It has finally happened...
Cool news, though it sounds legally complicated. Hopefully that doesn't bite them in the ass down the line....
it was gonna happen sooner or later--if nothing else Sony owning the film rights means they can charge Marvel for their own character!
Now if they just do something worthy of Spidey--Sam Rami's Spider-Man 2 came out a while ago...
Yes!!! Civil War dude... freaking Civil War! Love that story line... no Garfield though? He's awesome as Peter Parker.
Lol worthy of Spider Man 2? Easy.
Spiderman 2 was great for what was comic book movies back then. Now, how does it compare to any of the Marvel Cinematic University movies? Spider man is one of my favorite comic book characters... up there with X Men, the hulk and Iron Man. I am not even a Thor or Captain America fan but I was a big fan of how marvel did those movies... thor 2 admittedly less.
THe amazing spider man 2 was pretty good, even though they shoe horned a lot of villians in and had pete dealing with too much love stuff. It didn't have the same weight going through the entire film that Spider Man 2 did but it was a movie I was glad to see.
Whoever the new spider man is, should not be a celebrity... it should be a funny very flexible guy
Interesting...in the end, what Sony did was admit that no one can do Marvel better than Marvel. Now, let's hope that the goobers at 20th Century Fox wake up and smell the chronic.
Its encouraging that they were able to come up with an amicable deal with Sony. Negotiations with Fox have not gone so well. I was just looking at an article the other day that was discussing the fact that Marvel is completely ending the Fantastic Four comic to undercut any support for Fox's upcoming film, and has forbidden their writers from creating any new characters in the X-men pantheon, because Fox could use them. Also how there were no toys for Days of Future Past, because the toy rights belong to Marvel, and they weren't going to support the Fox films. http://collider.com/marvel-fights-fox-cancels-fantastic-four/
Spider-man 2 is easily among my top 5 superhero movies ever, and definitely my favorite Spidey film to date. I'm not a fan of either one of the Amazing Spider-man movies. It will definitely be interesting to see how Marvel decides to introduce him into the cinematic universe, though.
On the flip side, though, without Fox's X-men films, and Sony handling Spider-man, the Marvel Cinematic Universe would probably have never come into being, as it was the success of those films that opened the door for Marvel to be able to make their own studio. so on the one hand, I'm glad that Sony and Fox licensed those rights when they did, but on the other hand, it would be cool to see all of Marvel's characters come home, now that they have a home to come to.
I agree...without Fox, Columbia and Sony, Marvel Studios probably never would have come into being. Unfortunately, nothing in this life is free and Marvel is finding out now what the price is for having had to license the film rights "outside the house" in order to get their characters on the big screen.
Marvel has also killed off Wolverine in the comics in a bid to get the X-men back...as he is their most popular character. However, the fact that Fox has already begun casting "young & hot" actors for the X-men reboot probably is signaling that Marvel will have to pry the X-kids out of Fox's cold, dead hand with a Uru hammer.
Marvel, in the meantime, is lucky that some of their properties came back home. Columbia gave up Daredevil, Elektra and the Ghost Rider (which is why the DD show at Netflix was greenlighted). And--in the midst of his legal troubles--Wesley Snipes had to give up the rights to Blade and the Black Panther. Ironically, the Blade movies were originally done with New Line, which means that, now, Time Warner owns at least three Marvel films since WB took over New Line some years ago.
As far as Spider-Man goes, I'm hoping they'll do Miles Morales in lieu of Peter Parker since Andrew Garfield's been let go from the franchise.
Great news, interesting movie I like.
Spider Man 2 is still really, really superb. In fact, I'd go as far as to say that the train sequence is still the single best superhero action sequence ever created (the second best superhero action sequence is the plane sequence from Superman Returns). Spidey 2 (and maybe X2) are the only pre-Marvel films to really be on the same kind of quality level as the current Marvel films.
I would say Rami's Spider-Man 2 and X2 actually exceed many of the current Marvel Films. I've enjoyed all the Marvel Films so far (Ok, I didn't really enjoy Iron Man 3. Or Thor 2).
One thing about both of those films--they are both the center films of trilogies that got derailed in act III by studio interference. Spidey 3 was supposed to be Lizard (Why ELSE do you think Curt Connors was hanging around for two films) and Harry Osborn. Studio insisted on Venom and Sandman, Rami got pissed and basically made a crap film to take it out on the studio. X3, Singer got annoyed at studio interference and actor interference (Oscar Winner Halle Berry demanding to be team leader... Hey, Halle, go nail Storm's accent and we'll talk) on his plot and left, taking James Marsden with him, leaving Brett Ratner with a partially completed film, partially completed script, a bunch of studio demands and a large chunk of his production time gone. Kinda like how Dark Knight Rises just didn't work without Joker (But Nolan should have re-cast. He had no problem replacing Katie Holmes with Maggie Gyllenhall. Just... re-cast!).
