Talk:Marvel Cinematic Universe

Phase 2 Producer

The producer for phase two is the same therefore can be represented by a single cell, as in Phase 3. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MetalDylan (talk • contribs) 13:39, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

it would be but due to technical limitations on the way that the table is added to the page, via translation from the main list of films page, the tables are separate so it appears separate on this page I'm afraid. I may have a look at something later--Ditto51 (My Talk Page) 14:30, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

 Done with this edit to the List of films page.--Ditto51 (My Talk Page) 15:41, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

Agent Carter: Episodes, Movie and One-Shot

Marvel has revealed the Agent Carter tv series will have 7 episodes, not 8, the pilot being a 2-hour movie. [1]

The page Agent Carter (film) should be renamed Agent Carter (One-Shot or Agents Carter (short film), as the TV series pilot shall be a film. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.43.186.182 (talk) 11:39, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

Actually, the 2-part premiere is still two separate episodes, they will just be aired one after the other. The Agent Carter One-Shot is still the only Agent Carter film. - adamstom97 (talk) 20:11, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

Gunn, Guardians and Infinity War

Just came across this, and did not know where it would best fit. Gunn has also stated in some other recent interviews on this subject. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 22:49, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

As far as I can tell, it isn't really anything new. Marvel has always striven to have individual films be individual (to varying levels of success). Marvel will still put the Guardians and Thanos in Infinity War if they want, and Gunn will still try to make the best solo movie he can if he wants. - adamstom97 (talk) 00:28, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

If it hasn't already been noted though, we can put this at the GotG2 draft page, just saying that Gunn wants to focus on the single film rather than the bigger picture. - adamstom97 (talk) 00:29, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

I see we do have some stuff on that at the draft page, so I don't no where else it would be useful. - adamstom97 (talk) 03:41, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

Recurring cast and characters

@Favre1fan93: Since this section is about all of the MCU, not just the films, hasn't Gregg still appeared the most? He has been in 32 TV episodes so far, and Jackson has only been in 2. - adamstom97 (talk) 07:25, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

We are talking about properties, you can't compare a tv episode to a feature film. If that were the case Patton Oswalt might be have been in more then Jackson.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 07:41, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

Perhaps the wording should be changed to "appeared in the most properties in the franchise" or something, to clarify. - adamstom97 (talk) 08:02, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

Sounds fine to me.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 08:12, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, wording may have to be adjusted. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 23:14, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

State of the Articles (Jan 2015)

Hi all. Been meaning to create something like this for a while. Just wanted to kind of do a check in on the pages we have been working on to address anything, and what not. I think this past year, we made some really great strides and new article creations, and welcomed a bunch of editors into our "regulars" fold. At least for me with this, I wanted other opinions on GA and then just to kind of look ahead for the next few months for what pages have to worry about.

GAs

• To start, I think that GotG may be ready now from when I nominated it back in October. And if others agree, and it passes that will take me to my next point:
• If GotG is nominated and passed, do we feel ready to nominate the film articles for Good Topic?
• I also feel the list of television series article may be ready to nominate for a featured list, but I have thought of maybe waiting until Daredevil releases.
• Maybe Adam and our other more TV-series centric editors can answer this, but are any of the AoS articles ready for GA? I know there was a small discussion a bit ago on the season 1 talk. Would the main page, the season 1 article, or any of the episodes be ready? And if not for the first two, what work do we still need to do to get them there, in your opinions?

Upcoming work (~5 months)

• Jan-Feb: Agent Carter continues to air
• March: Agents of SHIELD comes back
• April: Cap: CW begins filming, draft article moves to mainspace; Daredevil premieres
• May: Age of Ultron releases, page has protection through October 2015; Doctor Strange begins filming, draft article moves to mainspace
  • For Cap: CW and Doctor Strange, I have the resulting sections that should subsequently appear at Captain America: The Winter Soldier#Sequel and Doctor Strange#Film once the mainspace articles exist.

