A Weasel Named Sony…

“If it had been a snake, it would have bit me.”

-Calvin Candie

Welcome back to the City Supreme! As always A.J. Diesel here coming to you with takes hotter than a supernova. I've gotta start by saying, does the Hindenburg sound familiar? How about the Titanic? SELL SELL SELL! That may be a bit of a stretch but do heed the warning. Disney did the work, Disney laid the foundation, and Sony backed out. They found stones and have decided to bet on themselves. The honeymoon is over and the marriage no more. And boy oh boy, Sony messed up. Sony fans can blame Disney for being “money hungry” all they want, but at the end of the day, Sony should have given Disney everything and some. They’re the reason people were excited about Spider-Man again.

I hate to say it, but I saw this coming. So much so, that as my wife and I were leaving the theater after Spider-Man: Far From Home, I text my brother “this is the end of Spidey in the MCU”. I said that for a few reasons. For starters, The Infinity Saga is over. Everything else that happens now is secondary. Surely the future MCU will do massive numbers, but it's already been done. If there was ever a time for Sony to pull out, it had to be now. It had to be when Spider-Man is at the peak of his popularity once more.

Spider-Man: Far From Home was the first Spidey flick to gross over a billion dollars. All of the films were super profitable, but half of those received negative feedback from fans. Aside from Raimis original two films, which don't hold a candle to either of the Tom Holland pictures, Spider-Man 3 and both of the Amazing Spider-Man films were ghastly, with shimmers of hope in J.K. Simmons and Emma Stone. Her death sequence was fabulous.


Image result for emma stone gwen stacyRelated image

Another reason this was obvious were those laughable post credits scenes. The first had zero to do with the greater MCU and the second was just rubbish. Nick fury has proved to be the worst secret agent of all time.


Image result for amazing spiderman 15 mary jane


Furthermore, somehow that ridiculous Venom film did well in theaters. Well enough that Sony Pictures is really going through with a solo Morbius movie. The bottom line is you cannot have those characters without Spider-Man. Disney should have seen this coming from light-years away. Sony has had a little success, and now they're going all in.


Image result for spiderman unlimited 2

Finale to the Maximum Carnage Series


Image result for spiderman 101

First Appearance of Morbius


You also have the Maguire and dare I say Garfield purists. So Sony can use the Spider-Verse and bring all of these characters together. In the cop out of the century, they can claim that all of their movies are in continuity, much like the X-Men did with their latter films. Bush league.


Image result for spider-man actors


In regards to comics, Spider-Man is much more along the lines of Batman. They pretty much always stay HOTT. As opposed to what we saw happen with the X-Men and Fantastic Four. Marvel sabotaged their own comics, and the Fox films sabotaged themselves, thus sinking the secondary market on most of those books. We saw a Death of X, Death of Wolverine, and well they kind of just stopped doing the Fantastic Four and hoped nobody would notice. No worries, we didn't. That being said, when talks began between Fox and Disney, Wolverine came back to life, the FF got a new title, and thankfully saw the Death of the Inhuman garbage that was being jammed down our throats.

First appearance of Silk

Of course Marvel couldn't be foolish enough to stop publishing Spider-Man. But here is what they could do. Kill off Peter Parker for the 500th time and start marketing Spider-Gwen, Miles Morales, and Mary Jane as the new…new Spider-woMan. Hell you could even use Silk.

The point is, Marvel is going to have to put pressure back on Sony. Are they going to alienate their main audience by going the diversification route? It's certainly a thought. One thing Sony doesn't control nor will ever are the comic books. Could Marvel self sabotage for the bigger payoff? We'll see.

Now is a good time to sell Spider-Man, but really, any time is a good time to sell Spider-Man. The better question is when is the time to buy Spider-Man? I'd say in about 1-2 years you'll see a soft decline on Spidey non-LEGITMATE key books.

Image result for edge of the spider-verse #2

First Appearance of Spider-Gwen

Alas, the next Spider-Man will be a solo Sony Pictures film, and it will likely gross over a billion riding the success of Far From Home. What's truly going to hurt Spider-Man is the quality, writing, and passion put into the films.

If I were Tom Holland, I'd get out now, or demand 15 million + percentage of gross. If and when these films are poorly received, bad reviews are had, and confidence is lost in the product. So sure, Sony mustard up the brass to pull out, but they may have inevitably made it easier for the mouse house to buy them outright in about 10 years.

When these movies fail, and mark my words, they will, Sony will not be forgiven. Not by me, not by the fans, and certainly not by the MCU. Sony has clearly forgotten the reason that they leased Spider-Man to Disney in the first place…it’s because you had failed!

Have we seen the last great Spider-Man film? You tell me.


Image result for spider-man no more



  • millivanilli

    As much as I dislike Sony and even though Disney laid the foundation, I am a bit glad they stood up to Disney. Can you really blame Sony for not liking what Disney had to offer? Sony knows what they have in their hands, and at the end of the day it is all about $$$ with both corporations.

