Confirmed: Spider-man to join the MCU.

[Iroscato]

Soooo, this happened. Fuckin' finally

http://www.denofgeek.com/movies/spider- ... c-universe

It's official: Spider-Man will appear in a Marvel film, before continuing his own adventures in 2017...

There's been no shortage of speculation as to the future of Spider-Man on the big screen, but now, that future has been confirmed. The news is good: Spider-Man is to join the Marvel cinematic universe, and Marvel is to be involved in the character's screen future.
Under the terms of a deal struck by Sony Pictures and Marvel Studios, a new Spider-Man will debut in a thus-far unspecified movie within the Marvel cinematic universe. After that, Sony will release the next installment in its own Spider-Man series.
Furthermore, Sony's next Spider-Man movie now has an official release date - July 28th 2017.
Lest you be in any doubt that this is an about turn for the screen adventures of Spider-Man, the official press statement declares that "together, [Marvel and Sony] will collaborate on a new creative direction for the web slinger". That sounds to us like the plans that Sony had been working on for its own Spider-Man movie universe have been set aside.
Our guess is that Drew Goddard's Sinister Six movie, as well as Alex Kurtzman's Venom spin-off, are both unlikely to happen. That's not been confirmed, but it's tricky to see where they'll fit in now.
What has been confirmed is that Marvel Studios' Kevin Feige will join outgoing Sony Pictures boss Amy Pascal in co-producing 2017's new Spider-Man movie.
Feige seems happy about this, too. In the official press statement, he's quoted as saying "I am thrilled to team with my friends at Sony Pictures along with Amy Pascal to produce the next Spider-Man movie. Amy has been deeply involved in the realisation on film of one of the world’s most beloved characters. Marvel's involvement will hopefully deliver the creative continuity and authenticity that fans demand from the MCU. I am equally excited for the opportunity to have Spider-Man appear in the MCU, something which both we at Marvel, and fans alike, have been looking forward to for years".
We'd assume that the search is now on for a new Spider-Man to take over from Andrew Garfield, but again, that's not part of the official announcement. Sony may yet make The Amazing Spider-Man 3 as planned, but we'd be surprised. We suspect Mr Garfield's web slinging days are over.
Let the speculation begin, too: just which Marvel film between now and July 2017 will Spider-Man be returning to the screen in? The betting surely has to be on Captain America: Civil War at this stage...
One further line from the press statement too: "Marvel and Sony Pictures are also exploring opportunities to integrate characters from the MCU into future Spider-Man films". This might just, then, be the deal that digs Sony out of proverbial jail.
There are clearly lots of details yet to come here. We'll keep you posted...

And the MCU's phase 3 dates have been shuffled slightly to compensate:
http://www.denofgeek.com/movies/marvel- ... spider-man

Thor: Ragnarok, Black Panther, Captain Marvel and Inhumans are all put back...
You've probably seen the news by now that Spider-Man is officially part of the Marvel cinematic universe. Furthermore, a new Spider-Man film from Sony has also been confirmed, and it'll have a release date of July 28th 2017.
That, though, has had a knock on effect on four other Marvel movies. For July 2017 was when we were originally going to see Thor: Ragnarok in cinemas. That's been put back now to November 3rd 2017.
November 3rd 2017 had been the date originally earmarked for Black Panther, starring Chadwick Boseman, so that's now going to be released on July 6th 2018. The domino effect continues, as Captain Marvel then goes from July 2018 to November 2nd 2018, and Inhumans is bumped from November 2018 to July 12th 2019.
In case you're not following this, the changes are:
2017
July 28th: Unnamed Spider-Man film
November 3rd: Thor: Ragnarok
2018 July 6th: Black Panther
November 2nd: Captain Marvel
2019: July 12th: Inhumans
The release dates of Avengers: Infinity War - Part 1 and Avengers: Infinity War - Part 2 are unaffected (they're due in May 2018 and May 2019).

So what do we make of this?

[Gandalf]

I don't see the point. Marvel is doing fine without him, especially one where Sony apparently has final creative say. Also, if Sony back out of the deal at some point it'll leave a weird Spiderman shaped gap in their established universe.

[The Romulan Republic]

The point, I imagine, is that Spiderman is probably the single most famous and iconic character Marvel has.

[FaxModem1]

Sony is swallowing any breadcumbs that Marvel is willing to offer after the severe mugging they took last year and will do anything to have an audience now that there Amazing Spider-man franchise failed?

[Iroscato]

Sony is swallowing any breadcumbs that Marvel is willing to offer after the severe mugging they took last year and will do anything to have an audience now that there Amazing Spider-man franchise failed?

Quite. However, as long as they use him well, we're the winners in this. Can't be worse than TASM2, right?
...Right?

[The Romulan Republic]

Sony is swallowing any breadcumbs that Marvel is willing to offer after the severe mugging they took last year and will do anything to have an audience now that there Amazing Spider-man franchise failed?

