Just Some Guy is good at what he does because he knows how to do literary analysis. You know, the kind of thing people used to get English, Film, Art, and Theater Degrees to know how to do. It's a skill, just like any other. It's very easy for a person to think that they know how to do literary analysis simply because they have an opinion on something, and they are good at expressing their opinion. Meanwhile, someone who actually knows literary analysis can provide CRUSHING insight, even if they don't have great communication skills. And if they do have good communication skills? Well, you get Just Some Guy.
Zach, the studios don't need you to speak up in their defense. TH-cam critics don't affect box office results to any meaningful degree. Some movies they dislike do well, some movies they like do badly. Some good movies do poorly, and some bad movies are very successful (*cough* Transformers *cough*). Was Kraven a good movie? Not really. Was it a bad movie? Not really. It was just "meh". In the present day, when people are watching what they spend money on, and streaming services exist, a movie typically needs a degree of audience enthusiasm before it'll make money, like Deadpool and Wolverine. Venom: The Last Dance is also a pretty mediocre movie, and generally trashed by critics, but there was at least some enthusiasm for it because it's made about $500 million. The Sony executive can say that Kraven and Madam Web were not bad movies (they would say that), but "not bad" doesn't put bums on seats. This isn't the late 90s when "not bad" sells tickets. The Sony Marvel universe has been almost universally "meh" since they stopped making Spider-Man movies, and now their efforts look more and more like they exist solely to retain the rights, like Roger Corman's Fantastic Four movie. Sony does have the movie rights to Spider-Man. They could hire Tom Holland to act in a Sony Marvel movie, they could bring back Andrew Garfield or even Toby McGuire if they really wanted to. They could hire a completely new actor to play "Sony Spider-Man". They don't, and they don't because they don't want to. If they're not going to make movies people actually want to see, then they can't complain when people don't go and see them. They certainly can't blame people on TH-cam for their own inactivity.
I wonder how it affects after market sales though less people not turning up? I know from my family experience we have ended up spending way more on merch relating to a movie. Predator, Star Wars and TLOTR probably the most on by far.
We don't owe Sony anything - time, money or attention. I certainly don't put much stock in an executive who has more to gain from blaming people other than himself.
This movie definitely felt like a modernized Tarzan movie, because most of Kraven's character stems from him hunting Spider-Man and being a big game hunter, whereas his anti-hero, hunting poachers thing is kind of new comparatively.
Sony can't just make a string of terrible movies then expect people to give their next movie a chance. It's the problem with a cinematic universe. I just assumed this was more slop like Morbius or Madame Web. I've got better things to watch, and for less money.
Sony's only had success with videogames, and their victory there was entirely pyrrhic. I suspect they're sticking with console gaming now because of burning everything else to a point where all they can do outside of videogames is copy Nintendo's "merchandise the things" strategy poorly, just with in-house studios.
I enjoyed Kraven and if anyone wonders why Kraven is such a great villain read Kraven's last Hunt it will blow your mind, and how many times did I just write Kraven lol.
The thing with using the 17% critic score as a sign that something is off is that it overlooks how that score works. Every review gets translated into either "good" or "bad" with no middle ground. Effectively, the tomato score forces critics into the same "best ever" / "worst ever" dichotomy that you dislike from youtubers. If you only look at the tomato score, you'll never know if the critics universally panned it, or if there were a mix of reviews saying it's anything from average to terrible.
The critic I trust the most is Ryan George. I look forward more to the Pitch Meeting than the film itself in most cases. His Kraven video was hilarious.
Sony can say whatever they want. I didn't see Kraven because I didn't want to. Not because some critic or some TH-camrs said it was bad. I form my own opinion. I actually DID go see Sonic 3 and I enjoyed it. Don't let these clowns sway your opinion, go see the movie or don't. You have choices.
