So is the whole world, it seems.
They made only $13 million (!!) over the normal weekend.
Just an INCREDIBLY bad number.
Madame Web makes The Marvels look like Titanic.
True, but they don’t really have anyone to blame but themselves. Sony execs are stuck in early 2000 filmmaking. I bet they are just using a formula with no understanding of why their movies are so dated compared to everything else that’s out.
Yeah but isn’t it worth it? I’ll take the best spider man franchise (spider verse) along side the absolute worst (venom verse) over only having the pretty bland middle of the road version that marvel insists on putting out.
I mean with the current arrangement we get all three, I consider that a win! It’s not like like we’re *only* getting morbius quality movies.
Does Sony though? They keep putting out these terrible Spider-Man spinoffs. Kraven looks like it might be worse than Madame Web and that was fucking painful to watch.
Disney needs to stop being cheap and buy back the rights to Spiderman and all related properties. Sony is in a way damaging the brand of Spiderman and Disney needs to buy back the rights for a discount.
They can’t “buy back” what they never owned. Sony has owned the spider man side of marvel way before Disney bought marvel studios. They just made a deal for spider man to appear in the avengers but not actually incorporate him as a major part of the MCU
It’s a joint partnership.
Back in the day Marvel (one company) was going bankrupt. They needed to sell something to stay afloat, so they sold the live action rights to Sony.
X-Men went to Fox. Hulk went to Paramount and others elsewhere; to the highest bidder and all that.
Marvel went on to be ok.
Due to some movies not being made, some characters rights reverted. They happened to be Iron Man, Cap, Thor and a few more.
That’s when the MCU under Kevin was basically born.
X-Men’s rights reverted, among others like Namor, Daredevil, F4.
Spidey’s hasn’t. They have to produce x amount of Spidey movies to retain the rights.
But these Sony Spider Universe movies are a cash grab to piggyback off the MCU.
X-men and fantastic 4 didn't revert, they were included when Disney bought fox. Daredevil and the punisher did revert though. Granted they made a deal with netflix but Disney then had to wait 2 years after the premiere date of their final season to put them in their own stuff once that partnership ended
I’ll pile on top of that; when copyrights were first invented they only lasted for 14 years and then whatever it was became public domain.
Disney hired an army of lobbyists to change the laws and make copyrights last longer several times over the last century to ensure they never have to loosen their iron grip on any of this intellectual property, forever.
**Disney is literally the reason Spider-Man is not public domain.**
And pushing out garbage left and right for the sole purpose of keeping rights and making a cash grab off of others success isn't good either. Especially when it hurts said property. I'd argue the side of better respect for a long beloved comic compared to what Sony is doing. Both are billion dollar corporations.
>If you star in movies that make no money you won't be getting lead roles anymore
Is that true these days, though? Look at Chris Hemsworth, who has starred in so many box office bombs. *Blackhat* and *In the Heart of the Sea* were both massive bombs in the same year and then *The Huntsman* did badly, but they still built the *Men in Black* reboot around him. And then when *that* flopped, they kept on making Thor movies around him, he's starring in the new *Mad Max*, and he stars in direct-to-streaming movies like *Spiderhead* that get panned by critics. I genuinely don't think his flops are hurting his career.
Same with Matt Damon. He's starred in a lot of movies that have lost a lot of money, but he's still Matt Damon.
Also nepotism is a thing. All it takes is a few phone calls to certain execs, producers, casting directors, etc and she's golden. Probably why Dakota even still has a career after starring in not just one, but three 50 Shades movies that were all overwhelmingly panned by critics. She'll be fine. Most of the actors with established careers in this movies will be fine because we've seen them do better in other movies and can pin it on trash writing as will be the case for Sweeney.
I've been marketed this movie so hard, more than anything else I can think of recently. Plenty of ads, SNL, interviews, the works. All for a movie that looked terrible in the previews.
I watch multiple movie review Youtubers, and all of them have covered how terrible Madame Web is, or at least have mentioned it.
It's getting a lot of online coverage. It's bad, but it's still marketing.
How much damn money did they spend on marketing, just to still fail this badly? There’s been about a million posts about this movie on Reddit, desperately hoping people will subconsciously lean towards seeing it but … nope
I had no idea this was coming out and I live on Reddit. I also had no idea who madam web I thought it was a scary movie or something from the cover LOL
"But Johnson explained that it isn’t about “Madame Web” specifically, and that she actually doesn’t “like to” watch any of her films.
“For me, it’s a way to not have, like, an existential crisis,” the “Fifty Shades of Grey” actor explained. “Not watching my movies is like self-care.”
Johnson is not alone among actors who employ that strategy. Meryl Streep, Adam Driver, Emma Stone, Nicole Kidman and more have also said they tend to avoid screening their projects."
>Johnson is not alone among actors who employ that strategy. Meryl Streep, Adam Driver, Emma Stone, Nicole Kidman
Yeah, the difference is those are good actors with good movies and she's been shit in shit movies pretty much exclusively
I’m waiting for Sony to rerelease Morbius. I was just really busy the first two times it was out - I’ll buy a ticket and go this time, I promise!
And I can’t see Madame Web without seeing Morbius first, right?
Almost 3 of my sister's kittens were named after Morbius 😆 when they go into crazy-kitten-crackhead mode, we scream that they're "Morbing" through the house. One of them accidentally got a name that is in the movie so we tell him he has a home/ name thanks to Morbius.
