Sony Spider-Verse discussion thread

[Turtletrekker]

Would Sony be allowed to do that? I had just assumed this was set in the same universe as the Venom movies.

Well, for better or worse, at the end of the day Sony does own a three-movie sized chunk of the Marvel Cinematic Universe. If they want to say that this movie that they're releasing is a prequel to these other three movies that they also own, produced and released, that's their own business. However, nothing says Kevin Feige and Marvel Studios has to acknowledge or reciprocate any of it.

 

[JD]

OK, I wasn't sure how all of that worked.

 

[Nightowl1701]

Apparently Madame Web was originally supposed to be set in the 90's, and present the birth of Andrew Garfield's Spider-Man. But in mid-production Sony execs switched that to Tom Holland's Spidey, forcing reshoots to move everything up a decade. But it turns out they couldn't even get that right, setting it a couple years after Tom's Peter Parker would have been born (2001 according to his passport in Far From Home, a month and a day before 9/11), so now they're saying this movie's in neither the MCU or the Venomverse. *facepalm*

 

[Turtletrekker]

So, given some of the clues we've received from recent BTS revelations, I'm starting to suspect that the big twist of this movie is going to be that...

Spoiler: My theory

... our team of Spider-ladies will ultimately have to protect an unborn/newly born Peter Parker from Ezekiel Sims/Morlun.

 

[JD]

That could explain why Ben Parker is involved.

 

[Nightowl1701]

Spoiler: Recently released TV spots indicate Sims...

... is acting out of sheer desperate self-preservation. There's no time travel involved here; he's seen in his nightmares the future Spider-Women killing him a few years down the line (which is probably the only time we'll see them in costume). He means to take them out first, before they grow up and get their powers.

 

[Tosk]

So, given some of the clues we've received from recent BTS revelations, I'm starting to suspect that the big twist of this movie is going to be that...

Spoiler: My theory

... our team of Spider-ladies will ultimately have to protect an unborn/newly born Peter Parker from Ezekiel Sims/Morlun.

Yeah, apparently that was a theory (or leak? I can't remember for sure) a while ago.

 

[The Nth Doctor]

If any of that is true...

...meh.

 

[wayoung]

Jesus that sounds like a mess.

Edit to add: BUT it sounds like exactly the kind of Sony Spider-Verse mess they'd try, like they did with Venom 2 and Mobius

 

[Rich Watson]

Yeah, apparently that was a theory (or leak? I can't remember for sure) a while ago.

I'm pretty sure I've seen it in this very thread if you go back far enough.

I am also delighted to see the professional leakers trip themselves up, since you can find photos from the first week of shooting where the set dressing is all early 2000s, proving that it was never changed.

 

[JD]

Spoiler: Recently released TV spots indicate Sims...

... is acting out of sheer desperate self-preservation. There's no time travel involved here; he's seen in his nightmares the future Spider-Women killing him a few years down the line (which is probably the only time we'll see them in costume). He means to take them out first, before they grow up and get their powers.

I'm not quite sure what the make of that, seems almost more like what you'd expect to be the motivation for a hero than a villain.

 

[Christopher]

I'm not quite sure what the make of that, seems almost more like what you'd expect to be the motivation for a hero than a villain.

Huh? There's nothing heroic about killing others to save yourself. That's pretty much the definition of villainy, doing harm to others out of pure self-interest. A lot of villains are motivated by self-preservation. For instance, the Master in Doctor Who: "The Deadly Assassin" tried to destroy Gallifrey in order to save himself from death after he used up his regenerations. The Son'a in Star Trek: Insurrection tried to take over the Ba'ku's planet so they could be healed by its rings' magic radiation. And so on.

 

[Tosk]

I am also delighted to see the professional leakers trip themselves up, since you can find photos from the first week of shooting where the set dressing is all early 2000s, proving that it was never changed.

What was in those photos that was 2000s, out of curiosity? I did some Googling but found it difficult to sift through. One detail I had either forgotten or never known was that Emma Roberts is playing the pregnant Mary Parker to Adam Scott's Ben.

 

[Rich Watson]

What was in those photos that was 2000s, out of curiosity? I did some Googling but found it difficult to sift through.

There was a advertising poster on a building wall for Beyoncé's first solo album, and that came out in 2003.

 

[kirk55555]

I think that Madame Web is going to be a mess, but honestly I'm still more interested in seeing it then I am Kraven or Venom 3. It has my attention, although not necessarily enough for me not to wait for streaming/home video to watch it.

 

[The Nth Doctor]

I think that Madame Web is going to be a mess, but honestly I'm still more interested in seeing it then I am Kraven or Venom 3. It has my attention, although not necessarily enough for me not to wait for streaming/home video to watch it.

I have zero interest in any of them. Just like the previous Venom and other Sony films.

 

[JD]

Huh? There's nothing heroic about killing others to save yourself. That's pretty much the definition of villainy, doing harm to others out of pure self-interest. A lot of villains are motivated by self-preservation. For instance, the Master in Doctor Who: "The Deadly Assassin" tried to destroy Gallifrey in order to save himself from death after he used up his regenerations. The Son'a in Star Trek: Insurrection tried to take over the Ba'ku's planet so they could be healed by its rings' magic radiation. And so on.

Well, I didn't mean killing people was the heroic thing, I just meant that trying to stop a vision of his own death was the kind of motivation you see from a lot of more heroic characters.

 

[Christopher]

Well, I didn't mean killing people was the heroic thing, I just meant that trying to stop a vision of his own death was the kind of motivation you see from a lot of more heroic characters.

But what differentiates a hero from a villain is often more about how they act on their motivations. Like, Soran in Star Trek Generations just wanted to be with his wife again, which is a nice sympathetic motive, but he was willing to blow up a star and murder 200 million people to do it. Hence, villain. It's not the intent that defines villainy, it's the harm done to other people.

 

[JD]

I guess that's true. I guess sometimes I just get used to the more outright evil motivations like wanting to take over the world or kill everybody.

 

[Nightowl1701]

El Muerto is still going forward, Sony vows, with - or, as it turns out, without Bad Bunny.

Interesting that their bullet point is basically 'Our movies are so cheap (compared to Disney), they make money regardless of how good or bad they are.'