I think that is it from my end. If I forgot anything in the upcoming section, let me know. I'm going to ping known editors that are always contributing, but others are more than welcome to join the conversation. Please let me know your thoughts on what I said, and add anything else you feel we need to go over! Looking forward to a productive 2015! @TriiipleThreat, Richiekim, Adamstom.97, Sock, and Fandraltastic: @Drovethrughosts and Ditto51:

- Favre1fan93 (talk) 04:19, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

Good idea Favre, communication is never a bad thing :) Concerning GotG, as long as the lead, post-credits scene, and box office issues are sorted out, I am fine with this being nominated. Once that passes, that will be 10 film GAs, so I would be happy to go ahead with the topic nomination straight after. I'm not so sure about the TV list, but if we leave it till after Daredevil comes out, hopefully we will have some more info on JJ and maybe some of the other series, and potentially on the futures of AoS and AC, so maybe waiting till then could help fill out the article a bit, etc. I wouldn't look to the AoS and AC episode articles for GA anytime soon. I plan on continuing to just create and expand these, and think that that should be the focus for now, but maybe down the track a bit. As for the main AoS articles, I think if some of us give the Season 1 page a full c/e, and then we perhaps ask the guild to do the same, and just make sure there isn't anything missing or something like that, then I would be happy to nominate that one. As for the main page, I am working on some issues in the reception section there, and I intend to completely redo the cast and characters section, so perhaps have a look at GA after that? I can't really think of anything else right now, just that I am looking forward to a good year :) adamstom97 (talk) 05:57, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

The biggest issue that the reviewer had with GotG was that it was unstable because it was still in theaters and so still had box office numbers coming in. Coverage is also something that is fixed as time goes on and various things that were missing like DVD releases and stuff are added to the article. The only bit I'm not sure on is if the sources have been ironed out yet or not.

I think Season 2 for AoS can go up for testing against the "B-class" criteria now. The List of characters page could use a few more sources in the character desciptions, just to ensure everything is sourced. Season 1 should go up alongside the main AoS page for GA-status if we are going to do that. While it does need copy editing (probably), it appears to be more sourced and detailed than the main article and nothing new and big is really going to come out because we are on season 2, so it is stable.

I have no idea on how to improve the list of episodes article though...

• Main AoS page →
• Season 1 page →
• Season 2 page → --Ditto51 (My Talk Page) 10:37, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

Actually, could we discuss the list of episodes article and how that works? Do we just leave it as a normal list? I can't see it changing much ever. I am also curently working on a revised version of the AoS characters page, as I said I would at that talk quite a while ago, but it is still an ongoing project, and I don't know if anybody else is interested in it or not, but if we are going to use it, it could help that page get to GA, since at the moment it is a pretty bare set of tables and lists really. - adamstom97 (talk) 11:10, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

There isn't actually must information at the MoS page. Just look at the other 3 examples I guess.--Ditto51 (My Talk Page) 15:35, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

I think the AoS LoE should be examined once the series ends, or has a few more seasons under its belt. I agree with Ditto's suggestions for changing classes. So pretty much, for the time being in the very near future, we will be planning three articles for GA: Main AoS, AoS season 1 and GotG? Adam, would the AoS Pilot be close to GA at all you think? - Favre1fan93 (talk) 06:20, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

It is definitely the closest out of them all. If you were interested in nominating it, then I wouldn't object. As long as there isn't anything that we really should be taking out/putting in, then I guess we could just c/e and give it a go. - adamstom97 (talk) 10:38, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

Spider-Man & Sinister Six

Should probably be added to the list of upcoming films. [2] Toonamiguy (talk) 09:55, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Even if this is true and they are still going ahead with the film, we need better confirmation than this, from a reliable source. Also, the article clearly states that the November 2016 date is the old release date (which we already knew) and that the film has been delayed, so what you are asking to be added is incorrect any way. And finally, the films table here is just transcluded from List of Marvel Cinematic Universe films, so more info on each of the actual confirmed films can be found there, with links to even more info where available. - adamstom97 (talk) 10:41, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

We all really need slow down and consider what we all just read. This is great news but in the rush I think we are loosing sight of what is actually being stated.

1. The character Spider-Man will appear in a MCU film.
2. MCU characters may appear in Spider-Man films.
3. Feige will CO-produce a future Spider-Man film.
4. Sony will retain ownership, financing, distribution, and creative control of future Spider-Man films.

