Sony Spin-Off Bad Bunny is El Muerto

Not to mention that Marvel Studios has a proven track record and built a good will with the audiences over the last 14 years. Sony has done neither with their solo projects.
 
Not really. Alot of the Marvels character needed to be updated to be translated on screen.
I guess, but you can't even adapt El Muerto without completely reinventing him.

This is pretty much guaranteed to just be a fully original movie that has nothing to with any Marvel comics about a superpowered Mexican wrestler who happens to be named El Muerto. Something so different from the source material like Toei's Japanese Spider-Man or Halle Berry Catwoman, and even then at least they chose a character with name recognition instead of a character even hardcore fans don't know.

At that point why even bother with making a Spider-Man Cinematic Universe instead of just fully inventing all your own characters?

And if you do want a Spider-Man Cinematic Universe, why work on a character that's pretty much fully original before you do the likes of

Black Cat
The Outlaws
  • Silver Sable
  • Prowler
  • Rocket Racer
  • Puma
  • Paladin
Cardiac
Solo
Man-Wolf
Grizzly
the Slingers
  • Dusk
  • Prodigy
  • Hornet
  • Ricochet
Superior Foes of Spider-Man
  • Boomerang
  • Beetle
  • Shocker
  • Overdrive
  • Speed Demon
 
Last edited:
Don't give us a live action adaptation of the Six Arms Saga, the Clone Saga, or even Silver Sable & Black Cat, but give us this...

And then if Sony really meant well, they couldn't have put a trained Hispanic actor in the role? It seems like they're just striking the iron while it's hot since Bad Bunny wrestled at a couple of Wrestlemanias.

Just silly.
 
Leave it to GuestStar to be the contrarian to everyone's opinion once again. Guy never fails. :funny:

Sony doesn't really have the faith or trust in fans to buy that this will in any way be good. They've learned nothing from Morbius and these upcoming Spider-Man spin-off flicks will most likely be of the same quality.

I'm not a sheep when it comes to this Sony = Wrong viewpoint. Its hypocritical. Id prefer to be critical in areas that matter, which is in the filmmaking process, not the greenlighting process.

And what should they learn from Morbius? That they should just stick to Spider-man? Thats biased learning, not logical learning. They can translate any character they want really. Just like Marvel and DC. Like who the hell is peacemaker? He went from no one i ever heard of to being talked about alot like he is the next deadpool.

Any issue with Morbius has nothing to do with the fact that he is a lesser-known spider-man character. We need to get that fact straight. Which is often the thing people mix up. That lesser-known = automatic failure = learned nothing.

There was a time when people were knocking Venom for not having Spider-man in it. Saying how it was gonna flop. It certainly did not flop. Now everyone changes their tune saying that its because its Venom... but thats not what people were saying before. Its almost like you can't say for sure how these things will go.

Now i didn't mind Venom and the sequel, there is a charm to them even if they ain't 100% comic accurate. And i suspect many did enjoy Venom too. I haven't seen Morbius though.
 
Last edited:
You're making a lot of assumptions that I never implied along with grossly generalizing what I was actually trying to come across. With this in mind, there is no point in having any discussion with you.

People dislike these movies based on all the points you brought up. If Sony wasn't the company that had made them, the same criticisms would still apply. Actually try to understand people's viewpoints for once instead of immediately jumping onto disputing them every single time.
 
People dislike these movies based on all the points you brought up. If Sony wasn't the company that had made them, the same criticisms would still apply. Actually try to understand people's viewpoints for once instead of immediately jumping onto disputing them every single time.

But then they pick the wrong words to suggest it. Saying "Sony are gonna Sony" to something you haven't seen a hint of synopsis for basically says if they greenlit anything that isn't spider-man then its wrong.

I mean most of the time it has nothing to do with quality. its the idea that Sony are trying to make money out of the spidey universe that bothers people the most. If they were sensible and just made Spider-man 4 and into the spiderverse, yno because people like that one, then no one would complain. but if studios just played it safe constantly then nothing would ever happen.
 
