I know it's still fresh news, but no indication if this is a reboot, correct? I did not care for Garfield as Parker/Spider-man. I am hoping for a new actor cast in the role.
Also, they should stay away from doing another Spider-man character (i.e. Morales.)
M
I've read that it will certainly not be Andrew Garfield.
I know it's still fresh news, but no indication if this is a reboot, correct? I did not care for Garfield as Parker/Spider-man. I am hoping for a new actor cast in the role.
Also, they should stay away from doing another Spider-man character (i.e. Morales.)
M
If the info from the hacked emails are still valid, Marvel wants a complete reboot. From the ones that were released, Marvel wanted to completely wipe the slate clean. They didn't want to pick up Garfield's contract, as they wanted to distance their Spider-Man from the current and previous continuities. They also felt Sony had tread over the origin too many times, as well as focused too much on the romance angle throughout both franchises. Their plan was to get away from that by starting the new film/s with Peter having already become Spider-Man. They planned to focus on the difficulties of being a teen and a superhero, with the romance elements as a possible side-story.
I'm not sure how much of that has changed. It should be noted that Amy Pascal was/is a big supporter of Garfield in the role. She is known for going to bat for her talent and Marvel's wanting to get rid of Garfield was actually one of the roadblocks during the original negotiations. They wanted him gone, she didn't.
This is great news. I'd be happy with a years delay to make sure Civil War (I assume that's the movie he'll be in) is done right.
Civil War starts filming in about 2 months, so I don't think they could delay it even if they wanted to. I doubt they'd need to. From what I've read, Marvel suposedly had 2 versions of the Civil War script in anticipation of a possible Sony deal. One with Spidey featured heavily and one without him. If this is indeed true, they're already prepared for his inclusion.
I'd like to know who they were going to unmask if this deal didn't happen...
We still don't know if unmasking or the Registration Act have anything to do with it.
Fallout from Stark's Ultron debacle is more likely to be the cause of the rift.
Good point. If that's the case who's to say Spideys first appearance will be in Civil War. No where has it been said that that movie will be his first appearance.
I really expect to see him in the stinger at the end of Age of Ultron.
If they could pull the Schwarma scene together overnight, they can give us a Spidey swing-by in two months.
Thanks @Chuck_Melville. Didn't realize The Punisher would fall under that. Of course, it also opens up all of his villains, which could be cool. Ooooo ... maybe SHIELD agent Jessica Drew?
Yes. This should resolve the Spider-Woman issue AND open up possibilities for Silk, Spider-Girl, Spider-Gwen and -- dare I say it? -- Superior Spider-Man!
I know it's still fresh news, but no indication if this is a reboot, correct? I did not care for Garfield as Parker/Spider-man. I am hoping for a new actor cast in the role.
Also, they should stay away from doing another Spider-man character (i.e. Morales.)
I'd almost like to see them go back to high school with Peter. Have it shown in the beginning of the Captain America movie that Spider-Man is around so you don't need a origin story or anything and make him an intern at Stark Industries. For some reason, I feel like making him a high school student who works for Stark but has a hero worship of Steve would work well.
I know it's still fresh news, but no indication if this is a reboot, correct? I did not care for Garfield as Parker/Spider-man. I am hoping for a new actor cast in the role.
Also, they should stay away from doing another Spider-man character (i.e. Morales.)
M
I've read that it will certainly not be Andrew Garfield.
I'm seeing the Spidey stinger with a slow pan across a bunch of wrecked Ultron 'Bots covered with webbing, revealing Spidey in a ragged costume (which is recognizable, but not a commitment to however they dress him in Civil War), he staggers to his feet, says "What was that all about?", shoots a webline and swings away.
This is great news. I'd be happy with a years delay to make sure Civil War (I assume that's the movie he'll be in) is done right.
Civil War starts filming in about 2 months, so I don't think they could delay it even if they wanted to. I doubt they'd need to. From what I've read, Marvel suposedly had 2 versions of the Civil War script in anticipation of a possible Sony deal. One with Spidey featured heavily and one without him. If this is indeed true, they're already prepared for his inclusion.
I'd like to know who they were going to unmask if this deal didn't happen...
We still don't know if unmasking or the Registration Act have anything to do with it.
