I still think 2.0 could have done well on the road. They could have scaled it down to something more realistic budget wise and just told the story without all the overhead audience flight sequences or limited the overhead flight to the act one finale with a much simpler stunt utilizing the rigs already in place in most venues for Cathy Rigby's overhead flight.
CATSNYrevival said: "I imagine Disney owns it now?"
Why would Disney own it?
Sony holds the film rights to Spider-Man (hence, the recent debacle with the deal between Disney and Sony).
And I was going to say, even if Disney did own the film rights, those would probably be separate from the stage-rights given that the musical isn't based on the films. However, I see now that Sony did co-produce the musical, so there is some connection there at least.
Hmm good questions. I just don't understand why they are keeping the rights to themselves. I figure at least community theater or colleges would love to give it a try. I'm in the minority but I enjoy most of the music from the show.
JBroadway said: "CATSNYrevival said: "I imagine Disney owns it now?"
Why would Disney own it?
Sony holds the film rights to Spider-Man (hence, the recent debacle with the deal between Disney and Sony).
And I was going to say, even if Disney did own the film rights, those would probably be separate from the stage-rights given that the musical isn't based on the films. However, I see now that Sony did co-produce the musical, so there is some connection there at least."
Disney owns Marvel Entertainment and has since 2009, which I would assume is why CATSNY thought they would own the musical (the character was licensed to producers but Marvel didn't contribute financially, according to Variety). Only the producers would likely know how much longer the license lasts (if it hasn't expired already), and after that point, ownership of the musical would likely revert to Marvel, right? If that's the case, it's no wonder we haven't heard of it since it closed in 2014: Marvel has its own brand of touring shows and now plays available to license, and they have full control over those and never did of Spider-Man.
perfectliar said: "JBroadway said: "CATSNYrevival said: "I imagine Disney owns it now?"
Why would Disney own it?
Sony holds the film rights to Spider-Man (hence, the recent debacle with the deal between Disney and Sony).
And I was going to say, even if Disney did own the film rights, those would probably be separate from the stage-rights given that the musical isn't based on the films. However, I see now that Sony did co-produce the musical, so there is some connection there at least."
Disney owns Marvel Entertainment and has since 2009, which I would assume is why CATSNY thought they would own the musical (the character was licensed to producers but Marvel didn't contribute financially, according to Variety). Only the producers would likely know how much longer the license lasts (if it hasn't expired already), and after that point, ownership of the musical would likely revert to Marvel, right? If that's the case, it's no wonder we haven't heard of it since it closed in 2014: Marvel has its own brand of touring shows and now plays available to license, and they have full control over those and never did of Spider-Man."
So I'm confused--can you tell I'm not a lawyer?
Though Disney/Marvell didn't write, stage or finance the show, the show belongs entirely to them? Not whomever wrote it or produced it? That sounds really weird. I can understand they might have leased the characters, so any future production would have to get their permission in part to move forward. But they really own it all? I don't think DC has that kind of control over It's a Bird...It's a Plane...It's Superman (granted, that contract would have been written up more than half a century ago).
perfectliar said: "JBroadway said: "CATSNYrevival said: "I imagine Disney owns it now?"
Why would Disney own it?
Sony holds the film rights to Spider-Man (hence, the recent debacle with the deal between Disney and Sony).
And I was going to say, even if Disney did own the film rights, those would probably be separate from the stage-rights given that the musical isn't based on the films. However, I see now that Sony did co-produce the musical, so there is some connection there at least."
Disney owns Marvel Entertainment and has since 2009, which I would assume is why CATSNY thought they would own the musical (the character was licensed to producers but Marvel didn't contribute financially, according to Variety). Only the producers would likely know how much longer the license lasts (if it hasn't expired already), and after that point, ownership of the musical would likely revert to Marvel, right? If that's the case, it's no wonder we haven't heard of it since it closed in 2014: Marvel has its own brand of touring shows and now plays available to license, and they have full control over those and never did of Spider-Man."
Impossible2 said: "perfectliar said: "JBroadway said: "CATSNYrevival said: "I imagine Disney owns it now?"
Why would Disney own it?
Sony holds the film rights to Spider-Man (hence, the recent debacle with the deal between Disney and Sony).
