|
Venom
Aug 9, 2018 22:17:46 GMT -5
Post by BackinBlack on Aug 9, 2018 22:17:46 GMT -5
I'm not sure about the whole "don't need Spider-Man" part. It was definitely true before when he was out of reach, but now that he has been integrated in, I feel they have a long-term plan for Tom Holland's Peter Parker, especially since he's part of the next generation that the original Avengers are passing the torch too. Hell, I wouldn't be surprised if they already had Miles Morales plans. Let's also take into consideration that Sony would pretty much lose if they don't keep Spider-Man in the MCU. I mean, all these spin-offs prove they aren't totally smart with what they're doing, but they aren't that stupid.
|
|
|
Post by mr. excellent on Aug 10, 2018 19:17:59 GMT -5
I'd like to think Marvel Studios sees it the way you do. I definitely don't want him taken out of the MCU sandbox. If we're looking at it in the sense of "who would be more damaged from Spider-Man being taken out of the MCU, Marvel Studios or Sony", it would definitely be Sony that was more hurt by it.
|
|
|
Venom
Aug 11, 2018 11:50:39 GMT -5
Post by mr. excellent on Aug 11, 2018 11:50:39 GMT -5
Venom May Be Rated PG-13 www.cinemablend.com/news/2455499/venom-may-not-be-r-rated-after-allSo, I'm not against the PG-13 on principle. I think we could still get some very intense action scenes with that rating, and I point to Captain America Winter Soldier and Captain America Civil War as examples. Perhaps a better example would be Tom Cruise and Emily Blunt's vastly under watched and under appreciated Edge of Tomorrow. I bring that movie in because at the time it came out I thought "that's the best CGI version of an alien symbiote I've seen" up to that point. They weren't symbiotes, but the imagery and the way they moved was very similar. That said though, I am against the PG-13 rating for this film, for the reasons being reported. It sounds to me that Tom Hardy and Ruben Fleischer came on board to create the hardcore, no holds barred version of this character. This creature is a monster, who like Wolverine and Deadpool, really does benefit from having the freedom to use that R-rated level of brutality. He's called the Lethal Protector and has a nasty habit of eating people's brains. That seemed to be what Sony was selling to everybody, but now just weeks before the movie drops, they want to walk it back? No, no, no. I get why they're doing it, but that's not what was advertised, and unfortunately, that's classic Sony. This is why their movie division has been in trouble these past several years now. No one trusts them, and they keep proving why the audience shouldn't trust them, and proving to Marvel not to trust them.
|
|
|
Venom
Oct 2, 2018 23:58:11 GMT -5
Post by BackinBlack on Oct 2, 2018 23:58:11 GMT -5
Currently 30% on the Tomatometer; "Venom's first standalone movie turns out to be like the comics character in all the wrong ways - chaotic, noisy, and in desperate need of a stronger attachment to Spider-Man." www.rottentomatoes.com/m/venom_2018/
|
|
|
Venom
Oct 6, 2018 13:18:39 GMT -5
Post by mr. excellent on Oct 6, 2018 13:18:39 GMT -5
Venom breaks October box office records www.comicbookmovie.com/venom/box-office-venom-devours-october-opening-weekend-record-despite-negative-critical-reception-a163965After seeing the film, I don't think they need Spider-Man with the version they've put forth. The next movie should mirror season 1 of Dexter, serial killer vs. serial killer. In this analogy, Venom is Dexter and Cletus Kassady is... I don't remember the name of the main serial killer antagonist from s1 of Dexter, but he is Dexter's brother. That said, I'd love to see Venom cross over with Spider-Man. I don't want to see Spider-Man in a Sony Venom movie if only because I don't trust them and I feel it would be about as special as Batman being in Suicide Squad. It didn't really do much for me. I could totally see Marvel doing something spectacular with the dynamite revelation that is the full on Tom Hardy Venom though. From a business perspective, and realistically, this ain't gonna happen.
|
|
|
Venom
Oct 7, 2018 13:30:55 GMT -5
Post by Webber3000 on Oct 7, 2018 13:30:55 GMT -5
I came out of the theatre feeling the same way I felt after watching Solo. It's definitely a calculated, greedy, soulless cash-grab from an equally greedy studio, rather than deliberate art (despite Venom being Avi Arad's "passion" project for over a decade now), but man is it getting crapped on way more than it deserves. Just like Solo, it probably shouldn't have been made, but now that it has, the end result is way more fun than people make it out to be.
Sure, Venom is poorly edited, and what should have been the latter half the movie was condensed into a rushed and boring third act and it is flawed in several other ways, but it's way more coherent and fun than many of its counterparts (at least 60% of the DCEU). Hell, I preferred it to Ant-Man and the Wasp. It may not be the better of the two, but it sure felt more original (especially in Venom's motivation, which might just be my favourite part of the movie, too bad they didn't play with it for very long).
|
|
|
Venom
Dec 19, 2018 20:06:15 GMT -5
Post by BackinBlack on Dec 19, 2018 20:06:15 GMT -5
So I have finally watched Venom. It's not as bad as I thought it would be. It's definitely not Fant4stic bad, since this film actually wants its audience to have fun. Hell, I was thoroughly entertained. As critics have said, it's much like a 2000's pre-MCU Marvel movie. It has its weird and questionable moments, but the way Venom looks and the action scenes are still entertaining. I was also satisfied that they explained that his desire to eat people is more out of necessity than joy. I still feel this film was unnecessary and it's pretty much a popcorn flick with nothing under the surface, but it's not a bad way to kill two hours. I do wish they put out an extended cut, since I do notice them pull back on the more gory moments that have semblance to their original R-rated intentions.
There are some "alarmists" if you will that Venom's success will lead to Sony ending their agreement with Marvel over Spider-Man. Sony has made some dumb decisions in the past, but they're not that dumb. If they pull Spidey out, they are doomed. I mean, they make all the profits from the solo films. Then again, we won't have to worry about this if those rumors of Apple buying Sony are true and Spidey's rights go back anyway.
|
|
|
Venom
Dec 19, 2018 20:43:41 GMT -5
Post by mr. excellent on Dec 19, 2018 20:43:41 GMT -5
Wait, hold on a second... how does Apple buying Sony connect with Spidey's right going back to Marvel? If anything, wouldn't that give Sony more money to play with like the Disney deal did for Marvel Studios? Or is it the case that Apple would just disband the film division of Sony and focus on electronics? I'd only just heard about the prospect of Apple buying Sony.
That aside, I used to give Sony the benefit of the doubt when it came to these ridiculous rumors. Then Sony came out and pulled a Sony so many times, I stopped doubting. The way they pulled out Into the Spiderverse with all the usual suspects on board that typically mess up the live action versions of Spider-Man movies, has me questioning if they'll get a huge amount of confidence from it and start flexing again. I'm glad these are entertaining and/or great movies, but Sony's problem is inconsistency. It's the same with the Fox X-Men movies. Anyway, Amy Pascal said she wants to keep Spider-man in the MCU for years to come, so there's that I guess. It's definitely what I want to hear her say.
|
|
|
Venom
Dec 20, 2018 7:11:51 GMT -5
Post by BackinBlack on Dec 20, 2018 7:11:51 GMT -5
Because Sony would be in a different place compared to when they were first sold the rights; it'd be giving ownership of rights to a different entity, which wasn't part of the initial deal. It's kind of similar to how if Comcast had won in buying Fox instead of Disney, then X-Men and Fantastic Four would have gone back anyway.
|
|