Why Disney Won't (And Can't) Buy Back Spider-Man 

I have a question why does'nt sony make a new deal

You were wrong on the initial part of the deal Marvel and Sony made. The deal that made it so that Sony would have to make a new Spider-Man movie every 5 years wasn't until around 2009 after Disney bought Marvel that Sony had to make a new Spider-Man movie every 5 years. There are conflicting sources with who went to who for this deal, as some people say that it was Disney that offered Sony, others say it was Marvel, and the same with Sony. At around that time Sony wasn't doing too good, so the deal was renegotiated so they would get back the merchandising rights, and the TV productions. I only know this because of the fact that Spectacular Spider Man couldn't be continued because Sony had lost the TV production rights when the deal was renegotiated. In short words Sony had it all with no issues before 2009, and only afterwards did they have restrictions on the movie deals.

Spiderman isn't a video game hero though. He's a comic book hero. You wouldn't call Mario a comic book hero since there are Super Mario comics would you?

Today is the day that spiderman has been taken away from Sony and now joins marvel. I ammmmmm soooooooo gassed that you are wrong

No Wolverine is

Not really, if they don't make a deal it is because they didn't feel the need to. Unless sonys film devision suddenly starts doing really well, they will eventually be sold and the rights transfer back to marvel. So Disney just waits and reaps the merchandising profits in the meantime.

and that maked more problems in the process really

Saleem Peterson their lawyers will figure it out

They could've done it, but they're making plenty of money off merch.

@@rmat1291 Well, its starting to at least getting improved again, slowly but improving

Marvel: Give me Spiderman or I’ll put some dirt in your eye.

🤣🤣🤣

Rent?

Give me rent

This meme is on every Spiderman video and I live it

“They can’t and they won’t”

They can't. The venom verse is in no way connected to the MCU, and the continuity would suck

I said this before but if they were allowed to make a 3rd mcu Spiderman movie that ended Peter's ark people would probably be a lot more calm about all this

Ethan Freeman EXACTLY

@@Jzombi301 because if the 3rd mcu Spiderman movie ended his ark people would probably be more calm about this I mean I'm sure some people would still be upset but I guarantee that people would be far more calmer about this because at least the 3rd movie would've gave him a full on conclusion to his character

one man Kevin Fiege..he literally turned Avengers around.. Imagine if he gets his hands on Spider-Ma(I meant by full control).

@@a.v.s.c9150 well…good thing he’s wasn’t, bc that would of meant no Spider-Man 3 having a multiverse with toby and Andrew…but I know what you mean, Kevin fiege is a genius and Spider-Man could be EVEN more epic if Sony wasn’t holding them back (to a certain extent, but they also did give us “Spider-Man into the Spider-Verse”)

10000% agree, the spiderman game alone should show why sony is better off with spiderman

@@Mel0nMel 😳😳😳 have you not seen Spider-Man homecoming, Spider-Man far from home…wow Tom Holland is amazing btw…literally how to loose respect for someone lol

@@Mel0nMel Guys who work on Sony's game and animation movie are different from guys who work for Spider-Man live action movie...

He is for me. Seeing him in the last two Avengers movies was the most fun and glee I ever had in any movie recently. But I don't blame Sony for doing this, even though I still fear they might screw it up on their own again.

@@michaelstrong5383 Well, we only have to wait and see, they should learn some things from Spider-Verse

@@michaelstrong5383 Tobey is the reason for me. I love Sam Raimi's trilogy, but I also like Tom as my second. I also like the 90s animated series.

@@TayoEXE For me it's: The Spectacular Spider-Man Tobey Maguire Tom Holland The 90's cartoon Into the Spider-Verse

but the Spidey from the mcu has barely anything to do with the character, as is in fact the problem several characters in the mcu has

That movie has got to be the most underrated film of the Spider-Man films.

My favorite in the trilogy

I though Spider Man 1 and 3 are both equal 9/10's, Spider Man 2 was clearly the best though.

He'll think it's a cinematic masterpiece when you fix this damn door.

*implying andrew garfield's spider-man movies were another mistake* "I'm sorry that just isn't the answer we were looking for"

😂❤️

Good god THAT'S why he died :/

Oh sh*t didn’t think abt it that way...

More like a dad not uncle

parker luck :/

He died for the people he loved not only spiderman that's like saying he said fuck his family and died for Peter

Underrated

Disney would still have the Death Star if they didn't try to adjust the deal. 🤷‍♀️

12% of a plan.

Disney is dutch confirmed!!

cant think of a name nice grammar

*what*

XxLittleGuvnorxX he wouldn't be devastated

Stan's daughter didn't like Disney

Thank god he is dead but he did his part... He can rest in piece with the other legends.... Let the other birds take the rest of the scraps.... Hahahah

@@PnkSamurai00 why would you say that? Why are you glad he's dead!

Zedd You literally play Minecraft

Merch had nothing to do with the deal though. Disney already owned the merch rights and will continue to do so either way.

