Morbius Sony announces a Morbius movie in development!

[dhandler01]

Yeah that is a bad example. Joker is one of the oldest and well known villains out there and was coming off one of the most iconic versions ever. (which won an Oscar) If you stop 100 random people on the street and show them a picture of the Joker (pick one of many versions) the majority likely will be able to identify him. I used to work in a comic store and I barely know who Morbius is outside being a vampire.

This would be like giving Man-Bat a solo but not connecting it to Batman at all.

 

[GuestStar2004]

False equivalence.

Sorry, it's not a valid comparison because none of these characters are on the level of The Joker. The Joker is one of the most iconic villains in history.

Yeah and many said The Joker doesn't work without Batman. It doesn't matter whether its "the joker" or not. People said it wouldn't work without Batman. People won't go to see the Joker without BATMAN. And they did. it doesn't matter whether its the joker or someone very few have heard of. A good 85% of characters can be translated into their own movies and stories. Its just a case of whether they are given the chance to find out.

I have got used to getting comic book movies of characters i have never heard of. I have got used to accepting that the movies will never be exactly like the comics. I have got used to the idea that fans don't verdict the much wider audience learning about these characters. So why do people still carry these ideas about how things should be done? Its almost like no one has learned anything. Or just very ignorant to the success of movies that differ from the comics.

 

[TheVileOne]

Yeah and many said The Joker doesn't work without Batman. It doesn't matter whether its "the joker" or not. People said it wouldn't work without Batman. People won't go to see the Joker without BATMAN. And they did. it doesn't matter whether its the joker or someone very few have heard of. A good 85% of characters can be translated into their own movies and stories. Its just a case of whether they are given the chance to find out.

Personally, I don't think he does. Also, there have been many movies before with Joker and Batman. Many movies and TV shows in live-action of the Joker, and in animation. None of these Spider-Man characters ever had that. Sorry, it's not a valid comparison. It's a false equivalence. Kraven, Morbius, and Madame Web have never had live-action appearances period. Joker has had multiple appearances in billion-dollar films before the Joaquin Phoenix film.

I have got used to getting comic book movies of characters i have never heard of. I have got used to accepting that the movies will never be exactly like the comics. I have got used to the idea that fans don't verdict the much wider audience learning about these characters. So why do people still carry these ideas about how things should be done? Its almost like no one has learned anything. Or just very ignorant to the success of movies that differ from the comics.

Blade and Guardians of the Galaxy this is not.

 

[InCali]

False equivalence.

Sorry, it's not a valid comparison because none of these characters are on the level of The Joker. The Joker is one of the most iconic villains in history.

No doubt. Completely agree.

If Marvel wanted to do something with Dr. Doom, they could do something similar with him, but that kind of movie is something that has to be set up with care. Pushing out Kraven without a proper set up (and maybe even WITH a proper set up; and assuming Sony is CAPABLE of a proper set up), is a recipe for disaster..... a la Morbius. Whether you liked Morbius or not, it's becoming clear it was a one weekend watch. It was almost caught in its 2nd weekend by Lost City's 3rd weekend gross.

 

[InCali]

Personally, I don't think he does. Also, there have been many movies before with Joker and Batman. Many movies and TV shows in live-action of the Joker, and in animation. None of these Spider-Man characters ever had that. Sorry, it's not a valid comparison. It's a false equivalence. Kraven, Morbius, and Madame Web have never had live-action appearances period. Joker has had multiple appearances in billion-dollar films before the Joaquin Phoenix film.



Blade and Guardians of the Galaxy this is not.

WRT Guardians of the Galaxy, this is yet another area where Marvel has a big, big advantage over Sony.......marketing and buildup. The marketing of GotG was nothing short of brilliant. The theater previews alone sold the original movie. It was funny, cool, and the music was pitch perfect. There is more than one way to sell a movie and I can think of 3 different ways Marvel has done it.

 

[GuestStar2004]

Blade and Guardians of the Galaxy this is not.

Because everyone knew who the guardians of the galaxy were prior.

There is alot of "this is not" or "this isn't" but these are only used after they are a success.

WRT Guardians of the Galaxy, this is yet another area where Marvel has a big, big advantage over Sony.......marketing and buildup. The marketing of GotG was nothing short of brilliant. The theater previews alone sold the original movie. It was funny, cool, and the music was pitch perfect. There is more than one way to sell a movie and I can think of 3 different ways Marvel has done it.

