Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Episode 1746 Talkback - Comic Talk Super-Sized Summer Spectacular

August heat got you beat? Cool off with a big, ice-cold pitcher of Comic Talk, featuring follow-ups to our recent Top 5 Animated Series of Our Youth episode; reactions to SDCC news & gossip; a full-scale, five-Geek review of Spider-Man: Far From Home; and more! It's comic fun in the summertime! (2:26:50)

Listen here.

«1

Comments

  • BrackBrack Posts: 773
    edited August 2
    The X-Men has has fluctuated wildly between messy , just right, and not messy enough.

    2013:

    Bendis X-Men : MESS. Never got around to finishing stories. Ran out of issues to tell his story before Secret Wars, meaning a Phoenix Egg appeared with no explanation.

    NEXT RELAUNCH! (2015, POST SECRET WARS)

    Extraordinary X-Men : MESS. Victim of the totally non-existent honest Fox boycott, as the series was sacrificed at the altar of making The Inhumans a thing in service of The Inhumans TV movie thingy. Not helped by Jeff Lemire's Marvel stuff being half-hearted.

    All-New X-Men : NOT QUITE AS MESSY. Concurrent with Extraordinary X-Men, Dennis Hallum picks up Bendis' plots and some from Remender's X-Force. Didn't have to worry about Inhumans quite as much.

    NEXT NEXT RELAUNCH! (2017, POST Inhumans vs. X-Men)

    X-MEN GOLD : NOT MESSY ENOUGH. Felt like an X-Men tribute band. Best thing was Kitty in story realising what the readers had already - that she shouldn't marry Colossus.

    X-MEN BLUE : GREAT. Cullen Bunn rolls his Magneto series into All-New X-Men, finally tidies up Bendis' plots and picks up stragglers from Secret Wars.

    ASTONISHING X-MEN : A GREAT MESS. Charles Soule does another jam series where a different artist does each issue meaning the storytelling varies between GREAT and MESS. This is where Professor Xavier, or something resembling him, returns from the dead. The issues 13+ are basically a prologue for Rosenberg's upcoming Uncanny X-Men run.

    X-MEN RED : THE BEST X-MEN COMIC SINCE NEW X-MEN LAUNCHED. 12 great issues that present a way that the X-MEN should work in 2018. Of course, baby has to be thrown out with the bath water for the...

    NEXT NEXT NEXT RELAUNCH! (2018, POST Extermination)

    UNCANNY X-MEN (weekly issues) : OK. The Weekly Issues are some of the wildest stuff in an X-Men comic in decades unfortunately they led into two different things of differing value.

    UNCANNY X-MEN (fortnightly, or something? issues) : DEPRESSING MESS. Do you want a favourite character get killed off each issue? Well this is the comic for you.

    AGE OF X-MAN : CLEVER, BUT TOO LONG. A smart inversion of the Age of Apocalypse storyline that probably has one mini-series too many, and all mini-series went one issue too long. Lots of clever ideas and examination of the relationship parts of X-Men comics.

    NEXT NEXT NEXT NEXT RELAUNCH! (2019, POST well, nothing I guess)

    HOUSE OF X & POWERS OF X : Let's wait and see. Hopefully the similarity to his Ultimates & Avengers story lines are deliberate and not evidence of Hickman only having so many ideas.

    Based on the fact it is tied specifically into Hickman's own Marvel continuity, but also does a trick with the sliding time scale that will make long term readers brains hurt, I suspect it will be just as messy as all these other relaunches. But a great read nonetheless.
  • nweathingtonnweathington Posts: 6,240
    Re: the video game cartoon adaptations of the ’80s, far and away the best of them was Dragon’s Lair. It was actually fairly clever with its cliffhangers before each commercial break, and was genuinely funny.

    Blue Falcon & Dynomutt nearly made my alternates list. Several years back, Nike did an anniversary edition of their Pegasus show—the shoe I wore consistently until they stopped making them. They were very customizable with the colors, and you could even put text in one spot. I ordered a blue, green, and gray design that said “Dynomutt” on the back. I still do a pretty good Dynomutt voice.

