|
|
Post by ArArArchStanton on Jun 19, 2017 12:13:29 GMT
This is mostly about the idea of loose continuity. One of the weirdest critiques I hear about the Netflix series is that they don't connect enough. I don't see why they'd need to. Surely there are things happening in the MCU that don't all relate to one another. We think Moon Knight exists for instance, but there's no reason that during the scenes related to other films that they would be mentioning him. We know full well that Tony had been following Spidey so these types of connections do exist, there's just not a constant need to reference them. I know there is a desire for that, but let's look at Guardians. There have been no references there, and yet we know we'll get that connection at some point. There were connections early on for Shield, and references in the other shows. But every show doesn't have to constantly be connecting.
So when it comes to Venom, if indeed they make an effort to be compliant with the MCU, I love the idea that there may very well be a loose connection, and I think it's smart for 2 reasons. It gives Marvel a buffer zone from a potentially R rated film and a film that may or may not do well. They don't have to be burdened with any potential baggage. Meanwhile it gives them time to grow that relationship with Sony and there will be opportunities for deeper connections later on. Secondly, it gives fans the same power to include it at their will. If you want to follow this expanded Spiderman mythos, go for it. If for some reason it's not your cup of tea, just ignore it. It won't effect the MCU proper, and I love that about it. It's expansive, yet contained, and I think it's a really smart way to start, until they can decide about deeper ties later on. Who knows. It may go so well we wind up seeing Peter find the symbiote in the Collector's possession during Avengers 4, and you realize the Venom movie takes place after. That would actually be pretty brilliant. |
|
|
|
Post by Atom(ica) Discord on Jun 19, 2017 14:36:39 GMT
One question. Do you now or have you ever collected comic books on a consistent basis?
|
|
|
|
Post by coldenhaulfield on Jun 19, 2017 14:39:00 GMT
One question. Do you now or have you ever collected comic books on a consistent basis? I'll bet he's never bought a floppy in his life. |
|
|
|
Post by ArArArchStanton on Jun 19, 2017 15:59:32 GMT
One question. Do you now or have you ever collected comic books on a consistent basis? I have. Mostly from the Dissassembled through the End of Guardians of the Galaxy. And then I went back and got several major back issues like all of Silver Surfer Vol 2 and the complete Age of Apocalypse |
|
|
|
Post by coldenhaulfield on Jun 19, 2017 16:09:19 GMT
One question. Do you now or have you ever collected comic books on a consistent basis? I have. Mostly from the Dissassembled through the End of Guardians of the Galaxy. And then I went back and got several major back issues like all of Silver Surfer Vol 2 and the complete Age of ApocalypseMight be hope for you yet. Prolly not though... |
|
|
|
Post by Atom(ica) Discord on Jun 19, 2017 19:27:57 GMT
One question. Do you now or have you ever collected comic books on a consistent basis? I have. Mostly from the Dissassembled through the End of Guardians of the Galaxy. And then I went back and got several major back issues like all of Silver Surfer Vol 2 and the complete Age of Apocalypse Then you know the importance of continuity and world building. Poorly contrived "side story" architectures is what effectively displaced the X-Men from the Marvel family back in the 90s. SaveSave |
|
|
|
Post by ArArArchStanton on Jun 19, 2017 21:35:55 GMT
Then you know the importance of continuity and world building. Poorly contrived "side story" architectures is what effectively displaced the X-Men from the Marvel family back in the 90s. SaveSaveWell of course I know the importance of continuity and world building, and I wouldn't want a poorly contrive side story.
What I'm saying is that there may be heroes in the world who don't run into the Avengers, and I'm cool with that.
A great example is the book Vitorio in the Anne Rice vampire series. It's not a part of the Lestat series, but the character makes one small mention at the beginning that he's aware of those characters but has never met them, and after that it doesn't reference them again. Similarly my grandmother doesn't know about all the things I did in college. Those things don't have to be referenced together in order for them both to exist and still be interesting.
To me that is world building. If every character is always in contact with every other character it makes it feel smaller to me, not bigger. So I appreciate having shows that have a clear connection, but don't constantly need to reference other things to prove it.
|
|
|
|
Post by barkingbaphomet on Jun 19, 2017 21:51:36 GMT
how do you feel about Sony's track record with Spider-Man?
|
|
|
|
Post by Hauntedknight87 on Jun 19, 2017 23:02:50 GMT
Look I'll be honest here: I'm a little bitter about this. I don't trust Sony film division, especially with them riding on the success of the MCU with their own spin-off.
