Spoilers Spider-man 3(take 2) Anticipation thread
- Thread starter Samurai8472
- Start date
Ideally, the partnership between Marvel and Sony will continue for as long as all parties involved want Tom Holland to continue to play the character.
However, post Tom Holland, I would actually rather Sony give the character a bit of a break, a significant one, and then come back with the inevitable new reboot.
It doesn't, though.
Marvel Studios gets far more out of this partnership than Sony does.
Those two statements aren't mutually exclusive.
Sony can still benefit from this relationship better than going it alone while at the same time as Marvel benefits from it than not having Spider-Man at all.
Sony can still benefit from this relationship better than going it alone while at the same time as Marvel benefits from it than not having Spider-Man at all.
I disagree.
I'm also not nearly as enamored with Tom Holland's Spidey movies as others are, and so I'm not convinced that the benefits that Sony gets from this partnership make the character's onscreen adventures better than they were prior to its inception.
Based on what metric?
Per Wikipedia (which, in turn, references Box Office Mojo), the Watts films made far more money, both domestically and internationally, than the Webb films and did so on much smaller budgets. Critically speaking, which is much more subjective, Watts films are far better regarded based on the Rotten Tomatoes, Metacritic, and CinemaScore ratings.
Granted, things aren't quiet as clear cut in comparison to the Raimi films (which are further removed from now), but keep in mind that they were part of the film superhero renaissance (along with the X-Men films) so they had very little competition at the box office for superhero films. Plus, Sony meddled so badly with the third film that Raimi ended up quitting after that. As for critically, I recognize I'm in the minority regarding those films, but I much prefer the Watts films over the Raimi films (for many reasons, but particularly because of the two leads).
I will give Sony credit were credit is actually due: Into the Spider-Verse was excellent on every level. That said, animation is a very different creature from live action.
Yeah it'd be pretty stupid to argue that Sony wouldn't benefit from a continued involvement in what is now far and away the largest, most profitable juggernaut in entertainment. Of course making stupid moves is what greedy studio execs (especially the ones at Sony Pictures) are kind of known for. So I wouldn't put it past them to delude themselves into thinking they can strike out on their own and net a larger profit.
Hopefully Sony Corporate still has them on a short leash after their last few attempts at independent thinking, or just flat out sells them to Disney...(which would also be bad, for different reasons.)
Hopefully Sony Corporate still has them on a short leash after their last few attempts at independent thinking, or just flat out sells them to Disney...(which would also be bad, for different reasons.)
My fear is that Sony will take the success of Venom as a sign they can make it on their own withou Marvel, and not renew the deal. Which would be dissapointing since I really enjoyed the Watts movies, and they've pretty solidly established Peter/Spidey as a significant part of of the MCU, and it would be weird for him to suddenly vanish from it.
Just because Sony has earned more money with this current crop of Spider-Man movies, it doesn't make said movies better, qualitatively, than the movies that they'd produced on their own.
Sony needs this partnership far less than fans think they do, and I've yet to see anything that convinces me that the benefits they get from it outweigh the potential negatives if it were to come to an end.
Sony needs this partnership far less than fans think they do, and I've yet to see anything that convinces me that the benefits they get from it outweigh the potential negatives if it were to come to an end.
And I've yet to see anything that convinces me that it would be a smart move for Sony not stick with the deal.
Ah, that's right. Because you failed to give me any evidence to support your argument. Simply refuting it doesn't make an argument.
I totally agree with you! Homecoming was on TV today and I watched it again and I really *really* love the Holland movies. He's a really engaging Peter Parker and I too hope we get to see him playing this role and growing the character for a long time.
Leaked scene. 
Okay, then. Take away the money aspect.
The Garfield movies were garbage and Venom (and the looks of the sequel along with Morbius) aren't much better, using any online metric you want other than "You're wrong, I'm the only person that loved them so my opinion is the only one that should count in a debate like this". Since we're not debating what individuals think. On every single level, the benefits to Sony are bigger other than maybe our own personal taste.
Movie theaters are being told by Sony to expect a run time of 150 minutes.
Fuck yeah! I was hoping it'd be about that long!
Problem is that Sony NEEDS to crank out films every few years so that they can retain the rights. That’s why the Marc Webb reboot happened so soon after the third Raimi film, and why they immediately made a deal to co-produce the films with Marvel Studios so soon after the second film underperformed.
Disney can at least keep the X-Men and Fantastic Four properties in hiatus since they now owned it. Sony can’t give Spidey a break.
The best thing Sony can do is try to model after the James Bond franchise where they keep cranking them out every two to four years and keep a winning team of filmmakers involved. Jon Watts gave Sony its highest grossing film since SKYFALL with FAR FROM HOME, so he’s probably set to keep making them for as long as he likes, and Holland will stick with the role until he’s ready to move on. I do hope we get to see Holland grow into Peter’s college years as an adult. I think it would be cool to chronicle a Spider-Man we saw from age 15 to his mid 20s. The Raimi films skimmed high school and went straight to college/rent life. Even though the Garfield films were initially high school set, the sequel immediately graduated him. I liked that we got to spend some time with Holland in high school to really see what a teenage superhero is like in contrast with the other MCU characters. NO WAY HOME is supposed to be his senior year, so we’re already about to move past that high school phase and into adulthood.
Ah, but will they keep with the "home" based titles once he's off to college?
Spiderman - Homeward Bound (a homesick Peter comes home from college after his first year away)
Spiderman - Home for the Holidays (A Spider-tastic Christmas is in store for Peter and Aunt May)
Spiderman - There's No Place Like Home (he gets sucked up into a multiverse tornado)
Spiderman - Home is Where the Heart Is (marriage to MJ)
Spiderman - Homeward Bound (a homesick Peter comes home from college after his first year away)
Spiderman - Home for the Holidays (A Spider-tastic Christmas is in store for Peter and Aunt May)
Spiderman - There's No Place Like Home (he gets sucked up into a multiverse tornado)
Spiderman - Home is Where the Heart Is (marriage to MJ)
Similar threads
