Does Sony Actually Have Creative Control Over Spider-Man? My Thoughts

Does Sony Actually Have Creative Control Over Spider-Man? My Thoughts

My opinion on who has the ultimate control over the "new" Spider-Man in the Marvel Cinematic Universe. Is it Sony or actually Marvel?

Editorial Opinion
By Khwaja456 - Mar 01, 2015 01:03 PM EST
Filed Under: Spider-Man

It is well known now that a deal has been established between Sony Pictures and Marvel Studios over the movie rights to our beloved wall-crawler: Spider-Man. Yes, that’s correct true believers, Spider-Man has returned home to Marvel! Well…not quite. Spider-Man still technically resides over at Sony, but Marvel now has the ability to include Spidey in the Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU). Whereas Sony will continue to produce solo Spider-Man films. However, characters which Marvel have woven in their movie universe can now appear in those Spider-Man films and vice versa. Exciting, right? Just imagine the verbal joust between Spidey and the likes of Tony Stark of the Avengers. That’s bound to cause some compelling on screen banter between our native heroes. We’ve yet to even begin climbing the mountain top here, people.
 
So how exactly is this going to pan out? From the official press release, it’s stated that Sony has “final creative control”. I think we should bear in mind here that their amount of control isn’t actually specified. The first film of the new incarnation of Peter Parker/Spider-Man will be presented to us on July 28th 2017, but we will see the introduction of Spider-Man in a Marvel movie first. Therefore, collaboration between the two studios is inevitably going to be in the same room, across the same table. If Spider-Man is to be integrated into the MCU, then an entirely rebooted Spider-Man universe will need to be created so that it is intricately and directly connected to the MCU. Surely, since this is now the scale being formed, Marvel will have a large say in what Sony intends to do with the Spider-Man character.
 
We have to believe that this is beneficial for both parties, and ultimately, us fans. Sony’s direction of Spider-Man has certainly been diminished, following what many fans and critiques felt was a disappointing attempt at The Amazing Spider-Man 2. As a massive Spider-Man fan, I personally loved it, just like every Spidey film. That includes the infamous Spider-Man 3 of 2007. In all honesty, that’s probably due to how enamoured I was by experiencing the web-slinger on the big screen. However, it’s only fair that I retain some impartiality. I must admit, both of the films had many flaws, but we can discuss that on another day. Besides, Sony haven't been a complete disaster. I'd say three out of five of their films have been rather successful. Or two and a half, if people wish to be pedantic. 
 
Comparatively, we are inundated with Marvel movies that have proven successful. Sony would be foolish not to utilise the vision and expertise of Kevin Feige (President of Marvel) who has masterminded the MCU. Here lies a concern: Will Sony heed the advice of Marvel? Creative control must’ve been negotiated, extensively. Otherwise, why would Marvel agree to partner alongside Sony? They don’t need Spider-Man, after all. The billions of dollars in profit and high ratings justify this. Just take Guardians of the Galaxy. A relatively unknown to the casual fan, but proved to be another Marvel juggernaut – one of their best, in my opinion. 

 
Although, the fact that the Spider-Man solo movie in 2017 is being co-produced by both Amy Pascal (partner to Sony) and also Kevin Feige, is an early indication of progress and change.  
The simple fact that Sony agreed to this deal suggests that they need Marvel's assistance in creating the definitive Spider-Man. Sony will surely have their interpretation, but I think now with Marvel, they will receive much assured guidance. So, perhaps we should credit Sony in finally allowing a co-pilot. We can only hope that this will herald a new era of Spider-Man supremacy. Alright, that may have been slightly subjective, but you can sense my optimism. As sad as I am about Andrew Garfield no longer continuing as Spider-Man, if this is necessary to produce a truly great adaption of Spider-Man in movie form, then I will support it. That’s all we want: Amazing Spider-Man movies. Yes, I think the pun works.

 
We shall see how the character will be handled and how he will be integrated into the Marvel Cinematic Universe, potentially in the near future.

SPIDER-MAN: BRAND NEW DAY - 5 MCU Characters Who Should Be Paired Up With Tom Holland's Peter Parker
Related:

SPIDER-MAN: BRAND NEW DAY - 5 MCU Characters Who Should Be Paired Up With Tom Holland's Peter Parker

TOY STORY 5: Buzz & Woody Reunite, But Jessie Rides Into The Spotlight; Ernie Hudson To Voice Combat Carl
Recommended For You:

TOY STORY 5: Buzz & Woody Reunite, But Jessie Rides Into The Spotlight; Ernie Hudson To Voice Combat Carl

DISCLAIMER: As a user generated site and platform, ComicBookMovie.com is protected under the DMCA (Digital Millenium Copyright Act) and "Safe Harbor" provisions.

