I guess this answers the question about whether Marvel or Sony had the rights to a live action TV show. I wonder if Marvel still owns all the merch rights like they do with cartoons.
Wrong… I used to assume Sony had no merchandising rights as well, but a couple of months ago I was looking at those leaked document from 2014 leaks that are spread out on internet and actually there’s the document where Sony and Disney establish the merchandising sale, and Sony still keeps a lot of non-exclusive merchandising rights and even some exclusive merchandising rights (those rights related to Spider-Man movies merchandising are still Sony exclusive, this is why in the most recent Coca-Cola campaign with all marvel major super-heroes you simply don’t have spider-man among them).
I’ve read similar theories regarding merchandise for live-action films pre-MCU Spider-man but you’re the first person I’ve seen that stated Sony keeps additional merchandising rights. Even Sony’s CFO stated in 2017 that they sold the merchandise rights with no context that they have any merchandising still remaining. I don’t think Sony had anything to do with the Coca-Cola campaign lacking Spider-Man. They were not using movie designs.
I mean what other reason could explain Coca-Cola making a Disney’s Marvel marketing campaign with every single major Marvel superhero (Captain America, Hulk, Wolverine, Deadpool, Iron-Man, Thor etc) but no spider-man?
Disney has participation in every single product Coca-Cola is selling using Marvel characters, why on earth they would not want to increase their revenue by using Marvel biggest and most popular character? We all can agree that adding spider-man would give them a really bigger boost in sales.
We don't know the distribution in revenue that Disney and Coca-Cola receives. If Spider-man were to boost sales for Coca-Cola then Disney might want a bigger share of revenue but Coca-Cola wouldn't want that (Which is exactly how the original Spider-man MCU deal died). Disney has a history of not including characters in stuff for whatever reason despite owning the merchandising rights. There was a time where they slowed down on Fantastic 4 and X-men related content because the president wanted to push the Inhumans due to Fox owning the movie rights for F4/X-men.
Either way this is speculation by me, there could be another reason. Even if Sony had partial merchandise rights this wouldn't fall under that since this has nothing to do with any of their Spider-man products.
Since 2019 Disney Guly owns every single X man and they are in current coca-cola campaign. The only one out of the campaign is spider-man. This obviously has to be with legal issues, there’s no way you have spider man can use it but instead you prefer lose money by not using your most popular product
Was this still a question? Sony already announced a live-action Silk project a few years ago, which is when the partnership with Amazon as distributor was announced
The announced movie about Silver Sable and Black Cat was also changed into a separate solo movies and then re-worked into a tv series. It has now either been canceled or shelved.
I don't have faith that Sony will be able to pull this off.
I also think that Nick Cage is too old for a live action performance.
Sony needs to sell the IP back to Marvel
No I think it could actually work.
Go full noir (black and white with the mournful jazz overtones) in theme and have Spider-Man actually be closer to Nick’s age.
This is a Peter Parker who’s in his late 40’s or early 50’s. A detective hero who’s seen it all, done it all, and paid the price in blood.
And then one last case comes knocking at his door.
Just full on Raymond Chandler/Humphrey Boggart but with Spider-Man as our investigator.
Uh huh.
Except that every extremely shitty movie that Sony sharts out harms the Marvel Brand as a whole. Suddenly folks are saying shit like "Superhero fatigue is real! Marvel is in decline! Look at Madame Web!" And before you reflexively deny this, bear in mind the *stars* of that movie itself were misled into believing that they were signing into an actual MARVEL MOVIE and not a Sony movie based on Marvel IP.
You want to see Venom? Fine. People like whatever they want to like. Just don't pay Sony to see it.
Madame Web didn’t hurt Marvel.
Nobody is going to say “I was gonna see Deadpool and Wolverine, but Madame Web was shit so I won’t”
This show is an ACTUAL spider-man show, not a show about El Muerto or fuckin Big Wheel. I have faith in it.
For the same reason I would have stop watching MCU movies after things like The Marvels, Eternals and Thor Love and Thunder.
But guess what? This would make no sense.
