Marvel Cinematic Universe (2008 - present)

1153154156158159183

Comments

  • Agent007391Agent007391 Up, Up, Down, Down, Left, Right, Left, Right, B, A, Start
    Posts: 7,854
    We also have something like two and a half minutes of the whole film. Motivation can be established over the course of what I can only assume will be a two and a half hour runtime.
  • Posts: 1,165
    So how did you miss the part where Holland is unmasked and Doc Ock stops fighting as he realizes he was fighting a total stranger rather than Maguire?

    That’s the point I’m making. Once he realises it’s not Maguire what motivation does he or any of the villains have to fight Holland?
  • Agent007391Agent007391 Up, Up, Down, Down, Left, Right, Left, Right, B, A, Start
    Posts: 7,854
    TR007 wrote: »
    So how did you miss the part where Holland is unmasked and Doc Ock stops fighting as he realizes he was fighting a total stranger rather than Maguire?

    That’s the point I’m making. Once he realises it’s not Maguire what motivation does he or any of the villains have to fight Holland?

    Perhaps watch the movie and find out? Or do as some here have done with NTTD and read the Wikipedia summary once it comes out. It can't be a crime for the trailer to leave big reveals for the movie itself.
  • edited November 2021 Posts: 1,165
    TR007 wrote: »
    So how did you miss the part where Holland is unmasked and Doc Ock stops fighting as he realizes he was fighting a total stranger rather than Maguire?

    That’s the point I’m making. Once he realises it’s not Maguire what motivation does he or any of the villains have to fight Holland?

    Perhaps watch the movie and find out? Or do as some here have done with NTTD and read the Wikipedia summary once it comes out. It can't be a crime for the trailer to leave big reveals for the movie itself.
    All terrific suggestions. Much appreciated.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,183
    TR007 wrote: »
    So how did you miss the part where Holland is unmasked and Doc Ock stops fighting as he realizes he was fighting a total stranger rather than Maguire?

    That’s the point I’m making. Once he realises it’s not Maguire what motivation does he or any of the villains have to fight Holland?

    If you actually watched it you’d also notice that there’s the implication that Holland and Doc Ock might team up once it’s established that they’re not each other’s enemies.
  • Posts: 1,394
    TR007 wrote: »
    So how did you miss the part where Holland is unmasked and Doc Ock stops fighting as he realizes he was fighting a total stranger rather than Maguire?

    That’s the point I’m making. Once he realises it’s not Maguire what motivation does he or any of the villains have to fight Holland?

    The likes of Doc Ock and The Green Goblin don’t particularly care what universe they are in.They have just as much motivation to cause havoc in the MCU as the Raimiverse.The end of the second trailer heavily suggests they team up.

  • Posts: 1,165
    TR007 wrote: »
    So how did you miss the part where Holland is unmasked and Doc Ock stops fighting as he realizes he was fighting a total stranger rather than Maguire?

    That’s the point I’m making. Once he realises it’s not Maguire what motivation does he or any of the villains have to fight Holland?

    If you actually watched it you’d also notice that there’s the implication that Holland and Doc Ock might team up once it’s established that they’re not each other’s enemies.
    Okay, thanks.
  • matt_umatt_u better known as Mr. Roark
    Posts: 4,343
    I have a feeling Dafoe's Goblin will be the big baddie of the film while Dock Ock will act more like a grey character not a straightforward villain.

    This is a spoiler but it looks like the post credit scene will 100% feature
    Venom.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    The marketing for the film has me fascinated, because it either looks this bad because it actually is bad, which I can believe, because the same people made it that did the ones I don't care for, but it could also look horrible because they have to hide everything they're doing that isn't horrible to avoid spoiling things even more.

    It's definitely going to be fascinating to see what comes of this whole thing once it hits theaters. You'll have the same group of people who think it's the best Spider-Man movie ever just because it's new or because it has a bunch of nostalgic villains in it, then there will be the people who were happy to see the old Spider-Men again but feel they were underused in a disappointing way, then people who would've just taken a shot of Tobey and Andrew in the post credits and been happy. I predict a very divisive movie, because of how much hype and speculation has been around this film, and how much of it has been spoiled already. It has definitely killed any anticipation I may have had.

