The Mego Museum needs your help!
The Mego Museum needs your help!

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

SPIDER-MAN: HOMECOMING Final Trailer and Posters

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Spyweb007
    replied
    Finally got to see Homecoming over the weekend and thought it was really good, every time Marvel Studios releases another movie I wonder if they will drop the ball, and against all odds they keep making good films. It's hard to be too concerned with the changes to supporting characters when I think back to the Marvel efforts we all grew up watching, where supporting characters and villains from the comics were rarely even present in their TV/Movie efforts. How many generic bad guys did Spidey and Hulk fight every week back in the day? Captain America in the 2 TV Movies also had no one from the comics, and even Steve Rogers was changed drastically, but I watched anyway and never dreamed we'd have movies about those characters on this level.

    Leave a comment:


  • The Bat
    replied
    I've got give them credit for creating a new character. Instead of taking an existing character and changing their race...they created a new one. That's been my point all along.

    Leave a comment:


  • Brazoo
    replied
    Originally posted by Brue
    they set up LOTS of characters! Donald Glover (who people thought was going to be Spidey, when he was cast in the film has a cool character coming. The Sinister Six on the horizon. Knowing who Ned is, I saw him differently than my non comic fans.
    For sure! I'm specifically excited for Mando, because the first time I saw him on Orphan Black I thought he was really great. He came into a roll that could have been really cliche and made it fun and really interesting.

    I was glad when he showed up on "Saul" too. It's exciting to see an actor do something awesome in smaller roll and then watch their career take off.

    Leave a comment:


  • Brue
    replied
    Originally posted by Brazoo
    POSSIBLY A SPOILER:

    Oh yeah, one more thing - as a huge "Better Call Saul" fan seeing Michael Mando getting a setup for the sequel was AWEEESOOOOOME!
    they set up LOTS of characters! Donald Glover (who people thought was going to be Spidey, when he was cast in the film has a cool character coming. The Sinister Six on the horizon. Knowing who Ned is, I saw him differently than my non comic fans.

    Leave a comment:


  • hedrap
    replied
    Nothing to apologize for. You're not wrong in your assessment. Hec's right when it comes to marketing towards Millenials, my problem is that there's more proof it doesn't work than does. It's a weird contradiction for established mediums to target Millenials, when that's the same group who openly rejects their outlets.

    Leave a comment:


  • Dark Shadow
    replied
    Originally posted by hedrap
    Original quote. Not singling out Hector as this is a shared belief.



    It's stating diversity is a financial booster and the box office proves that. It's not inferring casting was a risk that caused no damage, as you've revised the original statement to mean.



    I was working as an outside analyst at the time for investors. State of the nation and wom had nothing to do with it. You had three generations of fans anticipating this movie. It crushed every quadrant from the first trailer. The debate was whether it was going to beat Titanic.

    You're overlooking the entire reason Sony went along with Marvel. Amazing proved a straight reboot couldn't reach Raimi numbers. Sony agreed to the Marvel co-production because as a marketing tactic, MCU was the only relaunch with the potential to reach '02 numbers.

    That's the point of my comparison. Homecoming could have been as whitebread as '02 and because of the MCU/Premium factor, it still cruises over 100Mil. Diversity is not done for pure financial reasons, but it's also not purely ideological. Studios seek script approval from advocacy groups during development. They don't ask these groups to promote the movie because it can actually backfire as a marketing tactic, but they want to make sure these groups don't target the movie for being insensitive or uninclusive. It's a pure political decision to pacify advocates and the motive is not just financial but for the company/people to be seen as ideologically correct to these groups/communities.

    While I agree a high school in NYC would have a diverse makeup of students, it then becomes absurd to keep Peter as non-regional white as they did. As Chris pointed out, Homecoming has a lot of hallmarks of Ultimate Spidey. If you look at the Sony leaked papers, or Fiege's early comments, it's pretty clear this reboot was being groomed for Miles. It was only when the Russos took over MCU that you see a solid change back to Parker.

    Make whatever version of Ultimate Spider-Man - Miles comic, Peter cartoon - but subtract the MCU/Marvel-Team featuring Iron Man, and supposedly it would have done better numbers than Amazing because, millenials and diversity.

    Without Iron Man, this would have done worse than ASM2. Annnd on cue.... https://www.forbes.com/sites/scottme.../#777b599235fb
    Thanks for taking the time to clarify. I not only misinterpreted Hec's statement, but also misunderstood your box office analysis. Seems my pasture days are drawing nearer than I've realized...apologies to you both!

    Leave a comment:


  • Hector
    replied
    My bad, me stooopid, lol...

    Leave a comment:


  • Earth 2 Chris
    replied
    ^Well, that was for Garfield's second movie.

    Chris

    Leave a comment:


  • Hector
    replied
    Originally posted by Sideshow Spock
    ASM2: $200M
    Home: $175M
    Plus $200M in 2002 gave you a lot more bang for your buck than today...

    Leave a comment:


  • Sideshow Spock
    replied
    Originally posted by Earth 2 Chris
    Didn't ASM2 have a much higher budget than Homecoming, though?
    ASM2: $200M
    Home: $175M

    Leave a comment:


  • Earth 2 Chris
    replied
    Didn't ASM2 have a much higher budget than Homecoming, though?

    Chris

    Leave a comment:


  • Hector
    replied
    Your analytics are scaring me, stop it...

    Seriously though, pretty impressive regardless...

    Leave a comment:


  • hedrap
    replied
    Originally posted by Dark Shadow
    Was Hector claiming that Homecoming outperformed Spider-Man '02, or was he merely stating that the casting of Homecoming didn't hurt the 6th installment of a franchise that has already seen its 3rd incarnation within 15 years?

    Considering the second half of my question, is it even fair to compare the box office stats between the two?
    Original quote. Not singling out Hector as this is a shared belief.

    it's whatever has the more potential for money-making, millennials are the majority now, they seem to be more accepting of these changes...no further evidence needed than checking out its current box office numbers...
    It's stating diversity is a financial booster and the box office proves that. It's not inferring casting was a risk that caused no damage, as you've revised the original statement to mean.

    Originally posted by Dark Shadow
    Purely anecdotal: I anticipated the first film for years (and years and years), I attended 3 showings on opening weekend and 3 more the within the next week.

    Word of mouth was through the roof on the first film, and that, in part, was due to the state of the nation at that time. The U.S. needed a feel good hero movie, and we got it.

    And when you toss in the overalI attendance decline over the course of the past decade and a half, I find the comparison interesting although irrelevant.
    I was working as an outside analyst at the time for investors. State of the nation and wom had nothing to do with it. You had three generations of fans anticipating this movie. It crushed every quadrant from the first trailer. The debate was whether it was going to beat Titanic.

    You're overlooking the entire reason Sony went along with Marvel. Amazing proved a straight reboot couldn't reach Raimi numbers. Sony agreed to the Marvel co-production because as a marketing tactic, MCU was the only relaunch with the potential to reach '02 numbers.

    That's the point of my comparison. Homecoming could have been as whitebread as '02 and because of the MCU/Premium factor, it still cruises over 100Mil. Diversity is not done for pure financial reasons, but it's also not purely ideological. Studios seek script approval from advocacy groups during development. They don't ask these groups to promote the movie because it can actually backfire as a marketing tactic, but they want to make sure these groups don't target the movie for being insensitive or uninclusive. It's a pure political decision to pacify advocates and the motive is not just financial but for the company/people to be seen as ideologically correct to these groups/communities.

    While I agree a high school in NYC would have a diverse makeup of students, it then becomes absurd to keep Peter as non-regional white as they did. As Chris pointed out, Homecoming has a lot of hallmarks of Ultimate Spidey. If you look at the Sony leaked papers, or Fiege's early comments, it's pretty clear this reboot was being groomed for Miles. It was only when the Russos took over MCU that you see a solid change back to Parker.

    Make whatever version of Ultimate Spider-Man - Miles comic, Peter cartoon - but subtract the MCU/Marvel-Team featuring Iron Man, and supposedly it would have done better numbers than Amazing because, millenials and diversity.

    Without Iron Man, this would have done worse than ASM2. Annnd on cue.... https://www.forbes.com/sites/scottme.../#777b599235fb

    Sony's Spider-Man: Homecoming isn't remotely a flop. Yet the $175 million-budgeted Marvel Cinematic Universe entry earned another $45.2 million in its second weekend of release and has now earned $208.27m in 10 days. But the film did drop 61% in its second weekend, identical to the second-weekend drops for Spider-Man 3 and The Amazing Spider-Man 2. And that $45m weekend figure, from a $117m opening weekend, is identical to the $45m third weekend of Sam Raimi's Spider-Man (in 2002) and the second weekend of Spider-Man 2 (coming off an $88m Fri-Sun/$180m Wed-Mon debut in 2004).

    So, unless it catches up over the next month (and that's not remotely out of the question), we're looking at an identical multiplier to Amazing Spider-Man 2 ($202m/$91m) and Spider-Man 3 ($336m/$151m). That will lead to a domestic total almost identical to the $262m cume of The Amazing Spider-Man (from a $137m Tues-Sun debut) back in 2012. And adjusted for inflation, it will be noticeably fewer tickets sold than that 2012 reboot. And if the second-weekend figure holds up, the 61.3% drop will be the worst ever for a Marvel Cinematic Universe title.

    Leave a comment:


  • drquest
    replied
    Originally posted by Brazoo
    POSSIBLY A SPOILER:

    Oh yeah, one more thing - as a huge "Better Call Saul" fan seeing Michael Mando getting a setup for the sequel was AWEEESOOOOOME!
    1000% agree with that! It was cool to see him in the movie.

    Leave a comment:


  • Brazoo
    replied
    POSSIBLY A SPOILER:

    Oh yeah, one more thing - as a huge "Better Call Saul" fan seeing Michael Mando getting a setup for the sequel was AWEEESOOOOOME!

    Leave a comment:

Working...
😀
🥰
🤢
😎
😡
👍
👎