This post was submitted by a user who has agreed to our Terms of Service and Community Guidelines. ComicBookMovie.com will disable users who knowingly commit plagiarism, piracy, trademark or copyright infringement. Please CONTACT US for expeditious removal of copyrighted/trademarked content. CLICK HERE to learn more about our copyright and trademark policies.

Note that ComicBookMovie.com, and/or the user who contributed this post, may earn commissions or revenue through clicks or purchases made through any third-party links contained within the content above.

SoFresh
SoFresh - 3/1/2015, 2:41 PM
The title of your editorial is "Does Sony Actually Have Creative Control Over Spider-Man? My Thoughts".

Yet you say nothing to support or disprove the claim that may not have creative control even though them and Marvel have said so themselves.

Instead you go on a tangent about how awesome Marvel is and as such they should let the Marvel side take care of stuff.
SauronsBANE
SauronsBANE - 3/1/2015, 2:44 PM
Short answer: Marvel almost certainly has final creative control. It's hardly even a debate at this point.

Long answer: Based on several separate reports from different insiders in the industry, plus using common sense, it just fits that Marvel would have final say. The entire reason the two studios are collaborating in the first place is precisely because Sony clearly isn't comfortable with how they've done things in the past. If they have no faith in their own creative control of the previous Spidey movies...then what would be the point in maintaining creative control when they've finally partnered with Marvel??

A lot of insiders are in agreement that the press release saying that Sony has "final creative control" was nothing more than allowing Sony to avoid being completely embarrassed by all this mess. It gives them some semblance of respectability, rather than giving off the impression that Marvel "won" the negotiations. It's amazing how fragile egos are in Hollywood.
TronVin
TronVin - 3/1/2015, 2:48 PM


The hint he gave indicated that one was for Marvel and the ther DC.

https://instagram.com/p/zspNeNjpqM/
RextheKing
RextheKing - 3/1/2015, 3:16 PM
Technically Sony does, but only in the sense of having the title. One thing, Marvel Studios would not agree to a deal in which they had any fear of Sony screwing anything up for them. Second, given that Sony made this deal, it pretty much shows that they need Marvel's help, so in fear of not losing them, they would not abuse the power given to them.
Malakas
Malakas - 3/1/2015, 3:20 PM
@TronVin
kong
kong - 3/1/2015, 3:35 PM
@SoFreshso clean.
Lhornbk
Lhornbk - 3/1/2015, 5:23 PM
Umm.....no, Amazing Spiderman movies is not all "we" want. It might be what you want, and a lot of others, but not everyone. Personally, I have never been that big a fan of Spiderman, and I am frankly tired of Spiderman films. And I never really wanted him in the MCU, and just hope that Marvel is smart enough to not place too big a spotlight on him and take attention away from better characters. I think Feige is that smart, which is the one reason I can live with this deal (although I still wish they would have just put him on the shelf until Phase 4. A break from Spiderman is sorely needed.)
iMVuze
iMVuze - 3/2/2015, 1:13 AM
@Lhornbk

Why would they put one of the world's most popular characters on the shelf? Spidey is the lift Marvel needs to out do Batman vs. Superman. Captain America and Iron Man are popular don't get me wrong, but Superman and Batman trump those two. Especially when this will be Batman's and Superman's first time appearing on screen together.
chriskrispy
chriskrispy - 3/2/2015, 9:43 AM
I'd say Sony is saying they have control just to look tough. It's obvious they have no idea what to do with the character, considering all of their plans fell apart shortly after TASM2. If they knew what they were doing, they wouldn't allow ANOTHER reboot, no matter how much Marvel begged, pleaded, and cried. (I doubt they really did that, SM isn't a huge necessity for them at this point) I bet Feige is going to be telling them what to do, and they'll just take the credit.
chriskrispy
chriskrispy - 3/3/2015, 9:04 AM
@MrSotoMan
I mean, they already have a bunch of bankable characters, and can obviously turn D-list characters into one of their big money makers. Hell, the roster of the Avengers wasn't wildly popular among the common public until the MCU got rolling. I get that they would want Spider-Man back, he is and probably always will be Marvel's biggest character, but I don't feel that the deal was out of desperation on Feige's side. Civil War could have been done without Spider-Man (I wasn't a huge fan of the concept, but they must have been confident in what they had), but it's definitely a financial plus to have him, especially when facing off against Batman v Superman. But it's obvious they're doing pretty alright with box office without him, and creatively, they must not have needed him when they decided to adapt Civil War, when he's a big part of the arc. So my guess is that he isn't a necessity as much as an accessory.
View Recorder