Sony Confirms That Spider-Man Is Out Of The MCU

Sony Pictures chairman and CEO Tony Vinciquerra has gone on record to state that Spider-Man will not be a part of the MCU in the near-future, as they were not able to strike an agreement with Disney.

70 Comments  RefreshSorted By 
  • 70 results
  • 1
  • 2
GameSpot has a zero tolerance policy when it comes to toxic conduct in comments. Any abusive, racist, sexist, threatening, bullying, vulgar, and otherwise objectionable behavior will result in moderation and/or account termination. Please keep your discussion civil.

Avatar image for the1Jugg
the1Jugg

I think this is better. I hated that Homecoming focused so much on Iron Man and his crew.

Avatar image for justthetip
JustTheTip

That’s fine. The 2 Tom Holland movies sucked. Fanboys love them just because they think they have to love everything Marvel does (unless a chick stars in it), but those movies were honestly overrated.

Avatar image for HalcyonScarlet
HalcyonScarlet

@justthetip: All true.

The person I went to see Spider-Man Homecoming with fell asleep watching that.

Avatar image for waven101
waven101

Spiderman into the multiverse was awesome I want more like that no need for more live action until a great great story comes up.

Avatar image for PrpleTrtleBuBum
PrpleTrtleBuBum

@waven101: all they need to do is a series of nice single villain movies. and dont **** it with too much illuminati crap. like in tasm oscorp was supposedly behind all of the shitty villains we saw, and spidey, and the ones that were supposed to appear

even spiderman 3 would have been fantastic if they saved venom for sm4. thomas haden nailed it, and topher could have been alright if they made him hit the gym for a year or so between being eddie and becoming the bloodlusted parker hater. the complaints about the dance scene are ridiculous because sm1 and 2 had just as much camp as that. if that dance make blood boil then you probably wasnt audience even for the prequels

so just "continue" from sm3 by having kraven only movie. chameleon only movie. scorpion only movie. kingpin only movie. carnage only movie. and theyll be set for a decade with a guaranteed billion in the box office. then perhaps shove in half-seen sinister six like mysterio vulture electro scorpion kraven and rhino. and even then they have venom-carnage, morbius, clone wars, alistair and spider slayers, tombstone hammerhead and other mob war... dont rush it and theres material for 30 years

though sony is in the risk of making woke dumpster fire like the newest non-f4. because they want to show middle finger to disney. so they hire a female scorpion who wields a gun and double blades instead of a suit

Avatar image for HalcyonScarlet
HalcyonScarlet

@PrpleTrtleBuBum: That wasn't the problem with Venom. Sam Raimi didn't like or respect the character enough to put the effort in. If they wanted him to work he would.

Avatar image for PrpleTrtleBuBum
PrpleTrtleBuBum

@HalcyonScarlet: yes that was the core problem. sony forced him to have venom and he tried to skim the thing, making venom born and die in the last 30 mins

up until the bell tower scene it reminded me of comics and the 90s series. 90s series ended the first symbiote episode with that bell tower. they could have cut the movie there too.

if raimi really not like venom then symbiote and eddie could have disappeared for a movie or two and then come back when raimi was done with his vision anyway. having mysterio/vulture whoever he had in mind

Avatar image for glaciusts
GlaciusTS

Without the MCU, the franchise seems destined for mediocrity. It was a richer Universe and all these Spider-Man characters felt like they had so much more potential when there was a bigger universe for them to explore. Now they are gonna strip all those powerful character building elements from Peter and pretend they never happened? Bah, a waste of another Spider-Man reboot. It was good while it lasted.

Avatar image for bjohnson003
bjohnson003

I guess we could get a Spidey clone since Sony got the Spiderverse characters?

Avatar image for Baconstrip78
Baconstrip78

That’s a shame since after the DCEU and X-men fiascos, I don’t invest time in non-MCU comicbook franchises. I’ll pass on whatever Sony comes out with.

