(https://s25.postimg.org/fn6garbyn/tom_hardy_venom_and_ruben_fleischer_-_split_-_ge.jpg)
Looks like Sony has it's Venom alien symbiote host Eddie Brock with .... Tom Hardy!
Not bad, Sony. Not bad. I had some minimal interest in a solo Venom movie, but with this bit of casting, I can safely say that my interest in this project has gone up significantly. Truly, a outstanding choice for Brock. The embargo of complainers about Hardy's Venom being divorced from the MCU has, of course, already begun, but personally, I am A OK with this. Why's that? Simple. Being that there is no way in hell Disney is going to produce a R rated Marvel movie, a actual Venom movie would probably benefit from such a move. The Venom lore easily lends itself to a more mature audience, and given the success of non-MCU films like Deadpool and Logan, Sony is all too aware of this as well.
http://www.cbr.com/sony-venom-tom-hardy/
(https://s25.postimg.org/eyxlrtd8v/tom-hardy-venom-700x933.jpg)
Does this also translate to Venom being separated from Spider-Man too?
I have no idea what Avi Arad's boner with a standalone, Spider-Man-less Venom movie is all about... but I hold out hope he finally STFU and goes home after this Venom movie sinks like a stone.
G*ddamn, I'm falling in love with Hardy as Eddie Brock the more I think about it!
Brock's classic portrayal from the comics, has been that of a bit of a brute. He likes to lift, for a reporter, has problems with honesty (though he would fit right in these days), and can often be a absolute emotional wreck.
How the origin of the Venom symbiote, in relation to Spider-Man, is addressed within this film is a interesting one to think about. It could be done in a variety of ways. I look at Batman 1989 where what you needed to know about his origin was done in a couple or flashbacks, or let's take Blade for example, where his origin was done very simply by just a expository conversation with Whistler. Hell, I would probably prefer it be done along those lines, and spare us the Nolanesque obligitary origin story where 'everything' is spelled out to us. Let's see Venom eating up thugs and mobsters, rather than his origin story eating up running time. I see the symbiote itself probably being more along the lines of the Ultimate route where it's more of a very unique earth based created experimental organism. Possibly with a some of it's DNA coming from outer space.
A character like Eddie Brock needed just the right actor for the part, and I am confident Hardy will do the character justice in terms of acting/personality/disposition/etc. It's good to learn from past mistakes, and Hardy is going to make the Eric Forman version from SM3, tied in with Peter Parker Spider-Man and all, look like completely amatuerish sh*t.
i'm expecting the flattop buzz cut, but if they want to bring back the mullet, I'm sure Hardy could rock it. :D
(https://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/1/11136/665149-eddie_brock_naked___gotcha_.jpg)
So yeah, we got Tom Hardy as Venom and it's planned to be shooting starting this fall?
I bet Todd McFarlane is crossing his fingers that Spawn is just a little bit closer to that reboot he's been craving, and Josh Trank must be weeping under his blanket somewhere.
Quote from: thecolorsblend on Sat, 20 May 2017, 00:27
Does this also translate to Venom being separated from Spider-Man too?
I have no idea what Avi Arad's boner with a standalone, Spider-Man-less Venom movie is all about... but I hold out hope he finally STFU and goes home after this Venom movie sinks like a stone.
He tried this with the Raimi series, the Vulture was supposed to be in that film but Arad pressured Raimi to change it to Venom. And he was pushing hard for about 3 years for a Topher Grace Venom movie.
For Venom to be portrayed properly, I think they need at least two movies to do it; we need the symbiote properly developed and attaching to Peter Parker first as well as Eddie Brock, then at least one fight with Spider-man and venom.
I'm just hoping we finally get Carnage on screen.
As much as I enjoy Spider-Man 3, I think a lot of the novelty with Venom was that he'd never been done in live action. Now he has. And Spider-Man 3 didn't exactly win friends and influence people.
Honestly, you could probably craft an entire trilogy out of the living costume/Venom stuff. That may be the only way to do the story real justice. But why bother when wide audiences already had a fairly lackluster with a truncated version of that story?
If anybody is eagerly anticipating this movie, I won't rain on their parade. But I couldn't care less about it.
Spider-Man 3's Venom is a simplified telling of the story, but it ticked all the necessary boxes.
The symbiote fell to Earth.
The symbiote followed Peter around, waiting for the right time to strike.
The symbiote latched onto Peter and gave him improved abilities.
The symbiote made Peter act out his suppressed behaviour.
Peter realized he had gone too far, and ripped it off.
The symbiote found another host.
The symbiote was finally destroyed by Peter.
That's a clear beginning and end.
