Topic: Spider-Man absorbed by the Marvel Cinematic Universe

[CaledonianGonzo]

Oh yeah because Garfield was definitely the problem with the Amazing Spider-Man films.  Well done Sony.

He wasn't the worst thing about the new films, but neither was he so perfect a fit for the role that he's irreplacable.

[Replies From View]

I'm just surprised that they couldn't muster a decent single trilogy with Garfield.  It seemed for the first film of the reboot that they had some kind of plan worked out for where his story might go, but clearly by the second film they'd already lost momentum, and now they effectively just want to start again with Peter Parker back in high-school rather than college.  I'd have thought the reboot would have been the opportunity to get everything right in the first place.

[biggytitbo]

More of this in the new film please -
 

[checkoutgirl]

There was a good one in the 70s where Spider-Man mostly beat up Kung fu Masters, and the main villain was a bloke who hypnotised people with a weird noise that made them go up onto roofs.  Peter Parker was about 45 years old in it, and his Spider-Man costume was just some baggy pyjamas.  The film ended with Peter Parker saying the line "I believe!" and then grinning and walking off so you could see his arse in his tight trousers for the whole time it took until the credits had ended, which was ages.

I'll definitely be having a look at that, it sounds like a lot of fun.

That reminds me of the 1970s film adaptation of Captain America. If I remember correctly he was just some Flash Gordon looking bloke with blond hair whizzing around on a motorbike with a shit plastic shield. I don't remember much about it but I seem to recall the denouement being in an oil refinery or steel works like so many action films are. I mean, look at the state of that.



For more cheesy Marvel based cheap action you should check out Fantastic Four from the 1990s. Classic stuff.

[Alberon]

That Fantastic Four film was produced by Roger Corman for about a $1m and most people think it was never intended for release, but purely to keep the rights to the licence.

Which makes me want to see it much much more than any of the other Fantastic Four films that have been made or are in production.

[Spiteface]

There was a good one in the 70s where Spider-Man mostly beat up Kung fu Masters, and the main villain was a bloke who hypnotised people with a weird noise that made them go up onto roofs.  Peter Parker was about 45 years old in it, and his Spider-Man costume was just some baggy pyjamas.  The film ended with Peter Parker saying the line "I believe!" and then grinning and walking off so you could see his arse in his tight trousers for the whole time it took until the credits had ended, which was ages.

I think it wasn't actually a film so much as a double-episode pilot thing, but it still counts.  Basically that and the film with Alfred Molina are the best ones so far I reckon.


Edit:  here's that 1970s one - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8uRLgeEepzg

The TV series of that had a funky as hell theme song: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TbG9SKN7bBA

Sounds like they were told it was for a Blaxploitation film that got canned so they stuck it into Spider-Man.

[Bad Ambassador]

I've seen it - there are loads of bootlegs floating around, so it's not difficult to get hold of.

It's a lot more entertaining that the two "real" films, and looks more expensive that just $1m, thanks to Corman's ability to stretch a budget.

My favourite bit was the final shot, of Reed Richards' big long pipe-cleaner arm waving through the sunroof of a limousine.

[Mango Chimes]

The high school thing's a real problem with a live-action, franchised Spider-Man.  Unless you really commit to Harry Pottering a load of films in quick succession, he's too old in the space of a couple of outings.

[Ignatius_S]

It was being mooted a few months ago that this would happen (and remember it being touched upon in a superhero thread discussion). At that time, I felt – and still do – is that Sony wouldn’t sign away total rights and we would still see Spiderman in Marvel and Sony films.

Here’s some of a Variety article looking at the deal:

….Marvel Studios won’t pay Sony Pictures for the rights to put Spider-Man in “Captain America: Civil War,” the “Avengers” franchise or its other superhero films, as part of its new partnership with the studio, according to sources with knowledge of the deal. At the same time, Marvel won’t receive a cut of the box office for any of Sony’s films that feature Spider-Man. Sony won’t receive a percentage of the revenue Disney makes from Marvel’s films that have Spider-Man, either.

There may be some opportunities for Marvel to benefit financially from the Sony films, with payments tied to certain box office milestones. The financial relationship is likened by sources to the kind of compensation structure a producer would receive.

