Techwright Posted November 16, 2023 Posted November 16, 2023 (edited) After seeing Sony's animated Spider-Man: Across the Spiderverse, and knowing what they revealed in that show, the thought immediately went through my mind "Where's Madame Web in all this?" Now I know, though I don't know if the Miles Morales storyline will tie into this also Sony live action movie: Edited November 16, 2023 by Techwright
biostem Posted November 16, 2023 Posted November 16, 2023 (edited) I'm not hugely familiar with the lore, but it looks kind of like Groundhog Day or Edge of Tomorrow, to me. Is it going to be in the same universe as Spiderman, Venom, or any of Sony's other "Spider Movies"? Edited November 16, 2023 by biostem
Techwright Posted November 17, 2023 Author Posted November 17, 2023 21 hours ago, biostem said: I'm not hugely familiar with the lore, but it looks kind of like Groundhog Day or Edge of Tomorrow, to me. Is it going to be in the same universe as Spiderman, Venom, or any of Sony's other "Spider Movies"? That's a question I've seen people debating after the trailer was released. I feel that certain elements of the second Miles Morales movie play heavily into the potentials for Madam Web's storyline, but that might undercut the star of the show if Madame Web was introduced to the Miles Morales animation. As to live action, who knows? I'm aware that there's a fan effort to get Andrew Garfield a third solo movie, so perhaps webs cross there? I'm sure it would be based on reception of this film, first, though. 1
Without_Pause Posted November 17, 2023 Posted November 17, 2023 The trailer didn't suck as bad as it could have. Honestly, the Spider-Man aspect felt tacked on. It felt like, "We need Spider-Man, but we can't afford him." Top 10 Most Fun 50s. 1. Without Mercy: Claws/ea Scrapper. 2. Outsmart: Fort 3. Sneakers: Stj/ea Stalker. 4. Emma Strange: Ill/dark Controller. 5. Project Next: Ice/stone Brute. 6. Waterpark: Water/temp Blaster. 6. Mighty Matt: Rad/bio Brute. 7. Without Hesitation: Claws/sr Scrapper. 8. Within Reach: Axe/stone Brute. 9. Without Pause: Claws/wp Brute. 10. Chasing Fireworks: Fire/time Controller. "Downtime is for mortals. Debt is temporary. Fame is forever."
biostem Posted November 17, 2023 Posted November 17, 2023 I recall seeing a Madame Web in the 90s cartoon, so I'm wondering if either one of the women shown in the trailer will become her, or if there'll be some sort of reveal where she'll be introduced - either partway through or only at the very end...
Without_Pause Posted November 18, 2023 Posted November 18, 2023 6 hours ago, biostem said: I recall seeing a Madame Web in the 90s cartoon, so I'm wondering if either one of the women shown in the trailer will become her, or if there'll be some sort of reveal where she'll be introduced - either partway through or only at the very end... The Madame Web in the comic is an elderly woman. They reimagined her as a young woman. 1 Top 10 Most Fun 50s. 1. Without Mercy: Claws/ea Scrapper. 2. Outsmart: Fort 3. Sneakers: Stj/ea Stalker. 4. Emma Strange: Ill/dark Controller. 5. Project Next: Ice/stone Brute. 6. Waterpark: Water/temp Blaster. 6. Mighty Matt: Rad/bio Brute. 7. Without Hesitation: Claws/sr Scrapper. 8. Within Reach: Axe/stone Brute. 9. Without Pause: Claws/wp Brute. 10. Chasing Fireworks: Fire/time Controller. "Downtime is for mortals. Debt is temporary. Fame is forever."
Techwright Posted November 19, 2023 Author Posted November 19, 2023 23 hours ago, Without_Pause said: The Madame Web in the comic is an elderly woman. They reimagined her as a young woman. As the MCU did for Agatha Harkness as well. Ya gotta go through young to reach elderly, so I'm willing to see what's involved.
