An ironic coincidence, perhaps?Bruce Almighty said:I find it to be a coincidence.TexasAggie_02 said:
Anyone else find it ironic that Keaton follows up 'birdman' with 'vulture'?
*** MARVEL CINEMATIC UNIVERSE *** [Staff message on OP]
3,330,613 Views |
27125 Replies |
Last: 2 days ago by TCTTS
Basically what MC Swag said.gougler08 said:
How so?
The story seems like Spidey gets his ride pimped by Tony. Spidey wants to be an Avenger. Tony thinks he just needs to be a kid. Basically what he realized at the end of civil war. We get some fun school moments and buddy moments to keep the film light. Spidey tried to do too much (boat scene) and Tony takes away his toys. Spidey then takes on Vulture in a hoodie and goggles anyway.
Batman, Birdman, Vulture.... regardless, he's just a winged freak that terrorizes.
I feel like I just watched the whole movie. They gave away way too much with Tony and the suit. I wish I would have skipped this one.
Looks good.
Can someone refresh me on the deal that Sony and Disney made, allowing Spidey to be in these Marvel Avengers movies? Surely Sony didn't just give up the rights, no strings attached.
Can someone refresh me on the deal that Sony and Disney made, allowing Spidey to be in these Marvel Avengers movies? Surely Sony didn't just give up the rights, no strings attached.
Flashdiaz said:
Batman, Birdman, Vulture.... regardless, he's just a winged freak that terrorizes.
Wait'll they get a load of me!
double aught said:
Looks good.
Can someone refresh me on the deal that Sony and Disney made, allowing Spidey to be in these Marvel Avengers movies? Surely Sony didn't just give up the rights, no strings attached.
Money split of some sort. Marvel gets a hand in development of Sony Spidey films and get to use him in their movies too.
The short answer is that this is a Sony movie with Iron Mandouble aught said:
Looks good.
Can someone refresh me on the deal that Sony and Disney made, allowing Spidey to be in these Marvel Avengers movies? Surely Sony didn't just give up the rights, no strings attached.
not just Civil War, but Iron Man 3. Peter says "without the suit, I'm nothing." Tony replies "If you're nothing without the suit, then you shouldn't have it."Quote:
The story seems like Spidey gets his ride pimped by Tony. Spidey wants to be an Avenger. Tony thinks he just needs to be a kid. Basically what he realized at the end of civil war.
In IM3, Tony realizes that the suits don't make the man, he IS Iron Man. He's trying to teach Peter that as well.
Technically there's no money split. They're sharing him. Marvel can make their movies and Sony will make their own. Its unclear how creative control will work though. Sony could still make a Spider Man movie that is completely independent of any Marvel movie plot. (That would negate the purpose of this deal however. Sony wants to weave spider man with Marvel's success, so I doubt there will be any continuity issues.)AliasMan02 said:double aught said:
Looks good.
Can someone refresh me on the deal that Sony and Disney made, allowing Spidey to be in these Marvel Avengers movies? Surely Sony didn't just give up the rights, no strings attached.
Money split of some sort. Marvel gets a hand in development of Sony Spidey films and get to use him in their movies too.
You either die a hero or live long enough to see yourself become the villainFlashdiaz said:
Batman, Birdman, Vulture
That too.TexasAggie_02 said:not just Civil War, but Iron Man 3. Peter says "without the suit, I'm nothing." Tony replies "If you're nothing without the suit, then you shouldn't have it."Quote:
The story seems like Spidey gets his ride pimped by Tony. Spidey wants to be an Avenger. Tony thinks he just needs to be a kid. Basically what he realized at the end of civil war.
In IM3, Tony realizes that the suits don't make the man, he IS Iron Man. He's trying to teach Peter that as well.
I was more referring to realizing the Spiderman probably shouldn't have been fighting in Civil War. He was just a kid and Tony thought he might have gotten him killed or seriously injured.
M.C. Swag said:Technically there's no money split. They're sharing him. Marvel can make their movies and Sony will make their own. Its unclear how creative control will work though. Sony could still make a Spider Man movie that is completely independent of any Marvel movie plot. (That would negate the purpose of this deal however. Sony wants to weave spider man with Marvel's success, so I doubt there will be any continuity issues.)AliasMan02 said:double aught said:
Looks good.
Can someone refresh me on the deal that Sony and Disney made, allowing Spidey to be in these Marvel Avengers movies? Surely Sony didn't just give up the rights, no strings attached.
Money split of some sort. Marvel gets a hand in development of Sony Spidey films and get to use him in their movies too.
