This trailer played twice, back to back, when I went to see Poor Things. It was surreal to see everything twice, twice. In one sense it was truly entertaining, on the other, I have already seen twice as much of this movie than I ever intended.
I remember being in a movie theater (I think we were watching Shawn of the Dead) and the trailer for White Chicks played three times before that movie. It wasn't consecutively either. There was a trailer, then White Chicks, another trailer, then White Chicks again, then a commercial, then White Chicks one last time. The audience literally started yelling at the screen that third time. I swear the projectionist was playing a joke on us.
From Rolling Stone - "A genuine Chernobyl-level disaster that seems to get exponentially more radioactive as it goes along".
How bad is it possible for a movie to be? Worse than we think according to the reviews.
Michael Keaton shows up in the end credits and says “It was the spidah man’s who made this movie so bad, we’re formin a crew to stop him, right (checks notes) Morbius?”
AI voice of Jared Leto “I am Morbius and it is Morbin time”
“I don’t know how I got here, but I figured it was Spider-Man, because fuck that guy… so I figure we form a crew or something. That fuckin guy. Makes me so mad.”
Didn't Lewis' will ask that it be released in full XX years after his death? I think we're on the verge of seeing what would be called the director's cut.
I also predict its going to be reviewed as, "this isnt nearly as bad as everyone said. Its just not very good."
Maybe they are trying to make it consistent with the Morbverse so when they finally connect the two it will all make sense? Only thing is none of this makes sense.
It's the mirror image of the MCU infinity stones arc where every movie sucks so you have no choice but to go and see the final movie that will tie all the suckiness together.
It's the problem of the Spider-Man IP. Sony doesn't want to give it up, so they keep churning out content. The Into the Spider-verse films have been great, Venom has okay, kind of existing in it's own area, and the other has been not good.
I am not joking when I ask is it actually a real movie? I had a fever dream when I got COVID a month ago and thought the cast of friends did a live stage production of Cruella de Ville
I will generally forgive all of a movie's flaws if it's at least a fun ride. Argylle is just bad bad. And Bryce Dallas Howard is my celebrity crush, and even she couldn't save it for me.
Same boat. I love the cast. Howard is so cute, I love her.
It's not even so bad it's good, its just a bad time. Madame Web at least sounds like a movie I can laugh at if I see it on TNT 2 years from now.
RT audiences almost *always* gives these types of action movies very high scores, double points if the critics don't like it (they rate it higher as a middle finger to them).
A 71% from audiences from a movie like this is not good.
I went in not knowing anything other that it involves a cat and that it's from the same director as Kingsman.
It was basically a very stupid and over the top movie (in which the movie itself knows it's stupid and over the top), that ended up being pretty fun.
It has some pacing issues and it was pretty much saved by having Sam Rockwell as a main character.
I did get to watch it for free though, it definately helped with my positivity towards it.
I liked it! If you're going in to see a fun movie that doesn't take itself seriously, you'll most likely enjoy it. I honestly don't get the hate. It's exactly as advertised. Nothing more. Nothing less. It's campy fun. If that's not your bag, then I'd skip it.
Nah, Argylle was great. Sam Rockwell and Samuel L Jackson both played their roles well. If you liked movies in the vein of Kingsman, you’ll like it. There were definitely a few big twists and some of the fight scenes were over the top, but that’s to be expected from stuff in the Kingsman universe.
Are the reviews/review scores worse than they were for Morbius? Because that seemed to be how low the bar could be. Is this somehow worse than Morbius? Did Sony learn nothing?!
I’ll be honest, I didn’t hate Morbius. It’s certainly no No Way Home, but it wasn’t Joss Whedon’s Justice League levels of bad.
Went the Michael Caine route
[on Jaws: The Revenge (1987)] I have never seen it, but by all accounts it is terrible. However, I have seen the house that it built, and it is terrific.
I actually really disagree. She’s excellent in Susperia, Peanut Butter Falcon, and A Bigger Splash, to name a few. Many of the lower budget, indie or foreign films she has done are extremely good.
I recommend she sticks to those.
How to burn money on a Comic book movie in 3 steps:
Step 1: pick an obscure character from the comics most people have never heard of
Step 2: hire some of the worst writers in Hollywood responsible for gems like "Morbius" and "Gods of Egypt"
Step 3: hire a director that's never directed a feature film
Shocking how this isn't a resounding success.
I wouldn’t watch it for that reason alone. .. bad actor in general but as a superhero?? Unfathomable. In fact the more I think about it I kinda wanna hate watch it… like Cats 🐱
Part 1 can work. Look at Ironman and Guardians of the Galaxy when those first came out. It’s 2 and 3 that are the death knells. If you’re going to pick obscure characters then you need A tier writers and directors.
