Who really cares? Spider-man has always been a loner who doesn't fit with most of the other characters. In fact, I always hated to see him shoehorned into "team" storylines in the comics. Seems like a silly thing to get pouty over.
Ganoncrotch said:
Yeah the Toby Mc movies all landed in the region of 850m-750m in the cinema, the Amazing spiderman duo got around 750m a pop. Sure far from home made 1.1b but if Sony are being asked to gift 50% of that to Disney along with other things such as merchandise sales then Sony would straight up be at a loss to not just continue making movies which generate 750m region money, it's not like every kid and mum that goes into the cinema to watch a spiderman movie knows if he is part of the MCU or not, families just want to see a superhero movie, shit like Shazam/Aquaman making a fair amount of cash is proof that people will wander into a cinema to watch a movie which has no real cinematic universe behind it and will likely lead to nothing other than a 2 hour popcorn eating session. @KrspaceT you mention the DC studios laugh while this happens... you know that entire movie universe has fallen apart right? There isn't a Justice League Vs Avengers set of movies now, there is just the MCU films and a sprawling mess of random hero movies from DC, they are in a directionless spiral of random spin offs with no future planned outside of "can we have any box office monies" |
I was making a joke about rights issues more than DC movie quality.
Also on the Spiderman 'loner' thing....yeah no. Spiderman's had a long history of association with other heroes, don't confuse rights issues with anything.
Daredevil and the FF in particular.
The era of solo Big 2 movies is dead, accept it.
The Democratic Nintendo fan....is that a paradox? I'm fond of one of the more conservative companies in the industry, but I vote Liberally and view myself that way 90% of the time?
KrspaceT said:
I was making a joke about rights issues more than DC movie quality. Also on the Spiderman 'loner' thing....yeah no. Spiderman's had a long history of association with other heroes, don't confuse rights issues with anything. Daredevil and the FF in particular. The era of solo Big 2 movies is dead, accept it. |
Hmmmm... I think I get what you mean, you know the main thing about all this... I don't wanna see another fucking reboot.
I swear at this stage I am getting PTSD from seeing Uncle Ben getting gunned down.
Why not check me out on youtube and help me on the way to 2k subs over at www.youtube.com/stormcloudlive
It is funny that since this is VGC it obviously must be Sony fault, and also the success of this trilogy have been because of Disney. Like if Disney haven't been making dumb decisions like in Star Wars.
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."
KManX89 said:
Yup Sony, the company that butchered Spider-Man and Ghost Rider since 2007 and only made as much money off the current iteration of Spidey BECAUSE of the MCU connection is better off rebooting Spider-Man for the 4th (!) time after failing to do so TWICE on their own. That'll end well. |
Sony's mistake with the Sam Raimi series was giving him too much control. The first two were good films, but the third sucked because Raimi was given full writing control. He made his fave villian, Sandman, play too important a role in Spider-Man's backstory. He pretty much turned him into a Gary Stu. That and the fans were clamoring for Venom, but Raimi doesn't really like Venom, so got his character all wrong. It's really a shame that he doesn't like Venom, cause I think if he really read up on him he would, and could have had some real fun with him.
Also, where is the 2nd failed reboot you speak of? Sony only rebooted their Spider-Man once before the Tom Holland/MCU version.
Sony Pictures never ceases to disappoint. Fuck 'em.
Bet with Intrinsic:
The Switch will outsell 3DS (based on VGchartz numbers), according to me, while Intrinsic thinks the opposite will hold true. One month avatar control for the loser's avatar.
thismeintiel said:
Sony's mistake with the Sam Raimi series was giving him too much control. The first two were good films, but the third sucked because Raimi was given full writing control. He made his fave villian, Sandman, play too important a role in Spider-Man's backstory. He pretty much turned him into a Gary Stu. That and the fans were clamoring for Venom, but Raimi doesn't really like Venom, so got his character all wrong. It's really a shame that he doesn't like Venom, cause I think if he really read up on him he would, and could have had some real fun with him. Also, where is the 2nd failed reboot you speak of? Sony only rebooted their Spider-Man once before the Tom Holland/MCU version. |
Venom was shoehorned into Spider-Man 3 because Avi Arad meddled to get him put in. As a result, SM3 was an overbloated mess with too many characters/plotlines.
Then again, he's had quite the track record of butchering films. He also graced us with X-Men: the Last Stand, X-Men: Origins Wolverine, both Hulks, both Fantastic Four movies (he thankfully had no involvement in the godawful 2015 reboot, I can only imagine how much worse it would've been with him involved), both Ghost Riders, Elektra, the terrible theatrical cut of DareDevil (like I said, the R-rated DC on home video is much better), the terrible Amazing Spider-Man films, the list goes on.
Oh and I meant 4th continuity. It would technically only be the third time rebooting him, TASM series being the first.
| Mar1217 said: Now that's the actual Endgame I was waiting for, thanks Sony
|
Yeah, sure, let's let them make their own films again without Marvel's oversight (even though the MCU connection was the only reason they made as much as they did off the Tom Holland films).
Because it worked so well for Spider-Man 3, Ghost Rider, Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance, and both Amazing Spider-Man films. 
Venom wasn't all that great, either.
KManX89 said:
Venom was shoehorned into Spider-Man 3 because Avi Arad meddled to get him put in. As a result, SM3 was an overbloated mess with too many characters/plotlines. Then again, he's had quite the track record of butchering films. He also graced us with X-Men: the Last Stand, X-Men: Origins Wolverine, both Hulks, both Fantastic Four movies (he thankfully had no involvement in the godawful 2015 reboot, I can only imagine how much worse it would've been with him involved), both Ghost Riders, Elektra, the terrible theatrical cut of DareDevil (like I said, the R-rated DC on home video is much better), the terrible Amazing Spider-Man films, the list goes on. Oh and I meant 4th continuity. It would technically only be the third time rebooting him, TASM series being the first. |
While I agree Venom was shoehorned in and rushed, his character was also butchered by the Raimi Bros writing team. It also wouldn't have helped their mishandling of Sandman.
You do realize that Avi Arad was the producer on both MCU Spider-Man flicks, right? He also helped get the MCU rolling with Iron Man. Outside of the MCU, he produced the Blade Trilogy and first two Raimi Spider-Man films. Not saying he hasn't been involved with a bunch of stinkers, but he has been involved in some good ones, too.
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2024 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
