Disney-Sony Standoff Ends Marvel Studios & Kevin Feige’s Involvement In ‘Spider-Man’

[Crazymoogle]

I'm talking about "Disney needs Marvel money ASAP to cover the Fox bid." That is laughable. Disney doesn't need anything. They have all the properties they need, they don't need Spider-Man's film profits. It's Sony that has far more interest in the property than Disney and understandably are not willing to share such profits so generously of a property they own.

Click to shrink...

The words before: "Sony thinks..."?

Both companies are thinking financials. Sony knows they have a sure thing franchise. That's a lot easier to sell than Blade or whatever. It's why Marvel came to the table in the first place.

Disney knows they have the IP to pay it back anyway and then some, but the stock market runs on "now". I'm pretty sure both companies would rather announce a Spider-Man deal than back out and foil it with promises of future Morbius/F4 returns.

So in a way, you're right. It is laughable. Both parties think the others position is so laughable that they are willing to test the public on it, first.

 

[Legacy]

With out putting Peter in an alternate universe
How do you decouple his impact on MCU
Happy Hogan
Stark Tech
Being in outer space

Sony is shit in this scenario, give Disney a price and let them buy Peter back.

Click to shrink...

Happy was also dating Aunt May, they were kinda cute together.

 

[viskod]

Into the Spider-verse's was the best, though. Sony prolly think they could pull it off again. They know they made 3 good spidey movies with 0 Disney involvement.

Click to shrink...

Into the Spider-Verse doesn't really count here. That movie lucked out into a Deadpool scenario where the studio wrote it off as a loss, didn't expect anything from it, and didn't pay any attention to it. It turned out good in spite of Sony, not because of them.

I don't know what other films you're referring to. The original Spider Man movie and Spider Man 2? Surely not Venom.

 

[janusff]

How do you decouple his impact on MCU

Click to shrink...

hire a great writer to tackle this? I agree it sucks to lose that continuity, but if they manage to get a great script out of it, i think the audience will be forgiving about it.

Sony is shit in this scenario

Click to shrink...

see, i don't quite get these replies. we don't know who's gonna be involved with the next picture. these movies aren't their distributors. I get that there's the consistency of quality with the MCU under Fiege, but out in the rest of the industry, you publish good movies and bad ones. not one distributor out there puts nothing but bad films.

 

[gozu]

Into the Spider-Verse doesn't really count here. That movie lucked out into a Deadpool scenario where the studio wrote it off as a loss, didn't expect anything from it, and didn't pay any attention to it. It turned out good in spite of Sony, not because of them.

I don't know what other films you're referring to. The original Spider Man movie and Spider Man 2?

Click to shrink...

Of course.

 

[Wayfaerer]

Into the Spider-Verse doesn't really count here. That movie lucked out into a Deadpool scenario where the studio wrote it off as a loss, didn't expect anything from it, and didn't pay any attention to it. It turned out good in spite of Sony, not because of them.

I don't know what other films you're referring to. The original Spider Man movie and Spider Man 2? Surely not Venom.

Click to shrink...

Where was it said that they wrote it off as a loss, didn't expect anything from it and didn't pay attention to it?

 

[Keym]

After Homecoming's cliffhanger: "I'm no longer safe in this city. To protect my family and loved ones, I'll have to hide... in another dimension!"

Cue Venom swinging in the background of an alternate NYC.

 

[Betty]

Spider-Man 3 opens with Peter waking up having just had plastic surgery, he sees his reflection in the mirror and it's Tobey Maguire.

 

[BringBackSonics]

It's not that difficult to move on from spider man in the MCU. The only real MCU future lead was

Spoiler

SWORD, but you can still do that without Spider-Man

Everything else can just be ignored a bit or shifted around.

 

[Deleted member 38573]

Not 0. This tweet, for example, has 18K RT.

Click to shrink...

Such a power move

it's still fuck disney but you have to respect the play

 

[Harry Potter Obama]

I wonder if they'll try to have some semblance of continuity between new films and the MCU. Obviously without Feige it's not gonna have the oversight, but they could probably pull off referencing each other just enough to seem like it's still the same world.

 

[Deleted member 8674]

Not 0. This tweet, for example, has 18K RT.

Click to shrink...

This Spiderman wouldn't be as half as popular if it's not for the avengers and the MCU. The end of phase 3 what pushed the last movie to 1 billion. I didn't care about Captain Marvel or Doctor Strange at first, I speak as a non comic reader and someone who's unfamiliar with those characters. Still the idea that they are a part of something larger, that's why I went to see and enjoyed them greatly and didn't miss one movie until Endgame and it was worth it for the end.