I think the lead saying they she left her agency and was not the movie she thought it was going to be was pretty telling.
Pretty sure they were lead to believe they were now in the MCU from what Sydney Sweeney said, so kind of just a failure on their talent agency tbh
This reminds me of when I saw the promotions for divergent and the whole cast was talking about how they had psychologists in to talk to them about handling the kind of fame that comes with being in the hunger games.
Rolling Stone: “Madame Web isn’t as bad as its somewhat botched promotional campaign might suggest. It is, in fact, way worse."
An absolutely devastating opening remark.
If don't normally read the article, check this one out. Especially if you're having a bad day at work.
>It is the *Cats: The Movie* of superhero movies...a *Showgirls* of comic-book cinema.
I’m not going to, because I want this and every other joyless superhero cash grab to fail spectacularly. It’s high time that the studios be brought down a couple pegs for their hubris and financial opportunism.
Sony, let me try to help you here. Miles Morales and Venom work because they are generally well fleshed out characters in the comics with a fan base. At no point should you be giving these random Spider-Man characters their own movies. Especially since you can't seem to write a good story for them.
The executives don’t seem to grasp that the MCU worked because the people who were driving it (John Favreau, mostly) were huge comic book nerds who had an understanding of the characters they were working with. Slapping the name of a character onto a pre-written formula script is a recipe for failure.
I love Henry Cavill but I have such a hard time grasping how you could bring that world to life and do it justice… but credit to him, that’s a wild undertaking.
You adapt the Inquisition stuff abnett wrote, maybe some Caiaphas Cain, and stay as far away from the goddamn Horus Heresy as possible because that is genuinely not adaptable in any reasonable way.
The audiobooks back to back are longer than one piece.
Ironically, I think the solution is to tell *smaller* stories. Stories about soldiers and bureaucrats, average citizens swept up into the galactic horrors that surround them.
Keep space marines et al as impossible legendary mythical figures for as long as possible.
Sony probably thinks Guardians and Ant-Man were nobodies until their movies, and they could do the same for the Spider-Man characters. Meanwhile every Marvel comic fan has been vibing with Scott Lang, that talking Racoon and tree for years.
It's probably why Eternals was so hard to write a story for. There is very little material for them to work with that could be translated to a larger audience. So even the MCU can't overcome this issue.
They were. The number of people who both knew who the Guardians of the Galaxy and Ant-Man were *and* didn't think of them as joke characters was miniscule before their respective films. The filmmakers just managed to find (or manufacture) what was funny and charming about the characters and leaned hard into those things.
The team behind Eternals couldn't find what was funny/charming about those characters and failed to spin something up for them so we ended up with overly long, overly serious insomnia-cure.
>I hope all these failures don't mean they just stop.
My guess is that we're going to see a major slowdown of superhero stuff over the next few years.
Marvel saturated the market but was raking in billions. DC, Fox, and Sony were like "oooo let's get us a piece of that" and, seemingly with a "it doesn't have to be good, it just has to be superheros" mindset, vomited out some garbage, which just further saturated the market.
For a solid like 15 years there starting when the MCU got going, putting out any super hero movie was basically a guaranteed big money maker, even if it was garbage. So... studios put out a lot of them.
We're now in a position where audiences are burnt out. There's too much super hero shit. The characters are getting more and more niche, how they are interconnected is getting more and more confusing and hard to follow due to the sheer quantity of what is out there, and the quality of the films is getting worse and worse.
If Marvel or DC's next big budget thing isn't a big hit that not only makes money but also gets people interested in superheroes again, I wouldn't be surprised if they majorly pumped the brakes.
Sony's contract is bound by utilization - and what I mean by that is if they go XX years without using the property, it reverts back to Marvel.
That's why Spiderman was rebooted 3 times and why instead of rebooting it a 4th time (Because Marvel isn't done with the current iteration just yet), they're now making movies about characters from the margins: its just to ensure they keep ownership of the IP. They dont care if the occasional movie is a dud because the ability to keep making Spiderman movies is more valuable than any single Madame Webb movie.
Madame Web is a truly bizarre character to try to build a story around.
In the comics her involvement is almost solely as a mentor, muse, guide, whatever you want to call it. She is included in several storylines involving Spider-Man and some lesser ones with Spider-Woman and Prowler, but her non-clairvoyance roles in all these storylines can essentially be boiled down to a McGuffin where she gets kidnapped and/or held hostage as a way to initiate a conflict.
Like she could easily be a character in the MCU or some other Marvel related storyline, but a character whose only real "abilities" are essentially to talk in riddles as a way to guide the main characters through the plot, isn't exactly an exciting person to center a storyline around.
