|
|
Post by politicidal on Jun 24, 2017 1:59:42 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by sdrew13163 on Jun 24, 2017 6:06:20 GMT
If there's one thing I've learned from modern movies, it's to never trust Twitter reactions. They can be the exact opposite of what the real movie tends to really be like.
I still do like to look at them, though.
Plus, how annoying is it going to be to see "the best Spider-Man movie since 2004's Spider-Man 2"? Just about every review will say that, I guarantee it.
Not that "the best Spider-Man movie since 2004's Spider-Man 2" means much.
|
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Jun 24, 2017 8:35:50 GMT
how annoying is it going to be to see "the best Spider-Man movie since 2004's Spider-Man 2"? Just about every review will say that, I guarantee it. Not that "the best Spider-Man movie since 2004's Spider-Man 2" means much. So when they're say it's "the best Spider-Man movie since 2004's Spider-Man 2", they're really saying it's better than:
Spider-Man 3 (the worst of the 3 Tobey Maguire movies) the 2 Andrew Garfield Amazing Spider-Man movies, which weren't as good as the first 2 Spider-Man movies
But it's not as good as Spider-Man 2.
So in other words, the consensus is that Spider-Man: Homecoming is just another mediocre movie. LOL!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Jun 24, 2017 8:37:12 GMT
That's nothing good either. When they're say it's "the best Spider-Man movie since 2004's Spider-Man 2", they're really saying it's better than:
Spider-Man 3 (the worst of the 3 Tobey Maguire movies)
the 2 Andrew Garfield Amazing Spider-Man movies, which weren't as good as the first 2 Spider-Man movies
But it's not as good as Spider-Man 2.
So in other words, the consensus is that Spider-Man: Homecoming is just another mediocre movie.
|
|
|
|
Post by furiousstyles77 on Jun 24, 2017 10:11:44 GMT
That's nothing good either. When they're say it's "the best Spider-Man movie since 2004's Spider-Man 2", they're really saying it's better than:
Spider-Man 3 (the worst of the 3 Tobey Maguire movies)
the 2 Andrew Garfield Amazing Spider-Man movies, which weren't as good as the first 2 Spider-Man movies
But it's not as good as Spider-Man 2.
So in other words, the consensus is that Spider-Man: Homecoming is just another mediocre movie.
its better than DCEU movies that's for sure, I sense another home run for Marvel, will crush wonder woman at the box office , Marvel continues to dominate, DCEU continues to fall behind |
|
|
|
Post by sostie on Jun 24, 2017 11:22:48 GMT
how annoying is it going to be to see "the best Spider-Man movie since 2004's Spider-Man 2"? Just about every review will say that, I guarantee it. Not that "the best Spider-Man movie since 2004's Spider-Man 2" means much. So when they're say it's "the best Spider-Man movie since 2004's Spider-Man 2", they're really saying it's better than:
Spider-Man 3 (the worst of the 3 Tobey Maguire movies) the 2 Andrew Garfield Amazing Spider-Man movies, which weren't as good as the first 2 Spider-Man movies
But it's not as good as Spider-Man 2.
So in other words, the consensus is that Spider-Man: Homecoming is just another mediocre movie. LOL!!!
Was there a concensus that Man Of Steel was better than ANY earlier Supeman movie? |
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Jun 24, 2017 11:54:25 GMT
So when they're say it's "the best Spider-Man movie since 2004's Spider-Man 2", they're really saying it's better than:
Spider-Man 3 (the worst of the 3 Tobey Maguire movies) the 2 Andrew Garfield Amazing Spider-Man movies, which weren't as good as the first 2 Spider-Man movies
But it's not as good as Spider-Man 2.
So in other words, the consensus is that Spider-Man: Homecoming is just another mediocre movie. LOL!!!
Was there a concensus that Man Of Steel was better than ANY earlier Supeman movie? It'd be sad if no on thought it was better than Quest for Peace... |
|
|
|
Post by ArArArchStanton on Jun 24, 2017 15:32:54 GMT
yessssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss!!!!!!! |
|
|
|
Post by gromel on Jun 24, 2017 15:37:22 GMT
I hear Disney won't make a cent out of ticket sales, as they all go to Sony. Disney gets the merchandise money. So if you want to support Disney, don't watch the movie and buy the merchandise instead.
