1. Sign-up to become a member, and most of the ads you see will disappear. It only takes 30 seconds to sign up, so join the discussion today!
    Dismiss Notice

Venom (October 5, 2018)

Discussion in 'Movies' started by dpippel, Mar 17, 2017.

  1. Message #141 of 227 Oct 8, 2018
    Last edited: Oct 8, 2018
    Sean Bryan

    Sean Bryan Sean Bryan

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 1997
    Messages:
    4,916
    Likes Received:
    1,966
    Trophy Points:
    4,110
    Real Name:
    Sean
    CINEMASCORE, which is from actual audience members, is a very mediocre B+. In the CINEMASCORE scale, a B+ basically translated to “Meh”.

    And regarding:
    What exactly do you think “making” entails? They are using “marvel cameras” held by Kevin Fiege with “marvel set and costume designers” and “marvel etc, etc... to film exactly what “Sony” directs them to do? Nope. Sorry dude. If you think that you either haven’t been following any of the development of this over the last few years or are just willfully ignoring it.

    Kevin Feige has clearly stated way back when that when Sony asked him for help with Spider-Man he said he couldn’t do it becaus he would just be one voice amongst a room full of other Sony execs with their own ideas and plans and he had no interest in doing that. He suggested to them, “Let us make it for you” and the deal to share the character grew from there. “Making it for them” clearly means handling the creative direction, otherwise what’s the point? What, Marvel has “better cameras” than Sony? No. A better creative machine? Yep. What the heck would Sony be getting out of having Marvel “make” the Spider-Man movies for them other than Marvel’s creative direction? Jeeze Louise.

    Sony obviously has to sign off on what Marvel wants to do creatively, but taking advantage of Marvel’s creative direction for the character was the whole damn point of the arrangement. Can’t believe this even has to be even has to be said here.
     
    Detour (1945) and Jake Lipson like this.
  2. Malcolm R

    Malcolm R Executive Producer

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2002
    Messages:
    18,168
    Likes Received:
    4,931
    Trophy Points:
    9,110
    Real Name:
    Malcolm
    They say it's the same Cinemascore as Suicide Squad and Justice League, each of which did pretty well (though JL was a disappointment considering the characters involved). If Venom comes close to those numbers, I think Sony will be happy.

    Venom also attracted quite a young audience in the first weekend. Older moviegoers are more likely to skip a film the first week, so that may also give the film a small boost over the longer term as older viewers catch up in the next couple weeks.
     
  3. Patrick Sun

    Patrick Sun Studio Mogul

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 1999
    Messages:
    39,299
    Likes Received:
    818
    Trophy Points:
    9,110
    Not really, it's a forgettable movie, glad I MP'd it.
     
    Detour (1945) and Sean Bryan like this.
  4. Message #144 of 227 Oct 8, 2018
    Last edited: Oct 8, 2018
    Sean Bryan

    Sean Bryan Sean Bryan

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 1997
    Messages:
    4,916
    Likes Received:
    1,966
    Trophy Points:
    4,110
    Real Name:
    Sean
    But the point isn’t about box offfice, it is about polling actual audience members about how they liked the movie. Justice Leage and Suicide squad are generally not consider to be good movies, and their Cinemascores reflected that (just like with Venom).
     
    Detour (1945) and Jake Lipson like this.
  5. Tino

    Tino Executive Producer
    Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 1999
    Messages:
    17,401
    Likes Received:
    8,898
    Trophy Points:
    9,110
    Location:
    Metro NYC
    Real Name:
    Valentino
    Well whaddya know. I enjoyed it.

    Much more than I thought I would. A lot
    better than the bad reviews it’s getting imo.

    I like the interplay between Venom and Eddie. And the action was fine. I wasn’t bored.

    And certainly seeing it in IMAX 3D helped.
     
    Jeff Adkins likes this.
  6. Josh Steinberg

    Josh Steinberg Executive Producer
    Reviewer

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2003
    Messages:
    18,103
    Likes Received:
    22,167
    Trophy Points:
    9,110
    Real Name:
    Josh Steinberg
    Thinking about doing the same after work tonight - same rationale too!
     