@tylerjames805 Dear God. I thought Zack meant the old 1996 movie with Mario Van Peebles. I had completely forgotten about the Han Solo movie. Definitely my bad. 😆
Isn't this just a big part of the problem. This movie on it's own may or may not have been good or bad, we can debate that all day. I'm not saying either way because I have not seen it. But knowing what I know about Kraven, knowing this is never going to be that, I am immediately put off. Spider-Man's villains without Spider-Man isn't the problem though, it's a symptom. The core issue is Hollywood never wanting to make something unless it has an attached IP. The writers of this movie likely didn't want to make a Kraven movie. Probably don't even know Kraven. They were handed a property and said "make something". That is not conducive to art. That's just product. And hey, I like an awful lot of products, no shame there. My favorite series is Friday the 13th, which only exists because John Carpenter made Halloween and it broke records. Product can make good stuff if you have the right team who wants to make their own thing. But when it's top down, IP only, nothing new ever, well we get Spider-Man villains in movies with no Spider-Man in them and it's a harder sell. The entire point was to build something with the IP so you can leverage the fans, but the fans are put off. I'm sure Kraven is fine. I watched Venom and it was fine. But the best they were ever likely to make is a thing I might like, but could never love. And that's just hollow at the end of the day. I don't care if it's "woke", I care if it has soul. And I don't see a lot of soul coming from Hollywood these days. Except in horror movies, which tend to attract passionate up-and-comers. I think that is why the genre is such an easy sell a lot of times. Low budget, original ideas, passionate filmmakers. Harder to do that with hundreds of millions of dollars on the line, surely. At the end of the day, eh. I will probably eventually watch Kraven. But I have too busy a life right now to make time for a film that I may or may not like. And I recognize that this makes me part of the problem. I am that fan who would go if it had Spider-Man in it, or if it were a solid looking Batman flick. But I'm not getting someone to babysit my elderly mom (I'm a caregiver) just for a maybe. It's not worth the time and cost investment to me.
I don’t get why everyone keeps saying the problem is you can’t have a villain movie without Spider-Man when Joker came out a few years ago as a Joker movie without Batman and it made a billion dollars. If people think your movie is good it won’t matter.
@@deepfriedokra Joker is not a "Joker movie without Batman". It has nothing to do with the comic book character at all, apart from some aesthetics. Joker is a movie about a mentally ill man who gets kicked about by life, and receives the treatment we'd expect from the modern world, and strikes back in clown makeup. The only reason it has the name "Joker" attached to it is for brand recognition. As Paul says, it has an IP attached.
Movies get bad reviews from critics all the time and they do well. But now, a movie has to be really good to get people to go out. For a family, it’s a lot of money. If not good and just OK, they may catch it streaming or rent it. Big flat screen TVs are cheap and most people have them. It’s a post Covid world and even movies that would have crushed don’t hit the levels they should.
The exec would have more credibility if he just said Kraven was good instead of including madame webb. The trailer for kraven did look decent, but Webb looked awful, and sub CW.
idk, unless its Kraven's Last Hunt and Spider-Man is in it I have no interest in the Movie, I don't really care if its a good movie or not. Same with Madam Web, I'm not sure why its hard to understand that if its a Spider-Man Character and He is not in the movie I feel like its missing the point. I give a pass to the bad but I like them Venom Movies because I think the character is about the only one that can stand by itself and the spin off makes sense to me.
If it’s a good movie it’s a good movie. Why would being a Spider-Man villain movie without Spider-Man make it a bad movie if it’s otherwise well acted and written? In comics villains have been given their own one shot origins and miniseries without their archenemies in them.
@@2ndstreetmarvelyou said the movie could have been great if it wasn’t supposed to be a Spider-Man villain movie without Spider-Man, so the implication is it wasn’t great. That’s an opinion. You clearly gave an opinion that it wasn’t great and explained why. I’m saying whether or not it was great has nothing to do with whether or not Spider-Man is in it. It’s great based on whether or not the acting and writing and directing is well done. A few years ago we have a billion dollar Joker movie without Spider-Man no Batman in it and arguably not even the real Joker that was a critical and commercial success. Because people thought the writing and acting and directing were great.
@@deepfriedokra perhaps you should break down my whole comment, word for word. I didn’t state “could have been great” either. This is when words matter. Nowhere in my comment did I give any implication that I’ve seen the movie, or that it was bad.
I watched it with my brother in law, and it just felt like daredevil, but worse because there were no Evanescence songs. Joking, but Kraven was like, fine. I say that as someone who doesn't know anything about Kraven. It wasn't awful, but it was fine. I wish the foreigner wasn't killed right away, he seemed like a cool villian. I liked how the Rhino was spun, pretty cool
JSG is still cool - as I'm sure you already know he's gone on a similar arc to yourself by shooing a lot of his old audience away, and seems to be quite happy with the outcome. Just got around to watching your Robbie Williams (whoever that is) video, and you fumbled at the end because you didn't have the OBS Stop button prepped & ready. I always thought that was just your 'thing' for signing off from a video, but it's now occurred to me that maybe you don't actually know - you can assign a hotkey for that in OBS (eg Alt-X or whatever).