That being said, if Sony plays it cool and doesn't fuck it up for us fans, I'll give the Venom and Black Cat/Silver Sable films a shot.
After the god awful Resident Evil Film franchise and the bad Ghostbusters remake/reboot, I don't have much faith in Sony. Maybe they'll do good, but until the trailer drops, I'm going to be skeptical about this.
|
|
|
|
Post by ArArArchStanton on Jun 19, 2017 23:26:17 GMT
how do you feel about Sony's track record with Spider-Man? it's so-so. Spidey 1 and 2 were good. Spidey 3 was forced, but that was before the MCU changed everything. I thought the Garfield reboot was unnecessary and consequently I never cared about it. Amazing 1 seemed to be so obviously written from the Spidey 4 script and was basically the exact same story as Spidey 2. combined with not caring about it much in the first place I didn't bother to even see Amazing 2 once the reviews came out.
BUT
They gave up the going it alone dream, they understand that Marvel knows what they're doing, and I feel like they want to do it right. So to that end I say they've got my attention. The track record is irrelevant so long as they care about doing it right, right now.
|
|
|
|
Post by Spooky Ghost Ackbar on Jun 20, 2017 17:15:54 GMT
Can someone please explain to me why a Venom movie with Venom as the protagonist is a good idea??
|
|
|
|
Post by coldenhaulfield on Jun 20, 2017 17:26:20 GMT
Can someone please explain to me why a Venom movie with Venom as the protagonist is a good idea?? Because Sony. Obviously.  |
|
|
|
Post by ArArArchStanton on Jun 20, 2017 21:46:31 GMT
Can someone please explain to me why a Venom movie with Venom as the protagonist is a good idea?? I honestly can't tell you. My first impression was that Sony was just throwing stuff at the wall, and if they were going to make no effort to tie into a world that would obviously be beneficial to them, then I wasn't going to care about it, even if it turned out to be pretty good. But, if they are going to make that effort to die in, then I have to think they'll care about the product, will take some advice, and if it turns out to be an interesting concept then yeah, I'll love the fuck out of it. |
|
|
|
Post by thisguy4000 on Jun 20, 2017 23:37:36 GMT
Can someone please explain to me why a Venom movie with Venom as the protagonist is a good idea?? I honestly can't tell you. My first impression was that Sony was just throwing stuff at the wall, and if they were going to make no effort to tie into a world that would obviously be beneficial to them, then I wasn't going to care about it, even if it turned out to be pretty good. But, if they are going to make that effort to die in, then I have to think they'll care about the product, will take some advice, and if it turns out to be an interesting concept then yeah, I'll love the fuck out of it. The problem is that Sony is not a very reliable studio when it comes to these things. It's a very bizarre thing to do. |
|
|
|
Post by Atom(ica) Discord on Jun 21, 2017 2:19:00 GMT
Can someone please explain to me why a Venom movie with Venom as the protagonist is a good idea?? I honestly can't tell you. My first impression was that Sony was just throwing stuff at the wall, and if they were going to make no effort to tie into a world that would obviously be beneficial to them, then I wasn't going to care about it, even if it turned out to be pretty good. But, if they are going to make that effort to die in, then I have to think they'll care about the product, will take some advice, and if it turns out to be an interesting concept then yeah, I'll love the fuck out of it. Declaring that your independently-produced movies, based on Marvel IP, are "connected" should not be a free lunch. It is absolutly vital that Marvel Studios spearhead all external-studio MCU productions. If this becomes a trend and Fox jumps on board, I guarantee you that both studios will quickly produce shit and slap an MCU logo on it. Pascal made a unilateral announcement that her dinky Spider-Verse is now connected to the MCU. That statement was not corroborated by Kevin during the interview and it has yet to be confirmed by Disney Marvel. Saying her side-verse is connected to the MCU is a dangle. She is trying to bring credibility to an ill conceived side universe that has no fucking hero in it. Protect the brand. That needs to be job one. Your enthusiasm will slow when you realize... it's a trap!! |
|
|
|
Post by ArArArchStanton on Jun 21, 2017 2:40:48 GMT
The problem is that Sony is not a very reliable studio when it comes to these things. It's a very bizarre thing to do. And therein lies the brilliance of this move. If it turns out not to work, the MCU isn't going to reference the Sony films, so just ignore them. If they're good, then they'll work within the continuity so you can include them with the collection, AND, they'll probably work toward tighter continuity in the future. |
