WithKraven the Huntercurrently scrounging for scrapsat the global box office, it looks like the latest miss fromSony Pictures' Spider-Man universe (or SSU) will also be its last. A franchise thathas consistently scrambled to make a name for itself in Hollywood’s crowded superhero landscapeover the past six years, the collapse of the studio’s fledgling universe represents one more failed attempt to replicate theMCU’s success, which naturally begs the question of how we got here. Ina recent interview with theLos Angeles Times, outgoing CEOTony Vinciquerraoffered his own headline-making explanation for the SSU’s lackluster performance,placing the blame solely at the feet of criticswho supposedly ruined any chance of Sony’s spin-off films being taken seriously.
On the surface, this perspective doesn’t lack evidence. The SSU is actually a unique superhero franchise to examine because ofaudiences' wildly varied reactions to its six installments. In the case of each release,general audiences rated Sony’s Spider-Man films much higher than critics,with the Rotten Tomatoes scoreofAaron Taylor-Johnson’s latest film continuing this divisive streak. That said, the idea that critics alone are responsible for the SSU’s shortcomings doesn’t hold water, andthe studio’s losing streak is better explained by its flawed approach to superhero storytelling.
Critics Didn’t Crucify Sony’s Spider-Man Universe Because of Its Main Characters
In his remarks, Vinciquerra specifically claims that critics attacked SSU films because of their titular leads, saying as follows:
“Madame Web” underperformed in the theaters because the press just crucified it. It was not a bad film, and it did great on Netflix. For some reason, the press decided that they didn’t want us making these films out of “Kraven” and “Madame Web,” and the critics just destroyed them. They also did it with “Venom,” but the audience loved “Venom” and made “Venom” a massive hit. These are not terrible films. They were just destroyed by the critics in the press, for some reason.
Again, at first glance, these sentiments are understandable. It ismore difficult to build a franchise off the backs of less recognizable namesthan it is to ask audiences to sit through another Spider-Man movie. TheMCU’s own recent strugglesattest to the burden of juggling a large cast of new characters as the more successful franchise attempts to expand. Yet, difficult as this process may be, previous superhero adaptations have proven it’s not impossible, andlesser-known names are certainly no excuse for lazy storytelling.
This ‘Kraven the Hunter’ Detail Proves Sony Missed Out on a Killer Spider-Man Storyline
Sony had the solution to its Spider-Man problem waiting in plain sight.
To use the MCU again as an example, theGuardians of the Galaxywere not nearly as popularas the Avengers when the film released in 2014, butJames Gunn’s refreshing direction and entertaining script catapulted the movie’s cast into the popular zeitgeist. Gunn did something similarwith DC’sThe Suicide Squadin 2021, forcing audiences to emotionally invest in characters as obscure asDavid Dastmalchian’s Polka-Dot Man andDaniela Melchior’s Ratcatcher, and MCU series likeMoon KnightandMs. Marvelsimilarlyprove that more obscure names can be positively received as leads in pre-existing franchises. Therefore, Sony’s lacking performance is unlikely to be the result of critics targeting their specific leads, but rathera disappointed reaction to how the studio implemented these characters in the first place.
Sony’s Mishandling of Its Spin-Off Characters Led to the Collapse of Its Promising Franchise
The biggest blunder on Sony’s part is not investing enough time in its leads themselves.Rewatching previous entries in the SSUis like trying to complete a puzzle using pieces from different boxes. It’s a frustrating mess. From the unnecessary cameos tucked intoMorbiusandMadame Webto the multiverse-hopping antics ofTom Hardy’sVenom, the SSU canon is largely defined by suggested plot threads that ultimately lead nowhere, andyears of setup for interesting storylineswith no clear payoff in sight. Even when the studio did hone in on its main character’s development, such as in the first Venom movie, Sony’s characterization of its leadneglected the iconic villain’s dark storylines in favor of a campy, humorous portrayalthat felt more entertaining than dramatically compelling.
The reason these missteps are so disheartening is that the SSU had so much potential. FollowingSam Raimi’s Spider-Man trilogyin the early 2000s,Sony proved that it could make an engaging, character-driven origin storywith 2014’sThe Amazing Spider-Man,and Vinciquerra, to his credit, is not completely wrong about the SSU, either. Sony’s spin-off films are popular with audiences because they succeed as pieces of general entertainment. Essentially, these are films which are not intrinsically horriblebut fall short because they generally try too hard to imitate more successful effortsat building an interconnected universe. Therefore, the real mistakes thatSony made with its now-defunct universeshould serve as a roadmap for studios moving forward, as it is proof that presenting audiences with deep stories of well-rounded characters is more crucial to securing a franchise’s future than it is investing in references that will never get off the ground.
Kraven the Hunteris in theaters now.
BUY TICKETS
Kraven the Hunter
Kraven the Hunter explores the origin story of Sergei Kravinoff, known as Kraven, as he navigates his tumultuous relationship with his father, Nikolai. This path of vengeance sets Kraven on a journey to become a formidable hunter with a reputation for fearsome brutality.