While X3 is, on the whole, a bit crap, I'm still surprised that Ratner managed to get ANTHING out of it. It has a few individual scenes that are actually really decent.
The thing about X2 and Spidey 2 is that they are great films on their own. I love the current Marvel films, but a lot of them are enhanced specifically by the shared universe angle - eg, even a lacklustre Marvel film still has a certain momentum thanks to the 'bigger picture'.
Sometimes that's debatable--personally I feel the Avengers tie-in stuff weakens Iron Man 2, which is a revenge story between Tony and Ivan. Black Widow is there so we'll know who she is for Avengers and Fury? Um, Happy Hogan also worked for Howard Stark--Tony could talk to him about his dad. Fury has no need to be in that movie other than to set up the spin off. Which, again, to me is 15 minutes of film that has nothing to do with the core story.
And, of course, there's now questions. At the end of Avengers, Tony drives off with Banner at the beginning of a beautiful bromance. In IM3, Tony tells the story to a napping Banner, which begs the question. Banner works for Tony. Why wasn't he helping out in IM3? Guess he's in New York? As good as Cap: Winter Soldier is, again, where's Tony? Oh, right, he blew up his armor and lives in Cali--where he's busy building Ultron, I guess. Hawkeye was probably out of country on a mission suitable for his lack-of-talent.
(Nothing screams Hawkeye is useless like his double arm guard... worn by an actor who paid no attention to his archery coach. I just laugh at Hawkeye's trick shots, because it's so **** obvious Jeremy Renner has no clue what to do with a bow.)
Personal opinion. :-)
Lol you know how sometimes there is no telling people their favorite movie has issues. Don't continue reading because im gonna list my issues with Spider-Man 2
I went back and watched some scenes from Spiderman 2.
Dr. Oct almost kills peter twice (1throwing a car at his blindside and throwing him 30 feet against a wall) but wants his help getting spiderman?
Washing your spider man outfit at a laundry mat?
Violinist playing spiderman theme song?
Apparently pulling the plus required super strength?
His powers are like Superhero Erectile Dysfunction... he just doesn't believe in himself and they go away? HIs webbing, his vision, his strength and dexterity.
FRUMPY Mary Jane
While this movie has some beautifully done cinematography and lots cinematic moments
All I want is Spiderman to come into his own and I think Marvel can make that happen.
Iron Man 2 was a weak finale that let it down and it was really just to get avengers on track.
Captain America 3 is sounding more like Avengers Civil War
While I liked X men first class and DoFP, i'd love Marvel to back at the helm of X men.
The complaint that the Marvel films were wasting time setting up the Avengers was only really a negative thing for me before the Avengers actually came out. Once that film came out and I loved it, then they basically had permission to do all the world building they wanted, and it retro-actively made me pretty much OK with the 'wasted time' in Iron Man 2.
Certainly, if the Avengers had been terrible, then it would have meant all that world building was indeed a waste of time.
Sure, they're utterly strangely paced films with weird half-stories. But the mistake is thinking of the Marvel films as individual films in the first place. Just because they happen to be shown in cinemas doesn't really mean they have much in common with anything else at the cinema - they're making an on-going serial, not a series of movies.
Whether you like that or not is another matter, of course.
I like Raimi-Spidey 2 (and 1 to a degree) as fairly self-contained superhero films about a young, flawed hero who doesn't have an all-star supporting team. Sure, he's a bit whiny/emo/Toby Maguirey, but it's part of the story.
I also like most of the Marvel films (like Triem I'm not sold on Iron Man 3, I thought Cap 2 a bit naff, and I haven't actually watched Thor 2 yet), but the weaker ones definitely benefit from the shared universe and their contributions to the ongoing story.
But I think there's a limit to how many superheroes you can have in one ensemble universe, and the limit on how many is effective in a single film must be smaller still. Avengers pushes that limit, Days of Future Past exceeds it in places. I actually wouldn't want a film featuring Avengers + Spidey + X-Men + etc even if such a thing were likely, because it'd be asking too much to care about that many characters, and they wouldn't have anything to do except refuse to assemble, eventually assemble, fail a bit then work as a team a bit. As Triem points out, merging universes causes similar issues - you start wondering where was that guy when this guy was in trouble, etc.