What it does NOT say:

1. Future Spider-Man films will be a part of the MCU.

--TriiipleThreat (talk) 13:38, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

You're wrong. Spider-Man films will be a part of MCU. Why they changed realese dates and gave Spidey one of MCU dates? Mike210381 (talk) 13:58, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Do you have verification from a reliable source stating that the Spider-Man films will a part of the MCU. What you are stating is synthesis of published material: if A=B and B=C then A must equal C. We need a explicit verification that A=C.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 14:03, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

"We're thrilled to work with Sony Pictures to bring the iconic web-slinger into the Marvel Cinematic Universe"... read whole articles [3] & [4] Mike210381 (talk) 14:09, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Yes, the character that was #1 in my original post.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 14:11, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

And this is clear that next Spidey film will be a part of MCU. Mike210381 (talk) 14:14, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Hardly, the Spider-Man character will be in MCU. Sony is releasing a Spider-Man film in 2017, co-produced by Kevin Feige. But nowhere does it say that Sony's film will be a part of MCU.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 14:18, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Marvel gave Sony their realese date just like that and change dates for 4 their movies? They did that because it's not part of MCU????? Think about it... Mike210381 (talk) 14:25, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Who knows? It could be a non-compete clause in the agreement. We need explicit verification not assumptions. That is Wikipedia policy.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 14:28, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

That's not assumptions that's facts. All news pages says that. Everyone is wrong but not you? Mike210381 (talk) 14:32, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Again please provide explicit verification.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 14:35, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

I have found the statement you are looking for. "Marvel's involvement will hopefully deliver the creative continuity and authenticity that fans demand from the MCU." That's from Kevin Feige discussing the Sony films in future that he will be co-producing. That tells us the films will be set in the MCU (and that they will "hopefully" be able to keep it up to the standard people expect of the MCU). Bit of a dig through the article to get it but it was in there, I'd assume that they assumed that we'd assume it was part of the MCU which was why it wasn't made as clear as it was (but that takes a lot of assuming). Thankfully there is that one sentence to confirm it outright. Ruffice98 (talk) 14:45, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

You're still ignoring that just because A=B and B=C doesn't mean A=C. It says that Marvel is involved, and that they will hopefully "deliver the creative continuity..." and so on. Just be patient, we'll know soon enough. We're in no rush. Sock (tock talk) 14:53, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

I gave you that verification, but you have problem with understanding... In one news they said that Spidey had joined MCU, that he will appere in one film before his solo one, they annouced reboot on a date on one of MCU films and MCU characters may appear in Spider-Man films, that's clear that is a part of MCU, and that news says that! Mike210381 (talk) 14:59, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

"The new relationship follows a decade of speculation among fans about whether Spider-Man – who has always been an integral and important part of the larger Marvel Universe in the comic books – could become part of the Marvel Universe on the big screen. Spider-Man has more than 50 years of history in Marvel’s world, and with this deal, fans will be able to experience Spider-Man taking his rightful place among other Super Heroes in the MCU." [5] Mike210381 (talk) 15:10, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

At no point have they said that the Spiderman film will be in the MCU, just that the characters will be shared between franchises. And they also haven't stated reboot. They have stated a spiderman film will be released and that then forced the other films back. For all we know the film could be in the cinematic universe and the previous films could also be in the universe.

If Fox suddenly stated that they were willing to share characters and the term mutants (other than Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch) would we be jumping at the chance to ibnclude their films in the lineup? No. Why? Because they were released before the MCU, but would you assume reboot? Probably. And yet it is extremely unlikely to be a reboot. Until there is explict verivication that the spiderman and sinster six films will be in the same universe as the MCU.

Speaking of Sinsier Six, that is still in development and would likely use the continuity already set up rather than having to delay it further to try and match it up to the MCU story.--Ditto51 (My Talk Page) 15:43, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Another article that confirms the franchise being rebooted, and integrated into the MCU. http://www.movies.com/movie-news/new-spider-man-movie-questions/17885 Toonamiguy (talk) 15:49, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

That doesn't actually look reliable, it looks like someone with a website went across the internt and found answers that suited their plesure and then put them onto a question and answer sheet. Also if the fact that spiderman was being rebooted is true then why wouldn't that be in the titles of all the other sources provided? Along the lines of "Spiderman gets Rebooted and Joins the Marvel Universe! or something like that. It just seems like that is something they would want to make clear.--Ditto51 (My Talk Page) 15:56, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Every source has confirmed that Andrew Garfield is being replaced, due to the fact that the series is being rebooted. Toonamiguy (talk) 16:24, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