Avatar image for HalcyonScarlet
HalcyonScarlet

@Baconstrip78: I'm the opposite. With MCU saturating their franchises, I can't stand it anymore. At first it was great, but now I'm bored. Batman Vs Superman was a breath of fresh air from that colourful Marvel style with jokes every other sentence.

Avatar image for HalcyonScarlet
HalcyonScarlet

Can't say I care much, 'Homecoming' was one of the worst Spider-Man films I've seen. It was down there with Spider-Man 3.

Also has an annoying lack of a Spider sense in the MCU.

Avatar image for streamline
streamline

@HalcyonScarlet: yeah, way overrated. I bought the movie based on reviews since I missed it in the theater.

Avatar image for EvilTyger
EvilTyger

I wonder if there's some Behind the scenes deals happening we don't know about.

Disney and Sony using this to setup a 'multiverse' with more shared access

Avatar image for Sepewrath
Sepewrath

Sony's greed has ended the chance at good Spider-Man movies. Now we're going to be subject to a crappy Spidey vs crappy Venom movie.

Avatar image for wetro
wetro

@Sepewrath: ??? You have that backwards brah, It is Disney thats being greedy, do your research please. Sony simply wanted to continue the existing agreement, it was Disney that wanted a huge increase in their cut.

Avatar image for Sepewrath
Sepewrath

@wetro: No further research needs to be done,Spider-Man has been made into a billion dollar property by Marvel/Disney. Their creative team took Spidey from the brink of irrelevance like the Fox Marvel properties, to the top of the movie world. Sony had exactly zero to do with that, other than currently having the property. You could replace Sony with a cardboard box that spits out 20's and you wouldn't know the difference.

Disney wants to pay 50/50 and split the proceeds which is more than fair. Sony being greedy--wants to continue to attribute nothing and reap all the rewards. And before you say "Sony pays for it" Any company would take the deal of turning 150 million to near a billion, so that's doing exactly nothing.

Avatar image for ahmad996
ahmad996

@Sepewrath: "Irrelevance"? You high bro?

Avatar image for Sepewrath
Sepewrath

@ahmad996: Yes irrelevance, if you think Spider-Man wasn't on the same path as the Fox X-Men universe which was on a steady downward trajectory, then you need to put down whatever you're smoking.

Avatar image for iloveqwop
Iloveqwop

@Sepewrath: bs fanboy crap. Sony turned Spiderman into a TRUE billion dollar property back when it meant something.

Glad hes out the the upcoming sh*t show the will be MCU.

Avatar image for Sepewrath
Sepewrath

@iloveqwop: No it meant nothing when Sony did it--because back then when it was an anomaly. People always wanted to see their favorite comic book heroes on the big screen. Sony took an A list hero, with zero competition and ran with it, before running it into the ground. Marvel took superheroes that weren't A list, in a point where the superhero fad was dying thanks to stinkers like Spider-Man 3 and the declining X-Men movies and didn't try to ground it in reality like say The Dark Knight. They turned that into a juggernaut, lets see Sony release a Spider-Man movie against MCU--then have it compete in both quality and commercial success; then they will get a deserved pat on the back. However, both of those things seem like a longshot.

Avatar image for iloveqwop
Iloveqwop

@Sepewrath: Lol ticket prices were MINIMUM 2x less. Definitely more when the first came out it was like 5 bucks.

So yes, you are very wrong lol Im not gonna waste my time explaining basic math to you

Avatar image for Sepewrath
Sepewrath

@iloveqwop: lol first off, I don't know where you live where movie tickets were 5 bucks post 1982--but it definitely didn't cost that where I live. And it certainly wasn't 2x less, the tickets were maybe 4 bucks less than it is now.

Second, you act as if movie came out 100 years ago, the last Sony Spider-Man came out in 2014, not 1914. There is an 8 cent difference in inflation between then and now; the movie was a critical "meh" and the second lowest grossing Spidey film. Do I have to explain that basic math to you? Sony was driving the franchise in the ground and if Venom is any indication; they will continue to do so because Venom sucked.

