Talk:Venom: The Last Dance/Archive 1

Archive 1

Marvel Studios

Are we sure that this is true? Seems much more likely that this was a typo in the report and that they meant to put Marvel Entertainment. - adamstom97 (talk) 05:17, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

This is from Production Weekly, which should be reliable. Marvel Studios appears to be involved in a few other SSU projects as well. See here for more context. InfiniteNexus (talk) 05:24, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

Weird, even though they are a reliable source I am still dubious of this TBH. We've been down similar roads before... - adamstom97 (talk) 05:48, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

I was dubious of this all myself when I first went down this rabbit hole, but considering for Venom 3 and other films they listed Marvel Studios with their location and contact information, and in the same listing did the same for Marvel Entertainment on Kraven, and continued to list Marvel Studios on multiple listings, it should hold some weight, even though no other sources have corroborated it. Trailblazer101 (talk) 14:38, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

Filming momentarily

This source indicates filming will occur in the coming days. The fact it mentions set pieces already set up should be WP:BOLD grounds for moving out of draftspace MarioProtIV (^talk/_contribs) 18:48, 24 June 2023 (UTC)

With set photos having come out and a decent source covering this, it has been moved per WP:NFF. Trailblazer101 (talk) 07:10, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

Marvel Entertainment got defunct

Since Marvel entertainment got defunct, do we need to add Marvel Studios? Ashokkumar047 (talk) 13:40, 5 August 2023 (UTC)

While Production Weekly includes Marvel Studios in their listing as a production company, it was agreed for these articles to hold off including the Studios until further verification. Just because Marvel Entertainment has been defunct does not automatically mean that Studios must apply here. We should wait for the final credits, which will be for a while. Trailblazer101 (talk) 17:15, 5 August 2023 (UTC)

Andy Serkis as Knull

his voice is heard in the promo material 199.187.203.143 (talk) 15:06, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

We need a reliable source for this. giftheck (talk) 10:15, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

Juno Temple and Rhys Ifans

I've previously reverted these as they're added without a source to back them up and the sources provided don't back up their roles either. However, I have found this which does state that Juno Temple is Dr. Payne and Rhys Ifans is 'Martin'. Typically, we don't use YouTube videos like this as sources. However, there should be another source out there for both the Dr. Payne and Martin characters if Sony themselves have come forward with this. giftheck (talk) 10:18, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

Toxin?

I've heard conflicting reports on whether or not Toxin is in the movie. Is he in the movie or is the "Green Toxin" a different symbiote? HiGuys69420 (talk) 00:03, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

So in some promotional trailers for the film, when the green symbiote that is attached to Mulligan speaks, the subtitles attached to those trailers identify the symbiote as Toxin. However, there's important context missing. Studios outsource their trailers to specialized creative marketing teams, which often operate without input from the main filmmakers. These teams receive selected scenes, clips, and soundbites to craft a trailer, frequently without the full context only available in the final film. This likely led the trailer team to assume that Mulligan’s green symbiote was Toxin, drawing on the character’s comic history where Toxin is often linked with Mulligan. While what I just noted may be difficult to cite within the article, the film itself can be used to verify that Mulligan was previously bonded with a different symbiote not shown in the film. This is because, in the brief scene where Mulligan is first brought in to the facility, a line of exposition explicitly states that Mulligan was found left for dead by his original symbiote. That unseen symbiote is presumed to be Toxin. Furthermore, the actor Stephen Graham is only credited as his character Patrick Mulligan in the film with no mention of Toxin. UnqstnableTruth (talk) 01:14, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

"Toxin" isn't mentioned a single time in the entire movie, the symbiote's appearance does not resemble Toxin in the slightest so as of now it is just an unnamed green symbiote Kala7992 (talk) 10:39, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

I Do Have Serious Concerns About The Honesty Concerning The Stories Which Keep Claiming Films Need To Make Almost Four Times Their Production Budget In To Make A Profit Are Accurate

I just don't see advertising expenses as that high. I feel it is like Anchorman 2 sponsorship led news stories, which Minneapolis reporter Don Shelby acknowledged had truth to it.[1] Shelby also wasn't the only source who backed the way the film portrayed sponsorship influence over news stories either.[2][3][4] This time, and from a neutral point of view, I feel there is the possibility that companies focused on building their movie theater-rivaling streaming could be the sponsors of such stories.Speakfor23 (talk) 16:58, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

Well, isn't this a long title? I'm so far looking at a bunch of original research about sponsorship influence, and reads frankly almost like a fringe theory about movie theatre owners being chopped by streamers who want the idea that theatrical... films are.. uh, not commercially viable? Huh? Hey, Wikipedia isn't the place for these strange fringe theories. BarntToust 12:57, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

That's not a NPOV claim. There was certainly not "original research" in how the news articles responded to Anchorman 2's portrayal of news sponsors.Speakfor23 (talk) 22:36, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

I Have Additional Concerns About How The Deadline Hollywood Article Hyped "Audience Weariness" Of Superhero Films

Deadpool & Wolverine was recently an exception to this, as it made over $1.3 billion worldwide.[5]Speakfor23 (talk) 22:40, 28 October 2024 (UTC)