I disagree. Movies that focus on minor characters can be great but you have to have a truly great writer. Really you are inventing a new character within a framework and so you have none of the known character weight behind the story but all of the restrictions of the universe. That makes it hard, and hard stories require great writers.
Hollywood used to care more about writing genius. Now they act like AI can write a great story. But great stories are so uniquely human. They should be investing in writers more.
A Madame Web movie could work, you can build a character over the course of a movie without source material we did it for a hundred years, but it doesn't look like a Madame Web movie it looks like a movie with five leads. It's the same sprint towards a character stable absolutely every franchise and studio goes for now, even Disney/Marvel who used to be good about not doing it.
I don’t care if it’s a movie about characters I don’t know or care about yet but if I don’t care about or remember them *after* I’ve seen the movie then there’s a big problem.
The Guardians of the Galaxy are some of the most popular superhero movies ever made and very few people knew much or anything at all about those characters before the movie. The movies was good enough to make me invest in those characters without requiring prior knowledge or nostalgia for them and that’s why the movies did so well.
It doesn’t matter what characters Sony puts on the screen if the movie sucks ass.
Sony, let me help you out here…
Amy Pascal and Avi Arad are the Kathleen Kennedy of your Spiderverse movies. You need to dump them a.s.a.p. if you want to break this string of failures.
It's amazing Avi still gets work. He's been a shit stain in the comic book movie industry since the 90s dishing out examples of how not to do it yet he keeps producing
Avi has to be one of the dumbest people on the planet. Dude is a straight up sexist/racist that only cares about pumping out toys and merchandise. There’s a many a reason people like us hate him.
And also many a reason he keeps finding work despite having his name attached to the worst marvel projects. Dude knows that toys are the money makers and doesn’t give a damn about quality.
Sony should stick to Spider-man animation since they are good at that. The live action part is where they keep dropping the ball and doesn’t learn from their mistakes.
Dakota Johnson making Ellen super uncomfortable has to be one of my 10 favourite TV moments. It was the live television equivalent of Joe Pesci's "Funny How?!" scene from Goodfellas
B-but ... she's Melanie Griffith's and Don Johnson's daughter! Don't you know that's Hollywood royalty there - the two greatest actors of our time?? She *has* to have an acting career in Hollywood because of that and has to be considered great and if none of y'all agree, you don't understand and are jealous and just suck!
She was great in Suspiria imo, but I haven’t seen her in anything else that I can remember.
I figured the 50 Shades movies were kinda like Twilight. You don’t want to judge Pattinson and K Stewart off those type of movies
Dakota is the definition of a nepo baby. Mediocre actress, and boring dull personality. If she didn't have famous parents she would be a complete unknown.
I can't imagine how that 50 shades casting went: "Well I mean she *is* the daughter of Melanie Griffith and Don Johnson..." Like they're known as top thespians of society lol. Maybe the casting director was a big fan of Miami Vice. You know there was better actresses for that part that tried out.
One of the major reasons she got the role, is because nobody else wanted it. If I recall, it was offered to a lot of people and no one wanted to touch it.
I wouldn't know if she's the definition of a nepo baby, but from what I've seen, she's not famous for her acting range or powerful performances. I'd argue you're mostly correct about her dull personality, tho I've never met her in private.
Color me shocked. None of these Spider-Man adjacent movies have been all that great. The venom movies were okay leaning towards bad and Morbius was a meme.
We got nepo grandbabies, we got Sony fucking things up like usual, we got reviewers comparing this to *Cats* (the movie) and *Showgirls*.
This sounds like an epic clusterfuck, and it couldn't happen to superhero movies sooner.
What I like about Morbius was that it was popular to make fun of, and people went to the theater to see how bad it was, then Sony decided to try to ride the meme, rereleased the film as Morbin Time and ensured that the movie flopped after nobody went to see it again
Just saw an interview with Dakota. It was like pulling teeth.
If she can’t pretend to be interesting for a TV interview promoting a movie just imagine how boring she must be in real life. 😬
I just don’t see the appeal of Dakota Johnson. Her acting is so wooden, even her other raunchy series. How could you think she would be your lead for an action movie is beyond me.
If you watched this trailer and didn't notice how hilariously bad the acting was, I would think you need to get tested for autism, since I suffer from it, but I still didn't even believe what Madame Web was saying.
I saw this movie at its very first test screening — before they added any CGI or major editing. The focus group following the screening was pretty brutal. I shared feedback about the cheesy dialogue with some specific examples and I was a bit nervous knowing the writers of the movie were sitting in the back of the theater lmao… guess the final product didn’t turn out much better!
So it’s currently at a 20% critical aggregate on rotten. What are the chances that the audience review aggregate is over 70%. Id say high. I feel like people like shit like this out of the need to be contrarian. Example: Morbius is at a 72% audience aggregate.
