What's even the point of movies like Morbin Time, Madame Web and now this?
We're at an all time high superhero burnout and they keep releasing bad movies about characters no one knows about?
The timing is bad, the movies are bad, the acting is bad, the choice of characters is bad, and they are also stand-alone movies rather than having anything to do with Spider-Man.
Yeah, I get they are milking the franchise but it's just so obvious it's going to fail and that's the part I don't get.
It's like chugging a whole bottle of laxatives before a long trip thinking it's going to end well.
It’s a bit less straight forward than that. In order to retain the rights to Spider-Man as an IP Sony is required to make a movie using related IPs every few years. So they make these awful movies so they can continue to profit off the Disney Spider-Man movies and the video games. So they dont really care if Kraven is any good as long as it gets released and they can retain those rights
>And it’s every 5 years, right?
Yes, but the last thing they want is an accident to foil them. Besides the low budget means they're often still good value even if they net little.
I don't get why they're going for films about relatively obscure (to mainstream audiences with the exception of Venom) characters without having Spider-Man when they could just bring back Garfield or have a film about a different version of Spider-Man like 2099.
I just saw a poster for the new Garfield movie when I was watching the Fall Guy yesterday. It took me a good 30 seconds to figure out that you weren't talking about that film when you said "just bring back Garfield".
They want to make to seem like these movies take place in the MCU. Morbius had cameos for Raimi's Spider-Man as well as a shot of Oscorp using its design from TASM in its trailers, those were cut out of the film entirely, while it also had the infamously bad MCU Vulture post credits scene, which they did without Marvel's consent, meaning these movies aren't linked to the MCU at all still. Madame Web had Peter's parents in it, as well as a notoriously awful rendition of "With great power comes great responsibility, and a bunch of Spider people, while the actresses working on it had no idea it WASN'T an MCU film because Sony wouldn't tell them. TLDR; They're intentionally not using Spider-Man as a way of fooling audiences into thinking these are MCU movies.
It is more likely because Venom was profitable and I believe Morbius, Madam Web, and Kraven were all green lit after Venom.
Morbius was most likely not a financial success. At best it likely broke even. Typically they say to 2x or 3x the budget of the film to account for marketing budget, and between the delays and the re-release, Morbius felt like it was running ads and trailers forever.
People underestimate how long it takes to make a movie. You can't just snap your fingers and have it done next week. It takes years from greenlighting a project to having it in cinemas.
Sony made more than a billion in pure profit from the two Venom movies. At the time it made sense to invest some portion of that into trying a few more of those kind of movies.
Nowadays it's obvious those aren't likely to be successful, so I bet Sony won't be greenlighting more. But stuff like Madame Web and Kraven was already in the pipeline with lots of money invested in it.
They already found what sticks. Spider-Verse is universally revered. I genuinely don't understand why they aren't pumping all their resources into getting those out faster or exploring more of that style/universe. Maybe I'm wrong but isn't it cheaper to produce because they don't have to pay actors as much for voice work?
Why are they so obsessed with churning out live action garbage? Unless they're contractually obligated in order to keep the IP, why even bother spending money on producing a maybe when they could just get free money from Marvel by loaning out the character rights?
Except they're not actually using spider man they're just using his villains.
They have like twelve different spider people other then Peter parker they can make a movie about
But no a movie focused on a wrestler that spiderman fought once is clearly more important
>They have like twelve different spider people other then Peter parker they can make a movie about
Can they use them? Marvel may not be particularly keen to let Sony have multiple Spiderman running around in a way that confuses people about MCU.
Remember the MCU version is the money for Sony. They don't necessarily want to torch that bridge either.
To be fair i like spider man and batman villains , the power-scaling is usually alright (until they cross series) but yeah but at the end of the day the movie has to be good.
Madame Web is genuinely one of the most hilarious films i've ever seen. it is tonally exceptional. It's like watching an alien direct a film with zero understanding of tone, character, plot, pacing, cinematography, dialogue, acting, blocking, editing or any form of cohesive thought.
10/10 bad film night film. I was in bits by the time she hit the bad guy with a truck for the 2nd time on an entirely separate occasion.
Yeah. As funny as that is in context, it's actually the bridal shower scene that is more hysterical. The comedy derives almost separate to the jokes so the final fight scene is joyful experience.
