While I was watching the Madame Web trailer, for a minute or so I thought it was a fake trailer edited from some shoddy, amateurish Spider-Man fan films and other films, then I saw Adam Scott and got worried and then I realized it's a real trailer and laughed hard. Very, very hard. Amazing.
The only thing i felt bad about in Morbius was that THAT was the film they got Matt Smith for, and he probably only did it because his friend from his Dr Who days (Karen Gillian/Nebula) probably told him that Marvel movies are a BLAST to do. Funny thing us, I still maintain Matt Smith was the best part of Morbius.
I don't know about that. My understanding is that Karen Gillian is a massive marvel nerd, and must know that anything Marvel that's not MCU is a huge gamble. While the MCU was at its peak and prior to Venom, Sony put out the Amazing Spider-Man Films and Ghost Rider 2. Meanwhile every Marvel TV show expect for arguably Daredevil was floundering. We have hindsight now, but still anyone who looks past the surface must know that the MCU and Morbius were going to be completely different, so I wouldn't blame his inclusion on Gillian.
@@DavidMartinez-ce3lp eh, if you just pretend like Venom has nothing to do with Spider-Man(which they do pretty good with in my opinion), then the movies are cool
Which is why this video is overreacting. Venom 1 and 2 made money and were decent. Morbius is the only bomb. The other movies haven't even been released to make judgement on them.
I think it is pretty hilarious and telling that Morbius, a movie about a vampire has way less blood and gore/light body horror than a Marvel studios movie like Dr Strange Into the Multiverse of Madness despite both having the same age rating, how the fuck do you make Disney look more risqué by comparison? Thats a fucking undertaking.
What I don’t about the Live Action SSU is that no Spider-Man. How could you have villains with no Spider-Man. Spider-Man is the main reason why these characters exist. It’s like making Superman Universe, focusing on his villains but no Superman.😠😡😠😡.
I like how they dared to tease that Morbius and Venom were in the same universe as the MCU with that spiderman "murderer" poster in the Morbius trailer. But they reeled that in pretty quick.
If they really wanted a cinematic universe, they should have had Garfield be the main spider man of this cinematic universe but trying to fuse it with the mcu. Come on Sony -_-
Having watched TASM2 a few months back for the first time, I think it is a fairly good movie. Right up until they decided to end it with the death of Gwen Stacy. If they just kept the sinister six set up scene, that would be fine, but that ending with the Green Goblin was stupid.
According to their contract when they bought the Spider-Man movie right, Sony MUST release a live-action Spider-Man movie every five years. Otherwise they lose those rights and they revert to Marvel Entertainment. That’s actually why the MCU exists at all-the rights for Captain America, Thor, Iron Man, and Hulk were at different studios but all reverted around the same time. But when it became clear they’d have to reboot again after ASM2, they chose to sub-license their rights to Marvel Studios (technically a subset of Marvel Entertainment at the time) to bring Spidey into the MCU. Part of that agreement was that they couldn’t use Spider-Man in films they produced themselves, but they _still_ have to keep making movies based on Spider-Man characters to keep the rights. So they made Venom, which was popular and got fans wanting to see Spidey vs. Venom, and they made Into the Spider-Verse (animated movies don’t seem to count towards the “every five years” requirement) which was VERY popular. Remember after Far From Home when it was announced Tom Holland’s Spider-Man was leaving the MCU? That was on purpose. He’d been contracted with Sony to make three Spider-Man movies, but Sony had only contracted with Marvel Studios to make _two_ Spider-Man movies. Sony was going to pull Tom Holland into the Venom-verse and hope general audiences didn’t know the difference between Sony’s Marvel Superheroes movies and the then-popular MCU. But fan backlash was too great, so they renegotiated with Marvel Studios. That’s why Tom Hardy was at the end of No Way Home and Vulture was at the end of Morbius. They’re trying to link the MCU to the movies they still have to release for contractual reasons via the “multiverse” idea. The ultimate plan-originally with Andrew Garfield-was to have Spidey go up against the Sinister Six. It seems they’re still trying to build to that, and will either take the rights to Spider-Man himself back or force the MCU to use their established villains in, say, Spider-Man 6.
Frak me, Spider-Man 6. _Sinister_ Six. I’ve been following Spider-Man studio rights drama so long I got into their heads-that’s ABSOLUTELY what they’re planning… 🤦♀️
@@jesusramirezromo2037 The reason La Llorona isn't officially canon is because producer Peter Safran wasn't involved which is a contractual requirement for the series. But regardless, whether it is or isn't, it still made a substantial profit. ($123 million on a $9 million budget.)