The symbiote made each host stronger and amplified pre-existing personalities. The film also gave Brock more of a solid reason why to hate Peter as well, which I appreciate. The film sped through the arc, but really, apart from wanting to see Brock Venom kick ass more, what was really missing? Is the Venom storyline really that special? In terms of what the symbiote does to Peter it is, and that's what the film focuses on.
Quote from: The Dark Knight on Thu, 25 May 2017, 01:44Spider-Man 3's Venom is a simplified telling of the story, but it ticked all the necessary boxes.
Quote from: The Dark Knight on Thu, 25 May 2017, 01:44The symbiote made Peter act out his suppressed behaviour.
Quote from: The Dark Knight on Thu, 25 May 2017, 01:44The symbiote made each host stronger and amplified pre-existing personalities.
This is the angle a lot of people miss with Spider-Man 3. Peter was already a bit full of himself. He'd become a bit of a mono-maniac, in fact. The symbiote brought that out even more where he turned... well, not to the "dark" side. But to the
Really Dimly-Lit Side. I rather enjoy that aspect of the movie. In fact, I dig Spider-Man 3 in general.
Quote from: The Dark Knight on Thu, 25 May 2017, 01:44The film also gave Brock more of a solid reason why to hate Peter as well, which I appreciate.
Bingo. In the comics, Brock's grudge against Spider-Man is kind of thin. The movie gives him a far better motive to hate Peter
specifically rather than Spider-Man generally. Raimi gets picked on for not getting what Venom is all about (not enough snot-like green drool, I guess) but the haters miss the incredible setup Raimi gave Brock in that movie. It improves upon the comic in a big way.
Quote from: The Dark Knight on Thu, 25 May 2017, 01:44The film sped through the arc, but really, apart from wanting to see Brock Venom kick ass more, what was really missing? Is the Venom storyline really that special?
It's a sentimental favorite. But seriously, go back and read Amazing Spider-Man #298-#300 some time. The story is hardly the operatic epic that its fans make it out to be. Venom barely has cameo appearances in two of those issues. Compared to that, Spider-Man 3 is high art.
Still, I might've been interested in seeing Venom tear things up in the Webbverse... but I never would've insisted on it.
I think the movies really underplay the effects of the symbiote:
Peter does act like a jerk while under the symbiote influences but how many instances do we see him behave differently than he normally would? Look at the things he does which could be classified as wrong.
-trying to kill Flint Marko in the sewers. Maybe he went further than he normally would have but Peter didn't have too much remorse for killing Dennis Caradine when he thought he was Ben's killer so I don't think it's a stretch to say he wouldn't have done the same with the red suit especially since the Sandman got away they first time they fought (without the black suit).
-Peter generally acting cocky. The symbiote didn't help but he was already acting cocky and getting egotistical already. You can't blame the symbiote for his upside down kiss with Gwen in front of MJ.
-exposing Eddie for the fake photo. Peter wanted that job, didn't like Eddie, and most importantly knew that failing to stop a crime was what led to Ben's death. So I don't believe for a second Peter wouldn't have done the same thing without the influence (he'd probably just have been less aggressive in his manner).
- fighting Harry at his loft. Harry already tried to kill him once and broke up his relationship with MJ and Peter told him several times that he didn't kill Norman. Not that I'm condoning Peter going over there but it's not a stretch to say he stil would have without the symbiote.
-the only thing I think Peter may not have done without the symbiote is take Gwen to the jazz club MJ worked at. He probably would have stayed home crying over MJ and definitely wouldn't have drawn attention to himself or been aggressive in public like that or deliberately tried to use an innocent person to hurt MJ like that without the symbiotic influence. Normal Peter may not have even had the courage to ask her out. Sadly this scene was botched with silliness so it loss it's effectiveness.
There is a way Venom can be done without Spidey in the Ultimate Spider-man storyline, the symbiote suit is developed by Eddie Brock Sr. and Richard Parker to cure illnesses and stored at their lab. Eddie Jr. finds it and uses it to try and cure his own cancer which is what turns him into Venom. This is probably the storyline they would have used had the Garfield series continued, in fact there was a small easter egg of the symbiote container being shown in a trailer for the second film, later changed to Dock Ocks arms if I'm not mistaken, leading to theories as to what's to come. They could easily go the Ghost Rider/Ant Man approach of implying this sort of thing has happened before to someone else.
One of the things I hope to see more explored with a actual Venom film, is the relationship between Eddie Brock and the Venom symbiote. Something that was only very thinly elaborated upon back in 2007.