    I wouldn’t wish the Legends of the Superheroes: The Roast on my worst enemy, so I will not wish you bon voyage, @i_am_scifi, but rather good luck.

    Re: the 1978 New Fantastic Four cartoon, the best thing about it was that Kirby storyboarded for the show. And it wasn’t any worse a show than Super Friends. You guys laughed at the mention of the Mr. T cartoon, but it was actually one of the better shows at the time—granted, it was a pretty low bar. Plus, Kirby did character, background, and prop designs for it.
  • Mark_EngblomMark_Engblom Posts: 332
    edited August 3

    While I enjoyed most of Hickman’s FF run, his Avengers stuff was an absolute snore. From what I’ve already seen, his X-Men reboot seems to be more of the same “I’m the smartest guy in the room” 4D chess.

    ”Legends of the Superheroes”, while certainly a kitschy hoot, is still kind of a painful memory for me. As a teenage comic fan in the late 70’s, society’s default attitude toward comic books, specifically superhero comics, was that they were just silly, trashy, and stupid entertainment for young children. However, in late 1978, “Superman: The Movie” gave me hope that this attitude could change as people finally saw the grandeur and emotional power I’d always seen in comic books. But..,a few months later, “Legends of the Superheroes” made it abundantly clear they (or at least Hollywood) still saw superheroes through a campy and condescending lens. Watching it on TV live was such an embarrassing and humiliating experience, I still can’t bring myself to rewatch it even today. I’m very happy to see that superheroes now enjoy a level of popularity and respect I never dreamed I’d ever see back in 1979, but it’s been a long, long journey since then. Watch it, of course...and maybe laugh at it...but remember there were people who yearned for this to be truly good who quickly realized that popular culture still saw them as pathetic, maladjusted nerds...of course long before being a nerd was a hipster badge of honor.

  • mwhitt80mwhitt80 Posts: 3,983

    Guys I have really been enjoying the increased output and the enthusiasm levels seem way up too.

    Keep up the great work

  • luckymustardluckymustard Posts: 915
    I didn't know that about Fathom... a couple recent showings getting removed now makes sense.
  • VertighostVertighost Posts: 257

    @Mark_Engblom

    Great post I couldn’t agree more with both your points. I tried to get into Hickman’s Avengers several times and I never could. I thought he was brilliant at creating an ominous and portentous mood but it was the same note played over and over and over taking what seemed like forever to me (was it years?) before he reached his endpoint. I wouldn’t even describe his writing as decompressed, but labored.

  • Mark_EngblomMark_Engblom Posts: 332
    edited August 8

    @Vertighost

    As I was listening to another comic-centric podcast the other day, someone defending the Hickman style recommended that people read his issues at least three times to fully know what’s going on.

    I’m sorry, but those are just not comics I’m going to be reading.

    Now, before I'm accused of not being smart enough, I’m not afraid to read complex comics with big ideas. For example, Watchmen continues to surprise and delight me with new facets and details I hadn’t noticed before. But what sets it apart from Hickman’s approach is that Watchmen was a work you could read the first time through and get a full, coherent, and satisfying story. Hickman seems to care little about telling a coherent story, and, instead, plunges deep into his Unified Theory of Everything like a college professor filling blackboards with inscrutable formulae and flow charts as baffled and frustrated students look on.

    I want to read comics, not solve icosahedronic Rubic’s Cubes.

  • nweathingtonnweathington Posts: 6,240
    Outside of S.H.I.E.L.D., I haven’t/don’t read Hickman’s Marvel work. I have read a lot of his creator-owned work, and what I’ve read is great stuff. Manhattan Projects, East of West, and Black Monday Murders are far superior to S.H.I.E.L.D. as far as I'm concerned, and don’t suffer from anything you guys are describing.
  • spidspid Posts: 203
    Different strokes for different folks because I thought Hickman's run on Avengers was brilliant.