    Tino likes this.
  7. Jake Lipson

    Jake Lipson Lead Actor

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    Messages:
    9,576
    Likes Received:
    5,006
    Trophy Points:
    9,110
    Real Name:
    Jake Lipson
    I hope Marvel was smart enough to put something in their deal with Sony prohibiting them from using the MCU version of the character in a movie that Marvel is not supervising. If Sony were to do that and it was bad, it would taint the MCU. Whether Marvel produces it or not, Tom Holland's presence would automatically put it in MCU continuity as far as the general audience is concerned. Marvel's got to be smart enough to protect their brand by not letting this happen. I hope.
     
    Sean Bryan likes this.
  8. Jeff Adkins

    Jeff Adkins Cinematographer

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 1998
    Messages:
    2,483
    Likes Received:
    592
    Trophy Points:
    1,610
    Real Name:
    Jeff Adkins
    I never thought of that angle, but it makes sense. At the same time, I do find the discrepancy between the two contracts interesting. Sony makes a deal with Marvel for 5 films, but 6 films with Tom Holland. I'm wondering if that was by design or something unrelated? I wasn't even aware of this situation until Collider Heroes podcast did a whole episode recently on whether or not the Holland Spider-Man will stay in the MCU or not after Far From Home is released. The general consensus was that they hope so and feel it's the best move for both parties. Yet, they were skeptical of whether Sony will see it the same way.

    Whatever happens, I just hope the movies continue to be good. I don't really care who makes them......just make them good.
     
    Detour (1945) and Jake Lipson like this.
  9. Message #149 of 227 Oct 8, 2018
    Last edited: Oct 8, 2018
    Jake Lipson

    Jake Lipson Lead Actor

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    Messages:
    9,576
    Likes Received:
    5,006
    Trophy Points:
    9,110
    Real Name:
    Jake Lipson
    The thing is that it IS the MCU if Holland's in it. Because he is firmly entrenched into that world, there's no way to have him play that character and have it be out of continuity. So, if Marvel is not supervising his films after Far From Home and they're produced by Sony and they are bad, that reflects badly on the MCU. I had to explain to multiple friends who don't follow movie news like we do around here that Venom isn't in the MCU. If "Venom isn't in the MCU" is a concept that needs to be explained, then there's no way to divorce Tom Holland from the MCU. It would be very, very, very bad for Marvel if Sony tries to make a film with him in that part without their involvement.

    That's why I *hope* Marvel would have stipulated at the beginning of the arrangement that the MCU version of Spider-Man cannot appear in a non-Marvel-produced film. Otherwise, their quality control is on the line in the eyes of moviegoers.s

    I'm only guessing here, but perhaps the extra option for Holland will only get picked up if Sony and Marvel extend their arrangement. Or maybe Sony could decide to use that option to cast him in some other film that is not Spider-Man related. I don't know; these are just possibilities that entered my head. Again, it would just be really stupid of Marvel to open themselves up to problems if Holland makes a Spider-Man film they don't supervise, and they have been very smart at brand management, so I just feel like there's no way they would let that slide.

    Even though Venom was successful this past weekend, I can't see why Sony wouldn't want to continue with Marvel on the version of Spider-Man that is currently running, especially if Far From Home does well. And there's no reason to think that it won't.
     
    Detour (1945) and Sean Bryan like this.
  10. tempest21

    tempest21 Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2018
    Messages:
    238
    Likes Received:
    74
    Trophy Points:
    110
    Real Name:
    Mark
    I semi-agree with you but while I believe that Marvel has some creative input, it may be limited. Sony, from the way I understand it, is simply agreeing to allow Marvel Studios to make the film and the ancillary benefits to allow Marvel to use Spiderman in their own sandbox, so-to-speak. But, I do think that when Sony decides to yank Spiderman back, that Walt Disney won't be able to distribute copies of Home: Homecoming, Spiderman: Far From Home, Avengers: Infinity War 1 and 2,