    I wasn't all that interested when I knew we had the same director, as I just don't think Watts understands this character. After all, this is a guy who has only deemed it important to mention Uncle Ben in one heavily implicated scene and once in detail by having his initials on a suitcase Peter loses without a care in the world. This just isn't Spider-Man, to me. The films lack the heart of what Raimi and his cast and crew captured so brilliantly, as that is what defines who Peter is. He's a good kid just trying to do his best in a world that constantly throws curve-balls at him, and no matter how hard times get, he stays that same good hearted person. He isn't best buddies with a quadrillionaire who enlists him as a child soldier in a war he doesn't have any stake in, and he isn't the kind of idiot who gives away a powerful weapon to a stranger he just met or thinks playing with time is a smart way to deal with a problem. I don't know who this kid is, but he ain't Peter Parker.
  • Posts: 1,165
    The marketing for the film has me fascinated, because it either looks this bad because it actually is bad, which I can believe, because the same people made it that did the ones I don't care for, but it could also look horrible because they have to hide everything they're doing that isn't horrible to avoid spoiling things even more.

    It's definitely going to be fascinating to see what comes of this whole thing once it hits theaters. You'll have the same group of people who think it's the best Spider-Man movie ever just because it's new or because it has a bunch of nostalgic villains in it, then there will be the people who were happy to see the old Spider-Men again but feel they were underused in a disappointing way, then people who would've just taken a shot of Tobey and Andrew in the post credits and been happy. I predict a very divisive movie, because of how much hype and speculation has been around this film, and how much of it has been spoiled already. It has definitely killed any anticipation I may have had.

    I wasn't all that interested when I knew we had the same director, as I just don't think Watts understands this character. After all, this is a guy who has only deemed it important to mention Uncle Ben in one heavily implicated scene and once in detail by having his initials on a suitcase Peter loses without a care in the world. This just isn't Spider-Man, to me. The films lack the heart of what Raimi and his cast and crew captured so brilliantly, as that is what defines who Peter is. He's a good kid just trying to do his best in a world that constantly throws curve-balls at him, and no matter how hard times get, he stays that same good hearted person. He isn't best buddies with a quadrillionaire who enlists him as a child soldier in a war he doesn't have any stake in, and he isn't the kind of idiot who gives away a powerful weapon to a stranger he just met or thinks playing with time is a smart way to deal with a problem. I don't know who this kid is, but he ain't Peter Parker.

    Yes, I agree. I really don’t think Watts is up for the job and this globe-trotting, gadget laden, buffoon Peter Parker is so far removed from what makes the character enjoyable and relatable.
    Also, why does he always need to be paired up with another Marvel hero? These are more like team-up movies than solo Spidey movies.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    @TR007, absolutely. It's been such a frustrating Spider-Man to watch because if he had the right material, Holland would absolutely shine. There's parts in every Spider-Man movie where his potential is so vibrant, as he's a damn good actor and can evoke all the layers a good Peter needs, but he just never gets consistent writing to support him along the way. It's basically a less severe version of what Andrew Garfield dealt with, because he had the misfortune of trying to be Spider-Man at a time when Sony were adamant about building up a big universe of sequels and spin-offs nobody wanted.

    I just don't feel anything to latch onto with this Peter. They avoid mentioning Uncle Ben like the plague, so we lose a lot of context behind who he is and what has made him feel the way he does about his powers. Over time, it was Tony start who seemed to overtake Uncle Ben in Peter's mind in terms of who was the most important mentor to him, and that is just ridiculous. Tony came a long way and had grown as a person, but he isn't Uncle Ben. Ben was a good man his entire life, not just the last bit of it, and the fact that he feels like a stranger at this point is just unforgiveable. I don't need to see him get shot again, but it would have been nice to hear Peter or May or literally anyone mention him by name, and reminisce about the memories they shared and what he taught them about life. But we get none of it, and it blows my mind.

