Lmaaoooooo
Holy shit
Wow I've never seen that movie....like I'm still not sure that actually happened...
Make out? They slipped the gay shit in huh?
First vid of Venom
- Thread starter superfusion
- Start date
Wow I've never seen that movie....like I'm still not sure that actually happened...
Make out? They slipped the gay shit in huh?
oh damn...I never seen any of these other shits either...to be fair these shits was so trash I forgot them entirely...I heard ‘constantine’ was good tho...I think I might’ve seen parts of it
favorite comic book flick...I need to rewatch it tho...it might’ve been supplanted by civil war...black panther or infinity war
*edit*
might be time to update my list...looks like civil war never made the top 5 cut...I definitely feel comfortable taking iron man off the list...I’d probably put infinity war @ #2...and still keep watchmen @ #1...marvel studio flicks are great but it’s hard for me to rewatch them...I’ve watched watchmen like 3-4x bcuz the story goes well beyond the action and the excitement of seeing my favorite characters on the big screen...watchmen is a more “complex” film imo
new list would be...
1. Watchmen
2. Infinity War
2. Black Panther
4. Spider-Man: Homecoming
5. Batman Begins
IW and BP are a tie imo
Last edited:
I'ono. Probably check it out for sum'n to watch. 
Sony's Leaked Emails Reveal THIS Venom Was Always The Plan
The leaked Sony emails reveal that Venom hasn't changed quite as much over the years as we'd perhaps have believed. Avi Arad has been interested in developing a Venom movie for over a decade now, and his fondest dreams are finally coming true. On the surface, the film has changed shape substantially; after several attempts, by 2014 Sony envisioned the spinoff as part of Andrew Garfield's Amazing Spider-Man franchise. They initially hired Alex Kurtzman as director, but he was replaced by Ruben Fleischer. For all these changes, though, there's strong evidence that the overall shape of the movie has remained pretty much the same.
Sony was hacked back in Christmas 2014, and a wealth of email correspondence was dumped online. That included details of exec discussions about the future of the Spider-Man franchise, including details for more films in The Amazing Spider-Man series and even the proposed deal between Marvel Studios and Sony Pictures that would ultimately see the wall-crawler join the MCU. These leaked emails also hint at the studio's original ideas for Venom.
Related: Every Spider-Man Villain Spinoff Sony is Developing
Here, we'll look at those basic ideas and show how they laid the foundation for the final theatrical cut of Venom. As we'll show, the core concept of Venom was established all the way back in 2014 - and the finished product seems very true to Sony's initial vision.
ADVERTISING
Avi Arad had always believed that Venom had the potential to be a box office hit for Sony. It was Arad who pushed Sam Raimi into introducing Venom in 2007's Spider-Man 3, and he publicly admitted to considering a possible spinoff film for the tongue-slavering symbiote. There was one simple reason Arad loved Venom: the symbiote is popular was with kids and teenagers. Arad was an executive producer on the 1990s Spider-Man animated series, and he'd noticed how the character seemed to resonate. As the years passed, his instincts continued to suggest that Venom would be a major win. In one email from early November 2014, Arad pointed to the Toys 'R' Us circulars as evidence; Disney Infinity's advertising featured Venom, and he cited that as evidence even Marvel and Disney knew the character appealed to a younger demographic.
ADVERTISING
By 2014, Arad and Amy Pascal were pushing for the Spider-Man franchise to change shape. Taking a tip from Marvel Studios, they aimed to create an entire cinematic universe centered around Andrew Garfield's Spider-Man. First up was a Sinister Six film, heavily set up in The Amazing Spider-Man 2; Sony planned that to be followed by a dedicated Venom movie, which they initially planning to release sometime in 2017. It would only be after these two movies that The Amazing Spider-Man 3 would release. The potential scale of the franchise is hinted at in an email from Juan Capdet. He proposed an ambitious slate of Spider-Man spinoffs, ranging from Venom to Kraven the Hunter to Black Cat. In his view, the movies should build up towards an Avengers-style crossover featuring Carnage as the main villain. However, it's unclear how seriously Sony took his suggestions; there's no email trail beyond the initial pitch, which was at least shared among key figures in the studio. Presumably, they took the discussions offline.