I will watch the movie.
|
|
|
|
Post by ThatGuy on Jun 24, 2017 15:53:02 GMT
I hear Disney won't make a cent out of ticket sales, as they all go to Sony. Disney gets the merchandise money. So if you want to support Disney, don't watch the movie and buy the merchandise instead. I will watch the movie. Or watch the movies made for the MCU, but not when Sony takes the character back. They are trying to have the MCU make the character popular again after they threw him into the mud. |
|
|
|
Post by salomonj on Jun 24, 2017 16:04:43 GMT
Good to hear
|
|
|
|
Post by Atom(ica) Discord on Jun 24, 2017 16:24:52 GMT
I'm starting to think of "overwhelmingly positive" early reactions as a bit of a jinx. I'm not reading them because they're likely too shilly. We'll know the truth soon enough. Hoping for something at least on the level of Spider-Man 2. Don't care what it earns as the take can't be added to the MCU cume anyway.
|
|
|
|
Post by ArArArchStanton on Jun 24, 2017 16:34:29 GMT
I hear Disney won't make a cent out of ticket sales, as they all go to Sony. Disney gets the merchandise money. So if you want to support Disney, don't watch the movie and buy the merchandise instead. I will watch the movie. Or watch the movies made for the MCU, but not when Sony takes the character back. They are trying to have the MCU make the character popular again after they threw him into the mud. I don't mind the idea of Fox and Sony working as branches of the MCU at all. IF, and only IF they are truly working together to make good films that fit into the collective story. If they are however, then it means you have two studios who can increase the volume of films and it's an amazing collaboration that has never really happened before. I love the idea actually. |
|
|
|
Post by Atom(ica) Discord on Jun 24, 2017 17:33:14 GMT
Or watch the movies made for the MCU, but not when Sony takes the character back. They are trying to have the MCU make the character popular again after they threw him into the mud. I don't mind the idea of Fox and Sony working as branches of the MCU at all. IF, and only IF they are truly working together to make good films that fit into the collective story. If they are however, then it means you have two studios who can increase the volume of films and it's an amazing collaboration that has never really happened before. I love the idea actually. That would be a win win situation for everyone. Marvel gets the financial backing (and other resources) of two additional movie studios. They could increase their output threefold and do the same for their brand penetration - which is already dominant. The participating studios would get a boost from a brand with a proven track record. It's the second best option after a unified MCU scenario. |
|
|
|
Post by ThatGuy on Jun 24, 2017 18:45:17 GMT
Or watch the movies made for the MCU, but not when Sony takes the character back. They are trying to have the MCU make the character popular again after they threw him into the mud. I don't mind the idea of Fox and Sony working as branches of the MCU at all. IF, and only IF they are truly working together to make good films that fit into the collective story. If they are however, then it means you have two studios who can increase the volume of films and it's an amazing collaboration that has never really happened before. I love the idea actually. I don't even mind if they didn't make one big shared universe (which that would be since it's 3 studios, the MCU is just sequels of one movie line). As long as the other studios tried to make good movies and not use it for the popular IP and revenue only. You can tell that ASM (which I actually liked) was basically Raimi's Spider-man mixed with what would have been Spider-man 4 with little changes (webshooters and Ben's death). |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 24, 2017 19:12:30 GMT
My hope is that Fox is watching closely and if its a hit will seek to strike a similar type deal with Marvel for at least the F4.
If Marvel can do it for Spider-man and Sony they can also do it for F4 and Fox.
|
|
|
|
Post by ArArArchStanton on Jun 24, 2017 21:35:24 GMT
That would be a win win situation for everyone. Marvel gets the financial backing (and other resources) of two additional movie studios. They could increase their output threefold and do the same for their brand penetration - which is already dominant. The participating studios would get a boost from a brand with a proven track record. It's the second best option after a unified MCU scenario. I agree. I think it's actually worth a run at. It could be a level up from what they've already accomplished, we could see rated R films, we could see all sorts of crazy spin offs. I love the idea, and let's just hope it works. |
|
|
|
Post by spooner5020 on Jun 24, 2017 21:35:28 GMT
I'm so excited to hear this. I was never really nervous though. It looked exactly what a Spider-Man movie should look like.
|
|
|
|
Post by ArArArchStanton on Jun 24, 2017 21:39:00 GMT
I don't even mind if they didn't make one big shared universe (which that would be since it's 3 studios, the MCU is just sequels of one movie line). As long as the other studios tried to make good movies and not use it for the popular IP and revenue only. You can tell that ASM (which I actually liked) was basically Raimi's Spider-man mixed with what would have been Spider-man 4 with little changes (webshooters and Ben's death). I do mind if it's not a shared universe. If Venom isn't shared, I can't honestly say I won't be in any hurry to watch it, even if it's really good. It just won't have any purpose to me.
I do agree that Amazing 1 was basically just Spiderman 4. It was clear Lizard was going to be the next villain.
|
|
|
|
Post by barkingbaphomet on Jun 24, 2017 23:48:24 GMT
gods, i hope they really landed it. Spider-Man is my favorite.
|
|