Establishing a Spiderman cinematic universe without including Spiderman? Makes no sense. Sony should just bring back Andrew Garfield Spiderman, or at least his Flash Thompson. Get a decent Agent Venom story. Something more than just make villains into anti heroes. So boring.
Well that's what Amazing Spider Man 3 was going to be about long ago, I heard. But I think they scrapped it. It was gonna have him and Mary Jane be introduced. 💯💯🤦
@@DavidMartinez-ce3lp But before all that, they should've tried to fix Amazing Spider Man 2 first BEFOREHAND tho, then it would all make sense. Sony forced Venom in Raimi's Spider Man 3 which is why it came out the way it did. 🙄🤷🤦
I don’t trust Sony to make Amazing Spider-Man 3, they fucked it up with the second one and clearly can’t be trusted to make a live action spider-man on their own anymore They screwed up Spider-Man 3 too so Sony having sole creative control and making it on their own is a bad idea so I don’t really trust them to do ASM3
It sucks that awesome characters like Venom, Carnage and kraven are getting butchered by these lazy half assed attempts at setting up some cinematic universe that nobody cares about. Ah well at least we have Spider-man 2 giving us good versions of these characters
On God like I knew this was gonna be a bad idea and they were like "let's make spider man movies" without spider man not saying it can't work it's just sonys handling of this has been bad since it's inception. And unfortunately it doesn't look like it's gonna get any better what with Kraven and Madame web coming out ugh 😮💨 SMH Sony should just stick to everything but LA spider stuff. As it's been 9 years and there still tryna get this sinister six thing going on and their talking about using the madame web movie as a basis to bring tom Holland into this trash universe and I'm like just stop.
@@AndyXHDGamingrecency bias. Venom has to many great appearances in not only video games as not only a playable character but as a villain. Spider-Man 2 has a pretty good venom but let’s not act like he’s only in the game for 10 minutes. While web of shadows did the same plot to a bigger scale, and has the bonus of involving the greater marvel universe with big names like Luke cage, Wolverine, Black Cat, and Moon knight. Like what’s the point of the Baxter or A Tower building being built and not a single appearance from the Fantastic 4, Daredevil, At least the hulk or iron man during a symbiote alien invasion?
Good God I’m tired of seeing people wrongfully (Yep, straight up factually wrong I’m that petty) think Insomniac’s Venom is somehow better than Sony’s Venom, say what you will about the films, the criticisms are pretty valid honestly, but the characterisation of Venom in the films is MILES ahead of whatever happened in Spider-Man 2, a game I still love btw, that Venom was the true butcherization of the character. They took a character with charm and personality in the source material, everything Tom Hardy’s Venom had, and turned him into a bland and generic big bad 3rd act monster who is just straight up evil when that isn’t how Venom should be at all, it’s honestly no different than Raimi’s Spider-Man 3 Venom and everyone agree that was a bad adaptation, so why does Insomniac get a pass? The only reason people think it’s a good Venom is because of a great design and of course Tony Todd’s amazing voice, other than that it’s a failure in adapting Venom in every other way.
@@thevagabond1314 thank you. He was in the game for 2 minutes and was just bad guy and potentially killing it off is so stupid and kills all potential for the symbiote becoming a lethal protector like the character we all know love and laugh at.
I think you could make it work, spider man dies fighting the green Goblin. The Goblin dies too and is outed as Norman Osborn. This leads to a city with no protector so each film deals with a villain/anti hero and how they deal with it Film 1. Monster movie where Curt connors turns himself into the lizard becomes more deranged as the transformation goes on…. This brings in Kraven who is looking for a purpose after the death of the spider Film 2. Venom is in full anti hero mode and now tries to become the new hero of New York but his violent nature make him a monster to the populace. He runs afoul of a sadistic serial killer which leads to the arrival of carnage It could work
@@billmcdermott9647 It could, problem is they're trying to connect their universe with MCU which consider it's structure are not a guarrantee stuff. if they make their universe to differ from MCU it could work but their biggest mistake is that they try to connect it to MCU.
I think they should have made everyone just in the periphery of a Spiderman universe. Like Spiderman is built up like Fire Lord Ozai we don't see his face until the big team up movie
As a lifelong fan of Venom, their first movie captures his 90s Lethal Protector era pretty well. It matches the tone of the comics, Venom 2 is something else though. I did not like their handling of Carnage.
