Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

It's being reported that Amazon has ordered multiple Sony-Marvel shows. The first of which is ‘Silk: Spider Society’


jayboogieman
 Share

Recommended Posts

On 11/18/2022 at 3:47 PM, jayboogieman said:

They flooded the market. Sadly, it doesn't look to be slowing down either.

Agreed, Marvel has to many movies/characters now.  The comic book fans might still go, but I think the rest of them are starting to lose interest.  Although the most recent black panther movie seems to be doing extremely well.

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
3 hours ago, d-dave said:

They have to be smart.

That's not happening. They're milking the Marvel properties for all they can. Odds are there will be a superhero crash at some point in a few years and then there won't be comic based movies/shows for a decade or so before they start with the old fan favs like Spiderman once more.

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't lie I do want to see what they can do with X-Men and maybe an actual good Doctor Doom on the big screen.  But yeah, it's pretty saturated at this point.  Though I still enjoy the shows they aren't must watches like Daredevil was.  Though WandaVision and Loki were really good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • This is gonna be longest six weeks ever 
    • This 1000%.  Hey who wants to sign with the guy that couldn't even get his client the guaranteed contract of a 3rd round pick?  Lmao
    • I don't think it's any weird or unique clause, it's the offset language, same thing so many contract disputes are over. It just means that including it, if a player is cut and then signed by another team, the original team would be able to subtract how much they're getting paid by the new team from what they still owe him on their guaranteed money. For example, it's why Russell Wilson signed for the minimum last year with the Steelers as that was included in his Denver contract.  So if he signed with the Steelers for $1 million, he'd get $1 million less from the Broncos, if it was $2 million, he'd get $2 million less, basically he couldn't make any more money than he was already going to make, so you sign for the minimum to not take unnecessary cap room from your new team while giving extra cap room to your old one. The problem with trying to include it in rookie deals is that a team trying to include it, it says they think they don't really believe the player will make it 4 years with the team before they cut them.  And this usually comes up with one or two rookies in most seasons, the difference is it's usually handled much more quietly and not as public and ugly as this one. The other difference is that it's happening with the Bengals, which I believe I saw are one of the few (or only?) team that doesn't have protections for rookies in rookie and mini camps to be able to participate even if they haven't signed their contract yet.  The other teams have injury protections that allow them to still play, but the Bengals do not, which is also why this one is so public and ugly, as most the time this happens, the rookie is still participating in the rookie and subsequent mini camps, giving them more time to get the contract done before training camp when they'd then hold out.
×
×
  • Create New...