Hmmm, good idea or bad idea?

What? Spider-Man is coming home and joining The Avengers on the big screen? Not so fast! Whereas this seems like an incredible idea at first, the email memos released due to this massive Sony Hack have revealed more problems than hope for this new venture. In fact, with proposed clauses and plans such as these, one starts to wish this deal DOESN’T happen – or at least not in the way Sony wants.

Double Standard:

From the get go of these emails, you can tell things will be bad. At the start we see that Sony loves the idea of Spider-Man in Captain America: Civil War; but makes it clear that they “won’t give them [Marvel] what they want”. So what will they give them? Well Sony Pictures co-chairman Amy Pascal wants to make sure that any Spider-Man appearance in Captain America: Civil War is truly a joint venture with Sony having to approve not only castings; but also scouting locations in Queens. Totally understandable concerns to be sure; but things get interesting as we leave Captain America: Civil War behind.

In the email memo to herself, Pascal plans to inquire about using Captain America to also set up their Sinister Six movie – which is already in the works. The fact that they’d keep working on their Sinister Six movie – part of the Amazing Spider-Man universe – and start working a new Spider-Man is an awfully confusing and universe – violating idea; but that’s not what’s bad. Despite earlier insistence that any use of Spider-Man in Captain America: Civil War has to be approved by Sony – and will only be a ONE TIME THING – Pascal later goes on to write that Sony can use any Marvel characters and DON’T need their approval . . . huh?

Now earlier Pascal wonders how it will be to put Spider-Man in Sinister Six only 6 months after being with Captain America and Iron Man because the new Spider-Man Universe WILL NOT have these character. But they could. Pascal feels that Marvel shouldn’t be able to use Spiderman after Captain America: Civil War YET Sony can use any of Marvel’s characters. Now she says it would be in a “collaborative effort”; but is it really “collaborative” if Sony “Don’t need their approval”? I’m sure this didn’t fly with Marvel or Disney; but in case they missed that part, allow me to give some advice by quoting another –now- Disney franchise . . . “IT’S A TRAP!!!!”

Further more, that last note about how ‘Sony will put the Marvel logo on their films, but Sony can put their logo on Marvel’ is a nice gesture but ultimately pointless aside from the Disney add. Sony’s Spiderman films already have the Marvel logo because *drumroll* the CHARACTER of Spider-Man is Marvel. The movie rights might be owned by Sony currently; but the name, image, etc of Spider-Man is Marvel – just not Marvel Studios.

Andrew Garfield Is Out:

Now whether the crossover is a go or not, Sony is apparently set on one thing: Cast a new Spiderman. Apparently the studio was upset with The Amazing Spider-Man 2’s performance and didn’t like the fact that Andrew Garfield admitted the studio was probably to blame for AS2 poor performance. Was it an ill-advised thing to say? Sure; but was it true? Absolutely! Andrew Garfield plays an absolutely spectacular Spider-Man and combines the intelligence, angst and wise cracks associated with Spider-Man – as opposed to Tobey Maguire who just brought out the angst.

Was The Amazing Spider-Man 2 a bad movie? No; but it certainly wasn’t the movie they marketed it to be. Sure the villains ‘united’ to face Spider-Man as the trailers kept promising; but not in the same scale. Also let’s be honest, the movie was mainly about Gwen and Peter. Again, that doesn’t make it bad, just not what it was presented as. Heck the trailers used footage that wasn’t only ‘post credits’; but also didn’t even make it into the final film.

A Not So Different Re-reboot:

Crossover. No Crossover. Either way, it looks like Sony is trying to reset their universe again for Spiderman. Aside from them basically calling it quits on Amazing Spiderman 3 – yes, that was in the emails too – Sony seems to really want a whole new Spiderman; but do the viewers? Does EVERYONE love Garfield? No; but that’s not the point. How many times must we reboot this series? What will we call the next batch, The More-Amazing Spider-Man? HOW MANY TIMES must we watch Uncle Ben die? If Sony’s not pleased with any of their Spider-Man plans, then maybe they should stop making Spider-Man films. Hell, they were – or still are – thinking about making a movie all about Aunt May – without Spiderman. It’s almost like Sony is trying to pull a ‘Producers’ and purposefully make a flop.

Verdict:

It’s important to remember that all of these emails happened in October – BEFORE Marvel unveiled all their Phase 3 plans. So there’s a very strong chance that talks could have fallen apart very quickly due to Sony’s insane demands. Then again, maybe they’re still continuing and Marvel has called Sony’s bluffs. Either way, the problem with all this is that Spider-Man doesn’t NEED to be in Captain America: Civil War. Marvel Studios’ Kevin Feige has already said that this is the Civil War of the Marvel Cinematic Universe and not the one of the comics. Marvel doesn’t need Spider-Man, so Sony’s extreme ‘they need us’ mentality for these talks is ridiculous.

To throw Spider-Man into Captain America: Civil War just to have him leave and become a part of a totally unrelated universe in which Sony can reign free and use any of Marvels other characters without approval is AWFUL on so many levels. It’s not Garfield that ruined Spider-Man for Sony, it’s Sony. They can reboot it a million times but only Marvel – the company that ACTUALLY owns Spider-Man – can make him fly… or swing. There’s a huge difference between Spider-Man and movie Spider-Man; and Sony needs to remember that because whereas Spider-Man has been a beloved superhero for decades, the movie one has not – or at least was starting to until Sony pulled the plug.