Hitmonkey I'm saying Disney is already making bank off of spiderman. And the fact that they want 50% of the movie profit is crazy because they're already making a lot off the merch

@@jimjam3869 But again merch has nothing to do with the deal. The deal itself also has to benefit them or why would they do it? No studio is going to continue to make $billion movies for a rival studio for the sake of 5%, be real for 2 minutes. Far From Home made $1.1b and Marvel only got $50m of that despite being the ones who made the movie. The deal clearly didn't work for them but changing it didn't work for Sony.

@@jake27990 Merchandise does matter though. Sony is paying for the movie which essentially gives Disney free advertising on a standalone spiderman movie. Just because it's not written in the agreement doesn't mean that it doesn't play into negotiations.

@@ThePuredragon Nope. Disney already owned the merch rights and continue to now the deal is ended. It played no part in the deal and is irrelevant to it. Also Disney offered to split costs so that argument is void.

Bet they're regretting right now lol

Did you come up with that comment all by yourself? Or steal it from the countless others who couldn’t come up with something more original? Be honest now

Logan Gun Woah woah woah fella just cuz people use something unoriginal don’t mean you gotta make a fuss about it

@@logan6034 you like little boys👍

Derek Bolingbrook not really, not into that kind of thing. The Boys though, now that’s a damn good show. Highly recommend 👍🏻

you're gonna get a whole lot of spiderverse shows thats for sure

@@jessec.6876 Spider Verse is gonna be written by a guy Who created Doom film...

Achusttin I’m hopping the spider-verses movie and tv shows it spawns live up to the movie. I could see everything go downhill bit at the same time i could see it rise above marvel even. Sony will ride the spider-wave if venom and spider-verse do well. Also that next Tom Holland film, but I guess that's still connected to the mcu.

Let's hope for a brigth future! Spiderverse 2 will be directed for the same guy who did Avatar, so...

unlikely unfortunately, sony exces didnt interfere with spiderverse because they didnt think it would get money, now they've seen how well received it was you can be sure that avi arad or some asshole like him is going to try and fuck with it. In 4 years we'll see.

hehehe, you know who made miles morales in the movies AND the games? SONY - likely not intended by Disney OR marvel

But Spiderman is Marvel's and Marvel belongs to Disney so technically speaking youre wrong.

@@theinfantmetroid ok it seems you dont understand company rights. Let me explain it: back when comic books were starting to become a big deal in the movie industry, companies started buying rights off the comics: sony bought the spiderverse, fox bought xmen and fantastic 4, and marvel studios bought everyone else. Then in late 2000s/early 2010s, marvel was going bankrupt and Disney bought them. Then around 2015/16, disney bought fox, making 2/3 of the marvel comic characters back together. All in all, Disney never owned Spiderman, and Sony still has the rights to the spiderverse

Disney never owned Spiderman, but they own Marvel who did. If Marvel were to buy back Spiderman, it would be with Disney money, and the asset would ultimately belong to Disney even if under the legal name of Marvel.

@@MetalSandman999 ik. Just making a point cuz everyone is upset that spiderman was Disney. It was marvel's, who sold the movie rights to sony

@@theinfantmetroid that is like saying the guy building my house owns my house despite me paying

me

Marvel is split between Sony and Disney that’s why on marvel Sony movies they have the old marvel logo

Dominic Delgado not how it works

@@dominicdelgado1654 did you watch the video

@@dominicdelgado1654 nevermind you clearly didn't and can't accept the fact that Marvel sold the film rights a long time ago

You see the bigger picture bro 🤟🏻

oh shiz you got a point. But then again, disney doesnt really like to make lgbqt characters

@@YaBoiDoi but they've had the first gay character, like, ten times!!!11!

@@emmyciyat9904 did you know they've just released their first gay character?!?!?!?!?!??!???!?

You just have to be that guy, being a whiny triggered snowflake because of someone who's gay and hurt you so bad.

You do realize that those movies you mentioned were great because Sony had little to no executive meddling during them, right?

Michael Strong I’m aware. The last one I mentioned being their most recent movie so maybe they’ve learned their lesson.

@@RossJames96 I doubt it. From what I've heard, there was more creative freedom in their animated films than their live action films (for better or for worse).

Michael Strong Well either way I honestly wasn’t impressed with Marvel Studios Spidey. Lacked depth.

Spiderman from Sony are more rememberable,because they are not just cash grab marketing tool. "WITH GREAT POWER COMES GREAT RESPONSIBILITY", they take higher risk with darker tone about life and emotional investment. Marvel formula for comic book heroes and Starwars: -Make joke -Make joke -Make joke -CGi light hearted color -Make joke -a bit of drama - Uninteresting villain, a carbon copy of the main hero, or some forgetful villain. -Make joke -Make joke -Sequel bait for other movies You saw what happened to Starwars when they tried that formula? Star Wars is supposed to be space drama, not a comedy sketch movie.

You can solve that easy. Spider-Man just got exposed, so he's been imprisoned or whatever for defying the Sokovia Accords or something. I mean yeah, it sucks, but that doesn't mean you can't continue the story.

You know that sony made the movie right So they can continue making the story without the MCU characters

Well at least this comment isn't biased... Oh wait

@@aguy1272 He's biased because he doesn't suck Disney's dick? What are you trying to say?

@@noblesseux That's not what I heard in the video, lol. Guy in this vid is still biased.

