. NOt sure if they had done the SPiderverse movie on time if that would have worked (especially with Brand New Day this summer), but Project Hail Mary really felt fresh and original, and so glad our family saw it)
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.