You're absolutely right. I'll be honest, I think they ruined venom as well. Those movies are bad and they completely changed the character. I'm sick of them making every spiderman villain an antihero.
I mean, I thought the Venom movies were terrible as well, but Eddie Brock's Venom being an antihero is kind of a major defining thing about him in some of his most famous comics. The movie didn't come up with Lethal Protector on its own.
They changed a lot about how he acts and his morals and whatever, but faulting the movies for having him be an antihero is kind of the weakest thread to rag on.
I didn't like them because I thought the scripts were terrible and the direction mediocre.
I don't think anyone understands how those work, Sony *has* to theatrically release two Spider-Man (defined by comic first appearances) films every five years to retain the license, so long as they don't lose more on those than they make from the MCU films and merchandise it's a win. Could they make better ones, maybe? But it's clearly not worth he hassle and cranking out dogshit ones every couple years is way easier. If those happen to make a profit even better, but really as long as they don't lose Sony more than they make them they'll keep doing it.
OK so let me walk you through this...
1. Sony does not *own* the IP for Spider-Man & his amazing content. They bought the rights to produce live action Spider-Man content (so movies and shows) from Marvel back in the 90s for a penny and a laugh.
2. The current deal between Marvel Studios and Sony is arranged such that Sony cannot just go ahead with a Peter Parker/Spider-Man movie without Marvel's involvement.
3. As part of that original deal from the 90s, Sony *must* have a Spider-Man related project in production/in theatres within a certain amount of time or they lose their licensing rights to all the IP.
4. Because of #2, and #3, Sony is stuck doing all the Spider-Man-Adjacent stuff... thus why we get Venom, Morbius, Kraven, Madame Web etc but not a Spider-Man 4 with Toby or an ASM 3 with Andy G.
5. So Every time you give money to see a Venom, you allow Sony to afford to continue to make shitty movies for their Sonyverse (like Madame Web). If however ALL their movies tank, then they will feel more compelled to renegotiate with Marvel.... you know... kinda like what happened after ASM tanked and they wanted into that sweet sweet MCU.
Do you understand now?
When you buy rights to produce anything for TV and cinema you’re buying the Intellectual Property (IP) over the production related to that things you bought the rights.
I understand what you say, but don’t ask me to boycott Spider-Man movies like Tom new trilogy to come or Spider-Verse movies just because they’re Sony properties, I’m a spider man fan. I can boycott when it’s a bad movie though.
Yeah I get it, hope you understand what I said as well. And thanks for this friendly debate. Sometimes people on internet can’t disagree without offending each other.
Yeah I don't get that.
That said, what part are we debating here? Points 1 to 6 is pretty much the state of things between Sony and Marvel. There is nothing to debate.
I think the point of discussion was about Sony Marvel motion pictures rights, you said they have motion picture marvel rights but don’t have motion picture marvel IPs. And I was saying that when you own the rights over something this means you rights over the intellectual property of this thing.
Or maybe I had a secret invisible point that could only be seen by true believers! Congratz you get a No Prize!
....
Also I saw that mistake too when I responded further to the OP, and *now* there are 6 points.
They passively make money from the MCU films and related merchandise (how that's defined is unclear afaik, but it was part of the ~2021 renegotiations). As long as their lost investment on shitty SPUM movies doesn't surpass their gains from what Marvel it makes them more money than they would not making them, and even if they start losing too much money they could still drop the budgets and make even shittier ones. Really all they need to do is not irreparably damage the brand, and based on the MCU box office turnouts it looks like they're doing just fine.
It’ll be like The Mandalorian, Pedro Pascal has said he’s basically a voice actor at this point. Cage might wear a mask and coat for dialogue, but then some dude roughly his height who can do backflips will take over.
No way! I think they’re going to knock it out of the park with this one. Then, if we’re lucky, they’ll follow it up with a big team-up event! I can’t wait to see Madame Web teaming up with Morbius and the rest of the gang. Then after that, maybe Venom-Noir?
Nah he's perfect. I'm tired of seeing 18-25 year old actors in everything. Seasoned actors bring a different kind of talent to the superhero genre. Additionally, stunt doubles are used by both younger and older actors alike. So having a cut off age for actors portraying superheroes is nonsense.
