Business Experts Talk Sony’s Future with Spider-Man

21 Comments

1. @16 – I’d love for Wiseman to be on ASM. I think he could do some great stuff with 616 Spider-Man.

   @19- There are plenty of reasons for the Sinister Six to be bad in my opinion. The most obvious one is how stupid the premise sounds (to me). But another one is that we’re either going to have to deal with 5 origin stories in one movie, which will be really tedious and make the movie incredibly long. Or they’re all going to be criminals/oscorp employees that just get given their gear like Rhino. The third option I suppose would be to not give any of them origins at all, but that would be a bad choice too.
   I’m not saying the movie will be bad, I’m just saying I can’t see how it’s going to work.

   I’m still skeptical that the Venom movie will ever get made. It’s been “in the pipeline” since 2006 and nothing’s ever happened. I’d much rather see Doc Ock get a solo movie anyway.

2. @19 – “But what I do have to say is, I wonder what makes these guys in the video “experts.” I don’t hear them saying anything a layman couldn’t easily think up and say.”

   All three of these experts work for the Motley Fool, which is in the business of advising investors on investing, stocks and personal finance. People pay them money for investing advice. Their “layman” approach is purposeful and is part of the company’s culture.

   http://www.fool.com/

3. There is absolutely no reason why Sinister Six and Venom movies couldn’t be good. In particular I can imagine the SS movie being great if it was done right. Has there ever really been a quality heist movie about super villains? What if it ended up being Ocean’s Eleven meets The Avengers? I don’t know about you guys but I’d dig that completely.

   Of course it could end up sucking, too.

   I STILL haven’t seen ASM2, so I don’t know yet how I feel about it. I usually put movies off for a while so I can see them with less of a crowd in the theater.

   But what I do have to say is, I wonder what makes these guys in the video “experts.” I don’t hear them saying anything a layman couldn’t easily think up and say.

4. @16 If Weisman can’t land a movie, they should put him in charge of ASM as Slott’s successor

5. Animation guys dont always translate well to live action. For every Brad Birdbthere’s an Andrew Stanton.

6. @14 I agree about Sinister Six and Venom, they are obvious cash grabs, and I have little confidence that either movie will be good. I thought ASM 1&2 were somewhat heartfelt, mainly due to Garfield, Field and Stone’s performances. Marc Webb seems to genuinely like Spider-Man as a character, but I’m still not sold on some aspects of his direction.

   So many Spider-Man stories just wouldn’t work on-screen I think. Honestly I think Sony’s best bet would be to get Greg Wiseman to direct and write the movies. Spectacular Spider-Man is the most streamlined and well-thought out media adaptation of Spider-Man and I think it’s approach to the mythos could work on screen.

7. I’ve always wanted to make a Fearful Symmetry movie, but part of what worked so well for me in the comic was the inner monologues, especially the subconscious one that ran parallel to what Peter was narrating. It would be VERY difficult to keep that and wouldn’t have the same effect. I mean, they even ditched the voice over in The Dark Knight Returns animated movie! Plus, this isn’t a family Spider-Man movie with Happy Meals attached and I can’t see Sony want that, especially as Peter is pretty much asleep for a good chunk of the story!

8. The problem with Venom and Sinister Six is that there doesn’t look to be any creative vision or heart behind them. They look to be as corporate as canned cheese. Sony only cranked out ASM 1 and 2 in order to keep the license, not because there was any creative vision flowing. It will be the same with these other two. The Spider-verse isn’t deep, in terms of potential spin-offs. Black Cat? The Prowler? Not much there.

9. The new movie may not even break $200 million domestically…that IS a problem.

10. @9: Regarding the first part of your post, I feel the exact same way. I’m more neutral when it comes to the MCU stuff though.

11. @10 – Kravens Last Hunt would be amazing, but it’s so damned arty and weird I could imagine it putting the general public off. Part of the problem is that the general public only really accepts certain types of superhero plots. Watchmen getting a poor public response was evidence of that I think. Though Sin City was fairly popular so I could be wrong.

12. Part of the problem is Sony plowing spent soil. I would like to see a completely new Spider-Man plot derived from the 1980s or 90s, maybe the Hobgoblin saga, Kraven’s Last Hunt, or (rationally condensed) a version of the Clone story.

13. @1 – I agree, people are burnt out. I’d rather see ASM3 in 2 years or so, with nothing in between. I have no interest in seeing Venom or Sinister Six. I watch these movies to see Spider-Man, not the Sinister Six in a heist movie.

    That said I’m also kind of burnt out on the MCU too, the phase 2 movies (Cap 2 excluded) have been pretty poor and the release strategy has become predictable.

14. @3 – “Didn’t someone high up at Sony say that would only happen “over their dead body”? Although I guess that person won’t always be there.”

    That person was Sony Pictures Entertainment’s film division chairman, Amy Pascal.

15. @5&6 That is how I’ve read it as well, but if there is any credence to these rumors I’ve read about, then it won’t only be Sony’s film properties that will be lost, but their entire entertainment division, which, I think, would include animation as well.

16. @5 that is my understanding of the cartoon situation.

17. @3 – ALSO, my understanding of the Spectacular cancellation was that it doesn’t relate to the Spidey film rights being with Sony, as they’re not connected to the animation rights. Spectacular ended because Marvel was bought by Disney, so they opted to make the cartoon in-house rather than continue franchising it out. So it wouldn’t really make any difference. Feel free to correct me if wrong.

18. @3 Didn’t someone high up at Sony say that would only happen “over their dead body”? Although I guess that person won’t always be there.
    I imagine Sony will want to hang on to Spidey as long as superhero films are still making money, to be honest. As long as the genre as a whole is still doing well, there’s the possibility of a successful revamp. Once the whole Avengers thing dies off (and one day it might) and superheroes aren’t the in-thing, maybe it’ll be more valuable to cut some kind of deal with Disney.

    Probably the worst-case scenario if ASM2 is seen as having tanked is that they re-evaluate the current strategy and don’t go ahead with the current plan. Maybe shelve the property for as long as they can get away with and come back with new people and a different approach.

19. I read on a couple of sites that due to Sony’s entertainment division doing so poorly, the rights to make Spider-Man films might be reverting back to Marvel. Have you guys read/heard anything about this? I would be happier than Venom’s orthodontist if this came to pass! Cause it also might mean that. . .Spectacular Spider-Man COULD get going again (eek!)

20. ‘Heavily managed product’ really captures the situation perfectly. I enjoyed Amz 2, but I have no interest in Venom or Sinister Six, and do admit that the weakest part of Amz 2 (apart from the Parker history) was the set up for the S6.

    Marvel studios play that ‘chess game’ as well, but while the next move is important to them, they are also committed to the movie they are working on now. Guardians is a peice to the infinity gauntlet puzzle, but it is also breaking the mood of what we’ve come to expect from them.

    I’d like to hear these guys talk about Dawn for Justice.

21. A lot of what they say are things I have been saying (on our main page and our FB page) about the movie’s under-performance and how it effects Sony’s “Spider-movies every year!” plan.