We are stepping away from the central question again, is there explicit verification that states the Spider-Man film is a part of the Marvel Cinematic Universe? The quote Ruffice98 provided just seems like quality assurances from Fiege. @Adamstom.97, Fandraltastic, Favre1fan93, and Tenebrae: I'd like to here from some more regulars.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 16:35, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

I agree that it is premature to state that the Spider-Man franchise is now part of the Marvel Cinematic Universe. For all we know, this is a one-time "crossover". I support the content that currently exists in the article. However, are we wanting to list the planned Spider-Man film under the "Films" section, which is distinct from any franchise claims? Nevermind, I did not recall the film-specific details correctly. Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 17:00, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

@Erik: Sorry, List of Marvel Cinematic Universe films seems to be more directly impacted than this article. This was just the only thread I found on the subject.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 17:05, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

The Marvel press release does say: "Marvel and Sony Pictures are also exploring opportunities to integrate characters from the MCU into future Spider-Man films." If the reboot does feature MCU characters, with repercussions in the MCU, I suppose it would be considered an MCU film. But that's a ways away. Richiekim (talk) 17:02, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

But that's in reference to characters only. We need more information. For all we know it could be like the Quicksilver/Scarlet Witch situation with FOX. Iron Man could show up in a Spidey film but will it be the RDJ Iron Man from the MCU films? We just don't know.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 17:09, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

I'll make it short because every time I try to post something an edit conflict gets thrown up. The Kevin Feige comment is very clear from where I'm standing. They are going to try to deliver these demands because its in the MCU (the above butchering of basic arithmetic to prove a point is shocking frankly). As for other points, the reboot is quite clearly explained in the press release, it's a new Spider-Man making his first appearance. Also, if an MCU character appears in the film, say the MCU Iron Man but its not the MCU Iron Man, then it isn't an MCU character, it's a Marvel character that also features in the MCU. Ruffice98 (talk) 17:16, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

I agree with those who think that it is premature to say that the Spider-Man franchise is now part of the Marvel Cinematic Universe. Those who believe otherwise, should keep WP:OR and WP:CRYSTAL in mind... Fortdj33 (talk) 17:21, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

It isn't said that Sony and Marvel will be sharing Spidey like it's with Quicksilver ans Scarlet Witch, but that Spider-Man will join MCU. It's clear. Mike210381 (talk) 17:23, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

It isn't clear. Spiderman is involved in the comic civil war storylines just like Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch are involved in the comic Avengers, so Marvel negoitiate a deal so that Sony reboot spiderman and it gives them access to the character in there films as long as there is no competition between their films. No where have they stated that the reboot will be mixed in with the MCU films. Just that it will be rebooted.--Ditto51 (My Talk Page) 17:34, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

It's not using a crystal ball to point out a quote from the president of Marvel suggesting it. He's said that they are doing something because those are the demands on the MCU. How is that not suggesting it is in the MCU? Ruffice98 (talk) 17:27, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

People are assuming that because spiderman is now set to appear in the MCU that the films are also set in the MCU. However it could just be that the spiderman films just hire another dude to play there version of Iron Man. I can't see Marvel giving Sony the ability to play around with their characters since Sony will have complete control. Also "suggesting" does not equal certain, that is why it is a suggestion and not a statement of fact.--Ditto51 (My Talk Page) 17:34, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Okay, I'll give further evidence then. The quote I gave for the reboot confirmation refers to the MCU Spider-Man as "the new Spider-Man". That's a definite article, thus there is only one new Spider-Man. That leaves only two possibilities, either they are both the same Spider-Man (and thus the same universe) or Andrew Garfield is still Spider-Man over on the Sony end, but as numerous sources are saying he's been dropped. It's one or the other, certainly not a new Sony version. I'd also add that if Marvel and Sony were continuing with separate versions there certainly would not be any discussions of MCU characters appearing in the Amazing Spider-Man 3 (as it would be). That's going into original research territory, but is very sound logic to base the search for a definitive conclusion. If you can source Andrew Garfield as being definitely out, they have to be the same. Ruffice98 (talk) 17:52, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