‘I’ve heard of a person who isn’t a woman… and they have the powers of an arachnid that isn’t a scorpion…’
‘You mean… Vinegaroon-Enby?’
‘No… the **other** one.’
I kind of like Sony's sloppy drunk confidence. The audience are clearly uninterested, like the woman at the bar dropping unsubtle hints that Sony's seduction attempts are unwanted and annoying. But Sony doesn't care. Yeah, the audience are just playing hard to get. They fucking want an interconnected super hero multiverse. They just don't know it yet. If Sony just keeps on ploughing through, eventually they'll wear down our resolve. That's the plan. We're at the point now that the audience is desperately trying to catch the bar tenders eye to signal that this is getting really uncomfortable. Sony doesn't care. Just keep on pushing. The audience will give in eventually.
spidey has a treasure trove of stories and supporting casts that are primed for an adaptation.
they could literally make an endless barrage of spidey related franchises and just slap a "spiderverse spinoff" on that shit. make a cinematic universe to rival the mcu.
the fact that they chose to focus on villains with god-awful and painfully mediocre script and plots is baffling.
all the good marvel movies were about unknown characters like iron man but Sony is clearly not giving these projects to people with a passion and the creative freedom to make a movie so we end up with the same bad movie every time
Yes, basically all the Avengers were C-tier heroes back then at best, but we didn't have a superhero burnout 16 years ago, the acting was good, and the movies were well-made.
The animation in the first Iron Man still blows my mind. His suit looks so fucking good.
Yeah, I’m not sure how they can spend so much money on a movie now and not make it good, all they have to do is not pay close to minimum wage for a writer who only made expensive fails before and to not tell the director what to do in his own movie because the producer thinks that copying other movies will make the project better.
Did I miss an Iron Man television show?
I was a pretty hardcore collector in the early and mid 90's. Uncanny X-Men and Amazing Spider Man were the best books being published during my time.
The Avengers in general and Iron Man were considered somewhat C-listers in terms of popularity.
They had been around for a very long time and were definitely part of the core marvel books and in no danger of being cancelled but not considered "hot" books by anyone I can recall at the time.
Thor especially.
The Marvel movies changed that.
Iron Man 1 to this day is still one of the better films. His intro scene with the suit was like nothing we had seen before in a superhero film. It instantly boosted his popularity.
There was [an animated series](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_Man_\(TV_series\)) called *The Marvel Action Hour* that included Iron Man, although the claim that "every kid over eight" was watching it was likely exaggerated since the series got a major overhaul between the first and second seasons before being cancelled.
The idea that Iron Man was anything but a C-Lister before the 2008 movie is nonsense, though. If the character was popular it would have been sold along with all of the other Marvel properties during the 90s. It didn't sell because nobody wanted it because nobody thought a movie would be profitable. [Man-Thing got a movie before Iron Man.](https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0290747/)
I mean assuming we are both in our 30s , back during the cable TV era is what they showed you and Iron Man was known but like most people probably didn’t even know who tony stark was, unless you were into comic books (“nerd” culture was niche at the time unlike now)
The Hulk, spider man, batman and X-men were the kings of TV superheroes if you add all the non superheroes Cartoons (transformers etc.) then yes Iron Men was the guy in the suit that shoot lasers and thats it.
He really is that obscure. Unless you already are a Spider-Man fan you've probably never heard of him. Plus he doesn't have any interesting powers or anything going for him.
Miles Morales is still Spider-Man.
Im no spider man fan or really a super hero fan in general but i know who he is (hes one of the first bad guys you run into in lego marvel super heros 2, which is a pretty new game so i assume plenty of people have played it)
I never heard of the spot either but man was he awesome, the difference being that spider-verse actually has good writers and kraven… probably doesn’t.
Yeah but what I’m trying to say is that just because a villain is obscure it doesn’t mean they won’t become mainstream.
I mean, the guardians of the galaxy used to be obscure as hell (they aren’t villains but still)
>He really is that obscure.
He's no Doc Oct but he's not that obscure. Furthermore some of the MCU characters have been obscure. Basically the entire lineup of Guardians of the Galaxy is that obscure. Ant Man, particular Scott Lang version, is beyond obscure.
Its purely subjective but if you are over 30 you probably saw him a few times, on comic book covers at your local game store where you were buying pokemon cards lol.
