A friendly reminder to our users, please make sure your account is safe. Make sure you update your password and have an active email address to recover or change your password.
The actual character is this malevolent force. He's like Dracula for spider heroes. Ezekiel is just another dude with spider powers. He's an expository character who teaches the Peter and prospectively other spider heroes about their powers and he's not completely trustworthy. Ezekiel was never actually a villain. He doesn't look like a villain either. Case in point, they dress him up in this ridiculous costume to make everyone know he's a villain and looks like garbage.
Morlun actually looks like a villain and he's a dreadful character. He's likely ancient and stops at nothing. Case in point, audiences and critics are not buying into Ezekiel as a bad guy or character. People didn't like his performance, dialogue, or character arc. It was not a smart choice.
Also, I'm not saying Morlun as the bad guy would've definitively fixed a broken film, but it wouldn't have made things worse, which is basically what we're at here. We're at bottom of the barrel, Elektra/Catwoman levels with this film. And it's unfair to the actors who deserved better. Female-led superhero movies are already so heavily scrutinized anyway and you have the outrage grifters who go after them even further.
You're coming at this like a fanboy with a clear character preference. Nothing more. This wouldn't have tangibly fixed anything and Ezekiel being the villain they picked isn't why this movie sucked. Period. They easily could have tied Ezekiel to the Spider-Totem garbage and if the pre planned this as a trilogy built to Morlun. There are ways to make this work, but you're getting too bent out of shape about this 1 aspect of the movie that ultimately doesn't matter in the grand scheme. You're entitled to your opinion, but ya also are not changing my opinion
You're coming at this like a fanboy with a clear character preference. Nothing more. This wouldn't have tangibly fixed anything and Ezekiel being the villain they picked isn't why this movie sucked. Period. They easily could have tied Ezekiel to the Spider-Totem garbage and if the pre planned this as a trilogy built to Morlun. There are ways to make this work, but you're getting too bent out of shape about this 1 aspect of the movie that ultimately doesn't matter in the grand scheme. You're entitled to your opinion, but ya also are not changing my opinion
As with anything, it depends on what the idea is and the execution. Thor: Ragnarok was amazing, and that movie's Hela was vastly different to the comic's one. Same can be applied to many other villains in these movies. The issue here was the execution on basically every level was garbage, not that the villain wasn't named Morlun. This is a weird hill to die on, Vile. So, I am just gonna say I don't agree with your thesis and call it a day
I agree with @TheVileOne, I mean, look, this movie was likely going to blow chunks no matter what because the suits at Sony in charge of this universe dont know wtf they're doing. HOWEVER, a good IDEA or premise for this movie could and should have been a Terminator like story where this unstoppable force (Morlun) was after these Spider-powered indivduals: Madame Web, Jessica Carpenter etc, to wipe them out and it could have been this cool lean action thriller where these cool Spider characters have to band together to survive this unstoppable force and protect each other. And you know what...something tells me this movie was that in some incarnation pre rewrites and reshoots. But somewhere along the way, someone got cold feet on what they were making and completely wrote this movie off and we got...this.
On top of what @Arachnerd said, the guy is actually a pretty esteemed French actor. He had a major role in Napoleon last year. There are some rumours that he didn't even do his ADR, Sony just got a really bad sounds like, resulting in the accent changes and the like.
That would make sense. Sorry if my comment came across as insensitive. I have heard he's won a ton of awards in France but his poor performance or whatever happened to it, was the clear weak link to me. Obviously it's not all on him.
As with anything, it depends on what the idea is and the execution. Thor: Ragnarok was amazing, and that movie's Hela was vastly different to the comic's one. Same can be applied to many other villains in these movies. The issue here was the execution on basically every level was garbage, not that the villain wasn't named Morlun. This is a weird hill to die on, Vile. So, I am just gonna say I don't agree with your thesis and call it a day
She is different, but they still used Hela as a villain. They didn't make Valkyrie the villain and Hela some sort of misunderstood antihero who was actually trying to save Asgard and Thor from Valkyrie. That's comparable to what happened here.