Fallout from Stark's Ultron debacle is more likely to be the cause of the rift.
Good point. If that's the case who's to say Spideys first appearance will be in Civil War. No where has it been said that that movie will be his first appearance.
I really expect to see him in the stinger at the end of Age of Ultron.
If they could pull the Schwarma scene together overnight, they can give us a Spidey swing-by in two months.
I'd love to see that. I wonder if it would take something away from AOU though. Make that the talking point rather then the movie itself. Either way I'd be happy though.
This is great news. I'd be happy with a years delay to make sure Civil War (I assume that's the movie he'll be in) is done right.
Civil War starts filming in about 2 months, so I don't think they could delay it even if they wanted to. I doubt they'd need to. From what I've read, Marvel suposedly had 2 versions of the Civil War script in anticipation of a possible Sony deal. One with Spidey featured heavily and one without him. If this is indeed true, they're already prepared for his inclusion.
I'd like to know who they were going to unmask if this deal didn't happen...
We still don't know if unmasking or the Registration Act have anything to do with it.
Fallout from Stark's Ultron debacle is more likely to be the cause of the rift.
Good point. If that's the case who's to say Spideys first appearance will be in Civil War. No where has it been said that that movie will be his first appearance.
I really expect to see him in the stinger at the end of Age of Ultron.
If they could pull the Schwarma scene together overnight, they can give us a Spidey swing-by in two months.
I'd love to see that. I wonder if it would take something away from AOU though. Make that the talking point rather then the movie itself. Either way I'd be happy though.
I'm pretty sure AOU is gonna give us plenty to talk about.
I know it's still fresh news, but no indication if this is a reboot, correct? I did not care for Garfield as Parker/Spider-man. I am hoping for a new actor cast in the role.
Also, they should stay away from doing another Spider-man character (i.e. Morales.)
M
I completely disagree.
Make Mine Morales!
Over Peter? Really? If not Peter, I would prefer Miguel O'Hara.
I know it's still fresh news, but no indication if this is a reboot, correct? I did not care for Garfield as Parker/Spider-man. I am hoping for a new actor cast in the role.
Also, they should stay away from doing another Spider-man character (i.e. Morales.)
M
I completely disagree.
Make Mine Morales!
Over Peter? Really? If not Peter, I would prefer Miguel O'Hara.
M
I'd happily see them give Parker a rest... As long as we get J.J.J.!
I won't cry if it's Parker, but Miguel is a great character. And if done right, it could be a really cool twist in Civil War when the mask comes off.
I know it's still fresh news, but no indication if this is a reboot, correct? I did not care for Garfield as Parker/Spider-man. I am hoping for a new actor cast in the role.
Also, they should stay away from doing another Spider-man character (i.e. Morales.)
M
I completely disagree.
Make Mine Morales!
Over Peter? Really? If not Peter, I would prefer Miguel O'Hara.
M
I'd happily see them give Parker a rest... As long as we get J.J.J.!
I won't cry if it's Parker, but Miguel is a great character. And if done right, it could be a really cool twist in Civil War when the mask comes off.
I imagine there is no way to keep such casting under wraps in this media environment. But, damn, that would be an interesting moment to experience with a live audience if they could actually pull it off.
I imagine there is no way to keep such casting under wraps in this media environment. But, damn, that would be an interesting moment to experience with a live audience if they could actually pull it off.
Now that'd be a coup! Cast Spider-Man. Never show him out of the suit in his cameos in other movies. Never hint at his origin.
Pay a well-known caucasian actor to say he's playing Peter Parker in the newly franchised movies. Pay him well. Pay him a lot of money. A LOT of money (this comes up in a minute).
Civil War comes out. Spider-Man's on the stand. Nobody's seen him out of the costume yet. The mask comes off...
...and it's Miles.
Hey, the other guy said he was playing Parker. He never said he was playing Spider-Man.
I imagine there is no way to keep such casting under wraps in this media environment. But, damn, that would be an interesting moment to experience with a live audience if they could actually pull it off.
Now that'd be a coup! Cast Spider-Man. Never show him out of the suit in his cameos in other movies. Never hint at his origin.
Pay a well-known caucasian actor to say he's playing Peter Parker in the newly franchised movies. Pay him well. Pay him a lot of money. A LOT of money (this comes up in a minute).