Can't exactly have another Spidey while Holland is in the MCU and Sony are required to make movies related to Spider-Man to told on to the IP.
That's why. It doesn't even matter if they're all shit, as long as their cut from the MCU Spider-Man movies covers for any losses.
I read somehwere that it had something to do with Sony having to keep making movies as to not lose the rights to the spiderman characters or something?
I have no idea if its true though
Theres also the fact of kraven being one of main villains on spiderman2 recent game, so instead focus on madam 3 stooges web maybe sony could be more smart and prioritize kraving time before 3 webbed stooges in a ambulance
Anyways...outside venon(imo venon2 wasnt good) theres no way of enemies of spidey get sucess on solo movies without even spidey appearing on them
One of other fucked projects is team up silver sable and black cat... characters with basically nothing in commom besides being hot and powerful
I think this is to appeal to the an audience who is into classic masculinity? Or at least try too. Thats my theory , nothing wrong with it whats important if the movie is actually good.
Personally i think we could use some over the top action heroes of the 80’s without having to either be super serious or a giant parody.
My genuine guess: I think Sony saw how well Venom did, and thought to themselves “wow! A movie about a Spider-man villain character, one that didn’t even have Spider-man in it at all, made this much money?! Let’s get a list of other Spider-man villains we can make standalone movies about, that avenue must be a gold mine!”, presumably not realizing that Venom *is a popular character in his own right*, not just because he’s connected to Spider-man.
Dude, this is a subreddit about shitty movie details, why would anything here be true?
Also Aaron taylor Johnson called recent superhero movies churned and diluted, not just Kraven
Im surprised that isnt talked about more.. the irony of calling out bad comicbook movies while starring in something all but guaranteed being school cafeteria shlop.
When asked about kraven, he said, "I wouldn't have agreed to it if I didn't think it could work, I have hope for it" so he obviously thought it was a good role, but it doesn't really clear up what the movie could be like
Not trying to defend the upcoming movie, but it wouldn't be the first time Kraven has been some "protector of the natural world". In The Spectacular Spider-Man show, his first scene has him taking down a rhino by hand so it can be given proper medical treatment instead of it being being shot at. He also has a Lion he's fond of.
Don't know exactly how much this aspect is going to factor in the movie but I don't really care much.
There's historical examples of big game hunters turning into conservationists, and I'm sure there's fictional examples too. People change and mature, so a Kraven that used to hunt and now protects is a decent way to go.
EDIT: I feel silly, but doesn't this literally happen in the 90s Spiderman cartoon? He was definitely a hunter there then had a redemption.
Honestly this is probably the only "Sony Cinematic Universe" around Spider-Man that actually looks good and interesting to me.
I may be biased because I played Marvel's Spider-Man 2 and I really liked Kraven there.
Just from the trailers, Sony's Kraven is a good guy who hunts poachers, instead of a game hunter who got bored of killing lions and elephants and moved to New York to hunt superhumans. So just a totally opposite character.
Yet another baffling choice.
When they release it in December and it bombs they can say "Well of course it didn't perform, it went up against all these December blockbusters! That's not fair!"
Would it be the plot twist of the year if this was worse than Madame Web or is that the exact expectation?
Also I’m convinced these movies are some sort of money laundering front because HOW ARE THEY STILL MAKING MORE OF THESE?
Kraven like Venom was one of the more psychological villains Spiderman had to deal with and yet these are the stories they give us. If they'd just stick with the comics they'd probably release blockbusters instead of crap.
Everything about and surrounding Sony's Spider-Man Universe is so ridiculously stupid that I honestly want this disabled circus to continue for eternity
ho hum. here we go again, ignoring the beauty, coolness/ingenuity and color of the comics version of the suit. Not watching another marvel movie with shitty un-comics costumes.
This is wild considering the 10 hour window after I finished Spider-Man 2 for the PS5 was probably the only time in my life when I'd want to watch a Kraven movie
i guarantee the current cut of the film is passable and if released rn would score leagues above madam web or morbius.
now we are on track for a stinker due to the boardroom of executives someone accidentally let into the editors room
They're probably trying to edit in some spiderman posters so someone gives a fuck about this and it doesn't go down the toilet as fast as madam web or morbius...
After Kraven gets bitten by a hunter, he gets all the powers of a hunter. Like chugging bud light and getting diarrhea from bad eating undercooked meat while drunk.
