What I don't get is, if Sony clearly knows what fans want based on their misleading trailers, why don't they just...make the movie the trailer suggests?
“Show consumers what they want, so you can sneak what they say they don’t want into the plate.” That’s a paraphrase of the lead dev of the new Spider-Man game, but all these Big Media suits think the same way. They are trying to socially engineer the public tastes and they think all that it takes to get away with it is false advertisement.
Well considering the bangers Sony dose release despite pretends living in a fictional reality, Sony as a company needs a release schedule for investors and that means they need films releasing in slots. So that means films need to be green lit to mark a release quota why things like the next spider verse movie is in production.
Because studio execs have learned to think like game publishers. Why give away the best part when you can sell it to them later as DLC? Their theory is that they can save the thing that audiences really want for the sequel, rather than giving away the best stuff up front. Sell you the same movie twice. In a way, it's not a new idea; look at Batman Begins ending with the tease of the Joker. But where they went wrong is in forgetting that Begins was, for its time, a very good superhero movie in its own right, and Scarecrow and Ras Al Ghul were both villains that hadn't seen a silver screen adaptation yet, so audiences were still excited for what they got. Knowing that Joker was coming next just made it all the more exciting (Begins obviously chose not to start with the Joker, because he works better as an antagonist to a well established Batman who has already settled into his groove, but studio execs don't get that kind of nuance). And of course, Begins never tried to hint that Joker would be showing up; not until the last scene.
There's no way my dad CARES... Dunno how yall can advertise trash so long/often... "OMG dudes, I saw a dog turd on the street" - 4hr livestream coming up...
I thought it was until now lol Either way, I already lost interest in MCU so no loss here personally Maybe Disney is doing us a favor. Take all the legacy IP from the 1900s and purge it out of mainstream. Eventually maybe we can get some new staples of sci-fi / fantasy worlds to take the helm.
@@MinecraftMartin JUST IMAGINE... instead of "roasting bad media" these people made GOOD MEDIA... INSTEAD OF "I'd rather watch you tear MW to shreds than watch MW"/desperate for clicks so hop on the "trending algorithm".. ONLY UA-camrs are advertising this film - most people not on UA-cam are probably unaware it exists..
I told my friend at college today that an R Rated Kraven The Hunter movie was coming out and he got genuinely excited until I said it was in the same universe as Venom, Morbius, and Madame Web
Kraven's most famous and well-liked story inherently involves Kraven impersonating Spider-Man. The only way you could do it without Spider-Man would be if you had some other character filling in for Spider-Man's role in the story.
My parents probably wouldn't assume a connection between Superman and Spider-Man. But then they also wouldn't assume one between Batman and Superman. I'm not even sure if they've heard of Batman (although they definitely know Supes and Spidey).
@@Marco_Onyxheart your parents definitely heard of Batman. If they're boomers, the 60s television series introduced them to him & Robin. If they're Gen-Xers, then they were around for Batmania of '89. And of course, the biggest movie of 2008 was The Dark Knight. If your parents know of Superman & Spider-Man, then they've DEFINITELY heard of Batman. In fact, next time you see them, go "Na na na na na na na na na -" & see how they finish that line.
It’s a lot easier for audiences to make the distinction between Marvel and DC than Marvel and Sony. Most people are aware that Marvel and DC are separate brands/universes. Sony is trying to capitalize off the marvel brand which is confusing casual moviegoers.
The problem my parents have is picking up which Captain Marvel (Billy Batson or Carol Danvers) I'm talking about in a particular conversation, getting confused when I bring up Captain Marvel in the same sentence as the Justice League.
@@lightdarksoul2097 I saw a video with a lawyer who said that if Disney decided to sue Sony they could build their case on brand confusion and use the actors tagging the wrong studio on instagram as evidence. :D AND he also mentioned that IF they won, it COULD prevent Sony from making more Spider-man adjacent movies which COULD mean the rights reverting back to Disney.
I think the only issue with that is there is a chance to lose and if they did it's likely the relationship between the two would be finished so no more spiderman in the mcu and that would be bad. Still who knows? @@Domihork
I remember, like, 10yrs ago, someone asking me when we'll get Superman in the Avengers. A LOT of people don't even know the difference between DC and Marvel. They just go for superhero action movie. There may be a bigger distinction now compared to then, we do after all live in post Endgame times. But even then...
@@masonhackler2883 It's funny because the Transformers would make infinitely more sense than DC. Marvel made Transformers comics at one point, and they even had an official crossover WITH Marvel superheroes.
@@monumentvalley6681Not to mention the MCU and Transformers were both Paramount at the time. Couldn’t you see the first Iron Man and the first Transformers in the same universe?
Honestly, I think for the sake of everyone they should just do it. DC, Sony, Marvel, just do the DC v Marvel that they have in the past, just throw whatever shit at this point, they aren't making timeless art here. Who cares anymore
I mean, are they really that different? Sure, fans will know. But general audiences aren't that invested, and why should they be? It's not like there's much difference.
Sony has made a deliberate effort in their marketing to confuse consumers into thinking their spin-offs are in the MCU. Depressing, but it worked. People lump in Madame Web into the "Marvel is dead since Endgame" conversation despite the movie not being made by Marvel Studios at all. However, I'm sure Marvel Studios has been dealing with this 'brand confusion' forever as I'm sure there was a time no one knew different studios were making Avengers, X-Men or Spider-Man movies.
It's interesting because even back then the batting average and per movie quality was better. Granted stuff like Amazing Spider-man 2 and X-men Apocalypse were not good, bad even, but they weren't these mired disasters that recent Sony Spider-verse stuff has been. The average quality of marvel related films was better back then even in other studios. Now. MCU is bad and Sony's output is even worse. Nothing on Marvel's side has been good with only a few exceptions for quite a while. DC hasn't been doing great either though they have maintained average and okay output recently with some highlights (The Batman). And based on how people talk about it, it is obvious that it isn't superhero fatigue because people are WANTING THE FILMS TO SUCCEED. But the quality is just that bad.
The confusion would be somewhat lessened if marvels recent films hadn't been so mediocre and similar feeling, (although not nearly as bad), as sonys shlock.
Dude, a lot of the general audience didn't even know the difference between Marvel & DC characters until more recently. Some still don't. People can get so invested in their big franchises that they forget that a lot of casual viewers just see "action movie" or "superhero film" and don't put much though into the studios or creators behind them.
The dying frog asks the scorpion why it stung despite knowing the consequence, to which the scorpion replies: "I am sorry, but I couldn't resist the urge. It's my character."
Your analysis of the situation absolutely rings true to me. While I haven’t heard of anyone I personally know getting “schnookered” by Sony’s sleight of hand marketing, I’ve known casual movie-goers who confuse Marvel & DC characters - never mind expecting them be up-to-date on which company hold what character’s copyright within the series of Marvel movies. There is deliberate confusion out there, and I wouldn’t mind except that Sony is making the movies with the enthusiasm and expertise of a 3rd grader giving a book report presentation after reading only the Wikipedia page. "Help us Lord & Miller! You're our only hope!"
The biggest thing that concerns me is Sony not knowing their own history. There's a PSP in this 2003 set movie despite PSP not releasing until 2004 (Japan) 2005 (USA).
@EZ-IZZY1995 it's sony, the only product placement they do is their own products, hence the goddamn Sony Vaio in Amazing Spider-Man 2, along with the Xperia phone, Sony Triniton CRT TV, Sony monitor for Peter's PC, Sony SLR camera, the Sony headphones in Spider-Verse and the PS5 and Spider-Man 2 game in Across the Spider-Verse, among many others.
My friend's text reply when I told her on Feb 17 I was watching a bunch of video reviews about how bad Madame Web was exactly matches your concern: "That sucks. I feel like Marvel needs a win here."
I dont think its a coincidence that all the characters that they are using in the Sony Spiderverse are the same characters that Avi Arad gave major focus to in the 90s Spider Man show.