At the time of Eddie's bonding with the symbiote, his whole victim complex was at its peak. The loss of his job, respect, and wife Ann Weying after the Sin Eater debacle, Eddie no longer saw any sort hope for validation for continuing on. Throw in his situation were a new dead-end job as a tabloid journalist writing garbage, in addition to the discovery of his cancer, all of this cumulated to his degradation and thus, to the point of suicide. If it hadn't been for the symbiote intervening, Eddie would have died. Whether it be by his own hand, or becoming consumed by cancer. It is thru both of their familiarity with pain, that in turn created a complimentary psychological bond of sorts that provided them an exclusive, empathetic relationship which thus leads the symbiote to the conclusion that it will stick with Eddie. Even to the point where Eddie and the symbiote had a more explicit relationship in which the symbiote had a more proactive role than it ever had with Spider-Man, and would sometimes overpower Eddie's own psychology.
It is only though Eddie's relationship with the symbiote that his own self-destructive psychology is subsided in place of vengeance. Sometimes it's more to do with heroics, and occasionally he will revert to a murderous rampage provided just the right triggers. Essentially, whatever good bonding with the symbiote did for Eddie's incredibly fragile psyche, the bonding with the symbiote also set him on a downward path of self-destruction. As there has been more than one occurrences where Eddie has re-attempted suicide when he's not with the symbiote. Effectively, making him as much of a parasite as the symbiote itself.
Much of this was incredibly glossed over in SM3, or flat out not referred to at all, and resulted in a version of Venom that felt like it was straight out of a random Spider-Man cartoon. Pick one, and the SM3 could easily fit right on in there. If that's sufficient for you, great. I see room for alot of improvement. Sony being Sony, it's a 50/50% chance a Venom movie will be worthwhile or not, but the casting of Hardy is a big plus, and given the R rating, much of the aforementioned background with Eddie and the symbiote can be expanded upon, and more.
Quote from: The Joker on Mon, 5 Jun 2017, 01:37
One of the things I hope to see more explored with a actual Venom film, is the relationship between Eddie Brock and the Venom symbiote. Something that was only very thinly elaborated upon back in 2007.
At the time of Eddie's bonding with the symbiote, his whole victim complex was at its peak. The loss of his job, respect, and wife Ann Weying after the Sin Eater debacle, Eddie no longer saw any sort hope for validation for continuing on. Throw in his situation were a new dead-end job as a tabloid journalist writing garbage, in addition to the discovery of his cancer, all of this cumulated to his degradation and thus, to the point of suicide. If it hadn't been for the symbiote intervening, Eddie would have died. Whether it be by his own hand, or becoming consumed by cancer. It is thru both of their familiarity with pain, that in turn created a complimentary psychological bond of sorts that provided them an exclusive, empathetic relationship which thus leads the symbiote to the conclusion that it will stick with Eddie. Even to the point where Eddie and the symbiote had a more explicit relationship in which the symbiote had a more proactive role than it ever had with Spider-Man, and would sometimes overpower Eddie's own psychology.
It is only though Eddie's relationship with the symbiote that his own self-destructive psychology is subsided in place of vengeance. Sometimes it's more to do with heroics, and occasionally he will revert to a murderous rampage provided just the right triggers. Essentially, whatever good bonding with the symbiote did for Eddie's incredibly fragile psyche, the bonding with the symbiote also set him on a downward path of self-destruction. As there has been more than one occurrences where Eddie has re-attempted suicide when he's not with the symbiote. Effectively, making him as much of a parasite as the symbiote itself.
Much of this was incredibly glossed over in SM3, or flat out not referred to at all, and resulted in a version of Venom that felt like it was straight out of a random Spider-Man cartoon. Pick one, and the SM3 could easily fit right on in there. If that's sufficient for you, great. I see room for alot of improvement. Sony being Sony, it's a 50/50% chance a Venom movie will be worthwhile or not, but the casting of Hardy is a big plus, and given the R rating, much of the aforementioned background with Eddie and the symbiote can be expanded upon, and more.
What you are talking about was shown in glimpses in spider-man 3 (which came out 10 years ago last month if you can believe it) but hardly explained. Even though Topher Grace was outstanding in the church scene, I didn't like the pre-symbiote Eddie playing for God to kill Peter. That shows Eddie already had death on the brain and leaves the audience unclear whether Eddie Brock himself is capable of murder or whether it is the symbiote in him. I don't like to see Eddie Brock himself portrayed that dark. Lying, cheating, stealing, bullying should all be part of Eddie's natural personality: Eddie Brock himself is more of a small time crook whom Spidey wouldn't even bother with if not for the work rivalry. I prefer to have the symbiote push Eddie over the edge to commit the violent crimes and murder as Venom that he never would have done himself. Especially later on when he becomes an anti-hero once Carnage is born is it important not to make Eddie and all out bad guy from the start because we need some reason to cheer him on, especially if Cletus Kassidy comes along.