Civil War comes out. Spider-Man's on the stand. Nobody's seen him out of the costume yet. The mask comes off...
...and it's Miles.
Hey, the other guy said he was playing Parker. He never said he was playing Spider-Man.
And the internet explodes. EXPLODES, I tell you!
Ha! That would be so e interesting stuff.... That'll never happen.
I figure the only way we would see Miles is if Thanos whammied Parker with the Reality Gem.
Of course, "Iron Spider" certainly won't be in a Cap movie. But even if the 2015 comic story is completely different than the movie story (as well it should be) I could see where they might be getting this title synergy going.
Actually, another rumor I read, and take this with a huge grain of salt, is that this is part of the reason Marvel and Sony are so keen to share the Spider-man character. And if that deal is done in time we could see Spidey web up for this or Avengers 3.
Interesting. I haven't read into that one, so take this as an uninformed reaction, but on the face of it, I would be surprised for Marvel Studios to actually *need* Spider-Man in an Avengers movie. I am sure some part of sharing that character as a movie property would be some of the take going to Sony. And we can pretty well project (I mean, nothing is guaranteed, but maybe project) that if the Avengers franchise continues to grow based on these characters completely Marvel-owned characters, then why share some of that success with Sony? (Especially when you are already getting a piece of the Spider-Man movies they are making) Would adding Spider-Man to Avengers actually make it a bigger success? Do we imagine there are fans of the Spider-Man movies not showing up to Avengers movies already? I feel like this would be giving away money that they are not currently missing out on.
Avengers has made far money money than any Spider-Man movie has. Heck, Iron Man 3 has beat every Spider-Man movie to date. Amazingly, at this moment Iron Man is a bigger box office draw than Spider-Man. Why give away some of your Iron Man money to Sony?
I think the take-away is this. Sony repeatedly denied there were any serious talks for the Spider-Man property with Marvel Studios and even after the email hack revealed there had been some discussion, they continued to dismiss the possibility of anything being worked out, and yet here we are.
Often, if there are rumors in this industry, there is generally a lot of truth to the rumors.
Far more than Spider-Man, I want to see J. Jonah Jameson in the MCU.
Played by J.K. Simmons.
I could not agree with you more!
Would love to see Simmons back in the role, but I have a feeling his price tag is about to go up after he nabs the Oscar for Whiplash. Great flick by the way.
Of course, "Iron Spider" certainly won't be in a Cap movie. But even if the 2015 comic story is completely different than the movie story (as well it should be) I could see where they might be getting this title synergy going.
Actually, another rumor I read, and take this with a huge grain of salt, is that this is part of the reason Marvel and Sony are so keen to share the Spider-man character. And if that deal is done in time we could see Spidey web up for this or Avengers 3.
Interesting. I haven't read into that one, so take this as an uninformed reaction, but on the face of it, I would be surprised for Marvel Studios to actually *need* Spider-Man in an Avengers movie. I am sure some part of sharing that character as a movie property would be some of the take going to Sony. And we can pretty well project (I mean, nothing is guaranteed, but maybe project) that if the Avengers franchise continues to grow based on these characters completely Marvel-owned characters, then why share some of that success with Sony? (Especially when you are already getting a piece of the Spider-Man movies they are making) Would adding Spider-Man to Avengers actually make it a bigger success? Do we imagine there are fans of the Spider-Man movies not showing up to Avengers movies already? I feel like this would be giving away money that they are not currently missing out on.
Avengers has made far money money than any Spider-Man movie has. Heck, Iron Man 3 has beat every Spider-Man movie to date. Amazingly, at this moment Iron Man is a bigger box office draw than Spider-Man. Why give away some of your Iron Man money to Sony?
I think the take-away is this. Sony repeatedly denied there were any serious talks for the Spider-Man property with Marvel Studios and even after the email hack revealed there had been some discussion, they continued to dismiss the possibility of anything being worked out, and yet here we are.
Often, if there are rumors in this industry, there is generally a lot of truth to the rumors.
I think "generally there is a lot of truth" to industry rumors might be a stretch as far as takeaways from this one instance goes.
Yes. Granted. This one worked out. But there have also been plenty of times when there *isn't* a lot of truth to the rumors. (See: A LOT of specious Latino Review reports).
