|
|
Post by TomJohns on Jan 18, 2014 11:26:22 GMT -5
Warner Bros. announced today that they have pushed the release date of the Batman vs. Superman movie, aka Man of Steel sequel, a whopping 10 months from July 17, 2015 until May 6, 2016 to allow "the filmmakers time to realize fully their vision, given the complex visual nature of the story." Interestingly the May 6th date is also occupied by a Marvel Phase 3 movie.... Yup, Comic book giants Marvel & DC are to go head to head in the box office on May 6, 2016  If you're wondering what movie has been put in the July 2015 release date, It will now be filled by director Joe Wright's Peter Pan film. “We are happy to take advantage of these coveted summer dates, which are perfect for two of our biggest tentpole releases," Warner Bros. president of domestic distribution Dan Fellman said in a statement. "We share the fans’ excitement to see DC Comics’ most popular figures, Superman and Batman, together on the big screen for the first time, which will now be arriving in theatres in May 2016. Peter Pan has delighted people of every generation for more than a century, so we are thrilled to bring him back to the screen next summer for today’s moviegoers.” Thoughts on this Head to Head? What Movie will rein supreme? |
|
|
|
Post by wildknight on Jan 18, 2014 11:47:40 GMT -5
The Marvel movie is going to crush the Superman movie... the Superman story is inspiring facepalms all over the internet. Poor casting, horrendously stupid choices all around... unless Marvel is releasing Ant-Man that weekend, Marvel wins.
|
|
|
|
Post by TomJohns on Jan 18, 2014 11:54:29 GMT -5
The Marvel movie is going to crush the Superman movie... the Superman story is inspiring facepalms all over the internet. Poor casting, horrendously stupid choices all around... unless Marvel is releasing Ant-Man that weekend, Marvel wins. 4 Marvel movies are set for 2016, X-Men: Apocalypse, Amazing Spider-Man 3 and the other 2 have not yet been revealed, It's one of those two movies that is coming out on the same date. If it is the last movie of the phase that'll be released on the same date then it's going to be Avengers 3. |
|
|
|
Post by BaneTheDestroyer on Jan 18, 2014 12:37:34 GMT -5
I'm more excited about Ant-Man than I am Superman/Batman. At least Marvel (from what I've read) knows that Ant-Man should be a comedy of some sort.
|
|
|
|
Post by wildknight on Jan 18, 2014 12:59:21 GMT -5
Amazing Spider-Man is NOT a Marvel movie. The Spider-Man rights are owned by Sony, and the movies are not part of the same continuity as the Marvel movies, so if they're saying that it's up against a Marvel Phase 3 movie, it's not Spider-Man
|
|
|
|
Post by TomJohns on Jan 18, 2014 13:13:25 GMT -5
Amazing Spider-Man is NOT a Marvel movie. The Spider-Man rights are owned by Sony, and the movies are not part of the same continuity as the Marvel movies, so if they're saying that it's up against a Marvel Phase 3 movie, it's not Spider-Man Spider-Man is classified as a Marvel movie as one of their studios worked on it, Though much like X-Men not connected to the Phases and the Avengers Universe. That's why I said it was one of the two un-revealed movies. |
|
|
|
Post by wildknight on Jan 18, 2014 13:25:36 GMT -5
Amazing Spider-Man is NOT a Marvel movie. The Spider-Man rights are owned by Sony, and the movies are not part of the same continuity as the Marvel movies, so if they're saying that it's up against a Marvel Phase 3 movie, it's not Spider-Man Spider-Man is classified as a Marvel movie as one of their studios worked on it, Though much like X-Men not connected to the Phases and the Avengers Universe. That's why I said it was one of the two un-revealed movies. ... Marvel only has one studio, and is a Disney family company. TASM belongs to Sony. |
|
|
|
Post by TomJohns on Jan 18, 2014 13:30:03 GMT -5
Spider-Man is classified as a Marvel movie as one of their studios worked on it, Though much like X-Men not connected to the Phases and the Avengers Universe. That's why I said it was one of the two un-revealed movies. ... Marvel only has one studio, and is a Disney family company. TASM belongs to Sony. I know Sony owns TASM... But "Marvel Entertainment" is stated in the movies production credits. |
|
|
|
Post by wildknight on Jan 18, 2014 14:37:08 GMT -5
... Marvel only has one studio, and is a Disney family company. TASM belongs to Sony. I know Sony owns TASM... But "Marvel Entertainment" is stated in the movies production credits. Right, but only because the own the copyright on the name "Spider-Man" and the title "The Amazing Spider-Man." They have nothing to do with the movie whatsoever. They can't even veto stupid choices Sony makes. |
|
|
|
Post by BaneTheDestroyer on Jan 18, 2014 14:59:51 GMT -5
Technically, WK's right. Amazing Spider-Man's not a marvel movie. That being said, I'm kind of on the other side of the argument, because I don't see how a spider-man movie (based on Marvel's characters) isn't a Marvel movie, if that makes sense. I see both sides of the argument here.