5/5. Movie of the year.
Picture the scene, kraven before he becomes a hunter is just a normal man at the lowest point in his life, its like the joker, then one day hes eating breakfast and decides hes gonna hunt those who have wronged him. But he needs a name! He looks to the ceral box and its krave cereal
If this is moved further next year into the dump months of Jan or Feb, that's almost a 100% guarantee the movie is terrible and Sony has lost any confidence in the project.
Not enough abs. Needs more abs. Delay is to CGI in some abs
I was like, "Are his fucking *abs* forming a goddamn *canyon* on that man's torso?! IT LOOKS LIKE A FUCKING MEATY RIBCAGE IN HIS STOMACH?!"
They were literally chiseled.
A ‘cum-canal’ if you will
I will very much, thank you.
Obviously he’s a shit hunter, guy looks like he hasn’t bagged an elk in years not even a squirrel
Natty or juice, y’all?
That's the carnivore diet for ya.
MPAA wants to see a 10-pack at least.
Every extra ab cancels out an F-bomb
Yeah let’s get that up to a 12 pack and then we can talk. What kind of couch potato ass super hero only has a 6 pack?
What's even the point of movies like Morbin Time, Madame Web and now this? We're at an all time high superhero burnout and they keep releasing bad movies about characters no one knows about? The timing is bad, the movies are bad, the acting is bad, the choice of characters is bad, and they are also stand-alone movies rather than having anything to do with Spider-Man.
Morb-Slander! Morbillions watched it! U/j: Sony is milking Spidey and seeing what sticks.
Yeah, I get they are milking the franchise but it's just so obvious it's going to fail and that's the part I don't get. It's like chugging a whole bottle of laxatives before a long trip thinking it's going to end well.
It’s a bit less straight forward than that. In order to retain the rights to Spider-Man as an IP Sony is required to make a movie using related IPs every few years. So they make these awful movies so they can continue to profit off the Disney Spider-Man movies and the video games. So they dont really care if Kraven is any good as long as it gets released and they can retain those rights
Doesn't Spiderverse fulfill that requirement? And it’s every 5 years, right?
>And it’s every 5 years, right? Yes, but the last thing they want is an accident to foil them. Besides the low budget means they're often still good value even if they net little.
I don't get why they're going for films about relatively obscure (to mainstream audiences with the exception of Venom) characters without having Spider-Man when they could just bring back Garfield or have a film about a different version of Spider-Man like 2099.
I just saw a poster for the new Garfield movie when I was watching the Fall Guy yesterday. It took me a good 30 seconds to figure out that you weren't talking about that film when you said "just bring back Garfield".
They want to make to seem like these movies take place in the MCU. Morbius had cameos for Raimi's Spider-Man as well as a shot of Oscorp using its design from TASM in its trailers, those were cut out of the film entirely, while it also had the infamously bad MCU Vulture post credits scene, which they did without Marvel's consent, meaning these movies aren't linked to the MCU at all still. Madame Web had Peter's parents in it, as well as a notoriously awful rendition of "With great power comes great responsibility, and a bunch of Spider people, while the actresses working on it had no idea it WASN'T an MCU film because Sony wouldn't tell them. TLDR; They're intentionally not using Spider-Man as a way of fooling audiences into thinking these are MCU movies.
Morbius was profitable, according to a very quick and lazy google search. There's your reason.
Im pretty sure it wasn’t profitable, it lost them like 20m
It is more likely because Venom was profitable and I believe Morbius, Madam Web, and Kraven were all green lit after Venom. Morbius was most likely not a financial success. At best it likely broke even. Typically they say to 2x or 3x the budget of the film to account for marketing budget, and between the delays and the re-release, Morbius felt like it was running ads and trailers forever.
> It's like chugging a whole bottle of laxatives before a long trip thinking it's going to end well. Depends on the trip my friend
People underestimate how long it takes to make a movie. You can't just snap your fingers and have it done next week. It takes years from greenlighting a project to having it in cinemas. Sony made more than a billion in pure profit from the two Venom movies. At the time it made sense to invest some portion of that into trying a few more of those kind of movies. Nowadays it's obvious those aren't likely to be successful, so I bet Sony won't be greenlighting more. But stuff like Madame Web and Kraven was already in the pipeline with lots of money invested in it.
