• Welcome to the Devil May Cry Community Forum!

    We're a group of fans who are passionate about the Devil May Cry series and video gaming.

    Register Log in

Venom:Let there be Carnage

Morgan

Well-known Member
Premium
Xen-Ace 2021
Jan 19, 2013
1,038
1,325
3,625
How can he afford to make himself that kind of breakfast on a failed reporter's salary?
Well, not so failed I suppose.

Andy Serkis is directing? Niiiiice.

I'll watch it. This is a much better trailer than the first one's teaser trailer was for that movie. They know what they're presenting now and aren't trying to hide it to where no one can tell it's about Venom, Carnage, and symbiotes.

Well, let Tom do his thing, let Woody do his thing, and hopefully Sony doesn't ever get the idea of sticking Iron Lad into their universe.
 

absolitude

the devil is not as black as he painted
Jul 16, 2014
1,650
2,151
3,815
Andy Serkis is directing? Niiiiice.
Andy Serkis is directing? Dammit.. Now i'm interested

and hopefully Sony doesn't ever get the idea of sticking Iron Lad into their universe.
I'm surprised with how many is not in favor of Spiderman school trips.

I guess she is the film's secondary antagonist.

You must be registered for see medias
A case for why Venom doesn't need Spiderman.

Carnage might have some new tricks.

Yep, Venom doesn't need Spiderman, but i kinda want Morbius there..
 

BrawlMan

Lover of beat'em ups!
Nov 1, 2018
987
478
860
I'm definitely excited. I sent my brother the trailer, but I don't know if he's looked at it yet. I prefer Venom and Morbius were their own seperate universe. So enough of the connected universes already.
 

V's patron

be loyal to what matters
Sep 14, 2010
8,863
6,285
14,765
NY,Ny
I'm gonna break ranks and say Spiderman should pop up. He's the most popular character Sony has access to and most of the other characters they can use are built around him. So Sony using Spiderman later makes sense. I don't think it has to be the Tom Holland take on Peter Parker or even Peter Parker.

The Marvel Universe has many Spider-People and that's not even getting into the multiverse. So each sub-franchise could have their own Spider-person as antagonist/mentor/sidekick etc.

It's probably more ambitious than what Sony is gonna end up doing but that's my pitch.
 

Morgan

Well-known Member
Premium
Xen-Ace 2021
Jan 19, 2013
1,038
1,325
3,625
Andy Serkis is directing? Dammit.. Now i'm interested
;)

I'm surprised with how many is not in favor of Spiderman school trips.
Not in favor of Spider-Man being a Spider-Boy still in high school
Not in favor of Peter crying over Tony like he was actual family and more important than Uncle Ben, even though Tony was acting like the villain in a teenage-oriented romcom the entire time (blackmails Peter and sends him to another country, bribes with fancy gifts to shut him up and call favors with him later, tries to get with Aunt May while also acting behind her back, keeps tabs on Peter while also not talking to him, etc)
Not in favor of Yet Another Enemy of Spider-Man being a product of Tony's negligence, making them his enemy, not Peter's. Next thing we know, Norman Osborne is going to be mad that Tony cheated him out of a deal back in the day and somehow Peter will get himself embroiled into it.
Not in favor of Peter being basically Tony's sugar baby sidekick who somehow keeps being gifted lethal tech for no reason, especially lethal tech that proves Tony didn't learn a damn thing after Age of Ultron (just like he destroyed all his suits in IM3 and then made the Iron Legion anyway) because some dumb writer in this universe thinks involving him in continuous Patriot-Act-parallel behaviors is a good look.
Not in favor of MCU's refusal to let Peter grow up, that they told Tom Holland to drop the "manly swagger" he got from filming the Uncharted movie. Tom is in his mid-20s. Let him act like it instead of this tired Dawson Casting.

Anyone in favor of that doesn't actually care about comic book accuracy and honoring the characters, because Peter has punched Tony in the face for being his usual self, and isn't attached to his hip. Making Tony the Central Character of the MCU and a parallel to effing Thanos was a mistake.

They should've just cast Ty Simpkins (the kid from Iron Man 3) in solo Iron Lad films or given him a backdoor pilot in Iron Man 4 just to give RDJ something to do, and left Spider-Man alone. What does Peter gain from having his rogues gallery turned into "They all got screwed by Stark and hate him, and Peter is just a proxy!", exactly?

Yep, Venom doesn't need Spiderman, but i kinda want Morbius there.
Power move: Morbius does well enough on its own that Sony can negotiate for Blade, and they start making Blade solo films. Crossover between Blade and Morbius optional, but those Wesley Snipes films did pretty well on their own (except for Trinity, we don't talk about that one).
 

absolitude

the devil is not as black as he painted
Jul 16, 2014
1,650
2,151
3,815
I'm gonna break ranks and say Spiderman should pop up. He's the most popular character Sony has access to and most of the other characters they can use are built around him. So Sony using Spiderman later makes sense. I don't think it has to be the Tom Holland take on Peter Parker or even Peter Parker.