VENOM had the writer from 50 SHADES OF GREY (who is also directing VENOM 3) MORBIUS had the writers from GODS OF EGYPT (Who are also behind MADAME WEB) And KRAVEN THE HUNTER has the writers from TRANSFORMERS: THE LAST KNIGHT AVI ARAD ruined everything again And he isn't even involved in MADAME WEB But he is behind BORDERLANDS though
@@RayMcElroy50 Is he having health issues or something? I'll confess I don't keep tabs on Avi Arad because I don't like most of the things he's worked on.
Sony should just make horror movies with their Spider-Man villain characters like stop trying to make all these Spider-Man characters into antiheroes just make villain movies imagine if the director of terrifier made a Carnage movie or if they made a Mysterio movie like mike flanagans Occulus
The great thing about comic book movies is the endless amount of material they can draw from, which naturally led to the oversaturation of the medium. Like, tmost of the big characters have been around for 50-60 years. You can make decades of movies based on those stories, but people get tired. These movies need to be unique in order to grab people. The Batman and Spiderverse are fantastic examples. Even the mainline MCU Tom Holland Spiderman movies feel much smaller in scope, and it's no surprise that audiences like that. People just want to see a good movie.
In my opinion, it should have focused entirely on the three teenage Spiderwomen developing their powers, becoming the superheroes they were destined to become. Instead, they were running away and sidelined for the entire movie.
TRUE honestly A lot of people say they’re tired of Spider-Man as a teenager but I think there’s plenty more stories to tell, esp if you use new characters And it’s not like Madame Web was a big name that’d pull people into the theater
They could have just made a Spider-Gwen live action movie or just picked one of the Spiderwoman made a story about them instead of... whatever they thought they were doing.
You just wrote a more compelling script in a single sentence than a multimillion-dollar corporation could do with legions of employees and boatloads of cash. 😂😂
that’s what confused me most about this movie. we’re told that these girls will be powerful superheroes but then they’re just boring, nothing characters for the entire movie. As i was watching madame web, i thought that the concept of a villain trying to kill his enemies before they get their powers is VERY interesting. but this was just…boring
Madame Web was one of those baffling divisions studios used to make all the time. Take a character and make an "origin" movie where they never do the things the characters are known for. And in this case, these characters aren't even that well known! It's like making a Rambo prequel. You think "ok, maybe we'll see what he goes through in Vietnam. Maybe some boot camp stuff." but it ends up being about his high school career and it ends with him enlisting/getting drafted. Except in Madam Web's case, it's actually about the high school career of one of the cops in First Blood instead of John Rambo.
Superhero movies are definitely a "rising tide raises all ships" scenario. I used to work in a movie theater and I've definitely heard people say Wonder Woman was their favorite Marvel. People expected Spider-man to show up in X-Men Days of Future Past. The average movie goer doesn't pay attention to most of this stuff
I feel like the Venom cameo in NWH was to make it clear venom comes from a different universe. And honestly I wouldn't be surprised if Marvel studios had nothing to do with the Venom 2 and Morbius post credits and Sony used some legal loop hole that let them use spidey and the vulture as they technically own those characters
The Venom cameo in NWH made sense but the Vulture thing didn’t unless we see ATSV and it makes sense coz of the Super Collider causing issues and interfering with Strange's spell which creates this anomaly that ended bringing Vulture to Sony verse
@@abdulazimnaushadwell ATSV also had a Vulture being shot into a different dimension, so Beyond The Spider-Verse may end up referencing it with Miguel getting an alert that Morbin time is happening
I'm fascinated by the idea that maybe we got the best cut of Madame Web. Maybe there's a version with no plot, just dissociative vignettes . Inaudible dialogue, contract breaching references directly to Marvel's Spiderman. Cast members accidently using each others real names and looking into the camera
My new theory is that Morbius, Madame Web, et. al, are actually part of some hardball Sony/Disney negotiation strategy. Without them, the Spiderman rights are worth $X (primarily the value of Spiderman), but now the rights are worth $X+$Y where Y is the value of eliminating these ongoing reputational hits.
This would be crazy and I kinda buy it. Sony intentionally making bad movies so that Marvel will agree to their terms and just buy the IP back is wild 💀💀
A big part of the problem is click bait. You see a lot of videos and articles that are like "another flop for marvel" or "marvel fails again" or "marvels biggest bomb". A lot of people who make content thrive off normies not knowing the difference and actively participate in misinforming the public.
He did. This is just a video elaborating on the lasting effects of a train wreck like Madame Web. So yeah, it took him two videos to say what he needed to. That's just how BAD Madame Web is.
Idk man as a dude who is into more obscure characters, I didn't know Madame web was even in production let alone released. I doubt people who don't know about these characters will realize they're connected until they watch the movies. If they're even aware they exist.
Like me Cap, I'm STILL pissed about Kangaroo Jack not having a talking kangaroo, that had me hooked at the first trailer! Anyway, with how Morbius used wider Marvel stuff in the trailer, and Madame Web using the Spider-Women in marketing, I'm surprised lawsuit talks aren't ramping up.
a lot of people stayed in my cinema viewing after Madame Web expecting some MCU post credit scenes, I stayed too to see their reaction. Then when credits over everyone was so confused lmao
There is no suprise they would do it there are already Mysterio and Doc Ock movies are coming and youtube can't even figure it out without typing the whole line😆
Sometimes a bad movie can just be a bad movie. Half the time I feel like fans WANT the MCU to die out because it’s using the franchise as a scapegoat for Hollywood chasing after Marvel’s trends.
@@mr.merchandise4350You could just stop watching, let people enjoy it, and then it works itself out. Just because you don't like it doesn't mean those who do get nothing.
@@spicymemes7458 I tried that. As it turns out, ignoring the largest media franchise in the world isn’t really possible. That is, unless I’m willing to burry my head in the sand and avoid nearly all popular culture for the next decade.
You're absolutely right. I have this conversation with people any time any superhero movie comes out. They think it's all MCU. Just last week I mentioned to someone (who considers themself a superhero movie fan) that Deadpool was the only MCU movie this year. Their response to me was, "what about Madame Web though?"
Honestly the way Sony is doing these movies gives me the same vibe as the superhero movies from the 90s/early 2000s like Catwoman and Steel. They have the rights for one character and nothing else and as a result they make such drastic changes to said characters that they are unrecognizable to the ones the audience knew and loved from the source material.
Sony literally does not have to be doing this. The contract states they need to have a Spider-Man film in development every 5 years, not released. As long as they're working on an MCU aligned Spider-Man movie, they will retain the rights. I don't know why they are damaging this brand for no reason with these awful movies no one asked for.
I think people who don't know the difference between Disney Marvel and Sony Marvel aren't the type of people to watch interviews with Feige or read the trade magazines. If Disney wants to make that distinction clear, it has to be done in the trailers and opening credits.
I haven’t been on top of the MCU in a while, but I find copyright law fascinating, so I am usually on top of that. I mentioned to my wife earlier this year that Deadpool 3 was the only big Marvel movie this year and, within 24 hours or so, she got confused when we got a Madam Web trailer and I had to guide her through the weeds of the matter. So, indeed, the deceptive marketing is doing its job.
At a certain point, misleading trailers should be considered fraud. Food companies can't give you a wrong list of ingredience on their packaging either.
So as evidence to your argument, when I went on Rotten Tomatoes to check the audience reviews for Madam Web, there were several comments that said they felt bad for the MCU. Also, given that DC also plans to go easy on Superheroes until Superman legacy, Sony is not just distributing Marvel, but the whole genre's plans.
I can recognize the Marvel logo at a glance, but this did not stop me from misreading the text on the thumbnail as "Madame Web is Awful for Marriage" because the timestamp was blocking part of the title.
I feel like recent MCU has been more inconsistent than bad. Yeah you’ve got your Thor 4s and Ant-Man 3s as of late, but you’ve also gotten your GOTG 3s and Loki season 2s to go along with them. It’s been more hit or miss than anything
Irregular stuff is what really hurts. When is good is great when is bad it hurts, tuogh i admit i have less confidence even since Secret Invasion happened and what they did to Rhodey's character...