    Matt briefly mentioned the conspiracy of Disney buying tickets for Captain Marvel to boost sales mostly as a joke, but for anyone heard the rumor and thought it was real here is the most logical break down of how silly the thought is.

  • MattMatt Posts: 4,349

    I wouldn’t rule anything out. I’m not saying I buy it with Captain Marvel...but it was revealed to be the case in a groundbreaking investigation next week, I wouldn’t be surprised. I read an article that in Australia, the home media sales are being inflated too.

    I will say, there’s a less likely chance of being detected if you only bump a little. $17 million might not seem like a lot to risk getting caught on opening weekend, but there’s a much greater chance of being discovered with $170 million.

    Captain Marvel aside (I hate discussing the theories of that movie because I have issues with the movie), Endgame is where I really thought figures seemed a little fishy. Too much of a convenience for the movie to clinch the top spot the same weekend as the SDCC. The article I read stated they got the title after “finding a couple million” when started examining all of the returns.

    Since then, I’m sure they passed the needed box office number. Just at the time, it seemed fishy.

  • Well I was listening to your discussion about Dan Didio about that the facsimile editions selling better than the new stuff.

    What I found interesting is that you didn't talk about, I think, one of the major reasons why the current stuff isn't selling:

    I think the current stuff isn't that interesting, for both Marvel and DC.
    I mean in the past I would buy Marvel and DC comics, but for the last couple of years I haven't ordered any Marvel comic and only a couple of DC one's.

    The current way of writing stories isn't for me, and seeing how the facsimile editions from both Marvel and DC are selling I think that I'm not the only one who thinks that.

    Plus coupled with the delays on several series, the closing of imprints and the continuous restarting of series and the kind of PC writing makes me think that the buying public goes looking for something else.

    That's my idea about the facsimile editions
  • MattMatt Posts: 4,349

    I know why I’m not interested in the books, but why aren’t you interested in the current stuff out from DC & Marvel?

  • spidspid Posts: 203
    Matt said:

    I wouldn’t rule anything out. I’m not saying I buy it with Captain Marvel...but it was revealed to be the case in a groundbreaking investigation next week, I wouldn’t be surprised. I read an article that in Australia, the home media sales are being inflated too.

    I will say, there’s a less likely chance of being detected if you only bump a little. $17 million might not seem like a lot to risk getting caught on opening weekend, but there’s a much greater chance of being discovered with $170 million.

    Captain Marvel aside (I hate discussing the theories of that movie because I have issues with the movie), Endgame is where I really thought figures seemed a little fishy. Too much of a convenience for the movie to clinch the top spot the same weekend as the SDCC. The article I read stated they got the title after “finding a couple million” when started examining all of the returns.

    Since then, I’m sure they passed the needed box office number. Just at the time, it seemed fishy.

    It does not make sense for Engame or Captain Marvel. In the case of Endgame, Disney owns the rights to Avatar, and they still plan on release three more so they don't gain anything by cooking the books. What they did which is the same thing they did with A Wrinkle in Time is they keep repackaging it until they hit an attainable mark. You could maybe find fault with Disney using their influence to keep movies in theaters longer than some other studio's movie.

    The arguements made against Captain Marvel are even less legitimate as they are made by guys who got butt hurt about something the star said.

  • MattMatt Posts: 4,349
    edited August 13

    Again, I’ll put Captain Marvel aside from I think that movie got way more praise then it should’ve. Criticizing it will make me sound like I’m one of those “butt hurt guys”; though none of my couple of issues with Larson have been anything outside of the movie. She has a platform & uses it just like the other actors. Some of their POVs I agree with, some I don’t. Doesn’t mean I won’t watch a movie.

    Endgame makes sense. Disney has only owned Avatar for a few months; by default they have its title. By “cooking the books” to buy time (like the 7/20/69 moon landing), Disney can pull back on expenses to get it to that point (especially with the home release so close). Whether it legitimately hit that milestone or got a little push, Disney can market the fuck out of Endgame having the title.