That required some remodeling really. Alot of these aspects were not part of the source material right? Now they have become a big part of it and to a point rewritten the source material that we know of.

Whether you feel sony can do it well or not is very different to whether they could adapt a film out of said characters.

 

[InCali]

Because everyone knew who the guardians of the galaxy were prior.

There is alot of "this is not" or "this isn't" but these are only used after they are a success.


That required some remodeling really. Alot of these aspects were not part of the source material right? Now they have become a big part of it and to a point rewritten things in terms of source material that was about the guardians of the galaxy.

Whether you feel sony can do it or not is very different to whether they could adapt a film out of said characters.

Rewriting the characters, to a greater or lesser degree, is part of the business. Old stories, new stories, changed stories, etc. are all part of the business of ANY studio. I was talking about the marketing and PR for movies and Marvel CLEARLY has a big edge over Sony when it comes to this angle of the business. I was just using GotG as an example of this. Compare it to the campaign for Morbius (which was awful). Whether they rewrite the characters is a completely different issue.

I've never said I don't think Sony "can" adapt a successful film out of Kraven or Madame Web, for example. What I've said is that they don't have a very good recent track record and it doesn't bode well for their future efforts. I've used the recent SM collaborations with Marvel as one of "their" successes. Their solo efforts have resulted in a couple of decent box office numbers (though the last Venom had a precipitous drop and a very poor multiplier when all was said and done), but generally weren't considered very good movies. I don't believe this bodes well for future success of Venom, but if the movie is well received, that could change. Sony, frankly, doesn't have a very good, recent track record in the genre.

EDIT: I'm assuming you were being sarcastic when you said that everyone knew who GotG were before the movie because they were not well known. That being said, the marketing campaign sold it to the public, the movie was fun, it over performed on opening week, and had a multiplier of around 3.3 (as I recall). It was a textbook example of how to cast, make, and sell a movie with characters who have yet to be introduced to the public.

 

[dhandler01]

GOTG also had a whole universe to build on prior to it. It wasn't meant to help launch said universe...it was expanding it and setting up what was next.

Morbius had to bear the brunt of a lot of universe building and from the sounds of it failed. The character has zero draw power and Leto is not exactly a blockbuster star. The deck was stacked against it and it crumbled hard and fast.

 

[BobJM]

If you really wanted to do spinoff solo films for Spider-Man, you'd try doing Miles Morales movies, movies about Spider-Man 2099, maybe even Spider-Gwen or Black Cat. But that's after you maybe set them up in other films or what have you.

Morbius is a disaster. You can't do stupid solo **** for villains and characters like Morbius, Madame Web, and Kraven. Their whole existence is derived from Spider-Man. At least have them encounter and deal with Spider-Man first. These are not quality solo characters.

I think Morbius is the perfect character to give a spin-off to if I am being honest. He's not someone I necessarily want to see as a villain in any Spider-Man movie and his story doesn't really require Spider-Man at all. The execution of the released film was bad, but it could have easily been a vampire thriller movie. It's just that Sony thought this was another step closer to Sinister Six and tried to mash it up into an MCU / superhero flick.

Agreed though that I have no idea how you can make a Madame Web movie or Kraven movie without Spider-Man.

 

[InCali]

GOTG also had a whole universe to build on prior to it. It wasn't meant to help launch said universe...it was expanding it and setting up what was next.

Morbius had to bear the brunt of a lot of universe building and from the sounds of it failed. The character has zero draw power and Leto is not exactly a blockbuster star. The deck was stacked against it and it crumbled hard and fast.

GotG had the Marvel name. That's for sure, but it wasn't as strong back then or as well established as it is now and, outside of Marvel comic fans, they were virtually unknown. As a matter of fact, I remember hearing that no one wanted to go to see a talking raccoon and tree; that it was going to be a Marvel flop. What sold the movie, IMO, was the marketing. It was a fun movie and the previews showed that aspect. The accompanying music reinforced the idea that it was gonna be fun. I mean "Hooked on a Feeling"? Perfect choice.

I would argue that Venom was really the character that bore more of the brunt of setting up the "universe", but the SM connection was, I think, clear to just about everyone. It could be that it was clear to me because I'm familiar with Spidey, but, if so, Sony failed miserably in making that connection with Morbius because, looking back, I didn't see the lines drawn. I just sort of assumed everyone knew. The movie previews were dismal and were the main reason I didn't go see it.