    And I agree about Peter always being teamed up with someone. Holland never gets a single movie appearance to just stand on his own, and it takes away from him in the same way the uneven writing does. And they always put him with character that just don't fit as well. Peter Parker shouldn't like the kind of guy Tony is, or he at least should be very skeptical about him, but he quickly becomes the most important man in the kid's life. The biggest missed opportunity post-Civil War was having more interactions between Peter and Captain America, who I think is the perfect and most fitting role model for him, as he's regularly been in the comics. Steve's good-naturedness and humble beginnings are so much more suitable for Peter to be attracted to than anything Tony is.

    And now in this latest film when Holland finally has no heroes to worry about overshadowing him, he's got to contend with all these villains that are nostalgic for people watching, which will distract from him. And heaven forbid Tobey and Andrew are in the film longer than five minutes, as people will leave the theater only thinking about them. I feel bad for the dude, I really do. He got sold a raw deal.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,183
    Just be honest, you guys already hate the new film. No need to further aggravate yourselves.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    @MakeshiftPython, you make a lot of silly judgement calls on people, if I dare to be frank. We're just discussing how we feel about this version of the character, and how we feel about the films of the past definitely influences how we view the coming ones. I don't see anyone here making crazy leaps in order to complain for its own sake. We're all fans, and want to like each movie that comes out, but some of us just don't respond to this take on Spider-Man for obvious reasons. I think it's childish to continue to assume anything other than pure subjective opinion is going on here.

    I'm certainly not the type to hate something just to hate it, but the track record with this character, this director and Sony in general isn't great and hasn't been for well over a decade. I'm calling it as I see it, sorry I and others aren't as enthusiastic as you desire us to be.
  • 69breaker869breaker8 United States
    Posts: 2
    So, I'm new and even I'm having trouble understanding the idea that people are hating a movie that isn't even out now. How is this even possible? How can this be possible?
    @MakeshiftPython, you make a lot of silly judgement calls on people, if I dare to be frank. We're just discussing how we feel about this version of the character, and how we feel about the films of the past definitely influences how we view the coming ones. I don't see anyone here making crazy leaps in order to complain for its own sake. We're all fans, and want to like each movie that comes out, but some of us just don't respond to this take on Spider-Man for obvious reasons. I think it's childish to continue to assume anything other than pure subjective opinion is going on here.

    I'm certainly not the type to hate something just to hate it, but the track record with this character, this director and Sony in general isn't great and hasn't been for well over a decade. I'm calling it as I see it, sorry I and others aren't as enthusiastic as you desire us to be.

    I'm sorry, but did you never see Spiderman: Into the Spiderverse?
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    69breaker8 wrote: »
    So, I'm new and even I'm having trouble understanding the idea that people are hating a movie that isn't even out now. How is this even possible? How can this be possible?

    It's called speculation, obviously, and secondly, nobody I've seen is hating it, there is just a lack of enthusiasm or hope for it. Which people have a right to feel, by the way.

    What's happening with Spider-Man is kind of like the lead up to a Bond film coming out, where all we have to go on is trailers and set pictures. Some people get excited, others don't, and then there's the cross-section in between that could go either way. It's a natural human reaction to have.

    I just find it befuddling that it's always the people who aren't as enthusiastic about something who are picked out from a crowd and lectured at, but not the people who are on the other side. I don't see any greater sin in not liking what you see from an upcoming movie and therefore being more negative about it compared to hyping it up to high heaven and criticizing anyone who doesn't match your pie in the sky mood about it. We're all adults here, after all. Let's not make a soap opera out of this.
    69breaker8 wrote: »
    I'm sorry, but did you never see Spiderman: Into the Spiderverse?

    Yes, I watched it. Thought it was good, but certainly wasn't in the crowd of people who thought it was the greatest thing man had ever crafted. I've seen Spider-Man 2, after all. ;-)

    I will say it was certainly a treat to finally see Miles getting represented in a way that made him feel like his own character; the newest Spider-Man games did great with that as well, and I look forward to more of him. I just wasn't blown away by anything beyond how beautifully animated it was.
  • 69breaker869breaker8 United States
    Posts: 2
    69breaker8 wrote: »
    So, I'm new and even I'm having trouble understanding the idea that people are hating a movie that isn't even out now. How is this even possible? How can this be possible?

