|
|
Post by fartyfartsalot on Sept 14, 2018 6:59:33 GMT
|
|
Riddick
Sophomore
@riddick
Posts: 160
Likes: 47
 
|
Post by Riddick on Sept 14, 2018 9:19:45 GMT
Doesn't matter. Movie will be flop.
|
|
|
|
Post by Hauntedknight87 on Sept 14, 2018 9:33:11 GMT
Fucking stupid. Just like the fucking dumbasses over at fox making New Mutants PG-13.
I really hope Sony Pictures goes bankrupt, fucking useless studio that keeps fucking everything up. Ghostbusters, Resident Evil, Slenderman and now Venom.
Fuck Sony pictures and fuck anyone who defends this decision.
|
|
|
|
Post by blockbusted on Sept 14, 2018 12:55:30 GMT
Fucking stupid. Just like the fucking dumbasses over at fox making New Mutants PG-13. I really hope Sony Pictures goes bankrupt, fucking useless studio that keeps fucking everything up. Ghostbusters, Resident Evil, Slenderman and now Venom. Fuck Sony pictures and fuck anyone who defends this decision. Screen Gems, a Sony subsidiary, also ruined my country’s comic book series called ‘Priest’. |
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Sept 14, 2018 13:00:01 GMT
Looks like garbage whether it's R rated or not.
|
|
|
|
Post by coldenhaulfield on Sept 14, 2018 13:29:27 GMT
Looks like garbage whether it's R rated or not. Meh. It looks like a "throwback" superhero movie to me, which feels weirdly refreshing. You know? Couldn't you see this flick coming out circa like 2004-2007? I loved the pre-MCU era, before superhero flicks (save Nolan's) became a literal joke -- insofar as... they became basically cringe comedies with unthinkably huge budgets made to appeal to morons and small children. Plus, it's VENOM, mang. Have some respect! The very idea of a Venom movie onsceeen is an inherently superior, more interesting, and unquestionably cooler proposition than the premise of every single MCU movie except Infinity War and arguably Homecoming, regardless of how much you liked (or disliked) the execution of the films we got. Obviously I'd prefer an ultra-violent, R-rated movie, but at least I'm not offended by the very idea of the film's existence as in the case with Ant Mang, Black Panther, Homecoming, Captain Marvel, Civil War, and whatever else. Ugh. So, yeah. I'mma see that piece of shit opening weekend. |
|
|
|
Post by dazz on Sept 14, 2018 13:50:20 GMT
This maybe a real dumb question but why couldn't they just make 2 cuts of the film and do both?
Like couldn't they do a PG-13 version for the morning exclusively, and R rated for the past 7pm showings and then alternate it inbetween?
I mean theatres will and have done 2d and 3d screening why not an all ages and an adult cut of a film?
|
|
|
|
Post by blockbusted on Sept 14, 2018 13:54:27 GMT
This maybe a real dumb question but why couldn't they just make 2 cuts of the film and do both? Like couldn't they do a PG-13 version for the morning exclusively, and R rated for the past 7pm showings and then alternate it inbetween? I mean theatres will and have done 2d and 3d screening why not an all ages and an adult cut of a film? It’s a real shame that this film has fiasco written all over the place since the design of Venom itself was actually very good. |
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Sept 14, 2018 13:54:53 GMT
Looks like garbage whether it's R rated or not. Meh. It looks like a "throwback" superhero movie to me, which feels weirdly refreshing. You know? Couldn't you see this flick coming out circa like 2004-2007? I loved the pre-MCU era, before superhero flicks (save Nolan's) became a literal joke -- insofar as... they became basically cringe comedies with unthinkably huge budgets made to appeal to morons and small children. Plus, it's VENOM, mang. Have some respect! The very idea of a Venom movie onsceeen is an inherently superior, more interesting, and unquestionably cooler proposition than the premise of every single MCU movie except Infinity War and arguably Homecoming, regardless of how much you liked (or disliked) the execution of the films we got. Obviously I'd prefer an ultra-violent, R-rated movie, but at least I'm not offended by the very idea of the film's existence as in the case with Ant Mang, Black Panther, Homecoming, Captain Marvel, Civil War, and whatever else. Ugh. So, yeah. I'mma see that piece of shit opening weekend. I like the character, I just don't see how you do it without Spider-Man. Even a spinoff would be fine, had he already been introduced in a Spider-Man movie. But this is one of those IP in name only projects, it feels like a hijacking of the concept without any appreciation for what makes the character interesting. The trailers give off this vibe of studio groupthink, "Fans will love how Venom looks!" Fans will love it more if you successfully translate the character, not just his appearance and his powers. They focus on the wrong things (just like the Fox X-Men movies) and it can lead to disaster not only for the film itself, but for future comic book projects. |
