Jump to content
rllmuk

McCoy

Supporters
  • Content Count

    8,366
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

4,781 profile views
  1. Person of interest as well - great series.
  2. Just seen that every season of South Park and Smallville have been added to Amazon. For archive TV, I think Amazon is now much better an Netflix. Futurama, House, The Office (US), Roswell, Buffy, Angel, Ally Mcbeal, Firefly, One Tree Hill, NCIS, Burn Notice, Greys Anatomy, Walking Dead, New Girl, Bones are all on the service now so for 90s and more recent TV it is pretty peerless at the moment.
  3. McCoy

    Nintendo Switch

    I've got a flight at 3pm today. I have a feeling it'll be touch and go....
  4. https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/49569697 Quite sensible. Automatic demotion to the league below rather than expulsion from the EFL league entirely might be a better remedy to Club's in Bury's situation.
  5. McCoy

    Nintendo Switch Lite

    Makes a certain amount of sense. Well, as much as we could really expect from Nintendo. I guess, however, if you have two Switch's and take both on a plane then only one will be able to play the digital games without the online connection. They should give you a grace period of 24/48 hours between online checks.
  6. It is annoying that the 4k, best of best version, still does not come with a digital copy. I'd much rather lose the Blu Ray disk and gain a digital copy.
  7. Fair point about the safety car. Happens quite often in Spa and would have brought him right into it.
  8. Really? Watching a percentage crawl up to 100% does nothing to make me think the loading times are quick. Come back Wave Race Blue Storm, all is forgiven.
  9. So load times are off the table for criticism these days?
  10. Yeah, the game is fun but the load times are beyond terrible. Plus why is there 120 seconds between online events. 60 seconds would be fine considering you've got two minutes of loading time anyway every two events.
  11. Ahem... https://amp.businessinsider.com/disney-acquires-fox-71-billion-dollar-deal-2019-3
  12. True, the amount of money you make from Andrew Garfield Spiderman movie tie in merchandise is probably a lot smaller than generic Spiderman on lunch box merchandise type stuff.
  13. Absolutely. From Scott Mendelson at Forbes: https://www.forbes.com/sites/scottmendelson/2019/08/21/sony-doesnt-need-marvel-to-make-successful-spider-man-movies/#1ec1b910187e On a US domestic front, Far From Home has, currently, only made around $40m more than Homecoming. The rest of the increase is made up of increased foreign grosses which is a trend that many film series have seen in the last few years. Domestically, live action Spiderman films all tend to be in the $300-$400m mark, although the Amazing series were in the $200m range. But the original trilogy and the MCU ones have all had pretty similar domestic grosses with the original Spiderman movie still being the high water mark $403.7m, without inflation. Adjusted for inflation, MCU Spiderman sits firmly in the middle of the pack. As you say, on the right terms there is a mutually beneficial deal but Spiderman is a popular property and all the building blocks are in place for a successful Holland run even without future MCU involvement. To put it in perspective, the most financially successful X Men movie, Days of Future Past, only made $40m more worldwide than the least successful Spiderman Movie (ASM2). Spiderman is a consistent top tier movie franchise and Sony have the exclusive rights. They won't be in a hurry to give too much away to Disney.
  14. Well, it simply all depends on the terms Disney are offering for involvement with the MCU. If Disney demands 50% then it is simply not worth Sony making such a deal. The highest grossing live action SM movie made $1,109m worldwide, so $554.5m to Sony under the terms Disney proposed. The lowest grossing SM movie made $709M worldwide so $354.5M to Sony under the publicised Disney offer or, ahem, $709M without any deal with Disney. It is pretty easy to see why Sony would not make such a deal. Even the lowest grossing live action SM film will make Sony more money than partnering with Disney and creating the highest grossing SM film. Sony and Disney would need a SM film to reach $1.4bn for Sony to make as much money than it would have done by going it alone. There is a definite financial upside to Sony working with the MCU but it would probably be around 15-25% going to Disney to make it work. And that is working on the assumption that without the MCU grosses would fall back to the lowest level. With Holland established, there is a reasonable expectation that Holland Spiderman 3, even without the MCU connections, would still be approaching the levels seen by Homecoming and Far From Home. Your fundamental premise that Sony could look forward to one more round of $700m box office and then box office failure is simply not borne out by previous SM grosses. You could argue that SM3, ASM and ASM 2 were all critical rejections and still the worst result, after a run of three fairly average films, was over $700m. That critically rejected SM 3 is still the second highest SM movie without even looking at inflation. There is simply no reason to believe that any live action Spiderman film, made to even a vaguely competent standard, will gross less than $700m worldwide. I think it is reasonable to assume that Sony could pump out average SM films every three years and they could realistically expect at least $700m each time. If they actually managed to pump out good films then that expectation can go a lot higher. The simple point is that neither Sony or Disney really need each other, but Sony certainly does not need Disney if it means Disney taking anymore than 20-25% of the box office take. The caveat to all this is that we do not really know the exact terms on offer. Do Disney pay Sony for Spiderman appearances in Avengers films? Or do Sony get a Box Office % of the Avenger films? Do Disney contribute to the budget and marketing of Sony MCU Spiderman films? All of which would make a difference. All we can tell is that Spiderman is a consistent Box Office draw so Sony do not need to make a deal with Disney at any cost. Unless the right deal is offered, you can't blame the bean counters at Sony for walking away and just producing Spiderman films independently of the MCU.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Use of this website is subject to our Privacy Policy, Terms of Use, and Guidelines.