@@drpepper4761 says the guy called Donald duck, like if u gonna hate Disney then why is your name Donald duck 😂😂

@@aguy1272 Just because i hate Disney being greedy doesn't mean i hate every single character they have created. By your logic you're not allowed to dislike anything that's happening in Star Wars because of your clone trooper picture. Why does my username matter anyways?

Non-comicbook fans don't like superheroes

@@christianalexander579 points towards star wars,points towards Marvel's Agents of SHIELD,points towards Regular show,points towards Wonder Pets

stan lee: *don’t make me come down there you punk*

Wow, i guess you don't know a lot about the history of Marvel Comics, then.

Yeah, he was the last person to keep it in order after Steve and Jack died.

You realize Stan Lee was just a guy, right? He was a greedy opportunist who would do anything for a quick buck, he’s not a god.

Thank You 3000 Made what all possible? Subpar films shit out by a monopoly? Yeah, that sure makes him a god. I can’t wait for superhero fatigue. Both Marvel and DC are trash.

Say that to Spider-Man 3 and The Amazing Spider-Man. They made 2 good movies with the character. That's it. There hasn't been faith in Sony's Spidey for a very long time. I'm just waiting for it to blow up in their face. Then despair as they fucked the character again.

True Sony made Spider-Man 1&2,Spectacular Spider-Man, Ps4 Spider-Man and into the Spider-verse. Sony easily deserves spider-man more than Disney does.

True

Eh, I think MCU Spider Man was the Best cinematic Spider Man we've ever got

@@i.5625 Sony didn't make PS4 Spider-Man

@@ФилиппЛомакин-я4з no

Amu Cog yeah

He needs him to defeat Carnage in Venom 2 and im going to see it made by Sony im hyped to see venom 2

Haha

I was searching comments for entertainment and you Sir just made my day

If you don't understand that quote, you're missing out.

SinisterzSanctuary Spider-verse > Rami movies

@@SinisterzSanctuary this might be controversial but in my opinion raimi movies are overrated

I mean I don’t blame them really the old line was 95/5

@@imperfectninja6291 and merchandising which they own 100% of the rights. Sony would be stupid to accept that deal

Hridhay Kiran no they wouldn’t exactly because marvel made billions off merchandise alone of course movie sales were higher but marvel is clearly a high producer for long term sales and the strength of the characters future I would have taken that and let them do all the work

@@ericblackwell70 you are pretty lost

@@ericblackwell70 they are talking about the Spiderman merchandising rights which Sony sold to Disney after buying the complete rights for Spiderman. Marvel is gaining no profit with the Spiderman merchandises, Disney is. Disney made a deal with Sony in 2015 that Sony would give 5% of their Spiderman films' profit to Disney while Disney earns 100% profit from the merchandising rights. Now Disney is asking 50% Spiderman film profit which Sony owns + 100% Spiderman merch profit which Sony sold to Disney. Disney has bought the entire rights for Marvel Entertainment. Disney is now the one that pulls the strings of Marvel.

I think this is the crux of the issue. The MCU lost its two biggest draws (Iron Man and Cap), are likely retiring others (Thor), and face an uncertain future with new characters (to the universe) and fatigue. The ONE asset that has staying power is Spiderman. This was a tactic from a position of weakness in my opinion, and Sony held firm. I enjoy Spidey in the MCU as much as any other nerd, but I think films like Spiderverse show Sony is capable of still producing, just got to trust the talent to make it happen.

@@coastersandculture2125 I know right, di$ney just want another money making shit for their mcu. Also tom holland's spiderman is BLAND as fuck. Sony did a better job at Spiderman movies with Sam Raimi's Trilogy and Into Spiderverse.

@@Therizinosaurus yeah even Amazing spideman movies shows spiderman properly, except the stories are bad their but not spiderman. Tom is just worst spiderman.

Sony:no u dont get my money go rob a fucking bank if u want monwy

@@mvnsif exactly Disney is a little money hungry shit

Red Raider Math expert here- you are correct !

didnt he say 50/50 for merch aswell?

yungrupert Nope Disney still gets 100 of merchandise

So Disney wants 150% then. 100% for merchandise and 50% movie profits, I'm no match expert myself but that's 150%

It's their character

america government is really easily tampered with money. and it you got enough time you can put your people on the anti-trust board and court of appeals to eliminate needless arbitration

Bobo Boy nice alliteration

Monopoly, don't you win by owning all competitors properties...is what cable companies are saying in their regions they control.

How can this be a monopoly, when DC is still out there ? If Disney gets each and every superhero in every universe, only then can it be called monopoly.

A monopoly is the exclusive possession or control of the supply of or trade in a commodity or service

YEAH, lets give more power to a company that has so much influence that it shook the entire 2D animation industry when it shut down its 2D department.

Yeah, this channel is a corporate shill for di$ney. I can say that to every studio owning any IP.

I'm not entirely sure I understand the comment, but I had the ability to make the likes 69, so I did.

@@deathrayman8074 if u made it 69 u understand it,thats all that matters

lmao the guy has again shown he's an ignorant moron with his shitty takes.. "Sony is on its last legs" like wtf! they also have the most successful spidey videogames ip, the whole spiderverse and venom is doing more than fine, did he coincidentally forgot that Holland spiderman is also of Sony making, not Disney! Lastly, just go watch the spiderman cartoons they have on Disney+, they're boring, generic and quite simply fucking ass!!

