That looks good!
Marvel Cinematic Universe - General Thread
- Thread starter SHIELD Agent 47
- Start date
Echo's now out on both Disney+ and Hulu. But if you don't have your parental settings set to TV-MA, it won't show up as watchable on Disney+.
It's funny, Disney's now willing to put TV-MA content on Disney+, yet their initial refusal to make content geared towards adults is what led to the Lizzie McGuire revival getting canceled since it was about things adults go through like relationship cheating, and wasn't deemed family-friendly enough for Disney+. And Disney refused to put it on Hulu, too. Yet, here we are with Echo being on both platforms.
Desperation can be a strong motivator. Disney+ has yet to actually make any money.
Well, its been getting my money ever since it debut.
I STILL haven't seen Echo.
Anyhow, reviews are coming in of Madame Web and it's bad? Hoo boy.
Does it at least have a good extra scene?
Anyhow, reviews are coming in of Madame Web and it's bad? Hoo boy.
Does it at least have a good extra scene?
I can't imagine anyone expecting Madam Web to be good given Sony's track record with theirs "Un-Spidey films.
Myself I was hoping for "entertainingly bad". But so far not seeing anyone saying that.
-ZacWilliam, I don't know why they keep thinking spider characters without spidey is a thing to keep trying.
Myself I was hoping for "entertainingly bad". But so far not seeing anyone saying that.
-ZacWilliam, I don't know why they keep thinking spider characters without spidey is a thing to keep trying.
They should be able to see the they aren't doing a good job.
It COULD work. But they aren't doing it. I was vaguely aware of Ironman 18 years ago. I had no awareness of Vision or the Guardians of the Galaxy. I knew Thanos was the name of a Marvel character that Corvus liked. Marvel Studios made it work. Sony isn't getting the job done.
Hope Kraven is good. He's one of my fave classic villains.
Venom seems to be doing well tho. The snarky buddy buddy thing he has going on with Eddie seems to be something the general public enjoys, even if it's not true to the original comic.
Venom seems to be doing well tho. The snarky buddy buddy thing he has going on with Eddie seems to be something the general public enjoys, even if it's not true to the original comic.
This thread, not the MCU one.
I was aware of Iron Man and Vision from their being in Marvel's 90s cartoons, particularly Iron Man's 1994 cartoon and his guest appearances in Spider-Man's cartoon, and Vision's appearance in The Avengers: United They Stand.
Oh dang, yeah, I should have posted on that thread.
It's quite simple: They have to make a Spidey movie every X number of years to keep ownership of their existing license. Ones with Spidey himself are a guaranteed bank, but because they're tied to the MCU now, they have to play ball with Marvel Studios on scheduling(but the profit outweighs the annoyance I assume). If they have to make a Spidey movie to stay current, but can't use the man himself, then this is pretty much their only option. The losses due to a bad movie can be written off for tax breaks, and may very well be less than the profit they make from the MCU Spidey movies that they get a piece of due to keeping the license going.
At least they are releasing them, and not shelving/deleting them for those tax breaks.
So a little behind the times, but I finally saw Werewolf By Night.
1. Loved the switch that Ted was the monster in the garden, not the werewolf.
2. Elsa was awesome! I would love to see more of her and Jack.
3. I really love that they went with the classic wolfman look.
Such a great show! I was really hoping for more at the end.
1. Loved the switch that Ted was the monster in the garden, not the werewolf.
2. Elsa was awesome! I would love to see more of her and Jack.
3. I really love that they went with the classic wolfman look.
Such a great show! I was really hoping for more at the end.
Considering the response this last one got, they may very well with the next one.
Is Roger Corman still active? The Fantastic Four film he made in the 90s was exclusively for the purpose of rights retention, and considering the ultra-low budget it really wasn't that bad a film. No worse than the Hollywood entry made a decade later.
Maybe Sony should tap him for the next "Spidey" film? At least they'll get something efficient.