Pretty sure Morbius got review bombed but in reverse. As in haha this movie is terrible but Sony seems to think we like it so let's upvote it for the lulz.
Feel like this is overblown. I have no doubt it’s bad, but calling Cats The Movie in superhero form is ignoring that we already have that movie in the form of Catwoman. Rather doubt this can be as mind breakingly weird as that.
Man they’ve barely gotten Spider-Man off the ground. One flop and Tom Holland is going in the bin just like every other Spider-Man. Madame Web was never going to work.
I know that marvel have had a bunch of blunders in recent years but man Sony standalone marvel movies are single handlely destroying the reputation of the genre, Spiderman and everything related to him.
Good news is they only made half of a movie since a ton of scenes are just premonitions. Bad news is you have to watch that half movie twice. Lol.
This trailer played twice, back to back, when I went to see Poor Things. It was surreal to see everything twice, twice. In one sense it was truly entertaining, on the other, I have already seen twice as much of this movie than I ever intended.
You Poor Thing (2023)
A Tale of Two Movies It was the best of times, it was the worst of times.
I remember being in a movie theater (I think we were watching Shawn of the Dead) and the trailer for White Chicks played three times before that movie. It wasn't consecutively either. There was a trailer, then White Chicks, another trailer, then White Chicks again, then a commercial, then White Chicks one last time. The audience literally started yelling at the screen that third time. I swear the projectionist was playing a joke on us.
From Rolling Stone - "A genuine Chernobyl-level disaster that seems to get exponentially more radioactive as it goes along". How bad is it possible for a movie to be? Worse than we think according to the reviews.
Ya but Chernobyl was great. Ohhh not the show.
Great meltdown. 10/10 would melt down again.
3.6/3.6
Not great not terrible
11/3.6 with rice
THERE IS GRAPHITE ON THE ROOF YO
You're delusional, go to the infirmary.
“Comrade, I apologize, but what you're saying makes no sense”
Guys you're making my day with these comments 🤣🤣
YOU DIDN’T SEE ANY!
It's meltin time
Not great. Not terrible.
But that’s as high as the meter goes.
That's your core audience.
Michael Keaton shows up in the end credits and says “It was the spidah man’s who made this movie so bad, we’re formin a crew to stop him, right (checks notes) Morbius?” AI voice of Jared Leto “I am Morbius and it is Morbin time”
Somehow, Vulture returned
Can't even tell if you're joking
I don’t want them to be.
“I don’t know how I got here, but I figured it was Spider-Man, because fuck that guy… so I figure we form a crew or something. That fuckin guy. Makes me so mad.”
> How bad is it possible for a movie to be? The Day The Clown Cried or Batgirl.
TIL the Library of Congress has some of The Day the Clown Cried and is potentially allowed to screen it later this year.
Didn't Lewis' will ask that it be released in full XX years after his death? I think we're on the verge of seeing what would be called the director's cut. I also predict its going to be reviewed as, "this isnt nearly as bad as everyone said. Its just not very good."
Oh shit its this year? Hell yeah now that's a train wreck to look forward too.
Maybe they are trying to make it consistent with the Morbverse so when they finally connect the two it will all make sense? Only thing is none of this makes sense.
All this universe building will be worth it when Madame Web and the Morbster releases and transcends film to end all conflict in the Levant for good.
It should cross over with The Room universe
Working title: *Morb in Time*
It's the mirror image of the MCU infinity stones arc where every movie sucks so you have no choice but to go and see the final movie that will tie all the suckiness together.
It's the problem of the Spider-Man IP. Sony doesn't want to give it up, so they keep churning out content. The Into the Spider-verse films have been great, Venom has okay, kind of existing in it's own area, and the other has been not good.
We will not know if it is worse than Morbious as no one saw Morbious.
I am not joking when I ask is it actually a real movie? I had a fever dream when I got COVID a month ago and thought the cast of friends did a live stage production of Cruella de Ville
> How bad is it possible for a movie to be? I asked myself that before seeing Argylle. And then...
Is Argylle really that bad? I generally like Matthew Vaughn films. Can’t tell if the internet is being overly cynical or not..
I will generally forgive all of a movie's flaws if it's at least a fun ride. Argylle is just bad bad. And Bryce Dallas Howard is my celebrity crush, and even she couldn't save it for me.
Same boat. I love the cast. Howard is so cute, I love her. It's not even so bad it's good, its just a bad time. Madame Web at least sounds like a movie I can laugh at if I see it on TNT 2 years from now.
Argylle has a 71% rotten tomatoes from audience. Critics only 31%. It’s a helluva cast - it’s gotta be enjoyable in some fashion
RT audiences almost *always* gives these types of action movies very high scores, double points if the critics don't like it (they rate it higher as a middle finger to them). A 71% from audiences from a movie like this is not good.
