By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
colafitte said:
DonFerrari said:

Sony doesn't have a role in the Avengers movies. Sony doesn't make a cent from the use of Spider-Man on the movies.

Disney make money of the Spider Man movie even though they don't participate in it, they take all the money on the merchandise and wanted to make more money on the movie by forcing Sony to allow them to participate on it. So they were butting in and demanding more, and want to be seem as good guys in it.

Being clueless is part of being human. And hating Sony and faulting it for everything (and also taking any merit for any success) is a common place in VGC.

And I'll say I liked the original trilogy more than the Tom Holland one, he is just to dumb, well no only him but other heroes involved in the movie were all turned dumb (even though said to be genius of all type). I just hate entertainment that say a char is brilliant but fail to see even the obvious all the time, and almost always are less smart than myself.

Yes, i feel the same. The first 2 Raimi movies are full of classic scenes. Spider-Man 2 is in fact, is my favorite superhero movie, it has such a heart that no super hero movie after that one has reached to me.

Tom Holland is a funny guy, i like him in fact, but his Peter/Spiderman has never worked for me. He is by far the most incompetent Spiderman i've seen. He just makes mistakes after mistakes and i always have the feeling he is always a step behind against anyone. I always envisioned Spiderman as the smartest guy in the room, always prepared to every circumstance. Peter can be a loser, but Spiderman has to be "Amazing".

The last one had an amazing pair of scenes with Mysterio, but besides that, everytime i see this MCU Spiderman, i feel......second class super hero. 

Yep I gave good laughs on the SM Tom Holland, but he is a very inferior Peter Parker and SM. Even Morales on the spiderverse is a more competent spider.

I get that they are showing he still a teenager learning about the world and being a hero, that he is very naive and all. But they are taking their sweet time making Spider a dumb joke hero.

The scenes and battles have been great, story and intelligence nope.

RaptorChrist said:
DonFerrari said:

Sony doesn't have a role in the Avengers movies. Sony doesn't make a cent from the use of Spider-Man on the movies.

Disney make money of the Spider Man movie even though they don't participate in it, they take all the money on the merchandise and wanted to make more money on the movie by forcing Sony to allow them to participate on it. So they were butting in and demanding more, and want to be seem as good guys in it.

Did I read that right? I thought someone said that Sony made 1.1 billion on a Spider-man movie that Disney made, and Disney wanted more. This doesn't seem accurate.

You read wrong. If you get confused just read what I wrote again.

Sony made the movie that earned 1.1B and because it made a lot of money Disney want to have half of it without really giving anything (like a participation on the making or profits of MCU movies). They get all the merchandise money of the movie Sony makes, they get 5% profit of the movies they didn't make, they get the S-M on the MCU movies without having to pay anything for it and Sony is wrong for not wanting to give then even more money.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."