The Marvel Cinematic Multiverse

[Asura]

It's funny that #BoycottSony is trending today, because this really does sound like it's Marvel/Disney who are asking for more money, and that's why things have gone sour.

People have always kinda perceived Sony as the bad guy on Spiderman, though, since Marvel became successful again. I don't think they can do right.

[Dogg Thang]

Honestly, it's hard to know which corporate overlord to side with.

[Asura]

Honestly, it's hard to know which corporate overlord to side with.

That's the thing. I think in people's minds, especially fans, Marvel is still the ailing, failing but plucky, "honest" business that was FORCED to sell their favourite child to stave off bankruptcy, and now that child's new owner reminds them about it every few years because they're HEARTLESS MONSTERS

This, naturally, is absurd, but I think it's along these lines.

[Neon Ignition]

It'd be weird as well, as the third Spider-Man film was already under the existing deal so presumably if Marvel dropped out it'd through simply being arsey about it all. In terms of the films the only real visible change would be Holland no longer appearing in Marvel's entries. Sony has always planned for his Spidey to be in their own MCU movies so another reboot of the character has never been on the cards in any eventuality. The Spider-Man films would become like the Marvel TV series used to be, connected but not referenced by the Marvel made MCU movies. Spider-Man versus Venom is likely coming in any outcome

[Dogg Thang]

As always (and as someone who has contracted with Disney on far smaller projects), I'd speculate that the reality of what happens now is horrendously complex, with many, many 'what if' scenarios to play out. Right when this deal was announced, something didn't sit right with me - the idea that Disney/Marvel could essentially recreate Spider-Man for Sony, lock him into the MCU (with all the brand power that adds) and then let Sony go off and make whatever they want, potentially terrible movies, with the public at large thinking that these are MCU films. That has never felt like something Disney would do.

And now with it coming out that Sony were also making the lion's share of the money from the Spider-Man films and after Disney totally doubling down on the MCU connection in Far From Home (suggesting to me that they had no intention of having Spider-Man run free any time soon), it feels even more unlikely.

I can't possibly know what the deal is like but I will be massively surprised if Sony can just go and make their own Spider-Man movies following Far From Home as if nothing has changed and then build their own Spider universe from that, cashing in on everything Disney gave them. It just doesn't seem like a situation any Disney lawyer would let happen.

[Neon Ignition]

Pure guess work but I'm assuming Sony's protection comes from how locked down and indefinite their film rights to the character are. Presumably in any deal Marvel could impose all sorts of limits but once no agreement exists anymore they wouldn't have any control over what Sony does as Sony would then be contracting Holland on fresh terms to play a character that they have full rights and control of. As long as they didn't directly feature MCU designs then they could sidestep the issue. On some level I imagine it'd be like Deadpool where Reynolds wanted a SHIELD carrier in there and he managed it albeit by skirting the legal rules involved. It's interesting how Feige is so central to the MCU yet he yields little control when it comes to the fringe elements still, the Sony situation seems simple when compared to how he still doesn't have a way of reigning in the ambitions of Marvel TV despite the clear toe treading going on internally

[Dogg Thang]

Yeah, and this is where it gets even more complicated because there will be lots of questions over ownership of assets and designs. The fact that Sony have financed the Spider-Man movies would, under normal circumstances, suggest they have ownership of designs, script, character takes and basically anything that can be copyrighted and trademarked... except that much of that is MCU stuff and some core aspects were established not in a Sony film but in a Disney film. Which again under normal circumstances (which these are not) would suggest ownership belongs to Disney. So yes, Sony could make a Spider-Man movie with Tom Holland but it could be possible that they couldn't touch anything or reference anything that seems like it comes from those elements unless well worked out in a giant contract and run through about 20 legal departments to see what's cleared and what's not. In any case, I think it's likely to be a very complex scenario but I guess we'll never be party to what was agreed and instead will just have to wait and see what comes out the other end.

Edit: Wild baseless speculation: Donald Glover playing Miles Morales' uncle in Homecoming was setting up the backup plan - if Sony had to make more Spider-Man movies on their own with no elements that were set up by Marvel, the hero would be Miles, not Peter.

[Neon Ignition]

It's really messy to think about. Peter first appears in an MCU movie but that was filmed during Homecomings development, given Sony has the never ending exclusive film rights to the character it suggests that the basis of the deal is that Disney is technically licensing the use of Sony's Spider-Man whenever Holland appears in a different MCU film such as Endgame. But, like you say, Marvel have been so involved in the design of the films and character it's tricky.