    In an era where more movies are crossing $1 billion, why not try to get the top spot in the next bracket? “You’re either first or last”.

    Sure, Disney now has the Avatar sequels, which might top Endgame. It’s another feather in the corporate hat. With Disney essentially owning the box office, it’s about in-house franchises competing.

    Do you really not believe Studios are above shady shit?

  • hauberkhauberk Posts: 1,381
    Matt said:

    Again, I’ll put Captain Marvel aside from I think that movie got way more praise then it should’ve. Criticizing it will make me sound like I’m one of those “butt hurt guys”.

    Endgame makes sense. Disney has only owned Avatar for a few months; by default they have its title. By “cooking the books” to buy time (like the 7/20/69 moon landing), Disney can pull back on expenses to get it to that point (especially with the home release so close). Whether it legitimately hit that milestone or got a little push, Disney can market the fuck out of Endgame having the title.

    In an era where more movies are crossing $1 billion, why not try to get the top spot in the next bracket? “You’re either first or last”.

    Sure, Disney now has the Avatar sequels, which might top Endgame. It’s another feather in the corporate hat. With Disney essentially owning the box office, it’s about in-house franchises competing.

    Do you really not believe Studios are above shady shit?

    Studios are absolutely shady. However, making a movie look like it made more money faster just makes it harder for them to show how it didn't make any money at all when they're calculating residuals and percentages for those that have them contracted.

    Application of Occam's Razor would suggest that this is nonsense.
  • MattMatt Posts: 4,349
    edited August 12

    Couple of notions I try to teach my kids (and wife);

    • Work within the timeframe you establish, not the one given (https://youtu.be/lmHun0HpsgA)
    • never be afraid to question information given to you; especially when it’s what you want to hear
    • Information stolen is more valuable then information given
    • misdirection

    Should we rule out shady practices with the figures? Was Superman Returns really a box office failure with $392 million?

    I will say this, if there’s any revelations about actual box office numbers down the line, I’d be no more surprised then I was when it was revealed the government monitors it’s own citizens.

  • VertighostVertighost Posts: 257
    edited August 13

    Re: the issue of why comic shops aren’t selling as many current DC and Marvel as they are old facsimiles: IMO Chris Eberle has been hitting the nail on the head as to what the problem is (at least for me) for several years now: the cost. IMO $3.99 is a lot of money to pay for something that takes 15 minutes to read and, perhaps more importantly, is often only 1 chapter of a story that you will then need to wait 30 days to continue. (And no, bi-weekly shipping doesn’t help.)

    While I’m sure that the proliferation of trades has helped keep the business afloat, it has also made fans like myself conscious of how incomplete an experience a single floppy seems for the cost. (And no, more single issue stories are not what I’m looking for.)

    Having said that, I think the other important factor is that for fans who’ve been reading for a long time (let’s say at least 15 years of regular reading) the writer and artist are just as - if not more- important as the character.

    Combined with the price point, I’m especially reluctant to try out a new writer (who most likely will be nothing special - that’s the case with almost everything. Life is a bell curve with most people being average in any endeavor).

    I discover new artists through the grapevine like everyone else, but it seems like the cycle for praised writers leaving DC/Marvel has sped up and the minute someone acquires any kind of following they’re off to do their own independent books or work in Hollywood (and I don’t blame them). Obviously there are exceptions like Geoff Johns and Tom King who do both, but people like Rucka and Brubaker seemed to have left completely for the most part.