Here's how correct you are: I watched "Everything, Everywhere, All at Once" with a friend of mine, at my suggestion. We both thoroughly enjoyed it. When it ended they said, "That's the best Marvel movie they've made yet!"
Considering the Deadpool & Wolverine trailer broke the all-time 24 hour trailer viewership record, plus the people seemed to like X-Men ‘97’s trailer, and the cast of The Fantastic Four, I don’t think they’ll stop seeing MCU films and they’ll know Sony is just the problem with their movies and see it.
Other creators have added to the confusion with relish and glee. They used MCU, Marvel, and Disney in their titles and videos and linking the two together while barely mentioning Sony.
On one hand, I don't want to blame actors like Matt Smith and Dakota Johnson for essentially being tricked into taking on these roles, but on the other hand, did they not think to google their character's name? Their backstory? How fans feel about them, or if they're even popular to begin with? I just feel like they could have saved themselves some trouble.
Even in the early years of the MCU, there was confusion among some of my family and friends about which movies were in it. There was an assumption that pre-MCU Marvel movies like Spiderman, Hulk, X-Men, and Fantastic Four were already part of the MCU, not appreciating that Ironman was doing someting bold and different.
Forget people who don’t know that Madame Web and Morbius aren’t in the MCU, I know people who don’t know Superman and Batman movies aren’t in the MCU. To them all comic movies are the same universe.
I found it interesting that in Madam WEB, there are literally no "webs". evil black spidey only jumps dosn't swing and the women only wear their costumes in the short flash-foward clips at the very end.
Sony have fallen for the increasingly common media mistake. You cannot draw a blueprint for infinite money in a creative industry. Cash grabs based on comic characters without any actual intrest in exploring them, and reshooting to get the mimimum viable product, is not going produce endless viewership. The closest thing to a blueprint has consistently shown to be to making something worthwhile
I am playing City of Heroes every single day, often with various DCAU shows in the background - I don’t have ‘superhero fatigue’; I do however have franchise management fatigue. Write compelling characters that weren’t workshopped to oblivion.
I feel the same way. Marvel could release an MCU movie every month with shows in-between and I'd watch them all. Provided they're good. But I'm tired of flops.
My mom loves "Thor" and "Iron Man" movies, and is absolutely not aware that characters like Madame Web aren't a part of the MCU. She didn't know Aquaman and Flash were part of a completely different universe. They're all just "superhero movies" of varying quality to her, and I'm sure she's not alone in thinking that.
Look if Disney started doing good mcu movies, it would grow on her eventually that avengers stuff is good but no name stuff not good. But all movies are bad lol
@@Coolcoolcooldude He once reacted weirdly when Amy Pascal said that she and Sony were planning a Spider-Man universe of their own. Needless to say, he kinda was right about reacting, since everything that has come out of the SSU has been (mostly) a trainwreck.
What I don't really understand is how Sony tries to make movies about Spiderman villians that the general audience might not know while not being able to use Spiderman. I think a live action movie about Spider-Gwen or Miles Morales as Spiderman would make more sense because you wouldn't have to dance arround that one character that you can't use. But maybe they can't use any spider guy in their movies, I don't know.
To anyone who thinks general audiences know the difference between Sony Marvel & MCU: I heard a guy at the barbershop talk about how Wonder Woman was one of the better Marvel movies. Another guy agreed saying, “yeah, that was before they did the time travel crap in Endgame.”
I think this is interesting. The average Joe and Jane Public really don't know or care enough to distinguish between what's an MCU Marvel Movie, what the Fox movies were, and what the Sony movies are. And with stuff in the Spiderverse movies and the weird cameos Marvel/Disney has tied themselves a little too close to what Sony is doing. I also think the public really doesn't know the finer splits between Marvel and DC, cause I've seen people ask if Superman or Spider-Man are in the same universe or did Stan Lee create Wonder Woman. Might seem odd to us fans who are more in the weeds, but the average person doesn't know and that can also have an effect on how things are persceived.
I didn't follow Morbius full campaign abroad (I live in Brazil), however, weeks prior to its release, the movie tagline everywhere (billboards, trailers) was "Witness the origin of a new Marvel Legend". Besides Vulture and Spider-man's "murder graffiti", they went all out in this direction here regarding its promotion. Outside of my small inner circle of close friends, everyone else in my demographics just assumed it to be MCU connected. Same with Madame Web, with people even asking me about her and the other Spider-woman's lore before its release.
It’s interesting that only just now I’ve realised why the Marvel Studios card in trailers is always different or unique for every movie release like they’re trying to draw attention to “Marvel Studios” versus “in association with Marvel” where it’s just the red card
Sony is really contributing to the superhero fatigue narrative, and it's also ruining it for everyone else's product and future potential. I have to believe there's an elaborate conspiracy surrounding shifting the public's interest in superhero movie to the next big thing.. Cause this is getting out of hand..
Man, my mom didn't know that Batman & Superman weren't part of the MCU until I told her back in 2015 that she didn't need to watch BvS to understand the next avengers movie. The ultra-casual fan has no idea what movie goes with what continuity
I didn’t really consider that normal people don’t know the difference until a few years ago my sister told me she’s almost caught up on the MCU and needs to see Morbius while it’s in theaters 😮💨
The problem with Kraven is that they gave the whole plot/film away on that first trailer that now feels that it came out a long time ago. Not holding a candle for that film.
The moment I saw the trailer for this movie, I wasn't found of how Sony just wasted the potential of a good movie without tarnishing the MCU. The moment I heard from news that this will be connected to the marvel cinematic universe, I knew there is something fishy after just having other Spider-Man villians but never included their own Spider-Man. I mean they established that there is three of them in separated universe, why not use them?
Im a big believer that any story can be good if told properly, Morbius, Madame Web, and Kraven can be solid films but of course its not just execution thats the issue its the obvious studio interference. How hard is it to let people create?
I'm someone who stopped watching new MCU films after Endgame because I was just kinda sick of it at that point. I watched Spiderman No Way Home only because of Maguire, Garfield, Molina and Dafoe. I barely registered Madame Web was coming out at all. And I honestly forgot Sony was making superhero films. I haven't watched Venom or Morbius, and with what little marketing I did see and hear, i just assumed it WAS an MCU film to set up some Holland Spiderman backstory tbh. Wasn't planning on watching it, but when I saw all the videos coming out about how bad it was I got curious. I definitely think Sony is hurting Disney Marvel with movies like this. One person's perspective though: I stopped caring about the franchise a long time ago. Deadpool and Wolverine has my attention, but even that has me cautious with all the MCU references in the trailer.
Honestly the biggest shock of this video was that THE KANGAROO IN KANGAROO JACK DOESN'T TALK???? I'd never seen it and that was the one thing I expected from it if I ever experienced it
Just a reminder for everyone that a significant portion of audiences don't know the difference between the marvel and DC universes, let alone Marvel and Sony cinematic universes.
I appreciate this video so much because every decision they’ve made regarding the “villainverse” makes me feel insane. I just hope the third Spiderverse drops before the lawsuit/buyout.
I've heard that the actors were actually led to believe by Sony that this was going to be an MCU movie - and even on set were led to believe they were working for Marvel. If true, Marvel can easily sue to get the rights back. Right now, Sony fully owns Spider-Man (and all of those other characters), and they're just temporarily allowing Marvel to use him (and Sony gets like 40% of the gross). So the ties between the two universes are very real, it's just that while Marvel is using Spider-Man, Sony can't use him specifically - or at least, they can't use Tom Holland's Spider-Man (but could theoretically still use someone like Andrew Garfield, I believe). So instead, they were making these movies that "surround" Spider-Man, and they were hoping that everything would join together eventually (though I doubt Marvel wants to do that, because that would mean Sony/Marvel would have to team up in making the movies, and it would just be really difficult for the two studios to agree on plotlines, etc.). Hopefully now, Marvel will sue to get the rights back somehow and won't have to worry about Sony destroying the IP anymore - or they could sue to get the live-action rights, and allow Sony to keep making the animated versions.