    Also, Fans will eat up anything Spiderman related, whether the movie does good or bad.

    • A. J. Diesel

      I agree with to a point. But the entire reason Sony did the leasing with Disney in the first place is because the fan base was losing confidence in the product the Sony was putting out in regards to Spider-Man. There’s a strong possibility this could happen again…but this time, Disney will just buy them out.

      Appreciate the read and the comment my friend!

    • Avatar

      Agreed. And its not like SOny has done bad…2 Raimi hits, 1 meh and 2 losses/ Just like Marvel Disney–Iron Man 2,3..Thor Dark World…3 mehs Dr.Strange, Antman and Wasp, GotG 2

  • Adam Lebednik

    It is usually Amy Pascals fault.

    • Avatar

      Apparently Disney/Marvel was getting 5% of the Solo Spidey movie revenue.

      They asked for 50% and Sony balked. That’s negotiating that’s all. They could have settled, but Sony wanted the deal to stay as is.

      I don’t blame Disney/Marvel for negotiating a new deal. I mean they saved Sony’s only money making property.

      How good will the next Spidey movie be without Happy Hogan and the Ironman back story and no shield, no infinity war mentions.

      All of a sudden Venom will be in New York or Spidey will go to San Francisco?

      I hope Sony goes with the spider verse angle. It will convoluted everything and confuse casual fans and critics alike and within 5 years, we are back to the Amazing Spider-man 2 fiasco.

  • Conan the Librarian

    Anybody read what Stan Lee’s daughter said about Disney/Marvel’s handling of her father’s legacy today? Ouch!!

    • A. J. Diesel

      I just read that article. Seems a little misguided and attention seeking. The MCU has done Stan and Stans legacy an amazing amount of justice. Even when Stan was living the entire cast loved him. Obviously Stans legacy transcends films, but come on, The MCU has opened the eyes of so many who would have never read a comic book.

      • Conan the Librarian

        That’s true that they have done justice to Stan in many ways. Not only all the cameos, but you get the sense that Feige etc really know and love the comics and the characters. And the MCU has been pretty faithful to the source material for the most part. They’ve also brought a lot of characters to the big screen who the general audience had never heard of and who fans would never have dared hope to see even ten years ago! (okay, a lot of that is because they didn’t have the rights to the big guns). And Marvel really did put Stan front and centre of that, probably as much as was feasible given his age.

        However, I guess we don’t know what went on with her behind the scenes. If true, Marvel not reaching out to her when her dad died sounds unfortunate to say the least.

        And while I think the Spider-Man situation is a mess, I agree with her that Disney – who is just a big corporation that bought the rights to all her dad’s characters etc – maybe should not be the only gatekeepers. They have the legal right to the characters, but they didn’t create them. And while they also have to protect their IP, when they do stuff like refuse permission to a grieving dad to have an image of spiderman on his young sons gravestone, that just sucks!

        Tom Holland appearing as Spider-Man to visit kids in hospital is more like it!

  • CountZeroInterrupt

    “Are they going to alienate their main audience by going the diversification route?” The assumption here is that the main audience is white and male so they won’t pay to see these other characters that are not white and male? “The diversification Route (TM)” is really about giving audiences (that have been paying to see white guys as leads) stories and characters that look and feel more like them occasionally. You know, the same thing that white guys have been enjoying since…well forever. Why is this framed as some sort of negative for said white guys? They can’t do what everyone else has been doing while they were in the spotlight? They can’t relate to someone’s story unless they are the same race and gender?

    This has been thoroughly debunked, hasn’t it? I mean, black people didn’t put Black Panther over a billion dollars by themselves right? Into the Spider-Verse won an Oscar and is considered by many to be the best Spider-Man movie ever crafted (some say best superhero movie, period).

    I apologize if I’ve misinterpreted your meaning A.J. but I’d be interested to hear your thoughts about what you meant.

    • A. J. Diesel

      I understand and can appreciate all of your thoughts my friend. My comment has nothing to do with my opinion on diversification in comics. I’m simply stating that, without statistic, I think it’s safe to say, the majority of people still buying comic books are males (probably mainly white?) in their late 30s or older.

      By and large older and bygone eras are more stuck in their way of “I like what I like”. That being said, if they pushed more for a diverse spider-man sales would fall, unless of course newer or younger readership took over. It applies to characters both white and black. These people like their Iron Man white and their Black Panther black. These are the comic readers. That’s who I was discussing. As far as movies, not I believe it’s 50/50 on those who appreciate diversification and those who do not.

      I simply made the comment because clearly Marvel wouldn’t do away with Spider-Man like they did with the x-men and fantastic four (pulling their comics, hurt Fox movie stock, and people lost interest). But if they wanted to attempt to sabotage, they wouldn’t risk Peter Parker.

      I appreciate the thorough comment, and feel the conversation by both of us would be much easier relayed in person haha. Sometimes words can get lost on a page.