"The new Spider-Man will first appear in a Marvel film from Marvel's Cinematic Universe" & "Andrew Garfield is NO LONGER Spider-Man. Someone new will be cast. First appearance in MCU, then solo film"[6]. That says the solo movie will have MCU connection, if it will be the same actor in MCU film and new Spidey film. Mike210381 (talk) 17:41, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Guys the solo film will be part of the MCU Kevin Feige posted it online, and Spider-Man will re-appear in Avengers Infinity War Part 1, and possible Part 2 (unconfirmed) so why would they have him appear in a marvel, then sony, then a marvel film and not have the sony one part of the mcu? It's not a one-time crossover as spider-man as he will appear in a film before his solo film, then the solo film, then avengers 3. So marvel are making a deal with sony to make seperate films with the same actor despite the fact marvel said both companies would make films within the mcu, and by the way, marvel are making the whole film, Sony just distributes, advertises, casts, and has "tweaking" rights on the costume. So marvel are making sony a film and ultimately delaying their own films, when they had plenty of chances to do this, so they are making a film for a rival company, which would lose them money from their later films. Well done guys, the perfect logic. GUYS THEY SAID ITS PART OF THE MCU, IT WILL HAVE THE MCU INTRO, MARVEL MAKES THE FILM, IT WILL HAVE MCU CHARACTERS, ITS PART OF THE MCU FOR CRYING OUT LOUD! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kyloias (talk • contribs) 18:29, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Um...Marvel isn't making the film...--Ditto51 (My Talk Page) 18:57, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Um...Marvel is making the film. "...Spider-Man franchise, on July 28, 2017, in a film that will be co-produced by Kevin Feige and his expert team at Marvel..." -AnonWikiEditor (talk) 20:38, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

All I am reading is a bunch conjecture: "If they are doing this then it must mean that". Wikipedia policy is based on verification. If we do not have verification the explicitly states the film is a part of the MCU, then we cannot list it. I am not saying that it is or isn't a MCU film, just that we do not have verification that it is. Remember WP:Verifiability, not truth.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 18:44, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Seriously, it has not been stated that it is it, you are just taking what they say and twisting in. The most they have done in hinted at it, they have not actually confirmed it yet! When they do it will be added to the article.--Ditto51 (My Talk Page) 18:57, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

In official statements there is that he will be part of MCU... I don't get it, what else confirmation you want? It's state clear [7], [8]. Spidey will be part of MCU with new actor, who will first appere in one of MCU movies then in solo one. It's not enough? Mike210381 (talk) 19:07, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

They say Spiderman is, and we are not disputing that. We are disputing that nothing has stated that the new films will be in the MCU. Everyone is just assuming that that is what the sources say even when they don't outright say it.--Ditto51 (My Talk Page) 19:27, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Feige said "I am equally excited for the opportunity to have Spider-Man appear in the MCU", charakter will make an apperence in upcoming MCU movie. It doesn't meen that the movie is in the MCU? I think that we read different article. Mike210381 (talk) 20:44, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Seriously guys? This is getting ridiculous. There appears to be a consensus that we shouldn't jump to conclusions on this (even excluding my opinion), so can we knock it off for now? A character being in a film and a film being in a series do not necessarily go hand in hand. The bugs from Slither appeared in Guardians, should we add that? No, we shouldn't. Should we add A Million Ways to Die in the West to Back to the Future (franchise) because Doc Brown appeared in it? You better believe we shouldn't.

Please, just wait for explicit wording. You guys are making (very logical) inferences, and that's fine, but it doesn't belong here. The character is part of the MCU. His films probably are, but have not been confirmed to be. Either way, this argument has become so circular that I'm getting vertigo, so can we please let this lie until we have confirmation from Marvel or Sony? Sock (tock talk) 21:12, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

This isn't a statement on whether it should or shouldn't be in there, but I find it amusing that some of the same people who keep saying "we need to wait for explicit wording from Marvel" argued vehemently that it wasn't necessary in regards to Doctor Strange's release date (an old issue from last summer). The hypocritical stance makes it seem like certain people feel like they have ownership over the article as opposed to actually believing in Wikipedia principles and policies. -AnonWikiEditor (talk) 22:52, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

If it's any help, my reading of this portion of the Marvel press release...