Avatar image for iloveqwop
Iloveqwop

@Sepewrath: Lol you got ripped. How can you expect me to take this reponse seriously when you just said: "I don't know where you live where movie tickets were 5 bucks post 1982--but it definitely didn't cost that where I live"

EVERYWHERE.

You are a liar. Do you not understand that it is virtually THREE times more nowadays? The question is wtf do you live? If you paid more than 5 bucks, espcially for a matinee at ANY time in the 90s you got JANKED. Moron.

Avatar image for Sepewrath
Sepewrath

@iloveqwop: lol you are an idiot, I don't know what nowhere, small town you come from where movie tickets were 5 bucks--but in major cities in the US, it has been a very very long time since tickets were 5 bucks. Also we're not talking about the 90's, we're talking 2014 imbecile. You're trying to change your story now talking about matinees and other irrelevant things. I'm down with you, I feel like I'm losing brain cells just by engaging this level of stupidity.

Avatar image for iloveqwop
Iloveqwop

@Sepewrath: Uh Spiderman came out in 2001 or so. Man youre dumb.

Cost me 5 dollars to see it on a Sunday.

Avatar image for timthegem
timthegem

My cousin's best friend's mailman's former barbershop quartet tenor told me that Disney/Marvel wanted to make Spidey and Venom meet in Frisco and become gay for each other in a serious "Brokeback" style drama, ending in a vicious breakup that left Eddie/Venom scorned through the next five sequels.

Avatar image for streamline
streamline

@timthegem: That’s a good premise. You should steal the idea and pitch it to Hollywood.

Avatar image for HalcyonScarlet
HalcyonScarlet

@timthegem: Hey man, it's what Tom Holland would have wanted XD: https://www.out.com/film/2019/9/04/tom-holland-thinks-there-should-be-gay-spider-man

Avatar image for slakor
slakor

Spider-Flop incoming. Hope they do an awesome dance number.

Avatar image for chorn83
chorn83

I don't know why everyone is mad no one know what Disney really wanted all they know is that Sony backed out. For whatever reason Sony backed instead of blaming Sony why not ask yourselves why they decided to back out when they only benefited From the deal? I don't let media influence what I think I look at the situation and ask why?

Avatar image for ButDuuude
ButDuuude

@chorn83: The only thing I’ve read were rumors about it. They said Sony made most of the profit from the movies, but Disney kept 100% of the profit from the the merchandise and Disney was asking for 50% of the Spider-Man movies profit too and still keep the 100% profit for the merchandise. This is business and if the rumors correct, then Sony made the right move.

Avatar image for chorn83
chorn83

@ButDuuude: Even then that is only what they gathered from what the companies put out. What really happens in their discussion we will never know they mouse could have kidnapped the Sony CEO kids and held them for ransom until Sora, Riku and Kari went in with Cloud, Leon and Zidane to rescue them from under the Disney Castle where they hold all the secret merchendise sweat shops. With all the low paid latin workers.

Avatar image for HalcyonScarlet
HalcyonScarlet

@ButDuuude: No, I think that's the original license agreement. Marvel only gave the film rights. All other profits around the character are rightfully Marvels. Even when Sony make a Spider Man film, Marvel get a chunk of the profits.

Avatar image for texastitan123
texastitan123

I learned along time ago with the release of the psp that Sony sucks and is not in it for the fans. This just bolsters that idea. Venom was a bad movie.

Avatar image for santinegrete
santinegrete

Good luck making a spidey movie I want to see Sony. Who says, maybe you'll score again, like with multiverse.