Spider-man we all know is basically a boy scout, Carnage is about as nasty of a character as you can have (whether you're talking pre-symbiote Kassidy, Kassidy under the symbiote influence, or Carnage himself) and at the opposite end of the good/evil spectrum as spider-man. Venom should be somewhere in the middle but leaning more to Carnages end. That's what makes Eddie Brock such an interesting character, along with Frank Castle, he's Marvel's version of Selina Kyle the sense that writers have a lot of freedom to how good or evil they want to make the character. but the character should never be too evil because there's definitely worse people out there.
The Venom movie Twitter page is now up.
https://twitter.com/VenomMovie
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pVeL1eBIQpA
Considering Hardy's a fan of the character, it sounds like he's very committed to the role with his MMA and kickboxing sessions five days a week.
Also it being said Venom is going to be 8'4 was a eyebrow raiser. Sounds like we're getting the big hulk-like Venom (as some artists draw him looking huge) as opposed to a 6'3-6'5 Venom. If anything, the massive size will assuredly differentiate this Venom even further from the SM3 Venom.
Advertisement posters featured at the CCXP (Comic Con Experience) in São Paulo, Brazil.
(https://s25.postimg.org/8x95b48lb/venom-movie-poster-ccxp-image-2.jpg)
(https://s25.postimg.org/xdrb5ktwf/venom-movie-poster-ccxp-image-3.jpg)
First official image of Tom Hardy as Eddie Brock.
(https://s25.postimg.org/k66q1gc8f/Eddie_Brock_1st_Look.jpg)
(https://s25.postimg.org/49cjiqwfz/BTS_Venom_Jacket.jpg)
(https://s25.postimg.org/cg4ja0ozz/Venom_Logo_3837.jpg)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r9Dh46PLjOY
The teaser is up.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dzxFdtWmjto
(https://s25.postimg.org/ougu7zbyn/Poster_Teaser_Official.jpg)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u9Mv98Gr5pY
Silver Nemesis beat me to it ... ;D
There's stuff that I like, and don't like. From the official trailer, Tom Hardy's Eddie Brock is coming across as a reporter that's on the up and up, rather than being portrayed as self serving or shady, but again, it's just a trailer. There very well could be scenes of Brock being dubious in his back story, and without the Sin Eater angle being played out, is already in the process of trying to make up for his past sins by the time the start of the movie, so we'll see.
I do like the look, and that the Venom Symbiote is finally shown using telepathy in communicating with Brock. Thus making it a character in it's own right, and highlighting the "WE are Venom" line, giving it a bit more meaning. Which is a noticeable step in the right direction from the mute parasitic symbiote just looking for any random living host that's nearby that we got from SM3.
The trailer didn't do anything for me. It felt like a TV movie.
I also fail to see how this Venom aesthetic looks any different to what we saw in Spider-Man 3.
Quote from: The Dark Knight on Sat, 28 Apr 2018, 00:57
I also fail to see how this Venom aesthetic looks any different to what we saw in Spider-Man 3.
You know, the look of the 2018 Venom not being dramatically different from the 2007 Venom probably works in it's favor. The differences are there, but not overt. Both look like Venom, but from what I can tell, there's more of a vein-like pattern on the body than web-like one (I can't tell if Hardy's Venom has the white spider logo on the chest from the trailer, but that would be a big difference if not). Smaller white eyes, unless Venom's squinting in the reveal scene from the trailer. Longer, thicker crocodile teeth that appear to be in rows like a shark.
Much more pronounced tongue. Appears to grow 1-2 feet in height, and musculature when Brock transforms into Venom. Also, Brock demonstrates a different voice as Venom. Something I imagined was the case when I was a little kid reading any comics Venom appeared in, was validated with the 90's animated series (I assume the subsequent Spider-Man cartoons did the same?!?), missing from SM3 (unless I'm forgetting about it?!?), and now has come full circle with this.
Can't say I'm crazy about the Venom symbiote's voice though after repeated viewings of the trailer. I'm glad it's there for sure, cause the relationship needs to be established, but I always imagined it being more of a whisper when communicating with it's host, rather than sounding like Keith David.
New images released.
(https://s25.postimg.cc/7flhxiz27/image.jpg)
(https://s25.postimg.cc/nqllttw4f/Di_ADp_Gl_U0_AAilz_K.jpg)
and a comparison with McFarlane's Venom via Twitter.
(https://s25.postimg.cc/9wx94sqof/Untitled.jpg)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xLCn88bfW1o
Venom looks like an absolute beast, so that's good. The trailer itself seems like it's following WB/DC in mimicking the MCU tone, but maybe it's just the trailer? From what I've read, this movie might actually be R rated.
