DthRdrX

Because Spider-man, as a complete brand, makes more money for Marvel than anyone I believe. A good film interpretation of him would most likely continue to raise sales across the board. The last thing they want is people to become disinterested in their most popular character.

RichC2

Yeah, they've had 5 now, I loved one of them (Spidey 2), hated 1 (Spidey 3) and was sort of whatever on two of em (ASM, Spidey 1). Still haven't sat through ASM2, but its name isn't too appealing right now.

DthRdrX

An idea of how important Spider-man is for Marvel.

Sonic

Same here.

Defiant1

I didn't think Garfield was horrible in ASM (never saw ASM2) but replacing him would be no major loss. Sony is deep in the shit these days!

Shazam

I fell asleep during ASM1. Won't even bother with ASM2.

EdTheRipper

Agreed on both counts. I really liked Garfield as Parker.

Artman

Agree with the general opinions here... I like AG, but the scripts and direction for him wasn't great (still better than the previous series though, I was never a fan of the first three). And considering Marvel will want a Spidey for 10+yrs, he's already too old at 31.

Spider-man has been the face of Sony for awhile now, I'm not sure if there is any real financial gains for them outside of the films (which if they cost 250m and only make 700m, is not good). At this point, they've had five films...made a lot of good money, but they are clearly stuck now...

Could Disney just write Sony a check for 500m...1billion? Sprinkling him into a few Marvel films will benefit those, and the solo films will be billion dollar movies...plus the theme park/marketing additions....they'd get that $$ back within a few yrs.

Double_Oh_7

I think the Spider-Man theme park license is at Universal. This deal would have no affect on that. And Disney already has use of Spidey for marketing/merchandising. Sony only has rights to the character in movies.

DthRdrX

They could, but I doubt they will pay that much. Disney/Marvel have the upper hand here because they know Sony has no idea what to do with the property.

Josh-da-man

I'm not really sure why they felt the need to reboot the franchise, either. They should have just dropped the new actor in without explanation (works for James Bond) and had Spider-Man go up against the Lizard. Really lame decision to reboot and retell the character's origin in the fourth movie in less than a decade while it was still fresh in everyone's minds. Aside from getting bitten by a radioactive spider, Spidey's origin is basically the same as Batman's: Parental figure gets killed, fight crime.

planetaire

Spider-man is Marvel, not to have him in the cinematic universe is a shame. Garfield wasn't so bad, I haven't seen 2. Maguire was better in the role, even with 3.

Solid Snake

I dunno. Overall... Neither version has done grand justice to the character for me. This is something Marvel has in massive spades. They get their characters. They also get them to make them wildly accessible to all. Raimi's was too whiny. Webb's was too wishy washy in a few things. Sony's Spidey is just a product. Sony has mostly been totally fine w/ getting solid bank coming in but their quality for mainstream films is very very iffy.

Original Desmond

Sony have really done all they can possibly do with their limited Spidey and Friends rights

Without any other Marvel character rights, it's an endless cycle of same ole same old

Amazing spiderman 1 and 2 weren't bad, but didn't expand or differentiate themselves enough from the previous spiderman movies which were still pretty fresh in everyone's minds

The limited villians are a problem. Sure a few of them are cool, we have already seen depictions of most of the worthwhile ones that Sony has rights too.

Sony should sell the rights back to Marvel

Solid Snake

There really isn't a limit of villains. Spidey has a lot of baddies. Like Batman though... a focus is put on the popular ones.

taffer

What is the context of those graphs? I would think Batman is licensed more and sells more than Spider-Man.

Just looking at comic books alone, Batman sells a heck of a lot more than Spider-Man. Batman has been used as the base 100 index number for comic sales comparisons for many years because it is always in the top two or three. Really the only time Batman isn't the top sales for a month is whenever a special event is going on since events always top the charts. Spider-Man hasn't even been in the top ten several times. Plus, DC puts out over a dozen Batman related comics a month, and they all sell pretty well. Marvel doesn't pimp Spidey nearly as much as that.

Obi-Wanma

Comic sales mean dick. Most of the people buying these products have never read a comic.

Solid Snake

I'd also like to get the product context for those graphs. Taffer, what is your source link?

I have a hard time believing that Spidey, as an on the shelf type, product beyond film sells more shit than Bats.

Paul_SD

If Marvel can wrest creative control of the character, I hope they cast a real 16 yr old in the role.

I think Marvel working out a deal here is absolutely in the realm of the possible and I would give it better than 50/50 odds of happening.
At the moment, Marvel has an awful lot of leverage here - partly due to Sony's enormous clusterfuck of troubles and partly because of how limited Sony's rights really are.
Spider-man isn't really a licensing cash cow for Sony, which is why they are furiously trying to spin off so many other franchises from the property. And all that Sony can merchandise or license, is what is related to the movies they make.
Marvel, OTOH, owns the character and could conceivably flood the market with Spider-man product and licenses and in doing so de-value any future movie licensing...if they wanted to play hardball.

It would very much be in Sony's interest to revert the character back to Marvel for a set number of projects/appearances and get a cut from that. That way they derive income from doing absolutely nothing and with no risk. And they generate good will with the fan base. It would be a win-win for them to cut a deal. Especially now that the hacking/data dump is causing their Japanese overlords to seriously lose face.

Solid Snake

We don't need another HS Spidey again. Granted...Raimi's was barely in it but still. How about just make him...*gasp* a man w/ a shitty newspaper job who is juggling the duality of being a masked superhuman freak and normal guy? Instead of a college or HS kid... w/ whatever else he's got going on.

Paul_SD

Because a solo kid in a universe of more adult super-heroes would be distinct and unique.

Just because he would be a teen, doesn't mean the films have to be preoccupied with the typical teenage sturm and drang. Nor would I really want to see much screen time devoted to that stuff. I see it having value more as subtext.

Solid Snake

I don't think we need a Spidey in HS again... That'd be 3 times we hit a Spidey in HS. This is Marvel. They make their heroes wildly distinct and unique. That is one thing you cannot criticize on them. Maybe on Thor and Hawkeye you could but they're really good at making their heroes cool. What would be wrong w/ labeling him as a an early twenties guy among these much more adult heroes? Spidey doesn't need school to be to still be the Spidey we know.

Paul_SD

The Webb movies don't exist to me so that only makes one HS movie (that he graduates from midway through) with a 25+ yr old playing a teen.

I just don't see anything special about another young adult stud who's a superhero in his spare time. That describes nearly every other character.

Solid Snake

Doesn't matter that it exists to you or not. It exists either way.

What's special about having another team of white people saving the day? It can be many things. Spidey doesn't need to be a teen anymore. He can still be the lovably awkward, hardheaded, smart, worrisome, yet sarcastically cocky hero we all know and love w/o being a teen/school kid.

taffer

That wasn't the point of my post. I mentioned in the first sentence that Batman most likely is licensed more and sells more than Spider-Man. Which is why I asked for the context of those graphs.

I hardly ever see Spider-Man related merchandise for sale. Batman is freaking everywhere though. The Arkham video games are hot sellers. When's the last time Spidey had a good selling video game? Or animated series? Everyone loves BTAS, but I hardly ever see anything related to Spidey animated.

I just can't imagine Spidey being bigger than Batman. Batman has been on top pretty much ever since the Tim Burton movies. Which is why I want the context of those graphs because they don't seem accurate at all.


Why are you asking me for the source? I didn't post those graphs.