To be clear. I never said it wouldn't happen, or that there was no possibility that these rumors could be true. I said I would be surprised. And I am.
Because I don't think Marvel actually needs someone else's Spider-Man in their cinematic universe.
Personally, as this (at least reportedly) does not indicate Sony beginning to hand Spider-Man movie ownership back to Marvel, I wonder whether this will actually make that much of a difference as far as their growing Avengers franchise goes. I guess it depends on how soon they add Spider-Man, and to what. If it is to an Avengers movie, then do we really think there is someone out there who *wasn't* going to see an Avengers franchise movie, but if there is some Spider-Man in it, they will? Given that the Stark/Cap tension got firmly planted in the first Avengers movie, and is sure to grow in the next one, does a Civil War movie actually need a Spider-Man? Especially a Spider-Man who, up to this point, has no place in the MCU or relationship to the other characters? If a Cap 3: Civil War movie has RDJ's Iron Man in it, do we imagine there are any ticket buyers that are going to be like, "I don't know. I hear it's Civil War without Spider-Man..." and stay home?
Maybe. But in sufficient enough numbers to be worth giving some of your Avengers money away to Sony? And, maybe more importantly, spending screen time on Spider-Man (which helps sell their next Spider-Man movie) that you could be using to better have your audience get to know an emerging character like Black Panther? Or whoever might be taking over the Cap mantle if Chris Evans is on his way out?
I don't know. I mean, heck, it's not my money, and I was going to see these movies anyway, so I don't have a dog in the fight as to whether they should do it or not. It is not going to sway my ticket buying, as that was already settled.
But I will say I am surprised that Marvel felt like they needed to do this. At a time when they have built up the Avengers characters as franchises that can beat out X-Men and Spider-Man movies (15 years ago could we have imagined THAT?) I don't know that it looks like a position of strength to borrow another studio's property as a guest star.
But I will say I am surprised that Marvel felt like they needed to do this. At a time when they have built up the Avengers characters as franchises that can beat out X-Men and Spider-Man movies (15 years ago could we have imagined THAT?) I don't know that it looks like a position of strength to borrow another studio's property as a guest star.
Well put.
I've been wondering the same things.
It seems like a much better deal for Sony than Marvel.
As far as the movies go at least.
But Spider-Man is the most valuable superhero when it comes to marketing. (Yes, bigger than Batman.)
And Sony doing a crappy job with the character could erode that value.
So I think this is an investment on Marvel Disney's part in maintaining the long-term value of the character.
To use a board game analogy, perhaps Spidey isn't a Boardwalk & Park Place purchase, but it may be a Marvin Gardens or at least having both utilities. Not sure exactly what Marvel's angle is, but they see value in this and I'm pleased to see it happening. Sometimes there is truth in the rumors, and that's part of what makes these discussions fun.
Maybe. But in sufficient enough numbers to be worth giving some of your Avengers money away to Sony? And, maybe more importantly, spending screen time on Spider-Man (which helps sell their next Spider-Man movie) that you could be using to better have your audience get to know an emerging character like Black Panther? Or whoever might be taking over the Cap mantle if Chris Evans is on his way out?
I don't know. I mean, heck, it's not my money, and I was going to see these movies anyway, so I don't have a dog in the fight as to whether they should do it or not. It is not going to sway my ticket buying, as that was already settled.
But I will say I am surprised that Marvel felt like they needed to do this. At a time when they have built up the Avengers characters as franchises that can beat out X-Men and Spider-Man movies (15 years ago could we have imagined THAT?) I don't know that it looks like a position of strength to borrow another studio's property as a guest star.
I'm trig to look through the articles to confirm, but I thought I heard that Sony wouldn't get money from films that guest-star Spider-Man.
Maybe. But in sufficient enough numbers to be worth giving some of your Avengers money away to Sony? And, maybe more importantly, spending screen time on Spider-Man (which helps sell their next Spider-Man movie) that you could be using to better have your audience get to know an emerging character like Black Panther? Or whoever might be taking over the Cap mantle if Chris Evans is on his way out?
I don't know. I mean, heck, it's not my money, and I was going to see these movies anyway, so I don't have a dog in the fight as to whether they should do it or not. It is not going to sway my ticket buying, as that was already settled.