Last edited:
I literally had no idea who this character was until I heard the news. :dry:

Glad to know Sony is still making sound decisions after Morbius won audiences all over the globe. Thank god there's still the animated Spider-Verse movies to look forward to.

Then I hope you're OK with heavily pregnant crime fighters.
 
So he'll play a Mexican Wrestler.....he has the wrestling thing down as he's been in the ring for WWE.
 
So, apparently Bad Bunny and Post Malone are not the same guy.

Interesting.
 
Then I hope you're OK with heavily pregnant crime fighters.
They're taking inspiration from the Dennis Hopeless Spider-Woman run, which I loved. So I don't have a problem with it.
 
They're taking inspiration from the Dennis Hopeless Spider-Woman run, which I loved. So I don't have a problem with it.

It just seems such a shame that the cinematic debut of Spider-woman is that bizarre nonsense.
 
If we are gonna criticize them for doing something wrong, how can anyone criticize them for doing something Marvel would do? It sounds hypocritical.

In the long run i dunno who El Muerto is. But then i didn't know who Moon Knight. The Eternals, Guardians of the Galaxy, Captain Marvel, and Shang chi were either. These characters were not exactly well-profiled characters. But all these characters are translatable to screen, even if they all ain't Iron man, hulk, Spiderman, X-Men, fantastic 4.

I’m sorry, what? This is a thread about this project specifically, not a cross comparison of Marvel projects owned and operated by Disney. But since you brought it up, here we go…

The MCU has been in development since 2008 with a collective narrative threading the films together—for better or for worse—this led to a host of sequels that were terrible, average, or great. Over this course of time, they eventually introduced more and more virtually unknown characters to the general audience but because of the branding and relative consistency in quality, people continue to tune in to see what they come up with next. Sony has never done anything consistent besides consistently make bad movies. They drop the ball on almost every obscure character they introduce with Venom really only being a success because of the fan base and his close association with Spider-Man.

The Amazing Spider-Man series is a great example of Sony attempting to do what the MCU had been doing at the time, but instead of building up to it incrementally, they rushed it and the storyline crumbled in the process. Now, here we are right back at it again, except this time, they’re not trying to make a cohesive build-up to something, they’re seeing how much they can again try and fail to replicate the MCU’s success by having all these separate threads that aren’t going anywhere. Morbius should have been their opportunity to reassess where they take this and No Way Home should have helped them double down on collaborating with Marvel on a regular basis.

So no, Moon Knight, Captain Marvel, etc aren’t comparable to El Muerto, but you go ahead and continue peddling some warped thought process by completely misconstruing what I was saying from the beginning.
 
So he'll play a Mexican Wrestler.....he has the wrestling thing down as he's been in the ring for WWE.

Because of all the hard work he put into training to make everything he did look good, I'm somewhat convinced that Bad Bunny himself won't be the reason if this project fails.
 
They drop the ball on almost every obscure character they introduce with Venom really only being a success because of the fan base and his close association with Spider-Man.

This is a very fan bias view that's really not true. This was the view back in the day it was released, but the number of people who see that movie likely were not Venom fans. Most of the audience who see the film likely knew very little about Venom. Perhaps they knew he was associated with Spider-man... But no one came out complaining Spider-man wasn't there.

they’re not trying to make a cohesive build-up to something, they’re seeing how much they can again try and fail to replicate the MCU’s success by having all these separate threads that aren’t going anywhere.
The truth is, neither do Marvel. Marvel don't build things up the way people want to believe they do. They pretty much set up as many characters as possible and then find ways to move them around. Infact its worse today with just how many Marvel characters exist.

There is no build-up in any of the MCU spider-man movies. Aunt may finds out he is spider-man after 1 movie. Everyone finds out he is spider-man after 2 movies. He faces 5 villains thanks to the fact they were bringing back previous ones no one knew would ever be seen again.

