Madame Web

[yosemitemike]

It's a philosophy that puts me in charge of my own entertainment. It lets me judge movies on their own merits. Instead of being polluted by the opinions of failed film students who spend their lives tearing apart the products of those who succeeded where they failed.

It also means that you are commenting on critic's reasons for disliking the movie without ever bothering to listen to their actual criticisms.

[Zelen]

Until there's evidence to the contrary it's safe to assume the OP is some kind of ChatGPT marketing bot.

[hedgehobbit]

It's a philosophy that puts me in charge of my own entertainment. It lets me judge movies on their own merits. Instead of being polluted by the opinions of failed film students who spend their lives tearing apart the products of those who succeeded where they failed.

What is your hit to miss ratio of watching movies just to see if they are worth watching?

I've got so much other entertainment to do; my OD&D campaign, painting miniatures, making models and terrain, boardgames, video games, etc, that I don't think I could forgive myself for spending two hours watching a terrible movie.

[HappyDaze]

It's a philosophy that puts me in charge of my own entertainment. It lets me judge movies on their own merits. Instead of being polluted by the opinions of failed film students who spend their lives tearing apart the products of those who succeeded where they failed.

What is your hit to miss ratio of watching movies just to see if they are worth watching?

I've got so much other entertainment to do; my OD&D campaign, painting miniatures, making models and terrain, boardgames, video games, etc, that I don't think I could forgive myself for spending two hours watching a terrible movie.

Your life must be exhausting if your free time is that tight. Yet you somehow still find the time to post here, where most of the threads are hardly worth the time to read...

[Eirikrautha]

Your life must be exhausting if your free time is that tight. Yet you somehow still find the time to post here, where most of the threads are hardly worth the time to read...

Just because you seldom add anything of value to the threads here doesn't mean those threads are lacking in value...

[jhkim]

It's a philosophy that puts me in charge of my own entertainment. It lets me judge movies on their own merits. Instead of being polluted by the opinions of failed film students who spend their lives tearing apart the products of those who succeeded where they failed.

What is your hit to miss ratio of watching movies just to see if they are worth watching?

I've got so much other entertainment to do; my OD&D campaign, painting miniatures, making models and terrain, boardgames, video games, etc, that I don't think I could forgive myself for spending two hours watching a terrible movie.

I will often watch a possibly-bad movie if the conditions are bad - like flying on an airplane. I don't want to watch a good movie that way, because I can't really enjoy it. There's a ton of background noise, and I'm watching on a tiny screen, and I'm feeling cramped and queasy. But I can watch a possibly-bad movie and be diverted for a while, as long as it's not boring. It's similar if I'm sick or watch it in pieces over quick lunch breaks.

---

And... I went ahead and watched Madame Web on Netflix on some off time. I haven't read any of the reviews, so no comments on that side. Overall, I thought it was flawed -- there were some real possibilities, but it didn't execute on it consistently. I liked it better than Morbius and Venom: Let There Be Carnage, but that's a low bar since I thought those were both terrible (I watched them on an airplane as diversion). It was a big step down from Venom which I thought was surprisingly good.

It had the potential to be a taut thriller along similar lines to The Fugitive or The Sixth Sense, with mostly-ordinary people being chased by a terrifying killer with spider-powers. I liked spider-powers being a terrifying and horrific villain thing. It's a fun reversal from Spider-Man being a beloved hero.

As a thriller, its plot structure is different than the typical superhero movie, which is good. Its biggest flaw I felt was being too expository - trying to explain (and connect to the franchise) at the expense of working well as a thriller. There were also some plot and story holes that could easily have been filled without changing much else in the movie.

On a personal side, I had trouble with it being a retro movie set in 2003. I can handle the 1990s being retro, but 2003 felt awkward to me. Maybe younger generations see that differently, though.

Spoiler

On the positive side,

• I liked the villain's look and feel. The suave businessman with spider powers is a great enemy for a thriller, and the actor did well.
• I liked the setup of Webb as a EMT, her backstory, and her character arc with her mother. Having to make life-and-death decisions as an EMT is a great lead-in to her visions and saving people.
• I liked the climax concept. Logically, if one has the power of precognition, then a place with lots of random deadly threats is actually the best place to face off a powerful enemy.

On the negative side,

• In general, the direction felt too cut-and-dried - like an action or superhero movie, when it's really a thriller that could leave a lot more unexplained or assumed to build atmosphere.
• Conversely, the one crucial point to the story is why Ezekiel saw these three killing him. The idea was that he was cursed with getting just this one vision over and over, rather than having Spider-Sense. But it's never explained why. Also, he has a speech about them not destroying what he built, but it gives no idea about what he is building. There are lots of easy choices for this, but it needed an answer.
• The action went over-the-top too early. It could have been more impactful if Ezekiel hadn't shown his full hand, and his spider-powers could have been a midpoint twist.
• The climax had a bunch of times where the action was clunky, making Ezekiel seem incompetent rather than scary.
• Webb splitting herself into multiple parts was extraneous and just slowed the finale down. With all the nods and exposition in there, this should have been dropped. Likewise, Ezekiel's poison touch was pointless, since he could trivially kill people with his bare hands.

Despite these, I liked the concept and pieces of the movie, and don't regret watching it.

[Darrin Kelley]

What is your hit to miss ratio of watching movies just to see if they are worth watching?

Most of what I watch is on DVD. If it is a movie I'm really interested in, I will buy the DVD. But I have streaming options for movies I only have a glancing interest in.

For example, I tried watching Barbie today. And I just couldn't get through it.

I've got so much other entertainment to do; my OD&D campaign, painting miniatures, making models and terrain, boardgames, video games, etc, that I don't think I could forgive myself for spending two hours watching a terrible movie.

I read books and play games on the computer these days. And I have a game group I spend some weekends with.

[HappyDaze]

Your life must be exhausting if your free time is that tight. Yet you somehow still find the time to post here, where most of the threads are hardly worth the time to read...

Just because you seldom add anything of value to the threads here doesn't mean those threads are lacking in value...

Don't you have a charge to lead in your nonsensical culture war?

[Darrin Kelley]

To answer an earlier question: The DVDs I buy I am rarely disappointed by. If it is something I am just watching casually, it's about a 50-50 chance of my liking it or not.