No matter how you slice it, I think these are examples of how and how-not-to make and market a movie. I hear people say that they should have gone full on horror with Morbius and they might be right, but from the studio perspective, they are trying to set the stage for a coherent world and that might not have fit well. All I can say for sure is that the verdict is pretty much in and whatever Sony threw against the wall didn't stick; critically or financially.

I don't really have a dog in this fight and, as a movie lover, I want everything to be good. I certainly wasn't rooting against Morbius to succeed, but didn't like the prospects from what I saw of it.

 

[Batgirl0202]

I can see the marketing for Kraven already:

From the studio that brought you the box office smash Morbius, comes a new Marvel legend!

All joking aside, I also think that building a Villain-Verse was an interesting idea, but I agree that Sony's execution is sinking the concept.

In the comics, Sinister Six villains characters were introduced organically as Spider-Man villains. When they came together, it was logical because they had a common enemy, namely Spider-Man. It was personal and there were stakes because of their previous defeats at Spidey's hands.

Introducing the villains individually takes away from that. Aside from Vulture - whose presence in the Sony-Verse makes no sense - none of the villains have any reason to hate Spider-Man or want him dead. I suppose you could argue that the Hardy-Verse Venom symbiote might hold a grudge because of his shared hive mentality with the Raimi-Verse symbiote, but that's still kind of a stretch.

The best way for Sony to approach this would be to have the three Spider-Men (Holland, Garfield, Maguire) team up against the Sinister Six. Have the villains come together in some sort of "together we are invincible" scenario and use some Multiverse shenanigans to have the three Spidey's team up.

That's pretty much the only way I could see Sony having a billion dollar hit without Marvel/Disney holding their hand

 

[InCali]

I can see the marketing for Kraven already:

From the studio that brought you the box office smash Morbius, comes a new Marvel legend!

All joking aside, I also think that building a Villain-Verse was an interesting idea, but I agree that Sony's execution is sinking the concept.

In the comics, Sinister Six villains characters were introduced organically as Spider-Man villains. When they came together, it was logical because they had a common enemy, namely Spider-Man. It was personal and there were stakes because of their previous defeats at Spidey's hands.

Introducing the villains individually takes away from that. Aside from Vulture - whose presence in the Sony-Verse makes no sense - none of the villains have any reason to hate Spider-Man or want him dead. I suppose you could argue that the Hardy-Verse Venom symbiote might hold a grudge because of his shared hive mentality with the Raimi-Verse symbiote, but that's still kind of a stretch.

The best way for Sony to approach this would be to have the three Spider-Men (Holland, Garfield, Maguire) team up against the Sinister Six. Have the villains come together in some sort of "together we are invincible" scenario and use some Multiverse shenanigans to have the three Spidey's team up.

That's pretty much the only way I could see Sony having a billion dollar hit without Marvel/Disney holding their hand

New Marvel Legend.......

Yeah, a movie with the 3 spideys against the sinister 6 would be cool if done right. I hadn't thought much about that. As I understand it, and I may be wrong, Holland's SM can only currently appear in MCU. Even if he was in that movie, my question would be "What's next?" It's like the Sony version of Endgame only with few characters left to mine.

 

[Batgirl0202]

New Marvel Legend.......

Yeah, a movie with the 3 spideys against the sinister 6 would be cool if done right. I hadn't thought much about that. As I understand it, and I may be wrong, Holland's SM can only currently appear in MCU. Even if he was in that movie, my question would be "What's next?" It's like the Sony version of Endgame only with few characters left to mine.

That's a good question. Who knows what's going on behind the scenes. I think Marvel is allowed to use Spider-Man in another MCU Disney film with no compensation to Sony as per the terms of their most recent agreement. After that, who knows?

I definitely see the studios parting ways at some point. Sony needs Marvel way more than Marvel needs Sony at this point. Left to their own devices, Sony will eventually hit a brick wall with the Spider-Man IP. Seeing the theatrical rights back with Disney is definitely on my bucket list

 

[BobJM]

I can see the marketing for Kraven already:

From the studio that brought you the box office smash Morbius, comes a new Marvel legend!

All joking aside, I also think that building a Villain-Verse was an interesting idea, but I agree that Sony's execution is sinking the concept.

In the comics, Sinister Six villains characters were introduced organically as Spider-Man villains. When they came together, it was logical because they had a common enemy, namely Spider-Man. It was personal and there were stakes because of their previous defeats at Spidey's hands.