Where was the build up too ideas like Planet Hulk? They just jumped right into that one.

Whether the quality control isn't in Sony's favor, it doesn't change the fact that Marvels way of doing things is just as much an allusion of a plan that they manage to make it cool enough that no one even notices.

Morbius should have been their opportunity to reassess where they take this and No Way Home should have helped them double down on collaborating with Marvel on a regular basis.

i don't even have to work in the industry to tell you why that would never happen. There is probably like a 10 page contract of give and takes over just Spider-man himself alone.

And lets be honest, people basically just want Sony to get non-stop Spider-man movies in the MCU. constantly talking about another trilogy and all the directions they will go. Which in the end the fanrtasy is far more appealing than the overall reality
 
{me reading the thread title}
giphy-downsized-large.gif
 
I've defended Sony because I hold the Raimi trilogy in high regards, with SM2 being one of my top 3 CMB of all time; I defended the Andrew Garfield films as I saw their strenghts and didn't think they were bad as people made them out to be; I liked Venom - Venom 2, not so much but still had charm to it, and felt that, outside the editing, there was a legit good/enjoyable movie in Morbious (even if they used a recycled formula...like Marvel has done)

But this just makes me want to kick dirt and punch Bad Bunny; I can't stand that talentless hack.

As mentioned, Sony is trying to capitalize on his current success and greenlighting a project HE chose while he has downtime. Glad they didn't make Tarantula with him as I'm definitely skipping this.

Ps - Still have more faith in Sony with SM than I do with Marvel. I wish they would spend the time and care that allow the creative team to craft a compelling story with care and even build a world with these characters. Heck, a Spider Man 2099 movie would be a breath of fresh air.
 
Heck, a Spider Man 2099 movie would be a breath of fresh air.
I've thought that would've been a great way to deal with things. Have Peter Parker in the MCU and let Sony focus on a different Spider-Man series with a clear protagonist as the throughline (rather than a bunch of villains and anti-heroes that have nothing to tie them together since there is no Spider-Man) that cannot be mistaken for being Peter Parker/MCU. 2099 Also has a setting and aesthetic that are totally different from any Spider-Man we've gotten before. I'm sure the Marvel/Sony contract prohibits Sony from making a "Spider-Man" movie of any kind, but I think it would've made for a good compromise and would've definitely preferred that over stuff like how they went about Venom and Morbius.
 
Americans ad so much vocals to Spanish words y'all be like "L'mowerthaw"
 
If you want to find a latino protagonist for a movie why go for

El Muerto: A Mexican wrestler who has inherited a mask that makes him slightly stronger but who doesn't want to fight his planned opponent in his only 2 comic appearances total to draw from.

and not

Tarantula: A South-American revolutionary turned agent of the state turned mercenary who fled to the US where he works in the criminal underworld. Who uses incredible athletic skill combined with hidden blades laced with a paralyzing poison to take out his enemies. Who has at one point been turned into a gigantic mutant spider similar to Man-Spider. Who has almost 50 years of recurring appearances to draw from, as well as several other people who have taken on the mantle as both villains and heroes that each independently have at least 10 times the amount of appearances as El Muerto.


Like if you look at both of those, why would you ever pick the first one?

I don't know why you'd pick either. :funny::funny::funny:

Sony just doesn't have a lot to draw on. Maybe see if there's anyone in the company who has an ounce of creativity to just come up with some new characters; because they are going to need them.
 
If we are gonna criticize them for doing something wrong, how can anyone criticize them for doing something Marvel would do? It sounds hypocritical.

In the long run i dunno who El Muerto is. But then i didn't know who Moon Knight. The Eternals, Guardians of the Galaxy, Captain Marvel, and Shang chi were either. These characters were not exactly well-profiled characters. But all these characters are translatable to screen, even if they all ain't Iron man, hulk, Spiderman, X-Men, fantastic 4.