    And then there are people like Hickman or DeConnick who IMO split the DC/Marvel scene based entirely on having a small cult following as opposed to being writers who had amassed a huge fan base that would follow them anywhere. I might very well be wrong but to me it seems like Hickman’s return to Marvel is a result of his leaving too early and realizing he lacked a big enough fan base to support his independent work. His work on the Avengers was “an acquired taste” and then you have someone like DeConnick who, as far as I can tell, had nothing highly praised other than Captain Marvel under her belt before jumping ship. And I think a good deal of the press and praise she got was because she was a woman “finally” writing a long-running and important female character. That’s just my opinion but my point is she left and relatively quickly. And again if she left for Hollywood I don’t blame her.

    So fans are left with many acclaimed writers leaving Marvel/DC and Marvel/DC trying to double ship or charge even more for work by the acclaimed who stay (Slott’s $9.99 Giant-sized Spider-Man issues only insured I wouldn’t buy them and encourage the practice) and a host of new people we don’t want to blow $3.99 on.

    i get the impression that if they didn’t function as R&D for the movies and tv shows DC/Marvel wouldn’t even publish half the stuff they come out with. But who knows? Maybe these new writers are selling well and there’s a fan base out there with money to burn who only cares about the character and not who’s doing it.

  • nweathingtonnweathington Posts: 6,240
    Hickman left Marvel last time because his creator-owned East of West was picked up by Amazon, and he was heavily involved in the development. Obviously, he’ll make more money from that than he would have writing for Marvel. He also started a new creator-owned book, which regardless of sales could turn into something bigger down the road. Likewise, DeConnick left with her husband, Matt Fraction, because they (as Milkfed Criminal Masterminds) got a two-year development deal with Legendary Television. Frankly, I think they came back to writing for DC and Marvel because they enjoy the experience more than anything else. Doing a creator-owned series requires a lot of work beyond just writing a script, and sometimes writing for the Big Two can be just a way to recharge the batteries while keeping your name in the public eye.

    As for why DC and Marvel publish so many books, it’s for the same reason they’ve always published so many books (except when Marvel was limited to 16 monthlies while using DC’s distribution arm in the ’60s)—market share. The more books they print, the more they sell, and the more money they make (up to the point of diminishing returns, of course). And while I’m completely about following creators, and not characters, the vast majority of comic readers are still character-first. Perhaps it’s not quite as high a percentage as ten or twenty years ago—which I attribute to the proliferation of conventions and social media, where fans can now easily interact with creators—but it’s still the norm.
  • Mark_EngblomMark_Engblom Posts: 332
    edited August 14

    Re: Facsímile Editions

    Dan Didio:

    “We do these Facsimile Editions where we reprint older issues of comics including all the old ads and stuff…and in some cases these are selling more than the new comics with these characters. People are more interested in buying the stories from 30 or 40 years ago than the contemporary stories, and that’s a failure on us..."

    Didio doth protest too much. It’s not the “either/or” proposition he implies between new comics and reprinted older comics. DC has been publishing high quality reprints in a variety of formats for several decades, primarily as higher priced hardcover collections.

    The facsimile editions (from both Marvel and DC) are simply the latest twist in the reprint game. In fact, if you look at the $4 cover price, multiply it by 10, and you’ve got roughly the retail price of a hard cover collection (which typically reprint 10 issues or so). It’s actually similar to buying a single song on iTunes instead of the entire album. So why does this rather mundane consumer choice bother Dan Didio so much..,especially when it’s simply a micro-variation on a practice DC has been engaged in a large scale since at least the late 80’s?

    As I said, Didio doth protest too much. I think we’re actually seeing some of DC/WB's behind-the-scenes turmoil and stress bubbling to the surface...and it’s pretty pathetic.

  • ChrisMurrinChrisMurrin Posts: 156
    I love the mentions of Buck Rogers. Coincidentally, right before the guys started reminiscing about that show, I commissioned Dave Kellett to do a piece for San Diego featuring Hawk from Season 2 of Buck Rogers and the bionically-talking duck Arthur from his webcomic, Sheldon.

    image
  • Matt said:

    I know why I’m not interested in the books, but why aren’t you interested in the current stuff out from DC & Marvel?

