Jump to content
rllmuk
Pob

MCU Phase 4 and beyond - Spidey to leave MCU? (warning: Endgame and Far From Home spoilers)

Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, RubberJohnny said:

Disney was offering 50% of the funding, since Sony was complaining about the high budget from Far From Home, and then the return is based on the % funding.

 

It's not like they're offering nothing and expecting 10x their current return.

 

50% of funding doesn’t offset a 50% loss in box office take. That’s like offering to pay $100m to take $500m.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The new deal doesn't sound that sweet from a Sony perspective. Take away a lot of the time and hands-on care from the guy commonly attributed with making all these MCU movies a success, bung in a few hundred million of funding, and then take half the profit. It's presumably a first negotiating step, not the final offer.

 

I also assume this is all part of the negotiating process. Release all the details, and set the fans loose on the exec's Twitter accounts.

 

But it wouldn't necessarily be a terrible thing if it did fall apart. It would do Spider-Man some good to get out from under Stark.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is Norman Osborn, as a Spider-Man baddie, controlled by Sony? Given that he's heavily rumoured to be the overarching antagonist for the next phase of the MCU, this could put all that under threat. I assume a tonne of pre-work has been done on the story.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It’s weird Disney apparently aren’t budging when they stand to lose far more from this deal going South. Even if they’re not making bank on individual Spider-man movies, his popularity brings them cash from tons of other avenues, including their own MCU movies by association.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, grindmouse said:

It’s weird Disney apparently aren’t budging when they stand to lose far more from this deal going South. Even if they’re not making bank on individual Spider-man movies, his popularity brings them cash from tons of other avenues, including their own MCU movies by association.

 

I don't imagine Disney feel like Spider-Man being in their MCU movies is making them much more money in and of itself. Like, does Endgame sell more tickets because Spider-Man is in it? That seems unlikely to me. On the other hand, the toys and so on presumably make a lot. But I don't really know how much money is there for that.

 

I do assume there's a deal that will be done. But the financial case for either side to walk away is pretty easy to make.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Uncle Mike said:

 

I don't imagine Disney feel like Spider-Man being in their MCU movies is making them much more money in and of itself. Like, does Endgame sell more tickets because Spider-Man is in it? That seems unlikely to me. On the other hand, the toys and so on presumably make a lot. But I don't really know how much money is there for that.

 

I do assume there's a deal that will be done. But the financial case for either side to walk away is pretty easy to make.

 

I consume these superhero films without feeling much for them, but Spider-man is far and away my favourite - he’s more popular than any individual MCU character. Even Iron-man.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even with the current deal it's basically free money for Disney at the moment isn't it? Sure they put a load of the creative work in but I assume their talent gets paid for by Sony as part of the film's costs. Except for Feige, maybe.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Uncle Mike said:

Sure. But is he currently making Disney any money? 

 

Undoubtedly. He’s making them a shit ton of money via merchandising and indirectly within the MCU. They aren’t making a great deal directly from the Sony-produced movies but everybody benefits from the current agreement.*

 

*Unless you hate the current Parker-Stark relationship but that plotline is now over anyway.

 

I love the idea of having Osborne and Spider-man front and centre in the next phase of MCU. So Disney need to make this happen. Not least to save us from Spider-man vs Venom.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rough maths, Disney made about $100m from the two MCU Spider-Man movies combined. Now, that's not nothing. But it's not a huge amount either.

 

Endgame made them $2.8bn, admittedly for a lot more investment. EDIT: and that's just the box office takings. They obviously also make PPV and DVD revenue on top for Endgame that they don't with Spider-Man. But they can afford to ask for more, and walk away if they don't get it. If Spider-Man wasn't in Civil War, Infinity War and Endgame, those movies don't make much (any?) less money. They may lose some merchandise money, but it's probably not enough to stop them walking off.

 

Also, if Disney wants to focus more on the stuff it owns, and needs to fill its Disney+ service with top-tier superhero stuff (which it obviously does) Feige's time and the MCU tie-in just got more expensive in terms of opportunity cost for Disney.

