Sony Spider-Verse discussion thread

[Skipper]

How official is the word on "Tom Holland can't be in a Sony movie"...is it just a rumor/assumption, or has it been stated as a fact by those with the authority to do so?

Well, what I'm about to write is just the fruit of my hypotheses. It seems that Spider-Man was supposed to appear in Madam Web. This is also supported by concept art that appeared on the internet.

Tom Holland's Spider-Man Goes Toe-To-Toe With Ezekiel Sims in 'Madame Web' Concept Art

New Madame Web concept art shows an MCU collision with Sony's latest spider-movie. See Tom Holland's Spider-Man fight Ezekiel Sims in the new images.

collider.com

What some people assume is that the film began production with a script that included Spider-Man (in fact, Dakota Johnson has complained several times that the script she started with was very different from the final one). Also, there was a rumor that the actress' agent had told her that she would be working in a Marvel film (in the MCU sense). In fact, the first announcement about the film on Twitter also contained the Tag #marvel

For some reason, his appearance couldn't happen. But they found themselves with a good part of the film already shot. So they had to adapt the film during production and retroactively change the plot, even with a heavy use of ADR (the excessive use of this is something many have complained about).

 

[Tosk]

One would assume that if they went into production with a script that featured Spider-Man then it was because they had reason to believe they could use Spider-Man.

Even if the Sony productions are a complete mess.

 

[Skipper]

One would assume that if they went into production with a script that featured Spider-Man then it was because they had reason to believe they could use Spider-Man.

Even if the Sony productions are a complete mess.

It's a little too long, but this is an excellent analyses about the movie

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Kai "the spy"]

Kraven is apparantly so bad it made film critic Dan Murrell question his life choices:

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Skipper]

Kraven is apparantly so bad it made film critic Dan Murrell question his life choices:

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

But did Sony think that these films would be successful only thanks to the "notoriety" of the characters?

 

[Captaindemotion]

Den of Geek pulling no punches in this review. I hadn’t realised that its director also made the superb Robert Redford survival epic All Is Lost. What a waste of his talent.

Kraven the Hunter Review: No Bullets Left in Sony’s Marvel Villain Chamber

Kraven the Hunter leaves Sony Pictures’ Universe of Marvel Characters for dead after this safari goes tragically awry.

www.denofgeek.com

 

[JD]

In the verdict of IGN's review they ask that instead of paying for a ticket to go see Kraven, that you donate that money to The Lion Recovery Fund instead. And their actual rating for it is a 3/10.
https://www.ign.com/articles/kraven-the-hunter-review-aaron-taylor-johnson-russell-crowe

 

[Set Harth]

Den of Geek pulling no punches in this review. I hadn’t realised that its director also made the superb Robert Redford survival epic All Is Lost. What a waste of his talent.

Kraven the Hunter Review: No Bullets Left in Sony’s Marvel Villain Chamber

Kraven the Hunter leaves Sony Pictures’ Universe of Marvel Characters for dead after this safari goes tragically awry.

www.denofgeek.com

Kind of weird, badly edited ( or, let's face it, non-edited ) article. Not sure what a "Tendr date" is, or what is meant by "Sntached" which seems to be a random collection of letters in search of a word. The author seems to think Logan was Mangold's first Wolverine project. Also the name of the Exorcist girl is misspelled.

 

[Captaindemotion]

Hmmmm.

Even After ‘Kraven the Hunter’ and ‘Madame Web,’ Sony’s Marvel Movies Aren’t Dead (EXCLUSIVE)

"Kraven the Hunter" signifies an end to Sony's spin-off movies of secondary Spider-Man characters. But it is not the end of Sony's Marvel films.

variety.com

 

[Caretaker]

Hmmmm.

Even After ‘Kraven the Hunter’ and ‘Madame Web,’ Sony’s Marvel Movies Aren’t Dead (EXCLUSIVE)

"Kraven the Hunter" signifies an end to Sony's spin-off movies of secondary Spider-Man characters. But it is not the end of Sony's Marvel films.

variety.com

Ugh.

I seriously how much money Sony would accept from Disney to put an end to their (mainly) travesties and sell the rights to the competitor.

 

[Christopher]

I seriously how much money Sony would accept from Disney to put an end to their (mainly) travesties and sell the rights to the competitor.

Oh, I dunno. The Spider-Man live-action films are already handled by the MCU people on the creative side, and the Spider-Verse films are from the separate animation division of Sony and have turned out quite well. I guess that just leaves Venom, which I have little use for, but as long as it stays its own self-contained thing, whatever.