Venom was originally intended to link into the Amazing Spider-Man films, but with something of a modernized origin. Several Sony figures pointed to the Ultimate Comics version, where the Venom symbiote was a genetically engineered protoplasmic "suit" designed by Richard Parker and Eddie Brock Sr. Even at this stage, Arad was convinced that origin story could be sufficiently rewritten to remove Spider-Man. Pascal, for her part, wasn't so sure; she felt the symbiote's interaction with Peter Parker was a key part in its story. Interestingly, there are a couple of email threads in which Pascal told other Sony staff about Venom's supporting characters, most notably his ex-wife Ann Weying and Flash Thompson's Agent Venom. Sony clearly felt both these characters had some sort of potential.
Sony's Leaked Emails Reveal THIS Venom Was Always The Plan
VENOM IS NOW THE LAUNCH OF THE SPIDER-VILLAINS UNIVERSE (BUT WAS ALWAYS PART OF IT)
It's actually quite remarkable how little Sony's plans for Venom have changed since those 2014 leaks, especially considering that the center of the Spider-Man franchise as a whole has since been absolutely revitalized. Shortly after the leak, Sony and Marvel agreed to an unprecedented deal that has brought Tom Holland's Peter Parker into the MCU: Sony makes the Spider-Man films in the shared universe, while Marvel can use Spidey in teamups. Sony is still able to produce films centered around secondary Spider-Man characters alongside this, but they aren't able to tie them into the Spider-Man films themselves. That reshapes their Spider-villains cinematic universe quite dramatically, with Venom serving as its launchpad.
For all that's the case, though, so many of Sony's ideas seem to be rooted in discussions back in 2014. The emails showed a lot of discussion about a female Spider-Man character, for example; that was presumably Silk, a hero created by Dan Slott back in 2014 and whose film is now known to be in the early stages of preproduction. Juan Capdet's email references both a Kraven and a Black Cat film; while he was pitching for a universe that included Spider-Man, it's interesting to note that both movies are in the works. Other spinoffs have featured characters tied to the Maximum Carnage event, suggesting Sony may well be building up to the crossover movie Capdet suggested (possibly with post-credits scenes).
ADVERTISING
Related: Maximum Carnage Can Be The Avengers Of Sony's Spider-Villains Universe
The only real difference is that Sinister Six has been dropped. Curiously enough, though, not all Sony figures appear to have been convinced that film was a sensible one to go for anyway; in one email Pascal hints at being unsure whether or not it would work. It's possible this idea will be used in the MCU.
VENOM WAS ALWAYS GOING TO BE PG-13
"Kids love Venom," Avi Arad recently explained to Vulture. "It's something about it that attracts the anti-hero sensibility." It was exactly the same point Arad had been expressing privately for years, the point he was making when he noted Venom's prominence in the Toys 'R' Us circular back in 2014. Given that's the case, it's no surprise Arad has now revealed he never believed an R-rating was really an optionfor Venom. "There's no reason to put in violence," he explained. "To define what Venom is as violence. He's not... Today, in CGI and stuff, we can make Venom bite your head. But we don't have to show the head going side to side like, 'that actually tastes good.' It's irrelevant. What's relevant is that you finally understood, is that a bad guy?"
ADVERTISING
That doesn't mean the film will be your typical Marvel fare, though. Even back in 2014, emails suggest Sony was toying with a hard PG-13, one that pushed the boundaries of the superhero franchise a little bit further. That does indeed seem to be the approach the studio is ultimately taking with Venom, with Ruben Fleischer pointing to The Dark Knight as an example of how far you can go. "They put a pen through a guy's forehead," he pointed out, "So I figure if you can do that in a PG-13 movie you can bite some heads off."
Related: How Venom Can Get A Redesigned Spider Symbol In His Solo Movie
There is some evidence that Sony considered filming R-rated cuts of some of their films. Certainly, that was part of Juan Capdet's pitch for Maximum Carnage; he suggested it could be "hard PG-13 with the possibility of an unrated bloodier version for home entertainment." While Sony has teased that kind of idea in public, they don't appear to have taken it too seriously, instead using it to toy with viewers.
VENOM'S STORY HAS CHANGED - BUT STILL HAS SIMILARITIES
As we've noted, Sony originally considered using the Ultimate Comics origin of Venom, where the symbiote was a genetically engineered creature. But even that origin story is tied strongly to Spider-Man. With the studio unable to integrate the wall-crawler into the narrative, they've been forced to take a different approach. They've heavily adapted ideas from the Venom: Lethal Protector and Planet of the Symbiotes plots, telling a tale where an alien spaceship containing symbiotes comes crashing to Earth. The labs have remained part of the plot, although they've been tied to the sinister Life Foundation rather than to Oscorp.