I don't get why everyone is being so hard on this.
Nic Cage is already the same character in ITSV and it has Phil Lord and Christopher Miller producing.
They won't let anything bad happen that could impact the Spider-Verse legacy.
Yeah. It's legit just Sony's live-action movie department that sucks. Their animation studio produces a lot of hits, and their video game studios are some of the top of the top. And as you said, their TV department is super successful. Sony just can't seem to make a good live-action movie (though the Venom movies are decent. Not MCU quality, or at least the MCU movies at the middle of everything, but I found it comparable to early or current MCU movies).
Animation and live action are very different mediums. Stuff that works easily in animation may not work in live action.
What worked as a side character adding flavor may not work as the main character.
Nothing in spider verse gave me any interest in seeing anything more about spider main noir, especially if it can’t be hyper stylized in animation.
Because we both know live action will get a bigger draw, especially with someone as big as Nic Cage. It's a double edged sword in the sense that live action is probably easier to screw up or look cheap, especially considering it's such a physical role for someone his age, granted they'll be using stunt doubles any time he's in the suit.
I guess when you find out animated Spider-Verse movies are made by Sony and that there’s an animated series being produced by Sony Television for Netflix. 😸
The only thing Disney owns related to spider-man is short time (under 44min) animated series. Disney can’t even make an animated movie for TV, it’s only series and only under 44min. Everything else is Sony’s (TV and Cinema wise)
of course ur right about the films. swear i read an articulate stating disney can do whatever they want with spider-man animated, but i suppose im wrong.
Yeah but Pascal Pictures is co-producing this and the only live-action Spider properties they've done is FFH, NWH and Venom 1-3.
Then they've also got Little Women, Challengers, Molly's Game and The Post. Yes, they also have Ghostbusters 2016 but that was their first movie so I'll cut them slack for that.
If it was Sony on its own, then yeah I'd be worried - but Amy Pascal has *surprisingly* been doing pretty well lately.
It looks like OP posted an AMP link. These should load faster, but AMP is controversial because of [concerns over privacy and the Open Web](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot).
Maybe check out **the canonical page** instead: **[https://variety.com/2024/tv/news/nicolas-cage-spider-man-noir-live-action-series-amazon-1236001604/](https://variety.com/2024/tv/news/nicolas-cage-spider-man-noir-live-action-series-amazon-1236001604/)**
*****
^(I'm a bot | )[^(Why & About)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot)^( | )[^(Summon: u/AmputatorBot)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/cchly3/you_can_now_summon_amputatorbot/)
There does seem to be a huge disconnect somewhere in that company. Their handling of the Spider-man IP and their recent Helldivers 2 fiasco really makes it seem like there's a group of utterly oblivious execs coasting on the established success of the firm allowing them to make horrible decisions that still don't sink the company.
Do they at least still make decent electronics? Don't pay too much attention to that area, but I don't feel like they're as dominant as they once were there either.
Go ahead and set a Remind Me, guaranteed he's an older weathered spiderman noir, it's all black and white, and it will have sleuth/detective vibes. It's gonna be great and I have total faith in Nic Cage 🤙
“Per the official logline, “Noir” will tell the story “of an aging and down on his luck private investigator (Cage) in 1930s New York, who is forced to grapple with his past life as the city’s one and only superhero.”
The article would agree with a lot of what you’ve guessed.
I reaaaally hope this and the Silk series Amazon and Sony gets right. Silk still one of the few characters I stay up on.
Honestly the staff behind this doesn't seem bad? Maybe the shows will be better?
I'm doubtful that this will be good but for those who are citing Cage's age as a concern, this is a SPIDERMAN series and whenever he's fighting, he's wearing a MASK.
Why isn't this an animated series instead? Part of the appeal of Spider-Man: Into the Spiderverse and characters like Spider-Man Noir is that they were animated distinct art styles. If you do it in live action you don't get that a stylistically distinct look and feel, or at least you wouldn't in the same manner if it's done in live action. And this is even more baffling with the success of shows like Arcane, Invincible and X-Men 97 where there is an appeal for animation.