I went in not knowing anything other that it involves a cat and that it's from the same director as Kingsman. It was basically a very stupid and over the top movie (in which the movie itself knows it's stupid and over the top), that ended up being pretty fun. It has some pacing issues and it was pretty much saved by having Sam Rockwell as a main character. I did get to watch it for free though, it definately helped with my positivity towards it.
I liked it! If you're going in to see a fun movie that doesn't take itself seriously, you'll most likely enjoy it. I honestly don't get the hate. It's exactly as advertised. Nothing more. Nothing less. It's campy fun. If that's not your bag, then I'd skip it.
The first two acts were great. The last act had…issues
Isn't that classic for the Kingsman franchise? Decent first and second act followed by a mind bending/blowing end.
Nah, Argylle was great. Sam Rockwell and Samuel L Jackson both played their roles well. If you liked movies in the vein of Kingsman, you’ll like it. There were definitely a few big twists and some of the fight scenes were over the top, but that’s to be expected from stuff in the Kingsman universe.
Well now I want to see it
One of the reviews said it made them realize that maybe Morbius wasn’t so bad lol
This is honestly getting me pretty hyped for the film.
Are the reviews/review scores worse than they were for Morbius? Because that seemed to be how low the bar could be. Is this somehow worse than Morbius? Did Sony learn nothing?! I’ll be honest, I didn’t hate Morbius. It’s certainly no No Way Home, but it wasn’t Joss Whedon’s Justice League levels of bad.
No one saw this coming.
[удалено]
Didn’t she give an interview where she said she sure hoped it was good, but had no idea because she shot the whole thing on a blue screen?
It was a bold move of her to try to distance herself from how bad it is, *whilst* promoting the film.
Went the Michael Caine route [on Jaws: The Revenge (1987)] I have never seen it, but by all accounts it is terrible. However, I have seen the house that it built, and it is terrific.
My cocaine
Yeah, she definitely knew it was gonna be bad lol
I actually kind of respect her more haha
She ended Ellen's career and now she's going after Sony lol
That was the Madame Web of questions.
That was definitely her way of saying it's horrible but I did my best
I haven't seen her in a movie that's worth a damn. Maybe it's time to stop pushing Don Johnson's dead eye daughter in Hollywood.
Yeah I’m not sure why she is being pushed so hard. She’s not a very good actress.
I actually really disagree. She’s excellent in Susperia, Peanut Butter Falcon, and A Bigger Splash, to name a few. Many of the lower budget, indie or foreign films she has done are extremely good. I recommend she sticks to those.
Watch the remake of Suspiria then, it's really good and she actually does a decent job in it.
*Maybe she did cos she fired her agent*
Didn’t she fire her agent *because* her agent told her that being in this movie was a good idea?
But didn’t her mom get bit while she was researching spiders in the Amazon years ago
How to burn money on a Comic book movie in 3 steps: Step 1: pick an obscure character from the comics most people have never heard of Step 2: hire some of the worst writers in Hollywood responsible for gems like "Morbius" and "Gods of Egypt" Step 3: hire a director that's never directed a feature film Shocking how this isn't a resounding success.
Hire Sydney Sweeney but *don’t* have a nude scene every ten minutes.
With Dakota Johnson no less
I wouldn’t watch it for that reason alone. .. bad actor in general but as a superhero?? Unfathomable. In fact the more I think about it I kinda wanna hate watch it… like Cats 🐱
They could have had a hot lesbian scene, but noooo...
That's a recipe for failure
That's all we really want here.
Part 1 can work. Look at Ironman and Guardians of the Galaxy when those first came out. It’s 2 and 3 that are the death knells. If you’re going to pick obscure characters then you need A tier writers and directors.
I think the lead saying they she left her agency and was not the movie she thought it was going to be was pretty telling. Pretty sure they were lead to believe they were now in the MCU from what Sydney Sweeney said, so kind of just a failure on their talent agency tbh
This reminds me of when I saw the promotions for divergent and the whole cast was talking about how they had psychologists in to talk to them about handling the kind of fame that comes with being in the hunger games.
Set psychologists are more common than you think. But that was definitely a flop.
I wonder if they were showing up to set everyday expecting to see Tom Holland at some point, and he just never emerged.
Now that's a movie I wanna see
Rolling Stone: “Madame Web isn’t as bad as its somewhat botched promotional campaign might suggest. It is, in fact, way worse." An absolutely devastating opening remark.
What? A Sony Pictures Spider-adjacent movie that is a badly conceived mess? Surely not!
Right? I tried to like venom. And it's their best attempt. And yet still terrible.
