I wouldn't be surprised if Sony is playing games withe Marvel on purpose. I think that even Sony was surprised at how well the Venom movie did. Surely they want to edge Spiderman out of the MCU and towards their own universe at some point.
Definitely -- I don't think anyone outside the studios knows the full extent of the deal, but I would bet after this current set of movies releases (Avengers/Far From Home) they'll push hard to get Spider-Man back into the Sony universe to showdown with Venom and whoever else.
Definitely -- I don't think anyone outside the studios knows the full extent of the deal, but I would bet after this current set of movies releases (Avengers/Far From Home) they'll push hard to get Spider-Man back into the Sony universe to showdown with Venom and whoever else.
“I think about crying,” Pascal said of a potential Spidey break-up. “I can only hope for a future where things work out. I've known [Marvel Studios president] Kevin [Feige] since he was Avi [Arad]'s very, very quiet assistant, who for many years sat in that room listening to us and being so much smarter than any of us without any of us realizing. I will say that working with Marvel has been one of the highlights of my professional career.”
Situations change, jobs change but as of right now doesn't look to be a concern. I know she produced Homecoming but now she's not with Sony so who knows.
As for the original deal, here is what's out there. It seems very beneficial to Sony however.
Quote:
Spider-Man: Homecoming is still financed and distributed by Sony Pictures (i.e. they pay for 100% of it), and Sony gets the box office, but Marvel Studios produced the film and served as the “creative lead.” That means Feige and the Marvel Studios braintrust helped pick the director and cast, helped craft the film’s tone and style, and made sure to bring something fresh and new to character that audiences are already very familiar with. In short, they made a Marvel Studios Spider-Man movie.
Quote:
So what does Marvel Studios get in return out of this deal? Besides getting to play with a toy they’ve been eyeing for a very long time now, they get to use Tom Holland’s Peter Parker in a set number of MCU movies (five in total, per this initial agreement, including Homecoming and its sequel)
The five picture deal is interesting. Does that mean Far from Home is the last one?
-Civil War
-Homecoming
-Avengers Infinity War
-Avengers Endgame
-Far From Home
Amazing how quickly the resume builds up for the Marvel actors with all the crossover. Holland seems to love being Spidy however and can't imagine not having another couple stand alone Spider-Man movies.
Situations change, jobs change but as of right now doesn't look to be a concern. I know she produced Homecoming but now she's not with Sony so who knows.
As for the original deal, here is what's out there. It seems very beneficial to Sony however.
The five picture deal is interesting. Does that mean Far from Home is the last one?
-Civil War
-Homecoming
-Avengers Infinity War
-Avengers Endgame
-Far From Home
Amazing how quickly the resume builds up for the Marvel actors with all the crossover. Holland seems to love being Spidy however and can't imagine not having another couple stand alone Spider-Man movies.
There's nothing to stop Holland from having further standalone spidey movies. They just won't feature guest appearances from Tony Stark and Nick Fury. Although it sounds like RDJ may not play Stark again anyways. Plus the studios seem fed up paying RDJ the absurd amount of money he gets paid for each appearance....although he pretty much makes the movies he's in.
RDJ was apparently paid $15 million for his 5 minutes or so of screen time in Homecoming. He probably filmed all of his scenes in 1-2 days.
Well better than Superman vs anyone in the DC or Marvel Universe.
He can take on the entire avengers team plus their reserves plus thanos. The only way he can lose is if you blow up the Sun. So only the Dragonball Z guys can kill him.
I disagree with this. There are some great Superman stories out there. Superman's main weakness, besides Kryptonite, is that he always tries to do the right thing and genuinely cares about human life. To defeat Superman, you don't necessarily have to harm him physically, but do harm to innocent people.
Lex Luthor is his main enemy, because he is smarter than Superman and doesn't always do the right thing. In reality, Superman cannot be in two places at once. He will also harm himself for the purpose of saving innocent lives.
This was what Snyder seemed to miss. He actually had a great overall plot in the Man of Steel. If he'd depicted Superman's emotions better it would have been a great movie. Cavill scowled the whole time and was way too callous about killing Zod. In the comics, Superman kills Zod, as he sees no other choice. He's then haunted by that decision for the rest of his life; the consequences of that decision influence all future decisions Superman makes. That really didn't come across at all in the Snyder movies.
So there's been a secret Ghostbusters in the works set to release next year directed by Jason Reitman. This will be a sequel to the 1984 movie and not the 2016 one (which I actually liked)
So there's been a secret Ghostbusters in the works set to release next year directed by Jason Reitman. This will be a sequel to the 1984 movie and not the 2016 one (which I actually liked)
I'm a big fan of all 4 actresses/comedians from the 2016 reboot, but that movie was a huge misfire. I'm excited to hear that a true sequel to the originals is in the works.
Sony Pictures has tentatively scheduled the film for a summer 2020 release. Reitman’s father, Ivan Reitman, who directed the original 1984 Ghostbusters and its 1989 sequel, will produce the film.
“I’ve always thought of myself as the first Ghostbusters fan, when I was a six-year-old visiting the set,” the younger Reitman told EW.
“I wanted to make a movie for all the other fans. This is the next chapter in the original franchise. It is not a reboot. What happened in the Eighties happened in the Eighties, and this is set in the present day.”
Reitman's had some huge successes (juno, up in the air, thank you for smoking) but has been terribly hit and miss in recent years, alternating between sleeper hits and major flops.
He seems passionate about the source material so hopefully that translates to a good movie.
Can they stop trying to make Ghostbusters happen? I’m surprised they think it has this big franchise potential, it’s one of those franchises they keep going back to that’s only had one really good/successful movie. Like Terminator. Just stop.
I'm willing to give it a chance. Other than the disaster of the reboot, it's not like they have been trying for decades. It's been idle for 30 years. If the right person is in charge, with the right actors it could be good.
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Fuzz For This Useful Post:
I'll admit I am a sucker for nostalgia and got excited over the teaser.
Ghostbusters were during the prime years of my childhood, I watched the first movie over and over, had all the toys and loved the cartoon. It will make me happy to see the original cast back on the big screen, minus one big part obviously..
__________________ "In brightest day, in blackest night / No evil shall escape my sight / Let those who worship evil's might / Beware my power, Green Lantern's light!"
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to GreenLantern For This Useful Post:
Ghosbusters III was filmed in the streetcar suburbs of Boston in summer which made it feel disconnected from the other two. I'm guessing it's difficult logistically to film in Manhattan but it makes a difference and I hope they go that route this time.