The SSU lost my interest as soon as it was certain they were going to tell Venom’s origin story without Spider-Man. Telling Venom’s story without Spider-Man is literally like telling the Reverse-Flash’s story without the Flash. Like… no. You don’t do that. Many, hell, almost all Spider-Man villains can hypothetically be reinvented in a world where Spidey doesn’t even exist, but the ONE you can’t do that to is Venom. He’s just not Venom anymore. His fu**ing name itself is what it is because the guy wants to dedicate his life to being poison - or, you know… venom - to Peter Parker’s life.
I really think THIS IS an elaborate joke from Sony, look at the quality difference from these movies to the Spider-verse films. It's not even a contest.
6:04 is the venom movie really “insane?” Nothing it does is really memorable. It’s not as “what am I watching” as the worst early 2000s superhero movies and beyond the character design, the movie has no charisma or soul. It’s just boring and bland
Sony doesn't have a choice but make and release these films. They have to release Spider-man films every few years and the MCU Spider-man films don't count, meaning they have to make these Spiderverse films without spiderman... to keep Spiderman. It's a ridiculous position to be in, but what executive would want to be the one who gave up Spiderman for free?
If only they could put effort into these they keep meddling and making them actively worse even when they are just ok at best also what is going on qith them looking very cheap
I’m not sure why they even bothered making movies about the villains. There are plenty of spider people they could’ve made a movie about. .2099 .Noir . Scarlet Spider . Silk . Spider Woman . Superior Spider-Man . Spider Woman . Assassin Spider
I can understand venom. He’s popular and everyone knows him…kraven is the same deal but less so. It’s Madame Webb that feels like it’s scraping the bottom of the barrel because the general audience likely has never heard of her or if they do they know her as an elderly woman
@johans3164 I know you are being sarcastic but at least people would know who Aunt May and might go out of pure curiosity…. El Murto what is that about?
@@billmcdermott9647 i have no idea either. It will star a rapper named Bad Bunny. But the project has been cancelled. Seriously. Sony desperation isnt even funny anymorre. Its just sad. They could just focus on the Spiderverse franchise since thats very much well received but....yeah
I don't know if Sony is just incredibly stupid or if they do know these movies are bad but just don't care. I mean rumour is that Madam Web has the same writers as Morbius. Who in the right mind would rehire the same people who made a critical and financial disaster?
Sony needs to stop trying to make Spider-Man movies without Spider-Man. It's insane that they keep making these movies without the character that's the literal linchpin between all these characters and ideas.
It’s all just a desperate attempt for Sony to keep the rights to the characters and it’s honestly sad. It’s sad they think seeing that scene with Vulture and Moribus “together” would hype us up. There’s literally no point to these movies except Sony hoping we’ll give them money cause they’re limping. I don’t like the venom movies and all the other ones are terrible or they’re going to be terrible. Sony should just sell the rights back already.
I feel like Sony should’ve spent time building up these characters in the mcu spider man movies and could’ve worked out deals to do these projects under the mcu banner if they just had some patience. An agent venom movie could’ve worked really well in the mcu and you can have a sinister six of villains spider man had already fought. Like I just don’t get why you would feel the need to have your a list character in the mcu but not see a need for your b or c list characters connected to that franchise as well.
I think that the Sony Marvel Universe can work and possibly compete with the MCU in its Prime. However they need to fix some problems. 1. How does the world connect?: Morbius’ references to the Venom films are a good start. But I think we need some more connections. For example, Eddie’s Daily Globe incident wasn’t specified, but if we take how Eddie acted with Carlton Drake and applied it to another character who was secretly doing ill real experiments? Morbius can be that Daily Globe incident. We also don’t know what Milo did with Morbius’ research after he took the serum. Aleski can turn into a humanoid rhino in a similar way to Curtis Connors. 2. Use the tragic aspects of each of the characters. A good question to ask when making a team is “What connects all of these characters?” I think that the tragic aspects of Venom, Morbius, Kraven and Vulture can bring them together. Mainly that they are alone and have lost their families in one way or another. 3. Make Vulture the Tony Stark of the franchise. In other words, let him be the main protagonist, he drives the story and brings the sinister six together. Use the fact that his main driving force (His family) is non existent.
