, while Sony's solo Spidey movies had supporting appearances by Tony Stark — aka Iron Man — and Nick Fury., which grossed $880 million in worldwide box office, the second-highest of any film in the franchise at that point. Then, the sequelreleased this summer, and so far has top $1.
is a mess and the weakest film of the whole franchise by far, but still has lots of fun and some moving dramatic scenes ., which I feel is overall a better origin film than the 2002 picture, and I'm on record sayingis, for all of its faults, the most faithful version of Spider-Man's personality in the first five films, as well as being far better than its reputation.
Initial reports about the fracturing of the relationship between Disney-Marvel and Sony made it sound as if both sides already walked away, and claimed Sony made no counter-offer besides saying they prefer to simply keep their deal unchanged.
Maintaining use of the character, expanding Marvel's control over the IP and spinoffs, and getting a modest profit for each film is good reason for Marvel to agree to a deal, even if it's not their ideal scenario. Losing the character now will screw up the ability to use Spider-Man in the MCU for a long time.
Paying Sony to use a character in ways that primarily act as promos for Sony's solo films, while taking on the risk of those solo films hurting Marvel's own reputation, isn't a scenario favorable to Marvel. If Sony balks at a deal for the solo films, Marvel shouldn't waste time or money on trying to make a deal for the MCU team-ups.
They must just solve it, Tonny Stark did not die for this
In the event of their dispute its the loyal diehard fans that are gonna be hurt. Just like a child will be when parents split for no heckin reason.
Finally, you folks are sharing something valuable. (joking of course) 😜
United States Latest News, United States Headlines
Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.
Source: THR - 🏆 411. / 53 Read more »
Source: DEADLINE - 🏆 109. / 63 Read more »
Source: CNN - 🏆 4. / 95 Read more »
Source: latimes - 🏆 11. / 82 Read more »
Source: RollingStone - 🏆 483. / 51 Read more »
Source: CNBC - 🏆 12. / 72 Read more »