|
|
|
|
Post by SoonDragon67 on Jan 18, 2014 15:08:12 GMT -5
Technically, WK's right. Amazing Spider-Man's not a marvel movie. That being said, I'm kind of on the other side of the argument, because I don't see how a spider-man movie (based on Marvel's characters) isn't a Marvel movie, if that makes sense. I see both sides of the argument here. Marvel Studios is not Marvel, it's a film industry with the rights to most of Marvel comics. The Amazing Spider-Man is a Marvel film, but it is not a Marvel Studios film. Whether it's a Marvel film has nothing to do with the argument, it's irrelevant. It's whether it is a Marvel Studios film that matters, and it is not. |
|
|
|
Post by BaneTheDestroyer on Jan 18, 2014 15:10:46 GMT -5
Technically, WK's right. Amazing Spider-Man's not a marvel movie. That being said, I'm kind of on the other side of the argument, because I don't see how a spider-man movie (based on Marvel's characters) isn't a Marvel movie, if that makes sense. I see both sides of the argument here. Marvel Studios is not Marvel, it's a film industry with the rights to most of Marvel comics. The Amazing Spider-Man is a Marvel film, but it is not a Marvel Studios film. Whether it's a Marvel film has nothing to do with the argument, it's irrelevant. It's whether it is a Marvel Studios film that matters, and it is not. I said that WK was right.....did I not? That being said, I said nothing about what you just said either. I said spider-man's a marvel character, so I think of it as a marvel film...... |
|
|
|
Post by pinksparklepuff on Jan 18, 2014 16:21:48 GMT -5
-And humanity farted in unison.
|
|
|
|
Post by wildknight on Jan 18, 2014 16:49:30 GMT -5
Technically, WK's right. Amazing Spider-Man's not a marvel movie. That being said, I'm kind of on the other side of the argument, because I don't see how a spider-man movie (based on Marvel's characters) isn't a Marvel movie, if that makes sense. I see both sides of the argument here. It's not a Marvel movie because Marvel has NO input in how it's made. Literally none. If Sony wanted to make a movie called Spider-Man where Peter Parker was a female crocodile who had been bitten by a radioactive human and developed the proportionate strength of a porcupine, then used those powers to take over Swamp Planet, they could. Marvel owns the names. In no other way is it it a "Marvel movie." More to the point, however, when people talk about "Marvel movies" now, they're referring to the movies contained within the Avengers continuity. Since those movies cannot even use the name Spider-Man in any way, shape, or form, there's no way one could claim that the TASM series is "a Marvel movie" without completely misunderstanding what other people man when they use that term. |
|
|
|
Post by BaneTheDestroyer on Jan 18, 2014 16:52:34 GMT -5
Technically, WK's right. Amazing Spider-Man's not a marvel movie. That being said, I'm kind of on the other side of the argument, because I don't see how a spider-man movie (based on Marvel's characters) isn't a Marvel movie, if that makes sense. I see both sides of the argument here. It's not a Marvel movie because Marvel has NO input in how it's made. Literally none. If Sony wanted to make a movie called Spider-Man where Peter Parker was a female crocodile who had been bitten by a radioactive human and developed the proportionate strength of a porcupine, then used those powers to take over Swamp Planet, they could. Marvel owns the names. In no other way is it it a "Marvel movie." More to the point, however, when people talk about "Marvel movies" now, they're referring to the movies contained within the Avengers continuity. Since those movies cannot even use the name Spider-Man in any way, shape, or form, there's no way one could claim that the TASM series is "a Marvel movie" without completely misunderstanding what other people man when they use that term. ....once again, I'm not saying you're wrong. I'm saying that I personally still think of them as marvel movies. I even said you were correct, and I stand by that. I will still think of them as Marvel movies though, lol. |
|
justinlynch3
Jobber
Is not creative enough for a status.
Posts: 4,124 
|
Post by justinlynch3 on Jan 18, 2014 17:10:44 GMT -5
The Marvel movie is going to crush the Superman movie... the Superman story is inspiring facepalms all over the internet. Poor casting, horrendously stupid choices all around... unless Marvel is releasing Ant-Man that weekend, Marvel wins. 4 Marvel movies are set for 2016, X-Men: Apocalypse, Amazing Spider-Man 3 and the other 2 have not yet been revealed, It's one of those two movies that is coming out on the same date. If it is the last movie of the phase that'll be released on the same date then it's going to be Avengers 3. Avengers 3? Don't you mean 2? |
|
|
|
Post by SoonDragon67 on Jan 18, 2014 17:11:33 GMT -5
4 Marvel movies are set for 2016, X-Men: Apocalypse, Amazing Spider-Man 3 and the other 2 have not yet been revealed, It's one of those two movies that is coming out on the same date. If it is the last movie of the phase that'll be released on the same date then it's going to be Avengers 3. Avengers 3? Don't you mean 2? Avengers 2 is 2015 |
|
justinlynch3
Jobber
Is not creative enough for a status.
Posts: 4,124
|
Post by justinlynch3 on Jan 18, 2014 17:16:14 GMT -5
Avengers 3? Don't you mean 2? Avengers 2 is 2015 So 1 was in, 2012, 2013? Avengers 2 will be 2015, so 2 or 3 years to make it, and Avengers 3 will come out within a year in 2016? I'd expected Avengers 3 in 2017, 2018, not 2016 if they are going to release Avengers 2 a mere year earlier. |
|
|
|
Post by SoonDragon67 on Jan 18, 2014 17:17:51 GMT -5
Either way tomjohns is wrong. It's not viable for them to release Avengers 3 a year after Avengers 2, and Avengers 2 is already for 2015.
|
|
|
|
Post by wildknight on Jan 18, 2014 17:18:38 GMT -5
So 1 was in, 2012, 2013? Avengers 2 will be 2015, so 2 or 3 years to make it, and Avengers 3 will come out within a year in 2016? I'd expected Avengers 3 in 2017, 2018, not 2016 if they are going to release Avengers 2 a mere year earlier. If they really are pushing out Avengers 2 & 3 in back-to-back years, expect 3 to be an abomination. It means too little time to develop new characters, etc... and almost guarantees that 2 will have an unfinished plot that will wrap up in 3. One thing Marvel has done right so far is making each movie reasonably self-contained. |
|