Its silly aint it, both Disney/Marvel and Sony are a bunch of kids.

@@Wolverine-ky9gk but Sony does better with him

LOL

@@iangathogo9750 yes they can make better stand alone spiderman films but they have to try and keep this spider man to last longer then the other versions

El Plebe Uchiha I dislike when someone says a multimedia conglomerate is “greedy”. That doesn’t give any insight into what happened. Duh a corporation’s goal is to make money, that’s the same with any capital venture ever. It’s the process of HOW they plan to make money that is important. It isn’t just the one Scrooge Mcduck deciding to be greedy. The decision was probably made through various board meetings and stuff deciding what factors to consider and how much each factor should weigh into the final decision.

@@midshipman8654 Disney is clearly greedy they want to have a monopoly without passing the legal boundaries into monopoly territory. A company can be greedy they clearly didn't need 50% when they were getting all the merchandise and sony was only making money off the movie

Robert Grant my point is that “greedy” is a prerequisite. What matters is the extent and how. Why would Disney NOT Press their advantage? It’s not a charity. They are not getting much PR directly from it. I’m not saying this is a good thing, I’m saying that calling them greedy is redundant. Disney could do a whole bunch of things that would be considered “nice”, but why would they?

Sony doesn’t own the merchandise rights marvel does

It makes sense. No matter what, Disney makes money off of merchandise, producing spiderman movies or not. The amount of money Disney made Sony with their workers is insane. A 50/50 split for how many people, effort, and money disney puts in sounds fair. You're including the merchandising as if that should be accounted, and not as if Disney already has that.

That's likely never gonna happen. Sony itself also a giant company, they wouldn't just let their competitor buy their company.

That Japanese government would never allow it, plus Sony already said they don't plan on selling part of their business , All their divisions are making big profits and they want to continue to grow them. Sony returning to form again and there doing it fast.

@@johndoughnuts what does the Japanese government have to Do with sony? It’s not a government run company so why would they care?

@@BlueTyphoon2017 Japanese law states that none of the businesses in thier country would be bought by a western company or any other foreign company that could buy them.

@@BlueTyphoon2017 Protecionism, there is a law in Japan that forbids foreign companies to buy japaneses ones

Yes

Pretty much

They made the deal once and Sony went full on bitch mode and pulled him out of the MCU

@sydneyhundre d Disney approached them with the fifty-fifty deal once and like after the one time it was discussed, Sony rejected harshly and pulled him out of the MCU and no Sony doesn't make the scripts idiot.

@@ericstorm6582 Lol you missed part of "Sony reject but still open to discussion" While Disney pulled out and calling Sony greedy hahahahaha

I know right!

Lets just forget how the first Spiderman movie started the entire comic-movie age. 🤷‍♀️

Violet Fyxe it was actually x-men 2 years prior and realistically it was blade who did it first

@@violet-trash you're dumb as fuck if you think that

Wrong. 🕵🏻‍♂️

Pretty fair considering Marvel does literally ALL the work All Sony has is an old piece of paper and a Lot of shitty spiderman movies They're literally draining from Marvel and the fans

But who gives a fuck about the fans

@@GetOverHer3 any mcu movies with just Spiderman (like homecoming) are still produced and made by Sony though

@@GetOverHer3 Sony Funds the entire movie. It's not fair for Marvel to take 50/50 when sony funds it all + marvel gets all the merchandising rights

Oof 69, can't like

Yeah

100%

Wait wait wait wait wait wait wait, they did WHAT? They made him a sidekick? When did this happen?

@@shiloh9557 iron man

Yeah they don't have creative control over that character and the only films they have are when he is a part of avengers who already had iconic characters so they don't necessarily need an another character to back shoved into the team especially one who they can't freely create standalone films with

how far back are we talking here?

Before 2008

@@unsaidrumble1790 eh, i think spider-man was pretty big for the cartoons and raimi films at the time

@@sonicjamal230 I was excluding the spiderman films

Also, if Sony did buy those characters, the MCU probably never would have happened.

Right? He literally describes how its Marvel/Disneys greed causing this and then basically went ''So in conclusion its Sonys fault''

It’s not marvel it’s disney

Kitten Hermit it’s not marvel it’s Disney

@@Dareenah Marvel is a Disney property now so it's pretty much interchangeable...

Kitten Hermit yeah basically all fanboys

if only so marvel can have all their characters back. I don’t like it either

@@sub-zero5433 I dont get why people want dc to be brought by Disney

@@safwanmustafiz3106 fr, that’s the dumbest shit I’ve ever heard. why should both the superhero giants be part of a monopoly

We only want Disney to buy Spider-Man not all of Sony

@@lovleen exactly

Completely agree, I don’t really like how every marvel character is being thrown into other films to the point where every marvel film is just becoming the avengers.

@@Happymonday2015 agreed, all of them need to have independent film franchises about their characters as well as the avengers, similar to the phase 1 of the MCU.

