was the amazing spiderman franchise purposely sabotaged? do you think people were paid off to kill the franchise because sony wanted to get in on mcu's cash cow?
is this happening with the x men?
i honestly think there is some sort of insider sabotage going on.
(a reminder electro swings spiderman into generators and the itsy bitsy spider song plays)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n1_pICB-q4U
(who the fuck okayed this?)
Hanlon's razor.
>>82668293
is it that easy?
>>82668259
ASM was just Sony being terrible.
X-Men Apocalpse is Fox/Singer doing way too much and many characters didnt get enough screentime or had plotlines that went nowhere.
Critics are harsh on Fox, Sony, and WB because they prefer Marvel Studios. Which is understandable since they make more hit movies then misses. And even when they have flawed or controversal movies, most critics are willing to forgive and overlook ther flaws because the MCU has built themselves up loyal fans.
While Fox, Sony, and WB have made good movies before it has almost always been inconsistent.
>>82668259
Nah. If you look at the e-mails it's just incompetence. Feige even gave them sensible advice at points and they ignored it.
Shit, even looking at their other non-Spider-Man stuff that incompetence really spread.
>>82668724
>Critics are harsh on Fox, Sony, and WB because they prefer Marvel Studios
Critics don't like Marvel movies just because they are Marvel, they like them because they are usually good or at least not mediocre (Dark World and Iron Man 2 got the heat deservedly). The good/great DC movies have been always recognized as such (First Class, TDKR)
Oh come the fuck on, there are emails showing how shitty this franchise was being handled.
Also, you can't control the audiences and the fact is that ASM2 made the least money in the whole franchise
>>82668927
This. If it was just spider man, this thwart would be believable. But Sony Films just looks like one huge dumpster fire all over
>>82669158
Yeah, that should be conspiracy, and i should just stop posting from my phone
>>82668259
No. No. No.
Sony and Fox only care about making money and don't actually "own" the intellectual properties they are trying to make money from. So they're being complete morons with the way they make movies.
Disney/Marvel of course mainly care about money as well, but they also care about their properties to a small degree, because they know how to cultivate long-term money. So they treat their properties with care.
I don't know what the fuck Warner Bros. is doing, considering they also own their properties.
This shouldn't be hard for you to imagine, OP, considering that you're capable of actually entertaining the thought of "insider sabotage."
>/co/ - Conspiracies & Studio Bias
...I liked the Itsy Bitsy spider joke.
I think the cast and crew really did try their best but the powers that be at Sony just tried to cram in too much in one film. (This is also coming from someone who thinks that these films are unwatchable like what people think that they are but on the same level of the Thor movies.)
No. Sony is just run by incompetent idiots.
Oh, hello Ghostbusters reboot!
>>82668972
>The good/great DC movies have been always recognized as such (First Class, TDKR)
Do you thing the X-Men are DC?/co/ - Comics & Cartoons
>>82668724
>ASM was just Sony being terrible.
This.
It was Sony's fault for not having faith in their directors (Raimi/Webb). When you read about what ASM 1 and 2 were originally going to be like, it becomes pretty obvious that the only reasons the franchise flopped was because Avi Arad and Amy Pascal couldn't keep their slimy hands off of it. I'm certain that, had Webb been allowed to do what he had intended, /co/ would be getting excited for ASM3 right about now.
>>82669818
Could you provide a link for what was originally intended? I've never heard about what that was
>>82668259
Sony kind of lost a a lot of money due to leaked emails didn't they? That's what prompted them to do the deal with Marvel
>>82668259
Right.
Sony and Fox want to lose billions of dollars, tank their stock, and lay off employees so they can give an intellectual property they had 100% control over to a competitor.
Dude, read less comics and click on a fucking newspaper once in a while. You might learn how the real world works.
>>82668259
No. It suffers from what a lot of adaptations suffer from, which is changing things to appeal to a wider demographic.
Which is fucking stupid. there's a reason why these characters have been so popular for over half a century. They don't need "modernising" or "updating" they're fine as they are. Dialogue and slang maybe, but beyond that, their stories are fairly solid.
It was a rushed job approved by people who aren't fans who failed to see that in trying so hard to appeal to "today's demographic" they lost what made the source great in the first place.