So I'm happy to see things stay more or less as they are. Keep some heroes in their own series, with no connections to the shared universe! Give people like Edgar Wright an entirely separate hero to do something interesting and different with! Have somebody other than Marvel Studios doing everything so that sometimes the results are different! Emo, occasionally cringeworthy spidey for all!
See I think a movie with all of those things crossing could work if they do it in the same way the comics and the animated movies did. DoFP was a Charles and Magnus movie with tie ins for wolverine. Everyone else was just fluff. Some of animated shows would have episodes heavy on 1 character, but other times the conflict is the bigger driver. I know the idea of having a war movie with a battle that goes on for a 1/3rd the film would be out of the norm but at this point do you need to keep reminding us of Tony Stark being the rich, charming jerky guy? Or can I get Iron Man in his God Busting armor?
You're kinda coming back to my earlier point, Michael, in that what Marvel are doing isn't really making movies. They're making a serial. You can potentially get away with The Avengers having a couple of characters with no progression, IF they also have their own standalone movies to flesh them out.
Days of Future Past didn't work so well, precisely because the spin-offs have been awful, and have only been about Wolverine. So after 4 ensemble X Men movies, we still have NO idea about Storm as a character, for example. She's just a walking superpower.
Equally, if Daredevil shows up in Avengers 3 as an extended cameo, that could work - because he's got an entire Netflix show to give him depth. You don't have to do it all in one film, once you go down the serial route.
The problem, of course, is that you're still tied to movie release schedules and these productions being insanely complex, so it's not like you're delivering the episodes on the same schedule as, say, a comic book or TV show. Narratively, the Marvel movies fit into TV/comic structure perfectly. It's why watching them back-to-back on bluray is actually quite satisfying, because it all flows together rather than each one being 1-2 years apart.
In regards to serials and TV shows. Yeah, a TV show or (movie) serial can focus on a character for an episode, but that's six-to-twenty-six episodes in a year. Let's use 13 as a midpoint. Marvel has released 10 movies in 7 years...
As far as focusing on minor characters goes, with the slow pace and high budget of a film, oh, and the fact that Avengers 2 is a $100 Million film and $150 million in paycheck for Whedon and his seven principal actors... And $50-****ing millon of that goes to RDJ, well no **** wonder it's TONY creating Ultron. They will shove as much Stark at you as they can--gotta get your money's worth of your 10 days of RDJ shooting.
Michael, when I am on a comp, not phone, and feel like being verbose, I shall rebut some specific Spider-Man 2 points.
However, the above goes back into my issues with Iron Man 2. Nick Fury is only in that movie to talk Avengers. Yeah, there's that scene where Nick and Tony talk Daddy Howard Stark, but, guess what? Happy Hogan, loyal bodyguard worked for Howard. Happy could have had that heart to heart with Tony, which would have been a nice character focus on a minor character. But Nick could heart to heart, then remind Tony about the importance of the Avengers movie, er, Initiative.
Which isn't needed in the story of Ivan vs. Tony. Ivan thinks he's the hero. In his mind he's all, "My name is Inigo Montoya. you killed my father. Prepare to die."
@Simon maybe these movies aren't doing a good job for the uninitiated when it comes to giving backstories on the characters or character development but most of the movies are doing fan service. I like storm's character and she has had some interesting story lines but these ensemble movies aren't necessarily world building as they are highlighting things in the world. I don't want or need origin movies or motives for every single character. Was Hawkeye a flat character? yes. Was storm and Colossus flat characters? yes.
I think DoFP did very well because it reset much of the bullshit that was established in previous films. I think X men first class was criminally underrated in the pantheon of X men movies. The original 3 x men movies I have no interest in watching. I sat down and tracked down the pilot for Generation X(90s tv show) and watched that and would watch that again before I watch the first 3 x men movies. I'm glad they happened(the first 2 anyways) but I've moved on from them.
I don't see movies as needing to be contained stories in instances where the the movie is set in is bigger universe. It can be a serialized TV effort that you see in theaters but that's what fits these iconic characters. Every movie shouldn't be a studio debate on a reboot or continuation or a spin off. Marvel plans out more then doing a simple trilogy. Fox has fixed Xmen and Im glad sony is going to listen on Spiderman. When I heard about all of the spider man spin offs, I almost cried. Aunt Mae was getting a spin off
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!