I just don’t think Abrams has any interest in the Marvel characters, period. Abrams’ thing is to take an established character or property and try to put his mark on it. This is why as of now he’s attached to the Superman reboot at Warner Bros. Superman is still arguably the most recognizable and well-known superhero…

Nah, I don’t think Marvel would ever hire Abrams. Because his thing is reinventing characters in his own terms, and while the Marvel movies take tons of liberties with the comics (as would be totally reasonable after several decades of stories), the movie versions maintain fairly strong ties to the source material.

Well, here’s the thing: Abrams is a big fan of Star Wars, the movie he saw as a kid in 1977. He’s not into worldbuilding or any kind of big-picture narrative thinking.

I think I’d substitute “made for children by children” more specifically with “made for fans by fans.” One of the things that makes The Empire Strikes Back or The Wrath of Khan legitimately Great Movies is that they can stand outside of their respective franchises as (mostly) self-contained films in their own right.…

Can we stop with this “murderverse” stuff?

Fun tie in: Krieger’s workshop has its own containment unit. (Or his lab is in the old firehouse. Either is plausible.)

Natasha also had IM2 to kick off her Avenger career. So that’s three more movies (IM2, Cap2, Cap3) outside the Avengers quartet before she got her own solo outing...which preceded the last two Avengers films.

I would say that Avengers and AoU *mostly* do a pretty good job with the characters they’re using. I think the real problem with the MCU, as much as I absolutely adore the vast majority of the individual pieces, is that the road to Infinity War kind of mucked everything up. At a certain point, they had to start sacrifi…

These stories aren’t honestly about TELLING STORIES anymore. They’re stand-ins for people too frightened/insecure about engaging with larger political ideals and notions, filtering all their tribal animosities (safely) through online fights over who Superman kisses as if its at all equal to taking legitimate,…

“it’s just a matter of time before this temporary alliance ends and Sony moves on with their own stuff.”

Moth*

The common thread in many of the “positive” reviews on Rotten Tomatoes is “If you liked the first movie, you’ll probably like this one.”

Thank you! The first Venom did really well, but I just don’t understand why. I found it a slog to get through. The pacing was bad, the plot was tedious, and I know Tom Hardy was going for... something with that Eddy Brock voice, but I really couldn’t tell you what that is.

It didn’t help that the movie doesn’t start until 35 minutes in and everything before that is boring as hell.

Agreed! I read about the post-credits scene and I’m excited for that but just can’t get hyped for the movie itself. I hadn’t realized there was a different director this time around so that might sway me to give it a shot.

I don’t think Disney has a moral obligation to pay the estates of artists who produced content under a work-for-hire contract. And I don’t think it’s morally wrong for them not to pay.

How about his little known work “I’m a Virulent Anti-Semite and Make No Bones About It”?

This is correct, and I’m not sure why its remotely controversial. The shows are fun. They are well made. But their primary allure (including to everyone on this site) is the meta connections to other properties. It franchises and fan service all the way down, which is fine, but asking everyone else to take part in…

this is a very reddit reply

I hope no one knows who I am through my kinja account. The last thing my constituents need is more ammunition against their Prime Minister.