The Marvel Universe has many Spider-People and that's not even getting into the multiverse. So each sub-franchise could have their own Spider-person as antagonist/mentor/sidekick etc.

It's probably more ambitious than what Sony is gonna end up doing but that's my pitch.

I gotta say, Spiderman in MCU have involved in 'avengers level threat', would've been a downgrade if he finally enters his neighborhood that has nothing to do with the MCU, and maybe that's also what the upper guys think. Not that i care about MCU Spiderman, or MCU.

;)


Not in favor of Spider-Man being a Spider-Boy still in high school
Not in favor of Peter crying over Tony like he was actual family and more important than Uncle Ben, even though Tony was acting like the villain in a teenage-oriented romcom the entire time (blackmails Peter and sends him to another country, bribes with fancy gifts to shut him up and call favors with him later, tries to get with Aunt May while also acting behind her back, keeps tabs on Peter while also not talking to him, etc)
Not in favor of Yet Another Enemy of Spider-Man being a product of Tony's negligence, making them his enemy, not Peter's. Next thing we know, Norman Osborne is going to be mad that Tony cheated him out of a deal back in the day and somehow Peter will get himself embroiled into it.
Not in favor of Peter being basically Tony's sugar baby sidekick who somehow keeps being gifted lethal tech for no reason, especially lethal tech that proves Tony didn't learn a damn thing after Age of Ultron (just like he destroyed all his suits in IM3 and then made the Iron Legion anyway) because some dumb writer in this universe thinks involving him in continuous Patriot-Act-parallel behaviors is a good look.
Not in favor of MCU's refusal to let Peter grow up, that they told Tom Holland to drop the "manly swagger" he got from filming the Uncharted movie. Tom is in his mid-20s. Let him act like it instead of this tired Dawson Casting.

Anyone in favor of that doesn't actually care about comic book accuracy and honoring the characters, because Peter has punched Tony in the face for being his usual self, and isn't attached to his hip. Making Tony the Central Character of the MCU and a parallel to effing Thanos was a mistake.

They should've just cast Ty Simpkins (the kid from Iron Man 3) in solo Iron Lad films or given him a backdoor pilot in Iron Man 4 just to give RDJ something to do, and left Spider-Man alone. What does Peter gain from having his rogues gallery turned into "They all got screwed by Stark and hate him, and Peter is just a proxy!", exactly?


Power move: Morbius does well enough on its own that Sony can negotiate for Blade, and they start making Blade solo films. Crossover between Blade and Morbius optional, but those Wesley Snipes films did pretty well on their own (except for Trinity, we don't talk about that one).

Well said.. well said..
 

V's patron

be loyal to what matters
Sep 14, 2010
8,863
6,285
14,765
NY,Ny
@absolitude I just figured the MCU producers don't really care about the Sony films beyond who they want to use for themselves.

To follow @Morgan 's suggestion, they might give Sony limited use of Blade if they can use Venom in a future Spiderman film.

Sony and Disney worked out a co-ownership of Spiderman's film rights.
 
  • Like
Reactions: absolitude

Morgan

Well-known Member
Premium
Xen-Ace 2021
Jan 19, 2013
1,038
1,325
3,625
I gotta say, Spiderman in MCU have involved in 'avengers level threat', would've been a downgrade if he finally enters his neighborhood that has nothing to do with the MCU, and maybe that's also what the upper guys think. Not that I care about MCU Spiderman, or MCU.
So which part's turned you off the MCU,

the movies being advertisements for further movies?
the ensemble movies distilling the characters into stereotypes as if all development and nuance goes to die?
the reliance on lesser known directors to toe the company line with the expectation that they don't have full creative control over the work (see: Edgar Wright)?
the forgettable soundtrack that not even the people that watched these movies can hum a theme from off the top of their head? (Avengers doesn't count)
the overreliance on bathos?
the lack of immediate and lasting stakes until the plot calls for it? (It took until Civil War to address anything starting from the Battle of New York onward, and somehow only 74 people died in an alien invasion to which the first response from the World Security Council was to nuke an entire city to fix, and the Accords violate any type of constitutional law and skip every bit of due process to do it. What mouth-breather thought that that was a stable backdrop to carry CW?)

I mean, it could be all of these things combined, and I can see the point.

:whistle:

Kinda hard to sell that Spider-Man is "fighting for the little guy" when he's backed by a billionaire, magic-kicked Thanos a bunch, and fought an army of Outriders. They should just give him a hook-up to Captain Universe's powers and let him go Cosmic.

How were schools affording field trips after the Snap given how dire everything was made to look in TFatWS?