Look at Avengers. Is it spot on with the comics? No. But I'll tell you what I personally think it is. It's the closest thing to the feeling of reading an Avengers comic on the big screen. Yes it has plot holes, no it isn't perfect, but it captured the joy of the source material in a way that few other adaptations do in my opinion.
And that film is one of the highest grossing films of all time.
>>82669216
>I don't know what the fuck Warner Bros. is doing, considering they also own their properties.
Time-Warner's film division has been having problems lately since it's original head left and now it's being run by committee.
It's not just their superhero films, other recent WB films have run into tons of problems at the upper echelons and have been critical failures,
post the market researchpost the emails
>>82670956
>Sony and Fox want to lose billions of dollars, tank their stock, and lay off employees so they can give an intellectual property they had 100% control over to a competitor.
Sony ddn't completely control Spider-Man, though. Just the film and the box office profits. Marvel has the film merchandise rights.
Even so, you're right that OP is pretty dumb when you consider all the stuff brought up by the Sony e-mail leaks. I can't imagine how someone could look at that stuff and think someone at Sony intentionally sabotaged stuff to help Marvel instead of "These people seriously have no idea what they're doing."
If anything Marvel was trying to help Sony but they weren't listening according to the e-mails. Feige gave multiple suggestions.
>>82668259
Sony has more to lose by handing Spiderman over. Now they have to share the pie.
>>82671286
What emails?
>>82671524
You seriously forgot about the Sony e-mail leak from Best Korea?
Google it
>>82668259
have you read the Sony leaks?
they are pants on heads retarded
Pete was gonna ditch the Symbiote because the Sinister 6 thought it was lame
they where planning a Aunt May spy thriller for fucks sake
>this video ending up so prophetic
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lg6v1dgTcxw
>>82671286
I love how Feige called all those things reviewers would say months in advance
![15y9d00[2].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/9klj2nG.jpg "15y9d00[2].jpg")
>you now realise that theres a alternate universe where people never got based Holland and had to sit trough ASM3 and the Aunt May solo
>>82672299
It could be worse. They could have been watchingSpider-Man 6
>>82671145
>>82670022
bumping for this
>>82668927
> even gave them sensible advice at points and they ignored it.
Like what? I can't recall
>>82669818
>I'm certain that, had Webb been allowed to do what he had
What were Webb's intentions?
>>82672491
email between Alan Fine (Sony Pictures Exec) and Kevin Feige (1/2)
>I enjoyed speaking with you today (In reply to Kevin Feige). Thanks for being so open-minded and receptive. I know it’s not easy to get the type of feedback I gave and it will probably be even more difficult to read more of it in print. However, I promised to send you whatever I could locate of my notes. I am still searching for my notes on ASM but did find the notes on ASM2 (below). There are also a couple of back-n-forth notes between Kevin and I that help to illustrate my concerns on the ASM2 draft that I read. -Alan Fine They are definitely setting up an alternate universe to the first trilogy. No doubt about it – I saw the spider bite in Sam Raimi's movie and it was totally different than the Spider bite in ASM. They have rebooted. In a million years I would not advocate rebooting the Iron Man MCU. To me it's James Bond and we can keep telling new stories for decades even with different actors. -Kevin Feige Yes, and I think that is very dangerous. They are, in effect, obsoleting the first trilogy. They can call it whatever they like, e.g. telling a new saga from the same core elements…..the end result is that they’re making a mess of the first trilogy….exiling it from the cinematic universe. I think that is very risky thing to do with a movie audience following. Okay for comic books but I wouldn’t even do it with cartoon animation. Had I known, I would never have approved that strategy. Avi is totally nuts
>>82672736
(2/2)
>More confirmation to me that he never knew what he was doing. Question for you both: One day soon we will be rebooting the Iron Man franchise with new actors. In that reboot would you change the events of the first trilogy? E.g. Obadiah becomes a true father figure to Tony, Pepper gets jealous and she becomes the one that gets him thrown out of the company and tries to kill him for walking away from defense contracts? Pepper Potts falls in love with a caucasian Rhodey instead of Tony? It’s almost like setting up an alternate universe to the first trilogy. You guys are not seeing this? -Alan Fine
>>82672736
>>82672770
kek
I think it became a victim of how popular the reboots were doing like Casino Royale and Batman Begins. The original Spiderman movies were too recent to reboot.