Agree Cuz Disney has nothing to do with this Character plus Sony was the one who made the movies not the MCU aka Disney 😒

yeah it is bad

i mean spider-man isnt sony's character where micky is disney's character :P

Creator is dead but the enterprise is still there and they are the heirs of it to say it somehow.

That's totally true. We basically have two villains duking it out.

@@MEDOBOLT, In that case, Spiderman isn't Disney's character either, it's Marvel's, more specifically Stan Lee and Steve Ditko's character. People sell rights and ownership of characters all the time.

That is how the blame game been going. Make good movies apparently it doesnt matter how much you mess up.

The 30% they asked seemed fair enough. It's 25% more than they got before. For a giant like Sony that money shouldn't matter much if Spider-Man movies make a billion in box office. But clearly it does. Disney isn't blameless here but neither is Sony.

@@mahchestro9144 Its so nice that you are comfortable with offering 30% of someone elses property away LoL. With a successful Venom and Spiderverse why would Sony change the agreement in Marvels favor? They dont need Marvel to push their own film agenda forward. If either of the two needs the deal it would be Marvel since they lost of their good heroes and have pushed Spiderman as the new Iron Man. Sony doesnt need the MCU so they have no reason to give away their stuff. And they arent the ones who tried to change the deal so of course they are blameless. The only way you can assign blame to them is if you are one of those people who believe thag Sony has to take L's for the sake of your entertainment.

@@shihoblade Someone elses propery? Give away? Sir... are you on some tough medicine. If you hadn't realised by now. The MCU version of Spider-Man is entirely a Marvel concept. Sony had very little to do with that. And it worked. People were once again excited about Spider-Man after the disastrous Spider-Man 3 and The Amazing Spider-Man. The fact that they are done with the deal cause they can make more money on their own is gonna backfire. 2 great live action movies and 1 great animated movie isn't gonna change the shitty reputation Avi Arad has brought Spidey. Now it might continue and if they fail again. That might be just the last we'll see Spidey for a very long time. They had a sure thing with Marvel. They make billions for Sony. Even with the 30%. It would've been both financially and creatively more successful if they had taken the deal. Think about it like this. If they fail their next movie and it gets let's say... 500 million dollars. That will be the end. And no one has asked Sony to give away anything. The deal was fair to both parties. Sony sold their toy rights to Disney years ago so that's not the fault of Disney.

@@mahchestro9144 MCU Spiderman still belongs to Sony. He was on loan so yeah still their property. Far from home made a Billion so taking the deal would amount to 500 million anyway and they have no reason to pursue so hard. They can have Holland if they want him but they dont need him. Venom and the Spiderverse. Live action Miles or spider Gwen. They got tons of options that dont require Marvels help at all. Of course they rejected that pointless deal that greedy Marvel who already eats up Spideys merchandising suggested.

Underrated

Don't make me come down there you punks

Sony: Look at little Disney Jr, gonna cry? Disney: ...

a crab sings a song

@@chillastronaut5749 Sony : now dig on this

Me to.

no sony is step father

You mean when the step mom tries to get the fathers son saying the kid is hers 😂😂

Disney is the step dad that leaves in 50 years, when they become famous

@@kaistzar2831 Im tired of sony's bullshit they rip us off every goddamn day.

While spiderman real parents are angry up there.

Yeah that is why there is so many things Spider-Man movies and I've gotten rather sick of it

Same thing with Fantastic Four movies.

@@john-oh9cr tbh The mcu deal has made the mcu Spider-Man appear in more films then any other Spider-Man actor.

Yep same with X-Men & Fantastic Four. Marvel is the only company that can afford to care about quality over quantity when it comes to Marvel films.

@@lennywright5655 yeah that's why they release three films a year and had spider-man appear in 5 films within the span of 3 years.

This RU-vidr doesn't take psychology into fact. Lol

Well yeah that was the whole point in adding him to the mcu, it's a connected universe so I would be odd if other parts weren't mentioned

I beg to differ. How long is it since you saw the Tobey Maguire movies? He was absolutely terrible in the role. Partly outside of his control. He was just way too pathetic in those movies. His life was way too sad. He didn't even sound convincing as a Spider-Man. His villains in the first 2 movies were absolutely terrific and JK Simmons as J. Jonah Jamesson is basically perfect casting but other than that the Reimi trilogy had heaps of issues with their tone and overall arcs. These are my opinions but I just don't get why people keep praising Maguire for his subpar part in those movies. I think he absolutely sucked and was arguably the worst spidey we've ever gotten.

@@sindri1447 He being pathetic or having a sad life in the movies is not a problem from Tobey, but from the script, even then the script made total sense given the fact that they are, Idk, f*cking Spiderman movies, a depiction of how troublesome being a superhero can be from an ordinary guy with tons of responsabilities, exactly what the comics were about, exactly what made Spiderman, Spiderman. Not sure what your whining is about, because is not like the Raimi Trilogy were sad edgy movies, on the contrary, they were pretty light-hearted with tons of natural humor in them.

@@sindri1447 tell me you know nothing about spiderman without telling me you nothing about spiderman.

hkr006 True, but at the end of the day Marvel/ Disney is still the winner. Like he said in the video, the real money is made from merchandising which Disney makes 100% of. So even if Sony manages to make a Disney level success movie with Spider-Man... Disney is still making more money

@@nightshotz623 really? LMAO disney wins yeah ok buddy

χχχ -VIBE- ya... how don’t they? 😅

@@nightshotz623 Sony is worth more than Disney so who cares.

