Sony Can’t Low-Ball Their New Spider-Man Forever

Published 4 years ago by , Updated February 15th, 2014 at 4:29 pm,

Today Deadline spilled the news that Sony’s new Spider-Man Andrew Garfield is only being paid $500,000 for the upcoming Spider-Man reboot, with incrementally higher paydays for  the planned second and third Spidey reboot films.

This news is not surprising (cutting the cost of the Spider-Man franchise was one goal Sony stated early on) – however, there is some question about how realistic Sony’s goals are, and if they are not simply repeating the sordid history of their Spider-Man franchise.

According to Deadline, Andrew Garfield has a deal in place to receive $1 million for a second Spider-Man film, and $2 million for a third. To us rat-racers it might sound like big money – but in Hollywood? Not so much.

Granted, at the moment not a lot of us are that familiar with Andrew Garfield, so it’s not exactly a snub to his celebrity to hear that he’s only making 500K for this Spider-Man reboot. But Garfield does have a starring turn in Oscar-nominated director David Fincher’s upcoming biopic about the founders of Facebook, The Social Network. Early word we’re hearing is that Garfield is a standout performer in his role as Facebook co-founder Eduardo Saverin, the guy who left the team before Facebook went big time and later sued his old pals over the matter. By the time The Social Network hits theaters this fall, Garfield could likely be a breakout star.

Did I mention that Garfield has the usual renegotiation deals in place with Sony? If the Spider-Man reboot is a success then I’m sure you’ll be hearing all about that renegotiation issue, because if Garfield’s star is rising as quickly as some think it is, then in a few years you can bet the young actor will be asking for a bigger piece of that Spider-Man pie – and so will director Marc Webb (pictured above) if he does well at the helm, and so will  the actress who plays the love interest (provided they don’t kill her off at some point icon razz Sony Cant Low Ball Their New Spider Man Forever ).

In the end, if Sony does well with their lower-budget and “grittier” Spider-Man, it will still inevitably lead to the same bigger-is-better thinking that often ups the cost (and hollow spectacle) of major blockbuster franchises, while steering studios down the path of re-hashing proven formulas instead of exploring (and risking) creativity with each new franchise installment.  So how is this Andrew Garfield / Spider-Man situation going to be any different than when Tobey Maguire was paid $4 million then $17.5 million then $15 million (with sweet backend deals) then $50 million to wear the webs?

tobey maguire 50 million Sony Cant Low Ball Their New Spider Man Forever

And if history does end up repeating itself in terms of cost inflation, what is the ultimate point of Sony pursuing this reboot of a franchise that had barely become a trilogy? To keep “re-inventing” the franchise over and over again in order to keep it cost effective, only to have its financial success be the same determent (high cost, low quality) they wanted to avoid in the first place? Am I the only one who’s beginning to see some obvious parallels to crack dealing here?

How Sony benefits from all this…

« 1 2»

TAGS: spider-man

41 Comments

Post a Comment

  1. god i hope this kid can pull it off…….

    • after watching him in “The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus” i think he will do a good job if they find a director who will let him do his own thing in regards to the character.

  2. Tisk tisk tisk, I wonder why they would do the poor new Spidey such an unhonorably, low thing?

  3. I think this Spider Man movie will fail in many ways. Fans of the first 3 dont like the fact Tobey was replaced, and that Sony is focusing on the teeny bopper crowd more than the true fan crowd, by focusing on his feelings more instead of crime fighting.

    The main reason this film will fail, it opens the same weekend as Star Trek 2, which makes you wonder, what will make more money, Star Trek 2 or Sappy Spider Man

  4. This certainly looks like a case of low-balling to the extreme.
    However, this only occurs if he agrees to such a contract.

  5. why wouldnt he? sony wont bow, nor budge to his will, trust me

    • My point was he can walk away. He does not have to accept it.
      If he agrees then the deal suits him too, not just Sony.

      • i personally hope he walks away

        • Agreed.

  6. Now, I could care less if this new Spiderman trilogy fails or succeds..as a matter of fact I hope it fails that way Sony could see what big of a mistake they made in replacing Raimi and Tobey we could have had a good Spiderman movie coming up next year by now but to replace a good director and a good actor for this? I mean come on this guy is 26 years old I thought they said they wanted to go with a younger Petter Parker? I was hoping that pierce Jackson Movie kid was going to get the role.. he would have been a far better choice than this guy…I hope this new trilogy goes down the drain..maybe there greeds in paying less to the actors and and gain more from the franchise will level down a bit.

    • No, Jose. What you mean is, you couldn’t care less. Think about it.

  7. I dont understand how almost everyone hates the reboot, when spiderman 3 was horrible, and hearing of spiderman 4′s plot it was going to be worse.

    • Amen Taylor D.

    • Raimi’s version of Spiderman was certainly not a definitive one by any strectch of the imagination.

      This reboot seems like it’s going to be tailored for the Twilight / MTV crowd. YAY!