ADVERTISING
There are only a sparse few emails discussing the potential plot and secondary characters of Venom; the project was in the early stages back in 2014, and no details had really been set in stone. What is interesting, though, is that Pascal dropped in a reference to Eddie Brock's ex-wife, Ann Weying. She'll be an important secondary character in the Venom film, played by Michelle Williams. Pascal's brief email notes that Weying became a symbiote herself, She-Venom, so it's possible that could fit into Sony's future plans for the love of Eddie's life.
-
While many view the Amazing Spider-Man attempt at Venom as being replaced by the new movie, it's really just an evolution. Indeed, nowhere is this more obvious than in the release date: the original proposition for Venom eyed a 2017 release date, eventually pushed back to early 2018. In reality, Sony was just a few months out.
- BY THOMAS BACON
- – ON OCT 01, 2018
- IN SR ORIGINALS
The leaked Sony emails reveal that Venom hasn't changed quite as much over the years as we'd perhaps have believed. Avi Arad has been interested in developing a Venom movie for over a decade now, and his fondest dreams are finally coming true. On the surface, the film has changed shape substantially; after several attempts, by 2014 Sony envisioned the spinoff as part of Andrew Garfield's Amazing Spider-Man franchise. They initially hired Alex Kurtzman as director, but he was replaced by Ruben Fleischer. For all these changes, though, there's strong evidence that the overall shape of the movie has remained pretty much the same.
Sony was hacked back in Christmas 2014, and a wealth of email correspondence was dumped online. That included details of exec discussions about the future of the Spider-Man franchise, including details for more films in The Amazing Spider-Man series and even the proposed deal between Marvel Studios and Sony Pictures that would ultimately see the wall-crawler join the MCU. These leaked emails also hint at the studio's original ideas for Venom.
Related: Every Spider-Man Villain Spinoff Sony is Developing
Here, we'll look at those basic ideas and show how they laid the foundation for the final theatrical cut of Venom. As we'll show, the core concept of Venom was established all the way back in 2014 - and the finished product seems very true to Sony's initial vision.
ADVERTISING
- This Page: Sony's Original Plans for Venom
- Next Page: 2018's Venom Is Still Part Of The Plan
Avi Arad had always believed that Venom had the potential to be a box office hit for Sony. It was Arad who pushed Sam Raimi into introducing Venom in 2007's Spider-Man 3, and he publicly admitted to considering a possible spinoff film for the tongue-slavering symbiote. There was one simple reason Arad loved Venom: the symbiote is popular was with kids and teenagers. Arad was an executive producer on the 1990s Spider-Man animated series, and he'd noticed how the character seemed to resonate. As the years passed, his instincts continued to suggest that Venom would be a major win. In one email from early November 2014, Arad pointed to the Toys 'R' Us circulars as evidence; Disney Infinity's advertising featured Venom, and he cited that as evidence even Marvel and Disney knew the character appealed to a younger demographic.
ADVERTISING
By 2014, Arad and Amy Pascal were pushing for the Spider-Man franchise to change shape. Taking a tip from Marvel Studios, they aimed to create an entire cinematic universe centered around Andrew Garfield's Spider-Man. First up was a Sinister Six film, heavily set up in The Amazing Spider-Man 2; Sony planned that to be followed by a dedicated Venom movie, which they initially planning to release sometime in 2017. It would only be after these two movies that The Amazing Spider-Man 3 would release. The potential scale of the franchise is hinted at in an email from Juan Capdet. He proposed an ambitious slate of Spider-Man spinoffs, ranging from Venom to Kraven the Hunter to Black Cat. In his view, the movies should build up towards an Avengers-style crossover featuring Carnage as the main villain. However, it's unclear how seriously Sony took his suggestions; there's no email trail beyond the initial pitch, which was at least shared among key figures in the studio. Presumably, they took the discussions offline.