Introducing the villains individually takes away from that. Aside from Vulture - whose presence in the Sony-Verse makes no sense - none of the villains have any reason to hate Spider-Man or want him dead. I suppose you could argue that the Hardy-Verse Venom symbiote might hold a grudge because of his shared hive mentality with the Raimi-Verse symbiote, but that's still kind of a stretch.

The best way for Sony to approach this would be to have the three Spider-Men (Holland, Garfield, Maguire) team up against the Sinister Six. Have the villains come together in some sort of "together we are invincible" scenario and use some Multiverse shenanigans to have the three Spidey's team up.

That's pretty much the only way I could see Sony having a billion dollar hit without Marvel/Disney holding their hand

I think the time to do three Spider-Man vs. a Sinister Six was in No Way Home, right?

 

[Batgirl0202]

I think the time to do three Spider-Man vs. a Sinister Six was in No Way Home, right?

I guess you could argue that they already took this approach in NWH lol.

I was thinking about using a new crop of villains. NWH used the old guard. Going with the direction Sony is taking, they could use Vulture, Venom, Carnage, Morbius, Kraven, Scorpion, Shocker, Rhino, etc. Madame Web could be the mastermind, manipulating from her chair lol.

Or instead of Garfield and Maguire, use Holland and introduce Miles, Spider-Girl, Ghost-Spider as his allies. I'd pay good money to watch this kind of Endgame mashup

 

[InCali]

That's a good question. Who knows what's going on behind the scenes. I think Marvel is allowed to use Spider-Man in another MCU Disney film with no compensation to Sony as per the terms of their most recent agreement. After that, who knows?

I definitely see the studios parting ways at some point. Sony needs Marvel way more than Marvel needs Sony at this point. Left to their own devices, Sony will eventually hit a brick wall with the Spider-Man IP. Seeing the theatrical rights back with Disney is definitely on my bucket list

Which is why I think Sony will milk the SM/MCU success as long as possible. Marvel loves having SM, but will do just fine without him.

I think the time to do three Spider-Man vs. a Sinister Six was in No Way Home, right?

If Marvel had control of the SM IP for the last 10 years, we may have well seen something like that. Still, I agree it would have been a great opportunity. I don't think, however, that Marvel or Sony is complaining about NWH at this point in time.

 

[TheVileOne]

I guess you could argue that they already took this approach in NWH lol.

I was thinking about using a new crop of villains. NWH used the old guard. Going with the direction Sony is taking, they could use Vulture, Venom, Carnage, Morbius, Kraven, Scorpion, Shocker, Rhino, etc. Madame Web could be the mastermind, manipulating from her chair lol.

Or instead of Garfield and Maguire, use Holland and introduce Miles, Spider-Girl, Ghost-Spider as his allies. I'd pay good money to watch this kind of Endgame mashup

Why would Madame Web do that? She's not a villain and is not out to hurt Spider-Man.

If you really wanted solo films, Spider-Man 2099 is really your best bet because you can do Spider-Man 2099 all on its own without worrying about setup or having to service other characters or films since it takes place so far into the future.

Miles Morales - even Into the Spider-Verse understood you need Spider-Man/Peter Parker in a MIles Morales story in some way. So you either need to introduce Miles Morales in a later film like the Spider-Man Insomniac series did and then give him his own spinoff, or a film with at least Peter Parker/Spider-Man playing at least somewhat of a minor role to enable Miles' taking on the costume.

Black Cat - if you really want Black Cat, you really should set up Felicia Hardy/Black Cat in a future Spider-Man movie first. Then go from there.

I guess you could do Silk and Arana, but in those cases, I feel like at least set those characters up somewhere before just diving them into their own films blind.

I guess my point is, these characters are DERIVED from Spider-Man. They are derivative works of Spider-Man. They aren't really good self-contained solo characters on their own. It's not like going from Iron Man to Captain America to Thor to Hulk. These characters don't exist and don't happen without Spider-Man.

 

[Chip Chipperson]

Sony should just embrace the hilarity and slap

‘From the studio that let Marvel make the last 3 Spider-Man movies you all love so much’ on the first trailer for Kraven

 

[InCali]

Sony should just embrace the hilarity and slap

‘From the studio that let Marvel make the last 3 Spider-Man movies you all love so much’ on the first trailer for Kraven

 

[Mysteryman]

I can see the marketing for Kraven already:

From the studio that brought you the box office smash Morbius, comes a new Marvel legend!