 

[Anwar]

Apparently it was Venom's success that made Sony think they could get away with this...not realizing that Venom had been a semi-independent character in the comics for around 30 years by this point and can be slightly reworked to lessen the need for Spider-Man.

I'm honestly wondering if anyone else in the Spider-Cast Sony has access to who they COULD have used for independent storytelling. There's potentially Black Cat but I'm not sure about the rest

 

[The Nth Doctor]

I'm honestly wondering if anyone else in the Spider-Cast Sony has access to who they COULD have used for independent storytelling. There's potentially Black Cat but I'm not sure about the rest

Silver & Sable was the one project of the myriad of potential ideas Sony had that people were genuinely excited about (at least around here)...and it never went anywhere.

 

[Xerxes82]

not realizing that Venom had been a semi-independent character in the comics for around 30 years by this point and can be slightly reworked to lessen the need for Spider-Man.

I'm not convinced Venom's success has that much to do with the character. I really think that entire franchise is built on Tom Hardy committing and just really, really going for it. Without the boldness of his performance I'm not sure the first film fares any better than the rest of Sony's output. Hardy's ability and willingness to just be weird and sometimes offputting while also being charming and vulnerable kind of carry what are not really great movies.,

 

[Aragorn]

Without their Spider-Man adjacent movies, Sony will double down on legacy sequels. They have Ghostbusters, Bad Boys and Karate Kid in the bag, so how about some Blue Thunder 2, Air Force One 2, City Slickers 3, The Bigger Chill, Stand By Me Again, and The Sixth Element? I just remembered they're making Blue Streak 2 and spitballed the idea of a St. Elmo's Fire 2.

 

[StarTrek1701]

Budget obviously isn't a concern, but then why is it this hard to make a proper superhero movie that has years of backstories to fall upon?
Is it a rights issue to the older stories?

 

[Nerys Myk]

Budget obviously isn't a concern, but then why is it this hard to make a proper superhero movie that has years of backstories to fall upon?
Is it a rights issue to the older stories?

I'm pretty sure they have access to the entire back catalog to mine as they wish.

 

[Skipper]

Budget obviously isn't a concern, but then why is it this hard to make a proper superhero movie that has years of backstories to fall upon?
Is it a rights issue to the older stories?

No. They are simply incapable of making good movies. I often hear in criticism that these characters without the presence of Spider-Man are incapable of carrying a movie on their own, but I find that nonsense.

Take Morbius for example. It is essentially a vampire movie. On paper the idea was great. And the critical consensus is that it is still a bad movie.

All this talk about how much a character can or cannot be the protagonist of a movie on their own I find absolutely inconclusive and even useless. As if there was some kind of curse connected to their essence that affects the finished product.

The truth is that Sony has simply made movies between mediocre and bad. Even from a purely technical point of view (see Madame Web). Why, I have no idea. There are not many rumors or behind the scenes about it. Maybe it could simply be excessive interference from the studios. These are not seen as movies, but money-making machines like their MCU counterparts. And money makes people crazy.

 

[Captaindemotion]

I'm not convinced Venom's success has that much to do with the character. I really think that entire franchise is built on Tom Hardy committing and just really, really going for it. Without the boldness of his performance I'm not sure the first film fares any better than the rest of Sony's output. Hardy's ability and willingness to just be weird and sometimes offputting while also being charming and vulnerable kind of carry what are not really great movies.,

This. Venom was basically a bog-standard (or probably below-standard), slightly dour 2000s-style comic book movie but with a gloriously unhinged comedy performance by Hardy in the middle of it, making it more watchable than the rest of the film deserved. They haven’t really caught that lightning since, not even in Venom 2 (I haven’t seen 3 but I suspect it is a similar story).

 

[Mage]

This. Venom was basically a bog-standard (or probably below-standard), slightly dour 2000s-style comic book movie but with a gloriously unhinged comedy performance by Hardy in the middle of it, making it more watchable than the rest of the film deserved. They haven’t really caught that lightning since, not even in Venom 2 (I haven’t seen 3 but I suspect it is a similar story).

Very much agreed, you and @Xerxes82 nailed it. I have heard that Venom 3 is apparently quite entertaining because it dares to go off the rails a lot. We'll see. I never felt the need to rush to the cinemas for the SonyVerse movies, and with both Morbius and Madame Web on Netflix right now, I still don't feel the need to watch those. Venom 3 I actually do want to see.