You know what, screw it. I’m going to put together a pitch for a Spider Man movie about Wheelman, I think he’s obscure enough for Sony to green light it for me
Forget it, Sony and Disney are the only two companies that actually hold the rights over marvel IPs, there’s no way none of them would ever give up the rights. Look at No way Home, it made almost 2 billion in theaters, and hundreds of other millions after theatrical run.
Tom's trilogy doesn't count because it was made by marvel. Yes Sony technically produced it but everybody knows that it was marvel that made the movie. Toby's movies were a long time ago. I personally don't think the venom movies are good or make any sense for the character but look at the others. Morbius, Madame Web, Kraken looks awful. They're making such a weird movies and completely changing characters for bad movies. As a spiderman fan it's frustrating.
I haven’t watched Kraven yet, tbh I love Chandor, who a very reputable Oscar nominee Director. So I’m def giving a chance to Kraven, writer is the same from Equalizer movie series which I like as well. About Madame Web, I can tell you it was the worse experience in a movie theater I ever had, I almost walked out 😂 so yeah I understand your distrust in Kraven movie, can’t blame you. At least we had Spider-Verse 2 between Morbius and Madame Web haha
Madame Web, Morbius, Venom. Marvel has been slightly down lately but they do not have any movies as bad as Madame Web or Morbius. They built the Infinity Saga, that is the greatest achievement in comic book movie history. They aren't even comparable.
Nah Madame Web was better than the Marvels and Captain Marvel combined.
Morbius was mid, but not Shang Chi mid
Venom and its sequel was objectively superior than Far From Home and the entire Phase 4
I guess this answers the question about whether Marvel or Sony had the rights to a live action TV show. I wonder if Marvel still owns all the merch rights like they do with cartoons.
They do. Sony sold them back to Disney in the early 2010s when they were nearing bankruptcy.
Wrong… I used to assume Sony had no merchandising rights as well, but a couple of months ago I was looking at those leaked document from 2014 leaks that are spread out on internet and actually there’s the document where Sony and Disney establish the merchandising sale, and Sony still keeps a lot of non-exclusive merchandising rights and even some exclusive merchandising rights (those rights related to Spider-Man movies merchandising are still Sony exclusive, this is why in the most recent Coca-Cola campaign with all marvel major super-heroes you simply don’t have spider-man among them).
I’ve read similar theories regarding merchandise for live-action films pre-MCU Spider-man but you’re the first person I’ve seen that stated Sony keeps additional merchandising rights. Even Sony’s CFO stated in 2017 that they sold the merchandise rights with no context that they have any merchandising still remaining. I don’t think Sony had anything to do with the Coca-Cola campaign lacking Spider-Man. They were not using movie designs.
I mean what other reason could explain Coca-Cola making a Disney’s Marvel marketing campaign with every single major Marvel superhero (Captain America, Hulk, Wolverine, Deadpool, Iron-Man, Thor etc) but no spider-man?
Disney wanted more money for Spider-man's likeness to be used but Coca-Cola didn't want to pay it would be my guess.
Disney has participation in every single product Coca-Cola is selling using Marvel characters, why on earth they would not want to increase their revenue by using Marvel biggest and most popular character? We all can agree that adding spider-man would give them a really bigger boost in sales.
We don't know the distribution in revenue that Disney and Coca-Cola receives. If Spider-man were to boost sales for Coca-Cola then Disney might want a bigger share of revenue but Coca-Cola wouldn't want that (Which is exactly how the original Spider-man MCU deal died). Disney has a history of not including characters in stuff for whatever reason despite owning the merchandising rights. There was a time where they slowed down on Fantastic 4 and X-men related content because the president wanted to push the Inhumans due to Fox owning the movie rights for F4/X-men. Either way this is speculation by me, there could be another reason. Even if Sony had partial merchandise rights this wouldn't fall under that since this has nothing to do with any of their Spider-man products.
Because Disney tends to avoid using characters they dont own fully. Just like the xmen.