Dude, El Muerto is a guy that appeared in 2 comics ever. Even if you didn't hear about characters like Moon Knight or the Guardians or Captain Marvel or whatever, they all have supported their own various comics for many many years and have tons of stories to pull from. So there is a lot more data to at least see that these characters have maintained some level of popularity.

Also Marvel Studios in general has good will with the audience, but even with their goodwill, I saw PLENTY of people whine and moan about Eternals getting a movie. To the extent people are mocking Sony right now? No. But Marvel Studios also didn't make a stinker like Morbius recently, and are largely not pulling guys from like 1 comic as an excuse for vehicles starring musicians. You want people to start having more faith in your random solos, then they have to be better than trash. So far without Marvel Studios, their Venomverse has Venom, which is more ironically good than actually good. Having 2 so bad they're good movies and a dumpster fire isn't going to be good enough to counter random selections for movies

In short, there is nuance to this argument you are not taking into account.
 
I don't know why you'd pick either. :funny::funny::funny:

Sony just doesn't have a lot to draw on. Maybe see if there's anyone in the company who has an ounce of creativity to just come up with some new characters; because they are going to need them.
I'm not sure I entirely agree with this. Like, El Muerto would essentially be a new character since there's almost no source material and they won't stick to even those 2 issues that exist because the character's whole thing was that he wanted to avoid being a pro wrestler or a superhero and he had to be saved by Spider-Man. I think they actually have plenty to work with if they want to stick to Spider-Man supporting characters, but what they need is

1. Someone like Feige who knows the source material well and can oversee things, work on actually planning out a "phase", deciding what to adapt, maybe make a throughline of overarching themes or stories rather than just throwing every character they can think of at the wall and making such nonsensical scenes as the Morbius post-credits

2. Directors who are able to see the potential in characters and use that. I think James Gunn is a good example of someone like that. I'm not necessarily a huge fan of Gunn's humour nor do I think everything about how he's adapted his characters is how I would've liked, but there's no denying that the man is capable of making people care about characters they probably never heard of or never cared about (GotG's main team as well as Yondu, Nebula, etc., Ratcatcher, Polka-Dot Man, Peacemaker, Vigilante, etc.).​

As I've said before, I think they actually do have quite a bit to work with that could work just as well as an MCU movie, if there are competent people working on it that actually have some vision for the project, rather than seemingly just pumping out movies on commission. If people can care about Polka-Dot Man they can care about most of these characters.

I think out of the projects Sony has attempterd (excluding Spider-Woman and Silk because they're just Spider-People protagonists) Venom, Morbius, Kraven, Black Cat and Silver Sable are all characters that have enough history and don't neccessarily require Spider-Man to work (although several could definitely benefit a lot from having Spidey in their story). Hell, even that Nightwatch project they had planned at one point could work, given that Nightwatch does have a pretty unique origin and at least had 12 issues of his own solo comic plus a bunch of appearances in Spider-Man comics.

Madame Web I feel doesn't really ever work as a protagonist and Jackpot and El Muerto have literally nothing to work with.

Like I said before, I do think Sony has plenty of characters and stories to draw from that I think could work well.

And if you do want a Spider-Man Cinematic Universe, why work on a character that's pretty much fully original before you do the likes of

Black Cat
The Outlaws
  • Silver Sable
  • Prowler
  • Rocket Racer
  • Puma
  • Paladin
Cardiac
Solo
Man-Wolf
Grizzly
the Slingers
  • Dusk
  • Prodigy
  • Hornet
  • Ricochet
Superior Foes of Spider-Man
  • Boomerang
  • Beetle
  • Shocker
  • Overdrive
  • Speed Demon
 
Like I said before, I do think Sony has plenty of characters and stories to draw from that I think could work well.

They do. People tend to get hooked on source material. But often its not about the source material its about how you adapt the character or idea to screen.

El Muerto will either be a unique adaptation that makes the character relevant or just a complete failure. But then thats the risk of all movies in general.
 
Last edited:

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"