Does every single film HAVE to be “the Cinematic Event of Our Lifetime(s)!!!” every time? I look back on a lot of films I had spent money on in the theaters and a lot of them that I enjoyed was because I had nothing better to do or was waiting on something else. Every so often something would come out and I would really want to see it. Other times it was just: “Wanna go see a movie?” “Yeah, sure 🤷🏻♂️”. It didn’t feel like a life choice or like I was voting or anything 🤷🏻♂️🤷🏻♂️🤷🏻♂️
Going to the theatre costs money, an ever-increasing amount of money, and that amount multiplies if you try to go as a group. You'd better believe that if studios want bums on seats, they have to provide movies that are at least "good" not just "okay".
@@freman007 Oh, I totally agree with that notion too. I remember when it was cheaper to go too. But it’s not like there’s an over saturation of titles either. Now it’s like I have to strap myself into the movie theater and clench my teeth and close my eyes expecting to be beaten by a movie I know is bad, but people tell me it’s the best thing since sliced bread. But that is a whole nother discussion in and of itself.
I haven't watched the video yet so here is my review: GASP WHUT INCONCEIVABLE After watching: GASP! Zach is on point and it is shocking! WHUT? BPC don't watch movies altogether and have to put their finger in the air to see where the wind blows? INCONCEIVABLE! Just Some Guy still has a raspy dry voice but now sounds more audible!
Kraven was a solid 7/10 should have made $100 million minimum. People just meme sony without even giving it a chance. None of these movies are as bad as chronic online people say
Just Some Guy is good at what he does because he knows how to do literary analysis. You know, the kind of thing people used to get English, Film, Art, and Theater Degrees to know how to do. It's a skill, just like any other. It's very easy for a person to think that they know how to do literary analysis simply because they have an opinion on something, and they are good at expressing their opinion. Meanwhile, someone who actually knows literary analysis can provide CRUSHING insight, even if they don't have great communication skills. And if they do have good communication skills? Well, you get Just Some Guy.
Zach, the studios don't need you to speak up in their defense.
TH-cam critics don't affect box office results to any meaningful degree. Some movies they dislike do well, some movies they like do badly. Some good movies do poorly, and some bad movies are very successful (*cough* Transformers *cough*).
Was Kraven a good movie? Not really. Was it a bad movie? Not really. It was just "meh".
In the present day, when people are watching what they spend money on, and streaming services exist, a movie typically needs a degree of audience enthusiasm before it'll make money, like Deadpool and Wolverine.
Venom: The Last Dance is also a pretty mediocre movie, and generally trashed by critics, but there was at least some enthusiasm for it because it's made about $500 million.
The Sony executive can say that Kraven and Madam Web were not bad movies (they would say that), but "not bad" doesn't put bums on seats. This isn't the late 90s when "not bad" sells tickets. The Sony Marvel universe has been almost universally "meh" since they stopped making Spider-Man movies, and now their efforts look more and more like they exist solely to retain the rights, like Roger Corman's Fantastic Four movie.
Sony does have the movie rights to Spider-Man. They could hire Tom Holland to act in a Sony Marvel movie, they could bring back Andrew Garfield or even Toby McGuire if they really wanted to. They could hire a completely new actor to play "Sony Spider-Man". They don't, and they don't because they don't want to.
If they're not going to make movies people actually want to see, then they can't complain when people don't go and see them. They certainly can't blame people on TH-cam for their own inactivity.
I wonder how it affects after market sales though less people not turning up? I know from my family experience we have ended up spending way more on merch relating to a movie. Predator, Star Wars and TLOTR probably the most on by far.
We don't owe Sony anything - time, money or attention. I certainly don't put much stock in an executive who has more to gain from blaming people other than himself.
Madam web wasn’t a movie it was the longest commercial for 4 movies that were never made.
This movie definitely felt like a modernized Tarzan movie, because most of Kraven's character stems from him hunting Spider-Man and being a big game hunter, whereas his anti-hero, hunting poachers thing is kind of new comparatively.
Agree
Sony can't just make a string of terrible movies then expect people to give their next movie a chance. It's the problem with a cinematic universe.
I just assumed this was more slop like Morbius or Madame Web. I've got better things to watch, and for less money.
Sony's only had success with videogames, and their victory there was entirely pyrrhic. I suspect they're sticking with console gaming now because of burning everything else to a point where all they can do outside of videogames is copy Nintendo's "merchandise the things" strategy poorly, just with in-house studios.