TheMaster TM not even close dude

Id like to direct you to erb Stan lee vs Jim Henson

Honestly I don't care as long as Spidey is put back where he belongs and we keep getting good films.

@Bobby Tawil Ruined Star Wars? They made one bad film, and even that one wasn't _awful._

@Bobby Tawil What? Solo was a blast and TLJ was great. I thought so anyway. I was referring to TFA. Which I happen to agree wasn't awful, but wasn't really fun or noteworthy as a Star Wars movie or even a film in general imo. And it was pretty much just A New Hope 2 in plenty of ways. I still wouldn't say that's enough to have "ruined a Star Wars". Hell, even if you don't like the new films, saying that they "ruin Star Wars" is a bit odd, as surely you'd still love the original films and maybe other material despite that.

@@melancholyentertainment Lol shut up you embarrassing your bloodline

Tbh it was alot was diffirent with Star wars mainly to do with Lucasfilm and the way they built that up and plus you can't say you shudder to think what they'd do cos we've seen what they'd do in homecoming & ffh which have had good success and plus I don't think Disney really gets that Involved in what marvel studios & Kevin feige is doing

As long as the main director doesn't start with "K" and ended with "athleen Kennedy", it definitely will be fine. To say the least

@@bocahdongo7769 Agreed she really didn't handle star wars well

Yes they messed up star wars but marvel have been doing well and if Disney had spiderman they could make a series like they did with wandavision or winter soldier

I'm sticking with the Marvel comics

True they are and I don't like the fact that some people blame Sony for this.

OneYuDBZSlayers yeah in comparison Sony pictures is a much smaller production studio so they need Spider-Man more than marvel do. So they have more of a reason to fight for this character

I agree There was no reason to renegotiate the terms with Sony. Spiderman far from home grossed so much money and become the highest selling Sony picture EVER. Disney Saw all that money Sony made and even though they got Millions from their first day 5% share of the sales they got greedy and thought they could split the profits with sony 50/50. Disney doesn't need the money from the Spiderman films they make more then enough off merchandising. Disney just back stabbed their fans by making an offer that Sony would never have excepted and then they announced the news that the deal fell through with Sony and painted them as the bad guys. Anyone who is actually keeping up with the facts on this news should see that it's all disneys fault and we shouldn't direct our anger towards Sony.

Disney doesn't need the rights to spiderman now if they didn't have the rights to the Avengers that would be a problem

6 $1+ Billion Movies in a year wasn't enough for Disney, they want everything

Yeah. Disney is greedy af and it's mostly their fault but the safer decision would be for Sony to accept it. It's a gamble as to whether or not the next film will do well but I'm hoping that it does and I have a feeling that they will do something really good that we weren't expecting

Malkhut a gamble that the next film is critically well received? Maybe. Gamble it will make money? I would say no.

It's like you're saying you want to sell your own good business to someone & you will end up getting nothing & that someone earns more than you.

@@Mark-xw5yt It's not a gamble at all. Their lowest grossing movie still made over $700 million. The only reason we didn't get an Amazing Spider-Man 3 was because Andrew Garfield personally pissed off Kaz Hirai.

@@Mark-xw5yt its probably going to meet expectations but at what cost? Imagine all the fans who enjoyed Spiderman teaming up with the Avengers having to see the same Spiderman act like nothing happened? And what about the children?! They are going to bother there parents asking why isn't spiderman in the next Avengers movie.

yeah that was just dumb

Ikr so dumb..but now they realized and want backsies...

@@Faustaine when did Sony try to get the merch rights back? As far as I'm aware Sony hasn't done anything like that.

@@entropy5995 they want backsies on everything. They want complete ownership of all Spiderman themed merch.

@@Faustaine so sony own merch now ?

BlueYoshiGirl don’t forget Boeing, Microsoft, Android, Intel, AMD and Nvidia.

And pornhub they own sooo many different major adult sites

@@rawvid9065 Pornhub is a smaller scale, but they're literally big enough that they can manipulate pornography laws in the UK and own pretty much every general porn site.

Don't even get me started on Google, Apple, Amazon, and Facebook

@@kohkisparten117 eh those aren't the best examples. in fact, AMD still exists due to the monopoly law. Remember in 2014 when their market price was literally $1 and they were making NO money? There are only two dexktop cpu and gpu manufacturers because they are so complicated to make, and they're constantly pushing the physical limits of silicon development. Its not like making a car or some clothes where you just need to know the general steps. You guys are kinda getting the law confused: you can legally make as much dollar money as you want you just cant OWN everything, as in smaller companies. There must be at least one competitor in every market, with a few exceptions (certain regional power and energy providers are monopolies) none of the companies you mentioned are anywhere close to a monopoly nor do they even own smaller companies outside of Microsoft and Google. Also, Android is owned by google and not its own separate nor "parent" company so im substituting that for you.

A logical allusion to Disney

that was nice and all but what about when he started playing Pink Matter towards the end god damnn

That part started playing the same time I read that

Funny Jamie Foxx was apart of that song.