>>82668259
No, I don't think it was intentionally sabotaged.
>>82672362
Not seeing the problem...
God dammit that is still my favorite live action suit
>>82668354
Was Jupiter Ascending just Warner Bros. way of getting out of a contract with the Wachowskis for no real reason?
Was Man of Steel purposely bad because Warner Bros. didn't expect to make any money from it since they had to pay so much up to the Siegel estate at the time the movie was made, a decision subsequently and unexpectedly reversed?
Was Green Latern bad on purpose?
Bad movies happen. It's a fact. Nobody sets out to make a bad one, they just come up against irresistible forces - lack of budget, lack of talent from whoever, be it directors, leads, choreographers, costumers, lack of whatever is necessary to translate their vision into reality. Often it's a producer problem, in that the EP just doesn't know how much everything is going to cost and they set out with an unrealistic business plan.
If you think of every production as a new business - and they basically are, because it's much easier to spread risk like that - then you can more adequately compare them to new startups. The fact is, most startups fail - is that a conspiracy? Are the small grocers fucking themselves over, are the small restaurateurs getting into massive debt and destroying their marriages and whatever else because these people secretly want the big chains to succeed?
Walk around where you live and figure out how many centrally-located businesses have opened and closed permanently in the last 5 years. The results will surprise you: the fact is, it's hard to get a startup to go somewhere, and that's as true of filmmaking as it is of hairdressing. Even with plenty of past experience you're not guaranteed to make money or even produce something the public respect.
I love that those movies are a lesson in futility. They mean nothing. Everything they set up or tried to set up, means nothing. It was all a big, giant, corporate waste.
>>82668259
As in a conspiracy? Absolutely not. Sony's emails showed that they were incompetent and greedy. They wanted to jump-start a spider cinematic universe but didn't want to do the prep work of making actual movies.
Both Amazing films feel like extended trailers for future movies, not actual stories.
>>82671139
>Time-Warner's film division has been having problems lately since it's original head left and now it's being run by committee.
Warner Bros. is having problems because when Barry Meyer stepped down as the Chairman of the Studios, Jeff Bewkes, the Chairman of Time Warner, set up a cage match between Kevin Tsujihara, who ran the Home Entertainment Division, Bruce Rosenblum, who ran the TV Division, and Jeff Robinov, who was the number two in the film division.
Bewkes kicked Alan Horn, who was the head of the film division, to the curb.
Tsujihara won the battle, even though he's the least creative of the three and has a terrible reputation as a manage.
Robinov publicly disagreed with Tsujihara - called him cruel - before the bakeoff was decided, and as soon as he got the throne, Tsujihara promptly took away all of Robinov's power and forced him to sit out his contract before creating the bizarre ruling by committee for the film division. But really, Warner Bros. fate was sealed as soon as Bewkes decided to let go of Horn. Not to mention, Tsujihara is a terrible choice for a film studio chairman.
Horn is now running the theatrical division at Disney. 'Nuff said.
Sony is just incompetent. Reminder that they're making a fucking emoji movie.
U nerds are so dum
Asm2 wasnt even particulary egregiously bad
It was just sloppy and rushed/hackenyed
These big productions have a lot of moving parts that need a clear vision to pack down
U nerds are acting like its completely unwatchable
They could have gotten in on the MCU with andrew garfield if they didnt do such a shit job with ASM2. Marvel was ok with ASM, not thrilled, but it could have been worked into the MCU as it was.
The shakiness of ASM2 left sony going ASM3 or make a deal with disney? They chose the more money route.
>>82668259
Nah. It was terrible on it's own.
>>82673956
Stark Tower was even supposed to appear in ASM1
>>82668259
>it's a Disney is a conspiracy episode
>>82672736
Isn't Alan Fine from Disney?
>>82674613
No, none of that got close to happening. They did talk in 2012 about the future of spider-man. Marvel wanted spider-man back. They had to jump through hoops to get hulk in avengers, but they did it. They were willing to do the same with spider-man but sony was not playing ball with them.
>buy 2 for $20 blu ray
>picks up TAS 1 & 2
Did I actually paid for a shitty movie? Welp, there goes my evening of feeling like an accomplished adult
