taffer

The budget is skyrocketing? Each sequel shows diminishing returns? Where are you getting this from?

These are the figures from wikipedia

Spider-Man 1: Budget=140 mil, Box office=820 mil, Net profit=680 mil

Spider-Man 2: Budget=200 mil, Box office=780 mil, Net profit=580 mil

Spider-Man 3: Budget=260 mil, Box office=890 mil, Net profit=630 mil

Amazing Spider-Man 1: Budget=230 mil, Box office=750 mil, Net profit=520 mil

Amazing Spider-Man 2: Budget=200-250 mil, Box office=370 mil (so far), Net profit=120-170 mil (so far)

The budgets have not skyrocketed. They have been fairly consistent since the second movie.

Spidey 3 was actually more profitable than Spidey 2. ASM1 had a drop in profit, but not THAT significant. The movies are still very profitable.

Sony is NOT going to give up the movie rights anytime soon.

Shannon Nutt

Well that depends on how you view it. No the overall budget hasn't skyrocketed, but only because Sony dumped team Raimi/Maguire for the much-cheaper team Webb/Garfield. The actual costs of the films (sans talent) has increased.

And I'd be careful on your net profit estimates...those budget numbers for the films DON'T include what Sony spends on marketing, which can sometimes be as close to as much as the movie itself cost. That's why the general rule is a movie needs to make three times as much as it cost to be successful, because those marketing costs aren't part of the reported budget.

taffer

Ok. Likewise, those revenue figures don't show the full picture either. They don't include toys and other merchandise. They also don't show DVD/Blu home sales.

If revenue needs to be at least three times cost to be considered a success, then ASM1 was a success according to those figures. ASM2 isn't doing too bad either considering it just released. It would need to get up to 750 million to triple its highest budget projection, and it's already halfway there.

Point being, these movies are still very much profitable for Sony, and they aren't going to give it up anytime soon.

Mr. Cinema

Sony just needs to hire a good screenwriter and director and it won't matter who gives us a Spider-man movie. I'm still not sure what they saw from "500 Days of Summer" to hire Marc Webb in the first place. Assuming Dawn of the Planet of the Apes is a hit, and a good movie, I'd hope they would go for someone like Matt Reeves to direct part 3.

Shannon Nutt

I'm not sure Webb is the problem here...I think, given their screenwriting history (and the resulting movies), that Orci/Kurtzman are the issue. I mean if JJ Abrams couldn't do much with the INTO DARKNESS script, how was Webb supposed to do with what he was given here? You can even say the scenes that don't involve huge action/exposition in this film (the moments between Peter/Gwen and Peter/Aunt May) are the best.

With that in mind, Webb's already been locked-in for #3.

RichC2

I think Webb has alright storytelling chops, his action directing needs to go to a good second unit if he isn't going to do something interesting with it, but overall he wasn't a bad pick. He's the reason the Gwen/Pete scenes shine and the action scenes are kind of lackluster.

For this movie, I tend to agree it comes down to terrible screen writers. Orci/Kurtzman have good movie ideas, but write incomplete stories and terrible dialogue.

Solid Snake

Who's worse? Goyer or Orci & Kurtzman?

Obi-Wanma

I think Sony picked Marc Webb because his last name is Webb. Seriously.

Groucho

I've often thought that myself. But I think the real reason is that they wanted a "yes man" who would basically implement whatever was asked.

RichC2

On his own, Goyer. But most of his scripts get a brush up before going into production -- he co-wrote Dark City, Batman Begins, Dark Knight, etc; which is all fine and well, but the directors of each had a big role in those screenplays (Proyas and the Nolans). But then you look at the movies he had all to himself, like The Unborn, Blade Trinity and The Crow: City of Angels and yeah, not good.

Orci and Kutzman are bad, but not quite THAT bad. They need a strong director to shoot their material to make it entertaining.

Hokeyboy

You understand that Gross Net, correct? Studios get on average about half the box office, and you still need to factor in P&A (usually $100 mill for a tentpole pic). (And of course, I'm talking about theatrical revenue, not home video, cable rights, merchandising etc.)

DVD Josh

That does nothing to impact the thrust of his argument. Nothing.

devilshalo

I liked Blade Trinity (mainly because it was more of an ensemble piece) and to some extent Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance (too bad MSJ already fucked up Ghost Rider enough to scare people away).

Man of Steel on the other hand.....

Hokeyboy

It's an all-too common misconception about box office, e.g. "The movie cost $75 million but grossed $85 million, so it made $10 million!" Not high on the totem pole of Problems Affecting The World, but I'm a flibbertigibbet.

Also, I got something you can thrust

Shannon Nutt

Plus, we haven't even gone into how Hollywood studios handle their bookkeeping. I mean, according to them, Warner Bros. still hasn't made a dime off their Batman movies.

Groucho

Titanic is expected to break even sometime next year.

Mondo Kane

I admit to being stunned at how much money this made. It really looks like Sony can just go ahead with all plans now and have Miles Morales waiting in line for the reboot.

Big Boy Laroux

Donald Glover!

taffer

and Tobey Maguire as Ben Reilly

ddrknghtrtns

Overseas, the movie is on par (maybe?), to rake in what the others are making. Domestically each new sequel is making less than the previous movie. Because Marvel now has the merchandising rights, (Sony) won't see a nickel of that. Including inflation, global advertising, Marvel's share of the profits, and other unknown factors, each sequel will be showing diminishing returns.

I seriously doubt Marvel/Disney is going to do Sony a solid and let Spider-Man have a cameo in any of the Avenger's movies.

Mike86

Of course they won't just let them to use Spider-Man for nothing. In my opinion though if Sony, Fox, and Marvel/Disney were smart they would all just agree to collaborate and share profits off films allowing characters owned by all to appear in different films and expand the Marvel Cinematic Universe as a whole. Right now Marvel/Disney has it pretty well made as they profit off of films they don't make through merchandise and whatnot, but even so if they worked together being able to use characters like Wolverine and Spider-Man in their films would be huge. Same goes for Sony and Fox being able to use characters like Iron Man, Captain America, Thor, etc. That probably won't ever happen though because I'm sure it would be too much of a chore to get everyone to agree on how to share profits.