Joey Q confirms villian(Spoilers)

[TheSlag]

The Black cat is a terrible character. If shes in this movie its an automatic thumbs down. I hate that *****.

A frickin Men.

 

[Arcturus]

I'm pretty sure Venom was created in the (late) eighties. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Spawn is the ultimate poster boy for everything that was wrong with the early to mid nineties in comic books. IMO, of course...

The symbiote and Venom came from the 1980's, Venom arrived in Amazing Spider-Man #298, March 1988. Late 80's, but 80's none the less. As for the symbiote itself, it appeared in Amazing Spider-Man #252, which was May 1984.

 

[The Overlord]

Venom always had potenial in my opinion, until Marvel did irreversible damage to him by making him the "lethal protector", before that he was fine, after that he was ruined. Carnage, however, always sucked, he was nothing more than a mindless killer, with no class or style. Venom they could bring to big screen by avoiding all that "lethal protector" crap, Carnage however sucks and should never be brought to the big screen.

 

[The Overlord]

Yes but people are still saying they don't like Venom because he was created in the 90's. If they don't like him because they think he is dull and his powers are a rip of of Spidey's then that is fine, but the only reason giving is cuz he was created in the 90's.

Sorry I just don't think the date a character was created should have any bearing on people liking or disliking them.

Oh and I like stories mainly but Spawn just appealed to me...the cool red cape and chains helped a lot.

Man you are so 90s, liking style over substsance (Spawn). Spawn was just a Ghost Rider rip off anyway.

 

[Reikowolf]

oh the early to mid 90's... why did everyone have a mullet back then?
when were they ever cool?

I think the problem with the early mid 90's was the fact that they took the late 80's noir comics too far.

I mean.. Days of Future past??
how did they avoid being sued by James Cameron? lol

Venom would have been a great mastermind character... alas.. it was not to be

 

[The Overlord]

No idea but I've been waiting ever since I heard Sam Raimi would be directing the upcomig Spider-Man movie, I was just upset it was Green Goblin who was confirmed...then Doc Ock and now VENOM!!!

Green Goblin is Spider-Man's arch nemesis, he had to be the villain first movie. Besides if Venom was the first villain, the movie would have had to cover spider-Man's origin, the Venom symbiote comming to Earth, the Venom symbiote bonding with Spidey, Spidey rejecting it and it bonding with Brock to become the villain. It would have been a five hour movie to cover both spidey's origin and Venom in the first movie.

 

[Reikowolf]

Spider-Man's history dictates (Stan Lee says this in Mutants & Marvels DVD with Kevin Smith

Doc Ock was meant to be Spider-man's arch enemy. (the whole aunt may needs the medicine and the underwater lab plot)
After Stan and Kirby left, the GG killed Gwen, hence changing what was intended.

Hence SM1 had his arch enemy (gg)
and SM2 had the most iconic enemy (doc Ock)
Venom is now considered "one" of the more popular enemies

as far as I'm conserned.. the order is right.

in fact I wouldn't mind seeing the lizard before Venom

 

[Dragon]

Who the Fook is Joey Q... and why do we care what the guy making Pasta on the Corner thinks about Venom? "they just got out of a meeting in which we discussed Venom at length"????

Unless this meatball works on the film, why does it matter that he discussed Venom in a meeting? Does it count if me and some firends of mine "cussed" errr... discussed Sandy???? And talk about "Dis"CUSSIN when we talk about Black Cat Scratchy.

That's Joe Quesada, Editor-in-Chief at Marvel. And while he's pretty much seen by fans as a jerk, he would reasonably be a reliable source, considering that he'd be guiding the promotional stuff Marvel would be creating for the film.

 

[Reikowolf]

That's Joe Quesada, Editor-in-Chief at Marvel. And while he's pretty much seen by fans as a jerk, he would reasonably be a reliable source, considering that he'd be guiding the promotional stuff Marvel would be creating for the film.

I thought that was Avi Arad?

 

[Dragon]

I thought that was Avi Arad?

Avi Arad is Executive Producer and runs Marvel's film production division. He has nothing to do with the comic books themselves.

 

[Reikowolf]

Avi Arad is Executive Producer and runs Marvel's film production division. He has nothing to do with the comic books themselves.

yeah.. but wouldn't he be in charge of promotional stuff for the films?

 

[Jakomus]

So two actors, that actually work on the movie saying Venom will be in it wasn't good enough? An image of Spider-Man in a black suit from the movie wasn't good enough?

But the word of someone who is only technically connected to the movie.. IS good enough?

 

[Dragon]

yeah.. but wouldn't he be in charge of promotional stuff for the films?

Yes and no. I'm sure he, along with folks from Sony have final say over ads and other promotional things. But Sony's promotional division would be doing the actual work.

But Joe Quesada runs MARVEL COMICS- that is the comic producing end of Marvel. So he'd be dealing with the COMIC BOOK portion of the promotions -such as the comic book adaptation. He'd hire the writer-artist team and make editorial decisions about it (How long it will be, what scenes will cut and so forth).

 

[Reikowolf]

Yes and no. I'm sure he, along with folks from Sony have final say over ads and other promotional things. But Sony's promotional division would be doing the actual work.

But Joe Quesada runs MARVEL COMICS- that is the comic producing end of Marvel. So he'd be dealing with the COMIC BOOK portion of the promotions -such as the comic book adaptation. He'd hire the writer-artist team and make editorial decisions about it (How long it will be, what scenes will cut and so forth).

 

[Dragon]

So two actors, that actually work on the movie saying Venom will be in it wasn't good enough? An image of Spider-Man in a black suit from the movie wasn't good enough?

But the word of someone who is only technically connected to the movie.. IS good enough?

Dude, for some folks round these parts even that isn't enough. Even when a poster image of Venom is shown they'll probably still be saying he's not in the movie, it's just a trick.

 

[LarryLegend]

Dragon, you know its all a trick, The villans are going to be the Spot and the Kangaroo.

 

[SsM]

the spot.. That would be frickin awesome

 

[TheSlag]

That's Joe Quesada, Editor-in-Chief at Marvel. And while he's pretty much seen by fans as a jerk, he would reasonably be a reliable source, considering that he'd be guiding the promotional stuff Marvel would be creating for the film.

1) with the relationship that exists between Sony and Marvel, I would not be too sure of him being in the "know"

and

2) IF he was in the know and pulled this shiat of spilling the beans, he won't be in the know for long.

But thanks for the info about Joey Q_ball. And after what they allowed to happen in the comics, I don't want him anywhere near the movie version. HELL... even makes Sam look good.

 

[Tony Stark]

So two actors, that actually work on the movie saying Venom will be in it wasn't good enough? An image of Spider-Man in a black suit from the movie wasn't good enough?

But the word of someone who is only technically connected to the movie.. IS good enough?

That was my thought as well.

But hell, they put on the frickin press release "SPIDER-MAN WEARS A BLACK COSTUME IN SPIDER-MAN 3", and still people around here said "It's not black, it's just due to the lighting."

 

[Kevin Roegele]

But....we all knew for a year?

We all knew, since 2001, the following...

- Goblin in the first film
- Doc Ock in the second
- Venom in the third
- Harry would become the Goblin

I mean, it is obvious.

 

[Reikowolf]

We all knew, since 2001, the following...

- Goblin in the first film
- Doc Ock in the second
- Venom in the third
- Harry would become the Goblin

I mean, it is obvious.

haha
what about Sandman?