Sony Spin-Off Madame Web spin-off in the works

[DyeLorean]

I don't think the Sony Spidey Movies are that bad. Still think the franchise is better under Sony.

 

[SirStrangefolk]

We could have gotten a lousy Terminator rip-off instead.

That's not what I'm saying here. If you are even going to think about approaching Spider-Totems and Spider-Deities from the comics, you don't make Ezekiel your villain in a movie. You make Morlun the villain. It would need to be a completely different movie from the top down. Not same anything.

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.

What if Ezekiel wasn't after these 3 random Spider-Women but instead after Cassandra's young (grand)daughter Charlotte because he knew she'd become a killer of Spider-Totems in the future, in a "go back in time and kill Hitler as a child" way (or similar to Cable trying to kill Firefist as a kid in Deadpool 2 I guess). And then Cassandra had to protect Charlotte? Would that have been better?

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?

Yeah I don't get it either... They could've built a movie series around a non-Peter Spider-Man like Miguel. They could've built a universe with a character that isn't named Spider-Man as his stand-in, such as Silk. They could've built a universe around a different group of characters coming together, like the Outlaws. I do not understand why they rejected all 3 of those options in favor of whatever this is...

 

[Pennywise]

 

[XtremelyBaneful]

I was just thinking about this article. Kraken the hunter is still coming out this year, right?

 

[Arachnerd]

Yep. And Venom 3, supposedly.

 

[Spider-Fan]

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.

This movie basically is a Terminator rip-off. Ezekiel here is supposed to be an unstoppable force like the Terminator and the girls are supposed to band together with Cassandra and survive. That IS the movie we got. It is just a very incompetent version of that premise

 

[AndrewGilkison]

Sony just needs to scrap this "shared" Spider-Man Universe crap and just let Marvel/Disney handle the live action Spider-Man movies and park a dump truck full of money in front of Tom Holland's house to get him to do another trilogy. Stop trying to compete with Marvel. Its not going to happen.

 

[Arachnerd]

They aren't going to. Doing these movies are the only way for them to keep their grasp on the Spider-Man rights.

 

[AndrewGilkison]

They aren't going to. Doing these movies are the only way for them to keep their grasp on the Spider-Man rights.

That doesn't make any sense. Doing Spider-Man movies alone would allow them to keep the rights (no need for a dumb shared universe) and if they kept their joint partnership deal with Marvel going, why would they be in any danger of losing the rights?

There is no need to keep throwing money away on trying to compete with Marvel in the shared universe game just to hold onto the movie rights to the character. Am I missing something?

 

[Arachnerd]

Also because their attitude hasn't changed about creating their own Spider-Man adverse cinematic universe. Checking the old Sony leaks should give you a clear idea that their stance on this hasn't changed a whole lot.

 

[SirStrangefolk]

Sony just needs to scrap this "shared" Spider-Man Universe crap and just let Marvel/Disney handle the live action Spider-Man movies and park a dump truck full of money in front of Tom Holland's house to get him to do another trilogy. Stop trying to compete with Marvel. Its not going to happen.

I mean there's definitely a way forward for Sony with regards to Spider-Man live action movies if they wanted to. But they would need to hire some people who are actually knowledgeable about the IP and some people with a proven trackrecord of good scripts and good directing.

If they could somehow convince someone like Denis Villeneuve, Alex Garland, or Matt Reeves to make a Spider-Man 2099 movie together with some good writers they've worked with before, you have someone who knows the source material well informing them, and you don't let non-creative executives meddle a bunch, it's likely not gonna be as bad as when you pair up a first-time movie director with some writers that have an average Rotten Tomatoes score of 18% across their movies and tell them to make a movie about a character nobody cares about seemingly based on what you found on a wiki and then make them change course well into production. And that is an extreme example, there are smaller directors who could do the job just fine too, but ideally have some good writers at least.

I don't think you need to be a genius to come up with that hypothesis. But that would require a larger investment upfront and trust in creatives, so...

 

[Arachnerd]

You're forgetting the fact that Sony is notoriously terrible at not interfering with their non-MCU Spider-Man related movies (Spider-Man 3 and the ASM movies also counting), so the main problem isn't the directors and writers themselves.

 

[psylockolussus]

I would love it if this year marks the end of Sony's Spider-Man Universe.

But even if Kraven and Venom 3 both flop. They still have

-Miles Morales live action movie
-Spider-Gwen live action movie
-Venom vs someone familiar if not Spider-Man

I do think Madame Web flopping will not encourage them to do solo movies for Black Cat and Silver Sabre anymore (which imo would be really cool if done well).

Not sure about the rights issue for Spider-Woman movie? I would love that to be a co production with Marvel Studios.

