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

[joseephuss]

https://deadline.com/2019/08/kevin-...nter-soldier-tom-rothman-bob-iger-1202672545/

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

EXCLUSIVE: Marvel Studios president Kevin Feige won’t produce any further Spider-Man films because of an inability by Disney and Sony Pictures to reach new terms that would have given the former a co-financing stake going forward. A dispute that has taken place over the past few months at the top of Disney and Sony has essentially nixed Feige, and the future involvement of Marvel from the Spider-Man universe, sources said.

 

[nobody]

And thus passes good Spider-man movies.

 

[Stash]

Well it was good while it lasted...

 

[FloridaRob]

My 18 yr old grandson was having a meltdown at dinner tonight when he saw the news. He had to explain the details to me. I said there is no way they dont come to an agreement. Disney wants more than 5% and Sony wants more than 50%. Negotiate the dang thing. Something is better than nothing.

 

[DallasEast]

IDIOTS! (points finger at Sony)
IDIOTS! (points finger at Disney)

 

[Juggernaut]

https://deadline.com/2019/08/kevin-...nter-soldier-tom-rothman-bob-iger-1202672545/

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

EXCLUSIVE: Marvel Studios president Kevin Feige won’t produce any further Spider-Man films because of an inability by Disney and Sony Pictures to reach new terms that would have given the former a co-financing stake going forward. A dispute that has taken place over the past few months at the top of Disney and Sony has essentially nixed Feige, and the future involvement of Marvel from the Spider-Man universe, sources said.

 

[nobody]

IDIOTS! (points finger at Sony)
IDIOTS! (points finger at Disney)

Their partnership in regards to Spider-Man was pretty much a license to print money. Egos and more greed torched that license to print money. You are so right with "IDIOTS!" pointed at both.

 

[Stash]

I read an update on the situation that stated that it was more about a producer credit than bigger issues and that talks are still ongoing, so this thing isn't dead yet.

I cannot help but to think that both sides will ultimately work it out.

Both must realize that they have far too much to lose and need one another.

 

[quickccc]

I read an update on the situation that stated that it was more about a producer credit than bigger issues and that talks are still ongoing, so this thing isn't dead yet.

I cannot help but to think that both sides will ultimately work it out.

Both must realize that they have far too much to lose and need one another.

I think it will eventually come to an agreement .. but unfortunately that could be way down the road from now.
the flip good side is this version of Spider-Man (tom Holland) has allowed Spider-move mania to bounce back from the swamp as previously had issues at the
box office, and it had been in the slumping ever since Sam Raimi left the spidey workings.

the Andrew Garner version simply brought nothing of character appeal to the Parker- Spidey movement,
and the worst highlight was Spidey who was Marvel's pride and glory single superhero figure appeal (before Iron Man took the throne) wasn't pulling in the box office openings
Marvel thought it should have been, thus the needed mission for the " right" Spider man director, actor, right supporting cast, (ala Parker's hilarious friend Ned)
the only two things that I have not liked about the new Tom Holland's version is
1) the new Aunt May - I just cannot get with the younger Marisa Touma (sp) ,as it seems so misplaced and miscast- a horrible mistake, imo
2) Parker's love interests - they have been so boring and under-developed, a far cry from Kirsten Dunst's Mary Jane stand out performances

I also have to admit that I really didn't care for the Vulture in Spider-Man Homecoming, as I thought this villain and how he was displayed brought zero appeal and believe to the scene. It felt so fan-made fake, like it was built from YouTube or something.
As comparisons,, I easily got into Doctor Octopus (in Spider-Man 2) because his origin and good/evil character was so very well developed, the Green Goblin/Harry Osborn worked extremely also and would have even far better if not for that campy, cheesy- looking, fun house helmet he was wearing that covered up his facial expressions.

I think i'm ranting on too much, but because the Holland version has sprung a box office comeback for the Spidey franchise and money does talk .. it will eventually come to an agreement and be back in
production, ...but it could be a totally another question as to when and how long it will take the two sides to finally come to an mutual agreement.

 

[JD_KaPow]

The thing to be angry at here is the ridiculous extensions of copyright protection in recent years...which Disney had a big hand in. Spider-Man should be in the public domain now and none of this should be happening.

 

[DallasEast]

the Andrew Garner version simply brought nothing of character appeal to the Parker- Spidey movement,

Opinions vary. I enjoyed The Amazing Spider-Man and thought The Lizard was a good foe. The Amazing Spider-Man 2 was practically a running joke at times. Even so, I still have Garfield sandwiched between Maguire (over) and Holland (under).

the only two things that I have not liked about the new Tom Holland's version is
1) the new Aunt May - I just cannot get with the younger Marisa Touma (sp) ,as it seems so misplaced and miscast- a horrible mistake, imo
2) Parker's love interests - they have been so boring and under-developed, a far cry from Kirsten Dunst's Mary Jane stand out performances

Disagree strongly with #1. Marisa Tomei brought a mature yet younger face to the character. Even Sally Field's rendition filled the character with more life.