I enjoyed Kraven and if anyone wonders why Kraven is such a great villain read Kraven's last Hunt it will blow your mind,
and how many times did I just write Kraven lol.
@@tylerjames805 Honestly try watching it as its pretty good,but I look at it like a What if/elseworlds story if that makes sense to you?
To alter it a little: Only a BPC deals in absolutes.
The thing with using the 17% critic score as a sign that something is off is that it overlooks how that score works. Every review gets translated into either "good" or "bad" with no middle ground. Effectively, the tomato score forces critics into the same "best ever" / "worst ever" dichotomy that you dislike from youtubers. If you only look at the tomato score, you'll never know if the critics universally panned it, or if there were a mix of reviews saying it's anything from average to terrible.
notice its never the movies fault, it those who view its fault
The critic I trust the most is Ryan George. I look forward more to the Pitch Meeting than the film itself in most cases. His Kraven video was hilarious.
This movie is so much better the hate it's gotten. I enjoyed the movie very much.
Sony can say whatever they want. I didn't see Kraven because I didn't want to. Not because some critic or some TH-camrs said it was bad. I form my own opinion. I actually DID go see Sonic 3 and I enjoyed it. Don't let these clowns sway your opinion, go see the movie or don't. You have choices.
I have NEVER met a person who heard of or watched SOLO. I liked it. It certainly wasn't The Godfather, but it was a really fun watch.
@tylerjames805 Dear God. I thought Zack meant the old 1996 movie with Mario Van Peebles. I had completely forgotten about the Han Solo movie.
Definitely my bad. 😆
Isn't this just a big part of the problem. This movie on it's own may or may not have been good or bad, we can debate that all day. I'm not saying either way because I have not seen it. But knowing what I know about Kraven, knowing this is never going to be that, I am immediately put off. Spider-Man's villains without Spider-Man isn't the problem though, it's a symptom. The core issue is Hollywood never wanting to make something unless it has an attached IP.
The writers of this movie likely didn't want to make a Kraven movie. Probably don't even know Kraven. They were handed a property and said "make something". That is not conducive to art. That's just product. And hey, I like an awful lot of products, no shame there. My favorite series is Friday the 13th, which only exists because John Carpenter made Halloween and it broke records. Product can make good stuff if you have the right team who wants to make their own thing. But when it's top down, IP only, nothing new ever, well we get Spider-Man villains in movies with no Spider-Man in them and it's a harder sell. The entire point was to build something with the IP so you can leverage the fans, but the fans are put off.
I'm sure Kraven is fine. I watched Venom and it was fine. But the best they were ever likely to make is a thing I might like, but could never love. And that's just hollow at the end of the day. I don't care if it's "woke", I care if it has soul. And I don't see a lot of soul coming from Hollywood these days. Except in horror movies, which tend to attract passionate up-and-comers. I think that is why the genre is such an easy sell a lot of times. Low budget, original ideas, passionate filmmakers. Harder to do that with hundreds of millions of dollars on the line, surely.
At the end of the day, eh. I will probably eventually watch Kraven. But I have too busy a life right now to make time for a film that I may or may not like. And I recognize that this makes me part of the problem. I am that fan who would go if it had Spider-Man in it, or if it were a solid looking Batman flick. But I'm not getting someone to babysit my elderly mom (I'm a caregiver) just for a maybe. It's not worth the time and cost investment to me.
I don’t get why everyone keeps saying the problem is you can’t have a villain movie without Spider-Man when Joker came out a few years ago as a Joker movie without Batman and it made a billion dollars. If people think your movie is good it won’t matter.
@@deepfriedokra
Joker is not a "Joker movie without Batman". It has nothing to do with the comic book character at all, apart from some aesthetics.
Joker is a movie about a mentally ill man who gets kicked about by life, and receives the treatment we'd expect from the modern world, and strikes back in clown makeup. The only reason it has the name "Joker" attached to it is for brand recognition. As Paul says, it has an IP attached.
Your accent was as good as Christopher Lambert in Highlander
Movies get bad reviews from critics all the time and they do well. But now, a movie has to be really good to get people to go out. For a family, it’s a lot of money. If not good and just OK, they may catch it streaming or rent it. Big flat screen TVs are cheap and most people have them. It’s a post Covid world and even movies that would have crushed don’t hit the levels they should.
The exec would have more credibility if he just said Kraven was good instead of including madame webb. The trailer for kraven did look decent, but Webb looked awful, and sub CW.