Venom was originally intended to link into the Amazing Spider-Man films, but with something of a modernized origin. Several Sony figures pointed to the Ultimate Comics version, where the Venom symbiote was a genetically engineered protoplasmic "suit" designed by Richard Parker and Eddie Brock Sr. Even at this stage, Arad was convinced that origin story could be sufficiently rewritten to remove Spider-Man. Pascal, for her part, wasn't so sure; she felt the symbiote's interaction with Peter Parker was a key part in its story. Interestingly, there are a couple of email threads in which Pascal told other Sony staff about Venom's supporting characters, most notably his ex-wife Ann Weying and Flash Thompson's Agent Venom. Sony clearly felt both these characters had some sort of potential.
Sony's Leaked Emails Reveal THIS Venom Was Always The Plan
- BY THOMAS BACON
- – ON OCT 01, 2018
- IN SR ORIGINALS
VENOM IS NOW THE LAUNCH OF THE SPIDER-VILLAINS UNIVERSE (BUT WAS ALWAYS PART OF IT)
It's actually quite remarkable how little Sony's plans for Venom have changed since those 2014 leaks, especially considering that the center of the Spider-Man franchise as a whole has since been absolutely revitalized. Shortly after the leak, Sony and Marvel agreed to an unprecedented deal that has brought Tom Holland's Peter Parker into the MCU: Sony makes the Spider-Man films in the shared universe, while Marvel can use Spidey in teamups. Sony is still able to produce films centered around secondary Spider-Man characters alongside this, but they aren't able to tie them into the Spider-Man films themselves. That reshapes their Spider-villains cinematic universe quite dramatically, with Venom serving as its launchpad.
For all that's the case, though, so many of Sony's ideas seem to be rooted in discussions back in 2014. The emails showed a lot of discussion about a female Spider-Man character, for example; that was presumably Silk, a hero created by Dan Slott back in 2014 and whose film is now known to be in the early stages of preproduction. Juan Capdet's email references both a Kraven and a Black Cat film; while he was pitching for a universe that included Spider-Man, it's interesting to note that both movies are in the works. Other spinoffs have featured characters tied to the Maximum Carnage event, suggesting Sony may well be building up to the crossover movie Capdet suggested (possibly with post-credits scenes).
ADVERTISING
Related: Maximum Carnage Can Be The Avengers Of Sony's Spider-Villains Universe
The only real difference is that Sinister Six has been dropped. Curiously enough, though, not all Sony figures appear to have been convinced that film was a sensible one to go for anyway; in one email Pascal hints at being unsure whether or not it would work. It's possible this idea will be used in the MCU.
VENOM WAS ALWAYS GOING TO BE PG-13
"Kids love Venom," Avi Arad recently explained to Vulture. "It's something about it that attracts the anti-hero sensibility." It was exactly the same point Arad had been expressing privately for years, the point he was making when he noted Venom's prominence in the Toys 'R' Us circular back in 2014. Given that's the case, it's no surprise Arad has now revealed he never believed an R-rating was really an optionfor Venom. "There's no reason to put in violence," he explained. "To define what Venom is as violence. He's not... Today, in CGI and stuff, we can make Venom bite your head. But we don't have to show the head going side to side like, 'that actually tastes good.' It's irrelevant. What's relevant is that you finally understood, is that a bad guy?"
ADVERTISING
That doesn't mean the film will be your typical Marvel fare, though. Even back in 2014, emails suggest Sony was toying with a hard PG-13, one that pushed the boundaries of the superhero franchise a little bit further. That does indeed seem to be the approach the studio is ultimately taking with Venom, with Ruben Fleischer pointing to The Dark Knight as an example of how far you can go. "They put a pen through a guy's forehead," he pointed out, "So I figure if you can do that in a PG-13 movie you can bite some heads off."
Related: How Venom Can Get A Redesigned Spider Symbol In His Solo Movie
There is some evidence that Sony considered filming R-rated cuts of some of their films. Certainly, that was part of Juan Capdet's pitch for Maximum Carnage; he suggested it could be "hard PG-13 with the possibility of an unrated bloodier version for home entertainment." While Sony has teased that kind of idea in public, they don't appear to have taken it too seriously, instead using it to toy with viewers.
VENOM'S STORY HAS CHANGED - BUT STILL HAS SIMILARITIES
As we've noted, Sony originally considered using the Ultimate Comics origin of Venom, where the symbiote was a genetically engineered creature. But even that origin story is tied strongly to Spider-Man. With the studio unable to integrate the wall-crawler into the narrative, they've been forced to take a different approach. They've heavily adapted ideas from the Venom: Lethal Protector and Planet of the Symbiotes plots, telling a tale where an alien spaceship containing symbiotes comes crashing to Earth. The labs have remained part of the plot, although they've been tied to the sinister Life Foundation rather than to Oscorp.