Within my group of 5 friends, I am the comic book character fan, when we exit the cinema I explain every easter egg, possible future stories, relationships between characters and how what happened in that movie will affect the other ones in the MCU (and the DCEU when that was a thing). Every time Sony announced a movie, since Amazing Spider-Man I have told my friends, countless times that whatever Sony is doing is not MCU related. Every time. Then No Way Home happened and 1) they don't believe anymore, and 2) they think everything with the Marvel label is MCU.
@@captainmidnightoh come on, they’ve got some good quotes at least lol. I.E. “Chicken Blood, Chicken Blood, Chicken Blood”, “I am Bolo Man” and don’t forget “My name is Carbone, which means skinny white boy with a gun”
@@FilmScoreandMore he ends up in a hoodie, that has a lot of money stashed in it, so the main characters have to go and find this kangaroo and get their money back. A very disappointing plot, if you went there for the talking kangaroo.
Sony just needs to stop. We all see what they’re trying to do. Sony is trying to hold on to the rights to make Spider-Man movies. Sony needs to let Spidey go. They can finish the Spider-Verse movies, but after that? Give Spidey back to Marvel Studios and find something else to do.
I would personally love a Madame web sequel! It’s actually pretty good, I’m actually shocked that everyone thinks as bad as it is, because it’s not bad at all. It’s at the very least decent, and far far from the worst marvel let alone comic book/superhero movie. It’s actually quite interesting how they portrayed her visions and clairvoyance, and how many be realistic that even if it is a bit confusing to follow up first, once it finds its footing and you get it, it’s actually quite intriguing :-)
I have a feeling Kraven is going to fail and Sony will have no choice but to literally cut all of their lineup and start anew again. Their plans are so short term, they need a long term one.
Rather than "if you can't beat em, join em" I feel like Disney won't let Sony join em so Sony is "beating them" by attempting to drag down the MCU with it
You are absolutely correct about average movie goers not knowing the difference and I'm glad more people are talking about this issue. Had a co-worker very excitedly ask "did you see the trailer for the new Marvel movie?" the day Madame Web dropped, and when I said "oh, no I didn't I don't watch the Sony stuff" they had no idea what I was talking about.
You are 100% correct. I had friends that saw Morbius and straight up argued with me that it was an MCU movie because the Vulture was in it. I didn't have the willpower to explain the Sony/Disney divide. Casual fans see the Marvel logo and think its all MCU.
I mean when MCU is putting out titles like the Marvels, Madame Web isn't extremely different in terms of the level of quality and bringing shame to Feige.
I'm still here asking why are these movies being made, who are these for? these studio executives cannot be THIS clueless...but yet again i'm proven wrong.
Marvel puts out enough garbage outside of movie theaters. Not having them flop in theaters for a year wont change how tired people are of the whole franchise.
My dad said this weekend about madame web “it looks like marvel forgot how to make movies.” I told him it was Sony not marvel. I don’t think he really cared about the difference haha
You’re 100% correct. Problem is, Sony doesn’t care. They’re happy to make garbage movie after garbage movie just to keep the rights to Spider-Man. They don’t care if it confuses people, tarnishes Marvel Studios good name, or dilutes the comic book movie genre as a whole. Without Marvel Studios or Lord and Miller, they have no idea how to craft a good superhero movie.
Have you seen Madame Web yet? Will you?
Get a GREAT deal on Nebula now: go.nebula.tv/captainmidnight
No
Not too sure, it depends how good it is...
8:00 sony probably has a deal not to use villians that the MCU plans on using
It's better than the The Marvels.
No I'm not watching madame web I love Spider-Man but that doesn't ill watch bad movies based on Spider-Man characters I don't like
Kevin Feigi: "FOX! NOOOO!"
Fox: "I didn't do anything."
Kevin Feigi: "Sorry. Force of habit. SONY! NOOOOOO!"
It’s been Sony since the beginning though.
@@fulcrum6760maybe but we gotta make a Simpsons reference somehow
@@fulcrum6760 I think they were referring to X-Men, were they Sony before Fox?
@@Nikolaj11 I’m referring to attempts at a cinematic universe.
"It's just a little flop, it's still good, it's still good!"
What I don't get is, if Sony clearly knows what fans want based on their misleading trailers, why don't they just...make the movie the trailer suggests?
Well like think about it. You have to put actual effort then and Sony well….
Well the marketing team does, idk about the executives
“Show consumers what they want, so you can sneak what they say they don’t want into the plate.” That’s a paraphrase of the lead dev of the new Spider-Man game, but all these Big Media suits think the same way. They are trying to socially engineer the public tastes and they think all that it takes to get away with it is false advertisement.
Well considering the bangers Sony dose release despite pretends living in a fictional reality, Sony as a company needs a release schedule for investors and that means they need films releasing in slots. So that means films need to be green lit to mark a release quota why things like the next spider verse movie is in production.
Because studio execs have learned to think like game publishers. Why give away the best part when you can sell it to them later as DLC?
Their theory is that they can save the thing that audiences really want for the sequel, rather than giving away the best stuff up front. Sell you the same movie twice. In a way, it's not a new idea; look at Batman Begins ending with the tease of the Joker. But where they went wrong is in forgetting that Begins was, for its time, a very good superhero movie in its own right, and Scarecrow and Ras Al Ghul were both villains that hadn't seen a silver screen adaptation yet, so audiences were still excited for what they got. Knowing that Joker was coming next just made it all the more exciting (Begins obviously chose not to start with the Joker, because he works better as an antagonist to a well established Batman who has already settled into his groove, but studio execs don't get that kind of nuance). And of course, Begins never tried to hint that Joker would be showing up; not until the last scene.
As an average internet dweller it never crossed my mind, but you’re so right. There’s no way my dad knows this isn’t an MCU movie.
There's no way my dad CARES...
Dunno how yall can advertise trash so long/often...
"OMG dudes, I saw a dog turd on the street" - 4hr livestream coming up...
I thought it was until now lol
Either way, I already lost interest in MCU so no loss here personally
Maybe Disney is doing us a favor. Take all the legacy IP from the 1900s and purge it out of mainstream.
Eventually maybe we can get some new staples of sci-fi / fantasy worlds to take the helm.
@@MinecraftMartin
JUST IMAGINE... instead of "roasting bad media" these people made GOOD MEDIA...
INSTEAD OF "I'd rather watch you tear MW to shreds than watch MW"/desperate for clicks so hop on the "trending algorithm"..
ONLY UA-camrs are advertising this film - most people not on UA-cam are probably unaware it exists..
It's even crazier (for nerds like us) to think that a lot of people don't even know DC and Marvel are actually separate, competing franchises.
Deadpool should spell it out for everyone.
I told my friend at college today that an R Rated Kraven The Hunter movie was coming out and he got genuinely excited until I said it was in the same universe as Venom, Morbius, and Madame Web
Don’t people like venom though? It’s solely because of venom and Eddie Brock, but I mean, that’s still more than the other ones
@@gameb9oy I personally like Venom, he was more put off by the Morbius and Madame Web connections
Madame Web is in its own universe. It's not connected to the MCU or the Venomverse.
@@Coolcoolcooldude Fair point
Kraven's most famous and well-liked story inherently involves Kraven impersonating Spider-Man. The only way you could do it without Spider-Man would be if you had some other character filling in for Spider-Man's role in the story.
My parents don't remember that Superman isn't a Marvel movie. There is *definitely* confusion between Sony and Marvel :p
My parents probably wouldn't assume a connection between Superman and Spider-Man. But then they also wouldn't assume one between Batman and Superman. I'm not even sure if they've heard of Batman (although they definitely know Supes and Spidey).
