I can't seem to follow your math. Right now, six films have topped $1 billion, and they were all made by Disney:
Avengers: Endgame
The Lion King
Spider-Man: Far from Home
Captain Marvel
Toy Story 4
Aladdin
Once Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker joins the list that will make seven, and if Frozen 2 joins, 7+1=8. All eight films will have been made by Disney.
I highly doubt Jumanji 2 will top $1 billion, as the first one didn't, and sequels typically earn less than their predecessors, but if both Jumani 2 and Joker make the cut that's 8 for Disney and 1 each for Sony and Warner Bros. When you write 1-2 for each of those studios, what 2nd film do you have in mind for each of them?
Maleficent 2, another Disney release, is doubtful to hit the billion mark, and I think it's nearly impossible to imagine either Dark Fate or Doctor Sleep making it to $1 billion. None of the previous five Terminator films have even come close, and Doctor Sleep seems like something that will earn closer to $100 million than $1 billion.
reply
share
dmac8 (5050)
5 years ago
Spider-Man: Far from Home is Sony
reply
share
FilmBuff (7235)
5 years ago
It was made by Disney, featuring Disney characters, for a Disney audience. Because Sony owns the film rights to Spider-Man, they get the film credit, but by no stretch is it a Sony film.
reply
share
dmac8 (5050)
5 years ago
You're talking about box office haul. You asked what's the missing Sony pic. That's it. And that's what he's counting that you're not. It's co-produced by Sony and it's a Sony Pictures release. It's called "Sony Pictures' highest-grossing film ever."
reply
share
FilmBuff (7235)
5 years ago
The money isn't the issue here. I'm sure Sony made a nice profit from the film, but the trend I notice is that the films that attract the most people to theaters are all being made by Disney. The box office numbers tell us which films drew the largest audience, but the money itself is of no consequence. So sure, Sony made some money, but they didn't make a film that drew crowds. They happen to own the rights to a character on whom a film was based.
reply
share
dmac8 (5050)
5 years ago
It is in the context of which the other poster is speaking. It's a Sony Pictures release. Spider-man appears in Endgame but it's not a Sony co-production or release. Stark has appeared in Spider-man but it's not a Disney release. You're pretending there's no difference in the level of Sony's participation between the two. That's incorrect. What you're oversimplifying applies to Spider-man's appearance in Avengers/Capt America movies but not to his standalone movies.
"In February 2015, Disney, Marvel Studios and Sony announced a deal to share the Spider-Man film rights, leading to a new iteration of Spider-Man being introduced and integrated into the MCU. The deal allowed Sony to distribute and have final creative control over MCU films where Spider-Man is the main character, while Disney distributed the ones where he is not."
And no one is disputing Disney dominance. It might be the most talked-about film subject around here. But the other poster is talking about who released billion-dollar movies. Far From Home counts as a Sony. He wasn't going any deeper than that.
reply
share
FilmBuff (7235)
5 years ago
The deal may allow that, but if you've watched both MCU Spider-Man films and the previous two Sony Spider-Man films, I think you'll agree that it's quite clear Sony's only contribution was to say "yes" to whatever Kevin Feige et al wanted to do. Those are MCU films through and through, without a hint of the Sony taint to them.
reply
share
SpikeMike (470)
5 years ago
You are just factually incorrect Filmbuff. Marvel Studios helped to make it, but it was Sony's money and companies that released it.
reply
share
FilmBuff (7235)
5 years ago
Sony had nothing to do with the film other than providing the rights to Spider-Man. Beyond that it's a Disney/ MCU film from start to finish.
reply
share