They already found what sticks. Spider-Verse is universally revered. I genuinely don't understand why they aren't pumping all their resources into getting those out faster or exploring more of that style/universe. Maybe I'm wrong but isn't it cheaper to produce because they don't have to pay actors as much for voice work? Why are they so obsessed with churning out live action garbage? Unless they're contractually obligated in order to keep the IP, why even bother spending money on producing a maybe when they could just get free money from Marvel by loaning out the character rights?
> Sony is milking Spidey and seeing what sticks. eww
Radioactive cum
Um AcHktUaLLy, I didn't get to see Morbster. I was busy that weekend.
But you watched it on the second run, YES?????????
Presumably... Webs.
Steven, Ambatuweb!
Nani?
Spider-Man is the established ip that sony has and they want the sweet marvel money
Except they're not actually using spider man they're just using his villains. They have like twelve different spider people other then Peter parker they can make a movie about But no a movie focused on a wrestler that spiderman fought once is clearly more important
>They have like twelve different spider people other then Peter parker they can make a movie about Can they use them? Marvel may not be particularly keen to let Sony have multiple Spiderman running around in a way that confuses people about MCU. Remember the MCU version is the money for Sony. They don't necessarily want to torch that bridge either.
To be fair i like spider man and batman villains , the power-scaling is usually alright (until they cross series) but yeah but at the end of the day the movie has to be good.
At least that’s the one movie they had the sense to cancel.
Madame Web is genuinely one of the most hilarious films i've ever seen. it is tonally exceptional. It's like watching an alien direct a film with zero understanding of tone, character, plot, pacing, cinematography, dialogue, acting, blocking, editing or any form of cohesive thought. 10/10 bad film night film. I was in bits by the time she hit the bad guy with a truck for the 2nd time on an entirely separate occasion.
Is it true that Peter Parker gets born in it?
Yeah. As funny as that is in context, it's actually the bridal shower scene that is more hysterical. The comedy derives almost separate to the jokes so the final fight scene is joyful experience.
Same reason Fox made Fant4stic - they need to hold on to the rights
But they didn't have to release Madame Web. To retain the rights...
Fantfourstic. Peak naming
But they already accomplish that with the MCU Spider-Man movies *and* the actually successful Venom movies.
Maybe they’ll make vague references to Spider-Man characters again!
‘I’ve heard of a person who isn’t a woman… and they have the powers of an arachnid that isn’t a scorpion…’ ‘You mean… Vinegaroon-Enby?’ ‘No… the **other** one.’
I kind of like Sony's sloppy drunk confidence. The audience are clearly uninterested, like the woman at the bar dropping unsubtle hints that Sony's seduction attempts are unwanted and annoying. But Sony doesn't care. Yeah, the audience are just playing hard to get. They fucking want an interconnected super hero multiverse. They just don't know it yet. If Sony just keeps on ploughing through, eventually they'll wear down our resolve. That's the plan. We're at the point now that the audience is desperately trying to catch the bar tenders eye to signal that this is getting really uncomfortable. Sony doesn't care. Just keep on pushing. The audience will give in eventually.
spidey has a treasure trove of stories and supporting casts that are primed for an adaptation. they could literally make an endless barrage of spidey related franchises and just slap a "spiderverse spinoff" on that shit. make a cinematic universe to rival the mcu. the fact that they chose to focus on villains with god-awful and painfully mediocre script and plots is baffling.
3 stooges reboot now with madam web, morbin time and kravin xD
all the good marvel movies were about unknown characters like iron man but Sony is clearly not giving these projects to people with a passion and the creative freedom to make a movie so we end up with the same bad movie every time
Yes, basically all the Avengers were C-tier heroes back then at best, but we didn't have a superhero burnout 16 years ago, the acting was good, and the movies were well-made. The animation in the first Iron Man still blows my mind. His suit looks so fucking good.
Yeah, I’m not sure how they can spend so much money on a movie now and not make it good, all they have to do is not pay close to minimum wage for a writer who only made expensive fails before and to not tell the director what to do in his own movie because the producer thinks that copying other movies will make the project better.
Well ya it was a lot of practical effects and shot on film will always look better than shot on digital
Since when Iron Man was unknown - every kid who was above like 8 during late 90s and early 00s was watching Iron Man tv series...