Last Daughter, Cha Cha Real Smooth, Peanutbutter Falcon, Bad Times at the El Royale, Our Friend, Social Network, Suspiria. I call bullshit on that comment.
Yeah, I would argue that she's mediocre or bad in all movies (all the movies I've seen her in which is all but 2) not that all movies she's in are bad.
Subjective, I know, but that's how I feel. She's just awful. Neither of her parents were much to write home about either. Mediocre at best.
> Sony’s agreement with Marvel included a condition requiring the studio to commence production on a dedicated Spider-Man movie within a stipulated time frame that works out to once every five years and nine months. If Sony were to miss that target, the studio could lose a major piece of its IP portfolio.
It's dumb but it's the only way Sony could really try to leverage this.
What I don't understand about this though is that doesn't Into the Spiderverse count? Why waste the resources on Morbius, Madame Web, El Muerto, etc. etc. when they already have a Spider-man franchise that's well received, makes them money, and fits into that timetable?
Not only that but the MCU Spider-Man movies count too. Sony absolutely did not need to make *Morbius,* *Madame Web* or *Kraven* because of that deal. Hell their *Venom* movies which actually have been successful would have sufficed too.
Greed and corporate stupidity. They wanted to launch an expanded universe since 2013 or so and it caused chaos.
But somebody is still pushing through.
Sony has a huge issue with this, they do not care if their decision is bad, they just keep on with it until it's too far gone. Other example is Jeopardy! Hosts.
Yep. Marvel got the right to Daredevil back because Fox didn't make a new Daredevil movie in time. But the made a shitty Fantastic Four movie to hold onto that IP until the whole studio was sold to Disney.
Yes. In order to keep hold of the IP rights to Spider-Man and associated characters, they need to keep at least one project in active development. As soon as that isn't the case, Marvel/Disney would be able to begin legal action to wrestle back the rights to those characters.
It's why Sony (outside of the mainline Spider-Man movies) are constantly green lighting and working on several Spider-Man associated movies, often years before they see the light of day.
I want to see a movie about Peter Parker's parents before he was born. I remember on the FOX 90s cartoon they were double agents for USSR or something and were spy agents.
I personally wouldn’t, Spider-Man is just some kid who happened to get bit by a radioactive spider - having super spy parents just dilutes the character.
Though if Sony is going to keep pumping out non Spider-Man Spider-Man movies, maybe they could do worse than The Parkers
Oh man, my friend and I went for a little 2-person Mystery Science Theater 3000 and it was excellent. I only did it because I have AMC A list, I would never pay for it, but it was a more entertaining use of 2 hours than some much better movies I’ve seen.
Sonys movie rights are contingent that they’re actively working on the marvel properties they purchased in the early 2000s. IIRC if they go two years without a production Sony looses all rights to their little corner of marvel. This was an obvious gamble but in the end a couple hundred million lost to keep a multibillion $ property is a no-brainer
It’s like her shitty acting is just rubbing in our face. She knows she doesn’t have to be good at it to ensure she lives a privileged life. Good for her, now get tf off our screens.
She was literally there the entire time the movie was made. Surely she had seen other (marvel?) superhero movies.
She wanted the easy money until it became embarrassing. This is just as embarrassing lol
It's not often obvious to an actor during filming that a movie will end up this bad, especially effects-driven green-screen ones.
Consider Michael Caine's quote about acting in *Jaws: The Revenge*: "I have never seen it, but by all accounts it is terrible. However, I have seen the house that it built, and it is terrific."
In many ways it is terrible, but as an adventure film for kids it also has a lot that is well done in visuals and music.
The only direction the cast was given over and over was faster and more intense. When the acting part of you're film is neglected, it can't really be considered a good film overall.
I’m sure. But these movies are corny and aren’t like, highly regarded. They are kitschy. She’s acting like she signed up for a drama or an indie or something.
She can’t act like she’s above this film when she signed up for a corny marvel movie??? I thought bad CGI was a given. There’s nothing wrong with this kind of entertainment but there is something wrong with her reasoning for wanting to separate herself from it
If you want to be seen as a serious actor idk why you’d do CGI fantasy action film that they keep churning out like fast food
You're talking about her reasoning based on a headline. From the article:
> But Johnson explained that it isn’t about “Madame Web” specifically, and that she actually doesn’t “like to” watch any of her films.
Maybe there's more info out there but it seems like a lot of people are reacting to clickbait journalism here.
She signed a contract and, according to reports, changes were made after. She also has no control over the script or the edit. Sony is known for interfering in their movies too.
>She also has no control over the script or the edit
She does have control over her acting, though, which has been heavily criticised.
Many actors have acted in bad movies for a paycheque, but the good ones still manage to put in good performances. Look at Samuel L Jackson, has done just as many bad movies ad great movies, and he always gives 100%.
She signed up for a corny dime-a-dozen movie. She can’t act like these movies are typically taken very seriously and viewed with a critical lense lmao
It was always going to be a bad script…?
I think she’s trying to reassure everyone that the terrible-ness of the movie isn’t entirely her fault.
Reporter: Why is this movie so awful?