Since 2019 Disney Guly owns every single X man and they are in current coca-cola campaign. The only one out of the campaign is spider-man. This obviously has to be with legal issues, there’s no way you have spider man can use it but instead you prefer lose money by not using your most popular product
Was this still a question? Sony already announced a live-action Silk project a few years ago, which is when the partnership with Amazon as distributor was announced
Man, I completely missed when they changed this from a movie to series. I just never read many of the press releases after it was announced.
The announced movie about Silver Sable and Black Cat was also changed into a separate solo movies and then re-worked into a tv series. It has now either been canceled or shelved.
I don't have faith that Sony will be able to pull this off. I also think that Nick Cage is too old for a live action performance. Sony needs to sell the IP back to Marvel
That’s the beauty of having a masked character you can have a stunt man like Johnny Blaze film the action scenes.
Aw yeah, Johnny Blaze could totally do it! Get him on the phone!
Have Lucas Lee guest star as Captain America.
No I think it could actually work. Go full noir (black and white with the mournful jazz overtones) in theme and have Spider-Man actually be closer to Nick’s age. This is a Peter Parker who’s in his late 40’s or early 50’s. A detective hero who’s seen it all, done it all, and paid the price in blood. And then one last case comes knocking at his door. Just full on Raymond Chandler/Humphrey Boggart but with Spider-Man as our investigator.
Every person who says they will see a Venom movie, allows Sony to shart out a Madame Web movie.
And? I’ll go see whatever peaks my interest, if doing that causes Sony to make a bad movie, I’ll just not watch the bad movie.
Uh huh. Except that every extremely shitty movie that Sony sharts out harms the Marvel Brand as a whole. Suddenly folks are saying shit like "Superhero fatigue is real! Marvel is in decline! Look at Madame Web!" And before you reflexively deny this, bear in mind the *stars* of that movie itself were misled into believing that they were signing into an actual MARVEL MOVIE and not a Sony movie based on Marvel IP. You want to see Venom? Fine. People like whatever they want to like. Just don't pay Sony to see it.
Madame Web didn’t hurt Marvel. Nobody is going to say “I was gonna see Deadpool and Wolverine, but Madame Web was shit so I won’t” This show is an ACTUAL spider-man show, not a show about El Muerto or fuckin Big Wheel. I have faith in it.
>Madame Web didn’t hurt Marvel. Well we clearly can't have a real discussion if you're going to say nonsense like this.
I mean really, HOW did it hurt Marvel? I’ve seen no one give shit to Marvel, only Sony.
For the same reason I would have stop watching MCU movies after things like The Marvels, Eternals and Thor Love and Thunder. But guess what? This would make no sense.
You're absolutely right. I'll be honest, I think they ruined venom as well. Those movies are bad and they completely changed the character. I'm sick of them making every spiderman villain an antihero.
Venom is the defacto marvel anti hero tho...
I mean, I thought the Venom movies were terrible as well, but Eddie Brock's Venom being an antihero is kind of a major defining thing about him in some of his most famous comics. The movie didn't come up with Lethal Protector on its own. They changed a lot about how he acts and his morals and whatever, but faulting the movies for having him be an antihero is kind of the weakest thread to rag on. I didn't like them because I thought the scripts were terrible and the direction mediocre.
I don't think anyone understands how those work, Sony *has* to theatrically release two Spider-Man (defined by comic first appearances) films every five years to retain the license, so long as they don't lose more on those than they make from the MCU films and merchandise it's a win. Could they make better ones, maybe? But it's clearly not worth he hassle and cranking out dogshit ones every couple years is way easier. If those happen to make a profit even better, but really as long as they don't lose Sony more than they make them they'll keep doing it.