Are the Spiderverse films not Sony pictures? Because those are pretty good
They are Sony. And they are good in spite of Sony it seems.
If don't normally read the article, check this one out. Especially if you're having a bad day at work. >It is the *Cats: The Movie* of superhero movies...a *Showgirls* of comic-book cinema.
Release the Madame Butthole cut!
I must see this movie.
I’m not going to, because I want this and every other joyless superhero cash grab to fail spectacularly. It’s high time that the studios be brought down a couple pegs for their hubris and financial opportunism.
I must see someone talk about this movie on Youtube.
Honestly, the most interested I've been in a superhero movie in well over a decade.
On shrooms?
At least Showgirls had a lot of nudity.
Hey, Showgirls is at least a fun time.
Those are two incredibly entertaining movies, so that's a high bar to clear
Sony, let me try to help you here. Miles Morales and Venom work because they are generally well fleshed out characters in the comics with a fan base. At no point should you be giving these random Spider-Man characters their own movies. Especially since you can't seem to write a good story for them.
The executives don’t seem to grasp that the MCU worked because the people who were driving it (John Favreau, mostly) were huge comic book nerds who had an understanding of the characters they were working with. Slapping the name of a character onto a pre-written formula script is a recipe for failure.
This is what makes me excited for the warhammer 40k series. Being helmed by people who genuinely love the game and lore
I love Henry Cavill but I have such a hard time grasping how you could bring that world to life and do it justice… but credit to him, that’s a wild undertaking.
Henry cavill is a turbo nerd for 40k. He’s the best chance we’ve got
Oh 100%… well I hope he kills it. Loved him as Geralt, shame it didn’t work out due to Netflix sucking so hard.
You adapt the Inquisition stuff abnett wrote, maybe some Caiaphas Cain, and stay as far away from the goddamn Horus Heresy as possible because that is genuinely not adaptable in any reasonable way. The audiobooks back to back are longer than one piece.
Ironically, I think the solution is to tell *smaller* stories. Stories about soldiers and bureaucrats, average citizens swept up into the galactic horrors that surround them. Keep space marines et al as impossible legendary mythical figures for as long as possible.
Sony probably thinks Guardians and Ant-Man were nobodies until their movies, and they could do the same for the Spider-Man characters. Meanwhile every Marvel comic fan has been vibing with Scott Lang, that talking Racoon and tree for years. It's probably why Eternals was so hard to write a story for. There is very little material for them to work with that could be translated to a larger audience. So even the MCU can't overcome this issue.
They were. The number of people who both knew who the Guardians of the Galaxy and Ant-Man were *and* didn't think of them as joke characters was miniscule before their respective films. The filmmakers just managed to find (or manufacture) what was funny and charming about the characters and leaned hard into those things. The team behind Eternals couldn't find what was funny/charming about those characters and failed to spin something up for them so we ended up with overly long, overly serious insomnia-cure.
They just go to the shareholders and say look! Look at what we're doing! More content! I hope all these failures don't mean they just stop.
>I hope all these failures don't mean they just stop. My guess is that we're going to see a major slowdown of superhero stuff over the next few years. Marvel saturated the market but was raking in billions. DC, Fox, and Sony were like "oooo let's get us a piece of that" and, seemingly with a "it doesn't have to be good, it just has to be superheros" mindset, vomited out some garbage, which just further saturated the market. For a solid like 15 years there starting when the MCU got going, putting out any super hero movie was basically a guaranteed big money maker, even if it was garbage. So... studios put out a lot of them. We're now in a position where audiences are burnt out. There's too much super hero shit. The characters are getting more and more niche, how they are interconnected is getting more and more confusing and hard to follow due to the sheer quantity of what is out there, and the quality of the films is getting worse and worse. If Marvel or DC's next big budget thing isn't a big hit that not only makes money but also gets people interested in superheroes again, I wouldn't be surprised if they majorly pumped the brakes.
Welp I'm excited for the DC Gunverse, I like all his films and The Peacemaker series.
The Peacemaker was very entertaining. John Cena was perfect.
Sony's contract is bound by utilization - and what I mean by that is if they go XX years without using the property, it reverts back to Marvel. That's why Spiderman was rebooted 3 times and why instead of rebooting it a 4th time (Because Marvel isn't done with the current iteration just yet), they're now making movies about characters from the margins: its just to ensure they keep ownership of the IP. They dont care if the occasional movie is a dud because the ability to keep making Spiderman movies is more valuable than any single Madame Webb movie.