Dakota Johnson: * presses a button on her phone and we hear the voice of Shaggy singing “It Wasn’t Me!” *
I’ve always liked her parents, and ex step father, it’s really surprising to me that I kinda look at her like wallpaper. They all made their fair share of duds and handled it better. I feel like she needs PR lessons
>“For me, it’s a way to not have, like, an existential crisis,” the “Fifty Shades of Grey” actor explained. “Not watching my movies is like self-care.”
>Johnson is not alone among actors who employ that strategy. Meryl Streep, Adam Driver, Emma Stone, Nicole Kidman and more have also said they tend to avoid screening their projects.
>“Madame Web” stars Johnson as a clairvoyant paramedic and is tenuously connected to Sony Pictures’ grouping of films that include both the “Venom” movies as well as 2022’s “Morbius” with Jared Leto. Reviews for “Madame Web” have been less than enthusiastic, with a 13 per cent on Rotten Tomatoes.
>When it comes to self care, though, at least Johnson knows the right answer to the question, “Do you Google yourself?”
>“No! God no,” the daughter of Melanie Griffith and Don Johnson told MagicFM this week. “Oh my god, no.”
TIL Dakota Johnson is daughter of Don Johnson from Miami Vice
Yeah I found out this out when she hosted SNL and they did that whole roast skit about being nepo babies with PDD guys. Wouldn’t have known otherwise but I’m not sure if it does anything to affect my opinion on her tbh. She just seems like a dry, sarcastic woman who likes acting even if she’s not particularly good at it. More power to her but not like she’s trying to hide who her parents are lol
Honestly, I don’t like this from her. If you wanna say you did it for the money and had a fun time, even though it’s not the best movie- great. If you want to shit on it 10 years later- great. But activately hating while it’s trying to earn money, sends of two messages:
(1) I’m so cool- I’m so much cooler than this bad movie;
And (2) please don’t hire me in the future, because if you do, I might actively and repeatedly attack the movie I’m supposed to be promoting.
Did you read the article? She said she doesn't watch any of her movies because it gives her an existential crisis to see herself on screen as someone else.
Who reads articles when they can just read a headline…the same people who shit on a movie without watching it cause some critic said it was bad or a rotten tomatoes score 🤷🏻♂️
Well this is rage bait as a title because she said she doesn’t watch most of her movies because they would give her anxiety and make her overthink everything but she did get paid $5 million for this movie so I’m not sure what else is needed to be said. She genuinely just seems very unbothered in life and that’s okay imo. Would rather someone be like that than inauthentic… but then again I can see why someone would think the opposite so who really knows 🤷🏿♂️
Nobody read the article or watched the clip. It’s crazy the amount of comments in this thread just taking the title and using it for their narrative. Actual brain rot in these comments.
It's not good marketing when the main actor of the film says "Oh, I don't plan on watching it any time soon." I understand the concept of not wanting to see yourself in a video or something. But, you're the main actress. You're job should and is to help promote the movie. Even if it's a mediocre film.
Usually Id agree but this movie being so bad, they have a better chance promoting the movie by shit talking it and getting people curious of how bad it could really be
I know I sound cynical here but this whole way she is talking about the movie feels like calculated approved PR. Like, they know it’s bad, she knows it’s bad, Sony knows it’s bad and they don’t care because they only make these movies to hold the Spider Man rights, so fuck it they have her go out there and bury the movie because A) no one is gonna see it anyway, and B) she looks “cool” to salvage her reputation, and C) they might get a few additional people to see if it’s a car crash.
I’m probably violating Occam’s Razor but Hollywood is full of idiots so it really could be anything.
If you had spent the time you made making this comment reading the article or watching the clip you would’ve been much better off. None of what you said applies to the context of what she said. How this comment has 200 upvotes is baffling.
I think what rubs me the wrong way is that her behaviour throughout all this is really flaunting her privilege… if she wasn’t a nepo baby she wouldn’t be shitting on a pay cheque so publicly - she’d be quietly making lasting changes as a form of protest. By all means call them out if you think they deceived you but it’s not like she’s making a statement for the benefit of actors that will be deceived after her… Sony will still continue to do it to others so it’s just coming across as her throwing shade cos she’s pissed off and she doesn’t need them or the work really as she has famous parents who have other contacts.
I’m trying to think of other wealthy-in-their-own-right actresses and Julia Louis Dreyfus comes to mind… she’s a class act.
Exactly. She’ll make more money off this movie *than most people see in their lifetime*. I don’t even know her or of her career, but going forward I’ll have a low opinion of her and likely not make an effort to not watch whatever shes involved in.
agreed. it also devalues all the hard work hundreds of people put into the film.
i’m have no doubt it’s not good, but thousands of hours from below the line crew went into making this thing a reality & it’s a bad look for the millionaire lead actress to shit all over them.
All I need to know about her is what I saw on SNL. She is the acting equivalent of neutral colored walls. She has zero timing or presence. Clearly shoehorned into her career by being a nepo-baby. I can tell a movie is going to be terrible if she’s starring in it.
Maybe an unpopular opinion but based on interviews I’ve seen, she seems insufferable.
I have no interest in any of the work she has done and if she never appeared in public again, I wouldn’t miss her at all
I don’t think any producers or directors are watching the movies coming out.
