Actually, a new Spider-Man show came out last month
this post was submitted on 11 Mar 2025
1091 points (99.5% liked)
People Twitter
5974 readers
3150 users here now
People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.
RULES:
- Mark NSFW content.
- No doxxing people.
- Must be a pic of the tweet or similar. No direct links to the tweet.
- No bullying or international politcs
- Be excellent to each other.
- Provide an archived link to the tweet (or similar) being shown if it's a major figure or a politician.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Which was... A couple of weeks ago... Smh
/S
Spider-man should fight cops and the mayor
Wrapping Mayor Adams in a big cocoon and dangling him from a lightpost would be such a vibe right now
I like the idea that all Spider-man films are just remakes of the first Sam Raimi one, like that production company who only had the rights to make Bond as long as it was Thunderball.
It's because the contract sony signed with marvel back in the day stipulated that they must create a new Spider-Man movie every few years or lose the rights.
The contract specifies two key production windows:
Sony must start production within 3 years and 9 months after the previous film's release They must release the next film within 5 years and 9 months after the previous film's release There's also an important exception: if Sony releases three pictures within eight consecutive years, they can extend these deadlines to 5 years for starting production and 7 years for release
To busy remaking fantastic four
Yeah, it's only been 2 weeks since the Spider-Man Disney Plus show.
My 7 year old likes it. I can watch it without wanting to gouge my own eyes out. 2 thumbs up.
I saw that cartoon on my feed and it looks like the most unnecessary, almost exact copy of the Tom holland version, but in cartoon. Why? Nothing new and it just uses the same aesthetic as the movie
Its a different story overall, and just to say its actually much better than I was expecting.
The character designs match, but it is absolutely not the MCU story. Norman Osborn becomes Peter's mentor, not Stark, which should speak to how different it becomes.
I’ve watched part of it and really enjoy it so far. To say there’s nothing new I don’t think is right. It presents a lot of classic Spider-Man tropes and intentionally swerves them.
It got solid reviews on IMDB, which is usually how I judge the worthiness of shows.
Nothing new
It's 99% new and different from the MCU. The 1% are small nods to the MCU.
For example in both Peter is out and finds a broken DVD player, then he brings it home and tells May how excited he is that someone threw away a perfectly functioning (obviously broken) DVD player. All the while missing that his future mentor is on the couch, talking to May.
Or as the series progresses we learn that certain events that occured in the MCU also exist in this world.
Overall however it is a completely new Spider-Man. (Yes, Spider-Man interacts with well know Spider-Man characters, but not following any previously written story.)
It was originally going to be Tom Holland’s Spiderman origin story, but was changed to be its own canon.
Good choice. Spiderman's origin story has been done to death almost as badly as Batman's
I think it would have been interesting, but the showrunners decided to use characters not in the MCU and the movie people probably didn’t want to be locked into a design choice used in the animation.
We also haven't had Spider pig in a movie in a long time.
He is just doing what a spider pig does.
Wasn't he in both Spiderverse films?
No, that was Spider-Ham. Spider Pig was in the Simpsons movie.
And the Simpson's Movie.
MCU Spider-Man 4 is planned to release next summer, so they're good.
They're busy with their current Fantastic Four remake.
I need someone else to give me the "With great power..." speech as they die.
Since at some level we're all dying, I feel like I can safely tell you that with great power there must also come -- great responsibility!
Or were you looking for "Remember, with great power comes great responsibility" from the movie?
Or possibly "All power corrupts, absolute power..." "... is even more fun" if you prefer old school BOFH to Spider-Man.
They will give it a generic Hollywood oversize overused buzzword name like, Spider-man Rising or i spider-man. They love naming movies that shit
If things continue like they are currently, I would not be surprised to see a new Spiderman movie in the next 5 - 10 years that's just "Spider-Man" "The Spider-Man" or "Spider-Man One".
2 Spider 2 Man
Sman
They're on the verge of having 2 Batman's at once though, which will be a first.
That Flash movie had 3 different Batmen!
It's actually batmani
Batmopodes.
The reason they do this is because of licensing contracts. They have to use the rights or lose them.
It's also why Batman doesn't show up in TV and Movies lately, Disney has the rights because they purchased Fox even though WB owns the character.
READ YOUR CONTRACTS, CHILDREN.
Batman is a DC character, not Marvel. So Disney doesn't own them.