    Okay Matt,

    Well I wil try to put into words why I'm not interested in DC and Marvel:

    ----------
    Marvel
    ----------
    They, Marvel, like their crossovers.
    Ever since Civil War it's one crossover event, that they not really end, after another crossover.
    And the problem is that almost all regular series incorporate every single crossover in their books.
    And to follow the story you have to read a lot of other comics.
    Comics that I'm not in the least interested in.
    So that's one reason.

    Another is that it seems ever so often they say this is gonna change the status quo but before the ink is even dry they change it again.
    Reboot after reboot after return after rebirth, etc.
    So that's two reasons.

    Another reason is that they make everything PC.
    No confrontation or someone in the whole world will be upset and we can't have that.
    Eventhough the people that complain never even bought a comic.

    Oh yeah, make every character that made us successful a female that will sell beter.
    Oh it's not, well that's the customers fault. We don't want them as customers.

    And do we need so many Spider-Man series? Or X-Men or Avengers?
    And for most of the franchises you need to read them all ot follow the story.

    Another reason is that they can't create a story that's in one issue but has at least 6 or more parts.

    An a final reason for now is the price. I really have to pay 5 bucks for a chapter of a story?

    ----------
    DC
    ----------
    Most of the reasons for Marvel seem also to be there for DC, but there are some other ones.

    For the last years DC can't get their creators to create the stories on time.
    They must have seen what the delays in Civil War did to Marvel but Doomsday Clock end Shazam are embarrassing in their delays.

    Then they started with 52.
    With a kind of crossover that played a minor part in all the 52 books and I think they never actually ended that, or maybe I'm missing something.
    And everything is restarted with number #1.
    Oh no wait we are now at issue #1000?
    So back the old renumbering.

    And really a 100 issue story for Batman? In the current market?

    And then there the controveries:
    - The Boys? Oh no we can't have that. Let them go. And they did. And now it is a successful TV-series.
    - Second Coming? The not buying audience does not want a controversial series so we're not doing that.

    And there is/was Vertigo.

    The best running Trade Paperback imprint in comics.
    But also here crept in the PC-police.
    Result Karen Berger left. Series ended. New Series bombed and imprint is closed.

    Yeah there's gonna be a Black Label imprint, but with Batman Damned #1 being what is was I wouldn't keep my hopes up.

    So that's what I think of DC.

    And for both of them I have a couple of other opinoins:

    - Men and specifically white straight men: Bad and racist.
    - Any other gender, race or other qualification: The best and if you don't agree you are a probably a white straight man.
    - We don't want any critique from our customers. We know what you want and is you don't we will reboot with the same crap.
    - Oh yeah and Orange Man -> Bad and if you don't agree we don't want your money.

    So that are some of the reasons why I don't buy Marvel and DC.
  • David_DDavid_D Posts: 3,838
    edited August 16
    Just as a quick fact-check: Berger left Vertigo because of the restructuring of leadership, and what that restructure meant to the future of Vertigo, and how its importance would or would not be treated by the new management. She doesn't put it this directly, but basically she was not interested in, after 33 years at DC and all the successful work she had edited, for Levitz to retire, and not long after to find herself reporting to Dan Didio and Jim Lee, who had been placed above her in the new structure, at a time when the focus of the company seemed to be all New52 all the time.

    Those that are interested in getting into the weeds of this can see her talking about what led to her decision to leave DC in this video from a convention appearance last year (though she is very professional in how she phrases it, and doesn't name names.) And there were plenty of articles and talk at the time still online to be found if people are interested. This one from Publisher's Weekly is good.

    If anything, one can speculate that her concern was that they were heading into a more DCU and New52 driven-era at the company (and they were- John Constantine was about to become a member of a Justice League team, if memory serves.) Also anyone who believes that the most recent incarnation of Vertigo was any more politically progressive, provocative, or often concerned with reflecting modern culture than the old days of Vertigo under Berger, or pre-Vertigo books under Berger, may not be recalling that part of their DC history.
  • MattMatt Posts: 4,349
    edited August 18

    @comicfreak

    I would say some of those were factors for me. I’d throw in both were more interested in getting that new reader, so I felt like my business wasn’t as important. I understand businesses need growth to thrive, but there’s a risky trade off. 80% of a company’s business is by 20% of its customers.