 

[AnotherDayAnotherDollar]

Also, people keep throwing around the fact that Disney was willing to pay 50% of the production costs like it means anything. It doesn't. The most disappointing Spider-Man movie so far (ASM 2 both went over budget and disappointed at the box office) didn't come in at a loss. There's no risk involved for Sony in financing these movies, and they have more than enough money to be able to do so. Disney offering that money is all about getting more a say in the decision making (without it, Sony always had the final say on all decisions) and getting an ownership stake that they can leverage in terms of other decisions (like the moving forward of the other Sony Universe of Marvel Characters movies). Sony was more than likely willing to move in terms of giving Marvel more of a cut as producers (an aside: first dollar doesn't mean what you guys think it means), but the co-ownership is a sticking point that's gonna be pretty hard to reconcile if they decide to come back to the table.

Click to shrink...

That's what I have been saying. Disney wants 50% of everything. 50% of finance, 50% of the proceeds, 50% of the license ownership. It's not just about co financing. Disney is coming at this very strongly. If they came in and said we want 10% of the BO gross (which is very high for a licensing fee) Sony may have accepted and that would have been the end of that. The endgame for Disney is getting the remaining rights that they don't own for Spider-man.

 

[Legacy]

Where was it said that they wrote it off as a loss, didn't expect anything from it and didn't pay attention to it?

Click to shrink...

I'd like to see the receipts that one too

 

[Servbot24]

I don't care about Feige, I care about whether Spider-man will be in MCU movies. I take it that's a "no" at this point though.

 

[Deleted member 32822]

Such a power move

it's still fuck disney but you have to respect the play

Click to shrink...

No, you don't.

 

[Legacy]

I don't care about Feige, I care about whether Spider-man will be in MCU movies. I take it that's a "no" at this point though.

Click to shrink...

At this point in time, it's a massive "NO" sign that can be seen from outer space. That could change if an arrangement is made though, I don't think this outcome is final.

 

[Snake Eater]

I don't trust Sony alone with this Peter.

Click to shrink...

Trust in Sony you must

 

[Notaskwid]

Disney acting like the big bully they are getting put into their place. Respect for Sony

 

[LinkStrikesBack]

I definitely get why Sony refused. This is Disney trying to step towards utterly reclaiming the Spiderman license, and there's no way Sony accepts that result while it's such a success for them.

I'd much rather have MCU Spiderman than more attempts at standalone ones from Sony, but as is, there's no way they would accept the terms. Disney obviously knew that too, so this is being leaked is probably all a marketing tactic from at least one of them.

 

[Deleted member 38573]

No, you don't.

Click to shrink...

yes, we do

if disney go full heel, i may begin to stan

 

[fiendcode]

Marvel Studios in that incarnation didn't make their own films. They did licensing. So you're both kind of talking around each other on that point.

Fiege started out as an intern to Lauren Donner, whose company The Donners' Company, co-produced X-Men. She made Feige a producer on that film. Avi Arad hired him after that.

In any case, Man is correct in that this deal falling through will have no effect on any games. Not only would it not be effective, but the production time on games means that this dispute will likely already be completely resolved or done well before any such tactic *could* have an impact. Either they come to a new agreement long before or Marvel Studios and Sony will both have already adjusted and moved forward with their individual plans.

Click to shrink...

Marvel Studios were "only" co-producing films in the late 90s and early aughts yes (not just licensing, most rights were already sold by that point anyway) but they existed. They didn't begin the move to full production until they started working on Iron Man in 2005, coincidentally around when HOM delivered Decimation over in the comics.

As far as games are concerned, I dunno? We've seen what Disney "hardball" looks like and in that scenario I'd say nothing's really off the table. I certainly think the games (and other licensing) ending up as collateral is far more likely than Bat V Spider ever hitting screens.

 

[janusff]

At this point in time, it's a massive "NO" sign that can be visible from outer space. That could change if an arrangement is made though, I don't think this outcome is final.

Click to shrink...

i kinda think it is. Companies are in the business of making money. Sony thinks that they can go ahead with Spidey and keep all the profits from the film AND merchandising, while getting a head start with folks invested with Holland from the previous films for the next outing. If they did what Disney wanted, they would be making way less money out of all this, meanwhile it's pretty much guaranteed that the next movie will make some bank. I'm thinking this is what Sony wanted even if it's not what the fans want.

 

[mjc]

At this point in time, it's a massive "NO" sign that can be seen from outer space. That could change if an arrangement is made though, I don't think this outcome is final.

Click to shrink...

Yeah, as others have noted Feige is the tissue that connects the MCU movies. If he's not involved then it's not happening.

 

[Bob Beat]

Don't worry they're going to recast Andrew Garfield instead.

Click to shrink...

As venom? That's sounds horrible.