ADVERTISING
There are only a sparse few emails discussing the potential plot and secondary characters of Venom; the project was in the early stages back in 2014, and no details had really been set in stone. What is interesting, though, is that Pascal dropped in a reference to Eddie Brock's ex-wife, Ann Weying. She'll be an important secondary character in the Venom film, played by Michelle Williams. Pascal's brief email notes that Weying became a symbiote herself, She-Venom, so it's possible that could fit into Sony's future plans for the love of Eddie's life.
-
While many view the Amazing Spider-Man attempt at Venom as being replaced by the new movie, it's really just an evolution. Indeed, nowhere is this more obvious than in the release date: the original proposition for Venom eyed a 2017 release date, eventually pushed back to early 2018. In reality, Sony was just a few months out.
Venom Has About 40 Minutes of Deleted Scenes
Venom has close to 40 minutes of deleted scenes, according to star Tom Hardy. Venom is the second cinematic appearance of the title character, following Sam Raimi’s Spider-Man 3. Topher Grace played the role in that version, with the Venom symbiote infecting Peter Parker’s rival Eddie Brock and turning him into a villain. Unfortunately, Raimi’s noted distaste for Venom showed through in the movie, and the character’s appearance proved to be a major disappointment.
A spinoff featuring Venom was meant to follow Spider-Man 3, but the reception to the character – and the later cancellation of Spider-Man 4 – led to the movie stalling. Sony also had plans for Eddie Brock to appear in The Amazing Spider-Man 3, with the movie setting up a Venom spinoff too. Channing Tatum was reportedly eager to play the role in multiple movies, but once a deal was made between Sony and Marvel to share Spider-Man, those plans were scrapped.
Related: Exclusive: Avi Arad Takes The Blame For Venom In Spider-Man 3
After a long journey back to the big screen Venom finally gets his own solo movie, with Tom Hardy playing both Eddie Brock and Venom. During a new interview with Comics Explained, Hardy revealed the movie has at least 30 minutes of deleted footage, some of which were among his favorite scenes.
There are like 30 to 40 minutes worth of scenes that aren’t in this movie... all of them. Mad puppeteering scenes, dark comedy scenes. You know what I mean? They just never made it in.
Part of the appeal of a Venom movie is seeing what an actor like Hardy can do with dual roles, and it's likely he was given some creative leeway during filming to experiment. Hardy also recently revealed his inspiration for Venom's distinctive voice, which includes influences like Busta Rhymes and James Brown.
ADVERTISING
Fans were recently disappointed to learn Venom would be PG-13 since it was originally pitched as a darker, more mature comic book movie. It was recently confirmed the PG-13 rating was always the plan, and that no R-rated cut exists. This makes sense from a business standpoint, with Sony not only hoping to kick off a Spider-Man villain universe that includes Venom and the Jared Leto starring Morbius movie, they also want to tie-in with other potential Marvel cinematic universe projects. The movie is currently on track to perform well, but the reaction of fans will likely decide if a Venom franchise goes ahead or not.
- BY PADRAIG COTTER
- – ON OCT 01, 2018
- IN MOVIE NEWS
Venom has close to 40 minutes of deleted scenes, according to star Tom Hardy. Venom is the second cinematic appearance of the title character, following Sam Raimi’s Spider-Man 3. Topher Grace played the role in that version, with the Venom symbiote infecting Peter Parker’s rival Eddie Brock and turning him into a villain. Unfortunately, Raimi’s noted distaste for Venom showed through in the movie, and the character’s appearance proved to be a major disappointment.
A spinoff featuring Venom was meant to follow Spider-Man 3, but the reception to the character – and the later cancellation of Spider-Man 4 – led to the movie stalling. Sony also had plans for Eddie Brock to appear in The Amazing Spider-Man 3, with the movie setting up a Venom spinoff too. Channing Tatum was reportedly eager to play the role in multiple movies, but once a deal was made between Sony and Marvel to share Spider-Man, those plans were scrapped.