    Morrison killed my interest in Batman. He came in looking to focus on Bruce Wayne & introduced a son. I wasn’t interested in either. Aside from Batman, the only other DC character I found very interesting was Lex. Ultimately, if I’m not reading Batman, I’m not reading DC.

    I thought the One More Day restart was something I was cheated on by undoing the wedding. Parker has long since moved on from that, but nothing really has peeked my interest. For the most part, if I’m not reading Spider-man, I’m not reading Marvel.

    The only exception to the above was Moon Knight. Since Huston’s run, Marvel decided they needed a character with mental issues. Rather then use what Moench created, they essentially gave me a different character I don’t care for.

    I was reading Dynamite Entertainment’s Shadow books, but once they started putting him in modern times, it felt politically preachy. Doesn’t mean I didn’t agree with some of it, but the political lines people have drawn on social media has ended my run in that forum. I’ve been doing the same with other media as well.

    Its the Streisand Effect; the more I’m told I HAVE to care, the less I do.

  • BrackBrack Posts: 773
    Matt said:
    Ultimately the MCU got more from including Spidey in their films than the Spidey films did from including MCU things in theirs.

    It was clear from Far From Home's ending that they were setting things up have a clean break from having to include MCU elements in future, what with writing Happy out and Peter having a costume he designed himself rather than relying on ones made by Stark or SHIELD.
  • Mark_EngblomMark_Engblom Posts: 332
    edited August 21

    Now that Spider-Man's had a presence in the MCU, I'm fine with him migrating back to Sony-only films.


    I guess there's only so much stuff I can get worked up about. This ain't one of 'em.

  • MattMatt Posts: 4,349

    I’m not sure about that. Remove Parker from the MCU and they could’ve substituted another character. I’d argue the MCU Spidey rarely felt like Spider-man, anyway.

    Having Parker in the MCU helped his solo movies. Especially RDJ in Homecoming. I think it “legitimized” this reboot. How well are Marvel movies doing outside of the MCU lately?

    Far From Home just became Sony’s biggest box office movie. I don’t believe that would’ve been the case if he wasn’t in the MCU or served as an Endgame epilogue.

    There’s already been a slight dip in Sony stock after this news dropped. How big of a factor was that?

    I think Sony will wind up with regrets over this decision. Especially if in 5-6 years, the FF & X-Men are starting to interact with the MCU.

  • MattMatt Posts: 4,349

    I’m torn on this one. This version rarely ever felt like Spider-man to me. The last 2 Sony only movies (I haven’t seen ASM2) left a bad taste for me. I’ve no interest in seeing their “Sony Spider-verse” set of movies on the future slate. From that point of view, I’m good with it. I have zero reason to see the next solo Spider-man movie.

    On the other hand, with the MCU having access to all of the other toys in the toy box, there’ll be another huge event with new characters that I’ll think “the Webhead should be swinging in there”.

    I’m not losing sleep over it. Either way, I win.

  • nweathingtonnweathington Posts: 6,240
    For my money, Into the Spider-Verse, is the best Spider-Man movie ever made. I’d even go so far as to say it’s the best movie featuring a Marvel character out there. Feige had nothing to do with that movie, so as long as this doesn’t prevent Sony from making another one of the same quality, I'm good.
  • MattMatt Posts: 4,349

    This post made me realize, I should clarify an above statement:

    ”The last 2 live-action Sony movies...”

    I haven’t seen the Into the Spider-verse movie. I know it’s been highly praised, getting a sequel, & has won awards, but I’ve had zero interest.

    I wonder if that movie’s success is part of why Sony feels its good breaking the relationship.

Sign In or Register to comment.