|
|
|
Post by coldenhaulfield on Sept 14, 2018 14:00:21 GMT
Meh. It looks like a "throwback" superhero movie to me, which feels weirdly refreshing. You know? Couldn't you see this flick coming out circa like 2004-2007? I loved the pre-MCU era, before superhero flicks (save Nolan's) became a literal joke -- insofar as... they became basically cringe comedies with unthinkably huge budgets made to appeal to morons and small children. Plus, it's VENOM, mang. Have some respect! The very idea of a Venom movie onsceeen is an inherently superior, more interesting, and unquestionably cooler proposition than the premise of every single MCU movie except Infinity War and arguably Homecoming, regardless of how much you liked (or disliked) the execution of the films we got. Obviously I'd prefer an ultra-violent, R-rated movie, but at least I'm not offended by the very idea of the film's existence as in the case with Ant Mang, Black Panther, Homecoming, Captain Marvel, Civil War, and whatever else. Ugh. So, yeah. I'mma see that piece of shit opening weekend. I like the character, I just don't see how you do it without Spider-Man. Even a spinoff would be fine, had he already been introduced in a Spider-Man movie. But this is one of those IP in name only projects, it feels like a hijacking of the concept without any appreciation for what makes the character interesting. The trailers give off this vibe of studio groupthink, "Fans will love how Venom looks!" Fans will love it more if you successfully translate the character, not just his appearance and his powers. They focus on the wrong things (just like the Fox X-Men movies) and it can lead to disaster not only for the film itself, but for future comic book projects. So basically you have legitimate counterpoints and well-considered reasons for not supporting the flick. "That had not occurred to us, Dude." |
|
|
|
Post by blockbusted on Sept 14, 2018 14:01:07 GMT
Meh. It looks like a "throwback" superhero movie to me, which feels weirdly refreshing. You know? Couldn't you see this flick coming out circa like 2004-2007? I loved the pre-MCU era, before superhero flicks (save Nolan's) became a literal joke -- insofar as... they became basically cringe comedies with unthinkably huge budgets made to appeal to morons and small children. Plus, it's VENOM, mang. Have some respect! The very idea of a Venom movie onsceeen is an inherently superior, more interesting, and unquestionably cooler proposition than the premise of every single MCU movie except Infinity War and arguably Homecoming, regardless of how much you liked (or disliked) the execution of the films we got. Obviously I'd prefer an ultra-violent, R-rated movie, but at least I'm not offended by the very idea of the film's existence as in the case with Ant Mang, Black Panther, Homecoming, Captain Marvel, Civil War, and whatever else. Ugh. So, yeah. I'mma see that piece of shit opening weekend. I like the character, I just don't see how you do it without Spider-Man. Even a spinoff would be fine, had he already been introduced in a Spider-Man movie. But this is one of those IP in name only projects, it feels like a hijacking of the concept without any appreciation for what makes the character interesting. The trailers give off this vibe of studio groupthink, "Fans will love how Venom looks!" Fans will love it more if you successfully translate the character, not just his appearance and his powers. They focus on the wrong things (just like the Fox X-Men movies) and it can lead to disaster not only for the film itself, but for future comic book projects. I would like to hear what thenewnexus says about this since ‘Venom’ just turned “kiddie”.  Hee hee hee...  |
|
|
|
Post by coldenhaulfield on Sept 14, 2018 14:03:01 GMT
This maybe a real dumb question but why couldn't they just make 2 cuts of the film and do both? Like couldn't they do a PG-13 version for the morning exclusively, and R rated for the past 7pm showings and then alternate it inbetween? I mean theatres will and have done 2d and 3d screening why not an all ages and an adult cut of a film? Hell, have a PG-13 cut during the day, an R-rated cut for evenings, and then a hyper-gory, incredibly violent NC-17 version that airs the last screening of each night and includes gratuitous nudity verging on outright pornography; it will be called "Venom: the After Dark cut." Innit? |
|
|
|
Post by blockbusted on Sept 14, 2018 14:10:13 GMT