|
|
|
Post by ArArArchStanton on Jun 21, 2017 2:42:35 GMT
Declaring that your independently-produced movies, based on Marvel IP, are "connected" should not be a free lunch. It is absolutly vital that Marvel Studios spearhead all external-studio MCU productions. If this becomes a trend and Fox jumps on board, I guarantee you that both studios will quickly produce shit and slap an MCU logo on it. Pascal made a unilateral announcement that her dinky Spider-Verse is now connected to the MCU. That statement was not corroborated by Kevin during the interview and it has yet to be confirmed by Disney Marvel. Saying her side-verse is connected to the MCU is a dangle. She is trying to bring credibility to an ill conceived side universe that has no fucking hero in it. Protect the brand. That needs to be job one. Your enthusiasm will slow when you realize... it's a trap!! I'm not saying there will be an MCU logo on it. In fact I don't think there will be. So no, I'm not falling for a trap. I'm fully aware of what they're doing, which is to make a loose connection. Of course Disney isn't going to confirm it. THAT'S THE POINT. They want deniability. It's a trial run. They're testing the waters. Stop freaking out or making more out of it than it is. There is no reason for Marvel to publicize any level of commitment to it, at least until the relationship and collaborative product are on solid footing, which means that they have garnered public success. Wait to see what happens after Homecoming comes out.
|
|
|
|
Post by coldenhaulfield on Jun 21, 2017 12:06:49 GMT
Declaring that your independently-produced movies, based on Marvel IP, are "connected" should not be a free lunch. It is absolutly vital that Marvel Studios spearhead all external-studio MCU productions. If this becomes a trend and Fox jumps on board, I guarantee you that both studios will quickly produce shit and slap an MCU logo on it. Pascal made a unilateral announcement that her dinky Spider-Verse is now connected to the MCU. That statement was not corroborated by Kevin during the interview and it has yet to be confirmed by Disney Marvel. Saying her side-verse is connected to the MCU is a dangle. She is trying to bring credibility to an ill conceived side universe that has no fucking hero in it. Protect the brand. That needs to be job one. Your enthusiasm will slow when you realize... it's a trap!! I'm not saying there will be an MCU logo on it. In fact I don't think there will be. So no, I'm not falling for a trap. I'm fully aware of what they're doing, which is to make a loose connection. Of course Disney isn't going to confirm it. THAT'S THE POINT. They want deniability. It's a trial run. They're testing the waters. Stop freaking out or making more out of it than it is. There is no reason for Marvel to publicize any level of commitment to it, at least until the relationship and collaborative product are on solid footing, which means that they have garnered public success. Wait to see what happens after Homecoming comes out.
Do you even have any concept of the meaning of the words you literally type? Or not so much? I'm guessing that in the midst of your shitty "road job" you've not brushed up recently on grammar, logic, or rhetoric. What a putz. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 21, 2017 18:35:23 GMT
I saw the video and I think people read too much into it.
But I agree that Marvel has to be in control of what is connected to the MCU and what is not. No drunken Sony manager can change that.
|
|
|
|
Post by ThatGuy on Jun 21, 2017 20:36:22 GMT
I have. Mostly from the Dissassembled through the End of Guardians of the Galaxy. And then I went back and got several major back issues like all of Silver Surfer Vol 2 and the complete Age of Apocalypse Then you know the importance of continuity and world building. Poorly contrived "side story" architectures is what effectively displaced the X-Men from the Marvel family back in the 90s. SaveSaveNot really. Having editorial departments with no connectivity did that. They divided up the big "families" of comics and they went their separate ways. Spider-man kept to himself, Avengers kept to themselves, X-men kept to themselves. That's why it seems like these characters live in their separate worlds. It wasn't until around the late 90s that they came back together under Bob Harras (X-men editor), but the damage was done and he kept X-men above all. I think DC has the same editorial departments, but they also have the characters stay together by connecting with the Justice League. |
|