Personally, I am glad both books, television and movies have modernized parent characters. I grew up reading Superman as well. The idea of these superheroes having parents that looked and acted like they had one foot already in the grave became more inappropriate to me as I grew older. It was totally refreshing to see John Schneider (sp?) and Annette O'Toole as Clark's parents in Smallville. It made the characters seem more vigorous and vital, instead of just simply existing as "Hey! They are Ma and Pa Kent!"

Even though I saw Emma Stone as being too old (now that is ironic for this line of discussion lol), I thought the Parker/Stacy dynamic was solid romantically. However, I will not delving into the Parker/Jones combo. On reason being they have brought that relationship along very slowly to this point as opposed to Tobey Maguire lazily goggling Dunst from basically jump. Plus, I have learned Zendaya does not hald strong appeal among parts of the audience too from previous discussions.

I also have to admit that I really didn't care for the Vulture in Spider-Man Homecoming, as I thought this villain and how he was displayed brought zero appeal and believe to the scene. It felt so fan-made fake, like it was built from YouTube or something.

William Dafoe's Goblin/Osborn had been my all-time favorite franchise character/actor combo until Michael Keaton's Vulture/Toomes. Whereas Dafoe's performance was closer to being over the top, Keaton's steady malevolence was close to being surreal throughout his performance. And the CGI was convincingly menacing as well.

 

[quickccc]

Opinions vary. I enjoyed The Amazing Spider-Man and thought The Lizard was a good foe. The Amazing Spider-Man 2 was practically a running joke at times. Even so, I still have Garfield sandwiched between Maguire (over) and Holland (under).
Disagree strongly with #1. Marisa Tomei brought a mature yet younger face to the character. Even Sally Field's rendition filled the character with more life.

Personally, I am glad both books, television and movies have modernized parent characters. I grew up reading Superman as well. The idea of these superheroes having parents that looked and acted like they had one foot already in the grave became more inappropriate to me as I grew older. It was totally refreshing to see John Schneider (sp?) and Annette O'Toole as Clark's parents in Smallville. It made the characters seem more vigorous and vital, instead of just simply existing as "Hey! They are Ma and Pa Kent!"

Ironically since we’re mentioning both Superman and Spiderman I have to express how I saw issues with how their “ secret identities “ being displayed – especially when it comes down to Superman/Clarke Kent.. whether comics or movie films
With Spider man, it's particular director Sam Raimi I had issues with - per his film, in the the way Raimi persistently exposed Peter Parker’s identity as Spider man on more than one time, ..

1) for one, Parker is having a fight with the high school bullies in the hallway, displaying his superhuman strength and agility, and back flipping all over the place, so when the news come of spider man flipping and using his superhuman strength all over town , .. you mean no one is going to put two and two together from what they saw of parker in the hallway ..and what they are seeing from the news of spider man… that these two have to be one and the same ?

2) And then comes the subway train scene where he is unmasked for a great number of rescued passengers on board to finally see who is spider man ….but yet we get “ don’t worry, we won’t tell nobody! “ lol are you kidding me ? .. don’t they know National Inquirer or TMZ is everywhere out there and willing to bribe heavily for that secret ?.. lol

- But that doesn’t come even close to beating the bigger issue with Superman/Clarke Kent , It's always been much, much worse with Superman’s case.
Quite simple, .. how can over 20 million people of New York be sooo incredibly dumb that they simply cannot recognize that Clarke Kent is Superman ,..simply because he wear
eye glasses and a suit ?....Really?. oh c’mon on …. LOL !

 

[joseephuss]

The thing to be angry at here is the ridiculous extensions of copyright protection in recent years...which Disney had a big hand in. Spider-Man should be in the public domain now and none of this should be happening.

Far older characters(not limited to comic books) are still protected by copyright. Why would Spider-Man be any different? I'm truly curious. I know very little about the subject and what qualifies for public domain.

 

[joseephuss]

I read an update on the situation that stated that it was more about a producer credit than bigger issues and that talks are still ongoing, so this thing isn't dead yet.

I cannot help but to think that both sides will ultimately work it out.

Both must realize that they have far too much to lose and need one another.

If it is just about a producer credit, then it seems like a rather petty argument. Jerry Jones must be involved it is all about getting credit.

 

[timb2]

I am sure Kathleen Kennedy will takeover and do a great job like she did with Star Wars. Spiderman will get a sex change operation ,something like that.