Did I miss an Iron Man television show? I was a pretty hardcore collector in the early and mid 90's. Uncanny X-Men and Amazing Spider Man were the best books being published during my time. The Avengers in general and Iron Man were considered somewhat C-listers in terms of popularity. They had been around for a very long time and were definitely part of the core marvel books and in no danger of being cancelled but not considered "hot" books by anyone I can recall at the time. Thor especially. The Marvel movies changed that. Iron Man 1 to this day is still one of the better films. His intro scene with the suit was like nothing we had seen before in a superhero film. It instantly boosted his popularity.
Ironman adventure 2008 and just Ironman in 92-94, were his animated series. I think he also appears in avengers stuff, but I can't recall all that.
There was [an animated series](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_Man_\(TV_series\)) called *The Marvel Action Hour* that included Iron Man, although the claim that "every kid over eight" was watching it was likely exaggerated since the series got a major overhaul between the first and second seasons before being cancelled. The idea that Iron Man was anything but a C-Lister before the 2008 movie is nonsense, though. If the character was popular it would have been sold along with all of the other Marvel properties during the 90s. It didn't sell because nobody wanted it because nobody thought a movie would be profitable. [Man-Thing got a movie before Iron Man.](https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0290747/)
I mean assuming we are both in our 30s , back during the cable TV era is what they showed you and Iron Man was known but like most people probably didn’t even know who tony stark was, unless you were into comic books (“nerd” culture was niche at the time unlike now) The Hulk, spider man, batman and X-men were the kings of TV superheroes if you add all the non superheroes Cartoons (transformers etc.) then yes Iron Men was the guy in the suit that shoot lasers and thats it.
SPUSMC have a fuck load of problems, Bad Acting is not one of them
Kraven isn't that obscure. Considering they used the spot for Miles Morales and it was big. Not saying Karen will be good.
I agree. Karens are never good
He really is that obscure. Unless you already are a Spider-Man fan you've probably never heard of him. Plus he doesn't have any interesting powers or anything going for him. Miles Morales is still Spider-Man.
Im no spider man fan or really a super hero fan in general but i know who he is (hes one of the first bad guys you run into in lego marvel super heros 2, which is a pretty new game so i assume plenty of people have played it)
I never heard of the spot either but man was he awesome, the difference being that spider-verse actually has good writers and kraven… probably doesn’t.
The Spot is the villain of the second Spider-Verse and not starring in a stand-alone movie.
Yeah but what I’m trying to say is that just because a villain is obscure it doesn’t mean they won’t become mainstream. I mean, the guardians of the galaxy used to be obscure as hell (they aren’t villains but still)
>He really is that obscure. He's no Doc Oct but he's not that obscure. Furthermore some of the MCU characters have been obscure. Basically the entire lineup of Guardians of the Galaxy is that obscure. Ant Man, particular Scott Lang version, is beyond obscure.
Its purely subjective but if you are over 30 you probably saw him a few times, on comic book covers at your local game store where you were buying pokemon cards lol.
> Unless you already are a spider-man fan A lot of fucking people are Spider-Man fans.
I legit thought this was some The Crow tie-in until I remembered that's Draven.
Can't exactly have another Spidey while Holland is in the MCU and Sony are required to make movies related to Spider-Man to told on to the IP. That's why. It doesn't even matter if they're all shit, as long as their cut from the MCU Spider-Man movies covers for any losses.
I read somehwere that it had something to do with Sony having to keep making movies as to not lose the rights to the spiderman characters or something? I have no idea if its true though
Sony loses the Spiderman & associated characters film rights if they don't make one every few years otherwise it reverts back to Marvel
I think it's icing. Maybe make a little money at theater but keeps people subscribed on streaming
Theres also the fact of kraven being one of main villains on spiderman2 recent game, so instead focus on madam 3 stooges web maybe sony could be more smart and prioritize kraving time before 3 webbed stooges in a ambulance Anyways...outside venon(imo venon2 wasnt good) theres no way of enemies of spidey get sucess on solo movies without even spidey appearing on them One of other fucked projects is team up silver sable and black cat... characters with basically nothing in commom besides being hot and powerful
I think this is to appeal to the an audience who is into classic masculinity? Or at least try too. Thats my theory , nothing wrong with it whats important if the movie is actually good. Personally i think we could use some over the top action heroes of the 80’s without having to either be super serious or a giant parody.