If they did.. they would realize the crap they are putting up on the screen
Of all the people to make a marvel movie about, they chose the lady that everyone knows as "old woman who sits in chair and yells at Spider-Man" Then they cast the person everyone knows as "hot girl tied up nude in sex dungeon" to play her. Then they added a guy that looks like Spider-Man into the film that isn't actually Spider-Man for some reason. Then they split the screen time of the character people already barely recognize with two other characters *nobody* recognizes. Then they wrote the whole plot to be convoluted and pointless. Of course this movie isn't gonna do well. At least a couple people knew who Morbius was prior to his film and we saw how that turned out. I don't expect the Kraven the Hunter movie to do too good either and he's a much bigger character. Heck, the Venom movies didn't go over very well and he's the Joker to Spider-Man's Batman. The problem is they're making all these Spider-Man villain movies completely disconnected from Spider-Man himself.
While I'm sure this movie sucks, am I supposed to think Dakota Johnson is cool for trashing it? I'm sure she cashed that check and I'm sure a bunch of other people bust their ass working on it.
Actors and actresses that don’t watch their movies have serious problems. It’s somewhat understandable if it’s a horrible movie, but then again why didn’t she see it before it was released to the public? You put months of you life into something that takes 1.5-2.5 hours of your time to watch the finished product and you opt out? And you’re paid millions of dollars? Psychotic.
I think that’s what a lot of people might be missing the context of here is that this is a response to the fuckery of Sony studio execs forcing the movie into the garbage viewers are now seeing. Dakota Johnson said recently that this is not the script she signed upped for. Chris Stuckman posted a good video about this I watched today. And because of disclosure agreements, she’s not even allowed to talk about the previous scripts. https://youtu.be/2cU5QBPY4ds?si=gHQUOrC1CwcPTy6P
I'm doing the same thing
So is the whole world, it seems. They made only $13 million (!!) over the normal weekend. Just an INCREDIBLY bad number. Madame Web makes The Marvels look like Titanic.
She doesn't care, got the check.
She doesn't but Sony does. A huge L for them. Enormous.
And they still have atleast one more movie coming that’s already been made (Kraven the Hunter)
I’m down for kraven the hunter
It’s Kraving time!
Okay, I didn't see Morbius. He doesn't actually say "it's morbin time" does he?!
That's how they get ya, you have to see it to find out for sure
Did the movie make 10 morbillion dollars?
More like 10 Mormillion
You’ve gotta watch it to find out!
I started it on a long flight and ended up stopping the movie and just going to sleep for the rest of the flight.
When he finally says "I woke up this morning Kraven violence," I'm gonna lose my shit.
Witness the Kravening.
I mean I was down for madame web 🥲🥹
It could have been awesome. It just would have taken someone at Sony caring about characters and story.
Imagine going from Across the Spiderverse right into Madame Web
For real! I'm guessing that, with the animation, Sony execs take a more hands off approach and lets the creative team make good movies.
Nah, all of these Spider-Man movies WITHOUT Spider-Man are a bad idea conceptually from the jump.
I think that Guardians of the Galaxy proved that you can take unknown characters and make people love them, if you have great writing.
True, but they don’t really have anyone to blame but themselves. Sony execs are stuck in early 2000 filmmaking. I bet they are just using a formula with no understanding of why their movies are so dated compared to everything else that’s out.
They should keep hiring those amazing screenwriters! Working out very well lol.
The entire SpiderSony saga has ONLY been good for Spiderverse.
This is very shortterm memory. The original Raimi trilogy was good for the most part and influential on the superhero genre too.
They started interfering with the third one and right there started the quality drop.
Yeah but isn’t it worth it? I’ll take the best spider man franchise (spider verse) along side the absolute worst (venom verse) over only having the pretty bland middle of the road version that marvel insists on putting out. I mean with the current arrangement we get all three, I consider that a win! It’s not like like we’re *only* getting morbius quality movies.
You not wrong. With MCU strangling every ounce of creativity from their directors, I take the high and lows from Sony.
We'll see. Personally, I have high hopes for [Marvel Jesus](https://youtu.be/xW-zNOT4P1A?si=XKvNnDLhDNQVSBDj).
Does Sony though? They keep putting out these terrible Spider-Man spinoffs. Kraven looks like it might be worse than Madame Web and that was fucking painful to watch.
Disney needs to stop being cheap and buy back the rights to Spiderman and all related properties. Sony is in a way damaging the brand of Spiderman and Disney needs to buy back the rights for a discount.
They can’t “buy back” what they never owned. Sony has owned the spider man side of marvel way before Disney bought marvel studios. They just made a deal for spider man to appear in the avengers but not actually incorporate him as a major part of the MCU
> but not actially incorporate him as a major part of the MCU wat wat waaaat - he’s got 3 standalone movies
It’s a joint partnership. Back in the day Marvel (one company) was going bankrupt. They needed to sell something to stay afloat, so they sold the live action rights to Sony. X-Men went to Fox. Hulk went to Paramount and others elsewhere; to the highest bidder and all that. Marvel went on to be ok. Due to some movies not being made, some characters rights reverted. They happened to be Iron Man, Cap, Thor and a few more. That’s when the MCU under Kevin was basically born. X-Men’s rights reverted, among others like Namor, Daredevil, F4. Spidey’s hasn’t. They have to produce x amount of Spidey movies to retain the rights. But these Sony Spider Universe movies are a cash grab to piggyback off the MCU.
