Rumors of Apple Buying Sony Pictures might mean good news for Spidey-fans

The conundrum surrounding Spidey's status is getting more complicated. There are rumors claiming that SONY Pictures is on sale AND that Apple will be the most likely buyer. Allegedly, this is part of why the negotiations have stalled between SONY and Disney/Marvel.

IF Apple DOES buy SONY Pictures, then the Spidey rights would revert back to Marvel and Spidey would be able to return, triumphant, to the MCU. No money spent by Herr Maus, and possibly the cancellation of Morbius the living Alleged Pedophile (Jared Leto).

Of course people (read: morons) are complaining about this. Whining about "monopoly from the Mouse" or "I don't want Ironman Jr." and my favorite "SONY DID BETTER Spidey movies than Disney"... To them I say, you're not totally wrong, but you are mostly wrong.

Monopolies are bad, yes, BUT, Spidey's case is NOT a monopoly issue. It's a getting the rights back to the original owner issue. Yes, in the 90s Marvel had to sell Movie rights to different studios to stay afloat. Fox's take on X-Men and SONY's take on Spider-Man helped usher the modern Superhero movie era. BUT, as in a certain overrated movie from the Distinguished Competition said: You either die a hero or live long enough to become the villain.
Fox and SONY did the latter. I will only talk about SONY, since Disney ate Fox and it's no longer an issue. Sony has had MORE Failures than Victories with Spider-Man in LIVE ACTION. By using that "Monopoly" nonsense, then Warner Brothers should split up their DC heroes to different studios. Because DC is solely owned by Warner Brothers and "Monopoly BAD". (then again with WB's Mismanagement of DC stuff, maybe it wouldn't be a bad idea...)

I kinda understand the frustration of some fans with Peter being an Ironman fanboy... (I hated it back when ADULT PETER became Ironman's sidekick and revealed his identity to the world...) At least here, he's a 15 year old kid, which makes it a bit more understandable. Then again, the MCU is HEAVILY inspired by the Ultimate Universe, where Peter was 15! Not to mention that even "Classic Peter" did a bit of "fanboying" of his own. He gushed over the F4 but ended up claiming team ups weren't his thing after finding out that being part of the F4 had no payment benefits (not to mention that they have PUBLIC Identities, which goes against Peter's Secret ID) And something similar happened with the Avengers, back in the day... Public ID being the main issue for Peter. Is the current Spidey a bit TOO Reliant on Stark Tech? Yeah, but this was the only "Valid solution" for a poor kid from Queens to have such a professionally made costume. (The biggest issue with the Tobey and Garfield suits was that they looked like Expensive Big Budget Hollywood Blockbuster outfits instead of makeshift homemade Superhero suits. Like a modified two piece compression suit. (The shirt would connect to the pants via hidden Bra hooks... I did put thought into this years ago before "amazing") But that reliance makes sense within the MCU, since Stark was THE Gamechanger. With Ironman's passing, Marvel/Disney was setting up the way for Peter to grow into the Spider-Man we wanted.

Putting the trust on SONY to do things right is VERY Misguided... Sure, the Original Spider-Man was great for its time. Sadly, it hasn't aged THAT Well. Mostly on the effects and that it CAN FEEL a bit too long at times. Spider-Man 2 fares a bit better, BUT Then again, it could be my Doc Ock Bias talking. Spider-Man 3's mistakes are far more glaring now than they were back then. I've mentioned the SONY interference by forcing Venom. Then there was the whole SONY plotting behind Raimi's back with a Spidey vs. Lizard movie, which eventually became "Amazing" Spider-Man, when Raimi didn't want to do a Lizard movie, but a Vulture one.

"Amazing" was just a desperate ploy from SONY to hold on to the rights. The First "Amazing" wasn't BAD, but it wasn't great. The second one, while they undouched Peter a little, the movie was a Spider-Man 3 level of a mess... Forced Rhino cameo wasting Paul Giamatti on him, Dubsteptro, Weird Beavis and Butthead Hybrid Goblin, Forced Creation of the Sinister Six's weaponry WITHOUT THE SIX!? All of this because SONY wanted to create its own Cinematic Universe to compete with the nascent MCU.

Into the Spider-Verse had little interference from SONY because it was an animated film, which they didn't expect to be a hit.

The common denominator for the failures on Spidey movies has been SONY pushing for stuff that doesn't work with the story being told. I've mentioned this multiple times. (This doesn't just apply to Spider-Man. Ghostbusters is another example of SONY's cluelessness. Venom was a mess. Now they want to toss in Spider-Man, Carnage, and a Good Looking Morbius who is an alleged Pedophile. 

IF SONY were to play it Smart, they'd stick to making movies about a "Friendly Neighborhood" Spider-Man and keeping him to "Low-Level crime" in case the Apple deal doesn't go through, so they can have a Worthy bargaining chip to deal with Disney... (Also Start Venom from scratch...)