Skyhawke Posted November 23, 2023 Posted November 23, 2023 On 11/17/2023 at 4:32 PM, Without_Pause said: The trailer didn't suck as bad as it could have. Honestly, the Spider-Man aspect felt tacked on. It felt like, "We need Spider-Man, but we can't afford him." Kids: We want Spider-Man! Mom: We have Spider-Man at home. Spider-Man at home... Sky-Hawke: Rad/WP Brute Alts galore. So...soooo many alts. Originally Pinnacle Server, then Indomitable and now Excelsior
ThaOGDreamWeaver Posted November 23, 2023 Posted November 23, 2023 On 11/19/2023 at 3:25 AM, Techwright said: As the MCU did for Agatha Harkness as well. Ya gotta go through young to reach elderly, so I'm willing to see what's involved. Let's hope she gets showtunes. WAKE UP YA MISCREANTS AND... HEY, GET YOUR OWN DAMN SIGNATURE. Look out for me being generally cool, stylish and funny (delete as applicable) on Excelsior.
Techwright Posted November 26, 2023 Author Posted November 26, 2023 On 11/23/2023 at 1:45 PM, ThaOGDreamWeaver said: Let's hope she gets showtunes. Now I'm wanting a mash-up of Zemo dancing to the Agatha All Along song.
ThaOGDreamWeaver Posted November 27, 2023 Posted November 27, 2023 ...you had to ask, didn't you? 1 WAKE UP YA MISCREANTS AND... HEY, GET YOUR OWN DAMN SIGNATURE. Look out for me being generally cool, stylish and funny (delete as applicable) on Excelsior.
Ghost Posted February 25 Posted February 25 As more info is starting to come out, I’m even more confused as to how this was approved to be made According to one of the actresses - this was an origin story, which is why you didn’t get to see the characters in costume or using their powers (for more than a minute or two, total) Now the writer/Director says - this was a different type of origin story where there was no need to show their origin or how they got their powers Mmkay.
ThaOGDreamWeaver Posted February 25 Posted February 25 53 minutes ago, Ghost said: Now the writer/Director says - this was a different type of origin story where there was no need to show their origin or how they got their powers Studio rewrite? Out of curiosity, I've just had a look at IMDB. There are two fairly obvious pairs of writers credited: The writer/director, Brit TV journeywoman director SJ Clarkson, and a Brit writer called Claire Pearson - responsible for the brilliant and quite mindbending Life On Mars (the OG version with the Quattro, not the US remake), and also Spooks - a dark and slightly grimy Brit MI5 series (find it on Britbox if you can.) The other writers are... Matt Sazama and Burk Sharpless, whose highly esteemed credits include but are not limited to: the recent Power Rangers movie, Gods of Egypt, and a little charmer that went quite viral called Morbius. Sazama and Sharpless are also listed under Story, which would be the original pitch that got the greenlight. (Incidentally, Sazama is also on an IMDB user generated list called Hack Writers.) Which leads me to think the following. This is pure conjecture, but. 1) Sazama and Sharpless, among others, are hired to develop a batch load of Marvel properties to build out the Spideyverse before Sony has to hand back the keys. Possibly at bulk rates. 2) Morbius gets filmed and released. About which we know, and about which Matt Smith will happily tell you if you get him drunk enough. So here he is shirtless. 3) No-one in their right mind would touch this property after what happened with Morbius. So they have to hire in a fresh-faced Brit, excited to step up from TV to a big motion picture. 4) Clarkson finds out what she's got herself into slightly after accepting the gig - given filming schedules, possibly Morbius hadn't come out yet - and calls in a friend to help do a desperate attempt at a rewrite. Which... doesn't work either, or gets edited back towards the greenlit version. 5) If I'm even slightly right, I would 100% pay to see Emily Blunt and Ruth Wilson double-head a thinly-disguised movie about the making of this movie. Because it would be a whole lot funnier. 1 WAKE UP YA MISCREANTS AND... HEY, GET YOUR OWN DAMN SIGNATURE. Look out for me being generally cool, stylish and funny (delete as applicable) on Excelsior.
Ghost Posted February 25 Posted February 25 @ThaOGDreamWeaver I think you may be on to something. This movie is a huge bomb, and I bet people will be curious as to the why/how Sony should put together a documentary about it and recoup some of their losses.
ThaOGDreamWeaver Posted February 25 Posted February 25 Oddly, IMDB did a "making of" documentary series on it which is still live on their site. Perhaps one day it'll be a case study. WAKE UP YA MISCREANTS AND... HEY, GET YOUR OWN DAMN SIGNATURE. Look out for me being generally cool, stylish and funny (delete as applicable) on Excelsior.