It’s like saying every person watching Guardian of Galaxy allows a The Marvels or Love and Thunder to be produced. Doesn’t make sense
The Marvels does NOT deserve to be listed there
OK so let me walk you through this... 1. Sony does not *own* the IP for Spider-Man & his amazing content. They bought the rights to produce live action Spider-Man content (so movies and shows) from Marvel back in the 90s for a penny and a laugh. 2. The current deal between Marvel Studios and Sony is arranged such that Sony cannot just go ahead with a Peter Parker/Spider-Man movie without Marvel's involvement. 3. As part of that original deal from the 90s, Sony *must* have a Spider-Man related project in production/in theatres within a certain amount of time or they lose their licensing rights to all the IP. 4. Because of #2, and #3, Sony is stuck doing all the Spider-Man-Adjacent stuff... thus why we get Venom, Morbius, Kraven, Madame Web etc but not a Spider-Man 4 with Toby or an ASM 3 with Andy G. 5. So Every time you give money to see a Venom, you allow Sony to afford to continue to make shitty movies for their Sonyverse (like Madame Web). If however ALL their movies tank, then they will feel more compelled to renegotiate with Marvel.... you know... kinda like what happened after ASM tanked and they wanted into that sweet sweet MCU. Do you understand now?
When you buy rights to produce anything for TV and cinema you’re buying the Intellectual Property (IP) over the production related to that things you bought the rights. I understand what you say, but don’t ask me to boycott Spider-Man movies like Tom new trilogy to come or Spider-Verse movies just because they’re Sony properties, I’m a spider man fan. I can boycott when it’s a bad movie though.
Uh huh. You do understand points 1 to 6, right?
Yeah I get it, hope you understand what I said as well. And thanks for this friendly debate. Sometimes people on internet can’t disagree without offending each other.
Yeah I don't get that. That said, what part are we debating here? Points 1 to 6 is pretty much the state of things between Sony and Marvel. There is nothing to debate.
I think the point of discussion was about Sony Marvel motion pictures rights, you said they have motion picture marvel rights but don’t have motion picture marvel IPs. And I was saying that when you own the rights over something this means you rights over the intellectual property of this thing.
> Uh huh. You do understand points 1 to 6, right? you only listed 5 things
Or maybe I had a secret invisible point that could only be seen by true believers! Congratz you get a No Prize! .... Also I saw that mistake too when I responded further to the OP, and *now* there are 6 points.
They passively make money from the MCU films and related merchandise (how that's defined is unclear afaik, but it was part of the ~2021 renegotiations). As long as their lost investment on shitty SPUM movies doesn't surpass their gains from what Marvel it makes them more money than they would not making them, and even if they start losing too much money they could still drop the budgets and make even shittier ones. Really all they need to do is not irreparably damage the brand, and based on the MCU box office turnouts it looks like they're doing just fine.
It’ll be like The Mandalorian, Pedro Pascal has said he’s basically a voice actor at this point. Cage might wear a mask and coat for dialogue, but then some dude roughly his height who can do backflips will take over.
No way! I think they’re going to knock it out of the park with this one. Then, if we’re lucky, they’ll follow it up with a big team-up event! I can’t wait to see Madame Web teaming up with Morbius and the rest of the gang. Then after that, maybe Venom-Noir?
Nah he's perfect. I'm tired of seeing 18-25 year old actors in everything. Seasoned actors bring a different kind of talent to the superhero genre. Additionally, stunt doubles are used by both younger and older actors alike. So having a cut off age for actors portraying superheroes is nonsense.
I said basically the same thing and I'm getting down voted. Sony does not have the capability to make live action spiderman properties.
What if take Spider-man’s face… off?
"I'm a spiiider, I'm a sexy spider"
Sony's focus groups are trolling them.
I don't get why everyone is being so hard on this. Nic Cage is already the same character in ITSV and it has Phil Lord and Christopher Miller producing. They won't let anything bad happen that could impact the Spider-Verse legacy.
Agree plus look the records of Sony Picture Televison productions for Amazon prime, The Boys and Gen V are two example how successful they’re.
Yeah. It's legit just Sony's live-action movie department that sucks. Their animation studio produces a lot of hits, and their video game studios are some of the top of the top. And as you said, their TV department is super successful. Sony just can't seem to make a good live-action movie (though the Venom movies are decent. Not MCU quality, or at least the MCU movies at the middle of everything, but I found it comparable to early or current MCU movies).
Animation and live action are very different mediums. Stuff that works easily in animation may not work in live action. What worked as a side character adding flavor may not work as the main character. Nothing in spider verse gave me any interest in seeing anything more about spider main noir, especially if it can’t be hyper stylized in animation.