Which probably would help differentiate
Venom from the standard assembly line.
http://comicbook.com/marvel/2018/07/...ben-fleischer/
Quote
Speaking to ComicBook.com at San Diego Comic Con, Venom director Ruben Fleischer was asked if his film is approaching an R-rating or, at the very least, pushing the boundaries of violence and darkness. After all, Venom is a character known to be quite intimidating in Marvel Comics, given his violent and horrifying nature.
"That's the plan," Fleischer said. "It is not the plan, that's the movie. Our movie wants to honor the comics as close as we can tonally. In the comics, he bites people's heads off and eats brains. It would be weird to make a movie with Venom if he wasn't doing that. We tried to honor it as closely as possible. This is definitely a darker, more violent, more vicious Marvel character than I think anyone's ever seen before."
(https://s25.postimg.cc/6bdy5lovz/Djf_Ti_Pi_V4_AAru_VQ.jpg)
(https://s25.postimg.cc/khtp0ts1b/Djcskv_KV4_AALM7_D.jpg)
I've noticed that people on social media are hoping Venom fails because it's not part of the MCU. ::)
I'm not sold on Venom, but I hope it does succeed to spite the mindless bandwagon drones.
Quote from: The Laughing Fish on Sat, 4 Aug 2018, 00:24
I've noticed that people on social media are hoping Venom fails because it's not part of the MCU. ::)
I'm not sold on Venom, but I hope it does succeed to spite the mindless bandwagon drones.
Yes, it's predictable at this point, but for some, it's MCU or nothing. Which is weird, cause essentially it boils down to the group think that one has to be so enamored with a "shared universe", that anything related to Marvel that deviates from that gimmick, must not be worth of any quality or value. Where, in my estimation, there have been Fox X-Men movies, that literally trump some entries offered from Disney/Marvel. In addition, the same goes for a couple of the Wolverine/Logan films. Hell, I wasn't a very vocal, or adamant proponent for the
Amazing Spider-Man set of films, especially the 2nd one, but after leaving the theater following MCU's
Homecoming, I would have gladly taken a ASM 3, or even that proposed Sinister Six movie as a trade any day.
I can perhaps see Venom working as a standalone film, since the character is an antihero and has headlined numerous solo comics over the years. But I'm more sceptical when it comes to the other villain movies Sony is planning to make. Can Morbius carry his own movie? What about the recently announced Kraven the Hunter film?
I would love to see a faithful adaptation of Kraven's Last Hunt (one of the best Marvel storylines of the eighties), but I don't see how it can be done without Spider-Man. And I don't think the story can be rewritten to feature Brock or any other character in place of Peter Parker. Not without compromising some of the comic's central themes.
Then there's the Morbius movie. At one point David Goyer had planned to have Morbius be the main villain in Blade II. The Living Vampire even made a brief appearance in the first film's original ending.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CL-qxNcFcoA
I remember everyone expected Morbius to be the antagonist in the Blade sequel. Pairing those two characters was a no-brainer and had already been done successfully in Spider-Man: The Animated Series.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B2383o2YOeI
But how can they make a Morbius movie without Spider-Man or Blade? Will they have him face Venom? I understand that Sony is still desperate for a shared universe, but have they really thought this through? A standalone Venom film series might work, but a shared universe based around Spider-Man villains – but not featuring Spider-Man himself – could well be Sony's biggest misfire since Feigbusters.
Quote from: Silver Nemesis on Sun, 5 Aug 2018, 13:48
I understand that Sony is still desperate for a shared universe, but have they really thought this through? A standalone Venom film series might work, but a shared universe based around Spider-Man villains – but not featuring Spider-Man himself – could well be Sony's biggest misfire since Feigbusters.
That outcome is certainly a possibility. Especially given that the shared universe gimmick hasn't always quite worked out so well for studios that fully intended on having them. Over the years, I've grown increasingly less enamored, and at this stage, completely bored with the gimmick. Course it's all subjective, and pretty much boils down to personal taste, but what once felt fresh now feels fairly stale at this point in the game. Personally, I would be curious if the studio mindset on shared universes might change if Wonder Woman 1984 and Joker are proven successful. As both, from what I can tell, are more or less relying on concentrating on being a stand alone film, rather than another episode in the assembly line of modern shared universe serials we typically get now. Essentially, the old school approach in transitioning comics into a cinematic endeavor. Which, after being worn down by shared universes, I've kinda grown to miss.