@@zacharyharris2177 what in like quality or quantity. Because I’m talking like if it fixes some big problems that I mentioned it could compete with the best of the mcu
A way I can see them making the sinister Six work in this context is that you have to make Spider-Man the villain. In this reality you can make Spider-Man the world's greatest villain, and to compensate the universe makes his greatest villains the heroes in this timeline. However, I really don't want them to do that to Peter Parker. Madam Web actually seems to be setting up an idea of Ezekiel Sims being this world Spider-Man, and I think that could really work if you wanted to make him the villain of the universe, but given their track record, they'll probably kill him off the end.
Amazing Spider-Man 2 looks like a fucking masterpiece compared to all the SSU films and it’s no longer even the worst Spider-Man movie, that’s now Spider-Man Lotus.
Not sure if that even counts as a cinematic universe. It's only 5 movies and it's just Gojira and Kong, they haven't made a Mothra movie yet or something like that.
Sony's Cinematic Universe (SSU) faces significant challenges in crafting a cohesive universe, but practical solutions could pave the way for success. Andrew Garfield's version of Spider-Man should either be present in the SSU or another Spider-Man variation should serve as a central figure to unify the various characters and storylines. Without Spider-Man, the SSU lacks a recognizable anchor for audiences. To establish cohesion, Sony should draw lessons from the Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU) by carefully planning story arcs, avoiding rushed timelines, and working towards a major event like "Maximum Carnage." This will require thoughtful pacing and the creative freedom to tell meaningful stories. Sony should empower directors like Sam Raimi, who was given substantial creative freedom in the first two "Spider-Man" films, to focus on storytelling while experimenting with genres and taking creative risks. If Eddie Brock's Venom remains a focal point, it's crucial to introduce a Spider-Man character to maintain comic book accuracy. Venom’s narrative requires careful development of Eddie Brock's relationship with the symbiote, exploring his transformation from villain to anti-hero. This journey would benefit from a dedicated solo film that delves into the horror elements of the symbiote, much like "Spider-Man 3," but more logically fleshed out using body horror techniques. Sony should also prioritize creating strong, marketable characters and ensure the right creative talent oversees individual films and the cinematic universe as a whole. It’s crucial to have a well-structured plan that draws on the strengths of the MCU and DCEU or alternatively starts afresh with a reboot that avoids past errors. By granting directors creative freedom, pacing the stories carefully, and embracing experimental storytelling, Sony's Cinematic Universe can build a cohesive and captivating universe that resonates with audiences.
Im still hung up on the fact the morbius memes were mocking the movie. This entire time i thought they were appreciative. It feels like the entire internet was my older brother on this topic.
I disagree with this. The SSU is massively overhated and it’s not more embarrassing than the DCEU. First of all, there’s only been three films with only one actually being bad, the Venom films have been successfully and relatively well received by people. The first three DCEU films were MoS, BvS and Suicide Squad, and unlike the SSU they were using their most popular characters from the start. The SSU is trying to make the villains and allies of Spider-Man well know characters. It’s more embarrassing to mess up using the most popular characters than it is to mess up with more obscure characters. Also I hate it when people say that Sony is trying to make films about characters nobody cares about. Before the films came out, only comics fans cared about GOTG and Iron Man. Venom and Kraven are very popular for comics fans, Morbius also has fans and Madame Web is setting up a bunch of female heroes who also have fans. So yes, general audiences might not know who they are or care, but comic fans do.
Venom doesn't exist in a vacuum though. There is no venom without Spider-Man literally. And they have completely neutered my man venom, I can't imagine Stan Lee heaven venom call his self a loser. Off the Spider-Man rogues gallery is so intricately attached to Spider-Man himself that there's no way this universe will work. Unless someone gets creative in Sony, (that's a hilarious statement in and of itself,) and create their own independent hero and possibly have that person be the go to hero. Or borrow any of the other thousands of Spider-Men and women out there.
Imo the main issue is this universe has no Spider-man. You cant have villains without the hero to fight or challenge them. Turning these iconic baddies into anti heroes just isnt sustainable. The issue is Sony cant use Peter Parker or miles morales due to the mcu contract and miles being the spiderverse main. So what option do they have? They have 2 actually. Ben Reilly or Kaine would be PERFECT for the much darker Sonyverse. But not as a hero. But as an antagonistic Spider-man. Ben and Kaine are much more brutal than Pete and dont have the "no kill" rule. We'd not only get a new spidey we have never seen before but also a new perspective on the character. It would also be the PERFECT excuse for the sony villains to build the Sinister Six as they are beyond afraid of this more brutal Spider-man. And as a huge spidey fan im perfectly okay with Spider-man being seen as an antagonist. This is the villains' perspective so of course he'll be seen differently. But...sony wont do this because they have no talent writers and execs who dont care and arent creative
We already have 2 onscreen Spider Men, with a beloved video game series on top. At this point, I can’t bring myself to care whether or not any new Spider Man related stuff flops, especially when they don’t even try to justify their existence by being high quality or revolutionary. Id rather support other things that show promise to push the culture forward rather than keep it stagnant, in other words, providing something valuable to the consumer, rather than make a quick buck off them.