Under the deal, the new Spider-Man will first appear in a Marvel film from Marvel's Cinematic Universe (MCU). Sony Pictures will thereafter release the next installment of its $4 billion Spider-Man franchise, on July 28, 2017, in a film that will be co-produced by Kevin Feige and his expert team at Marvel and Amy Pascal....

...is that the Disney movies (and the former Paramount entries) are in the MCU and that the upcoming Sony Pictures release is not.

It's saying "Spider-Man will first appear in a Marvel Cinematic Universe film and then afterward in the Sony franchise." It sounds to me as if Marvel considers them two different things.--Tenebrae (talk) 22:53, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

The difference between that dispute and this one is that we had a source that definatly stated the Doctor Strange date (Variety) here we have people looking at the source, all infering the same thing (that the new spiderman films will be in the MCU) but some of us are actually trying to follow Wikipedia Policy by arguing that the sources don't state it clearly and as such it is not clear. All that is clear is that a spiderman that may or may not be the same one as the one in the re-rebooted franchise will be in MCU films during Phase 3. Most notably Civil War...--Ditto51 (My Talk Page) 22:57, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

This obviously isn't the place to get into that other dispute, but with that one we had literally a dozen different sources (some with QUOTES FROM KEVIN FEIGE!) that all said the same thing and were much newer than the source being used. Yet people still insisted that it didn't matter what Marvel was saying. At least this time it's not as bad. There wasn't even any ambiguity last time, yet people still argued otherwise. -AnonWikiEditor (talk) 23:07, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

I think this is a similar situation to the (as we know it) current Hulk situation. Marvel Studios has control of the character rights, but any future solo film will still be distributed and financed by Universal. The main question I have that makes me sway towards these films being in the MCU is, if the supposedly "same" character is appearing in definitive MCU films, and then again in solo Sony films, with the potential for MCU versions of characters to appear, I take that to mean that it is within the MCU. Also, can we please create a subheading "Break" and clearly layout what is explicitly known from the press release and subsequent reliable sources, and what is still the question areas? - Favre1fan93 (talk) 23:08, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Break

Just to clarify everything that is actually known, and has been absolutely clearly stated in the press release (with no ambiguity) as requested above:

1. Sony and Marvel have reached a deal to allow Spider-Man to appear in the MCU.

2. Spider-Man will appear in an upcoming MCU film prior to July 2017.

3. A new Spider-Man film will be released in July 2017 with Kevin Feige acting as producer, produced and distributed by Sony.

4. The aforementioned MCU film will be the first appearance of the new Spider-Man (note the definite article).

5. Sony will continue to finance, distribute, own and have final creative control over all future solo Spider-Man films.

6. Marvel and Sony are looking to include MCU characters in future Spider-Man films (note "MCU characters", not just "Marvel owned characters").

7. This will definitely be the Peter Parker version of Spider-Man.

8. Marvel intend to deliver the creative continuity and authenticity that fans demand from the MCU in the Sony film.

I hope this clarifies the situation for everyone, but with the MCU characters being under consideration, and also the fact that they only refer to one new Spider-Man in the press release it only leaves two potential situations as I have described before unless the situation changes in the mean time (namely that either it is intended to be the same universe or Sony intend to continue their existing films alongside Marvel's new continuity within the MCU). Ruffice98 (talk) 23:26, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Here are some of my opinions on points from the press release (they are similar to Ruffice's, as I was writing this as they were submitting theirs, so sorry for overlap) This is from the press release or other RS (which will be linked). Points listed are from top of the press release, down:

1. "Under the deal, the new Spider-Man will first appear in a Marvel film from Marvel's Cinematic Universe (MCU)."

This is expanded by the WSJ's report that that film will be Civil War. (WSJ article is for subscribers, here is an RS reporting on it). Additionally, using the wording "new Spider-Man" suggests that Andrew Garfield will not be involved, thus ASM and ASM 2 should not be considered as tied to this new franchise. Multiple RS's have since reported that Garfield will be recast. As well, the WSJ article reports that Sinister Six has been delayed, so who knows how that will apparently fit in with these new films.