 

[JD_KaPow]

Far older characters(not limited to comic books) are still protected by copyright. Why would Spider-Man be any different? I'm truly curious. I know very little about the subject and what qualifies for public domain.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_Term_Extension_Act

The copyright term has been extended many times, largely for the benefit of corporations. The law linked above was derisively called the Mickey Mouse Law because it kept Mickey and other Disney characters out of the public domain.

 

[Stash]

If it is just about a producer credit, then it seems like a rather petty argument. Jerry Jones must be involved it is all about getting credit.

I'm no telling sure that comment about the producer credit is entirely true, but I was glad to read that talks were ongoing.

Both parties need one another.

 

[Runwildboys]

Opinions vary. I enjoyed The Amazing Spider-Man and thought The Lizard was a good foe. The Amazing Spider-Man 2 was practically a running joke at times. Even so, I still have Garfield sandwiched between Maguire (over) and Holland (under).
Disagree strongly with #1. Marisa Tomei brought a mature yet younger face to the character. Even Sally Field's rendition filled the character with more life.

Personally, I am glad both books, television and movies have modernized parent characters. I grew up reading Superman as well. The idea of these superheroes having parents that looked and acted like they had one foot already in the grave became more inappropriate to me as I grew older. It was totally refreshing to see John Schneider (sp?) and Annette O'Toole as Clark's parents in Smallville. It made the characters seem more vigorous and vital, instead of just simply existing as "Hey! They are Ma and Pa Kent!"

Even though I saw Emma Stone as being too old (now that is ironic for this line of discussion lol), I thought the Parker/Stacy dynamic was solid romantically. However, I will not delving into the Parker/Jones combo. On reason being they have brought that relationship along very slowly to this point as opposed to Tobey Maguire lazily goggling Dunst from basically jump. Plus, I have learned Zendaya does not hald strong appeal among parts of the audience too from previous discussions.
William Dafoe's Goblin/Osborn had been my all-time favorite franchise character/actor combo until Michael Keaton's Vulture/Toomes. Whereas Dafoe's performance was closer to being over the top, Keaton's steady malevolence was close to being surreal throughout his performance. And the CGI was convincingly menacing as well.

100% agree on all points.

As for the Vulture's wings, the comic/cartoon version would have looked just plain silly. The way they infused drone-like rotors into the wings was brilliant, IMO. Better than jets would've been, and certainly better than flapping wings.......and Keaton was masterful in the role, as he is with all his more psychotic characters.

 

[JD_KaPow]

Opinions vary. I enjoyed The Amazing Spider-Man and thought The Lizard was a good foe. The Amazing Spider-Man 2 was practically a running joke at times. Even so, I still have Garfield sandwiched between Maguire (over) and Holland (under).
Disagree strongly with #1. Marisa Tomei brought a mature yet younger face to the character. Even Sally Field's rendition filled the character with more life.

Personally, I am glad both books, television and movies have modernized parent characters. I grew up reading Superman as well. The idea of these superheroes having parents that looked and acted like they had one foot already in the grave became more inappropriate to me as I grew older. It was totally refreshing to see John Schneider (sp?) and Annette O'Toole as Clark's parents in Smallville. It made the characters seem more vigorous and vital, instead of just simply existing as "Hey! They are Ma and Pa Kent!"

Even though I saw Emma Stone as being too old (now that is ironic for this line of discussion lol), I thought the Parker/Stacy dynamic was solid romantically. However, I will not delving into the Parker/Jones combo. On reason being they have brought that relationship along very slowly to this point as opposed to Tobey Maguire lazily goggling Dunst from basically jump. Plus, I have learned Zendaya does not hald strong appeal among parts of the audience too from previous discussions.
William Dafoe's Goblin/Osborn had been my all-time favorite franchise character/actor combo until Michael Keaton's Vulture/Toomes. Whereas Dafoe's performance was closer to being over the top, Keaton's steady malevolence was close to being surreal throughout his performance. And the CGI was convincingly menacing as well.

I loved Vulture, specifically because he has a relatable point of view, plus that Michael Keaton charisma. The best bad guys are compelling to watch, have meaningful motivations (not, "he's crazy! he does crazy evil things 'cause he's crazy and evil!") and get to interact with the heroes in meaningful ways, ideally helping shed light on the hero's personality or weaknesses. He had all of that.

 

[The Ominous]

Disney wanted access to Sony's "Spider-verse" with the new deal and I'm glad Sony gave them the middle finger. Disney is trying to dip their greedy toes into everything now and someone needs to grow a sack and tell Bob Iger and Kevin Feige they ain't the only Big Boys in Hollywood.

I love Marvel to death, but I think they might have peaked with Endgame. I do not like the direction they are heading at all. A PG-13 Deadpool and Blade movie is an absolute insult to me as a fan of their comics and movies. On the bright side I'm stoked for Spidey against some Venom, Carnage, Kraven, Sinister 6 epicness.

I'm with Team Sony on this one.