Ghost Posted February 26 Posted February 26 Geez 6mill for the 2nd weekend. This thing may not even break 50mill total
PeregrineFalcon Posted February 26 Posted February 26 Being constantly offended doesn't mean you're right, it means you're too narcissistic to tolerate opinions different than your own.
Frostbiter Posted February 26 Posted February 26 This movie only exists to keep Sony Studios from losing the rights to make movies with the Spider-Man IP. They can't all be Beyond the Spider-Verse. They'll lose money on this just so they can make large stacks with whatever the next Spider-verse movie is. Torchbearer Discount Heroes SG: Frostbiter - Ice/Ice Blaster Throneblade - Broadsword/Dark Armor Brute Silver Mantra - Martial Arts/Electric Armor Scrapper
Ghost Posted February 26 Posted February 26 2 hours ago, Frostbiter said: This movie only exists to keep Sony Studios from losing the rights to make movies with the Spider-Man IP. They can't all be Beyond the Spider-Verse. They'll lose money on this just so they can make large stacks with whatever the next Spider-verse movie is. Sort of, yes and no. They do have to make a movie every 5 years - so there is no reason to rush out junk like Madame Web. The next movie is Kraven, which does not look as if it’s going to make stacks of anything (could be wrong - just going by the look of the trailer). If this movie was really just fodder, they wouldn’t have spent so much on it nor would they have spent so much on marketing. No, they had hope. The real truth is Sony has been chasing after Avengers money. They originally said that they wanted their own spiderverse to accomplish this - which is not working.
ZacKing Posted February 26 Posted February 26 3 hours ago, Frostbiter said: This movie only exists to keep Sony Studios from losing the rights to make movies with the Spider-Man IP. They can't all be Beyond the Spider-Verse. They'll lose money on this just so they can make large stacks with whatever the next Spider-verse movie is. This doesn't make any sense. They can churn out movies of the quality of the Spider-verse films every five years, make money and not have to worry about losing the IP. There's nothing to gain by making crap that loses tons of money. That's just stupid.
Lightslinger Posted February 26 Posted February 26 (edited) In my opinion, we should all be incredibly grateful for Madame Web, Kraven, and apparently El Muerto(?) being the movies Sony has chosen to make. Why should we be grateful? They could be putting these same no-talent, hack teams in charge of a Miles, Spider-Gwen, or Noir Spider-Man movie. They could decide to make non-MCU Peter Parker/Spider-Man movies again. At least right now Sony is only intent on butchering villains and D-list Spidey characters. As long as Sony wants to churn out cheap garbage, I'm extremely glad they're not adapting my favorite characters. EDIT: and I want to add, Madame Web might be D-list, but this still could have been a really good movie with a decent team behind it, the core concept of the movie is a good idea, just executed very, very badly. Sony just wants to hire cheap talent and make cheap movies, then they're surprised when the movies are cheap and bad. Edited February 26 by Lightslinger 1
Frostbiter Posted February 26 Posted February 26 41 minutes ago, ZacKing said: This doesn't make any sense. They can churn out movies of the quality of the Spider-verse films every five years, make money and not have to worry about losing the IP. There's nothing to gain by making crap that loses tons of money. That's just stupid. So why did they make a failing movie then? Torchbearer Discount Heroes SG: Frostbiter - Ice/Ice Blaster Throneblade - Broadsword/Dark Armor Brute Silver Mantra - Martial Arts/Electric Armor Scrapper
Ghost Posted February 26 Posted February 26 1 minute ago, Frostbiter said: So why did they make a failing movie then? Really? They thought it was good and that the audience would come out in droves to support it
Frostbiter Posted February 26 Posted February 26 1 minute ago, Ghost said: Really? They thought it was good and that the audience would come out in droves to support it Really? Torchbearer Discount Heroes SG: Frostbiter - Ice/Ice Blaster Throneblade - Broadsword/Dark Armor Brute Silver Mantra - Martial Arts/Electric Armor Scrapper
Ghost Posted February 26 Posted February 26 6 minutes ago, Frostbiter said: Really? Yes - a studio doesn’t spend almost 200mill on a throwaway movie. They do it on a movie they believe will make them money. They also don’t heavily promote a movie that think will bomb. They quietly release them without wasting tons on advertising, or sell them to streaming services in order to recoup some of the money.
Recommended Posts