@@Marco_Onyxheart your parents definitely heard of Batman. If they're boomers, the 60s television series introduced them to him & Robin. If they're Gen-Xers, then they were around for Batmania of '89. And of course, the biggest movie of 2008 was The Dark Knight. If your parents know of Superman & Spider-Man, then they've DEFINITELY heard of Batman. In fact, next time you see them, go "Na na na na na na na na na -" & see how they finish that line.
It’s a lot easier for audiences to make the distinction between Marvel and DC than Marvel and Sony. Most people are aware that Marvel and DC are separate brands/universes. Sony is trying to capitalize off the marvel brand which is confusing casual moviegoers.
The problem my parents have is picking up which Captain Marvel (Billy Batson or Carol Danvers) I'm talking about in a particular conversation, getting confused when I bring up Captain Marvel in the same sentence as the Justice League.
Wait, Superman isn't in the MCU?!! But I saw in that movie. You know, the one with the guy. Fake news. Superman is definitely in a movie.
Don't forget how the actors tagged marvel studios while announcing the movie on instagram
To be fair to them they are sometimes likely fooled into thinking they are in the mcu
@@lightdarksoul2097 I saw a video with a lawyer who said that if Disney decided to sue Sony they could build their case on brand confusion and use the actors tagging the wrong studio on instagram as evidence. :D AND he also mentioned that IF they won, it COULD prevent Sony from making more Spider-man adjacent movies which COULD mean the rights reverting back to Disney.
10:45 @@Domihork
I think the only issue with that is there is a chance to lose and if they did it's likely the relationship between the two would be finished so no more spiderman in the mcu and that would be bad. Still who knows? @@Domihork
@@lightdarksoul2097to be fair maybe they are. Nobody can tell anymore
I remember, like, 10yrs ago, someone asking me when we'll get Superman in the Avengers. A LOT of people don't even know the difference between DC and Marvel. They just go for superhero action movie.
There may be a bigger distinction now compared to then, we do after all live in post Endgame times. But even then...
I thought the transformers would be in the avengers based on how poorly the concept was explained to me in 2012 lol
@@masonhackler2883 It's funny because the Transformers would make infinitely more sense than DC. Marvel made Transformers comics at one point, and they even had an official crossover WITH Marvel superheroes.
@@monumentvalley6681Not to mention the MCU and Transformers were both Paramount at the time. Couldn’t you see the first Iron Man and the first Transformers in the same universe?
Honestly, I think for the sake of everyone they should just do it. DC, Sony, Marvel, just do the DC v Marvel that they have in the past, just throw whatever shit at this point, they aren't making timeless art here. Who cares anymore
I mean, are they really that different? Sure, fans will know. But general audiences aren't that invested, and why should they be? It's not like there's much difference.
Sony has made a deliberate effort in their marketing to confuse consumers into thinking their spin-offs are in the MCU. Depressing, but it worked. People lump in Madame Web into the "Marvel is dead since Endgame" conversation despite the movie not being made by Marvel Studios at all. However, I'm sure Marvel Studios has been dealing with this 'brand confusion' forever as I'm sure there was a time no one knew different studios were making Avengers, X-Men or Spider-Man movies.
To be fair, if the MCU movies didn’t have such massive brand loyalty most of them would get the same reaction
It's interesting because even back then the batting average and per movie quality was better. Granted stuff like Amazing Spider-man 2 and X-men Apocalypse were not good, bad even, but they weren't these mired disasters that recent Sony Spider-verse stuff has been. The average quality of marvel related films was better back then even in other studios. Now. MCU is bad and Sony's output is even worse. Nothing on Marvel's side has been good with only a few exceptions for quite a while. DC hasn't been doing great either though they have maintained average and okay output recently with some highlights (The Batman). And based on how people talk about it, it is obvious that it isn't superhero fatigue because people are WANTING THE FILMS TO SUCCEED. But the quality is just that bad.
The confusion would be somewhat lessened if marvels recent films hadn't been so mediocre and similar feeling, (although not nearly as bad), as sonys shlock.
Sony makes the Spider-Man movies dude
Dude, a lot of the general audience didn't even know the difference between Marvel & DC characters until more recently. Some still don't. People can get so invested in their big franchises that they forget that a lot of casual viewers just see "action movie" or "superhero film" and don't put much though into the studios or creators behind them.
The dying frog asks the scorpion why it stung despite knowing the consequence, to which the scorpion replies: "I am sorry, but I couldn't resist the urge. It's my character."
The Scorpion
I too am a fan of Drive (2011)
That’s not Marvel though. That’s just studio executives chasing trends.
"lol," said the scorpion. "Lmao."
@@ProcyonNite And drowned.
"It's a classic Kangaroo Jack situation." Is not a phrase I had on my 2024 bingo card. And even worse, is I knew exactly what you meant.
Brought up some repressed memories ngl
I think thag was the first movie my child mind hated, we were lied to!
Memories unlocked
Yep the kangaroo singing was all a dream@@seanmurphy4758
Bro even as a child I felt jipped. Where’s my talking Kangaroo movie?!
Your analysis of the situation absolutely rings true to me. While I haven’t heard of anyone I personally know getting “schnookered” by Sony’s sleight of hand marketing, I’ve known casual movie-goers who confuse Marvel & DC characters - never mind expecting them be up-to-date on which company hold what character’s copyright within the series of Marvel movies.
There is deliberate confusion out there, and I wouldn’t mind except that Sony is making the movies with the enthusiasm and expertise of a 3rd grader giving a book report presentation after reading only the Wikipedia page. "Help us Lord & Miller! You're our only hope!"
The biggest thing that concerns me is Sony not knowing their own history. There's a PSP in this 2003 set movie despite PSP not releasing until 2004 (Japan) 2005 (USA).
I was far more bothered by the guy playing on his touch screen smartphone in the subway, despite that not really being a thing until 2007.
Should've been a game boy advance or something
@EZ-IZZY1995 it's sony, the only product placement they do is their own products, hence the goddamn Sony Vaio in Amazing Spider-Man 2, along with the Xperia phone, Sony Triniton CRT TV, Sony monitor for Peter's PC, Sony SLR camera, the Sony headphones in Spider-Verse and the PS5 and Spider-Man 2 game in Across the Spider-Verse, among many others.
My friend's text reply when I told her on Feb 17 I was watching a bunch of video reviews about how bad Madame Web was exactly matches your concern:
"That sucks. I feel like Marvel needs a win here."
I keep seeing posts about Adam Scott being the MCU's Uncle Ben, and as a longtime fan it's baffling to see how many people don't realize he's not
TBF the movie is set in 2003, around the time Tom Holland Peter Parker would have been born. So I can see where they would think that.
@@mr.dystopian5554I think the pitch for this movie was an prequel for Holland's Peter. But Marvel held the line against explicit ties to the MCU
Holland's Peter was born in 2001
I dont think its a coincidence that all the characters that they are using in the Sony Spiderverse are the same characters that Avi Arad gave major focus to in the 90s Spider Man show.
I'll laugh my ass of if Sony announces a Hydro Man movie in their Spider-Man less universe
So.... the Hobgoblin is next?
Not only that, but Avi Arad co-created the Spider-Verse for the 90s cartoon. And he suggested The Spot for ATSV. They really are not coincidences.
Great show but take Spider-Man away and you’ve got nothing.
@@NadeemShekh-uy9znavi arad made hydroman look a thanos level threat in the fox cartoon
VENOM had the writer from 50 SHADES OF GREY (who is also directing VENOM 3)
MORBIUS had the writers from GODS OF EGYPT (Who are also behind MADAME WEB)
And KRAVEN THE HUNTER has the writers from TRANSFORMERS: THE LAST KNIGHT
AVI ARAD ruined everything again
And he isn't even involved in MADAME WEB
But he is behind BORDERLANDS though
Avi Arad is now Marvels biggest villain now that Pelmutter is completely out of the picture.
Gosh trash all around 😢
I dread what Avi is going to do to that announced Zelda movie if it doesn't get canned.