As far as Sony's hope of Spidey characters having movies that are not Venom, I just don't see it. Unlike Kraven and Morbius, whether it be Eddie Brock or Flash Thompson, Venom has proven to be a title that can carry itself as a comic book series, and assuredly has more name recognition than Krav and Morb. I kinda agree that adapting Kraven's Last Hunt with Eddie Brock as a stand in for Peter Parker isn't the ideal situation, but on the other hand, I also think about all the liberties taken with continuity/characters in Marvel Studio's
Spider-Man Homecoming and think it's possible it could be achieved. Course one studio gets a pass on liberties, and the other simply isn't, and hasn't gotten that sort of reception with anything Spidey related since, say, 2007.
Final Venom movie posters.
(https://i.postimg.cc/VNsdQV19/Poster_September_2018_Cast.jpg)
(https://i.postimg.cc/XJwhfQGh/Poster_IMAX_Art_Tongue.jpg)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-R197YhAvo0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UriEYGuGGbk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9b5Oo5x9PzY
And a pretty good brief summary video for Venom noobs.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YqlB5lfVtCk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7DA9-ROw-PI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EDbIgO70hKo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HqgnF3CvR7U
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Nz-zA9Q0r8
** SPOILER REVIEW **
Alright. So how is VENOM 2018 starring Tom Hardy? Well, that's going to depend on one's interest and any pre-conceived notions going in. For me, it's nothing more than a decent film at best, but overall, I had a good time. The script is pretty rough around the edges, and really could have used another pass or two, but whats there is atleast servicable.
Tom Hardy as Eddie Brock was especially entertaining, though still not entirely accurate to the comic book counterpart. Obviously we're still not getting the Eddie Brock that sports a flattop, and is big, and buff. If anything, Hardy resembles Eddie Brock from his time as Anti-Venom, but character wise, it's perfectly conveyed that he's very much a flawed, but overall decent person. Instances where we as the audience see that Eddie, as a journalist, isn't above doing shady things (like using his fiance's password and snooping into her account) in order to get 'the story' is very much a Eddie Brock thing to do. There's also a scene where he purposely stays out of sight during a convenience store hold up. Which made Eddie seem more 'real', as making him heroic right off the bat would have, I think, been a bit too much. Yes, he does get fired and goes into a depression, similar to the comics, but in this case, he gets fired from his own viral show called, "The Brock Report". Making him more successful as a journalist than the comic book version. During a date night with his fiance, Anne, the "Daily Globe Incidient" in New York is mentioned as something Brock doesn't want to discuss, which left the impression that he was possibly fired before moving to San Fransisco. A nod to the comics I assume.
Eddie's relationship with Anne was alright. It's definitely a different than the Marvel Comics version, but it's decent. Personally, I think she worked better during the 2nd half than she did the 1st. However, you get the impression that prior to the Venom symbiote coming into Eddie's life, the relationship between Eddie and Anne was awkwardly cute, yet obviously messy like a real couple.. Thus, making them seem more realistic in a psychological sense.
The relationship between Eddie and the Venom Symbiote came off strong, and is flat out the highlight and driving force of the movie. Was it my preferred interpretation? Not really. The juvenile nature of the Venom symbiote got on my nerves, along with, I thought, too many MCU humor-type jokes, but atleast there's something there establishing the psycological bond and co-dependance between Eddie and Venom. Which was something sorely lacking in Raimi's SM3. For people who only have a very scant knowledge of the character, I believe they would like the interactions between Eddie and Venom more than a die hard fan, but it's serviceable.
Does the origin work without Spider-Man? Well, yes. I wouldn't say it's executed particularly well, but it works fine with what we are given. Similar to the 1990's Spider-Man animated series, the symbiotes are brought back to earth by a spcae shuttle mission, and we get that one of the astronauts aboard the ship carrying the symbiotes is named, "Jameson", but that's about it. No idea on his fate whatsoever, and he appeared worse for wear. One thing I did appreciate, is that the film essentially focused entirely on itself, rather than trying to set up a 'shared universe' that we've seen time and time again. I didn't spot any Morbius, Black Cat, Silver Sable, Kraven the Hunter references whatsoever, and was thankful for it. If that's something that harkens back to a late 1990's-early 2000's approach in storytelling, then count me in as giving it a big thumbs up.
The biggest flaws in the movie are without a doubt the unconvincing villainous threat that is Drake/Riot; In the case of Drake/Riot, both just came across as your very run-of-the-mill villains wanting power. The rushed plot points; noticeable quick editing (yes, think Suicide Squad); the ironically heatless final battle. However, during the final battle there were a couple fantastic slow motion shots with Venom versus Riot that looked like they were straight out of the comics come to life, which was appreciated. Actually, I dug the hell out of those graphic images. The action for the most part I thought hit it's beats. The humor? Not so much. The movie's atmosphere actually felt seedy in it's presentation, which worked for me, but unfortunately there was also a camp factor as well. Once again, VENOM 2018 isn't the dark, and gritty body horror movie I would have preferred, but thanks to Hardy's enthusiastic performance, I found the movie entertaining. If you don't buy the Brock/Venom dynamic then there really isn't much to bite into here to be perfectly honest.