This maybe a real dumb question but why couldn't they just make 2 cuts of the film and do both? Like couldn't they do a PG-13 version for the morning exclusively, and R rated for the past 7pm showings and then alternate it inbetween? I mean theatres will and have done 2d and 3d screening why not an all ages and an adult cut of a film? Hell, have a PG-13 cut during the day, an R-rated cut for evenings, and then a hyper-gory, incredibly violent NC-17 version that airs the last screening of each night and includes gratuitous nudity verging on outright pornography; it will be called "Venom: the After Dark cut." Innit? Hee hee hee... |
|
|
|
Post by Power Ranger on Sept 14, 2018 14:12:48 GMT
That sucks. I wanted an R rating.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Sept 14, 2018 14:14:08 GMT
I like the character, I just don't see how you do it without Spider-Man. Even a spinoff would be fine, had he already been introduced in a Spider-Man movie. But this is one of those IP in name only projects, it feels like a hijacking of the concept without any appreciation for what makes the character interesting. The trailers give off this vibe of studio groupthink, "Fans will love how Venom looks!" Fans will love it more if you successfully translate the character, not just his appearance and his powers. They focus on the wrong things (just like the Fox X-Men movies) and it can lead to disaster not only for the film itself, but for future comic book projects. So basically you have legitimate counterpoints and well-considered reasons for not supporting the flick. "That had not occurred to us, Dude." And I always forget to mention this: I completely understand your criticism of the MCU. I don't agree with a lot of it, but I understand where you're coming from. After seeing the latest Mission Impossible movie, I saw a review thread for it on another board here. I wrote a scathing review of the film (I hated it maybe more than you hate MCU movies? Not sure, but the hate is strong). Only after I posted my review did I bother to read through the thread, and I realized everyone else there absolutely loved the flick. I felt like I was living in bizarro world. (And to their credit, nobody attacked me or called me a troll. They probably all shook their heads the way I was.) But that's how it goes with movies. If the tone doesn't resonate with you, the rest of the material just isn't going to work. It's like my view of the X-Men films. Maybe the real frustration comes with wanting to like the films, but not being able to. I don't agree with their approach on the material, so the entire thing is going to be flawed irrevocably from the start. Not sure if this applies to you as well, but that's my take on it anyway. |
|
|
|
Post by Hauntedknight87 on Sept 14, 2018 14:23:21 GMT
This maybe a real dumb question but why couldn't they just make 2 cuts of the film and do both? Like couldn't they do a PG-13 version for the morning exclusively, and R rated for the past 7pm showings and then alternate it inbetween? I mean theatres will and have done 2d and 3d screening why not an all ages and an adult cut of a film? ☝ This! Absolutely this! Once again Sony Pictures missed another good opportunity. |
|
|
|
Post by blockbusted on Sept 14, 2018 14:26:05 GMT
This maybe a real dumb question but why couldn't they just make 2 cuts of the film and do both? Like couldn't they do a PG-13 version for the morning exclusively, and R rated for the past 7pm showings and then alternate it inbetween? I mean theatres will and have done 2d and 3d screening why not an all ages and an adult cut of a film? ☝ This! Absolutely this! Once again Sony Pictures missed another good opportunity. That’s what happens when Tom Rothman is in charge.  |
|
|
|
Post by Hauntedknight87 on Sept 14, 2018 14:32:05 GMT
☝ This! Absolutely this! Once again Sony Pictures missed another good opportunity. That’s what happens when Tom Rothman is in charge. Yeah I fucking hate that prick. |
|
|
|
Post by blockbusted on Sept 14, 2018 14:37:20 GMT
That’s what happens when Tom Rothman is in charge. Yeah I fucking hate that prick. He practically let ‘Ghostbusters: Answer the Call’ fiasco to completely spin out of control because he thought it would give the film a lot of attention and make it successful as a result. Oh, how that backfired BIG TIME. |
|
|
|
Post by dazz on Sept 14, 2018 15:52:44 GMT
Yeah I fucking hate that prick. He practically let ‘Ghostbusters: Answer the Call’ fiasco to completely spin out of control because he thought it would give the film a lot of attention and make it successful as a result. Oh, how that backfired BIG TIME. I don't think he practically did anything, he flat out let that fucking thing go crazy, was he the one who put Feig and those involved on the project also? if so that's even worse, who the fuck though Paul Feig could make a good GB movie? his stuff isn't just comedy but parody and GB wasn't a brand you should be parodying to relaunch it as a franchise. |
|