 

Similarly, there's little incentive for Sony to give up much more than they do, as @McCoy pointed out. A lot of the apparent uplift in revenue for Far From Home can equally be argued as Hollywood just getting better at selling overseas (China). A crappy Spider-Man movie still makes more money than half of a good one, even if you assume that the only thing making the Holland ones good is MCU tie-in, which seems simplistic.

 

It may be that the right deal is a win-win, but there might not be enough incentive on either side to find it. Which is presumably why someone leaked it, to try and generate some pressure to get the teams back to the table.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Marvel win with Spidey in MCU because it raises the profile of the already ridiculously popular character. So it’s a small percentage increase on top of a huge amount. But they’ll win whenever a Sony Spidey movie is released anyway regardless. 

 

I agree with your analysis in general.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Admittedly, I'm no comic book fan, only getting into the superhero wave with my sons and their obsession with the MCU, but why is Spidey such a popular character? I mean, he's cool and all in the MCU, but he's nowhere near my boys, or any of their mates, favourite. I take it he's had some of the better comic book stories or something and it's the older fans who prefer him?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, JPL said:

Admittedly, I'm no comic book fan, only getting into the superhero wave with my sons and their obsession with the MCU, but why is Spidey such a popular character? I mean, he's cool and all in the MCU, but he's nowhere near my boys, or any of their mates, favourite. I take it he's had some of the better comic book stories or something and it's the older fans who prefer him?

There are a few reasons I reckon but the overarching one is that he appeals to kids from 2 years old upwards. 

The MCU has made many other characters popular. Iron Man was a joke before Downey's Stark. Captain America popular but a bit too worthy. Spidey has always been Spidey.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hollywood Reporter article, focusing mainly on the different situation Marvel and Sony are in now compared to when the Spider-Man deal was made:

 

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/spider-man-standoff-why-sony-thinks-it-doesnt-need-kevins-playbook-anymore-1233644

 

 

 

A couple of comments I saw posted on Birth Movies Death, which are just speculation, not exactly insider knowledge, but seem plausible:

 

Quote

Samuel Crystal
I'm betting both versions of this story are a little true. Probably something like Disney did tell Feige they wanted him full time on X-MEN and F4 rather than Spider-Man because they make more money off stuff they entirely own rather than just partially. But Feige probably wanted to keep his hands on Spider-Man for a lot of reasons, so he goes to Sony and says "Disney won't let me work on the rest of the Spider-Man films unless you guys give them a big enough cut of the profits for it to be worth more than focusing solely on F4 and X-MEN." And that's where the 50/50 number or something close to it came up, and Sony would say "hate to see you go but we're not gonna become minority stakeholders in a property we technically own the rights to. We'll take our chances with running our own cinematic universe now that we've got two very successful Spidey films and one very successful Spidey-adjacent film."

 

Quote

heiro one

I kinda wonder if there's some Disney internal politics going on here too. You know, with Alan Horn being the head of the film division and Kevin Feige being his subordinate, but Feige being an equally excellent producer / money maker for Disney with Marvel as Horn is with the live action remakes of the animated movies. And with Bob Iger just getting older, and an eventual C-suite shakeup coming down the road, Horn not feeling like he should cut Feige any slack. If this is kinda like a "As long as you work for my division, you're going to spend your time working on projects that are as profitable for us as possible, not some other studio's project" kinda thing.

 

Kinda like how Horn went over Feige's head and fired James Gunn over something Feige had been aware of and addressed years earlier when he first hired the guy.

 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Spider-Man has had good cartoons since I was a kid. Spider-Man and his Amazing Friends? I mean, my Mum sent me a picture of me at about 4 years old wearing a Spider-Man suit, and my 4 year old has one too. I don't consider myself a particular Spider-fan. Even the 90s Spidey series, not that we really got to watch it all, was decent. And it went off on the Secret Wars storyline, with Spider-Man bringing together other Marvel Heroes (including some X-Men) and eventually saving everything and becoming a great leader. Then there are super kid friendly cartoons, and his distinct look is super recognisable. Classic Blue/red. He really has all angles covered. 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, sir stiff_one said:

There are a few reasons I reckon but the overarching one is that he appeals to kids from 2 years old upwards. 