With that Woody Harrelson/Cletus Kasady scene. Well, I thought the head full of red curly hair was .... interesting. But what little we're given, I'm sure Harrelson would do just fine as Carnage. Given how different the origin story of Eddie Brock bonding with Venom was (no, we don't get Eddie about to commit suicide and begging for forgiveness at a catholic church when Venom first bonds with him), I am curious just how the Carnage symbiote will get ahold of Cletus in the sequel. I sincerely doubt it will be anything like the comics version, as Harrelson's Cletus Kasady appears to be about as dangerous as a Hannibal Lecter. Essentially, not someone who's going to have a cell mate anytime soon.
Now the 'critics' who compared VENOM 2018 to Catwoman 2004 can suck my symbiote because this movie, despite having it's fair share of issues, was overall decent and entertaining. Overall, I liked it well enough. I don't need movies to be flawless masterpieces. They're not THAT important. Personally, I think this is an example of shills wanting Non-MCU Marvel movies to bomb so bad, that they will automatically b*tch and moan in order to keep the tired narrative alive of "ONLY THE MCU CAN DO GOOD SUPERHERO MOVIES." ::)
A flawed but entertaining movie? I'll take that over alot of the cookie cutter MCU stuff. The hell with group think.
6 1/2 to 7/10 for me. Similar to Suicide Squad, I could see this movie being better given better editing, pacing, and a more mature presentation, but Tom Hardy ... yeah, I liked him here. The Venom/Brock relationship is the highlight of the movie and their banter/bromance carries the film.
Yeah this movie was way better than Homecoming. 8)
Venom reaches $822M at the worldwide box office
https://twitter.com/getfandom/status...103597056?s=21
Quote from: The Joker on Tue, 9 Oct 2018, 00:39
The juvenile nature of the Venom symbiote got on my nerves, along with, I thought, too many MCU humor-type jokes, but atleast there's something there establishing the psycological bond and co-dependance between Eddie and Venom.
I'm glad you got some enjoyment out of this, Joker. But I've seen a few scenes from the movie online, and I'm afraid I'm going to have to skip the rest of it. Not only because it appears to have the same garbage-tier humour that's plaguing the MCU nowadays, but I heard a rumour that Venom was compromised into a PG-13 rating so Sony could regain some hope to tie it together with the MCU, specifically with Tom Holland's Spider-Man. :-[
If that's true, that gives me less motivation to watch it. I would've preferred an R-rated horror film for a change, as it was originally reported.
Quote from: The Joker on Tue, 9 Oct 2018, 00:39
Now the 'critics' who compared VENOM 2018 to Catwoman 2004 can suck my symbiote because this movie, despite having it's fair share of issues, was overall decent and entertaining. Overall, I liked it well enough. I don't need movies to be flawless masterpieces. They're not THAT important. Personally, I think this is an example of shills wanting Non-MCU Marvel movies to bomb so bad, that they will automatically b*tch and moan in order to keep the tired narrative alive of "ONLY THE MCU CAN DO GOOD SUPERHERO MOVIES." ::)
A flawed but entertaining movie? I'll take that over alot of the cookie cutter MCU stuff. The hell with group think.
If there's any consolation, the film's financial success will be sour grapes among MCU fanboys.
Going back to the critics for moment: yeah, the narrative they run with crap like "only MCU can make good movies" or "Nolan is the only who gets Batman" really is tiresome, as well as both are absolutely false. Never mind the fact those things have their own issues that would've been condemned if other movies have them, but it's conveniently disregarded when assessing trash like Infinity War or TDK.
But of course, critics do have influence as people are quick to defend something based on general consensus, and the media will happily lap it up to sell the movie to a widespread audience willing to submit to brand loyalty, blindly. Sometimes, even violently. I remember reading Rotten Tomatoes had to shut down TDKR's ratings because the brainless fanboys sent death threats to anybody who didn't give the film a positive review when it came out, as well as attacking reviewers who didn't like the second Nolan movie. Even the first Avengers movie had fans being guilty of such vile worship, I remember fans attacked a reviewer who thought the movie was merely okay. Yes, that's how moronic and dangerous people are. For some reason, if a comic book movie gets good reviews AND makes billions of dollars, you
have to like it. You can't dare say it's bad. Not even Star Wars fans are as pathetic as this fan base, I'm afraid to say.