In theory you'd have the assume the crux of the deal was that Marvel act as consultants on Spider-Man films and provide their characters whilst Sony make the character available and adhere to whatever ruleset that is in place. The benefits for both being Marvel see's revenues from merch increase and a greater hand I maintaining the characters reputation whilst Sony gets that MCU $$$ boost and creative assistance in rebooting a character that had become difficult to relaunch. An exit to the deal had to have been thought of originally as it was only ever a 5 film deal to begin with, it was never really discussed as a never ending agreement by either and Sony has never shy'd away from their ambitions to have Holland appear in their other films so I'm assuming Sony has always been free to do that once the deal with Marvel ends.

If all that's the case or close to it, the issue likely comes from the next Spider-Man film. Given it's in development and is the last one of the current contract, we're likely hearing less of a fall out and more of a contract renegotiation intended to cover the next 4-5 appearances which is proving tricky because of how much money the latest film has generated. Personally, given how confidently Sony have talked about their long term plans I'm leaning to the side that all Sony lose by the agreement ending at this point (given the characters resurgence is complete) is featuring future MCU character appearances and having the risk of plots that contradict the wider MCU because they wouldn't be talking with Marvel as closely (presumably there'd be some contact still due to the money from the existing films and Feige already has a long history working on non-MCU Spider-Man films)

[Dogg Thang]

If all that's the case or close to it, the issue likely comes from the next Spider-Man film. Given it's in development and is the last one of the current contract, we're likely hearing less of a fall out and more of a contract renegotiation intended to cover the next 4-5 appearances which is proving tricky because of how much money the latest film has generated. Personally, given how confidently Sony have talked about their long term plans I'm leaning to the side that all Sony lose by the agreement ending at this point (given the characters resurgence is complete) is featuring future MCU character appearances and having the risk of plots that contradict the wider MCU because they wouldn't be talking with Marvel as closely (presumably there'd be some contact still due to the money from the existing films and Feige already has a long history working on non-MCU Spider-Man films)

Yeah, I think you're probably right. The way the trades are reporting it, they make it sound like it would be largely business as usual for Sony from here with regards to Spider-Man even without Disney which is surprising to me but they would know if there were any major hurdles.

[ItsThere]

Spider-Man: Homecoming
Spider-Man: Far From Home
Spider-Man: Homeless

*Shamelessly stolen from someone on Twitter*

[Neon Ignition]

http://www.darkhorizons.com/sony-responds-to-spider-man-deal-breakdown/

Sony has responded to yesterday's news seemingly confirming the end of the relationship with Disney whilst at the same time knocking the nature of the news stories as being inaccurate. Their main point is to suggest that Disney sought to restrict Kevin Feige's involvement in future Spider-Man films because of concerns he was becoming to thinly spread across the existing content and intake of Fox properties. Their wording is non-specific but does suggest that Sony's intention is for the character's current incarnation to continue as is regardless of not being so closely tied to the rest of the MCU anymore.

http://www.darkhorizons.com/jon-watts-not-confirmed-for-spider-man-3/

Also emerging is that director Jon Watts looks increasingly to not be returning for the third Spider-Man entry.


The thing is, in theory the fan hate is pointless, the only concern is whether Sony can maintain the quality bar. A Spider-Man film without Marvel's direct input is no more or no less directly connected to the MCU arc than Ant-Man, Guardians etc were where they had fairly contained plots and didn't feature cross franchise characters. To the general viewer there'd be no visible difference and arguably after the last two films a third Spider-Man film's plot should be about Peter finally learning to stand alone instead of relying on others

[Cassius_Smoke]

I'd be happy to pull it away from marvel if it means dropping the whose Stark/iron spider stuff.

[Nu-Eclipse]

Marvel/DIsney have done a fecking great job of spinning this to make Sony look like the villains here.

[Neon Ignition]

It's staggering as to how much the narrative has run away from Sony, all they need to do is to formally say Holland etc are staying and the films will continue. A Spider-Man film outside a Disney agreement at this point is like Ant-Man, Guardians, Incredible Hulk etc that only contained light cursory links to the wider MCU and would be exactly the same with those references removed.

[Dogg Thang]

It's staggering as to how much the narrative has run away from Sony, all they need to do is to formally say Holland etc are staying and the films will continue. A Spider-Man film outside a Disney agreement at this point is like Ant-Man, Guardians, Incredible Hulk etc that only contained light cursory links to the wider MCU and would be exactly the same with those references removed.

Except not made with any involvement from Marvel and that's a massive factor. Sony's track record is, with only a few recent exceptions (Spider-verse being the big one), abysmal. Marvel's is exactly the opposite. So no, it's not like Ant-Man or Guardians any more than a toddler painting a picture is the same as some great master just because they both have access to paints.