WELCOME TO THE MARVEL MULTIVERSE -*RIP STAN LEE & Boseman* - XMEN97 release 3/20

itsaboutthattime said:
However what concerns me is the Deadpool of it all.. as was discussed many times when deadpool was successful, a lot of studio heads were going take away the wrong ideas of what made that thing successful and a lot of the things that made Deadpool successful could be applied to spiderverse

But I look at venom and I think that succeeded, to a degree, on those negatives studio executives would have taken away from Deadpool
Click to expand...


i have no idea what you are talking about but you are the only one i see bringing up this deadpool stuff :lol:

honestly i am more worried with the possibility of avi arad being back on touching the spidey films again than anyone else
 
rfx45 said:
i have no idea what you are talking about but you are the only one i see bringing up this deadpool stuff :lol:

honestly i am more worried with the possibility of avi arad being back on touching the spidey films again than anyone else
Click to expand...

Rothman was the creative mind that birthed Baraka-pool in X-Men Origins...He’s also the one that supposedly vetoed the ideas that Feige gave Sony for Venom (Whatever they were)...He’s the one saying that Sony has this on lock without the MCU...

At least that’s what I glean from there connection...
 
rfx45 said:
i have no idea what you are talking about but you are the only one i see bringing up this deadpool stuff :lol:

honestly i am more worried with the possibility of avi arad being back on touching the spidey films again than anyone else
Click to expand...

Well I’m discussing couple things regarding Deadpool

- in general, I was concerned back when it was originally such a success that studios would only take away the cursing, R rating and violence of the movie.. instead of the part where you had people involved who were genuinely passionate about the property

- on rothman and his role with Deadpool the character: https://geektyrant.com/news/deadpoo...an-for-keeping-the-movie-grounded-for-so-long
 
All this conjecture we’re coming with :lol:...

This hurts both studios...Just posturing at this point...They’ll eventually pick up talks again then get a deal worked out...
 
The thing I think that Sony is overlooking (or maybe they just don’t care and figure they don’t need the assist) is the fact that a large (I’m not sure how large, but it has to be a decent size IMO) contingent of people see these MCU flicks because of their connection as a part of the entire MCU. No one was necessarily checking for Dr. Strange, my wife didn’t even like the movie and wasn’t super interested in seeing it in the first place, but because it’s a part of the saga that is the MCU as a whole, it was a “must see.” You don’t read books and skip random chapters, especially knowing that each chapter builds upon the previous. Spider-Man will ALWAYS make money IMO, and if this deal does indeed dissolve, the next one might make numbers in the range of Far From Home, but with each succeeding flick without the MCU connection, the returns will diminish IMO. They might be good movies (I’d hope so, but IMO the MCU blueprint makes them superior), but as fans realize it, they’d lose a percentage of people that show up with the mentality mainly of “let’s see where the MCU is heading now.” I’ll always show up, and many will also show up, but Sony is trippin’ if they don’t acknowledge that there are people (again, who knows how many) that are pushed over the edge, and some that show up only because of, the narrative connection to Disney’s MCU.
 
papichino said:
Nah into the Spiderverse was too good to boycott its sequel
Click to expand...

Spider-verse is separate in that it wont affect live action movies such as Spider-man so I will gladly pay for a sequel.

Venom 2 however aint getting a dime from me (I didnt see the first one either) nor will any live action film they do in the future that would justify them creating a cinematic universe. If they fail in the future trying to replicate Marvel Studios then give it another year or 2 for them to be calling Marvel Studios again.
 
j mobile said:
The thing I think that Sony is overlooking (or maybe they just don’t care and figure they don’t need the assist) is the fact that a large (I’m not sure how large, but it has to be a decent size IMO) contingent of people see these MCU flicks because of their connection as a part of the entire MCU. No one was necessarily checking for Dr. Strange, my wife didn’t even like the movie and wasn’t super interested in seeing it in the first place, but because it’s a part of the saga that is the MCU as a whole, it was a “must see.” You don’t read books and skip random chapters, especially knowing that each chapter builds upon the previous. Spider-Man will ALWAYS make money IMO, and if this deal does indeed dissolve, the next one might make numbers in the range of Far From Home, but with each succeeding flick without the MCU connection, the returns will diminish IMO. They might be good movies (I’d hope so, but IMO the MCU blueprint makes them superior), but as fans realize it, they’d lose a percentage of people that show up with the mentality mainly of “let’s see where the MCU is heading now.” I’ll always show up, and many will also show up, but Sony is trippin’ if they don’t acknowledge that there are people (again, who knows how many) that are pushed over the edge, and some that show up only because of, the narrative connection to Disney’s MCU.
Click to expand...
Def true

You think FFH made a billion because it was a cinematic masterpiece? Nope. It did bc people wanted to see what happened immediately after Endgame and how it would tie in with Tony’s death.

You hit it on the head with dr Strange movie. People will watch the sequel to see where it ties in with past and future movies. Etc. it’s all linked and we are almost FORCED to watch or be left out of the loop
 
papichino said:
Nah into the Spiderverse was too good to boycott its sequel
Click to expand...

itsaboutthattime said:
The exception.. like deadpool
Click to expand...

anigif_enhanced-9176-1428539383-10.gif
 
Last edited:
Delusionallakerfan said:
Def true

You think FFH made a billion because it was a cinematic masterpiece? Nope. It did bc people wanted to see what happened immediately after Endgame and how it would tie in with Tony’s death.

You hit it on the head with dr Strange movie. People will watch the sequel to see where it ties in with past and future movies. Etc. it’s all linked and we are almost FORCED to watch or be left out of the loop
Click to expand...
Exactly. If we want to know the entire MCU story as a whole, we are more or less forced to watch every MCU that releases. I'm fine with that as I personally love the MCU, getting enjoyment from even the "bad" ones (I'm looking at you "Thor: The Dark World"). I also recognize that if I miss a flick I'll miss small details at the least, but sometimes even bigger story elements. Dr. Strange made $677.7M worldwide, and I feel like $200-300M of that was solely off of the strength that is the Disney/MCU connection. Spider-Man is WWWAAAYYY bigger than Strange as a property, but a piece of its money is undeniably from that same connection.

I can understand Sony not wanting to go from giving Disney 5% to a whole 50%, but IMO they're highly mistaken if they think they'll sustain Spidey's current streak of critical and financial success without any Disney involvement and/or MCU connection. Again, if this partnership does indeed dissolve, the first Sony Spider-Man might do fine (as most consumers aren't that knowledgeable about this type of stuff, and you best believe Sony will market it in a way to hide any lack of connection to the MCU/Disney), but IMO following sequels would have diminishing returns as audiences realize this is a separate universe that has no connection at all to the ever evolving MCU narrative.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ube
You must log in or register to reply here.

Thread Gallery

View Full Gallery

The ultimate sneaker enthusiast community.

NikeTalk was created as a way of giving back to both the sneaker enthusiast community and to the greater global community of which we are all a part.

NikeTalk is NOT affiliated with Nike Inc. in any way, shape, or form. All opinions expressed herein do not necessarily reflect those of Nike, Inc.

© 1999-2024 NikeTalk.com

Share this page

Back
Top Bottom