The Contract That Commits Sony To Making ‘Spider-Man’ Spinoffs
Few major movie franchises have produced as sustained a string of critical failures as Sony’s Spider-Man Universe. Over the past eight years none of the studio’s six spinoff movies in the series has been rated fresh by review aggregator Rotten Tomatoes and several of them have even been pilloried by their own stars. Despite this, Sony has persisted in making more movies about increasingly obscure aspects of Spider-Man lore causing many industry watchers to wonder whether it was contractually obliged to do so. That question has finally been cleared up.
Sony’s universe of Spider-Man spinoffs got off to a rocky start before the first movie in the series had even hit theaters. Called Venom, it was named after a hulking alien antithesis of Spider-Man played by Tom Hardy and just days before the film debuted, the British actor said that his favorite moment in it was “things that aren’t in this movie.”
Hardy explained that “there are like 30 to 40 minutes worth of scenes that aren’t in this movie…all of them. Mad puppeteering scenes, dark comedy scenes. You know what I mean? They just never made it in.” Critics shared his disappointment.
They rated Venom just 30% on review aggregator Rotten Tomatoes but against all the odds it was a dream ticket with takings of $856.1 million according to industry analyst Box Office Mojo. It gave an unrealistic impression of the level of interest in films about characters connected to Spider-Man. Instead of quitting while it was ahead, Sony commissioned sequels to Venom which each grossed less than their predecessor.
Sony didn’t stop there as it also trawled through the comic archives and green lit movies about little-known characters from the Spider-Man universe. Accordingly, films followed about Morbius the living vampire, the clairvoyant Madame Web and, just last month, Kraven the Hunter. They didn’t just bomb at the box office but became infamous in their own right.
Morbius found fame thanks to memes of its scenes whilst Madame Web star Dakota Johnson didn’t hold back in her comments about the caliber of the movie saying that “it’s not nice to be a part of something that’s ripped to shreds, but I can’t say that I don’t understand.”
The ultimate ignominy came last month when it was reported that Kraven would open in 1,000 fewer theaters across North America than Morbius and Madame Web. Aaron Taylor-Johnson, who plays the eponymous predator, practically had to beg fans to turn up saying “really, come see this movie, man. Come see this movie.”
Critics rated Kraven just 16% and its box office stands at only $52.9 million, the lowest of any of Sony’s Spider-Man spinoffs. The studio couldn’t ignore this and, according to The Wrap, it has no plans for further Spider-Man movies or shows about the web head’s supporting stars. Instead, it is focusing on its critically-acclaimed Spider-Verse animated movies as well as the live action Spider-Man movies starring Tom Holland. However, that’s not all.
Sony is also in the process of making Noir, an MGM+ and Amazon Prime Video series starring Nicolas Cage as a retro take on Spider-Man who fights Nazis in a stylized version of New York during the Great Depression. It is a fan-favorite version of the character but with its intensely obscure premise, this spinoff may struggle to appeal to a wider audience, especially given Sony’s recent track record in the Spider-Man universe. So why does the studio keep on heading down the same road? There is actually a good reason for it.
Of course, Spider-Man wasn’t actually created by Sony but was instead the brainchild of writer-editor Stan Lee and artist Steve Ditko of Marvel Comics. As this report explains, Sony acquired film and television rights to the character in 1998 when Marvel fell on hard times. The terms governing the use of the character are set out in a 71-page license agreement executive summary which was released in a 2014 hack of Sony Pictures Entertainment (SPE).
The document covers everything from Spider-Man’s powers, character traits and costumes to Marvel’s approval process for each picture, their minimum budget and even the number of screens they have to play on in their initial domestic theatrical release. Buried in the terms is the revelation that “the ‘Production Term’ extends indefinitely as long as SPE continues to produce and release Pictures as follows: As a general rule, SPE must (a) commence production of each Picture within 3 years and 9 months after the release of the preceding Picture and (b) release each Picture within 5 years and 9 months after the release of the preceding Picture.
“If SPE releases 3 Pictures within 8 consecutive years, then SPE may extend the foregoing deadlines as follows: (a) commence production of the next Picture within 5 years after the release of the preceding Picture and (b) release such Picture within 7 years after the release of the preceding Picture.”
In short, Sony does indeed need to continue making movies or TV shows set in the Spider-Man universe in order to retain its rights to the character. The contract was drafted in 2011 and was amended in 2015 and 2019 so the details could have changed and Sony declined to comment on them. Nevertheless, it gives a fascinating insight into the structure of Intellectual Property agreements as well as the obligations and restrictions governing one of cinema’s most bankable brands.
It reveals that when SPE is developing a new Spider-Man movie it must consult with either of two senior creative executives designated by Marvel regarding the script; the top five principal cast members; the producers; the director; the director of photography; the production designer; the composer; the editor; the costume designer; the principal visual effects vendor; the design of Spider-Man’s costume; and the design of the principal villain.
The contract stresses that SPE’s decision is final but this doesn’t mean that the oversight ends there as it “is required to provide Marvel with each draft of the screenplay, the proposed design of the Spider-Man costume and one or more cuts of the picture. SPE may, at its election, provide Marvel with other development and/or production materials.”
It’s a different story when the cameras start rolling as the agreement reveals that “Marvel’s creative executives do not have access to sets or creative meetings unless invited by SPE.”
That said, the document shows that the collaboration between the two studios is a partnership in the truest sense of the word. On the one hand “SPE has the right to notify Marvel of the one or two featured villains in upcoming Pictures. After receiving such notice, Marvel can’t feature that villain (other than in ‘cameo roles’ in any animated TV series episodes that are first broadcast on TV or sold in the home video market) from receipt of that notice until 30 days after the home video release of the applicable Picture.”
This gives Sony’s big bad an exclusive window and the studio returns the favor. The agreement states that “SPE must make the director, a principal actor (e.g. ‘Spider-Man,’ the key villain or the love interest), or an individual receiving ‘produced by’ credit available to Marvel (at Marvel’s cost) for one meeting with Marvel’s merchandising licensees. SPE and Marvel are to work together to identify the person to be furnished (with SPE’s decision final) and a mutually acceptable meeting date.”
Since 2011 the partnership has become even closer as Marvel now puts up roughly 25% of the financing for Sony’s Spider-Man movies in return for around 25% of the profit. Leaving nothing to chance, the contract even requires that “each Picture must have an all-in budget of not less than $75M, qualify for a PG-13 rating and have an initial domestic theatrical release of no less than 2,000 screens.”
Even though Kraven’s presence was slashed by 1,000 screens it still played in 3,000 theaters which ensured that Sony adhered to the letter of its agreement. As long as it keeps on doing that the curtain won’t come down on its ownership of one of Hollywood’s most famous heroes.