All joking aside, I also think that building a Villain-Verse was an interesting idea, but I agree that Sony's execution is sinking the concept.

In the comics, Sinister Six villains characters were introduced organically as Spider-Man villains. When they came together, it was logical because they had a common enemy, namely Spider-Man. It was personal and there were stakes because of their previous defeats at Spidey's hands.

Introducing the villains individually takes away from that. Aside from Vulture - whose presence in the Sony-Verse makes no sense - none of the villains have any reason to hate Spider-Man or want him dead. I suppose you could argue that the Hardy-Verse Venom symbiote might hold a grudge because of his shared hive mentality with the Raimi-Verse symbiote, but that's still kind of a stretch.

The best way for Sony to approach this would be to have the three Spider-Men (Holland, Garfield, Maguire) team up against the Sinister Six. Have the villains come together in some sort of "together we are invincible" scenario and use some Multiverse shenanigans to have the three Spidey's team up.

That's pretty much the only way I could see Sony having a billion dollar hit without Marvel/Disney holding their hand

More than likely, its going to be something like "From the studio that brought you."into The Spiderverse".

 

[InCali]

More than likely, its going to be something like "From the studio that brought you."into The Spiderverse".

Oh, no doubt, but it's not as funny.

 

[Batgirl0202]

Why would Madame Web do that? She's not a villain and is not out to hurt Spider-Man.

I was being facetious lol! If they insist on using Madame Web, they may as well give her something useful to do

I guess my point is, these characters are DERIVED from Spider-Man. They are derivative works of Spider-Man. They aren't really good self-contained solo characters on their own. It's not like going from Iron Man to Captain America to Thor to Hulk. These characters don't exist and don't happen without Spider-Man.

That's exactly the point I was making as well. The characters Sony is introducing should flow organically and logically from the Spider-Man mythos. Introducing characters independently, especially villains, robs them of both their thematic and narrative significance. Where are the interpersonal stakes if the villains don't have any intrinsic reason to hate Spider-Man, based on previous exposure?

For the Sinister Six to work as potential enemies of Spider-Man, they need to stem naturally from him. I fear that Sony may be missing this crucial point.

 

[GuestStar2004]

If Marvel had control of the SM IP for the last 10 years, we may have well seen something like that. Still, I agree it would have been a great opportunity. I don't think, however, that Marvel or Sony is complaining about NWH at this point in time.

Funny thing is, The fans perspective was that Marvel would reintroduce the villains and build up to the Sinister 6. This is what the fans said! The fans said this!. And recently Kevin Fiege has pretty much said they actually had no plans on doing that. The thing fans said marvel would do, is not what they would do... weird huh?

So Basically NWH could be considered Marvel The Sinister 6 movie. Minus 1 villain. In terms of these villains being used in a team in the MCU.

 

[InCali]

Funny thing is, The fans perspective was that Marvel would reintroduce the villains and build up to the Sinister 6. This is what the fans said! The fans said this!. And recently Kevin Fiege has pretty much said they actually had no plans on doing that. The thing fans said marvel would do, is not what they would do... weird huh?

So Basically NWH could be considered Marvel The Sinister 6 movie. Minus 1 villain. In terms of these villains being used in a team in the MCU.

Do you have a cite for that? I'm a fan and I never said that. I said they may have "if" they had control of the IP. I wouldn't think Feige would really consider going all out in that direction, spending a lot of time and money for build up if he didn't control the IP. "If" I were Feige, "I" would just use the villains that were available to me from other SM movies, bring back the other SMs to help the current MCU one in order to create a sense of nostalgia, and make a really killer, well received financial blockbuster.......well, that's what I'd do if I was smarter than I am.

It'a already been stated here that NWH "was" sort of a SM vs S6, so, yeah, that's true.

EDIT: TBH, I really don't care much about what fans said because fans say a lot of things. I mean if 10% of fans thought something, does it really matter? I'll bet that most MCU fans, for example, are more focused on DS, Thor, FF, BP, etc. than they are the S6 and only thought about them in the context of NWH after they found out the basic plot of the movie or saw it.

 

[GuestStar2004]

Do you have a cite for that? I'm a fan and I never said that.

Various comments over the years on this forum, twitter, comment sections. People are constantly talking for Marvel. With the result often be very different.