So this is Kim Jong Un's doing?

[Iroscato]

Sony is swallowing any breadcumbs that Marvel is willing to offer after the severe mugging they took last year and will do anything to have an audience now that there Amazing Spider-man franchise failed?

So this is Kim Jong Un's doing?

Hmmm. Doesn't quite atone him, but it might be enough to earn a 10 minute break from fellating the Devil every 6 million years once he pops his clogs...

[Guardsman Bass]

I don't see the point. Marvel is doing fine without him, especially one where Sony apparently has final creative say. Also, if Sony back out of the deal at some point it'll leave a weird Spiderman shaped gap in their established universe.

I assume Sony is unhappy with Amazing Spider-Man 2 and willing to make a deal favorable to Marvel in order to get Marvel's promotion for the character. Marvel probably busted them over it as well - I'd love to see the full terms of their agreement.

[Gandalf]

The point, I imagine, is that Spiderman is probably the single most famous and iconic character Marvel has.

Yet the MCU remains quite a success without him.

[darth_timon]

I am very happy about this. Spiderman is a great character when done properly and a good fit for the Avengers. I look forward to seeing if they can indeed integrate him into the Civil War film, and how Marvel might tweak Sony's vision for the character.

[Crazedwraith]

So very likely no more Andrew Garfield? Alas, I rather liked him. Haven't seen ASM2 all the way through though.

Any reboot needs to not have or super abbreviate the origin story. People get it. Great power, great responsibility.

[Tribble]

Well, let's just hope they don't decide to do a film adaptation of One More Day. You know, for the dramaz.

[Grumman]

Well, let's just hope they don't decide to do a film adaptation of One More Day. You know, for the dramaz.

If it happens, it won't be hard to miss - just look for a director being hurled out of the building by a couple of burly Disney henchmen.

[Flagg]

Sony has not made a single good Spider-Man movie. They have had 5 tries. Now let's give the guys who made fucking THOR a success take a whack at it. Especially if it's Miles Moralez. Conservative and fanboy pantshitting could destabilize the Earths magnetic field, killing us all. Just the way we deserve to go, IMO.

[Crazedwraith]

Not sure why you're holding Thor up as the pinnacle of the MCU's work. But cool. eta: oh re-reading I get your meaning. Thor was particularly hard to adapt. But then so I think was Captain America. Or at least selling it abroad. lol.

Well, let's just hope they don't decide to do a film adaptation of One More Day. You know, for the dramaz.

Wouldn't rule it out, they're doing a version of civil war after all. Though hopefully they'll only do it in very broad strokes/just use the title.

[The Romulan Republic]

Not sure why you're holding Thor up as the pinnacle of the MCU's work. But cool. eta: oh re-reading I get your meaning. Thor was particularly hard to adapt. But then so I think was Captain America. Or at least selling it abroad. lol.

Well, let's just hope they don't decide to do a film adaptation of One More Day. You know, for the dramaz.

Wouldn't rule it out, they're doing a version of civil war after all. Though hopefully they'll only do it in very broad strokes/just use the title.

One might think that Captain America's blatant patriotism wouldn't be popular with non-American audiences, especially given how criticized America is around the world. But here's the thing: Captain America represents a more idealized version of America and a lot of his story is about his conflict with the more flawed America. I wonder if that's part of the appeal to foreign audiences- Captain America's an embodiment of the America people wish actually existed who's fighting against the dark aspects of America.

[Joun_Lord]

I wouldn't mind Miles Morales Spiderman being in the MCU just because of the fanboy rage that would cause. "Oh no, the PC checkbox gay black/latino Spiderman is ruining muy movies, I hate you Marvel!!!!!!" Also to get a bit more color in there (the MCU is pretty goddamn white) and maybe some new story ideas. I like Peter Parker but he's been done to death.

Miles Morales may well be a character created to check some PC checklist rather then any real thought or character behind his creation, don't know as I don't read comics anymore and therefore don't care about the character whether he was white, black, or green but do enjoy the fanboys crying on the message boards aboot him, but using him creates the opportunity to tell a story that doesn't involve a pasty white 20 something guy playing a teen living with his aunt and uncle (who dies tragically), IE something new. We've seen Peter Parker being awkward and whining about having superpowers in 5 damn movies. Let someone else have a go at being awkward and whiny.

[Majin Gojira]

One one hand, it's nice to have Spider-Man and that part of the Marvel Universe available for Marvel to use.

On the other, it pushes back Black Panther and Captain Marvel among others, which I don't like.

And I pray to god we don't get another origin movie for Peter Parker. Hell, if I can dream, I'd prefer Miles or any non-Peter Spider to go with. But it's going to be Peter, he's specified in the contract from what I've seen.