@@gregvs.theworld451 or if he doesn't die first
@@RayMcElroy50 Is he having health issues or something? I'll confess I don't keep tabs on Avi Arad because I don't like most of the things he's worked on.
Sony should just make horror movies with their Spider-Man villain characters like stop trying to make all these Spider-Man characters into antiheroes just make villain movies imagine if the director of terrifier made a Carnage movie or if they made a Mysterio movie like mike flanagans Occulus
Occulus is super underrated and a fantastic horror movie
Dope.
The director of Terrifier lmao
Oculus was absolute 🔥
The great thing about comic book movies is the endless amount of material they can draw from, which naturally led to the oversaturation of the medium.
Like, tmost of the big characters have been around for 50-60 years. You can make decades of movies based on those stories, but people get tired.
These movies need to be unique in order to grab people. The Batman and Spiderverse are fantastic examples. Even the mainline MCU Tom Holland Spiderman movies feel much smaller in scope, and it's no surprise that audiences like that. People just want to see a good movie.
In my opinion, it should have focused entirely on the three teenage Spiderwomen developing their powers, becoming the superheroes they were destined to become. Instead, they were running away and sidelined for the entire movie.
TRUE honestly
A lot of people say they’re tired of Spider-Man as a teenager but I think there’s plenty more stories to tell, esp if you use new characters
And it’s not like Madame Web was a big name that’d pull people into the theater
They could have just made a Spider-Gwen live action movie or just picked one of the Spiderwoman made a story about them instead of... whatever they thought they were doing.
You just wrote a more compelling script in a single sentence than a multimillion-dollar corporation could do with legions of employees and boatloads of cash. 😂😂
The only Spiderwoman I have ever wanted to see in live action is Jessica Drew.
that’s what confused me most about this movie. we’re told that these girls will be powerful superheroes but then they’re just boring, nothing characters for the entire movie. As i was watching madame web, i thought that the concept of a villain trying to kill his enemies before they get their powers is VERY interesting. but this was just…boring
Madame Web was one of those baffling divisions studios used to make all the time. Take a character and make an "origin" movie where they never do the things the characters are known for. And in this case, these characters aren't even that well known!
It's like making a Rambo prequel. You think "ok, maybe we'll see what he goes through in Vietnam. Maybe some boot camp stuff." but it ends up being about his high school career and it ends with him enlisting/getting drafted.
Except in Madam Web's case, it's actually about the high school career of one of the cops in First Blood instead of John Rambo.
Superhero movies are definitely a "rising tide raises all ships" scenario. I used to work in a movie theater and I've definitely heard people say Wonder Woman was their favorite Marvel. People expected Spider-man to show up in X-Men Days of Future Past. The average movie goer doesn't pay attention to most of this stuff
Yeah, audiences don't care what studio has a license to which superhero. It's all just people in capes fighting CGI bad guys.
I feel like the Venom cameo in NWH was to make it clear venom comes from a different universe. And honestly I wouldn't be surprised if Marvel studios had nothing to do with the Venom 2 and Morbius post credits and Sony used some legal loop hole that let them use spidey and the vulture as they technically own those characters
That cameo was probably just extremely confusing to most people.
The Venom cameo in NWH made sense but the Vulture thing didn’t unless we see ATSV and it makes sense coz of the Super Collider causing issues and interfering with Strange's spell which creates this anomaly that ended bringing Vulture to Sony verse
@@abdulazimnaushadwell ATSV also had a Vulture being shot into a different dimension, so Beyond The Spider-Verse may end up referencing it with Miguel getting an alert that Morbin time is happening
I'm fascinated by the idea that maybe we got the best cut of Madame Web. Maybe there's a version with no plot, just dissociative vignettes . Inaudible dialogue, contract breaching references directly to Marvel's Spiderman. Cast members accidently using each others real names and looking into the camera
I’d love to see that
You’re 100% right. Everyone I talked to thought Madame Web was an MCU movie. Hell even Dakota and Sydney thought they were in the MCU.
My new theory is that Morbius, Madame Web, et. al, are actually part of some hardball Sony/Disney negotiation strategy. Without them, the Spiderman rights are worth $X (primarily the value of Spiderman), but now the rights are worth $X+$Y where Y is the value of eliminating these ongoing reputational hits.
This would be crazy and I kinda buy it. Sony intentionally making bad movies so that Marvel will agree to their terms and just buy the IP back is wild 💀💀
Lol
Honestly, first explanation I've heard that made sense. I think you nailed it
So they are actively degrading the value just to spite Disney?
A big part of the problem is click bait. You see a lot of videos and articles that are like "another flop for marvel" or "marvel fails again" or "marvels biggest bomb". A lot of people who make content thrive off normies not knowing the difference and actively participate in misinforming the public.
Ayo, a fellow victim of the Kamgaroo Jack disappointment.
You never wanted to hear a roo talk more than Jack
"Oh, I am Jackie Legs and I like to say 'Hello!'"
Had to a double take cause I thought you already reviewed Madame Web
He did. This is just a video elaborating on the lasting effects of a train wreck like Madame Web. So yeah, it took him two videos to say what he needed to. That's just how BAD Madame Web is.
Idk man as a dude who is into more obscure characters, I didn't know Madame web was even in production let alone released. I doubt people who don't know about these characters will realize they're connected until they watch the movies. If they're even aware they exist.
Like me Cap, I'm STILL pissed about Kangaroo Jack not having a talking kangaroo, that had me hooked at the first trailer!
Anyway, with how Morbius used wider Marvel stuff in the trailer, and Madame Web using the Spider-Women in marketing, I'm surprised lawsuit talks aren't ramping up.
a lot of people stayed in my cinema viewing after Madame Web expecting some MCU post credit scenes, I stayed too to see their reaction. Then when credits over everyone was so confused lmao
Frickin hilarious
It'll be so funny if sony announces a Hydro Man movie or a Big Wheel movie in their Spider-Man less universe
There is no suprise they would do it there are already Mysterio and Doc Ock movies are coming and youtube can't even figure it out without typing the whole line😆
At least they'd have more source material to work with than the El Muerto and Hypno-Hustler movies
@@AJFStudios98Hypno Hustler is the one that might actually be good, since Donald Glover is behind it.
Sometimes a bad movie can just be a bad movie. Half the time I feel like fans WANT the MCU to die out because it’s using the franchise as a scapegoat for Hollywood chasing after Marvel’s trends.
I’ll just say it. I DO want the MCU to die. It’s just grating at this point.
It’s not using it as a scapegoat if it is undeniably true the MCU inspired a whole host of bad trends in movie making over the past decades
@@mr.merchandise4350You could just stop watching, let people enjoy it, and then it works itself out. Just because you don't like it doesn't mean those who do get nothing.
@@spicymemes7458 I tried that. As it turns out, ignoring the largest media franchise in the world isn’t really possible. That is, unless I’m willing to burry my head in the sand and avoid nearly all popular culture for the next decade.
@@mr.merchandise4350lmao so not watching them isn't enough? Everyone gotta stop talking about them too?
You're absolutely right. I have this conversation with people any time any superhero movie comes out. They think it's all MCU. Just last week I mentioned to someone (who considers themself a superhero movie fan) that Deadpool was the only MCU movie this year. Their response to me was, "what about Madame Web though?"
It just doesn't matter to most people. Caped heroes fighting bad guys, big CGI battle, etc. Who cares which studio owns the rights?
Honestly the way Sony is doing these movies gives me the same vibe as the superhero movies from the 90s/early 2000s like Catwoman and Steel.
They have the rights for one character and nothing else and as a result they make such drastic changes to said characters that they are unrecognizable to the ones the audience knew and loved from the source material.
Sony literally does not have to be doing this. The contract states they need to have a Spider-Man film in development every 5 years, not released. As long as they're working on an MCU aligned Spider-Man movie, they will retain the rights. I don't know why they are damaging this brand for no reason with these awful movies no one asked for.
