By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
colafitte on 21 August 2019
Edit Thread
DonFerrari said:

colafitte said:

Of course not.

And people saying..."but is Disney sharing 50% of the costs, not the profits!!!"

1st. If anyone believes Disney is going to take 50% of the cost and don't get 50% of the profits they are naive as hell.

2nd. The 50% cost/profit for both doesn't benefit Sony at all. It's just simple maths. Let's say a movie costs as a whole 200M to make and it makes 1000M on the box office. (I know it doesn't work this way but it's just to make an example). There will be 800M in profits, and Sony will get its part of those 800M. But if they share the costs and profits. They spend 100M and they get 400M, so instead of getting their part from a 800M profit, they will get their part from a 400M profit...

If you are the legitimate owner of the movie rights of Spiderman, this deal, on its own is absolutely insulting and a step back. But then you have to add that Sony didn't profited at all from the Marvel movies where Spiderman was on it, despite 2 of them, being 2000B+ on the box office, and not getting anything at all of merchandise of this specific Tom Holland Spiderman either.

Sony saying no to this deal, is absolutely reasonable. This is 100% Disney's fault.

1 - It is that disney is so benevolent that they want to double the budget of the movie to make it much better so Sony can profit more, Disney will take the loss out of their good heart and small value SpiderMan add to MCU.

2 - Yes, sharing costs and profits could be good for Sony on something that is a risk investment. On a sure investment if you can do all of it by yourself it would be much better. And if you need money the bank will charge you interest rates that is much lesser than 400M of your profit in this case.

Yep for me the current deal is already very much better to Disney than to Sony, and they want even more and faulty Sony for not allowing to be bullied as Disney have been able to do to others without resistance.

Another thing that pisses me off is people saying Sony wouldn't be able to reach this level of success with Spiderman on their own without Disney. They have no fucking clue about what they're talking.

When you adjust the inflation to current days, the original trilogy was way more profitable than MCU films in USA. You can absolutely say that all of them would've been 1100-1300M movies worldwide, and this was in a time when the asian market was not as important as is today, because then, those movies could've been 1500M or more easily.

Homecoming did barely better than the first Garfield movie. It can be said that the only Sony Spiderman movie that really "bombed" was  second one. 

When a movie like Venom, with all the bad press it received, made 860M worldwide...., come on...., of course a new only Sony Spiderman movie can make more than 1000M.