Because the whole point of the deal for Sony was to gain some momentum for their Spider-man, and Homecoming is their movie so its their Spider-man.
You can be connected to Spider-man and not interfere with Marvel's grand scheme at the same time.
A... Aunt may what ?
Ok Sony you need to fuck off.
That's it.
Interesting. On one hand, I like the idea of having the freedom to Logan-ize it and I think that could make sense for Venom. On the other...
...this.
Tom Rothman
That's all you need to know.
Indeed, the deal was to give momentum for the Spiderman franchise. Not invariable spin-offs utilizing secondary Spiderman characters in films that are reported to have no connection with the MCU whatsoever.
Your argument for these movies being connected to the Tom Holland version of Spiderman makes no sense, and flies in the face of previous evidence that indicates these movies won't even be set in a universe where Spiderman is even a thing. These films are only "connected with Spiderman" to the extent that they're taking characters commonly associated with Spiderman and giving them their own isolated stories (see also: Catwoman)
Where do you see evidence that these movies will exist in a world that Spider-man doesn't?
Like he may not be in them, and could be events before his time, but nothing points to this lacking Spider-man in this universe.
So Spidey is going to be Ursula Buffay, except no Helen Hunt cameo?
Tom Holland's Spiderman won't be in this, because his version is currently web-slinging it up in the MCU. If these films aren't set in the MCU, he won't be in them. Holland is contracted for a handful of movies, and those movies will be set within the MCU. So his Spiderman will not be in these films.
It's theoretically possible that another, brand new Spiderman could be introduced in these films...but I think even Sony realise that would make things very messy and only inevitably end up diluting the Spiderman brand.
I guess this also torpedoes the idea of Venom showing up in a Spider-Man MCU sequel. Sigh.
Guys. Where is this no spiderman thing in the venom movie coming from?
I looked at the article and OP and nowhere does it say Spider-Man wont be in the movie?
What am I missing.
Which version of Venom are we getting?
Tom Holland's Spiderman won't be in this, because his version is currently web-slinging it up in the MCU. If these films aren't set in the MCU, he won't be in them. Holland is contracted for a handful of movies, and those movies will be set within the MCU. So his Spiderman will not be in these films.
It's theoretically possible that another, brand new Spiderman could be introduced in these films...but I think even Sony realise that would make things very messy and only inevitably end up diluting the Spiderman brand.
This isn't even true. Tom can do both movies from the original contract I thought? They're sharing him. Right? Wrong?
Indeed, the deal was to give momentum for the Spiderman franchise. Not invariable spin-offs utilizing secondary Spiderman characters in films that are reported to have no connection with the MCU whatsoever.
Your argument for these movies being connected to the Tom Holland version of Spiderman makes no sense, and flies in the face of previous evidence that indicates these movies won't even be set in a universe where Spiderman is even a thing. These films are only "connected with Spiderman" to the extent that they're taking characters commonly associated with Spiderman and giving them their own isolated stories (see also: Catwoman)
Sony doesn't have rights to use Spidey anymore
Can't Sony put Spider-Man in whatever movies they want? They own the film rights to Spider-Man, they are just loaning the character out to Marvel Studios for Avengers. There doesn't seem like any reason why they couldn't put him in these movies.
Rothman's Spider-Man Universe Without Spider-Man.
Fucking shut this shit down, can it. Burn Sony Pictures away.
This isn't even true. Tom can do both movies from the original contract I thought? They're sharing him. Right? Wrong?
In an interview with THR, Spider-Man: Homecoming star Tom Holland revealed that he's contracted for six Marvel movies – three solo adventures as Spidey and three appearances in other films:
One of the best Spider-Man stories of all time could easily be R-Rated. It's not like Spider-Man is without dark themes and stories.R rated Spider-man universe?
Spider-Man?!?
Sony....get your head out of your ass. No wonder why Sony relies more and more on their gaming division.
Almost as stupid as Marvel TV doing all sorts of crazy things within the MCU and getting completely ignored by Feige?
Casuals don't care.
If Spider-Man isn't a part of this, I have to assume they're skipping straight to "Venom the antihero", which means I probably won't be seeing this. Venom the antihero was never as interesting to me as Venom the Spider-Man antagonist.
Sony doesn't have rights to use Spidey anymore
Sony, no. You're not talented to pull off a good R rated film. You are just doing it because Logan and deadpool did well. You couldn't remember how to make a good Spiderman movie with him in it. You sure as shit can't do it without him. and nobody wants to see R rated Spiderman, christ.
Sony doesn't have rights to use Spidey anymore
The only thing that could possibly get me excited for this is if they got Raimi to do it.
Fiege should get him to do one of the future Spider-Man Sony/Marvel collaboration movies.
That I can agree with. But Raimi is probably done with superheroes, sadly.
He hated Venom before Spider-Man 3 and he probably hates him even more now.
Could it work? Disney-Marvel already releases some dark stuff with the Netflix line of Marvel shows while not having problems with continuing their family safe movies. Fox juggles R rated entries based on a PG-13 franchise (X-men)
Are we underestimating the audience's ability to understand that these franchises offer family-friendly options with rougher, optional entries available as well?