I think people who don't know the difference between Disney Marvel and Sony Marvel aren't the type of people to watch interviews with Feige or read the trade magazines. If Disney wants to make that distinction clear, it has to be done in the trailers and opening credits.
MCU opening up the concept of multiverse and connecting different spidey movies openned the idea that now everything is somewhat connected...
I haven’t been on top of the MCU in a while, but I find copyright law fascinating, so I am usually on top of that. I mentioned to my wife earlier this year that Deadpool 3 was the only big Marvel movie this year and, within 24 hours or so, she got confused when we got a Madam Web trailer and I had to guide her through the weeds of the matter. So, indeed, the deceptive marketing is doing its job.
At a certain point, misleading trailers should be considered fraud. Food companies can't give you a wrong list of ingredience on their packaging either.
As a lawyer I can confirm that the studio contracts are doubtlessly at least an order of magnitude longer than War and Peace. You have no idea.
So as evidence to your argument, when I went on Rotten Tomatoes to check the audience reviews for Madam Web, there were several comments that said they felt bad for the MCU. Also, given that DC also plans to go easy on Superheroes until Superman legacy, Sony is not just distributing Marvel, but the whole genre's plans.
I can recognize the Marvel logo at a glance, but this did not stop me from misreading the text on the thumbnail as "Madame Web is Awful for Marriage" because the timestamp was blocking part of the title.
I feel like recent MCU has been more inconsistent than bad. Yeah you’ve got your Thor 4s and Ant-Man 3s as of late, but you’ve also gotten your GOTG 3s and Loki season 2s to go along with them. It’s been more hit or miss than anything
People like to ignore those because it messes with their narrative that the MCU is dramatically failing.
@@anthonyvillanueva5226I mean, I watched the First three episodes of Loki s2 and is still an abomination
@@randomusername3873It's better than most of Phases 1 and 2
@@randomusername3873 Loki season 2 is amazing wtf
Irregular stuff is what really hurts. When is good is great when is bad it hurts, tuogh i admit i have less confidence even since Secret Invasion happened and what they did to Rhodey's character...
Here's how correct you are: I watched "Everything, Everywhere, All at Once" with a friend of mine, at my suggestion. We both thoroughly enjoyed it. When it ended they said, "That's the best Marvel movie they've made yet!"
You could have replied " Yeah, it is like Multiverse of Madness, but better.
You didn't even mention the El Muerto movie. I think I read that Bad Bunny backed out but the fact they decided to make an El Muerto movie is WILD.
Considering the Deadpool & Wolverine trailer broke the all-time 24 hour trailer viewership record, plus the people seemed to like X-Men ‘97’s trailer, and the cast of The Fantastic Four, I don’t think they’ll stop seeing MCU films and they’ll know Sony is just the problem with their movies and see it.
Other creators have added to the confusion with relish and glee. They used MCU, Marvel, and Disney in their titles and videos and linking the two together while barely mentioning Sony.
Ah yes the "anti woke" losers
@@Dave102693 I try not to sling stones, I’m far from perfect myself but I believe we are discussing the same people
On one hand, I don't want to blame actors like Matt Smith and Dakota Johnson for essentially being tricked into taking on these roles, but on the other hand, did they not think to google their character's name? Their backstory? How fans feel about them, or if they're even popular to begin with? I just feel like they could have saved themselves some trouble.
Even in the early years of the MCU, there was confusion among some of my family and friends about which movies were in it. There was an assumption that pre-MCU Marvel movies like Spiderman, Hulk, X-Men, and Fantastic Four were already part of the MCU, not appreciating that Ironman was doing someting bold and different.
Forget people who don’t know that Madame Web and Morbius aren’t in the MCU, I know people who don’t know Superman and Batman movies aren’t in the MCU. To them all comic movies are the same universe.
I found it interesting that in Madam WEB, there are literally no "webs". evil black spidey only jumps dosn't swing and the women only wear their costumes in the short flash-foward clips at the very end.
Sony have fallen for the increasingly common media mistake. You cannot draw a blueprint for infinite money in a creative industry. Cash grabs based on comic characters without any actual intrest in exploring them, and reshooting to get the mimimum viable product, is not going produce endless viewership. The closest thing to a blueprint has consistently shown to be to making something worthwhile
What Sony should really do is put Phil Lord and Chris Miller in charge of their cinematic universe
They're the only ones that know what they're doing
At least when they learn to treat their filmmakers with respect.
I am playing City of Heroes every single day, often with various DCAU shows in the background - I don’t have ‘superhero fatigue’; I do however have franchise management fatigue.
Write compelling characters that weren’t workshopped to oblivion.
I feel the same way. Marvel could release an MCU movie every month with shows in-between and I'd watch them all. Provided they're good. But I'm tired of flops.
@@Marco_Onyxheart So you're basically wanting factory level production with a bespoke fine dining quality. Very realistic expectations, there 😂
My cousin Arrin, who I went and saw Madame Web with, thought it was in the MCU until I told him that it wasn’t.
My mom loves "Thor" and "Iron Man" movies, and is absolutely not aware that characters like Madame Web aren't a part of the MCU. She didn't know Aquaman and Flash were part of a completely different universe. They're all just "superhero movies" of varying quality to her, and I'm sure she's not alone in thinking that.
Look if Disney started doing good mcu movies, it would grow on her eventually that avengers stuff is good but no name stuff not good. But all movies are bad lol
This is the type of movie Kevin Feige would reject instantly, and make him reject a movie needs to be the HARDEST THING EVER
I would love to sit next to Feige in a theater playing Madame Web. Can you imagine his expressions.
@@Coolcoolcooldude He once reacted weirdly when Amy Pascal said that she and Sony were planning a Spider-Man universe of their own. Needless to say, he kinda was right about reacting, since everything that has come out of the SSU has been (mostly) a trainwreck.
I'm interested enough in this stuff to sub to your channel and I didn't know these films were from a different company and not an MCU production.
What I don't really understand is how Sony tries to make movies about Spiderman villians that the general audience might not know while not being able to use Spiderman. I think a live action movie about Spider-Gwen or Miles Morales as Spiderman would make more sense because you wouldn't have to dance arround that one character that you can't use. But maybe they can't use any spider guy in their movies, I don't know.
To anyone who thinks general audiences know the difference between Sony Marvel & MCU:
I heard a guy at the barbershop talk about how Wonder Woman was one of the better Marvel movies. Another guy agreed saying, “yeah, that was before they did the time travel crap in Endgame.”
I won’t lie, as someone who doesn’t keep up to date on films except for major releases I thought this was a Marvel production until like… yesterday.
I think this is interesting. The average Joe and Jane Public really don't know or care enough to distinguish between what's an MCU Marvel Movie, what the Fox movies were, and what the Sony movies are. And with stuff in the Spiderverse movies and the weird cameos Marvel/Disney has tied themselves a little too close to what Sony is doing.
I also think the public really doesn't know the finer splits between Marvel and DC, cause I've seen people ask if Superman or Spider-Man are in the same universe or did Stan Lee create Wonder Woman. Might seem odd to us fans who are more in the weeds, but the average person doesn't know and that can also have an effect on how things are persceived.
I didn't follow Morbius full campaign abroad (I live in Brazil), however, weeks prior to its release, the movie tagline everywhere (billboards, trailers) was "Witness the origin of a new Marvel Legend". Besides Vulture and Spider-man's "murder graffiti", they went all out in this direction here regarding its promotion. Outside of my small inner circle of close friends, everyone else in my demographics just assumed it to be MCU connected. Same with Madame Web, with people even asking me about her and the other Spider-woman's lore before its release.
Well, one thing I learned from this video… Dani Rojas is the bartender Venom was talking to!
It’s interesting that only just now I’ve realised why the Marvel Studios card in trailers is always different or unique for every movie release like they’re trying to draw attention to “Marvel Studios” versus “in association with Marvel” where it’s just the red card
Wait... Sorry. The Kangaroo in Kangaroo Jack doesn't talk?!?