    You pointed to the wrong page and forgot to clarify. Venom did $80 true, but that amount was only Domestic U.S. The film actually did $205 million worldwide. An awesome opening weekend performance: https://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=venom2018.htm

    I have to disagree with you on the Venom scores. Venom isn't that bad. There are plenty of Marvel films that are bad. Iron Man 3, Avengers: Age of Ultron, Guardians Vol 2, the first Thor movie to name a few. The thing is, every MCU films follows the same screenplay outline as does Venom. But, Venom does outshine Spiderman in the humor. Whereas Peter Parker/Spiderman tries to be funny, Venom pulls this off perfectly and comes across as a much funnier film.

    Maybe, but I always notice that when people talk about reviews, they seem to over-glamorizing the reviews made by critics. Critics have gotten more movies wrong. According to Salon.com, Critics have gotten 20 films wrong with their reviews, which Rotten Tomatoes took the fall on. Metacritic even called critics out on 15 films from 1983-2008:

    https://www.salon.com/2017/09/17/rotten-tomatoes-movies-wrong/
    https://www.metacritic.com/feature/15-movies-the-critics-got-wrong

    I'm not calling anyone out for it but a critic review of a movie just doesn't hold itself up anymore like it used to and should never lend itself to being judged which are good films and which are bad. They seem to give bad reviews on just about every film that comes down the pike. Sci-Fi movies, Fantasy films, Action films, Superhero films, they always bear the brunt of it. Just reading some of those reviews is just bad enough to make you nauseous. I tend to give more weight to people I know who have seen a particular movie.

    That almost sounds like Marvel has more control in what they can demand from Sony. I seriously doubt that Sony would have allowed any such language to be out in a contract and you can bet that Sony got something out of Marvel rear-end over the agreement. Sony just isn't not magnanimous about allowing Marvel to play with the movies to a superhero that Sony owns. I'm sure that Sony just didn't allow Marvel Studios to produce the film without getting anything in return.
     
  11. Message #151 of 227 Oct 9, 2018
    Last edited: Oct 9, 2018
    Jake Lipson

    Jake Lipson Lead Actor

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    Messages:
    9,576
    Likes Received:
    5,006
    Trophy Points:
    9,110
    Real Name:
    Jake Lipson
    Is this a joke?

    First of all, Disney doesn't distribute Homecoming and Far From Home, and never have. They are distributed by Sony via their Colombia Pictures banner. That's why the Sony and Colombia logos play at the start of the film. Conversely, Sony has no claim to the Avengers films at all. Disney paid for those movies and owns them outright. Sony will not be able to block distribution of Disney's films, nor would they want to do so. The whole point of Sony allowing Spider-Man to appear in Disney's films is for Spider-Man's appearance alongside the Avengers to fuel interest in his solo films, so his being in those helps Sony out. If their agreement ends, the movies that were made under it will continue to exist and will remain available perpetually. Unless Disney decides to start employing their "going into the Disney vault" tactic with Marvel titles, then the Avengers films might disappear, but that wouldn't be related to rights issues with Spider-Man.

    Sony absolutely did get something in return. They got association with Disney's MCU brand, which helped to make Spider-Man relevant and fresh again after the dumpster fire that was The Amazing Spider-Man 2. That movie was such a fiasco that they had no creative path forward after it, which is why they would have agreed to let Marvel produce it in the first place. Sony also got the MCU's signature star, Iron Man, appearing in their movie even though Disney controls his film rights. Also, Sony received 100% of the monies from Homecoming. Marvel produced it for Sony using Sony's money, and Sony reaped the reward.

    Sony pays for Spider-Man films and keeps the money that they make. Disney pays for Avengers films and keeps the money that they make. The shared-custody agreement on the character benefits both studios because the MCU connection boosts Sony's box office on solo films, and Disney gets to have Spider-Man interact with the Avengers which they wouldn't otherwise be able to do.