 

[Old School Gamer]

Deal isn't no where near done. Disney did a high ball number to "start" negotiations. I wouldn't be surprised if Disney was the one who leaked the deal to Deadline to get public PR heat from the internet on Sony. Sony will either walk away or come back with a 20-30 share deal.

 

[Wayfaerer]

i kinda think it is. Companies are in the business of making money. Sony thinks that they can go ahead with Spidey and keep all the profits from the film AND merchandising, while getting a head start with folks invested with Holland from the previous films for the next outing. If they did what Disney wanted, they would be making way less money out of all this, meanwhile it's pretty much guaranteed that the next movie will make some bank. I'm thinking this is what Sony wanted even if it's not what the fans want.

Click to shrink...

Sony doesn't get any money from merchandising.

 

[Deleted member 4260]

i kinda think it is. Companies are in the business of making money. Sony thinks that they can go ahead with Spidey and keep all the profits from the film AND merchandising, while getting a head start with folks invested with Holland from the previous films for the next outing. If they did what Disney wanted, they would be making way less money out of all this, meanwhile it's pretty much guaranteed that the next movie will make some bank. I'm thinking this is what Sony wanted even if it's not what the fans want.

Click to shrink...

sony makes nothing from merch.

EDIT: someone replied already. sorry for the dogpile.

 

[Shock32]

Such a power move

it's still fuck disney but you have to respect the play

Click to shrink...

Hmm yes fuck Disney, and no i don't respect the move because it will get much worse with them if it worked.

 

[TyraZaurus]

Okay, I'm going to give the benefit of a doubt here. Someone with knowledge of movie making and finance explain to me how Disney co-financing the film at 50 % translates to "50 % profits". I'm willing to accept there's a gap in my knowledge here.

 

[Mahonay]

As venom? That's sounds horrible.

Click to shrink...

 

[Principate]

After Homecoming's cliffhanger: "I'm no longer safe in this city. To protect my family and loved ones, I'll have to hide... in another dimension!"

Cue Venom swinging in the background of an alternate NYC.

Click to shrink...

More like we get a spider-verse/Spider-wars scenario where Sony transports multiple spider-men into one dimension like one of their old plans. Leads into a battle against venom, Carnage and Spider-Carnage.

 

[mjc]

Okay, I'm going to give the benefit of a doubt here. Someone with knowledge of movie making and finance explain to me how Disney co-financing the film at 50 % translates to "50 % profits". I'm willing to accept there's a gap in my knowledge here.

Click to shrink...

Disney brought that to the table as their opening offer, they thought they should get more of a share. Sony doesn't have to accept that, so they walked away. It's true that the MCU has re-elevated Spider-Man's value with general audiences, but he's still Sony's character in terms of film IP use. So unless something happens where Disney buys out the character again, or something else, they both get equal say in this. Ideally you'd see both sides negotiating a bit more to work out the profit percentages..which may still happen. (Or not)

 

[janusff]

Sony doesn't get any money from merchandising.

Click to shrink...

sony makes nothing from merch.

EDIT: someone replied already. sorry for the dogpile.

Click to shrink...

oh wow didn't know this. that's a lot of dosh sony isn't getting.

 

[Legacy]

It's a shame really, I got used to Spidey being in the MCU and loved Far From Home.

I do wonder how well the next film will do with Sony back in full control and without any Stark Tech, Happy, Avengers, Fury, etc.

 

[Azerth]

From Sony's tweet it also read like they wanted Spider-man out every 2 years or so and Marvel was like, "naw fam we good. We have other properties to push and we can't keep milking Spider-man like that". And then Sony was like, "Feige is too busy to work on Spidey!"

Click to shrink...

homecoming came out in 17 and far from home came out this year. the two year thing isnt an issue with marvel

 

[BossAttack]

The words before: "Sony thinks..."?

Both companies are thinking financials. Sony knows they have a sure thing franchise. That's a lot easier to sell than Blade or whatever. It's why Marvel came to the table in the first place.

Disney knows they have the IP to pay it back anyway and then some, but the stock market runs on "now". I'm pretty sure both companies would rather announce a Spider-Man deal than back out and foil it with promises of future Morbius/F4 returns.

So in a way, you're right. It is laughable. Both parties think the others position is so laughable that they are willing to test the public on it, first.

Click to shrink...

Disney stock isn't going to budge over Spider-Man. Sony is far more reliant on its Film/Picture business than Disney is on its Film business. Further, Disney has a million other properties to rake for profit. Disney wasn't making substantial money off of the Spider-Man films in the first place, hence the renegotiation. Plus, Disney still owns the rights to Spider-Man with regards to everything not film including TV and Theme Parks, you know the crux of Disney's business. So, regardless of whether they get to use Spidey in their film universe again, they still get to reap the benefits of Spidey in all other media.

Sony needs Spider-Man more than Disney.