The MCU has made many other characters popular. Iron Man was a joke before Downey's Stark. Captain America popular but a bit too worthy. Spidey has always been Spidey.

I know it’s anecdotal, but like I said, neither my boys or any of their mates are big into Spidey. They’re all Iron Man, Cap, Star Lord, Thor, Hulk, Black Panther. And this is all obviously off the back of the films that they’ve grown up with. I think it’s more the older fans who are into him, as Mike said.

 

He’s obviously still great in the MCU and it’d be a real shame to lose him. I can’t see it happening though. I reckon they’ll sort out a deal that works for both parties.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Uncle Mike said:

Similarly, there's little incentive for Sony to give up much more than they do, as @McCoy pointed out. A lot of the apparent uplift in revenue for Far From Home can equally be argued as Hollywood just getting better at selling overseas (China). A crappy Spider-Man movie still makes more money than half of a good one, even if you assume that the only thing making the Holland ones good is MCU tie-in, which seems simplistic.

 

Absolutely. From Scott Mendelson at Forbes:

 

Quote

Yes, Far From Home is now Sony's biggest global grosser, but that's as much about China's new fondness for superhero movies as anything. Far From Home jumped 75% from Homecoming's $116 million gross in China. Considering the wave of sudden theatrical interest in solo superhero movies, it is just as likely that Chinese moviegoers having a grand old time with Tom Hardy's Venom ($269 million in China alone) helped spur some of the boost that pushed Spider-Man: Far From Home to $205 million and thus over the $1.1 billion global milestone. 

 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/scottmendelson/2019/08/21/sony-doesnt-need-marvel-to-make-successful-spider-man-movies/#1ec1b910187e

 

On a US domestic front, Far From Home has, currently, only made around $40m more than Homecoming.  The rest of the increase is made up of increased foreign grosses which is a trend that many film series have seen in the last few years. 

 

Domestically, live action Spiderman films all tend to be in the $300-$400m mark, although the Amazing series were in the $200m range. But the original trilogy and the MCU ones have all had pretty similar domestic grosses with the original Spiderman movie still being the high water mark $403.7m, without inflation. Adjusted for inflation, MCU Spiderman sits firmly in the middle of the pack. 

 

As you say, on the right terms there is a mutually beneficial deal but Spiderman is a popular property and all the building blocks are in place for a successful Holland run even without future MCU involvement. To put it in perspective, the most financially successful X Men movie, Days of Future Past, only made $40m more worldwide than the least successful Spiderman Movie (ASM2). Spiderman is a consistent top tier movie franchise and Sony have the exclusive rights. They won't be in a hurry to give too much away to Disney. 

 

 

SM2.jpg

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, JPL said:

I know it’s anecdotal, but like I said, neither my boys or any of their mates are big into Spidey. They’re all Iron Man, Cap, Star Lord, Thor, Hulk, Black Panther. And this is all obviously off the back of the films that they’ve grown up with. I think it’s more the older fans who are into him, as Mike said.

 

He’s obviously still great in the MCU and it’d be a real shame to lose him. I can’t see it happening though. I reckon they’ll sort out a deal that works for both parties.

It’s a credit to the MCU that it has made these other characters so popular. 

 

Back in 2014 Spider-Man merch was estimated as 1.3bn vs 2nd place Batman at 494m ($) Avengers was pretty popular then and pulled 325m

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Obviously, the movies have had a huge impact on the relative popularity of the MCU superheroes. But even now, I see loads more Spider-Man stuff on kids and in shops than I do Thor stuff or Captain America stuff. He's been Marvel's big earner generally speaking since pretty much the start.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, sir stiff_one said:

Back in 2014 Spider-Man merch was estimated as 1.3bn vs 2nd place Batman at 494m ($) Avengers was pretty popular then and pulled 325m

 

Given those figures (annual figures!), the one-off $175 million fee mentioned in the Hollywood Reporter article sounds ridiculously low:

 

Quote

There was also the unique merchandising arrangement. Sony had earlier relinquished the merchandising rights to Disney for a one-time payment of $175 million. 