    It's called speculation, obviously, and secondly, nobody I've seen is hating it, there is just a lack of enthusiasm or hope for it. Which people have a right to feel, by the way.

    What's happening with Spider-Man is kind of like the lead up to a Bond film coming out, where all we have to go on is trailers and set pictures. Some people get excited, others don't, and then there's the cross-section in between that could go either way. It's a natural human reaction to have.

    I just find it befuddling that it's always the people who aren't as enthusiastic about something who are picked out from a crowd and lectured at, but not the people who are on the other side. I don't see any greater sin in not liking what you see from an upcoming movie and therefore being more negative about it compared to hyping it up to high heaven and criticizing anyone who doesn't match your pie in the sky mood about it. We're all adults here, after all. Let's not make a soap opera out of this.
    69breaker8 wrote: »
    I'm sorry, but did you never see Spiderman: Into the Spiderverse?

    Yes, I watched it. Thought it was good, but certainly wasn't in the crowd of people who thought it was the greatest thing man had ever crafted. I've seen Spider-Man 2, after all. ;-)

    I will say it was certainly a treat to finally see Miles getting represented in a way that made him feel like his own character; the newest Spider-Man games did great with that as well, and I look forward to more of him. I just wasn't blown away by anything beyond how beautifully animated it was.

    Speculation? Could have fooled me.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    @69breaker8, what else would you call the experience of people taking their impressions of a film before its release and sharing what they think they'll think of it? Are we not allowed to assess what we know of a movie to figure out if it's worth seeing in theaters, or at the very least to gauge our anticipation for it?

    I just get the impression of a select few who dislike people not being over the moon for a movie they're looking forward to, and the apprehension and criticism others have is taken to be something more sinister than it is. Welcome to the internet, it's kind of how it is.
  • Posts: 1,394
    @MakeshiftPython, you make a lot of silly judgement calls on people, if I dare to be frank. We're just discussing how we feel about this version of the character, and how we feel about the films of the past definitely influences how we view the coming ones. I don't see anyone here making crazy leaps in order to complain for its own sake. We're all fans, and want to like each movie that comes out, but some of us just don't respond to this take on Spider-Man for obvious reasons. I think it's childish to continue to assume anything other than pure subjective opinion is going on here.

    I'm certainly not the type to hate something just to hate it, but the track record with this character, this director and Sony in general isn't great and hasn't been for well over a decade. I'm calling it as I see it, sorry I and others aren't as enthusiastic as you desire us to be.

    Unfortunately,there are a few here like MakeshiftPython who makes personal attacks on people here who disagrees with him.Just ignore him.

    Regarding the Holland films,I call them Iron Man junior films.This Parker had everything gifted to him and didn’t have to work for anything which is a shame as Holland is a good actor and suits the role but he’s not allowed to carry Spider Man film on his own.It doesn’t help that his MJ is played by an overhyped,overrated actress who looks nothing like the character in the comics.

  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    edited November 2021 Posts: 8,183
    Stuff like “they don’t mention uncle Ben!!” is more of a gripe than a criticism.

    And if we can accept a Aquaman that isn’t blonde and white we can accept an MJ that’s not redhead and white. (Even though it’s technically not Mary Jane)
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,546
    AstonLotus wrote: »
    @MakeshiftPython, you make a lot of silly judgement calls on people, if I dare to be frank. We're just discussing how we feel about this version of the character, and how we feel about the films of the past definitely influences how we view the coming ones. I don't see anyone here making crazy leaps in order to complain for its own sake. We're all fans, and want to like each movie that comes out, but some of us just don't respond to this take on Spider-Man for obvious reasons. I think it's childish to continue to assume anything other than pure subjective opinion is going on here.

    I'm certainly not the type to hate something just to hate it, but the track record with this character, this director and Sony in general isn't great and hasn't been for well over a decade. I'm calling it as I see it, sorry I and others aren't as enthusiastic as you desire us to be.

    Unfortunately,there are a few here like MakeshiftPython who makes personal attacks on people here who disagrees with him.Just ignore him.