    I think it would be entirely reasonable for Marvel to say, "We are not agreeing to this arrangement in the first place if you can use the MCU Spider-Man in a film that we do not produce." Otherwise, it threatens the integrity of the MCU brand which Kevin Feige and his team have worked so hard to build and cultivate. If there is such a stipulation in there -- and I don't know that there is, but I hope so for Marvel's sake -- such a stipulation would not mean that Sony couldn't use Spider-Man in one of their own films again, but that it would have to be a different iteration of the character, so that Marvel retains control of the MCU.
     
    Detour (1945) and Sean Bryan like this.
  12. Message #152 of 227 Oct 9, 2018
    Last edited: Oct 9, 2018
    Jake Lipson

    Jake Lipson Lead Actor

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    Messages:
    9,576
    Likes Received:
    5,006
    Trophy Points:
    9,110
    Real Name:
    Jake Lipson
    Whether we like a film is entirely subjective. That's what makes discussion and debate about them on forums like thee interesting. It's not possible for a critic to have a wrong opinion. It is just their opinion. If a movie becomes a box office success in spite of negative reviews, that doesn't mean any given critic was wrong in saying they didn't like it. It just means that movie audiences went to see the movie and formed their own opinion.

    Also, just because something makes a lot of money the first weekend doesn't mean that the audiences liked it. The reviews for Batman v. Superman were bad but I went anyway. But I ended up hating it and agreeing with many of the negative criticisms of it in the reviews. The movie sank like a stone from there. It had a -69.1% drop during its second weekend. By the end of its run, the opening weekend gross wound up as 50.3% of its entire domestic gross. Literally over half of the money it made came on the first weekend.

    That's because lots of people who saw it the first weekend felt like I did, and didn't go see it again and again, and told their friends not to see it. We'll see in the weeks to come how word-of-mouth impacts Venom and whether it will be frontloaded, or if it will be able to develop legs.

    As others have told you, Rotten Tomatoes does not write reviews. They simply compile reviews from other sources into a single place, so I'm not sure what you mean by them "taking the fall."

    In context of advance reviews, the critic's job is to provide an analysis of the film and to help the reader use that information to decide whether to go to the film or not. Recommending films or not is literally their job. And there are plenty of films that have enjoyed a positive critical consensus, including superhero films. Just this year, Black Panther, Infinity War, Ant-Man and the Wasp and Incredibles 2 were all favorably reviewed by several critics.

    Also, I don't like this critics-vs-fans mentality that is developing lately. Movie critics are fans too; why would they get into film criticism if they didn't like movies? They are just giving their opinion. It's not a war. Nor do I think that any of the critics I know of and follow would hope that a movie is bad. Who wants to sit through a bad movie? I just don't think this argument holds any water.

    If you don't want to read reviews, that's fine. But it's narrow-minded to dismiss the validity of the entire profession because you disagree with some critics on certain movies. And by the way, the Rotten Tomatoes score for Venom means that 30% of the critics gave it a positive review, so some critics liked it. Certainly not all critics or even most critics, but there are positive reviews there.
     
    Detour (1945), Sean Bryan and TravisR like this.
  13. Jeff Adkins

    Jeff Adkins Cinematographer

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 1998
    Messages:
    2,483
    Likes Received:
    592
    Trophy Points:
    1,610
    Real Name:
    Jeff Adkins
    I agree, but then again I often get shot down when I try to say the same thing about Sean Connery in Never Say Never Again. :)

    I'm not sure it would hurt Marvel unless they made a film on par with Spider-Man 3 or The Amazing Spider-Man 2.

    They may very well have. I think we'll have an answer to that in the spring. Certainly that question is going to be asked during all the press junkets for Far From Home if it's not addressed prior to that.

    The problem for Sony is that I don't think they can continue to keep making Spider-verse films without Spider-Man. At some point they're going to want to include him. I know that as a fan, I really want to see a Holland/Hardy Spider-Man vs. Venom movie. I want to see him with Carnage. I would love a Sinister Six film.