Yes

Yes and no. They are att this moment in preproduction on Venom 2 and currently Spiderman is still partnerd whit marvel studios. If he leves, then he might be in Venom 3 (funny enough) or in a standalone movie (whit Tom Hollend), but this is al just a big IF.

Maybe As a 2nd part of an another reboot tho... Or as a part 3 of amazing Spiderman. Anything could be possible...

@@thehalobrony9050 I don't think so Sony will be able to get Tom Holland to sign for their movie. "Legal stuffs" and all you know... Cuz Disney were the one who casted Tom Holland as Spiderman.

GOD FORBID!!!!!!!!

Goodvillain 101 Thank you so much for saying this.

We must have the same mind set because I thought the exact same way with all of this madness

@Mathilda I'm sure the MCU can manage without Iron Spider, a.k.a. Stark's errand boy, a.k.a. Iron Man junior, a.k.a. Stark's Spiderboy.

@Mathilda So? MCU makes tons of money has tons of projects without Spiderman

@@goodvillain1015 I'm pretty sure SpiderStark can manage without the MCU.

Sony: "Not for sale" Disney:"Ok how much for Japan?"

@@grandor8852 And then ghost samurai invade Disney HQ.

Government would say no to monopoly People wants Disney to just buy song when Japan's Palace Grounds Once More Valuable than California.

**when sony gets 100 quadrillion dollars from 3rd spider man film** Sony: how much for disney?

@@corvocorvus9982 heh? What?

Spiderman belongs to marvel not sony

Bruh, I this is exactly what I was thinking. Especially when I look at them as companies, I understand that Spiderman belong to marvel I do. Word to Ol'Stan! But if we are talking about which company I trust more, Disney has been fucking up for a good while now (outside of Marvel) that I don't think will stop anytime soon so.... keep spidey where he is.

@@benwatkin7734 Spider-Man is an asset created by Stan Lee and Steve Ditko for Marvel, a company that was bought by Disney. Disney owns the image, idea and ability to create any sort of media *other than films/movies* representing Spider-Man as a character. Sony legally bought the rights to present Spider-Man in films/movies from Marvel before Marvel was bought by Disney to stop them from going under. That's my understanding anyway.

@@benwatkin7734 Saying the right to make Spider-Man films belongs to Marvel is like saying a house belongs to the builder, no matter who bought it.

@@kristinnkristinsson1369 okay fair enough it's just I think it's unfair that marvel can't use their biggest character freely in their biggest movie series of all time.

Only liked because of that

Oh the Harry Potter reference *applause*

@AdrFax oooooooof sad but true

At least Tom Holland wasn't eateen by a giant snake, I guess. XD

@@sexydictator3241 Tom Holland would be Lupin.

Wait. If sony now has the rights to spidey does that mean the have the rights to Tom playing spidey?

Its not at all ludacris. The studio is struggling why would they pass up an opportunity to spend less on a film. 🤷🏿‍♂️ considering how much more they'd make is they didn't have to keep rebooting

Jaylen Duncan The studio isn’t struggling, even the worst Spider-Man’s still made 700 million each

@@IncognitoSprax 700 million maybe alot to all of us and even you, but its probably not enough to keep a gigantic company like Sony afloat. Hell it's so bad that they considered selling what they have to Apple and gave merch right to Disney. If 700 million was enough they wouldn't make those decisions in the first place.

Well Disney will probably try for a Hostile take over of Sony now..

@@produceryoongi5962 700 mil only needs to keep Sony STUDIOS afloat, not the entire company. They break these things down into departments.

BlackGreninja1 you don’t know PepeLaugh

BlackGreninja1 too soon

Too soon bro

Either that or you have the bias

@@jrthe2nd494 I know right. Its funny how that works.

nah, sony is being petty

@@francisdelamerced5900 sony is being petty for not giving up half the money for their only franchise? That's ridiculous.

jayhartRIC marvel are literal gods they are the saviors for the movie industry i don’t care if they asked for 100% of the money honestly give them whatever the fuck they want

Exactly

@@robl0xgamer258 Marvel sold the movie rights of Spider-Man to Sony, so Sony owns all rights to spider man in the movies. It’s not about deserving or knowing spider man it’s about money and Sony paid for Spider-Man.

@@robl0xgamer258 I mean they didn’t boot spider man, they sold him because marvel was going bankrupt. Disney bought marvel long after that. I like the MCU and Disney movies, but I hate Disney as a company. That’s why I was more in favor of Sony than Disney.

Sony movies are kinda meh

Disney doesn't have complete control over the superhero landscape. DC makes superhero movies too that are fairly popular

Usaia Va'adrigi avatar reference?

@@claytoncarmine244 yes

Hahahaha

Disney-Marvel was literally doing all the work on the homecoming movies while Sony just sat on their asses and demanded money because they owned the rights. How does that seem fair to you? Plus if Sony keeps getting their way we're just gonna keep seeing half assed solo Spider-Man villain movies like Morbius and Venom just so Sony doesn't lose the rights to Spider-Man. Sony doesn't care about the fans at all. Those movies are literally just made to buy them time. I don't see how anyone can defend Sony they're literally the greediest company and stick their grubby hands in everything from videogames, televisions, movies, music, headphones, cameras, phones, batteries, computers, insurance, and banks. No other company does that shit and focuses on either hardware, software, or entertainment.

