Yeah, I was going to say the most likely option is Disney buys Sony's movie division or Sony sells it off piecemeal and Disney buys the Marvel part.
Spider-Man: Homecoming' anticipation thread
- Thread starter Turtletrekker
- Start date
God, no. I'll take ambitious misfires over Marvel Studios' factory-produced mediocrity every day of the week. (Except for X-Men: Apocalypse. That was just fucking unforgivable.)
Yeah, that would definitely be a good thing. Especially if they could get back the Fantastic Four rights. The MCU is the best producers of superhero films ever in my opinion. them having their properties all back would be amazing.
I think at this point if Marvel's going to back anything it'll Fantastic Four. At this point Fox has done three movies, and none of them have done that well. I just can't see them that attached to the property, especially after the disaster that Fan4stick ended up being.
Ambitious is the last word that should be used for any of the Spider-Man flicks.
Fox lost the rights to Daredevil and Ghost Rider. Sure, at least with Daredevil, they had last minute plans to bring it back, but those fell apart. Fox can't be enthusiastic about another Fantastic Four film given the last one lost them money.
Another problem that I forgot about is that FOX doesn't even own the rights to F4, a company called Constantin Films does. They have a deal with FOX where FOX produces them and Constantin helps distribute, but in the end its Constantin who would have to sell the rights. I've heard that Constantin will almost certainly just keep crapping out the bare minimum needed to keep the rights (they were the ones that made the 90s FF movie knowing they would never release it just to keep the rights), so who knows if the MCU will ever get the F4 back. If FOX decides to bail on FF but the other company still thinks it can make money, the MCU won't be getting the F4 back.
Final International trailer. Fair warning-- This is one of those trailers that gives away pretty much the whole plot.
Last edited:
Just for record (and to be a nerd) Sony/Columbia had Ghost Rider
Here's the thing about Fox and it's hold on F4's rights: it's in their interest to make another one if only to stop the rights reverting back to Marvel, because if Marvel gets it and makes a profitable movie out of it, then that's money that Fox thinks *they* could have had given that box office revenue is perceived to be a finite resource over which the studios battle (which is sort of true, to a degree.)
Keep in mind that in the last couple decades corporate mentality has slid from thinking "let's make this profitable and sustainable" to "let's make ALL THE MONEY!"
The common sense notion that they'd probably make more money in the long run if they cut a similar deal with Marvel as Sony is irrelevant to this mindset. They don't want *more* profit, they want *all* of the profit. They will happily kill something that's profitable but not as profitable as it could possibly be, easy in the knowledge that they saved their quarterly reports from the dreaded "not all the profits!"
It's stupid, it's unsustainable, but it's pretty much where we're at.
Keep in mind that in the last couple decades corporate mentality has slid from thinking "let's make this profitable and sustainable" to "let's make ALL THE MONEY!"
The common sense notion that they'd probably make more money in the long run if they cut a similar deal with Marvel as Sony is irrelevant to this mindset. They don't want *more* profit, they want *all* of the profit. They will happily kill something that's profitable but not as profitable as it could possibly be, easy in the knowledge that they saved their quarterly reports from the dreaded "not all the profits!"
It's stupid, it's unsustainable, but it's pretty much where we're at.
Bah, my bad.
I can't remember for sure where we've been posting the news about Sony's non-Spider-Man Spider-Man universe movies, so I'm just going to post this here.
There are a couple new rumors about Silver & Black aka the Silver Sable/Black Cat movie. One is that this will lead to a all women team up Spider-Verse movie featuring Silver Sable, Black Cat, Jessica Drew/Spider Woman, Charlotte Witter/Stunner, Sarah Ehret/Jackpot, and Cassie St. Commons/Dusk. The other one says that S&B will introduce Jessica Drew, and deal with Chameleon, Scorpion, Tarantula, Tombstone, Kraven the Hunter, and Norman Osbourne. Second one seems pretty unlikely to me, because I just don't see how a single movie could handle that many villains, along with two or possible even three heroes.
There are a couple new rumors about Silver & Black aka the Silver Sable/Black Cat movie. One is that this will lead to a all women team up Spider-Verse movie featuring Silver Sable, Black Cat, Jessica Drew/Spider Woman, Charlotte Witter/Stunner, Sarah Ehret/Jackpot, and Cassie St. Commons/Dusk. The other one says that S&B will introduce Jessica Drew, and deal with Chameleon, Scorpion, Tarantula, Tombstone, Kraven the Hunter, and Norman Osbourne. Second one seems pretty unlikely to me, because I just don't see how a single movie could handle that many villains, along with two or possible even three heroes.
Wait. Does Sony even have the movie rights to Jessica Drew? I was sure she never left Marvel.
Theoretically I don't think she automatically falls under Spider-Man's "umbrella" as she didn't premier in a Spider-Man title and was very deliberately created independently of him. Indeed, so far as I'm aware she has less to do with the "Spider-Verse" the Scarlet Witch & Quicksilver had to do with the X-Men side of things. That alone makes me suspect this rumour is a load of fan created wishful thinking.
Last edited:
In point of fact, the Jessica Drew/Spider-Woman character was created for the sole purpose of securing a trademark on the name "Spider-Woman" before Filmation could.
The same link also explains that in their rush to secure the trademark, they gave Spider-Woman the origin that was originally planned for Wolverine! In the end, I think that both characters wound up with far superior origin stories, because this one kind of sucked!
Sony could be taking advantage of the Marvel deal's shared character clause. They might be allowed to use characters that Marvel Studios doesn't have any plans for.
EDIT: Fixed link.
Last edited:
I thought it was something like that (and IIRC a similar situation surrounded She-Hulk's inception?)In point of fact, the Jessica Drew/Spider-Woman character was created for the sole purpose of securing a trademark on the name "Spider-Woman" before Filmation could.
The same link also explains that in their rush to secure the trademark, they gave Spider-Woman the origin that was originally planned for Wolverine! In the end, I think that both characters wound up with far superior origin stories, because this one kind of sucked!
Sony could be taking advantage of the Marvel deal's shared character clause. They might be allowed to use characters that Marvel Studios doesn't have any plans for.
EDIT: Fixed link.
Of course without actually knowing the explicit terms of the Marvel/Sony deal we can only speculate, but it doesn't seem likely that Sony would have licence to use any old characters they liked in their solo movies, unless they already held the rights. One would think anything outside of that would have to be traded on a case-by-case basis and they'd have to give something in return like the Ego/Negasonic exchange with Fox.
If Marvel do still have the Spider-Woman rights, I can't see them giving them up for anything short of Spidey himself. So that's not going to happen.
While you're correct that she should be with Marvel, she's actually shared and Sony has more of her rights. Marvel can use Jessica Drew as long as they don't call her Spider-Woman or use her spider powers. Sony can use the character.
Some new footage and a crossover promotion for the NBA finals ("I think I know that guy!").
The 16 minute featurette
Similar threads