Related: Exclusive: Avi Arad Takes The Blame For Venom In Spider-Man 3
After a long journey back to the big screen Venom finally gets his own solo movie, with Tom Hardy playing both Eddie Brock and Venom. During a new interview with Comics Explained, Hardy revealed the movie has at least 30 minutes of deleted footage, some of which were among his favorite scenes.
There are like 30 to 40 minutes worth of scenes that aren’t in this movie... all of them. Mad puppeteering scenes, dark comedy scenes. You know what I mean? They just never made it in.
Part of the appeal of a Venom movie is seeing what an actor like Hardy can do with dual roles, and it's likely he was given some creative leeway during filming to experiment. Hardy also recently revealed his inspiration for Venom's distinctive voice, which includes influences like Busta Rhymes and James Brown.
ADVERTISING
Fans were recently disappointed to learn Venom would be PG-13 since it was originally pitched as a darker, more mature comic book movie. It was recently confirmed the PG-13 rating was always the plan, and that no R-rated cut exists. This makes sense from a business standpoint, with Sony not only hoping to kick off a Spider-Man villain universe that includes Venom and the Jared Leto starring Morbius movie, they also want to tie-in with other potential Marvel cinematic universe projects. The movie is currently on track to perform well, but the reaction of fans will likely decide if a Venom franchise goes ahead or not.
people are way too critical of these movies. I'll be there next week just because I'm happy to see a character like Venom on the big screen!! keep them coming!!!
Wow these reviews.. Gawd dAMn
1 out of 5
‘Venom’ Review: This Mess of a Marvel Supervillain Movie Bites
Not even Tom Hardy can save this attempt to combine a dark super-antihero story and ‘Deadpool’-style shenanigans
By
PETER TRAVERS
In the first scene ofMarvel’s utterly unmarvelousVenom,an alien space ship crashes and burns on earth leaving behind a slithering mass of defanged, digitalized slop. That’s also a fair description of this puddle of simplistic, sanitized PG-13 drivel that Marvel has released instead of the scary, dark-night-of-the-soul thunderbolt fans had the right to expect.Tom Hardyand a massively overqualified cast, includingMichelle Williamsand Riz Ahmed, have been reduced to putting on a clown-show for kiddies in a shameless corporate product where the creativity stopped with the balance sheet. This year gave us the best and most imaginative Marvel film inBlack Panther.Now we have the worst.
What went wrong? Everything, actually. Crudely directed by Ruben Fleischer (remember the bliss ofZombieland?) from an aggressively blockheaded script by Jeff Pinkner, Scott Rosenberg and Kelly Marcel, this super–antihero tale seems to take a twisted pride in missing the point. Hello! The title character is an alien symbiote (that tongue! those teeth!) who bites off heads and feeds on human brains. The damn thing needs a human host to survive. InSpider-Man3,Topher Grace played the villain with a capital “V.” But in this lame origin story, Venom’s accidental target is a crusading, San Francisco TV journalist named Eddie Brock (Hardy). He cares about his fellow man, so there should be a chill — think Jekyll and Hyde — when Venom possesses Brock and starts leaving broken bodies in his wake. It’s the stuff of nightmares. Not here. Our hero actually carries on a dialogue with his mental roommate, telling the monster to ease up. There areDeadpool-style laughs here, and they’re welcome, until you realize the comic side is all there is. The hard-charging reporter and the annihilating counterpart are actually cuddlebugs. Yuck!
This leaves the movie with nowhere to go. It’s hell watching the mega-talented Hardy struggle with a mumbly American accent and a script that chokes the vibrant life out him. Williams is stuck in the paycheck role of Eddie’s former fiancée Anne, a lawyer who has moved on to romance with a doctor (Reid Scott). If that doesn’t send you into a snooze, wait till to see what this movie does to Ahmed. This brilliant actor (Nightcrawler, The Night Of) can’t do a thing with the villainous Carlton Drake, a billionaire entrepreneur who’s obsessed with melding aliens and humans. Since this movie takes all the terror out of those implications, Ahmed never looks more than mildly annoyed; it’s more like he’s on aShark Tankpanel and no one has any solid business ideas.