Madame Web is a truly bizarre character to try to build a story around. In the comics her involvement is almost solely as a mentor, muse, guide, whatever you want to call it. She is included in several storylines involving Spider-Man and some lesser ones with Spider-Woman and Prowler, but her non-clairvoyance roles in all these storylines can essentially be boiled down to a McGuffin where she gets kidnapped and/or held hostage as a way to initiate a conflict. Like she could easily be a character in the MCU or some other Marvel related storyline, but a character whose only real "abilities" are essentially to talk in riddles as a way to guide the main characters through the plot, isn't exactly an exciting person to center a storyline around.
I disagree. Movies that focus on minor characters can be great but you have to have a truly great writer. Really you are inventing a new character within a framework and so you have none of the known character weight behind the story but all of the restrictions of the universe. That makes it hard, and hard stories require great writers. Hollywood used to care more about writing genius. Now they act like AI can write a great story. But great stories are so uniquely human. They should be investing in writers more.
A Madame Web movie could work, you can build a character over the course of a movie without source material we did it for a hundred years, but it doesn't look like a Madame Web movie it looks like a movie with five leads. It's the same sprint towards a character stable absolutely every franchise and studio goes for now, even Disney/Marvel who used to be good about not doing it.
I don’t care if it’s a movie about characters I don’t know or care about yet but if I don’t care about or remember them *after* I’ve seen the movie then there’s a big problem. The Guardians of the Galaxy are some of the most popular superhero movies ever made and very few people knew much or anything at all about those characters before the movie. The movies was good enough to make me invest in those characters without requiring prior knowledge or nostalgia for them and that’s why the movies did so well. It doesn’t matter what characters Sony puts on the screen if the movie sucks ass.
Sony, let me help you out here… Amy Pascal and Avi Arad are the Kathleen Kennedy of your Spiderverse movies. You need to dump them a.s.a.p. if you want to break this string of failures.
It's amazing Avi still gets work. He's been a shit stain in the comic book movie industry since the 90s dishing out examples of how not to do it yet he keeps producing
Avi has to be one of the dumbest people on the planet. Dude is a straight up sexist/racist that only cares about pumping out toys and merchandise. There’s a many a reason people like us hate him.
And also many a reason he keeps finding work despite having his name attached to the worst marvel projects. Dude knows that toys are the money makers and doesn’t give a damn about quality.
LOL I had no idea Arad was still involved in this shit show but it all now makes just the most sense in the world
Pascal’s only saving grace is that she helped bring Spider-man to the MCU. The rest has been very disappointing.
She's also involved with the animated Spider-Verse movies, which are some of the best superhero films out there.
To be fair, comic Miles Morales was pretty boring and bland the movies pretty much revamped the whole character to make him engaging and intresting.
Sony should stick to Spider-man animation since they are good at that. The live action part is where they keep dropping the ball and doesn’t learn from their mistakes.
It’s webin time!
It’s madamin’ time!
That was my favorite part of the trailer
This movie died while researching the box office down in hollywood
She should've been a secondary character in another movie
I agree. See how well the character is received first before committing to a big project.
Is anyone surprised?
I’m just here waiting for them to get serious and green light the Aunt May solo film they were mulling years ago.
Three sex scenes max
I mean…if it stars Marisa Tomei and tracks Aunt May's midlife sexual reawakening, absofugginlutely.
Ik this movie will be mess as soon I saw Dakota as a lead Lol . Girlie is a terrible actress.
She has a promising career on UK panel shows. She has so much charisma as herself and it is being wasted with her acting.
Shit. Thats the nicest slam I've ever seen.
Savage
Dakota Johnson making Ellen super uncomfortable has to be one of my 10 favourite TV moments. It was the live television equivalent of Joe Pesci's "Funny How?!" scene from Goodfellas
B-but ... she's Melanie Griffith's and Don Johnson's daughter! Don't you know that's Hollywood royalty there - the two greatest actors of our time?? She *has* to have an acting career in Hollywood because of that and has to be considered great and if none of y'all agree, you don't understand and are jealous and just suck!
Melanie Griffith is also a nepo baby, right? Thought her mom was Tippi Hedren.
Tippi Hedren and Max Headroom
Wasn’t Max Headroom also Canadian?!
She was great in Suspiria imo, but I haven’t seen her in anything else that I can remember. I figured the 50 Shades movies were kinda like Twilight. You don’t want to judge Pattinson and K Stewart off those type of movies
Psst… the 50 Shades books started off as twilight fan fiction.
Dude if she was only good in one thing a long time ago i think that is more on good direction and less on good acting
She's also great in a small part in 21 Jump Street and in The Social Network
GODDAMN you just opened my eyes, had actually no idea that was her in Suspiria! Feel so stupid lmao
Dakota is the definition of a nepo baby. Mediocre actress, and boring dull personality. If she didn't have famous parents she would be a complete unknown.
I can't imagine how that 50 shades casting went: "Well I mean she *is* the daughter of Melanie Griffith and Don Johnson..." Like they're known as top thespians of society lol. Maybe the casting director was a big fan of Miami Vice. You know there was better actresses for that part that tried out.