2. "Sony Pictures will thereafter release the next installment of its $4 billion Spider-Man franchise, on July 28, 2017, in a film that will be co-produced by Kevin Feige and his expert team at Marvel and Amy Pascal"

"co-produced by Kevin Feige and his expert team at Marvel and Amy Pascal" indicates that Marvel Studios will be a production company for the film, along with Sony Pictures Entertainment

3. "Sony Pictures will continue to finance, distribute, own and have final creative control of the Spider-Man films."

This statement confirms that Columbia Pictures will distribute the film, not Disney. I am also potentially reading this as a similar situation to the Hulk rights, where Marvel Studios has the ability to use the character, but solo films are still financed and distributed by Universal.

4. "Marvel and Sony Pictures are also exploring opportunities to integrate characters from the MCU into future Spider-Man films."

Personally, this statement here reveals that the Spider-Man films will have some connectivity to the larger MCU. The full extent, based on this wording, is unclear. It should be noted that the wording is explicitly characters from the MCU not additional Marvel characters (ie Iron Man appearing but it not being RDJ's Iron Man).

5. Kevin Feige said, "Marvel's involvement will hopefully deliver the creative continuity and authenticity that fans demand from the MCU. I am equally excited for the opportunity to have Spider-Man appear in the MCU, something which both we at Marvel, and fans alike, have been looking forward to for years."

The first sentence does not clearly indicate to me that the Spider-Man films will be in the MCU. It will be an "upgrade" as it were from the ASM films, but could still be separated. The second sentence about him appearing in the MCU, could just refer to the first film appearance.

These are the points I felt we were all trying to discuss. Overall, I feel like yes the Spider-Man films will be a part of the MCU in some way, but the wording as presented in the press release does not give us unquestionable doubt that this is the case. If you agree or disagree with my personal opinions on them, let's discuss. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 23:39, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Sorry for all my posting. I've just come across new info. Here from here and here. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 23:46, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

I think you've covered almost everything. The only other thing that really stands out is of course the use of "the new Spider-Man" which confirms there is currently only one new Spider-Man in the foreseeable future. That does leave open the possibility Sony could be carrying on The Amazing Spider-Man series of films as well, so as I've said before get a source confirming Andrew Garfield is out and you confirm it is the MCU, otherwise there would be more than one new Spider-Man and Marvel wouldn't have "the new Spider-Man". Ruffice98 (talk) 23:53, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

I just want to clear-up a few things. First it says Feige will be a CO-producer. There's a huge difference between a producer and co-producer. Despite common misconception a co-producer has nothing to with the number of producers or shared responsibilities. A producer is the person who is in charge of the production, which is what Feige was on most of MCU films. A co-producer is more or less just an advisor. Which backs up what Feige talking about in he said, "Marvel's involvement will hopefully deliver the creative continuity and authenticity that fans demand from the MCU". However, the source goes on to say "Sony Pictures will continue to finance, distribute, own and have final creative control of the Spider-Man films." So Sony will have the last word and can totally disregard any suggestions from Feige. Also Marvel Studios was already a co-production company on the previous Spider-Man films, X-Men films and Fantastic Four films, which are not a part of the MCU. This is NOT like situation with Universal, which was a distribution deal only. Marvel had a similar one with Paramount, but the films were independently produced by Marvel Studios. Sony will be lead company on the Spider-Man films. Secondly, even if the same actors are used it does not guarantee that film is a part of MCU. More likely yes, but guarantee no. As Sock pointed out there is precedent that this is not always the case. Bottom line is we need explicit verification.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 12:50, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

While I agree with you in this discussion TriiipleThreat, I would like to point out that the Producers Guild defines co-producers as "two or more functioning producers who perform jointly or cumulatively all of the producer functions as a team or group." See here. What you described sounds more like an Executive Producer to me. DinoSlider (talk) 17:14, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Variety confirms that Sony will continue development of Spidey spinoff films like Sinister Six and Venom without Marvel or Feige's involvement. Richiekim (talk) 00:18, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