[The Cooler King]

Some very interesting details on the deal:

Marvel isn't paying a dime to Sony for the rights to use Spidey. But the studio won’t receive a cut of the earnings for any of Sony’s Spider-Man films, and Sony won’t get a cut of the Marvel films that feature Spider-Man. (Marvel also controls the merchandising rights to Spidey.)

Disney/Marvel reportedly had previously offered Sony "billions" to buy back the character.

So both studios keep their own earnings. Interesting; I would have thought that there would be some sort of profit-sharing deal in place, but it seems like this is purely a creative decision. This looks like a win/win for everyone involved, audiences included.

Marvel is instead essentially leasing the rights from Sony. Sony gets a (hopefully) revitalized Spider-Man thanks to Marvel, while Marvel gets to use one of their most iconic characters.
The new Spidey will first appear in a Marvel movie (reportedly Captain America: Civil War) before getting his own stand-alone film from Sony on July 28, 2017. MCU characters could also appear in the new Spider-Man films.
Marvel Studios head Kevin Feige will not be compensated for producing Sony's 2017 Spider-Man film.
Sony will have final say over casting for the new Spider-Man, and is said to be looking for an actor much younger than Andrew Garfield, who is 31. Sony is looking to go back to "Spidey’s roots and put the character back in high school."

It also looks like Sony will have the opportunity to use other MCU characters in their Spider-Man films. Good on them, and on everyone involved in this.

[The Cooler King]

One one hand, it's nice to have Spider-Man and that part of the Marvel Universe available for Marvel to use.

On the other, it pushes back Black Panther and Captain Marvel among others, which I don't like.

And I pray to god we don't get another origin movie for Peter Parker. Hell, if I can dream, I'd prefer Miles or any non-Peter Spider to go with. But it's going to be Peter, he's specified in the contract from what I've seen.

I wish I could remember where I saw it, but from what I understand, Marvel wants to basically do what they did in The Incredible Hulk: do a basic origin through the opening credits, and then jump right into the story.

[Simon_Jester]

Peter Parker's a good character. The problem is simply that they've done his origin story twice in a twelve year period, with at least one of the other three Spider-Man movies tying into aspects of his origin story by pressing a reset button on his relation with Mary Jane.

He'd make a great character, but it'd be nice if any new Spider-Man movies could reflect the character's relatively "mature" status as one of the first of the superheroes to have a successful silver-screen breakout in the new millenium. We know him, we've seen him, we know who he is; let's see what he does as a well established character whose basic relationships have settled into their 'classic' positions.

EDIT: And while wobbling back and forth on the Peter/MJ relationship is certainly in keeping with the current trend in the comic, frankly I think it makes for worse art than trying to portray a superheroic character who's in a stable, successful, permanent relationship. As opposed to guys who can't commit effectively because they're chronically irresponsible. Or who are just plain afraid of women. Or whose girlfriends keep getting killed off, or aren't 'allowed' to know about their lovers' double lives.

[TOSDOC]

My children will be pleased. That's really the highest praise I can give for adding Spiderman to the MCU. They expect this kind of thing, and can't wrap their brains around the adult concepts of different companies owning the rights to characters so they can't appear in each other's movies. Sony made the right move, and will likely see a big reward.

While it's interesting to ponder how they'll approach him in the MCU (web-shooters vs. web glands, etc), I feel pretty comfortable at this point that Parker's part of the ongoing story won't be bogged down by ongoing angst-ridden love-triangle relationships, as there likely won't be time for that in a story like Civil War. Future Spiderman movies can now refer to or even add other heroes in NY like the Avengers and Doctor Strange, which will only make the plots richer.

[Iroscato]

Sony has not made a single good Spider-Man movie.

Not even the first two Raimi movies?

[Adam Reynolds]

One might think that Captain America's blatant patriotism wouldn't be popular with non-American audiences, especially given how criticized America is around the world. But here's the thing: Captain America represents a more idealized version of America and a lot of his story is about his conflict with the more flawed America. I wonder if that's part of the appeal to foreign audiences- Captain America's an embodiment of the America people wish actually existed who's fighting against the dark aspects of America.

That was essentially the entire point of The Winter Soldier, that the internal threats were actually greater than the external. He actually spent almost the entire movie fighting Americans.

[Vendetta]

Not sure why you're holding Thor up as the pinnacle of the MCU's work. But cool. eta: oh re-reading I get your meaning. Thor was particularly hard to adapt. But then so I think was Captain America. Or at least selling it abroad. lol.

Captain America shouldn't have been hard to adapt, the core story is just misfit makes good, does heroism. Nice and simple, character easily relatable to audience, gets to win, hooray!

Trouble was the first movie did that for 80 minutes and then had another 30 minutes of nazi-punching-montage and rejected concepts for Wolfenstein cutscenes because they had to reach an endpoint where he's on ice ready for The Avengers.

Which meant that it was 3/4 of a good adaptation but was sadly a quarter shit as a film.