    It'll probably never happen, but as a fan I think the best option would be for Spidey to stay in the MCU while also making appearances in the Sony films with Marvel's oversight. Feige doesn't have time to make a film for Sony every year, but he could be given some creative control where he would approve storylines, scripts and editing. I could see that being feasible. That would allow Sony to maximize the rights to the characters they own, while Marvel Studios could still use him whenever they want. I realize this probably won't shake out this way, but it would be a lot of fun for me as a fan.
     
  14. Todd H

    Todd H Go Dawgs!

    Joined:
    May 27, 1999
    Messages:
    2,270
    Likes Received:
    164
    Trophy Points:
    1,610
    Location:
    Georgia
    Real Name:
    Todd
    I saw this yesterday and thought it was terrible. At least I didn't have to suffer through this crap long as the film seemed short (wonder if all the cut footage would have made a difference). Different strokes and all I suppose.
     
    Detour (1945) and Sean Bryan like this.
  15. Malcolm R

    Malcolm R Executive Producer

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2002
    Messages:
    18,168
    Likes Received:
    4,931
    Trophy Points:
    9,110
    Real Name:
    Malcolm
    Is there any point at which the Spider-Man rights expire and will revert to Marvel? Why would they have assigned them permanently to Sony?
     
    Jake Lipson likes this.
  16. Josh Steinberg

    Josh Steinberg Executive Producer
    Reviewer

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2003
    Messages:
    18,103
    Likes Received:
    22,167
    Trophy Points:
    9,110
    Real Name:
    Josh Steinberg
    I think Sony has the rights in perpetuity so long as they release something related to those rights every five years or less. I think that was part of the reason they had such urgency for doing The Amazing Spider-Man reboot so quickly after Spider-Man 3. As long as Sony keeps pumping out the films, they keep the rights.

    As to why they made this deal - when they made it, they didn’t have a studio, superhero movies weren’t big business for anyone, and they weren’t in the financial position they are now.
     
  17. Jake Lipson

    Jake Lipson Lead Actor

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    Messages:
    9,576
    Likes Received:
    5,006
    Trophy Points:
    9,110
    Real Name:
    Jake Lipson
    Josh is absolutely correct about the reason they rushed out Amazing Spider-Man so quickly to prevent Disney from having the rights revert to them. However, I actually think I read something somewhere at the time that Homecoming was released saying that when they entered into the co-production deal, the ticking clock on Sony making the films was removed, and Sony will own him in perpetuity now. However, i don't remember where I read that so I could be mistaken.

    The problem with that is that Holland's appearance would make them MCU films.

    I think that the answer is simple. If they want to include Spider-Man in the Venom films, or any of the other films they are doing without Marvel, simply recast him so that Holland is in the MCU and the other actor is not.
     
  18. Tino

    Tino Executive Producer
    Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 1999
    Messages:
    17,401
    Likes Received:
    8,898
    Trophy Points:
    9,110
    Location:
    Metro NYC
    Real Name:
    Valentino
    That will never happen. Holland is the only Spiderman for the foreseeable future. Why confuse the audience with two Spider-Man’s?
     
    Jake Lipson likes this.
  19. Jake Lipson

    Jake Lipson Lead Actor

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    Messages:
    9,576
    Likes Received:
    5,006
    Trophy Points:
    9,110
    Real Name:
    Jake Lipson
    I get what you're saying, but the answer is: to protect the integrity of the MCU. Allowing Sony to make projects featuring Holland without Marvel oversight is too big a risk for Marvel's brand.

    I also agree that it's highly unlikely. But it would be a way to allow Spider-Man to appear in the Sony films without tainting the MCU, is all I'm saying. Because if Holland appears in a non-Marvel project as Spider-Man, the entire continuity of Venom and whatever the sequel/spinoff is would automatically become part of the MCU whether Marvel supervised it or not. It's in Marvel's interest to make sure that doessn't happen.
     
  20. Josh Steinberg

    Josh Steinberg Executive Producer
    Reviewer

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2003
    Messages:
    18,103
    Likes Received:
    22,167
    Trophy Points:
    9,110
    Real Name:
    Josh Steinberg
    Well...until December at any rate...
     

Share This Page

Movie information in first post provided by The Movie Database