 

That sale of merchandise rights took place in 2011:

 

https://comicbook.com/marvel/2017/02/02/sony-admits-selling-spider-man-merchandising-rights-were-short-s/

Quote

While the franchise is again in fan's good graces with a reintroduction in Captain America: Civil War and an upcoming solo venture in Spider-Man: Homecoming, Sony admits they would have made different decisions in hindsight.

 

Most of that regret comes in the form of merchandising, something Sony sold to Marvel back in 2011 in return for needed cash.

 

Kenichiro Yoshida, Sony's chief financial officer, spoke on an earnings call and admitted that the decision to let those go was a bad one (via The Wall Street Journal). “We had sold some assets of the studio, such as merchandising rights of Spider-Man, to raise short-term cash in exchange for long-term cash flow when the electronics units were struggling,” he said.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Pob said:

Is Norman Osborn, as a Spider-Man baddie, controlled by Sony? Given that he's heavily rumoured to be the overarching antagonist for the next phase of the MCU, this could put all that under threat. I assume a tonne of pre-work has been done on the story.

 

I think this this pretty much puts those rumours to bed. The assumption was that if that was the case, Sony and Marvel must have started negotiating new deals for all these characters behind the scenes, but as that’s clearly not the case the rumours about Osborn having a big part in the MCU going forward are probably false. They always sounded more like wish fulfilment than anything realistic to me anyway.

 

2 hours ago, JPL said:

Admittedly, I'm no comic book fan, only getting into the superhero wave with my sons and their obsession with the MCU, but why is Spidey such a popular character? I mean, he's cool and all in the MCU, but he's nowhere near my boys, or any of their mates, favourite. I take it he's had some of the better comic book stories or something and it's the older fans who prefer him?

 

Historically, Spider-Man is a lot more human and fallible than other super heroes. Superman is often used as an example of a character who isn’t interesting because he’s too powerful and too good, but up until relatively recently, all of them were a lot more Superman than Spider-Man. Pre-MCU, captain America is basically the same as superman, morally perfect, always winning, pretty dull. Even Batman is a billionaire. 

 

Spider-Man is a normal kid, who by chance has something amazing happen to him. He’s not innately perfect, he needs to remember the lessons his parental figures taught him in order to do the right thing. He’s human, far more so than any other character, and he’s not part of a chosen one narrative. This stuff may all seem like standard super hero stuff now, but until relatively recently (the mid eighties), it was pretty unique to him. That’s why he has a passionate, engaged fan base but also why he effortlessly appeals to new child audiences.

 

1 hour ago, JPL said:

I know it’s anecdotal, but like I said, neither my boys or any of their mates are big into Spidey. They’re all Iron Man, Cap, Star Lord, Thor, Hulk, Black Panther. And this is all obviously off the back of the films that they’ve grown up with. I think it’s more the older fans who are into him, as Mike said.

 

Also anecdotal, but he revived my kids interest in the MCU just as they were growing out of it. They were first watching movies during phase 1, and we used to watch loads of marvel stuff. Because of me, they grew up familiar with most marvel properties, but their favourites were iron man and Thor. As they got older, they started to lose interest, and I’d gone back to watching Marvel movies alone. We went to see Homecoming for my birthday, so they were forced into it, and they both loved it, so much so that they were suddenly interested in watching Infinity War and Endgame. My older son, who is 12 now, was clearly mostly invested and anchored into those stories by Spider-Man, not any of the others, despite him being the newest from his perspective. That’s Spider-Man’s value, he can draw new people into the world because he’s so much easier to identify with. 

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Nick R said:

“We had sold some assets of the studio, such as merchandising rights of Spider-Man, to raise short-term cash in exchange for long-term cash flow when the electronics units were struggling,” he said.

Christ! Had they not even seen Spaceballs?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I mean, it's a cheap sale, but I also wonder how often (given they'd only have rights for specific movie-related merchandise) they'd have had to get lawyers in, and spend ages tooling and retooling stuff only to get nixed by a legal somewhere. It might have seemed like the right thing to do to let those rights go to someone whose business it was.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Use of this website is subject to our Privacy Policy, Terms of Use, and Guidelines.