    Regarding the Holland films,I call them Iron Man junior films.This Parker had everything gifted to him and didn’t have to work for anything which is a shame as Holland is a good actor and suits the role but he’s not allowed to carry Spider Man film on his own.It doesn’t help that his MJ is played by an overhyped,overrated actress who looks nothing like the character in the comics.

    My favourite part was when you went into a bunch of threads just to talk smack about Makeshift. :)) Really taking the high road there pal.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,183
    Can’t get enough of me! :D
  • Posts: 1,394
    Dr Strange 2 is undergoing “ significant “ reshoots according to various sources.I wonder what made Disney/Kevin Feige make that decision? Sam Raimi did hint before it would have more of a horror vibe than previous MCU movies.Did they have second thoughts and force him to go more family friendly?
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,183
    SPIDER-MAN 2 had reshoots too. It’s not the end of the world.
  • Posts: 1,165
    Just be honest, you guys already hate the new film. No need to further aggravate yourselves.
    How could anyone hate the film? It hasn’t been released yet.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    Stuff like “they don’t mention uncle Ben!!” is more of a gripe than a criticism.

    No, it's definitely a criticism. Uncle Ben and the lessons he taught Peter are the entire cornerstone of his character, the thing that motivates him to do what he does. You can't have Spider-Man without "with great power comes great responsibility." As I said, I didn't need to see Uncle Ben get shot for the thousandth time-but still wouldn't have minded it-but at the very least he could be mentioned in full detail. All we get is Peter or May stepping around saying his name, and Watts thinks putting his initials on a suitcase that Peter loses but doesn't seem to care about losing (even though he should value the last item he had of Ben) is enough. But it isn't.

    Part of why people have such a disconnect with this version of Peter is because we don't have enough of an idea of where he comes from and what makes him tick. His intro in Civil War was strong, as we saw that he was down on his luck but just trying to do his best. He paraphrases the great power/great responsibility line, but the film leaves it up for Ben to be mentioned in full later. But Watts and the writers never invoke Uncle Ben, like they're actively trying to avoid it. By the time Homecoming rolls around Tony has effectively become the Uncle Ben to this Peter, which I just find ridiculous. Tony came a long way, but he was massively imperfect even near the end and he wasn't the right mentor figure for Peter.

    Regardless of all that, though, it wouldn't have killed them to have Peter say, "My uncle Ben once told me..." or "When I was in trouble, my uncle Ben always said..." I don't need a twenty minute flashback sequence, I'd just like to hear Peter talk about the man that raised him to be the good kid he is. I'd have removed any sequence Peter had with Iron Man in any part of Homecoming for just one scene with the balls to mention Ben, since it seems to demand courage to invoke him anymore.

    It's just part of the disconnect I have, and why the Raimi movies feel so special in that regard. Even when Ben is dead, he plays a vital role in each movie, being the source Peter has to keep going. He is the constant in Peter's life, the guy whose teachings he can always turn to. But in the MCU, he's just another guy.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,183
    See, I think the Raimi films leaned too hard on Uncle Ben. All Peter really needs to learn is from his inaction that killed his uncle and it’s what drives him from there on. When he tells his date at the homecoming dance that he can’t stay (so he can go after Vulture), I don’t need to be explicitly told why, I fully understand his stance and how it hurts him still at that moment. He could easily just look the other way and have a dance with his high school crush, but his having learned that great power comes with great responsibility compelled him to make a decision he doesn’t even interpret as a choice but as a moral obligation. At this point it’s part of pop culture osmosis which is why I don’t mind that the MCU films don’t lean heavy on referencing Uncle Ben. They don’t need to, because we understand why Peter does what he does. Funnily, I think WHAT IF is the only instance where MCU Peter Parker actually recalls something about Uncle Ben to someone. Aside from that, I watched the 90s TAS growing up, and that show went by just fine without having Uncle Ben constantly referenced.

    If Uncle Ben has to be brought up, it would actually be cool if they start one of Holland’s films with a flashback of a moment Peter recalls fondly, before cutting to the present. Later in the film that moment can inferred. Sort of like how we saw a young Tony Stark in an idealized version of how he would have been with his parents before they died.

    But I’m also tired of how the Batman films constantly bring up Bruce’s parents. Hell, we see their killing TWICE in the 1989-1997 run. When it was announced that BvS would introduce a 20 year active Batman I thought that was refreshing that we wouldn’t have to go through his parents getting killed the umpteenth time since BATMAN BEGINS was still fresh on the minds a decade earlier. But surprise, the movie literally opens with Bruce’s parents getting killed. Ugh. Unnecessary. And then a mere three years later we get JOKER depicting that scene yet again.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    @MakeshiftPython, you make fair points, and I don't disagree. I don't expect every movie to have ten minutes dedicated to Uncle Ben, I just find him to be a vital part of any Spider-Man incarnation because of his value to Peter's life. He's not just a mentor, he's the father he was cheated out of having and what he teaches Peter lays the groundwork for who he is as a man. It'd be like having a Superman movie that just never talks about Pa Kent. By avoiding these characters and their impact on the hero, we are missing a part of what makes them tick.

    I would be perfectly satisfied with just a line or two of Peter just mentioning Ben in a positive light, and sharing a kernel of wisdom he once shared. I don't need to even see him. I just hope I got my point across at how weird I think it is that they appear to have done everything they can not to mention Uncle Ben. That's the only thing I find strange, like they're afraid to be compared to the past incarnations or something, or just want Tony to fill that role.

    I don't expect it, but it'd be kinda cool to have a moment in NWH where all three Spider-Men realize they all got the same advice from the Uncle Bens in their timeline, which proves that Ben's teachings are one of the constants in the multiverse. Sounds a lot dorkier on paper, but I like the sentiment of it.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,183
    See, THAT would actually be a great bit, and would be even more potent after having Uncle Ben not present for two films.

    I’ll give this to Marvel Studios, they’ve done a great job at hiding aspects of their films. No leaks. Marketing for ENDGAME barely put footage out there, so most audiences went in cold. Nobody knew the true nature of Ben Kingsley’s Mandarin until opening day. And while most geeks are zeroing in on the previous Spidey’s making a surprise appearance, it wouldn’t surprise me if the studio used that to their advantage by hiding an even more important scene: involving a high profile playing Uncle Ben.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    @MakeshiftPython, NWH seems to be the only movie I can think of in the MCU that has been wracked with these kinds of leaks. Disney really do all they can, including giving actors different scripts that limit their knowledge of what happens with other characters in other sections of the film, and that seems to do them well. I think I'd find it frustrating as an actor, but clearly it works.

    I wonder what changed with NWH? Certainly the hype for it has been beyond insane, which doesn't help. There's more eyes on this than ever, not just because it's an MCU film, but because past Spider-Man fans are anticipating seeing their favorite Spider-Man on screen too. The pressure would be crippling, for me.

    Makes me want to be a fly on the wall in the studio right now, as they are probably trying to figure out where the leaks came from, how they got out, who did it, etc. I also feel like they have manipulated the trailers in ways we don't expect, and I don't just mean by removing the other Spider-Men. I think it's very likely that just as they did with Endgame, certain shots are showing things that aren't necessary what they seem to be, if not downright different in the final cut. Don't know how much I agree with that level of manipulation, but I guess with how crazy the internet is these days the rules of play have been more blurred than ever. We'll have to see what shakes out.

    I just hope NWH isn't as bloated as I have feared it could be, as it seems to have so much going on. I just want it to be a well paced, balanced story. After all, if the rumors of the next Doctor Strange film are to be believed, more multiverse shenanigans will afford the filmmakers to offload some of NWH's weight onto that film in order to expand upon the full scope of what the multiverse is.

    Before the leaks came out I genuinely would've thought it'd made more sense for Tobey's Spider-Man to cameo in DS2, given that Raimi himself is behind that.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,183
    It wouldn’t surprise me if those leaks regarding Garfield and Maguire were actually intentional in order to have everyone focus on that and not look for an even bigger secret that they’ve successfully kept hidden. Plus it stirs fans up to a frenzy that they end up promoting the film more than Sony has to.

    But also just imagine if they actually aren’t in it at all and it was all just fabricated fan garbage. Either way, I’m looking forward to the reactions!
Sign In or Register to comment.