And I was going to say, even if Disney did own the film rights, those would probably be separate from the stage-rights given that the musical isn't based on the films. However, I see now that Sony did co-produce the musical, so there is some connection there at least."
Disney owns Marvel Entertainment and has since 2009, which I would assume is why CATSNY thought they would own the musical (the character was licensed to producers but Marvel didn't contribute financially, according to Variety). Only the producers would likely know how much longer the license lasts (if it hasn't expired already), and after that point, ownership of the musical would likely revert to Marvel, right? If that's the case, it's no wonder we haven't heard of it since it closed in 2014: Marvel has its own brand of touring shows and now plays available to license, and they have full control over those and never did of Spider-Man."
Sonyowns the rightsto the Spider-Man character."
Sony does not own Spider-Man. Sony has/owns certain production rights pursuant to contract. The contract will specify how long Sony keeps those rights.
ggersten said: "Impossible2 said: "perfectliar said: "JBroadway said: "CATSNYrevival said: "I imagine Disney owns it now?"
Why would Disney own it?
Sony holds the film rights to Spider-Man (hence, the recent debacle with the deal between Disney and Sony).
And I was going to say, even if Disney did own the film rights, those would probably be separate from the stage-rights given that the musical isn't based on the films. However, I see now that Sony did co-produce the musical, so there is some connection there at least."
Disney owns Marvel Entertainment and has since 2009, which I would assume is why CATSNY thought they would own the musical (the character was licensed to producers but Marvel didn't contribute financially, according to Variety). Only the producers would likely know how much longer the license lasts (if it hasn't expired already), and after that point, ownership of the musical would likely revert to Marvel, right? If that's the case, it's no wonder we haven't heard of it since it closed in 2014: Marvel has its own brand of touring shows and now plays available to license, and they have full control over those and never did of Spider-Man."
Sonyowns the rightsto the Spider-Man character."
Sony does not own Spider-Man. Sony has/ownscertain production rights pursuant to contract. The contract will specify how long Sony keeps those rights."
So exactly just what I said. Sony currently owns the rights to the Spider-Man character.
Impossible2 said: "Sony owns the rights to the Spider-Man character."
No, Sony doesn't. Marvel only sold the film rights to Sony. This is pretty typical. Harry Potter's film rights were sold to Warner Brothers, but JK Rowling retained the stage rights until she sold them to, I assume, Jack Thorn or Sonia Friedman. She sold the theme park rights to Universal. When Disney purchased Marvel, they had to buy back the rights from the other studios; Sony was the lone holdout.
Marvel actually sold the stage rights separately to Tony Adams, upon whose death were then held by his producing partner David Garfinkle. Unless there was a clause that transfers the rights back to Marvel under certain conditions, he presumably owns the rights until he sells them.
Fosse76 said: "Impossible2 said: "Sony owns the rights to the Spider-Man character."
No, Sony doesn't. Marvel only sold the film rights to Sony. This is pretty typical. Harry Potter's film rights were sold to Warner Brothers, but JK Rowling retained the stage rights until she sold them to, I assume, Jack Thorn or Sonia Friedman. She sold the theme park rights to Universal. When Disney purchased Marvel, they had to buy back the rights from the other studios; Sony was the lone holdout.
Marvel actually sold the stage rights separately to Tony Adams, upon whose death were then held by his producing partner David Garfinkle. Unless there was a clause that transfers the rights back to Marvel under certain conditions, he presumably owns the rights until he sells them."
Thank you for your correct answer instead of **** above it x
So assuming the rights are not owned by a giant corporation, why do you think they still aren't available for any other productions? Wouldn't they make back some money?
I highly doubt that any other theatre in their right minds would attempt a production - regional, college, community, or otherwise. It's a technical nightmare. It would never work. Besides the technical issues, it's also just not that good of a show.
I would love to see a production that deliberately embraces the opposite extreme:
Performed in a dingy blackbox, some crappy Halloween-costumes and masks for all of the characters, silly string for webs, standing on a chair to simulate flying, etc. Also, all characters are played by like 5 or 6 actors.
joined:1/19/08
joined:
1/19/08
Posted: 8/28/19 at 2:38pm