Meanwhile, Sony can keep making Spiderverse and Venom-related movies just to provide variety and so Disney doesn't own Absolutely Everything. Example: who owns the rights to use Mr. Negative/Martin Li's character? They could introduce him in the next Venom movie (if not this one) and create the Anti-Venom symbiote to fix that "weakness to sound" issue. Or they could do Agent Venom with an original, non-Flash-Thompson character to get into a different genre. Whatever works.
 
  • Love
Reactions: absolitude

absolitude

the devil is not as black as he painted
Jul 16, 2014
1,650
2,151
3,815
@absolitude I just figured the MCU producers don't really care about the Sony films beyond who they want to use for themselves.

To follow @Morgan 's suggestion, they might give Sony limited use of Blade if they can use Venom in a future Spiderman film.

Sony and Disney worked out a co-ownership of Spiderman's film rights.

I hope it's like that..

So which part's turned you off the MCU,

the movies being advertisements for further movies?
the ensemble movies distilling the characters into stereotypes as if all development and nuance goes to die?
the reliance on lesser known directors to toe the company line with the expectation that they don't have full creative control over the work (see: Edgar Wright)?
the forgettable soundtrack that not even the people that watched these movies can hum a theme from off the top of their head? (Avengers doesn't count)
the overreliance on bathos?
the lack of immediate and lasting stakes until the plot calls for it? (It took until Civil War to address anything starting from the Battle of New York onward, and somehow only 74 people died in an alien invasion to which the first response from the World Security Council was to nuke an entire city to fix, and the Accords violate any type of constitutional law and skip every bit of due process to do it. What mouth-breather thought that that was a stable backdrop to carry CW?)

I mean, it could be all of these things combined, and I can see the point.

:whistle:

Kinda hard to sell that Spider-Man is "fighting for the little guy" when he's backed by a billionaire, magic-kicked Thanos a bunch, and fought an army of Outriders. They should just give him a hook-up to Captain Universe's powers and let him go Cosmic.

How were schools affording field trips after the Snap given how dire everything was made to look in TFatWS?

Meanwhile, Sony can keep making Spiderverse and Venom-related movies just to provide variety and so Disney doesn't own Absolutely Everything. Example: who owns the rights to use Mr. Negative/Martin Li's character? They could introduce him in the next Venom movie (if not this one) and create the Anti-Venom symbiote to fix that "weakness to sound" issue. Or they could do Agent Venom with an original, non-Flash-Thompson character to get into a different genre. Whatever works.
Man, how are you so on point?

All of those and i never felt any of the emotions, stakes or the tensions in them, cept for the first Thor with the family issue. Feels like waste of talents..

And this will go off topic.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Morgan

V's patron

be loyal to what matters
Sep 14, 2010
8,863
6,285
14,765
NY,Ny
You must be registered for see medias

Sony may not need Spiderman but they definitely should use his villians. Specifically the obscure ones. He's been around for 60 odd years, he has plenty he could spare.


Revamping these C/D list villians is a good way to bolster the heroes Sony could use. Plus its less likely the MCU would care to use some of the more obscure ones.

PS. I'm hoping Jared Harris is playing Dr. Warren aka The Jackal in Morbius.

 
  • Like
Reactions: absolitude

Morgan

Well-known Member
Premium
Xen-Ace 2021
Jan 19, 2013
1,038
1,325
3,625
Sony may not need Spiderman but they definitely should use his villians. Specifically the obscure ones. He's been around for 60 odd years, he has plenty he could spare.


Revamping these C/D list villians is a good way to bolster the heroes Sony could use. Plus its less likely the MCU would care to use some of the more obscure ones.
You're not wrong, but you could've just linked to the specific villains you were thinking of. That's a whole gallery of someone else's pet project turning miscellaneous characters into Spider-Man-centric ones hooked completely to him, including Kingpin's lackeys, which has a firmer association with Daredevil with the TV series and previous movie making those two enemies.
 

V's patron

be loyal to what matters
Sep 14, 2010
8,863
6,285
14,765
NY,Ny

The Venom entry reveals some interesting details for a scrapped Venom script from the 1990s. Most of them apply to Eddie's dynamic to Cletus and even setup another long term villian for Venom.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Morgan

V's patron

be loyal to what matters
Sep 14, 2010
8,863
6,285
14,765
NY,Ny
@Morgan

Fair point. I just wanted to show what that these characters can be revamped. Plus Kingpin becoming a bigger DD rogue is what I'm looking for. He took on a new life once Frank Miller brought him over.

He didn't stop being a Spiderman villian so you could just have these villians jump around between heroes.

Off the top of my head I'd choose this guy just because he has ties to how Venom's symbiote gets to Earth.


The Spectacular Spiderman had an episode with John Jameson becoming a superhero but growing out of control.

He would work as antivillian or a foil for Eddie's struggles to control Venom.

You must be registered for see medias
 
Last edited: