Wow, he really has had an crazy life.
As a division - profitable, sure.Ah ha
Around 2 minutes and 4 seconds is where it starts
Also
Though, that's clumping together a whole of some very disparately performing parts. Venom, Venom 2 and Across the Spider-Verse are doing the seriously heavy, heavy lifting there. It's a bit like having 4 minimum wage workers and three millionaires together and saying, on average, there are 7 millionaires.
As I said, though, I think Sony's real goal is to hold onto the rights to the Spider-Man movies proper, which are the real cash cows. It's a cushy situation, because they can just sit back and let the MCU people handle the creative side of the Spidey movies, which Sony/Columbia profits from as the license holders and co-producers. So it doesn't matter to them if the other Spidey-adjacent movies they put out are flops, because they're just placeholders to retain the license.
lol lol imagine many movies and tv shows about the co workers enemies friends and family members of peter parker in the spider verse
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.
lol lol or the mcu verison should have done what red guardian said in the mid credits of the 2025 film thunderbolts aka the new avengers when the new avengers aka thunderbolts were discussing about the trademark battle they are in against captain america and his verison of the avengers
red guardian tells the gang that instead of spelling it avengers with a s at the end its avengerz with a z at the end
so instead of spider man it should be spy derr mann
Sony owns the film rights to the character and can literally do anything that they want with him.
So they deliberately chose to exclude him from Venom et al.
i wonder what mcu verison of venom would be called
Yeah, I can't think of any example of the MCU changing a character's superhero name, so I don't see why they would suddenly do that to Venom. They did change a few characters, like making Spidey's MJ Watson, Michelle Jones Watson instead of Mary Jane. I think there are one or two times where a new character took on superhero name from the comics, but as far as I can remember the superhero names have pretty much always been the same as they are in the comics.
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.)
They changed Falcon to Captain America.
Which the comics did first, so it doesn't count.
Night Monkey?
It was very brief but it had a story purpose.
It was very brief but it had a story purpose.
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.
Not if they kept churning out B-movies about Spidey villains, which is probably the only reason those movies exist.