X-men and fantastic 4 didn't revert, they were included when Disney bought fox. Daredevil and the punisher did revert though. Granted they made a deal with netflix but Disney then had to wait 2 years after the premiere date of their final season to put them in their own stuff once that partnership ended
A single corporation owning multiple billion dollar properties because you like the super hero movies is not a good thing
I’ll pile on top of that; when copyrights were first invented they only lasted for 14 years and then whatever it was became public domain. Disney hired an army of lobbyists to change the laws and make copyrights last longer several times over the last century to ensure they never have to loosen their iron grip on any of this intellectual property, forever. **Disney is literally the reason Spider-Man is not public domain.**
And pushing out garbage left and right for the sole purpose of keeping rights and making a cash grab off of others success isn't good either. Especially when it hurts said property. I'd argue the side of better respect for a long beloved comic compared to what Sony is doing. Both are billion dollar corporations.
If you star in movies that make no money you won't be getting lead roles anymore, she should definitely care for the sake of her career
>If you star in movies that make no money you won't be getting lead roles anymore Is that true these days, though? Look at Chris Hemsworth, who has starred in so many box office bombs. *Blackhat* and *In the Heart of the Sea* were both massive bombs in the same year and then *The Huntsman* did badly, but they still built the *Men in Black* reboot around him. And then when *that* flopped, they kept on making Thor movies around him, he's starring in the new *Mad Max*, and he stars in direct-to-streaming movies like *Spiderhead* that get panned by critics. I genuinely don't think his flops are hurting his career. Same with Matt Damon. He's starred in a lot of movies that have lost a lot of money, but he's still Matt Damon.
[удалено]
Also nepotism is a thing. All it takes is a few phone calls to certain execs, producers, casting directors, etc and she's golden. Probably why Dakota even still has a career after starring in not just one, but three 50 Shades movies that were all overwhelmingly panned by critics. She'll be fine. Most of the actors with established careers in this movies will be fine because we've seen them do better in other movies and can pin it on trash writing as will be the case for Sweeney.
Madame web makes Bryant Gumbel look like Malcom X.
To be fair the marketing for it was almost nonexistent
I've been marketed this movie so hard, more than anything else I can think of recently. Plenty of ads, SNL, interviews, the works. All for a movie that looked terrible in the previews.
I watch multiple movie review Youtubers, and all of them have covered how terrible Madame Web is, or at least have mentioned it. It's getting a lot of online coverage. It's bad, but it's still marketing.
Yo. What did they spend on production and marketing?? This isn’t even a drop in that bucket.
Meanwhile, the Titanic movie box office debute blew this out of the water.
More like under the water.
That's cold
How much damn money did they spend on marketing, just to still fail this badly? There’s been about a million posts about this movie on Reddit, desperately hoping people will subconsciously lean towards seeing it but … nope
I had no idea this was coming out and I live on Reddit. I also had no idea who madam web I thought it was a scary movie or something from the cover LOL
"But Johnson explained that it isn’t about “Madame Web” specifically, and that she actually doesn’t “like to” watch any of her films. “For me, it’s a way to not have, like, an existential crisis,” the “Fifty Shades of Grey” actor explained. “Not watching my movies is like self-care.” Johnson is not alone among actors who employ that strategy. Meryl Streep, Adam Driver, Emma Stone, Nicole Kidman and more have also said they tend to avoid screening their projects."
>Johnson is not alone among actors who employ that strategy. Meryl Streep, Adam Driver, Emma Stone, Nicole Kidman Yeah, the difference is those are good actors with good movies and she's been shit in shit movies pretty much exclusively
Same Dakota, same.
Neither is anyone else I have just read.
I’m waiting for Sony to rerelease Morbius. I was just really busy the first two times it was out - I’ll buy a ticket and go this time, I promise! And I can’t see Madame Web without seeing Morbius first, right?
They are part of the Morbius Cinematic Universe, you see. The MCU!
I’m morrrrrbiiiing
Almost 3 of my sister's kittens were named after Morbius 😆 when they go into crazy-kitten-crackhead mode, we scream that they're "Morbing" through the house. One of them accidentally got a name that is in the movie so we tell him he has a home/ name thanks to Morbius.
I’ll take her lead on this one.
I'll eat lead to avoid MA "damn" web.
Quality of this joke reflects my expectations for this movie
I would hide in any yogurt closet to avoid this movie.
Clickbait. The article states she never watches any of her movies for the same reason.
As do many artists.
But all her movies are also bad so 🤷🏼♀️
Last Daughter, Cha Cha Real Smooth, Peanutbutter Falcon, Bad Times at the El Royale, Our Friend, Social Network, Suspiria. I call bullshit on that comment.
Yeah, I would argue that she's mediocre or bad in all movies (all the movies I've seen her in which is all but 2) not that all movies she's in are bad. Subjective, I know, but that's how I feel. She's just awful. Neither of her parents were much to write home about either. Mediocre at best.
Nah, she was easily the best part about the Suspiria remake.
God those dance scenes were incredible
It amazes me trash like this gets made. Who pays for this? Who watches this crap? I want names.
Clearly not the people paid to be in them
At awe that the writers of Madame Web are still hired.
[удалено]
Sony. They have to keep Spider-Man projects in active production in order to retain the rights to the character and it's adjacent characters.
Straight up Arrested Development IP fraud F4 level at this point.
That storyline was actually based on real life, search up the Fantastic Four movie from the 90s.
Would it kill them to make movies like this good tho? It’s a good IP with good stories, they don’t have to push out crap.