But I will say I am surprised that Marvel felt like they needed to do this. At a time when they have built up the Avengers characters as franchises that can beat out X-Men and Spider-Man movies (15 years ago could we have imagined THAT?) I don't know that it looks like a position of strength to borrow another studio's property as a guest star.
I'm trig to look through the articles to confirm, but I thought I heard that Sony wouldn't get money from films that guest-star Spider-Man.
That's what I heard too. Someone described it as "Sony leases Spider-man to MCU".
Comments
Matthew
http://www.bleedingcool.com/2015/02/10/spider-man-movie-tid-bits-garfield-sinister-six-delayed/
I'm not sure how much of that has changed. It should be noted that Amy Pascal was/is a big supporter of Garfield in the role. She is known for going to bat for her talent and Marvel's wanting to get rid of Garfield was actually one of the roadblocks during the original negotiations. They wanted him gone, she didn't.
I guess we'll see.
If they could pull the Schwarma scene together overnight, they can give us a Spidey swing-by in two months.
Make Mine Morales!
M
I won't cry if it's Parker, but Miguel is a great character. And if done right, it could be a really cool twist in Civil War when the mask comes off.
M
Pay a well-known caucasian actor to say he's playing Peter Parker in the newly franchised movies. Pay him well. Pay him a lot of money. A LOT of money (this comes up in a minute).
Civil War comes out. Spider-Man's on the stand. Nobody's seen him out of the costume yet. The mask comes off...
...and it's Miles.
Hey, the other guy said he was playing Parker. He never said he was playing Spider-Man.
And the internet explodes. EXPLODES, I tell you!
I figure the only way we would see Miles is if Thanos whammied Parker with the Reality Gem.
What's the Marvel reboot going to do to the movies?
Often, if there are rumors in this industry, there is generally a lot of truth to the rumors.
Yes. Granted. This one worked out. But there have also been plenty of times when there *isn't* a lot of truth to the rumors. (See: A LOT of specious Latino Review reports).
To be clear. I never said it wouldn't happen, or that there was no possibility that these rumors could be true. I said I would be surprised. And I am.
Because I don't think Marvel actually needs someone else's Spider-Man in their cinematic universe.
Personally, as this (at least reportedly) does not indicate Sony beginning to hand Spider-Man movie ownership back to Marvel, I wonder whether this will actually make that much of a difference as far as their growing Avengers franchise goes. I guess it depends on how soon they add Spider-Man, and to what. If it is to an Avengers movie, then do we really think there is someone out there who *wasn't* going to see an Avengers franchise movie, but if there is some Spider-Man in it, they will? Given that the Stark/Cap tension got firmly planted in the first Avengers movie, and is sure to grow in the next one, does a Civil War movie actually need a Spider-Man? Especially a Spider-Man who, up to this point, has no place in the MCU or relationship to the other characters? If a Cap 3: Civil War movie has RDJ's Iron Man in it, do we imagine there are any ticket buyers that are going to be like, "I don't know. I hear it's Civil War without Spider-Man..." and stay home?
Maybe. But in sufficient enough numbers to be worth giving some of your Avengers money away to Sony? And, maybe more importantly, spending screen time on Spider-Man (which helps sell their next Spider-Man movie) that you could be using to better have your audience get to know an emerging character like Black Panther? Or whoever might be taking over the Cap mantle if Chris Evans is on his way out?
I don't know. I mean, heck, it's not my money, and I was going to see these movies anyway, so I don't have a dog in the fight as to whether they should do it or not. It is not going to sway my ticket buying, as that was already settled.
But I will say I am surprised that Marvel felt like they needed to do this. At a time when they have built up the Avengers characters as franchises that can beat out X-Men and Spider-Man movies (15 years ago could we have imagined THAT?) I don't know that it looks like a position of strength to borrow another studio's property as a guest star.
I've been wondering the same things.
It seems like a much better deal for Sony than Marvel.
As far as the movies go at least.
But Spider-Man is the most valuable superhero when it comes to marketing. (Yes, bigger than Batman.)
And Sony doing a crappy job with the character could erode that value.
So I think this is an investment on
MarvelDisney's part in maintaining the long-term value of the character.And it keeps the talent happy.
And us.
M