Sony is really contributing to the superhero fatigue narrative, and it's also ruining it for everyone else's product and future potential. I have to believe there's an elaborate conspiracy surrounding shifting the public's interest in superhero movie to the next big thing.. Cause this is getting out of hand..
Man, my mom didn't know that Batman & Superman weren't part of the MCU until I told her back in 2015 that she didn't need to watch BvS to understand the next avengers movie.
The ultra-casual fan has no idea what movie goes with what continuity
I didn’t really consider that normal people don’t know the difference until a few years ago my sister told me she’s almost caught up on the MCU and needs to see Morbius while it’s in theaters 😮💨
The problem with Kraven is that they gave the whole plot/film away on that first trailer that now feels that it came out a long time ago. Not holding a candle for that film.
The moment I saw the trailer for this movie, I wasn't found of how Sony just wasted the potential of a good movie without tarnishing the MCU. The moment I heard from news that this will be connected to the marvel cinematic universe, I knew there is something fishy after just having other Spider-Man villians but never included their own Spider-Man. I mean they established that there is three of them in separated universe, why not use them?
Im a big believer that any story can be good if told properly, Morbius, Madame Web, and Kraven can be solid films but of course its not just execution thats the issue its the obvious studio interference. How hard is it to let people create?
I keep asking if Disney/Marvel can sue Sony for damage to the Marvel brand, and possibly break the contract.
No
I'm someone who stopped watching new MCU films after Endgame because I was just kinda sick of it at that point. I watched Spiderman No Way Home only because of Maguire, Garfield, Molina and Dafoe.
I barely registered Madame Web was coming out at all. And I honestly forgot Sony was making superhero films. I haven't watched Venom or Morbius, and with what little marketing I did see and hear, i just assumed it WAS an MCU film to set up some Holland Spiderman backstory tbh. Wasn't planning on watching it, but when I saw all the videos coming out about how bad it was I got curious.
I definitely think Sony is hurting Disney Marvel with movies like this. One person's perspective though: I stopped caring about the franchise a long time ago. Deadpool and Wolverine has my attention, but even that has me cautious with all the MCU references in the trailer.
Honestly the biggest shock of this video was that THE KANGAROO IN KANGAROO JACK DOESN'T TALK????
I'd never seen it and that was the one thing I expected from it if I ever experienced it
It's just a normal kangaroo except for a single dream sequence. It's misleading marketing at its finest.
The average person barely knows that DC and Marvel are different companies with different universes.
1:48 Wait, wait, wait, wait, hold on... Kangaroo Jack didn't talk??
Just a reminder for everyone that a significant portion of audiences don't know the difference between the marvel and DC universes, let alone Marvel and Sony cinematic universes.
I appreciate this video so much because every decision they’ve made regarding the “villainverse” makes me feel insane. I just hope the third Spiderverse drops before the lawsuit/buyout.
I've heard that the actors were actually led to believe by Sony that this was going to be an MCU movie - and even on set were led to believe they were working for Marvel. If true, Marvel can easily sue to get the rights back.
Right now, Sony fully owns Spider-Man (and all of those other characters), and they're just temporarily allowing Marvel to use him (and Sony gets like 40% of the gross). So the ties between the two universes are very real, it's just that while Marvel is using Spider-Man, Sony can't use him specifically - or at least, they can't use Tom Holland's Spider-Man (but could theoretically still use someone like Andrew Garfield, I believe). So instead, they were making these movies that "surround" Spider-Man, and they were hoping that everything would join together eventually (though I doubt Marvel wants to do that, because that would mean Sony/Marvel would have to team up in making the movies, and it would just be really difficult for the two studios to agree on plotlines, etc.). Hopefully now, Marvel will sue to get the rights back somehow and won't have to worry about Sony destroying the IP anymore - or they could sue to get the live-action rights, and allow Sony to keep making the animated versions.
Well said about people not knowing the difference. They dont. And fans who do know arent enough to make box office hits
Within my group of 5 friends, I am the comic book character fan, when we exit the cinema I explain every easter egg, possible future stories, relationships between characters and how what happened in that movie will affect the other ones in the MCU (and the DCEU when that was a thing). Every time Sony announced a movie, since Amazing Spider-Man I have told my friends, countless times that whatever Sony is doing is not MCU related. Every time. Then No Way Home happened and 1) they don't believe anymore, and 2) they think everything with the Marvel label is MCU.
We're gonna need the full story on this Kangaroo Jack grudge you've got
They had that kangaroo dancing and singing in every ad! You go see it, that’s one like 30 second dream sequence. He’s a regular kangaroo!
@@captainmidnight So what is Kangaroo Jack? Why does he matter if he's just a regular kangaroo?
@@captainmidnightoh come on, they’ve got some good quotes at least lol. I.E. “Chicken Blood, Chicken Blood, Chicken Blood”, “I am Bolo Man” and don’t forget “My name is Carbone, which means skinny white boy with a gun”
They advertised it as a kid's talking animal movie when it's an adult crime stoner black comedy. @@FilmScoreandMore
@@FilmScoreandMore he ends up in a hoodie, that has a lot of money stashed in it, so the main characters have to go and find this kangaroo and get their money back. A very disappointing plot, if you went there for the talking kangaroo.
Sony just needs to stop. We all see what they’re trying to do. Sony is trying to hold on to the rights to make Spider-Man movies. Sony needs to let Spidey go. They can finish the Spider-Verse movies, but after that? Give Spidey back to Marvel Studios and find something else to do.
I would personally love a Madame web sequel! It’s actually pretty good, I’m actually shocked that everyone thinks as bad as it is, because it’s not bad at all. It’s at the very least decent, and far far from the worst marvel let alone comic book/superhero movie. It’s actually quite interesting how they portrayed her visions and clairvoyance, and how many be realistic that even if it is a bit confusing to follow up first, once it finds its footing and you get it, it’s actually quite intriguing :-)
I have a feeling Kraven is going to fail and Sony will have no choice but to literally cut all of their lineup and start anew again. Their plans are so short term, they need a long term one.
Rather than "if you can't beat em, join em" I feel like Disney won't let Sony join em so Sony is "beating them" by attempting to drag down the MCU with it
You are absolutely correct about average movie goers not knowing the difference and I'm glad more people are talking about this issue. Had a co-worker very excitedly ask "did you see the trailer for the new Marvel movie?" the day Madame Web dropped, and when I said "oh, no I didn't I don't watch the Sony stuff" they had no idea what I was talking about.
You are 100% correct. I had friends that saw Morbius and straight up argued with me that it was an MCU movie because the Vulture was in it. I didn't have the willpower to explain the Sony/Disney divide. Casual fans see the Marvel logo and think its all MCU.
I mean when MCU is putting out titles like the Marvels, Madame Web isn't extremely different in terms of the level of quality and bringing shame to Feige.
Marvels is still at least a movie.
Yeah I've had coworkers tell me Madame Web is "another marvel cash grab" and they "used to love the avengers stuff don't know what happened"
Disney and Kev are FUMING man I would
I'm still here asking why are these movies being made, who are these for? these studio executives cannot be THIS clueless...but yet again i'm proven wrong.
Marvel puts out enough garbage outside of movie theaters. Not having them flop in theaters for a year wont change how tired people are of the whole franchise.
My dad said this weekend about madame web “it looks like marvel forgot how to make movies.” I told him it was Sony not marvel. I don’t think he really cared about the difference haha
Are you planning on making a review of Netflix ATLA? I'd like to hear your thoughts on it.
god i remember watching kangaroo jack as a kid and i was so bored because i was expecting a talking kangaroo
You’re 100% correct. Problem is, Sony doesn’t care. They’re happy to make garbage movie after garbage movie just to keep the rights to Spider-Man. They don’t care if it confuses people, tarnishes Marvel Studios good name, or dilutes the comic book movie genre as a whole. Without Marvel Studios or Lord and Miller, they have no idea how to craft a good superhero movie.