      • Im all for this reboot. Raimi and Tobey didnt do a very good job at be faitful to the comic book Spiderman. Hopefully Webb can do better. So much was missing from 1-3 and it made me not want a 4th movie.
        1) We need more action
        2) We need more Spiderman
        3) Spiderman needs to use all his abilities (super strength of 10 tons, super speed, super agility, flawless percision, spider-sense, and fighting abilities.)
        4) the story needs to be about more than just Mary Jane and Aunt May.

  8. ONLY $500,000 ? I couldn’t even make that in a lifetime!

    • In 1997 you needed around a million for you and your spouse to retire on. That’s barely a middle class income too. So SuperLC you really need to consider hard what you do for a living if you ever think you’ll retire…

      • just wait until the inflation hits from all the govt debt. in 10 years, $500k will be nothing

  9. I never understood why actors make so much money. its not like their work is all that important.. $500K for what 9 months real work followed by promotion work… I would harldy say thats small change

  10. Probably because even what we used to call cracker box housing in most places in Ca. starts at $500,000.00 Shamose. It’s very costly to live there compared to living in the east.

  11. It’s either he didn’t ask for much cuz he likes the character or it’s just a business thing. Either way I really don’t care. As long as this project get’s off the ground. So far Mgm and FOX are going straight down the crapper with their big budgeted films. And Sony And Marvel seem to keep there hold on things so I wouldn’t worry that much.

  12. ONLY 500k?!?!?!?!? ON HEAVENS NO!

    He’s fine, isn’t Chris Evans earning a similar amount for a role that will probably serve him more justice? Also he’s somewhat of an established actor already, I’ve never heard of this guy outside of the articles about him being the new Spider-Man.

  13. I’d be glad of this news if the savings were passed along to the consumer, but let’s not even pretend that’ll ever happen.

  14. I could care less about this film and kinda hopes it fails if it would help Marvel buy the rights from Sony. Like other people i know, i rather of seen Spider-man 4 than to see petey back in high school again.

    • No, WallyWest. What you mean is, you couldn’t care less. Think about it.

      • You knew what i meant

  15. If nolan wont put catwoman in batman 3 then the next best thing is to put black cat in the new spiderman. They make an interesting couple

  16. “by drowning those projects in their financial politics, instead of turning them loose to studios who can actually get them onto the screen (that would go against the bottom line! :-P ).”

    If you had a business and your business was stalling/failing why would you want to give up your “company secrets” just so your competitor could make a buck?

    This is not air or food we are talking about. We dont “need” these things to live. While I would LOVE to see Bond/Hobbit etc to say a company should allow their cash cows to go to someone else just for the sake of appeasing the masses is like shooting yourself in the foot.

    MGM is not dead yet. Please wait until they die to pick over their carcass.

  17. peple who think maguire didn`t do a good job as spidey because he doesn`t look like spidey or can`t stand his nerdy/charming looks or wasn`t good enough of an actor as well as kirsten dunst + all other actors are all WRONG AND/OR SO CHILDISH! He had done an outstanding interpretation of the 3 film scripts, so for all the effort and achievements, i don`t think or imagine anybody will be better than them. spidey as we know him is some ordinary young man with human-like problems, caused by slight irresponsibility, not all that great looking, not meaning bad looking, just nicely in the middle of great and bad looking, and from the life i`ve gotten to know of this comic book character, i`m sad to say that noone i can imagine will do better than the person who if hadn`t become an actor name “tobey maguire” wouldn`t have been recognized. he`s a mature looking guy, like maguire.

    • Tobey Maguire acted nothing like the Peter Parker / Spiderman of the comic books. He has been quoted as never having read a Spiderman comic book ever in his life and so his own interpretation was a fairly dead pan one to say the least.

      You need to remember or take hold of the fact that Steve Ditko drew Peter the most nerdy and that’s where I guess Raimi drew inspiration from for Tobey’s look.

      When John Romita took over in 1966 he drew Peter slightly more mature and handsome.

      The other thing about Tobey was he was too short and displayed NONE of Spidey’s wise cracking humor. WOW one of the key components of the character missing. Both the Director and actor NOT doing their research. Not very outstanding as far as I’m concerned.

      You need to get over your “man crush” with Tobey because there are lots of other suitable actors for the role of Peter Parker / Spiderman.

      Raimi had a great supporting cast but overall it was an overblown big budget cartoon rather than a mature adaptation of the comic book.

      Not all people who don’t think like you do are WRONG or SO CHILDISH. Everyone is entitled to an opinion. Some folks are just better informed than others.

    • Yeah, Tobey did great with what he had in the script. But thats where it all fails is the script anyways. Maybe they wrote it for him knowing that he cant play anything remotely intimidating or cool. I mean, look at the DARK PETER…he was more of a loser that way.
      In the comics, Peter Parker only retains his nerdy attitude/appearence through outhis high school years. As he enters adult hood, he becomes a smart, serious, young man with a great sense of humor. Not the childess geeky, nerdy sense of humor that Tobey Portrayed in the 3 films.
      Think of Peter Parker as being a smarter and nicer Dead Pool.
      I dont think Toey could have pulled that off very well. I mean, his performance in Brothers was good, but again, i didnt take him that seriously.
      As for Kirsten…The girl is ugly. She looked like a beat up Wet Dog in Spiderman 2 and looked like a starved emo girl in Spiderman 3. In the comics, Mary Jane is a stunningly beautiful Super Model….Kirsten can never be that.
      The only actor who was able to nail his character perfectly was J. Jonah Jameson.