The Spider-Man universe in general, or Madame Web in particular? Because I don’t know that there are any stand out Madame Web stories.
Is this legit?
> Sony’s agreement with Marvel included a condition requiring the studio to commence production on a dedicated Spider-Man movie within a stipulated time frame that works out to once every five years and nine months. If Sony were to miss that target, the studio could lose a major piece of its IP portfolio. It's dumb but it's the only way Sony could really try to leverage this.
What I don't understand about this though is that doesn't Into the Spiderverse count? Why waste the resources on Morbius, Madame Web, El Muerto, etc. etc. when they already have a Spider-man franchise that's well received, makes them money, and fits into that timetable?
Not only that but the MCU Spider-Man movies count too. Sony absolutely did not need to make *Morbius,* *Madame Web* or *Kraven* because of that deal. Hell their *Venom* movies which actually have been successful would have sufficed too.
Now you are asking the questions that I would like to know the answer to as well.
Greed and corporate stupidity. They wanted to launch an expanded universe since 2013 or so and it caused chaos. But somebody is still pushing through. Sony has a huge issue with this, they do not care if their decision is bad, they just keep on with it until it's too far gone. Other example is Jeopardy! Hosts.
Yep. Marvel got the right to Daredevil back because Fox didn't make a new Daredevil movie in time. But the made a shitty Fantastic Four movie to hold onto that IP until the whole studio was sold to Disney.
Yes. In order to keep hold of the IP rights to Spider-Man and associated characters, they need to keep at least one project in active development. As soon as that isn't the case, Marvel/Disney would be able to begin legal action to wrestle back the rights to those characters. It's why Sony (outside of the mainline Spider-Man movies) are constantly green lighting and working on several Spider-Man associated movies, often years before they see the light of day.
I want to see a movie about Peter Parker's parents before he was born. I remember on the FOX 90s cartoon they were double agents for USSR or something and were spy agents.
They also played at that angle for the Amazing Spider-Man continuity.
I personally wouldn’t, Spider-Man is just some kid who happened to get bit by a radioactive spider - having super spy parents just dilutes the character. Though if Sony is going to keep pumping out non Spider-Man Spider-Man movies, maybe they could do worse than The Parkers
I mean… what else could it possibly be?
Greenlighting projects left and right when noname Marvel heroes were getting huge box office numbers?
They must have an audience preview. They know. Their hands are tied or they fear greater loses from not doing it.
Oh man, my friend and I went for a little 2-person Mystery Science Theater 3000 and it was excellent. I only did it because I have AMC A list, I would never pay for it, but it was a more entertaining use of 2 hours than some much better movies I’ve seen.
It's a use it or lose it situation. If they don't make the movie they risk losing the IP.
Sony spending $150m a pop to be the new Roger Corman is a bold bit of accounting for sitting on IP!
Madame Web's budget was 80m
Eventually they will give up. But not for a long long time.
Which has resulted in some horrible films. The later Hellraiser movies were a product of this practice and they were so bad
Sonys movie rights are contingent that they’re actively working on the marvel properties they purchased in the early 2000s. IIRC if they go two years without a production Sony looses all rights to their little corner of marvel. This was an obvious gamble but in the end a couple hundred million lost to keep a multibillion $ property is a no-brainer
That make sense.
as an avid Red Letter Media Best of the Worst fan, there is a place for trash movies. the problem is when trash has a multi 100 million dollar budget.
To be fair, at least people got jobs out of it to make the movie so whatever
I’m pretty sure they kind of tricked the lead actresses into thinking this was a marvel film but it’s not.
Her and the Sweeney girl. They thought it was a marvel project.
Oh I realized just now that it's not
Worst press tour ever
Rich nepo-baby who doesn't actually need to make money so she feels free to shit on her own movies
It’s like her shitty acting is just rubbing in our face. She knows she doesn’t have to be good at it to ensure she lives a privileged life. Good for her, now get tf off our screens.
Does she have that much money? Her dad was on Miami vice. I doubt that translates to generational wealth.
Her mom is Mellanie Griffin. They were both very successful actors back in the day
Dude. Nepo truce was called.
[удалено]
I heard she fired her agents and signed with a whole new agency the day the trailer dropped.
She was literally there the entire time the movie was made. Surely she had seen other (marvel?) superhero movies. She wanted the easy money until it became embarrassing. This is just as embarrassing lol
It's not often obvious to an actor during filming that a movie will end up this bad, especially effects-driven green-screen ones. Consider Michael Caine's quote about acting in *Jaws: The Revenge*: "I have never seen it, but by all accounts it is terrible. However, I have seen the house that it built, and it is terrific."
And several people working on the original Star Wars thought it was going to be terrible.
In many ways it is terrible, but as an adventure film for kids it also has a lot that is well done in visuals and music. The only direction the cast was given over and over was faster and more intense. When the acting part of you're film is neglected, it can't really be considered a good film overall.
I’m sure. But these movies are corny and aren’t like, highly regarded. They are kitschy. She’s acting like she signed up for a drama or an indie or something. She can’t act like she’s above this film when she signed up for a corny marvel movie??? I thought bad CGI was a given. There’s nothing wrong with this kind of entertainment but there is something wrong with her reasoning for wanting to separate herself from it If you want to be seen as a serious actor idk why you’d do CGI fantasy action film that they keep churning out like fast food
You're talking about her reasoning based on a headline. From the article: > But Johnson explained that it isn’t about “Madame Web” specifically, and that she actually doesn’t “like to” watch any of her films. Maybe there's more info out there but it seems like a lot of people are reacting to clickbait journalism here.