This is what is bizarre to me. Sony is reportedly trying to make a Venom solo film and a Black Cat & Silver Sable film. They're not part of the MCU. Presumably they wouldn't be able to use Spidey at all. Or they will? Or they could? I'm not sure.
Is there anything stopping them from having Spider-Man be referenced in these films, even if they're not part of the MCU? Is there anything Disney can do about it?
It's very confusing. Also, Sony Venom and Black Cat films without Marvel Studios involvement sound like ****.
And other than hot women, who are Black Cat and Silver Sable without Spiderman?
Everything I've read suggests that Sony can still do whatever they want with regards to Spider Man.
They can still use Spider-Man, even Tom Holland. Marvel just doesn't recognize them as canon.
It will confuse the hell out of people.
It will confuse the hell out of people.
So you're saying that theoretically Sony could kill Holland's Spiderman, but he could still appear in the Marvel Studios movies as if it didn't happen?AliasMan02 said:
They can still use Spider-Man, even Tom Holland. Marvel just doesn't recognize them as canon.
It will confuse the hell out of people.
3rdGen2015 said:So you're saying that theoretically Sony could kill Holland's Spiderman, but he could still appear in the Marvel Studios movies as if it didn't happen?AliasMan02 said:
They can still use Spider-Man, even Tom Holland. Marvel just doesn't recognize them as canon.
It will confuse the hell out of people.
In theory, yes. Though I'm sure Marvel would intervene.
Sony is going to be making an animated Spider-Man movie with Miles Morales. Even though they can, and even though they are going ahead with these solo spinoff movies, I really doubt Sony will be making a Spider-Man movie in their own (non-Marvel) universe with Tom Holland.
I just don't see it happening. I see Marvel eventually just buying out Sony and bringing him over to the MCU for good.
Because until cameras physically roll on these Venom and Black Cat (?!) movies, I don't see any of them actually happening. It's all just wishful thinking on Sony's part....or a scheme to force Marvel to pay them off because even Marvel understands that all this is going to be a massive clusterf*** of confusion.
I just don't see it happening. I see Marvel eventually just buying out Sony and bringing him over to the MCU for good.
Because until cameras physically roll on these Venom and Black Cat (?!) movies, I don't see any of them actually happening. It's all just wishful thinking on Sony's part....or a scheme to force Marvel to pay them off because even Marvel understands that all this is going to be a massive clusterf*** of confusion.
I thought the trailer looked good. I was worried about Vulture because he's such an idiot character in the comics, but he looks way better than I expected.
I'm not worried about it. If there's one thing we need to give Sony credit for, it's that they take continuity very seriously and will always put consistency above all else in their movies.AliasMan02 said:
They can still use Spider-Man, even Tom Holland. Marvel just doesn't recognize them as canon.
It will confuse the hell out of people.
I'm pretty sure the Spider-Man: Homecoming trailer spoils the entire film
I guess I wasn't the only one who thought so.
I guess I wasn't the only one who thought so.
Not overly excited by this, but the trailer does look good.
I was always a Marvel kid growing up, but I was focused on the X-men family, not so much the Avengers side of the house.
I like Spidey enough, but not the teen Spidey.
I was always a Marvel kid growing up, but I was focused on the X-men family, not so much the Avengers side of the house.
I like Spidey enough, but not the teen Spidey.
i think it is a case of trying too hard to show how this spidey film is not like all the other spidey films.aggie1906 said:
I'm pretty sure the Spider-Man: Homecoming trailer spoils the entire film
I guess I wasn't the only one who thought so.
Not a huge Spidey fan, think the first two original movies were good, the third sucked dog crap, and the two reboots were meh ... I liked his role in Civil War but wasn't jazzed like so many were regarding his appearance in Cap 3. Now seeing this trailer, I will say that looks awesome. Can Marvel NOT make a worthy movie? Even their perceived weak movies are pretty damn good.
This one is definitely on my top 10 most anticipated for this year, along with The Last Jedi, Justice League, Guardians Vol 2, Alien Covenant, Dunkirk, Blade Runner 2049, and Thor Ragnorek.
This one is definitely on my top 10 most anticipated for this year, along with The Last Jedi, Justice League, Guardians Vol 2, Alien Covenant, Dunkirk, Blade Runner 2049, and Thor Ragnorek.
TexasAggie_02 said:
Anyone else find it ironic that Keaton follows up 'birdman' with 'vulture'?
I believe Sony, not Marvel, still owns and has final creative control over standalone Spider-Man movies.
But I bet they'd love you to think it's Marvel behind the wheel.
But I bet they'd love you to think it's Marvel behind the wheel.