Marvel had originally wanted to buy back Spider-Man from Sony. But its resulting partnership, which was in the works since October, is just that — an arrangement that enables both Sony and Marvel to mutually benefit at the box office by having Spider-Man appear in their movies.

The deal actually benefits both sides significantly.

Sony needed to breathe life into its “Spider-Man” franchise; by lending its character to Marvel, it has a way to generate more exposure for its bigscreen hero. Doing so also creates some serious goodwill among Spider-Man fans, who have wanted to see the character become part of the Avengers.

Marvel now gets access to one of the comicbook company’s most popular characters — it already controlled the rights for TV, merchandise and other platforms, but the holy grail for Disney has lately been film, where it has been able to launch franchises that impact the bottom line of all of its various divisions.

Character crossovers across studio films are virtually unheard of and have been considered too cost prohibitive in the past. They’re so rare that Marvel and Fox cast different actors to play Quicksilver in “The Avengers: Age of Ultron” and “X-Men: Days of Future Past.”

But with Sony looking for a creative way to put a spotlight on its franchise, and Marvel so eager to get its hands on Spidey, Hollywood actually figured out a way to work together for once….

The studio is still moving forward with the Spider-Man villain-centric “Sinister Six,” and “Venom” spinoff, as well as a film that features female characters in the “Spider-Man” universe. “The Amazing Spider-Man 3″ has been cancelled. While Marvel’s Kevin Feige is involved with Sony’s new “Spider-Man” films, he is currently not expected to be creatively involved with the spinoffs, sources say.
http://variety.com/2015/film/news/details-spider-man-appear-in-sony-and-marvel-movies-1201429039/

Pretty sure that when Disney bought Marvel, it was very keen to get Spiderman in the films – would have been surprised if Sony would have relinquished all rights but it was only a matter of time before there was some kind of deal.

The high school thing's a real problem with a live-action, franchised Spider-Man.  Unless you really commit to Harry Pottering a load of films in quick succession, he's too old in the space of a couple of outings.

Yeah, that's a good point about that kind of setting.

[Alberon]

But presumably Marvel must have some creative input into the Sony Spider-Man films They wouldn't just let them do anything that might potentially harm the bloated cash cow that is the MCU.

[Tiny Poster]

If Kevin Feige is producing them, having more control than the clueless Avi Arad, then they have a strong chance of improving significantly.

[Ignatius_S]

But presumably Marvel must have some creative input into the Sony Spider-Man films They wouldn't just let them do anything that might potentially harm the bloated cash cow that is the MCU.

There will be creative input – the next Spiderman film, I believe is being produced by the head of Marvel Cinema and his team. This makes sense, rather than being a necessity.

With what you said, I think the other way round would be better - Sony has the rights, not Marvel; it’s not up to the latter (or rather Disney) to dictate what Sony can or can’t do. Both parties have something to gain by this deal and if Sony did do something, for instance, to damage the Spiderman brand, it’s shooting itself in the foot. I don’t think Marvel have too much to worry about there, but there are going to be clear benefits working together to maximise profits make the best damned films possible.

[Don_Preston]

Screw that, gimme Takuya Yamashiro!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jG-xuLDhXLU&list=PLU5_9iBqQdzbz_E1C66M1Cbyhf1pKZqr6#t=935

This van chase scene with Samson must be included.

[Ignatius_S]

If Kevin Feige is producing them, having more control than the clueless Avi Arad, then they have a strong chance of improving significantly.

Yup, I would certainly go along with that.

[greenman]

Rather than going black maybe Italian?

http://vimeo.com/42254051

[Leo2112]

For more cheesy Marvel based cheap action you should check out Fantastic Four from the 1990s. Classic stuff.

It will be difficult for any rebooted FF to ever better this - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RPcpD07LzGU

[Delete Delete Delete]

It will be difficult for any rebooted FF to ever better this - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RPcpD07LzGU

Big fan of Roger Cormans work, directed or produced. I've been collecting the Us releases of Roger Cormans cult classics and have yet to be disappointed. If your into B-movies and low budget movies he is the undisputed king. There is no Genre he won't milk. Looking at my shelf you have Rock N roll high school, futuristic death Race, Star Wars Rip offs, Jaws Rip Offs, Alien rip offs, Chase movies, Gangster movies, sword and sorcery, classic horror. This is one of my favorite Corman related clips.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YXTmWsD-p98