Avatar image for ProjektInsanity
ProjektInsanity

I say this as a HUGE Sony fan and not the biggest Marvel/Disney fan (at least, not for the last 8 or so years). Sony, you dun #$%@ed up. Basic business sense that a percentage ownership of a wildly successful product > 100% ownership of a piece of crap. Much as it pains me to say it, you guys just aren't great solo'ing superhero movies. Disney, while they're not what they once were, is clearly superior, especially from a production/marketing perspective. Whether I like them or not, look at the box office numbers. Hell, look at what they were able to do to revitalize Spiderman after you guys damn near rendered him comatose.

It's like Sony immediately forgot what made Spiderman successful after Disney made him relevant again. Dumb, guys. You're going to remember quickly why you sought a partnership in the first place.

Avatar image for chaosbrigade
chaosbrigade

@ProjektInsanity: Disney wanted 50% of revenue from all movies that Spiderman will appear in. It makes zero sense for Sony to agree to that.

The lowest grossing mainstream Spiderman movie was Amzing Spiderman 2 wtih $200,000,000. Even if the next MCU Spiderman Movie makes $400,000,000, Sony still makes the same amount of money, but taking all the financial risks while all Disney needs to do is incorporate Spiderman into their MCU, which benefit them more than Sony.

I believe Sony offered a 25%-35% deal, but Disney insisted on getting at least half. So maybe you should ask Disney not to be so greedy instead, Sony after all does own the rights of Spiderman for better or worse.

Avatar image for ZIMdoom
ZIMdoom

@chaosbrigade: the Disney movies so far have made far more money and have a far better reputation than the Sony only movies. So even at 50% Sony would be making more Than they have In the past. And that doesn’t count money they could potentially get from future MCU movies like a new avengers, civil war 2 or any other major storyline they could tie Spidey into. Sony is leaving a lot of money on the table simply because they think they can now cash in on what Disney/Marvel have done so far. They stand to lose A LOT and really don’t have a whole lot to gain. Plus, their history wit the franchise is far worse. I have been a big spidey fan for decades and this is just a dumb move from Sony.

Avatar image for chaosbrigade
chaosbrigade

@ZIMdoom: Not really. Besides the Avengers and Black Panther, MCU movies average about $300,000,000 gross, which is pretty much what Spiderman usually makes.

https://www.boxofficemojo.com/franchises/chart/?id=avengers.htm

If Spiderman makes $500,000,000, which is being very optimistic, and Sony agrees to split 50/50 with Disney, Sony would only make $250,000,000, this is less than the gross of any Spiderman movie that Sony has made so far.

Sony execs aren't idiots when it comes to profitability, their team of professional accountants have done all the math and calculated that a 50/50 split with Disney just doesn't make any financial sense, hence why they couldn't sign the deal with Disney.

Again, if you want Spiderman to stay in the MCU, don't blame Sony, blame Disney for being greedy, which isn't exactly news.

Avatar image for chorn83
chorn83

@chaosbrigade: If they thought they were loosing something they would not have left. They knew that Marvel was setting up for a Secret Wars movie that would have Spidey in the forfront but I wasnt in love with Marvel's all inclussive spiderman I dont really think at the heart Sony was either. Sony is Japanese company at heart all the talk of inclussiveness and turning Spiderman bi they would have backed out eventually. The are not into the politics I know they censor some stuff but that is different from force politics in movies for all we know they may have not been into what Marvel was cooking and wanted to separate from the franchise.

Avatar image for nintendians
nintendians

so i guess other version of future marvel vs. capcom games not going to have spiderman in there for other system and just for sony console, exclusive then?

Avatar image for PrpleTrtleBuBum
PrpleTrtleBuBum

@nintendians: sony doesnt own spiderman just the movie rights

which is a good thing. disney has grown so humongous there needs to be a pushback. next they will be buying nickelodeon and hasbro and a few game studios

Avatar image for nintendians
nintendians

@PrpleTrtleBuBum: okay on the movie rights.

okay. don't know about other studios, they seem to be fine (i think) and probably some game studios, but not the major and well know ones.

  • 70 results
  • 1
  • 2