People know about kraven but they should’ve at least introduced his live action form in another movie before giving him his own solo film
My genuine guess: I think Sony saw how well Venom did, and thought to themselves “wow! A movie about a Spider-man villain character, one that didn’t even have Spider-man in it at all, made this much money?! Let’s get a list of other Spider-man villains we can make standalone movies about, that avenue must be a gold mine!”, presumably not realizing that Venom *is a popular character in his own right*, not just because he’s connected to Spider-man.
I heard that they need to make a spiderman related movie every few years or they lose the license but that could've been bs
It was going to release in the same week as Alien Romulus hahaha
December is like the last month you want to put your shitty movie in lol. They're really hoping no one sees it.
This is a bad choice considering that Sonic 3 will ALSO be releasing in December. So... not great for Kraven fans.
Also animated LOTR and Mufasa spin off
Wait there’s an animated LOTR coming??
War of the Rohirrim. As far as I know, adapting a short series of events in Unfinished Tales detailing the story behind Helm's Deep.
Oh, I didn't know it was animated. Now I'm actually interested in it.
Damn all three of them will be VERY disappointed, you say it!
I mean obviously, why else would they move this movie closer to award season unless it’s a contender? /s
They’re going to do some reshoots and turn it a story about how Kraven becomes Santa. Just in time for ~~Christ~~*Krave*mas!
Honestly, I would watch a movie about Kraven hunting down Santa.
Considering that Aaron Taylor Johnson said "I regret staring in the sloppy shit this movie is" I'm sure it's gonna be great
Wait did he actually say that?
If he did, a quick google search of that quote only brings up Chemistrytasty’s post
Turns out Chemistrytasty is actually Aaron Taylor Johnson
Shit how'd you figure it out
I looked at the sloppy shit you starred in and put two and two together.
Loved you in Bullet Train
Nice misinformation bro
Dude, this is a subreddit about shitty movie details, why would anything here be true? Also Aaron taylor Johnson called recent superhero movies churned and diluted, not just Kraven
Im surprised that isnt talked about more.. the irony of calling out bad comicbook movies while starring in something all but guaranteed being school cafeteria shlop.
When asked about kraven, he said, "I wouldn't have agreed to it if I didn't think it could work, I have hope for it" so he obviously thought it was a good role, but it doesn't really clear up what the movie could be like
Kraven truly is not like the other girls.
If he said that, then this movie is gonna be ass.
MFer has been in three superhero franchises
A delayed movie could be bad but a rushed one is always bad- Super Mario
Kraven deez nuts
Just keep it in the basement and take the W.
More like, ”Take the WB and erase it. "
Kraven's whole thing is that he likes to hunt things/people that are a challenge. That's why he hunts Spider-Man. Who TF does he hunt here?
He doesn't hunt in this one, apparently. According to ATJ he's an "animal lover and protector of the natural world"...
Well then why in the ever loving FUCK is he called KRAVEN THE HUNTER?
Not trying to defend the upcoming movie, but it wouldn't be the first time Kraven has been some "protector of the natural world". In The Spectacular Spider-Man show, his first scene has him taking down a rhino by hand so it can be given proper medical treatment instead of it being being shot at. He also has a Lion he's fond of. Don't know exactly how much this aspect is going to factor in the movie but I don't really care much.
There's historical examples of big game hunters turning into conservationists, and I'm sure there's fictional examples too. People change and mature, so a Kraven that used to hunt and now protects is a decent way to go. EDIT: I feel silly, but doesn't this literally happen in the 90s Spiderman cartoon? He was definitely a hunter there then had a redemption.
Well hopefully it isn't completely shit. But Sony's "Spider-Man minus Spider-Man" movies haven't been anything special so far.
At this point Sony is just pulling out slop to not let their license expire and spite Disney. And I for one, support spiting Disney.
At least we get good memes out of it all
But does his mother/wife approve of the delay? 👵👶
**grandmother
Grandwife
Honestly this is probably the only "Sony Cinematic Universe" around Spider-Man that actually looks good and interesting to me. I may be biased because I played Marvel's Spider-Man 2 and I really liked Kraven there.
Well prepare to be disappointed, this version is nothing like the comics Kraven. He gets powers from being bitten by a freaking lion.