Batman had a live action film in 2022, with a sequel in production.
Batman cameoed in an animated TV series earlier this year.
Batman had his own animated TV series on Amazon last year, with a second season planned.
Batman appears in animated films about once a year.
If you're talking about the flash cameo, many fans were quick to point out that it had its ears digitally removed. That wasn't BatMan. That was Man.
20th Centurt Fox owned the televised rights to Batman, meaning without permission from Disney there are no new televised appearances of him. Even the Batman animated series were on Fox.
I think even Teen Titans original series excluded Batman.
There are different rights and types of ownership for these things. One person can own the merchandising rights while another owns the rights to distribute media.
The animated Batman cameo was Creature Commandos.
The Amazon show was Batman: Caped Crusader.
James Gunn recently (a year ago) debunked the rumor that Disney owns Batman in some way, https://screenrant.com/batman-tv-rights-james-gunn-disney-rumor/
Oh James Gunn made a four word tweet about it? That totally convinces me. Thanks for that. /s
You can come up with as many examples as you want, examples of times they had permission, but the fact remains that studios go far out of their way to obscure batman, digitally alter his appearance, or exclude him entirely. So this rumor won't die that easily. Truly the dark knight, brooding in the shadows just out of frame.
I know you've said you're not convinced... But then you also called it a rumor that won't die?
For Creature Commandos here is a whole interview where James Gunn says Batman again and again. He has made creative decisions to limit his appearance, but it's 100% Batman.
If course that article isn't even 100% correct best we actually see a dead Batman earlier in the same series as part of a premonition.
Also James Gunn isn't just "some guy" he's the Co-chairman and Co-CEO of DC Studios. This isn't Kevin Feige having to drag out Amy Pascal or Sony Everytime they mention Spider-Man. This is a clear statement.
Disney does not control the rights to Batman. MAYBE they have some residual rights to older content, but nothing recent.
I feel like you're stuck on loop with these examples where batman makes an appearance or reference but I've already explained to you so many times that this can happen in the theory I presented but they require permission to do it.
DC is owned by Warner Bros who is a competitor (in the most uneven sense possible) to Disney which owns Fox who from the 1960s to at least the 1990s owned the rights to televise Batman.
My point is that they don't require permission anymore. Disney does not own Batman in any of his recent work. Batman can pop up anywhere and anytime and Disney does not need to OK anything, they are not involved.
So the argument that the reason we don't see Batman on TV and movies recently is because of Disney is false. Both because Disney is not involved and because yes, yes we have seen him on both big and small screen recently.
There are no existing articles to support the idea that Disney owns/controls current day Batman.
There are rumors that they do, but even those rumors confuse things like the Gotham TV series airing on Fox having anything to do with who owns the rights to Batman. For example as I stated earlier, an animated Batman show ran on Amazon, that doesn't mean Amazon owns the rights to Batman either, just those specific streaming rights.
They're still hiding or obfuscating their most popular character. Even your James Gunn interview admitted they were intentionally limiting his screen time. I don't think this is some 4D Chess Game by Gunn, I think they simply don't have the authority, that is the evidence I've presented.
Yes, "you think" based on... What?
My source is the CEO of DC, your source is...?
Gunn was clear why the screen time was limited, they hadn't yet decided how they wanted to use Batman.
Of course that's specifically for their universe.
There is no quote of him saying that the Matt Reeves Batman film can't do X. Or that The Penguin TV show couldn't include Batman. In fact, here's another article about Batman not showing up in The Penguin . No one is taking about Disney/Marvel being the reason.
And in case the thought process is, well maybe they don't want to talk about that stuff, here is an article talking about Spider-Man not being in a live action TV series .
If Disney/Marvel we're involved with Batman, we would know. There would be articles. At the moment, no such article exists. If you want to believe something based on no information, that's fine, just be aware that there is nothing to support that claim.
Bro fr is stuck in a loop
Bro fr just making things up.
I wish they would stop remaking these stories, just keep the story line going and change actors along the way as they age out. How many people actually care about which actor is playing the hero this movie?
Ummm a lot? The actor makes such a huge difference.
I would normally disagree but I howled when Tobey Maguire made a cameo
It's been a couple of months since the new animated "Friendly Neighborhood Spider-Man" came out. Maybe they're out looking for an even younger Aunt May?
If she gets any younger we are going to run into the really 600 years old anime problem.