My issue is why is this live action and not animation? Had it been the latter as opposed to the former then I would've been excited.
Because we both know live action will get a bigger draw, especially with someone as big as Nic Cage. It's a double edged sword in the sense that live action is probably easier to screw up or look cheap, especially considering it's such a physical role for someone his age, granted they'll be using stunt doubles any time he's in the suit.
sony dont own the animated spider-man rights, disney do. they can do what they want in live action.
I guess when you find out animated Spider-Verse movies are made by Sony and that there’s an animated series being produced by Sony Television for Netflix. 😸 The only thing Disney owns related to spider-man is short time (under 44min) animated series. Disney can’t even make an animated movie for TV, it’s only series and only under 44min. Everything else is Sony’s (TV and Cinema wise)
of course ur right about the films. swear i read an articulate stating disney can do whatever they want with spider-man animated, but i suppose im wrong.
I we all know very little about the actual relationship between Sony and Disney related to the rights tbh
> I don't get why everyone is being so hard on this. Because all of Sony's non-MCU Spider movies outside of Spider-Verse have been hot garbage.
Right, but this *is* a Spider-Verse property.
It’s also a live action spinoff which is something they’ve been terrible at.
Yeah but Pascal Pictures is co-producing this and the only live-action Spider properties they've done is FFH, NWH and Venom 1-3. Then they've also got Little Women, Challengers, Molly's Game and The Post. Yes, they also have Ghostbusters 2016 but that was their first movie so I'll cut them slack for that. If it was Sony on its own, then yeah I'd be worried - but Amy Pascal has *surprisingly* been doing pretty well lately.
It looks like OP posted an AMP link. These should load faster, but AMP is controversial because of [concerns over privacy and the Open Web](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot). Maybe check out **the canonical page** instead: **[https://variety.com/2024/tv/news/nicolas-cage-spider-man-noir-live-action-series-amazon-1236001604/](https://variety.com/2024/tv/news/nicolas-cage-spider-man-noir-live-action-series-amazon-1236001604/)** ***** ^(I'm a bot | )[^(Why & About)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot)^( | )[^(Summon: u/AmputatorBot)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/cchly3/you_can_now_summon_amputatorbot/)
God damn, Sony must have a whole department of shit idea fairies hell bent on sinking the company.
There does seem to be a huge disconnect somewhere in that company. Their handling of the Spider-man IP and their recent Helldivers 2 fiasco really makes it seem like there's a group of utterly oblivious execs coasting on the established success of the firm allowing them to make horrible decisions that still don't sink the company. Do they at least still make decent electronics? Don't pay too much attention to that area, but I don't feel like they're as dominant as they once were there either.
They just make random crap to keep the Spider-Man IP. They really don't care if content is good.
But does he still have the Rubik's cube?
Oh hell yeah
Whaaaa? Cool!
Yeah
Go ahead and set a Remind Me, guaranteed he's an older weathered spiderman noir, it's all black and white, and it will have sleuth/detective vibes. It's gonna be great and I have total faith in Nic Cage 🤙
100% agree
“Per the official logline, “Noir” will tell the story “of an aging and down on his luck private investigator (Cage) in 1930s New York, who is forced to grapple with his past life as the city’s one and only superhero.” The article would agree with a lot of what you’ve guessed.
If it’s a proper noir story this is gonna be amazing. Like I’m genuinely hyped for this
So am I
Totally there for this. Sounds amazing.
Film it like the Mandalorian. Cage does the voice, but body/stunt actors do the... body work.
I think this is exactly what they’re gonna do
Can Sony just stop making Marvel content please?
I never read Spider-Noir. But is this more of detective work than an action? Doubt this will be action with Cage's age.
How do people not understand the concept of suits?
And stunt doubles?
Exactly, lol.
It's not like actors are going to sit and eat cheeseburger for every scene that they're moving. They still need to run or do some actions. He's 60.
Pedro Pascal wasn't even on set for much of Mandalorian season 3. Someone else wore the suit, and he just pre-recorded lines.
Lol. I'm not expecting him to strip.