Sony still owns the movie rights to Spidey, I think the deal with Marvel boils down to "if you want him to play with the Avengers, then do x,y,z"Aggie_Journalist said:
I believe Sony, not Marvel, still owns and has final creative control over standalone Spider-Man movies.
But I bet they'd love you to think it's Marvel behind the wheel.
Holland already appears to be a huge upgrade, imo. Better than Garfield. WAY better than Maguire. He's funnier, and more believable as a high school kid.
I really like the new dynamic with Tony Stark.
The last few movies haven't been kind to Tony. He screwed up horribly in Ultron, his family was a point of angst in Antman, and he alienated half of the Avengers in 'Civil War'...with Black Widow and Black Panther eventually siding with Cap. He also found out that his parents were murdered, and Pepper left him.
Seeing him mentor Peter is a positive step for his character. It also appears to show some growth. Especially with the whole "If you're nothing without the suit, then you shouldn't be wearing it". Hopefully we'll get to see more of Tony doing some good instead of messing things up. And hopefully, despite his awful experiences, we get to see more of the fun "blaring the AC/DC and ready to kick ass" Tony again at some point.
Keaton is also a bonus. Looks like a great fit as the villain in this one. And who's going to argue with Marisa Tomei as Aunt May?
I really like the new dynamic with Tony Stark.
The last few movies haven't been kind to Tony. He screwed up horribly in Ultron, his family was a point of angst in Antman, and he alienated half of the Avengers in 'Civil War'...with Black Widow and Black Panther eventually siding with Cap. He also found out that his parents were murdered, and Pepper left him.
Seeing him mentor Peter is a positive step for his character. It also appears to show some growth. Especially with the whole "If you're nothing without the suit, then you shouldn't be wearing it". Hopefully we'll get to see more of Tony doing some good instead of messing things up. And hopefully, despite his awful experiences, we get to see more of the fun "blaring the AC/DC and ready to kick ass" Tony again at some point.
Keaton is also a bonus. Looks like a great fit as the villain in this one. And who's going to argue with Marisa Tomei as Aunt May?
I can guarantee you that Marvel is calling 100% of the shots here. Sony has had zero say in the script.....in the casting of Holland.....in anything.Aggie_Journalist said:
I believe Sony, not Marvel, still owns and has final creative control over standalone Spider-Man movies.
But I bet they'd love you to think it's Marvel behind the wheel.
Sony has no leverage here. They had their chance with the character...twice. And they blew it. The Amazing Spider-Man was good, but that swelled their egos into thinking that the sequel should launch an entire universe. It didn't. It killed the franchise again. So, they were stuck with a hot character with no prospects again. So, they sold to Marvel.
Do you really think Kevin Feige would allow Sony to dictate or change one line of dialogue in this movie?
That's why Sony is so desperate to launch solo spin-off movies: they know they have now lost Spider-Man to Marvel and are simply collecting a check for his use.
http://www.showbiz411.com/2017/03/28/exclusive-jeremy-renner-not-in-mission-impossible-6-said-to-be-too-busy-with-avengers
Aren't the two Infinity wars movies filming back to back? It could be possible that the reporter is confused and jumped to the conclusion that he will be in Ant Man.Quote:
Jeremy Renner will not be in Christopher McQuarrie's "Mission Impossible 6." That's the word and I've confirmed it. He did two "MI"s with Tom Cruise, but that was enough. He's doing two "Avengers" movies back to back instead "Infinity War" and "Ant-man and the Wasp" as Hawkeye.
Or that it's actually 3 films - the two IWs and Ant-ManTexasAggie_02 said:
http://www.showbiz411.com/2017/03/28/exclusive-jeremy-renner-not-in-mission-impossible-6-said-to-be-too-busy-with-avengersAren't the two Infinity wars movies filming back to back? It could be possible that the reporter is confused and jumped to the conclusion that he will be in Ant Man.Quote:
Jeremy Renner will not be in Christopher McQuarrie's "Mission Impossible 6." That's the word and I've confirmed it. He did two "MI"s with Tom Cruise, but that was enough. He's doing two "Avengers" movies back to back instead "Infinity War" and "Ant-man and the Wasp" as Hawkeye.
Gigem314 said:TexasAggie_02 said:
Anyone else find it ironic that Keaton follows up 'birdman' with 'vulture'?
I love that movie, so underrated.
true
Featured Stories
See All
9:38
6h ago
4.9k
6:33
7h ago
6.0k
14:01
20h ago
17k
After-dark Aggies weather storm to take down Gators in MCWS, 3-2
by Richard Zane
Father's Day in Omaha: A thankful nod to my baseball-loving dad
by Richard Zane