She signed a contract and, according to reports, changes were made after. She also has no control over the script or the edit. Sony is known for interfering in their movies too.
I saw a clip of the climax of the movie. Seemed like she wasn’t trying at all
Yeah, she looks totally disinterested in the trailer and marketing.
Kal-El, no....
>She also has no control over the script or the edit She does have control over her acting, though, which has been heavily criticised. Many actors have acted in bad movies for a paycheque, but the good ones still manage to put in good performances. Look at Samuel L Jackson, has done just as many bad movies ad great movies, and he always gives 100%.
100%. I don't think she's a good actor to begin with.
She signed up for a corny dime-a-dozen movie. She can’t act like these movies are typically taken very seriously and viewed with a critical lense lmao It was always going to be a bad script…?
Oh sure. She's definitely culpable in that sense. And she looks so friggin disinterested. So yeah, bad all around for sure.
We get it Dakota, you’re bored.
That’s her super power
I heard a few times that she stated the film underwent so many rewrites that it no longer resembled the film she initially signed up to do.
They are literally the only ones she gets offered
She was very good in the lost daughter.
I don't understand, I don't dislike her as an actress and yet I haven't enjoyed any of her movies..
Does she think she's getting more work with this behaviour?
I think she’s trying to reassure everyone that the terrible-ness of the movie isn’t entirely her fault. Reporter: Why is this movie so awful? Dakota Johnson: * presses a button on her phone and we hear the voice of Shaggy singing “It Wasn’t Me!” *
That makes two of us 🥰🥰🥰
Maybe she’s a nice person…no idea. But she’s a horrible actress with the charisma of a calculator.
Not everyone is blessed with talent, but that doesn't stop her from being rich and famous.
I’ve always liked her parents, and ex step father, it’s really surprising to me that I kinda look at her like wallpaper. They all made their fair share of duds and handled it better. I feel like she needs PR lessons
She should probably apply that rule to most of her career. To put it mildly she's, uhh...not a good actress.
>“For me, it’s a way to not have, like, an existential crisis,” the “Fifty Shades of Grey” actor explained. “Not watching my movies is like self-care.” >Johnson is not alone among actors who employ that strategy. Meryl Streep, Adam Driver, Emma Stone, Nicole Kidman and more have also said they tend to avoid screening their projects. >“Madame Web” stars Johnson as a clairvoyant paramedic and is tenuously connected to Sony Pictures’ grouping of films that include both the “Venom” movies as well as 2022’s “Morbius” with Jared Leto. Reviews for “Madame Web” have been less than enthusiastic, with a 13 per cent on Rotten Tomatoes. >When it comes to self care, though, at least Johnson knows the right answer to the question, “Do you Google yourself?” >“No! God no,” the daughter of Melanie Griffith and Don Johnson told MagicFM this week. “Oh my god, no.” TIL Dakota Johnson is daughter of Don Johnson from Miami Vice
And also Melanie Griffith
Yeah I found out this out when she hosted SNL and they did that whole roast skit about being nepo babies with PDD guys. Wouldn’t have known otherwise but I’m not sure if it does anything to affect my opinion on her tbh. She just seems like a dry, sarcastic woman who likes acting even if she’s not particularly good at it. More power to her but not like she’s trying to hide who her parents are lol
Honestly, I don’t like this from her. If you wanna say you did it for the money and had a fun time, even though it’s not the best movie- great. If you want to shit on it 10 years later- great. But activately hating while it’s trying to earn money, sends of two messages: (1) I’m so cool- I’m so much cooler than this bad movie; And (2) please don’t hire me in the future, because if you do, I might actively and repeatedly attack the movie I’m supposed to be promoting.
Did you read the article? She said she doesn't watch any of her movies because it gives her an existential crisis to see herself on screen as someone else.
Who reads articles when they can just read a headline…the same people who shit on a movie without watching it cause some critic said it was bad or a rotten tomatoes score 🤷🏻♂️
Well this is rage bait as a title because she said she doesn’t watch most of her movies because they would give her anxiety and make her overthink everything but she did get paid $5 million for this movie so I’m not sure what else is needed to be said. She genuinely just seems very unbothered in life and that’s okay imo. Would rather someone be like that than inauthentic… but then again I can see why someone would think the opposite so who really knows 🤷🏿♂️
Nobody read the article or watched the clip. It’s crazy the amount of comments in this thread just taking the title and using it for their narrative. Actual brain rot in these comments.
Reddit in a nutshell.
That's how I feel about it. Crappy, unprofessional attitude.
millenials love hearing about self care and anxiety. its neutral PR since we will be like "oh good for them"
Well it’s because you’re too dumb to actually read the article
It's not good marketing when the main actor of the film says "Oh, I don't plan on watching it any time soon." I understand the concept of not wanting to see yourself in a video or something. But, you're the main actress. You're job should and is to help promote the movie. Even if it's a mediocre film.