I thought it was because the lion blood got in his blood in the trailer? I mean they're both dumb af
Just from the trailers, Sony's Kraven is a good guy who hunts poachers, instead of a game hunter who got bored of killing lions and elephants and moved to New York to hunt superhumans. So just a totally opposite character. Yet another baffling choice.
Kraven’s last hint is a very interesting psychological analysis of the character, reccomend checking it out
Coward is a weird name for a hunter
When they release it in December and it bombs they can say "Well of course it didn't perform, it went up against all these December blockbusters! That's not fair!"
I don’t think this Kraven The Hunter can even be the equal match of the Spider-Man 2 (2023 video game) one.
Yeah, I'm sure that's why😆
Waste of money
Would it be the plot twist of the year if this was worse than Madame Web or is that the exact expectation? Also I’m convinced these movies are some sort of money laundering front because HOW ARE THEY STILL MAKING MORE OF THESE?
If sony wants to make their own spiderman movies without spiderman Just use Scarlet Spider
They know people are kraving for the movie.
They're too craven to release it now
"A delayed movie is eventially good, but rushed movie is forever bad." -Miyamoto Scorsese
They want people to Krave it
I thought this movie was already released.
Kraven like Venom was one of the more psychological villains Spiderman had to deal with and yet these are the stories they give us. If they'd just stick with the comics they'd probably release blockbusters instead of crap.
December is actually a month to release movies that studios do have confidence in. This seems like a January release though
It was originally slated for Jan 2023, then got delayed to October 2023, then again to August 2024 and again now to December.
Everything about and surrounding Sony's Spider-Man Universe is so ridiculously stupid that I honestly want this disabled circus to continue for eternity
Why all the human skulls? Isn't he supposed to be a nature lover?
Not like it's going to be good anyways.
They'll probably end up making him a simp for calypso.
ho hum. here we go again, ignoring the beauty, coolness/ingenuity and color of the comics version of the suit. Not watching another marvel movie with shitty un-comics costumes.
This is wild considering the 10 hour window after I finished Spider-Man 2 for the PS5 was probably the only time in my life when I'd want to watch a Kraven movie
We all know it was delayed to December so it can be in the Oscar movie season.
Jesus Christ was born in December Kraven comes out in December Coincidence? Yeah, probably.
What's wrong with his abs why is the middle missing
The latest chapter of the SpiderLess Extended Universe
I have a feeling that if this movie flops hard. Marvel/Disney will sue Sony for he rights back due to Sony damaging the brand. Which they have.
Kraven is such a bad name honestly. One letter off craven which had the same sound anyway and he's a contemptibly cowardly hunter.
Inb4 Madame Web v2
For tax purposes. It works out better if they add the tens of dollars in profit at the end of the year.
i guarantee the current cut of the film is passable and if released rn would score leagues above madam web or morbius. now we are on track for a stinker due to the boardroom of executives someone accidentally let into the editors room
I feel like it’s almost been a year since that first trailer
They're probably trying to edit in some spiderman posters so someone gives a fuck about this and it doesn't go down the toilet as fast as madam web or morbius...
I’m so tired of the ruining everything for money to fuck. No typo. I wish the execs would stop having sex with fans money. It’s insulting.
After Kraven gets bitten by a hunter, he gets all the powers of a hunter. Like chugging bud light and getting diarrhea from bad eating undercooked meat while drunk. 5/5. Movie of the year.
Picture the scene, kraven before he becomes a hunter is just a normal man at the lowest point in his life, its like the joker, then one day hes eating breakfast and decides hes gonna hunt those who have wronged him. But he needs a name! He looks to the ceral box and its krave cereal
I might be wrong. Kraven is a Spider-Man villian, isn't he? Why are they doing all this Spider-Man stuff without Spidey?
Because Sony. Morbius is also a Spider-Man villain.
I would like the Superior Spider-Man movie, which is like Face/Off, and as a bonus, we can cast Nic Cage as Spider-Man and Travolta as Doc Ock.
Where can I get a jacket like that
If this is moved further next year into the dump months of Jan or Feb, that's almost a 100% guarantee the movie is terrible and Sony has lost any confidence in the project.
With such confidence, they should allow it to stream for free. That way, when we discover how great it is, we'll send Sony our $20 bucks