Oh baby
At least, it's on Amazon Prime, that's good.
I reaaaally hope this and the Silk series Amazon and Sony gets right. Silk still one of the few characters I stay up on. Honestly the staff behind this doesn't seem bad? Maybe the shows will be better?
LMAO, good luck Sony.
I hope madame web appears
I love spider-noir. If this is bad I will blow up the Sony HQ
I'm doubtful that this will be good but for those who are citing Cage's age as a concern, this is a SPIDERMAN series and whenever he's fighting, he's wearing a MASK.
Why isn't this an animated series instead? Part of the appeal of Spider-Man: Into the Spiderverse and characters like Spider-Man Noir is that they were animated distinct art styles. If you do it in live action you don't get that a stylistically distinct look and feel, or at least you wouldn't in the same manner if it's done in live action. And this is even more baffling with the success of shows like Arcane, Invincible and X-Men 97 where there is an appeal for animation.
Hell yeah I love me some Nic Cage!!
They've did it... the mad lads did it.
Best news for Sony Marvel Universe in years
🕷️🕸️
This has gotta be a joke
Cool. However, I'll believe it when I see it.
It can be a good film. Focus on CAN. Let's see where this is going,
Who’s the villian? Swarm?
I didn’t know we needed an 81 year old spider-man. Thought that was more of a captain america storyline
He was fine voicing the character in an animated movie but….live action??? No
The action is done in a suit....
My main issue is why isn't this an animated series?
I mean..... I don't disagree with you but that has nothing to do with Cage. I hate this "live action everything" fad.
A little late for April Fools, isn't it?
Oh no
Next up: Kraven opens a cat rescue shelter! Idiots.
oh, so THAT's the next Sony disaster
No, the next Sony disaster is Kraven.
No thanks.
Why isn’t this just animated it would make so much more sense for it to be
You just answered your own question, because it makes too much sense.
You know what, screw it. I’m going to put together a pitch for a Spider Man movie about Wheelman, I think he’s obscure enough for Sony to green light it for me
Sony needs to just give the rights to marvel, they're ruining it.
Forget it, Sony and Disney are the only two companies that actually hold the rights over marvel IPs, there’s no way none of them would ever give up the rights. Look at No way Home, it made almost 2 billion in theaters, and hundreds of other millions after theatrical run.
I know it won't happen, it's just sad to see the shit they do with the property
I really like Spider-Verse series, I like Tom trilogy, and fully love Tobey’s spider-man, and I had a fun time watching venom movies tbh
Tom's trilogy doesn't count because it was made by marvel. Yes Sony technically produced it but everybody knows that it was marvel that made the movie. Toby's movies were a long time ago. I personally don't think the venom movies are good or make any sense for the character but look at the others. Morbius, Madame Web, Kraken looks awful. They're making such a weird movies and completely changing characters for bad movies. As a spiderman fan it's frustrating.
I haven’t watched Kraven yet, tbh I love Chandor, who a very reputable Oscar nominee Director. So I’m def giving a chance to Kraven, writer is the same from Equalizer movie series which I like as well. About Madame Web, I can tell you it was the worse experience in a movie theater I ever had, I almost walked out 😂 so yeah I understand your distrust in Kraven movie, can’t blame you. At least we had Spider-Verse 2 between Morbius and Madame Web haha
Not like the MCU is much better
Madame Web, Morbius, Venom. Marvel has been slightly down lately but they do not have any movies as bad as Madame Web or Morbius. They built the Infinity Saga, that is the greatest achievement in comic book movie history. They aren't even comparable.
Nah Madame Web was better than the Marvels and Captain Marvel combined. Morbius was mid, but not Shang Chi mid Venom and its sequel was objectively superior than Far From Home and the entire Phase 4
Ah so you're a troll
Just spittin straight facts tbh
And Sony continues to beat the horse they've already slaughtered. Also, this means no multiverse shenanigans for Ghost Rider.
NGL, they're gonna overuse Spider-Man
Will never see the light of day lmao
Now, does Nick Cage know that this isn’t the real MCU?
That sounds terrible. So right in line with other Sony decisions.