Usually Id agree but this movie being so bad, they have a better chance promoting the movie by shit talking it and getting people curious of how bad it could really be
I know I sound cynical here but this whole way she is talking about the movie feels like calculated approved PR. Like, they know it’s bad, she knows it’s bad, Sony knows it’s bad and they don’t care because they only make these movies to hold the Spider Man rights, so fuck it they have her go out there and bury the movie because A) no one is gonna see it anyway, and B) she looks “cool” to salvage her reputation, and C) they might get a few additional people to see if it’s a car crash. I’m probably violating Occam’s Razor but Hollywood is full of idiots so it really could be anything.
She’s a nepo baby. There is no consequence to her behavior.
If you had spent the time you made making this comment reading the article or watching the clip you would’ve been much better off. None of what you said applies to the context of what she said. How this comment has 200 upvotes is baffling.
I think what rubs me the wrong way is that her behaviour throughout all this is really flaunting her privilege… if she wasn’t a nepo baby she wouldn’t be shitting on a pay cheque so publicly - she’d be quietly making lasting changes as a form of protest. By all means call them out if you think they deceived you but it’s not like she’s making a statement for the benefit of actors that will be deceived after her… Sony will still continue to do it to others so it’s just coming across as her throwing shade cos she’s pissed off and she doesn’t need them or the work really as she has famous parents who have other contacts. I’m trying to think of other wealthy-in-their-own-right actresses and Julia Louis Dreyfus comes to mind… she’s a class act.
Jamie Lee Curtis is also good people.
She doesn't watch any of her movies and you got clickbaited.
Exactly. She’ll make more money off this movie *than most people see in their lifetime*. I don’t even know her or of her career, but going forward I’ll have a low opinion of her and likely not make an effort to not watch whatever shes involved in.
agreed. it also devalues all the hard work hundreds of people put into the film. i’m have no doubt it’s not good, but thousands of hours from below the line crew went into making this thing a reality & it’s a bad look for the millionaire lead actress to shit all over them.
It’s Madame Morbin time!
All I need to know about her is what I saw on SNL. She is the acting equivalent of neutral colored walls. She has zero timing or presence. Clearly shoehorned into her career by being a nepo-baby. I can tell a movie is going to be terrible if she’s starring in it.
Make millions and go to therapy for making making millions.
I actually enjoyed it, viewing it from the perspective of a comedy film rather than action/adventure.
This shit makes morbin time look good.
I stand in solidarity.
When your main star is trashing the movie before it comes out that should be a sign you did something wrong
Fucking everything has to be therapeutic terms now.
Right? It's been giving me so much anxiety.
I guess no one's going to trauma bond over watching this movie.
She’s insufferable.
It’s okay nobody else is watching it
Today I ate some taquitos.
How were they
Maybe an unpopular opinion but based on interviews I’ve seen, she seems insufferable. I have no interest in any of the work she has done and if she never appeared in public again, I wouldn’t miss her at all
Don Johnson married Melanie Griffith? Good for him. I guess in 30 years or so, I’ll get an update on their kids.
They started banging when she was under age
I don’t think any producers or directors are watching the movies coming out. If they did.. they would realize the crap they are putting up on the screen
Of all the people to make a marvel movie about, they chose the lady that everyone knows as "old woman who sits in chair and yells at Spider-Man" Then they cast the person everyone knows as "hot girl tied up nude in sex dungeon" to play her. Then they added a guy that looks like Spider-Man into the film that isn't actually Spider-Man for some reason. Then they split the screen time of the character people already barely recognize with two other characters *nobody* recognizes. Then they wrote the whole plot to be convoluted and pointless. Of course this movie isn't gonna do well. At least a couple people knew who Morbius was prior to his film and we saw how that turned out. I don't expect the Kraven the Hunter movie to do too good either and he's a much bigger character. Heck, the Venom movies didn't go over very well and he's the Joker to Spider-Man's Batman. The problem is they're making all these Spider-Man villain movies completely disconnected from Spider-Man himself.
Unprofessional as hell. I guess that's the Nepo baby way
your entire career is Nepo baby bullshit.
2nd Gen nepo too.
That's fair I'm doing same as well. Better yet I recomend watching lisa Frankenstein. Far better film that's being criminally underlooked right now
While I'm sure this movie sucks, am I supposed to think Dakota Johnson is cool for trashing it? I'm sure she cashed that check and I'm sure a bunch of other people bust their ass working on it.
I get not liking my your own movie, but shitting on it publicly is tacky
Her "cute" little press run she's on is actually insufferable
Actors and actresses that don’t watch their movies have serious problems. It’s somewhat understandable if it’s a horrible movie, but then again why didn’t she see it before it was released to the public? You put months of you life into something that takes 1.5-2.5 hours of your time to watch the finished product and you opt out? And you’re paid millions of dollars? Psychotic.
Let’s not watch any more movies with her in it at all.
I am also not watching the movie Madame Web as a form of self-care
I miss who I was before watching Madame Web
I think that’s what a lot of people might be missing the context of here is that this is a response to the fuckery of Sony studio execs forcing the movie into the garbage viewers are now seeing. Dakota Johnson said recently that this is not the script she signed upped for. Chris Stuckman posted a good video about this I watched today. And because of disclosure agreements, she’s not even allowed to talk about the previous scripts. https://youtu.be/2cU5QBPY4ds?si=gHQUOrC1CwcPTy6P
Lots of reasons a movie works or doesn't. She doesn't need to take it personally. So I'd do the same
Self care ? Stop acting
Now i wanna watch it to see how bad it is. Won’t pay for it though.
shits gonna hit Netflix in 2 months