Sony's Spider-Man Options

Category: Spider-Man
Last article published: 28 June 2022
This is the 104th post under this label

I'm not gonna pretend I know the ins and outs of Sony's deal with Disney, but where I'm from, their slate of live action Spider-Man related films are often a often discussed derisively. Venom was unsurprisingly a hit with audiences (because the character has a coolness factor) even if it was panned by critics. But Morbius wasn't just a bomb, it was a laughing stock. TWICE. And what do they have in the pipeline? Kraven the Hunter as an anti-hero (WHAT!?), Madame Web (REALLY?!) and (looks at notes, no recognition flickers in his eyes) El Muerto. Reportedly in development, they have one-joke character Jackpot, and (looks at notes again, same deal) Nightwatch. Their Sinister Six movie has yet to materialize, and Sony seems well on its way to a failure akin to their Universal Monsters shared universe (especially considering the horror elements they've injected into this franchise). Who's the suit at the top who's making all these wrong-headed decisions?

Because Sony is sitting on a license to print money even if they're somehow barred from doing Peter Parker Spider-Man movies (sorry recently-redeemed Andrew Garfield) - the highly successful Spider-Verse is ripe for live action conversions. Even of we think of Miles Morales and (now) Spider-Man 2099 as "locked" into animation, they could still spin off  Spider-Gwen, Spider-Man Noir, Peni Parker and SP//dr, and Donald Glover as the Prowler (Mahershala Ali is otherwise occupied as the MCU's Blade). Their other big hit is No Way Home, which certainly opened the door to Toby Maguire playing retired dad to Mayday Parker's Spider-Girl.

Instead of trying to exploit villains-as-heroes and Z-listers, Sony should be going after characters who had their own series recently - Scarlet Spider (Ben and/or Kane), Silk (only slated for a TV series), and Black Cat (whose own movie/series with Silver Sable - still a better option than a lot of the stuff still in the cue - was announced and cancelled). And if you REALLY need to be doing villains, where's my Superior Spider-Man movie?

Like I said, I don't know that all those characters are really on the table (like, how does Frog-Man show up in the MCU with She-Hulk, and is not considered a Spider-Man character if Morbius is?), but many of them seem to be (or is animation handled differently from live action?). I'm not asking Sony to glut the market with even more superhero films, just that if they're going to do it anyway, that they make it worth our while instead of trying to push some kind of "edgy" horror alternative at us because they're sore their Universal Monsters thing didn't work out.

Comments

Green Luthor said…
If I had to guess, Frog-Man might not be considered a Spider-Man character because he was a revamped version of Leap-Frog (Leap-Frog's son took his costume to attempt to become a hero), and Leap-Frog first appeared as a Daredevil villain. (I think the only time Leap-Frog ever encountered Spider-Man, it was a story where Spidey and the Beast teamed up against him in an issue of Spidey Super Stories, so it doesn't really count.)

So it's likely that, due to Leap-Frog's history, he's considered a Daredevil character rather than a Spider-Man character (and I doubt he's a character Sony wants to bother arguing over), though I can't claim to know how exactly all these things work.

(Fun fact: Leap-Frog first appeared in Daredevil #25. Which was ALSO the first appearance of "Mike Murdock". Yeah, not Marvel's finest moment there...)