Disney:

Sony:

 

[Trey]

Such a power move

it's still fuck disney but you have to respect the play

Click to shrink...

Respect is the last thing we should give a megacorporation throwing around its absolutely terrifying capitalist weight in a manner that has zero positive impact to the consumers.

 

[jack_package_200]

Its weird but unsurprising how much people are acting like Disney is the fucking victim

 

[Astronut325]

This Spiderman wouldn't be as half as popular if it's not for the avengers and the MCU. The end of phase 3 what pushed the last movie to 1 billion. I didn't care about Captain Marvel or Doctor Strange at first, I speak as a non comic reader and someone who's unfamiliar with those characters. Still the idea that they are a part of something larger, that's why I went to see and enjoyed them greatly and didn't miss one movie until Endgame and it was worth it for the end.

Click to shrink...

This is where I stand too. Disney is the reason Spider-Man is pulling in $1 billion. I don't think the Spider-Man movies before Homecoming we're even close a billion at the box office.

I as a casual fan want quality Spider-Man movies. That won't happen with Sony going it alone.

 

[AnotherDayAnotherDollar]

homecoming came out in 17 and far from home came out this year. the two year thing isnt an issue with marvel

Click to shrink...

That was 1 time. Do they want to keep moving their schedule around to account for Sony's need for a SM movie every 2 years? I highly, highly doubt they do.

 

[TyraZaurus]

Disney brought that to the table as their opening offer, they thought they should get more of a share. Sony doesn't have to accept that, so they walked away. Ideally you'd see both sides negotiating a bit more to work out the profit percentages..which may still happen. (Or not)

Click to shrink...

But that still doesn't mean 50 % = 50 % profit. I've seen multiple articles that have talked about that and the actual number they were asking for in returns (which isn't stated) like they're different things.

 

[manchego obfuscator]

why would a comic book company need film rights for why wouldnt they sell

people always say it was to prevent bankruptcy as if toys and cartoons werent a thing back then im pretty sure thats an urban myth

Click to shrink...

this narrative is so widely believed and repeated so often that it's almost impossible to debunk it, but the fact is that the deals in question were signed years before Marvel filed for bankruptcy, and that Marvel's management at the time saw film adaptations of its IP primarily as a way to increase the value of its IP in other media rather than as a revenue stream in and of itself

 

[Deleted member 8674]

Respect is the last thing we should give a megacorporation throwing around its absolutely terrifying capitalist weight in a manner that has zero positive impact to the consumers.

Click to shrink...

How is Spiderman in the MCU not postive to the consumers?

 

[Deleted member 38573]

Hmm yes fuck Disney, and no i don't respect the move because it will get much worse with them if it worked.

Click to shrink...

Of course

But how they've manipulated social media isn't something i've really seen before. It's still trending!!!

 

[Candescence]

While their push was a bit too aggressive, it'd be ridiculous to argue that Disney/Marvel doesn't deserve a bigger cut of some kind after revitalizing Spider-Man as a movie name (after the disasters that were the Amazing films). Like it or not, people want to see Peter Parker in the MCU. Venom is... An outlier, because, well, Venom is inexplicably popular, and Enter the Spider-Verse, as amazing as it was, didn't make as much bank as it should've, and was a relative success in spite of Sony. Sony has proven they don't know what the hell they're doing with Spidey when Disney or Sam Rami isn't involved, and they alienated the latter already. They really don't deserve to keep the film rights as it is, but that's how the cards are laid out.

I do expect the two companies to come back to the table. Sony like knows it has no way in hell of winning a PR war against the House of Mouse, and it's already obvious that the public isn't in Sony's corner. This whole situation is messed up to high heaven and kinda emblematic of the problems with copyright law.

 

[Uzumaki Goku]

Ned Leeds? Sony. He's an older SM character, mixed up with Miles Morales' best friend Ganke Lee.

I wonder if Marvel still has the rights to Zendaya's Michelle Jones, since she's an original character?

Click to shrink...

From what I gather, she is now "frozen" because Marvel couldn't use classic Mary Jane.

Or so I've heard.

 

[LinkStrikesBack]

homecoming came out in 17 and far from home came out this year. the two year thing isnt an issue with marvel

Click to shrink...

Two films in short succession isn't a problem for them. Two films every two years repeatedly for an indefinite amount of time may well be.

 

[Shock32]

Of course

But how they've manipulated social media isn't something i've really seen before. It's still trending!!!

Click to shrink...

It's scary really, they probably have the biggest fanbase anywhere and now they can weaponize social media to get their way.

 

[Dalek]

It puzzled me why people were blinding defending Sony on this no matter what-then it dawned on me. We are on a video game site. They are Sony fanboys-I feel foolish for not seeing it before. Any other site right now and you don't see this "Major corporation picking on poor old Sony" mentality.