      As for Black Panther, it did receive a vast black audience in America, as it didn’t fare nearly as well overseas. And I loved Into the Spider-Verse, but winning an Oscar certainly doesn’t mean people have seen a movie, as a handful are much smaller budgeted and not as appealing the general public.

    • A. J. Diesel

      And just a side note. What I mean by forced diversification, is when the publisher are changing a characters gender or sexual preference just to appeal to a political/social agenda, rather than focusing on the characters legitimate story. It’s a disservice in my opinion to legitimate diversification and story telling of minorities. I don’t think they should be used as marketing gimmicks, just my opinion though.

      • CountZeroInterrupt

        Thanks for elaborating A.J.

        I appreciate the added context and understand a bit more about how it relates to the overall point you’re making with this whole movie studio debacle and how each respective company may operate as a result. I guess my real issue stems from the idea that, as you say — if they pushed for a diverse Spider-Man, sales would fall. I don’t know if it’s an accurate assessment but it’s predicated on the idea that yeah— older white dudes won’t buy books about characters that don’t look like them. Whether it’s true or not, people seem to just accept it like they do so many other things. It just gives me pause to consider that this is a reality.

        And yeah, I do feel sometimes this stuff is best addressed over beers!

        Take care.

        • Conan the Librarian

          I think white males whether young or older, or whatever other wide ranging characteristics they have (white males are not a monolith, and nor are any other racial demographic), are happy to buy and read stories about characters that don’t look like them, and have been for a long time. But less so if it has to involve demonising them in some way, or using their years of fandom to take an established IP and then completely f**k around with it waaaay too much (cough cough* Star Wars *cough cough)

          I also think those same white male fans (including myself) are happy to see lots of new and different characters in the movies. But then you have Taika Waititi’s twitter comments (re: Thor Love and Thunder) such as “I’ll destroy your mythos in a minute baby” etc., it’s easy to see why many fans are feeling a bit put off and less interested in the future of the MCU.

          I would love love love to see a Doctor Aphra Star Wars movie for example, or a GOOD Batwoman tv show,
          or tv show of Velvet by Ed Brubaker, Jessica Cruz in the DCEU, Monica Rambeau as Captain Marvel etc etc etc

          Do Marvel, Lucasfilm etc really somehow not realise they are alienating and pissing off so much of their audience who they’ve got soooo much money from and used to springboard their franchises to a much wider audience???

  • El Elefante En El Cuarto

    Aside from ppl here who get offended over micro aggressions. you can guess who you are. NOT the author of this article. that is clear.

    Im indifferent to both SONY and MCU. Sony has no clue or has anyone at SONY that has no clue what to do with Spiderman. They failed. failed like FOX failed with BOTH the FF and the X-Men. The Phoenix saga was like a big f.u. we are done here.

    The MCU is just going woke. I think Stan Lee had to much of a voice. As soon as he passed on. Kevin went full SJW/NPC mode. Tom Holland doing talk of making Spider man gay? That turned me off
    Then SONY getting all big and bad like. oh , we got this. When they’ve seen for years what works and doesn’t work and they still made the crappy Venom movie

    So when im asked which is better? Into the frying pan or the fire? Both are just going off the rails. Especially SONY. How is Spider man going to explain no tech? no mention of the Avengers, ever. no mention of Iron Man ever, they might as well just not use Tom Holland or any of the actors they used. It will just raise to many questions. Then what? No Vulture. we did that, Sinister Six? from what? That ending in Far From Home showing Mystery revealing his identity? Use that? I wonder if they can’t use that for contract reasons?

    Its all a mess due to the greed and wokeness of society today. I miss the violent days of the 80;s and 90s; in NYC at least you knew why ppl where they way they were.

    Spider-Man: No Home

    • A. J. Diesel

      Appreciate the comment my friend. I try not to get to political on here, as I’m a true believer in the “stick to sports” model., but at times the two cross paths. I must agree with you, that even though I do love the original MCU, it’s truly becoming the WCU; Woke Cinematic Universe.

  • Avatar

    I heard on the Fatman Beyond that Disney got 5% AND all the merchandising money. Sony paid for the film and kept the 95%. If thats true then Disney got way more than 5% f the gross. PLUS, Spiderman isnt in any Phase 5 that we can see. Itll be years before we gat another Spidey. Maybe Sony wanted to make another one before Marvel got around to do it. Tom Holland isnt going to be young looking forever.

  • Avatar

    Great article, I’m just tired of the tug O war. It’s Disney, just give Sony all the money and a cut of the next couple movies. Done. Spiderman needs to be in the MCU.

  • Avatar

    There could be a new Generation of readers on it’s way, with a completely new vantage point to comics. The MCU is doing now what cartoons were doing in the ‘90s, and they will consider that to be Cannon. Both Marvel and DC are publishing more digest sized GNs for Young Adults, and these seem to be catching on.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.