I want to live with harmony but not with what Disney is doing now with She-hulk and other shitty Disney+ shows I really hope they don’t ruin daredevil (I also want to be inside harmony)

@Mystique Dreamer Well I know nothing about the Eternals, but now Im super looking forward to seeing the movie, cause I know the MCU will end up doing something cool.

@Mystique Dreamer me and many others because it will introduce many cool concepts like deviants

@Thyme and Oregano yeah! But there’s also a new Guardians and Thor

@@anuvette ????

Right? It's not that these multi-million dollar characters existed, just waiting to be plucked and put in a movie. They didn't just magically appear as fan favorites. They could have been like Toy Story and make one of their biggest characters a piece of trash, and STILL made millions. OMG there is so much wrong with this video!!!!

True but they’ve been improving recently with Wonder Woman, Aquaman, and Shazam. And I’m actually interested in the Joker movie to see how Juaquin Phoenix portrays the Joker

@@cherrypie581 joker is rated r it's gonna be crazy

Uh hello? Aquaman and Shazam?

@@vadamsvengeance3219 Yes, Warner, and DC are getting better, but they could still drop the ball at any time now, and I hope that doesn't happen anytime soon.

yea but im happy they havent sold. I dont worry about them because theyve made amazing cartoons and good animated movies, so I think they'll eventually make another dark knight or wonder woman. Just give them some time and a few more mistakes lol. While i didnt really feel shazam (shazam and billy batson honestly seemed like totally different people), aquaman was badass

i think you kinda said it wrong. Shouldn't it be "I'm glad there are companies big enough NOT to take Disney's BS"?

@@happyburgerman9724 Either works, the idea is the same. Kinda like flammable and inflammable.

Well the state the Sony movie division is in, they're really not. This might finally end their misery.

@@nemanjajovanov keyword: "might". Fans are already pissed at Sony.

MGM should take some huge notes from this if they want to branch out, because their solo comeback hasn't exactly been stellar

So true and besides disney buys too much shit and ruins it.

@@vitocorleone4799 Can you please explain what Disney has ruined? Pixar seems to be doing fine, even if they are making too many sequels. Marvel is doing amazing with the MCU. They haven't really done anything with 20th Century Fox yet either. There is an argument that they ruined Star Wars after acquiring Lucasfilm but ruining one franchise does not warrant being labelled as a company who ruins whatever they touch. I hear people saying that Disney ruins everything a LOT and I'm not really seeing it. I just want to know what I'm missing.

Absolute Madness they ruined Star Wars

I hope Disney never gets Spider-Man back.

@@Seraserastria the ruined aladin

Ivan Morales. Remember when marvel owned spider man. Good times.

Ivan Morales. They’re also acting like Marvel doesn’t own Spider-Man in anything else.

@@thewalrus5198 it's like a car and you sell it. you don't own that car anymore. That's why marvel didn't have power cause they're owned by disney, they got paid already and do their job.

Thank you!

Right ?

Lol...brooo.....I can't believe he said that...u beat me too it by 5 seconds

Y'all have got to be kidding

That last sentence reminds me of feminists arguing

I think what he means it it wasn't actually their true aim. It was a stupid unreasonable deal, half of movie sales and all of merchandising? you would have to be crazy to accept that. If for some reason they did agree to it, I am sure Disney would be thrilled, But I bet they knew it wouldn't work. They want spiderman back in Marvel's possession so they can get all of the movie sales, and I guess the best way they came up with was to sever their deal and wait for sony to fuck it up again, fans to turn on them (already happening), and for them to either agree to the unreasonable deal or out right sell the rights to them.

It's not that they don't want it, because they obviously want more money. It's that they don't need it. Merchandise will always trump film profit. Especially when it's a kid-friendly, superhero franchise like Spider-Man.

sony animation is a very different department from sony pictures

@@deanmoriarty6015 They're different departments of Sony. Still the same company

@@deanmoriarty6015 So what? It's the *same* company.

@@ojigbo But they have completely different people. I'm my opinion I think DC Films makes nothing but garbage but I think that DC Entertainment makes some of the best hero animated series and films. They are both DC but different departments filled with different people.

Eh, it was decent but it can't cover the whole garbage Sony has Made with Spider Man aka TASM films

BadHiVal no, most of Tom Holland’s Spider-Man’s audience are young. If anything it would be detrimental.

With Carnage? Yes definitely! With Spider-Man? Eeeeeeh, not really. He's more of a family-friendly character.

@@bonsaigecko9153 well, it's being planned so...

How? Sony's Venom has literally no connection with this Spidey, that's shoe-horning of the highest levels. Maybe you should definitely work for Sony, you'd fit in with the rest of the "we have no fucking clue how storytelling works" committee.

Kanakalala🌺 I don’t think it would be with Tom Holland’s Spider-Man though. I’m not saying it would be terrible just that it would be bad business. I also can’t rly tell why it would *need* to be rated R? I don’t rly know the exact limitations that pg-13 would put on a Spider-Man movie, especially given who Peter Parker is