      • I was personally looking forwared to seeing John Malcovich playing the vulture in Spider-Man 4. I found Tobey to be a passable Peter Parker, but we’ll never really know of he could have pulled off “dark peter” in Spidey 3 because the script really didn’t provide one, though I agree he seriously lacked Peter/Spidey’s sense of humor which is critical to the character. I agree that J. Jonah Jameson was portrayed brilliantly throughout the trilogy but I also feel that James Franco did a great job as Harry Osborne. While his “kid goblin” costume lacked something to be desired, I think the characters death in Spidey 3 was handeled (at least characterally driven wise) spot on with how it happened in the books. Part of the original trilogy’s problem was casting though and the use of characters. Why did we not see Gwen Stacey until 3? She should have been in from the 1st movie and MJ should have been brought in later. William Dafoe was a great Norman Osborne but the Green Goblin suit was a joke. Alfred Molina was a great Doc Ock and while his character wasn’t written true to the books he still came off really well. Casting of the Sandman was good but I don’t know where they pulled this daughter stuff from. Topher Grace is (I think) a good actor but he was the completely wrong choice for Eddie Brock. And they cast a brilliant actor in James Cromwell as George Stacy, and then didn’t use him. Again he should have been around since the 1st movie, maybe getting killed in 2 by Ock. I would have liked to see where Raimi was going with the series though and again I was looking forward to John Malcovich (the only decent think about Jonah Hex) as the Vulture (though I think he could be better as the Owl in another Daredevil pic). I’ll see the re-boot out of support for the genre but I can’t say I’m looking forward to it. And Sony should sell the rights to Marvel, let Spidey be where he belongs.

  18. That’s an excuse all inarticulate people use when they don’t know how to use a capital \I\.

  19. Yeah ok, whatever. I thought this site was about movies, not people’s mis-typos, lol.

  20. Ah the \Sony Spider\ man I wish they were making a Spider man film

  21. oh yeah, unfortunately, that may have been the only problem, even if hes not weak, too short. i prefer more average height. i may be immature to think that but the reason kind of relates to a superbaby the way i see a 5’4-5’7 er playing spidey. but i know, the human race is born able to grow to a variety of heights. so that may be a stupid reason to think he doesn`t portray a good spidey. but he`s ugly? if you think that maguire is ugly than i guess you can`t stand the nerdiness/maturesness in his face, or somehow, do you see that he`s goofy looking? i guess some people`s minds live in a different dimension than others don`t they. to me in this universe, there are certain appearances such as maguire`s face that don`t represent badness. so on to my predicament, this next franchise will fail without maguire. so i suppose someone in this world thinks/would think bale isn`t good as batman? reeve/routh weren`t good as superman?

    • @ John K

      If this franchise fails again it won’t be because Tobey Maguire wasn’t in it. It will be because the story or direction sucks along with the whole “Ultimate” Spider-TEEN “Twilight” emo angle.

      As far as I’m concerned Maguire & Dunst did not convince me at all in their roles so any new face that at least looks like the comic book counterparts is a welcome relief.

      I don’t understand your fascination with wanting Tobey as the only Spiderman.

  22. maybe it doesn`t matter what some of the characters other than peter and mj look like. i believe many actors can portray harry oborn though thoght james franco portrayed him perfectly, and to me it doesn`t matter what the J.j. jameson portrayer looks like, just needs to interpret the character well. so honstly, lots of characters it may not matter to me who portrays them as long as they familiarize and bond their personalities with them. but i thought j.k. looked exacctly like j.j. from the comic and did a fantastic part. since i didn`t this franchise go up and stay up i don`t have any inspiration to watch a new franchise. i should`ve known i wouldn`t be able to see a good action spidey film with all the right actors. i`ve always felt somehow i was cursed and not meant to have a good life.

  23. since i didn`t see this franchise go up is what i meant

  24. spider law, by childess do you mean childless? i may have used the wrong word, maybe i don`t understand what “nerd” or “dork” or “geek” quite means. i guess childish humor isn`t anything unlively, unless that means immature such as making a joke about doing something wrong against an innocent. kids and adults have good humor, although if “nerd” means smart and kind, then i guess that means it has never been a “bad” or “uncool” word. of course you can`t have a relationship and have a good life if you aren`t nice and educated.

  25. Andrew Garfield singlehandedly saved the Spiderman franchise from Spiderman 3s train wreck and this is the Guy u give only 500 thousand dollars! To? This is exactly y marvel should have the rights to Spiderman at least they treat their actors with respect. U didn’t see any of the avengers making only 500k

Post a Comment

GravatarWant to change your avatar?
Go to Gravatar.com and upload your own (we'll wait)!

 Rules: No profanity or personal attacks.
 Use a valid email address or risk being banned from commenting.


If your comment doesn't show up immediately, it may have been flagged for moderation. Please try refreshing the page first, then drop us a note and we'll retrieve it.

Be Social, Follow Us!!