Finally, I noticed Aquaman was getting an overwhelming positive word of mouth in the past few weeks it opened in other countries like China, but it appears that the critics in North America are trying to dampen the enthusiasm with giving it bad reviews or backhanded compliments. Don't expect the tired "DC is doomed" narrative to go away any time soon. ::)
Quote from: The Laughing Fish on Sat, 22 Dec 2018, 10:07
I'm glad you got some enjoyment out of this, Joker. But I've seen a few scenes from the movie online, and I'm afraid I'm going to have to skip the rest of it. Not only because it appears to have the same garbage-tier humour that's plaguing the MCU nowadays, but I heard a rumour that Venom was compromised into a PG-13 rating so Sony could regain some hope to tie it together with the MCU, specifically with Tom Holland's Spider-Man. :-[
If that's true, that gives me less motivation to watch it. I would've preferred an R-rated horror film for a change, as it was originally reported.
Sure, Venom is enjoyable enough, it's just not anything that would have truly made the film special with it's plot and direction. For me, and especially after just posting about my personal Spider-Man solo movie rankings, which evidently doesn't differ from your own, I would place Venom somewhere around SM3 and ASM. Which reiterates the film being serviceable, but unfortunately, in my mind, not reaching it's full potential which may have very well placed it right up there with SM2.
There's a number of ways a R rated Venom movie could have been achieved, and evidently will remain a great "what if" route for some time to come. However, I'm sure Sony is pleased with the film's box office, and is happy with the overall product as is. It's just that the film doesn't stand out from the usual Superhero fare we've seen for years now.
Quote
If there's any consolation, the film's financial success will be sour grapes among MCU fanboys.
Going back to the critics for moment: yeah, the narrative they run with crap like "only MCU can make good movies" or "Nolan is the only who gets Batman" really is tiresome, as well as both are absolutely false. Never mind the fact those things have their own issues that would've been condemned if other movies have them, but it's conveniently disregarded when assessing trash like Infinity War or TDK.
But of course, critics do have influence as people are quick to defend something based on general consensus, and the media will happily lap it up to sell the movie to a widespread audience willing to submit to brand loyalty, blindly. Sometimes, even violently. I remember reading Rotten Tomatoes had to shut down TDKR's ratings because the brainless fanboys sent death threats to anybody who didn't give the film a positive review when it came out, as well as attacking reviewers who didn't like the second Nolan movie. Even the first Avengers movie had fans being guilty of such vile worship, I remember fans attacked a reviewer who thought the movie was merely okay. Yes, that's how moronic and dangerous people are. For some reason, if a comic book movie gets good reviews AND makes billions of dollars, you have to like it. You can't dare say it's bad. Not even Star Wars fans are as pathetic as this fan base, I'm afraid to say.
Despite my issues with Sony, it does warm my cold black heart to see Venom as a financial success, along with
Into the Spider-Verse getting much praise. If anything, it's a double slap in the face to MCU-NPC's.
QuoteFinally, I noticed Aquaman was getting an overwhelming positive word of mouth in the past few weeks it opened in other countries like China, but it appears that the critics in North America are trying to dampen the enthusiasm with giving it bad reviews or backhanded compliments. Don't expect the tired "DC is doomed" narrative to go away any time soon. ::)
Yes, there's appeal in non-MCU material. Imagine that. Alternatives to the Disney/MCU/Feige output is welcome. I'm sure there's some very entertaining Dick Tracy/Fighting American/Mr. A/Vampirella/Bloodshot/X-O Manowar/Lady Death movies that could be made. Or how about stuff printed under Image? Spawn? ... imagine what a The Maxx movie would be like? Or a R rated Youngblood?
Lotsa untapped cinematic material.
Well, Venom 2 is shaping up with a lot of potential. Now that the MCU has no use for Ulysses Klaue, Andy Serkis has been hired to direct the sequel. Robert Richardson, who was deprived of the chance of working on Ben Affleck's unproduced Batman movie, is hired as the movie's director of photography.
https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/venom-2-adds-once-a-time-hollywood-cinematographer-1232465
I never watched the first Venom, and I had less desire to do so when it ended up becoming a PG-13 blockbuster. But if Serkis has a vision to make the sequel something special and it get away from the PG-13 formula, I might give it a chance. Judging by the new faces and Tom Hardy returning, I think I'll take Venom 2 any day, than all of the garbage the MCU and Warner will try to throw at us in the coming years. Fingers crossed.
Of course, I wouldn't be surprised if the trash media and moronic fanboys will do their best to put the movie down like last time, and NPCs will follow whatever the critical consensus will be. But f*** 'em.