Instead of soo these useless movie they should’ve put more effort for comfortable conditions to spiderverse team,and maybe some money to make an agreement to return spectacular Spider-Man show
Just remember that morbius only got any sort of money back was because it was a joke movie. It was the funniest shit to come out that's how bad it was. And Sony released it a second time in the same year because memes funny
Venom should just be the MC of the SSU. Just throw out anything spider related and have all characters revolve around Venom. But that might require creative thinking…
Sony ar trying to take Spiderman villains and turn them into anti hero protagonists when the most interesting part of their characters are their dynamic with Spiderman!
Sony dropped the ball with all of them. All complete trash after tasm. They should of just used marvel for peter and tried to build a universe for Miles or Miguel.
Who do you think Nicolas Cage is Drake? He does not have ghost writers. He writes his own lyrics. Nicholas Cage hip hop album coming soon. Track one not the killa BEES!! Anything but the BEES!! featuring Wu-Tang.😂😂
The DCEU was awful, but it had some entertainment value sprinkled throughout. But the Sony Universe? There was next to nothing worthwhile the entire time. Venom was OK, but only because Hardy was enjoyable. The actual story was terrible, and just felt like a boring 00's era origin story. Even more confusing, they basically did the same exact thing again for Venom 2, even using the stupid trope of the villain just being an evil version of the hero (with similar powers) yet again! Eddie was back to arguing with Venom, like none of the development from the first movie even mattered. And Morbius was just generic & boring & Kraven looks the same. I can't imagine turning more villains into anti-heroes is going to rope me back in.
I can only think of a few franchises and IPs the can be major ongoing cinematic universes. Star Wars MCU DCEU Game of Thrones Harry Potter Lord of the Rings I'm sure there are a few more but those are the only ones that come to mind and do work because they wear designed to be that. Sony's fraction of Marvel on it's own dose not work and everyone knows it including Sony itself. Avi Arad has no idea what he's doing he just wants money. Sony needs to return the fights to Feige. Give Spiderman back to his family where he belongs.
I hate how people don't do their research when shit talking Sony. Venom 1 was originally set in the MCU, hence why Venom was in San Francisco instead of New York so they could explain why other heroes didn't appear. Morbius was originally supposed to come out before Venom 2, and it was made at the time they still had the deal where these movies were in the MCU. In the Morbius trailers you can see Morbius was supposed to be in the same Prison as Vulture, and that would lead to their team up. Marvel and Sony had a very public spat over reworking their Spider-Man deal and Marvel forced Sony to make their movies a separate universe. Sony agreed on the condition that Venom would be in NWH. Since they made that new deal they had to change a fuck ton about Morbius so thats why it came out the way it did and also why it got pushed to be put out after Venom 2. NWH also got reworked to release before Dr Strange 2, so that messed up Venom's role as well as America Chavez's role in the movie. And yes I know they used the wrong graffiti in the Morbius trailer for Spider-Man but that was just a temp image
It's embarrassing that a supposed to be content creator doesn't even bother to check his claims. Like it or not, Warner Bros movies up until JL were (financially speaking)as successful as marvel. They actually made the same exact money that marvel phase 1 made but with 5 releases instead of 6(Marvel phase 1 had six releases)and I am not even counting Aquaman in the batch. We can say that in terms of reception were definitely less favorite to the general public. Man of steel, BvS and Suicide Squad,Wonder Woman, made a lot of money and profit. The first failure in terms of money was JL who kind of break even. Man of steel for example made 668M plus 100M in Blu-ray. Suicided squad with no China release,made about 750M. BvS under performed but manage 870M. After that Aquaman made over a billion. Problems (again, financially speaking) started after they lost their fan base due to Z Snyder departure. After that pretty much every movie flopped.
the second Garfield was indeed set up for other films but it also advances and pushes forward the character of Peter so to dismiss as "just set up" is quite disrespectful also you put it on par with morbius that should be crime!