She is different, but they still used Hela as a villain. They didn't make Valkyrie the villain and Hela some sort of misunderstood antihero who was actually trying to save Asgard and Thor from Valkyrie. That's comparable to what happened here.
Alexander Pierce worked just fine. Again, you have your opinion and that's fine, but Ezekiel or Morlun are not characters anyone really cares about like they do Green Goblin or Venom etc. Thus you can play with those a bit more and no one cares.
So serious question, why is it you think they backed down and removed and downplayed all of the “Spiderman” aspects and tie-isn of this movie that were so clearly a part of the original cut of this film?
So serious question, why is it you think they backed down and removed and downplayed all of the “Spiderman” aspects and tie-isn of this movie that were so clearly a part of the original cut of this film?
I dont have access to the contract, so I cannot verify I am right but I strongly think I am:
Sony and Marvel Studios have a deal to co-produce Spider-Man films, so I think Spider-Man appearing in live action would violate that deal because there is probably some kind of non-compete clause. Meaning, Sony probably cannot make their own Peter Parker Spider-Man films while they have the deal with Marvel Studios. Hence why we won't be getting a Tobey or Andrew led Spider-Man film anytime soon
But SF, what about Spiderverse? Animation and live action rights are different, so animation is probably okay.
Sony has been talking about a Miles Morales movie in live action recently, so maybe they're working on something that would allow that. But notice in Madame Web
they never say Peter Parker by name nor May's name when Cassandra asks Ben what is his girlfriend's name and why May isn't at the baby shower, but Ben Parker wasnt in a Marvel Studios movie, so no conflict
Like I said, I cannot prove this but I just know I am right
I have a suspicion Venom1988 is right, but it makes this live-action Spider-Man Universe that much goofier considering they are trying to build a shared universe about Spider-Man characters when they can't utilize or reference Spider-Man at all.
Like what are they building and trying to do here with this franchise? Especially if they can't reference or mention Spider-Man? The villains are going to band together to fight Arachnid Male?
While I think keeping the license rights is part of it, I don't think it's their main reason for doing it. If it was Sony would be content with just releasing 1 Spider-Man movie every 3-5 years. I think it's more to do with the fact that they are still trying to chase that MCU success and make as much money as possible, regardless if the final product makes sense.
I know this is wishful thinking, but I hope the back to back bombing of Morbius and Madame Web forces them to rethink their whole approach to their movies
at the very least, if they stop working with those screenwriters that’d be an improvement
Actually, I think the changes to Madame Web and Morbius suggest Marvel Studios stepped in and said Sony cannot legally do what they're trying to do, and so they made all these clumsy changes as to not be sued.
Presidents Day box office will see Bob Marley: One Love win with $35M-$38M, while Sony's 'Madame Web' crashes with $20M.
deadline.com
Sony went after young women with Madame Web, with 75% of its $60M global P&A allocated toward social and Tik Tok. The Marvel Spider-Man spinoff property is bringing in men 53% and women 47%.
Wild that they managed to spend 60M on marketing, it felt nonexistent. So they're on the hook for 140M, the movie looks to make 80M WW. Even with such a small budget this thing might lose Sony close to 100M theatrically.
alright...I just got back from the showing with the wifey, and...
...I thought it was, the first word that I mentioned: alright? it wasn't perfect, but I thought it was overall an alright movie. it wasn't terrible, and it certainly wasn't the worst movie ever, let alone worst comic book movie. I don't know why all the critics hate it, but then again I didn't want to read the reviews to accidentally have my opinion get influenced them.
I haven't seen it, I don't think the Sony Spidey Movies are that bad. I think the worst one has been Let There Be Carnage. Morbius had potential. Still think the franchise is better under Sony.
Why they haven't done a 2099 or Scarlet Spider movie is beyond me, that way they can use these characters with A Spider Man character.
2099 would be unique and fresh take, Scarlet could lead to a cool collaboration between MCU and Sony Spideys Clone Saga type of event.
Hope Sony rethinking their approach and hire a competent James Gunn or Feige type guy.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