 

[Spider-Fan]

Venom 3 won't flop. At worst I see it doing about what Venom 2 did. Which is fine for it. Kraven I see doing better than Madame Web but worse than Morbius

 

[Boom]

Meanwhile, Ben Reilly sitting there not being used

 

[OrbOfConfusion]

As brief as his time in the MCU was, I feel Venom 3 could try to capitalize on Brock briefly being in that other universe. I don't know how they'd do that, but at this point, the cat is out of the bag that he was sent to another, more successful film universe that Sony could easily milk in its marketing.

Why Venom wasn't recruited as the sixth villain in No Way Home to make it a proper Sinister Six, I'll never know.

 

[Spider-Fan]

As brief as his time in the MCU was, I feel Venom 3 could try to capitalize on Brock briefly being in that other universe. I don't know how they'd do that, but at this point, the cat is out of the bag that he was sent to another, more successful film universe that Sony could easily milk in its marketing.

Why Venom wasn't recruited as the sixth villain in No Way Home to make it a proper Sinister Six, I'll never know.

I think earlier versions had Venom popping up in the finale cause he sees Spider-Man challenge the others at the Statue of Liberty on TV and then shows up. My guess is he would at first have attacked Spider-Man and then ultimately helped.

 

[Arachnerd]

Why Venom wasn't recruited as the sixth villain in No Way Home to make it a proper Sinister Six, I'll never know.

My theory is because Sony wanted to build to their own Sinister Six and resurrect that project under their own cinematic universe. Not sure if that's still the plan, but if so, Venom, Morbius, Vulture and Kraven being part of it doesn't exactly make up for an interesting line-up so far.

 

[Venom 1988]

I think earlier versions had Venom popping up in the finale cause he sees Spider-Man challenge the others at the Statue of Liberty on TV and then shows up. My guess is he would at first have attacked Spider-Man and then ultimately helped.

My theory is because Sony wanted to build to their own Sinister Six and resurrect that project under their own cinematic universe. Not sure if that's still the plan, but if so, Venom, Morbius, Vulture and Kraven being part of it doesn't exactly make up for an interesting line-up so far.

These are both correct. They had previous verions of the script that utilized Venom more but it seems he was going to be spending most of the movie trying to get from Mexico to NY and would have finally shown up at the Statue of Liberty at the end.

Spider-Man: No Way Home writer shares Venom's alternate role

"There were versions where he shows up earlier."

www.digitalspy.com

But yea ultimately it came down to both an already stuffed script and the potential of a future Sinister Six movie. Copying a post I had in other thread about this after reading the Reign of Marvel Studios book:

* Previous versions of the script had Dunst MJ, Emma Stone Gwen and Sally Field Aunt May but were cut due to being overstuffed. They seem to imply RHINO (Giamtti) might have potentially been a 6th villain at one point (which lines up with a leak that occured back in 2021). It seems they settled on 5 so that Sony could still have the opportunity to do an actual Sinister Six movie down the road.

 

[GwensNeckBrace]

A Spider-Woman won’t happen anymore, if under Sony. Judging by them pulling the plug on Silk and reworking it after Madame Web bombed

 

[Spider-Fan]

A Spider-Woman won’t happen anymore, if under Sony. Judging by them pulling the plug on Silk and reworking it after Madame Web bombed

It still could, but also might be made with a male audience in mind like Silk is now. As you say this, it's been ages since we heard anything about that Olivia Wilde directed Spider-Woman movie

 

[Frodo]

Good points here.

The reality is , Sony is not gonna stop making " Spider-centric " , what have you , films outside of the Marvel Cinematic universe , even if that's not what alot of fans wish.

They're a bit like Wiley Coyote .

 

[Filmfreak]

Venom 3 won't flop. At worst I see it doing about what Venom 2 did. Which is fine for it. Kraven I see doing better than Madame Web but worse than Morbius

At a time where 90% of superhero films are flopping really hard, including far more profitable franchises and films than Venom, I'll be shocked if it does anything near what the second film did worldwide. I don't necessarily expect it to flop, because these films are relatively cheap to make, but I don't see it having many chances to not at least take a dive.

 

[Spider-Fan]

At a time where 90% of superhero films are flopping really hard, including far more profitable franchises and films than Venom, I'll be shocked if it does anything near what the second film did worldwide. I don't necessarily expect it to flop, because these films are relatively cheap to make, but I don't see it having many chances to not at least take a dive.

Difference is though that is now on its 3rd film and thus has its audience established in a way Blue Beetle and crap wasn't.

 

[Filmfreak]

Difference is though that is now on its 3rd film and thus has its audience established in a way Blue Beetle and crap wasn't.

I understand that, hence why I don't necessarily think it's going to flop, and if it was a conversation that we were having last year I wouldn't object with that, but 2023 happened and it changed everything.

In similar notion the MCU as a whole was established for 30 films before it had its first major misfire. I can't believe that in a world where a sequel to a 1.13 billion dollar movie in the most popular and successful cinematic universe in existence made a mere 200 million a few months back, amongst numerous other bombs, and a Venom sequel will still reach half a billion after all is said and done. I guess we'll still be here to talk about that, but I just don't see it.