The worst part is - they had a movie in the works that could have been interesting: Silver and Black, a Silver Sable and Black Cat team-up movie. Two characters which, while Spider-Man related, can work without him much more easily than Venom or Kraven. They had a director, a script, pre-production had started. And…

Yeah, I agree. Like, clearly Sony just wants to exploit the IP they have the rights too, but none of those characters have any public awareness except as Spidey villains. At least Venom has had solo adventures pretty much consistently since 93-94. But Morbius? Kraven? Madame Web? El Whatevero?

Am I the only one who, upon watching the Kraven trailer, went “Damn, I would absolutely watch a movie where Spider-Man fights Russel Crowe as Kraven, with that accent”

The most surreal thing about this movie is that the villain is an authoritarian president with shitty blonde hair who live in a tower bearing his name in downtown Manhattan.

The most recent Tomb Raider movie is a great comparison. I wasn’t too bothered by the movie not being as dark and gory as the game, because I think the game went a bit overboard with that at times, but removing all the supernatural just made the film so damn boring. There is also way too much stuff about Lara as a bike…

“The fans really liked the [Uncharted] movie, and people who didn’t know anything about the game really liked the movie.”

But it is though? When your movie’s best jokes require a deep understanding of Hollywood minutia, you have a big problem. And I say that as someone who got the jokes and enjoyed them. But I have a grand total of one friend I wouldn’t have to explain the jokes to.

Yeah, itwas only more subtle in the book because of the way the book was written, in third person omniscient narration with a lot of aside and footnotes. That creates a distance between the readers and the characters that isn’t there in the TV show.

The Time Square sequence is one of the moments I was thinking off. Another is the opening Rhino chase, where the quips are on point.

When Amazing Spider-Man came out, I remember my main takeaway: “Man, I really want a sequel with the same cast with a better script that doesn’t butchered in editing”

Except the film isn’t set in the Ottoman Empire or Khanates. And it doesn’t actually reflects the actual, complex political structures of the slavery system in the Ottoman empire. It’s just using the harem stereotypes to give some colour to the villain. The fact that the stereotype has some basis in reality doesn’t…

Color me surprised: a very good, very well marketed movie that give people something to chew on a little after seeing it, thus garanteeing abundant word of mouth, is proving successful.

As someone pointed out, the monster is for all intents and purposes Victor Frankenstein’s son, which mean he inherited the surname. So calling him Frankenstein is accurate, just like “Shelley” can now mean refer to both Percy or his wife Mary, unless you are a very old-fashioned, snobby English Lit. prof.

My comment didn’t seem to bother the half dozen people who replied to give their own thoughts about BR2049, Ridley Scott and Denis Villeneuve.

I had no idea they were doing a live-action How to Train Your Dragon remake.

Atlantis and the Aryan civilization are fictional, yes, but they are fiction that were once posited as something that truly happened in the real past of our world. By mentionning them, the movie implies that the movie’s fantasy setting is our world, but in some sort of mythical, forgotten age. That first line grounds…

True. It might also be taken directly from the original stories, which were written when the concept of a mythical Aryan civilization was not yet inexorably tied to you-know-who.

Well, that’s disappointing.

Yeah, I was pretty sure about the Atlantis bit, but not the second part. But I think a reference to Aryans is kind of even more ideologically loaded. 

So I went back and checked it, it’s actually: