Jump to content

Talk:Venom (2018 film): Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
→‎Not Foreign: new section
→‎Venom has legs: new section
Line 135: Line 135:


Edit request: The article uses the phrase "Worldwide, it grossed $125.2 million from foreign territories" and needs to be changed as "foreign" is USA centric POV, which [[WP:MOSFILM]] already recommends against. The phrase can be replaced with "other territories" or "international territories". -- [[Special:Contributions/109.79.191.81|109.79.191.81]] ([[User talk:109.79.191.81|talk]]) 22:24, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
Edit request: The article uses the phrase "Worldwide, it grossed $125.2 million from foreign territories" and needs to be changed as "foreign" is USA centric POV, which [[WP:MOSFILM]] already recommends against. The phrase can be replaced with "other territories" or "international territories". -- [[Special:Contributions/109.79.191.81|109.79.191.81]] ([[User talk:109.79.191.81|talk]]) 22:24, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

== Venom has legs ==

[https://filmschoolrejects.com/venom-has-legs/ Venom has legs]! Beside the pun that Venom fans should understand, the article needs more information about the second weekend at the Box office holding up better than expected. -- 23:40, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

Revision as of 23:40, 15 October 2018

Officially NOT part of the MCU

According to the source, it is "something that Marvel Studios, Kevin Feige, Spider-Man star Tom Holland, Marvel director Joe Russo and Spider-Man director Jon Watts have all made abundantly clear, for over a year now. In fact, the only time there seemed to be a glimmer of hope for Venom crossing over into the MCU, was last year when Sony's Amy Pascal misspoke about the possibility, nearly causing Feige's head to explode". So I think that should be used to clarify any confusion in the article. --Kailash29792 (talk) 10:02, 19 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Unless we get clarification from Pascal or Sony then the consensus wording shouldn't change. We always new that this was considered separate by Marvel and was essentially being considered separate by Sony, but deep down the latter seems reluctant to fully cut ties and we can't say they have until they actually tell us that's the case. - adamstom97 (talk) 21:17, 19 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I believe the opening credits on the new poster say "in association with Marvel and Tencent Pictures" which seemingly confirms it's not MCU since there's no Marvel Studios in it. - Cineplex (talk) 10:40PM, September 17, 2018
We have known that Marvel Studios was not involved this whole time. That is stated pretty clearly in the article and in past discussions here. This new poster does not change anything. - adamstom97 (talk) 05:47, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

We already got clarification from Sony, Ruben Fleischer, and Matt Tolmach that Venom is standalone and it's own universe.

Now, to adamstom97, thejoebro64, or whoever made this article over a year ago, may we please PLEASE drop the consensus and leave out any MCU connections for the sake of Sony's Universe of Marvel Characters? The movie is already in theatres, there's no MCU reference in there whatsoever, and it's gotten bad reviews. Do you think Kevin Feige would want this world of Venom to be a part of his universe considering that all 20 movies in said universe have received positive reviews? - Cineplex (talk) 7:33PM, October 5, 2018

Just because there's no references to the MCU doesn't mean it's entirely separate. As this Screen Rant article notes, Sony's hope is to retcon Venom as taking place in the same world as the MCU, and Fleischer has said that they are hoping Venom will interact with MCU characers. And I'm pretty sure it's not up to Feige to set a movie in a universe. JOEBRO64 23:56, 5 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
ARE YOU NUTS? Kevin Feige created and owns Marvel Studios. So, of course it's up to him! - Cineplex (talk) 10:44PM, October 5, 2018
Feige is president of the studio, he doesn’t own it nor did he create it. Rusted AutoParts 03:45, 6 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Budget?

Anyone got any source on the 100 Million budget? asking because I've not seen a source on that. -74.116.240.2 (talk) 17:56, 20 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There is a source in the article. - adamstom97 (talk) 07:48, 21 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Box Office Mojo do not say where they get their budget figures from and sometimes they change them later too (see reports from FilmLA.com) but Variety also says the budget for Venom was $100 million.
We will probably find out more when any tax rebates for New York and Atlanta have to be declared. -- 37.110.218.43 (talk) 13:49, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Deadline says "the production cost was net $100M before P&A" and "it’s around $116M with Georgia tax credits".
The reason I'm even checking the source is the difficult to believe statement "We’re told that a $450M global take ultimately gets Venom to break-even during its theatrical release." I can only guess they have a whole lot of marketing and other costs, but $450 to break even, wow! -- 109.77.203.86 (talk) 00:20, 11 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Spider-Man explanation

So now we've got a detailed explanation from Fleischer on why Spider-Man isn't in the movie and how they retooled Venom so he could stand on his own: [1]. Where should we add this? Maybe try to start a writing sub-section? JOEBRO64 12:55, 28 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Under "Future" it says "Main Article: Sony's Marvel Universe", which links you back to the "Future" section of this article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.19.58.249 (talk) 16:10, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 3 October 2018

CillianChampion (talk) 17:50, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Can i edit a bit of Venom?

Not done: It is not possible for individual users to be granted permission to edit a semi-protected article. You can do one of the following:
  • You will be able to edit this article without restriction four days after account registration if you make at least 10 constructive edits to other articles.
  • You can request the article be unprotected at this page. To do this, you need to provide a valid rationale that refutes the original reason for protection.
  • You can provide a specific request to edit the article in "change X to Y" format on this talk page and an editor who is not blocked from editing the article will determine if the requested edit is appropriate.
Thanks, ‑‑ElHef (Meep?) 19:01, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Was there a particular reason the article was completely locked rather than partially locked and set to allow flagged edits? It feels like an ongoing problem that admins overreact and completely lock an article instead of taking the less restrictive step of allowing flagged edits. As a newly released film this article is in need of substantial changes. Obvious improvements like adding reviews haven't happened yet and would have happened[took longer than] if the article hadn't been locked. -- 37.110.218.43 (talk) 09:16, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
WP:Pending changes is typically only used on a fairly inactive article, because frequent edits by multiple editors cause very complex situations for reviewers to untangle. (I speak from experience - even edits by two different editors can be a headache. I can't even imagine trying to review something with this level of activity.) Until the activity on the article slows down significantly, semi-protection is a better fit for the article. ‑‑ElHef (Meep?) 13:39, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 4 October 2018

I want to edit the venom page please Raj kumarawala (talk) 12:13, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: It is not possible for individual users to be granted permission to edit a semi-protected article. You can do one of the following:
  • You will be able to edit this article without restriction four days after account registration if you make at least 10 constructive edits to other articles.
  • You can request the article be unprotected at this page. To do this, you need to provide a valid rationale that refutes the original reason for protection.
  • You can provide a specific request to edit the article in "change X to Y" format on this talk page and an editor who is not blocked from editing the article will determine if the requested edit is appropriate.
Thanks, ‑‑ElHef (Meep?) 13:44, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 4 October 2018

The person who wrote this never mentioned the post credits scene (the one with an intro to "into the spider-verse") , only the mid-credits. MrMango77 (talk) 17:45, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ‑‑ElHef (Meep?) 18:09, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 5 October 2018

Who's Donna Diego? Her name is "Homeless Woman Maria" acted by Melora Walters.

see the page of IMDB [1] 42.200.236.43 (talk) 07:57, 5 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 09:34, 6 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

References

Semi-protected edit request on 6 October 2018

There should be an added sentence in the section about critic reviews under the “reviews” section, as well as the general info stating that “Although critic reviews for the film have been negative, the audience reviews as recorded by Rotten Tomatoes rank the film with an aggregate score of 88% on opening day.” 2001:5B0:2A22:13D8:55ED:8DFF:F790:9B7B (talk) 04:56, 6 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 09:35, 6 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
We don't consider that type of poll to be a reliable source (here's an example why). Note that audience surveys like CinemaScore and PostTrak are okay, which is why they have been already included. 212.139.194.211 (talk) 22:43, 7 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"Intended to be..."

@PeeJay2K3: This is the first film in Sony's MU. It just is. Whether that shared universe goes on to include any more feature films is irrelevant. - adamstom97 (talk) 09:08, 8 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Well, for one thing, you can't call it a "shared universe" if it's not sharing the universe with any other films or characters. But be that as it may, I don't think it's unfair to say it's "intended to be" the first in this universe, as that recognises that there is an intention to make further films but also intimates that those future films are not yet in production (and may never be, based on the reaction to this dumpster fire). – PeeJay 15:14, 8 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Can we say it "is the first film in Sony's planned Marvel Universe"?-TriiipleThreat (talk) 15:16, 8 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I still disagree that any wording change is necessary, but that does seem like the best compromise for the moment. - adamstom97 (talk) 20:20, 8 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request Carnage

Please change "he is invited to interview incarcerated serial killer Cletus Kasady" to "he interviews incarcerated serial killer Cletus Kasady, who promises he will escape and there will be carnage". -- 37.110.218.43 (talk) 09:59, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done as we don't just quote dialogue in a plot summary like that, and that would be a WP:EGG link anyway which is based on outside knowledge rather than the plot itself (read: WP:OR). - adamstom97 (talk) 15:26, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Considering the requirements for brevity the phrasing is sloppy in any case "he was invited to interview", instead of "he interviews". I wasn't suggesting that dialog be quoted directly but it is weird for the article to merely state that he interviews Kasady without saying anything about the substance of that interview, the point is Kasady makes a threat.
I disagree with the suggestion that WP:EGG even applies to a case of such an obvious link from the word "carnage" to the comics character Carnage. It is leading the reader but it isn't surprising them with an egg or using wildly unrelated link text, but with or without a wikilink, rephrasing would improve the sentence.
You make an interesting point about outside knowledge, but following that logic through you might need to deleting the mid-credits scene from the plot section entirely, since it is tangential to the plot and requires outside knowledge. (I note the into the Spider-Verse post credits scene has been deleted since I last looked at the article.) So maybe the mid-credits scene should be removed from the Plot section, after all Harrelson is already explained in the Cast section, but if it is going to stay then the phrasing could be improved. -- 109.77.203.86 (talk) 23:38, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
There is no good reason to remove the scene entirely or to not say what actually happens in it. The rest of my points still stand. - adamstom97 (talk) 18:25, 11 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

East Malaysia

Should you mention that the filming also took place at Sibu, Sarawak, Malaysia? Xyuehong (talk) 17:52, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

According to the film's production notes, the "Malaysian village" was built on a dirt lot in Georgia.

https://www.nst.com.my/lifestyle/groove/2018/10/418084/malaysians-tizzy-over-sarawaks-starring-role-marvels-venom
Sorry to disappoint, but it was only set in Malaysia not filmed there. Interesting production information, maybe worth mentioning for other reasons. -- 109.77.203.86 (talk) 23:45, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not Foreign

Edit request: The article uses the phrase "Worldwide, it grossed $125.2 million from foreign territories" and needs to be changed as "foreign" is USA centric POV, which WP:MOSFILM already recommends against. The phrase can be replaced with "other territories" or "international territories". -- 109.79.191.81 (talk) 22:24, 13 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Venom has legs

Venom has legs! Beside the pun that Venom fans should understand, the article needs more information about the second weekend at the Box office holding up better than expected. -- 23:40, 15 October 2018 (UTC)