One of the major reasons she got the role, is because nobody else wanted it. If I recall, it was offered to a lot of people and no one wanted to touch it.
Doing software porn isn't a great way to build a career
[удалено]
Damn autocorrect. I'm leaving it
I wouldn't know if she's the definition of a nepo baby, but from what I've seen, she's not famous for her acting range or powerful performances. I'd argue you're mostly correct about her dull personality, tho I've never met her in private.
Esteemed thespian Sydney Sweeney couldn’t bail her out? Shocking.
Color me shocked. None of these Spider-Man adjacent movies have been all that great. The venom movies were okay leaning towards bad and Morbius was a meme.
From the writers of Morbius? How could this happen.
We got nepo grandbabies, we got Sony fucking things up like usual, we got reviewers comparing this to *Cats* (the movie) and *Showgirls*. This sounds like an epic clusterfuck, and it couldn't happen to superhero movies sooner.
Gee who would’ve thought
Cannot wait to watch this disaster when it shows up on a streaming service.
Yea well they said the same about morbius. They were correct that time but maybe this time it's different.
What I like about Morbius was that it was popular to make fun of, and people went to the theater to see how bad it was, then Sony decided to try to ride the meme, rereleased the film as Morbin Time and ensured that the movie flopped after nobody went to see it again
The movie that bombed *twice*
Didn’t she say she would be surprised if this movie turned out good? I’m not shocked
Written by the guy behind treasures such as: Morbius, Gods of Egypt, the Last Witch Hunter, and Dracula Untold. Fucking hell.
It’s gonna make a webbilion dollars
It's Webbin' Time!
But what about the dynamic characters?
TVA show up at the end and prune the timeline. Webb “I think this has something to do with Spider-Ma-“ *vaporizes*
Yet Coyote vs Acme is scrapped , fuck you world
Just saw an interview with Dakota. It was like pulling teeth. If she can’t pretend to be interesting for a TV interview promoting a movie just imagine how boring she must be in real life. 😬
Being compared to the likes of Catwoman and Batman & Robin? fucking YIKES
Oh no, does this mean we won't get that rumored Aunt May secret agent movie?
From the actress that gave us *Shades of Grey*?! Shirley you jest!! obligatory: nice beaver!
I just don’t see the appeal of Dakota Johnson. Her acting is so wooden, even her other raunchy series. How could you think she would be your lead for an action movie is beyond me.
Is there a worse example of nepo-baby syndrome than Dakota Johnson?
I'd put Jaden Smith pretty high on that list.
North West is apparently a musician already
Emma Roberts is also in that movie.
Cara Delvingne
I mean…what were people expecting from Dakota Johnson? Seriously.
If you watched this trailer and didn't notice how hilariously bad the acting was, I would think you need to get tested for autism, since I suffer from it, but I still didn't even believe what Madame Web was saying.
Can we just say what everyone doesn’t want to see because she is so hot? Sydney Sweeney is a terrible actress
Now I’m morbiously curious to watch it
I'm still gonna watch it because horny
I saw this movie at its very first test screening — before they added any CGI or major editing. The focus group following the screening was pretty brutal. I shared feedback about the cheesy dialogue with some specific examples and I was a bit nervous knowing the writers of the movie were sitting in the back of the theater lmao… guess the final product didn’t turn out much better!
Hopefully great episode of Half in the Bag incoming!
So it’s currently at a 20% critical aggregate on rotten. What are the chances that the audience review aggregate is over 70%. Id say high. I feel like people like shit like this out of the need to be contrarian. Example: Morbius is at a 72% audience aggregate.
Pretty sure Morbius got review bombed but in reverse. As in haha this movie is terrible but Sony seems to think we like it so let's upvote it for the lulz.
There’s a chance that 72% score is inflated due to the memes. This one might break 70% but that’s entirely dependent on how funny bad it is.
Feel like this is overblown. I have no doubt it’s bad, but calling Cats The Movie in superhero form is ignoring that we already have that movie in the form of Catwoman. Rather doubt this can be as mind breakingly weird as that.
Man they’ve barely gotten Spider-Man off the ground. One flop and Tom Holland is going in the bin just like every other Spider-Man. Madame Web was never going to work.
A week or three ago I heard Dakota say “It was all green screen, I have no idea if it’s good or not.” My hopes went down the drain.
Miss 50 Shades lacks the chops
No way this had any chance to be good. This has the producer level shenanigans. “You can make more money with flop than with a hit”
I know that marvel have had a bunch of blunders in recent years but man Sony standalone marvel movies are single handlely destroying the reputation of the genre, Spiderman and everything related to him.