Remember critics hated the shining Jumanji 90s TMNT now they been replaced by nerds like ned Flanders comic book guy from Simpsons
I like ATJ but the movie looks fairly generic from the trailer.
idk, unless its Kraven's Last Hunt and Spider-Man is in it I have no interest in the Movie, I don't really care if its a good movie or not. Same with Madam Web, I'm not sure why its hard to understand that if its a Spider-Man Character and He is not in the movie I feel like its missing the point.
I give a pass to the bad but I like them Venom Movies because I think the character is about the only one that can stand by itself and the spin off makes sense to me.
🤘🏿This movie seems like it’d be great if it wasn’t suppose to be a Spider-Man villain movie without Spider-Man!🤘🏿
If it’s a good movie it’s a good movie. Why would being a Spider-Man villain movie without Spider-Man make it a bad movie if it’s otherwise well acted and written? In comics villains have been given their own one shot origins and miniseries without their archenemies in them.
@@deepfriedokra where did I state that it was “bad”, anywhere in my comment?
I didn’t even use the word, bad, let alone give an opinion on the movie.
@@2ndstreetmarvelyou said the movie could have been great if it wasn’t supposed to be a Spider-Man villain movie without Spider-Man, so the implication is it wasn’t great. That’s an opinion. You clearly gave an opinion that it wasn’t great and explained why. I’m saying whether or not it was great has nothing to do with whether or not Spider-Man is in it. It’s great based on whether or not the acting and writing and directing is well done. A few years ago we have a billion dollar Joker movie without Spider-Man no Batman in it and arguably not even the real Joker that was a critical and commercial success. Because people thought the writing and acting and directing were great.
@@deepfriedokra perhaps you should break down my whole comment, word for word. I didn’t state “could have been great” either. This is when words matter.
Nowhere in my comment did I give any implication that I’ve seen the movie, or that it was bad.
i enjoy solo. saw it in theaters and i have the comic also.
I watched it with my brother in law, and it just felt like daredevil, but worse because there were no Evanescence songs.
Joking, but Kraven was like, fine. I say that as someone who doesn't know anything about Kraven. It wasn't awful, but it was fine. I wish the foreigner wasn't killed right away, he seemed like a cool villian. I liked how the Rhino was spun, pretty cool
Also Kraven flexing was pretty funny
JSG is still cool - as I'm sure you already know he's gone on a similar arc to yourself by shooing a lot of his old audience away, and seems to be quite happy with the outcome.
Just got around to watching your Robbie Williams (whoever that is) video, and you fumbled at the end because you didn't have the OBS Stop button prepped & ready. I always thought that was just your 'thing' for signing off from a video, but it's now occurred to me that maybe you don't actually know - you can assign a hotkey for that in OBS (eg Alt-X or whatever).
Does every single film HAVE to be “the Cinematic Event of Our Lifetime(s)!!!” every time? I look back on a lot of films I had spent money on in the theaters and a lot of them that I enjoyed was because I had nothing better to do or was waiting on something else. Every so often something would come out and I would really want to see it. Other times it was just: “Wanna go see a movie?” “Yeah, sure 🤷🏻♂️”. It didn’t feel like a life choice or like I was voting or anything 🤷🏻♂️🤷🏻♂️🤷🏻♂️
Going to the theatre costs money, an ever-increasing amount of money, and that amount multiplies if you try to go as a group.
You'd better believe that if studios want bums on seats, they have to provide movies that are at least "good" not just "okay".
@@freman007 Oh, I totally agree with that notion too. I remember when it was cheaper to go too. But it’s not like there’s an over saturation of titles either. Now it’s like I have to strap myself into the movie theater and clench my teeth and close my eyes expecting to be beaten by a movie I know is bad, but people tell me it’s the best thing since sliced bread. But that is a whole nother discussion in and of itself.
Won't spitfire names, I am getting tired of channels that are essentially fake fans that are just riding controversy speed tracks.
I haven't watched the video yet so here is my review: GASP WHUT INCONCEIVABLE
After watching: GASP! Zach is on point and it is shocking! WHUT? BPC don't watch movies altogether and have to put their finger in the air to see where the wind blows? INCONCEIVABLE! Just Some Guy still has a raspy dry voice but now sounds more audible!
Kraven was a solid 7/10 should have made $100 million minimum. People just meme sony without even giving it a chance.
None of these movies are as bad as chronic online people say