It says Kevin Feige isn't involved currently with any of those projects. That doesn't rule out his involvement in future, and it also does not place Marvel in any position at all. The press release tells us the deal between Sony and Marvel will continue to develop the character "into the future" so to assume Marvel is dropping out after this next film is a bit off to say the least. They'll want to keep an eye over things, especially if it is tied into the MCU as most expect. Ruffice98 (talk) 01:33, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Here's a source saying Spider-Man will join the MCU. Also, it mentions Marvel moving back 4 of its films to accommodate the deal. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 07:58, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Did you read the entire article? Your source says: "In a deal long-sought by Marvel Studios, Spider-Man—the character licensed to Sony Pictures years before the comic book company got into the filmmaking business—will be joining the Marvel Cinematic Universe alongside Robert Downey Jr.’s Iron Man, Chris Evans’ Captain America, and the rest of the Avengers team." Spider-Man the character. Nowhere in that article does it say the point you're trying to prove, which is that the 2017 film is in the MCU. "After the webslinger does a tour within the Marvel Studios realm, Sony Pictures will release a stand-alone Spider-Man film on July 28, 2017, and Marvel Studios president Kevin Feige—who engineered the concept of a interconnected superhero franchise—will help produce it along with Amy Pascal..." is what is said. Which is what every other source is saying. Sock (tock talk) 13:03, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Marvel had never annouced a film before, that wasn't in the MCU on their official page. None of X-Men, F4 or earlier Spieder-Man films were annouced there. By the way, most of the web sites inform about new Spider-Man film as a part of third phase of MCU. And as I said earlier, they changed four dates to put Spidey movie, and this is without any profits from this movie... Main argument about that this is a part a MCU is that they annouced that film on Marvel.com. Spider-man joined MCU as a character but also as a movie, they didn't said that only the character joind. Mike210381 (talk) 13:24, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

They did not explicitly say that the film is a part of the MCU, only that Spider-Man is. Everything else is completely circumstantial. If it is we will have verification sooner or later. Wikipedia is not the news and there is no rush.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 14:24, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

I know that's wikipedia it's not the news and there is no rush!!! Maybe you could start to read the others arguments and stop looking for a trick in Sony/Marvel deal??? Look maybe at the facts:

1. As I said, Marvel had never annouced a film before, that wasn't in the MCU??? NO THEY HAVE NOT!!! He annouced Spieder-Man film on their realese date (previously Thor: Ragnorok) and change 4 realese date for MCU phase three. [9], [10]

2. One of MCU connections are cast & characters... Spidey will be recast and his first apperence will be before his solo film, in one of MCU films (probably in Civil War). That's mean that he will be introduced in MCU and the same actor will play him in his solo one. Also the other MCU characters can appere in Spider-Man future solo movie (NOT Marvel characters but MCU's). That's connect with the MCU??? YES IT IS!!! [11]

That aren't a reliable sources??? I don't think that Feige will say: "for all wikipedia users, that don't understed Sony/Marvel deal, yes, Spieder Man film will be part of MCU"... All the news sites said that it is! The other languages wikipedia used that source as reliable, but YOU knows better. Mike210381 (talk) 15:16, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Again the evidence you provided is circumstantial and the very definition of WP:SYN. None of the sources you provided say the film is a part of Marvel Cinematic Universe. Marvel moving release dates or making announcements on their website is irrelevant unless they say WHY they are doing it. Us inferring why, no matter how logicial it might seem to you is original research.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 15:24, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Discussion with you makes no sense at all, because you know the best.Mike210381 (talk) 15:38, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

As you can see here, I'm not alone.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 15:52, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

I'm not too. Mike210381 (talk) 16:06, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Guys...come on. This has gotten so far beyond out of hand. TriiipleThreat's last argument was bulletproof, and you responded snidely without actually countering any of his points. That seems strange to me. WP:SYN is the absolutely best way to describe the arguments presented here, and in this case, TriiipleThreat does know best. He's presented every single argument he's made clearly, with sources, and with policies/guidelines backing his points. This is nearing WP:DROPTHESTICK territory. Sock (tock talk) 16:38, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

This is a dumb argument over semantics again. Obviously the 2017 Spider-Man movie will be set in the MCU whether or not the press release specifically states it, it's inherently implied. I guess we have to wait several months for someone to say in layman's terms that the movie will be set in the MCU so we can edit the page. What a joke. Suzuku (talk) 17:24, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 10 February 2015

Spider man has recently joined the MCU and this page hasn't featured that so I would like to edit this page adding information about this and the consequences of it. Thank you 86.181.153.1 (talk) 19:08, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

 Not done Please see above section--Ditto51 (My Talk Page) 19:25, 10 February 2015 (UTC)