The action? It’s repetitive enough to bore you breathless. And the special effects are strictly bottom shelf. Social media has been all overVenom,accusing fans of stuffing the Web with fake bad reviews soA Star Is Bornwon’t whack it at the box-office. Don’t sweat it. No one has to fake a bad review of this. The ending suggests there’s a Eddie/Venom buddy sequel in the offing. Someone needs to bite the head off that idea pronto. Audiences have suffered enough.
https://www.rollingstone.com/movies/movie-reviews/venom-movie-review-tom-hardy-729583/
‘Venom’ Review: This Mess of a Marvel Supervillain Movie Bites
Not even Tom Hardy can save this attempt to combine a dark super-antihero story and ‘Deadpool’-style shenanigans
By
PETER TRAVERS
In the first scene ofMarvel’s utterly unmarvelousVenom,an alien space ship crashes and burns on earth leaving behind a slithering mass of defanged, digitalized slop. That’s also a fair description of this puddle of simplistic, sanitized PG-13 drivel that Marvel has released instead of the scary, dark-night-of-the-soul thunderbolt fans had the right to expect.Tom Hardyand a massively overqualified cast, includingMichelle Williamsand Riz Ahmed, have been reduced to putting on a clown-show for kiddies in a shameless corporate product where the creativity stopped with the balance sheet. This year gave us the best and most imaginative Marvel film inBlack Panther.Now we have the worst.
What went wrong? Everything, actually. Crudely directed by Ruben Fleischer (remember the bliss ofZombieland?) from an aggressively blockheaded script by Jeff Pinkner, Scott Rosenberg and Kelly Marcel, this super–antihero tale seems to take a twisted pride in missing the point. Hello! The title character is an alien symbiote (that tongue! those teeth!) who bites off heads and feeds on human brains. The damn thing needs a human host to survive. InSpider-Man3,Topher Grace played the villain with a capital “V.” But in this lame origin story, Venom’s accidental target is a crusading, San Francisco TV journalist named Eddie Brock (Hardy). He cares about his fellow man, so there should be a chill — think Jekyll and Hyde — when Venom possesses Brock and starts leaving broken bodies in his wake. It’s the stuff of nightmares. Not here. Our hero actually carries on a dialogue with his mental roommate, telling the monster to ease up. There areDeadpool-style laughs here, and they’re welcome, until you realize the comic side is all there is. The hard-charging reporter and the annihilating counterpart are actually cuddlebugs. Yuck!
This leaves the movie with nowhere to go. It’s hell watching the mega-talented Hardy struggle with a mumbly American accent and a script that chokes the vibrant life out him. Williams is stuck in the paycheck role of Eddie’s former fiancée Anne, a lawyer who has moved on to romance with a doctor (Reid Scott). If that doesn’t send you into a snooze, wait till to see what this movie does to Ahmed. This brilliant actor (Nightcrawler, The Night Of) can’t do a thing with the villainous Carlton Drake, a billionaire entrepreneur who’s obsessed with melding aliens and humans. Since this movie takes all the terror out of those implications, Ahmed never looks more than mildly annoyed; it’s more like he’s on aShark Tankpanel and no one has any solid business ideas.
The action? It’s repetitive enough to bore you breathless. And the special effects are strictly bottom shelf. Social media has been all overVenom,accusing fans of stuffing the Web with fake bad reviews soA Star Is Bornwon’t whack it at the box-office. Don’t sweat it. No one has to fake a bad review of this. The ending suggests there’s a Eddie/Venom buddy sequel in the offing. Someone needs to bite the head off that idea pronto. Audiences have suffered enough.
https://www.rollingstone.com/movies/movie-reviews/venom-movie-review-tom-hardy-729583/
Not a review.
I had a feeling it was going to suck. Sony can't make a good superhero movie, but they have to keep making these movies so they won't lose the rights to Spider-Man.
All I've seen of this all day is shit reviews.
At this point, they're makin' shit movies as so they won't have to cough up them rights. No matter how shitty da movie may be. Nobody cares about these shitty Sony comic movies.
Peace,
Just saw it today. Shit was very enjoyable. The critics are full of shit. They must not have gotten paid off for this one.
Just saw it today. Shit was very enjoyable. The critics are full of shit. They must not have gotten paid off for this one.
So watched it thanks to BGoL cinemas and
I know I’m usually extremely hard on movies and I’m a hardcore venom fan....
I really wanted to hate this but I can’t...
It wasn’t bad
But
Sadly
Upgrade did it much better
I know I’m usually extremely hard on movies and I’m a hardcore venom fan....
I really wanted to hate this but I can’t...
It wasn’t bad
But
Sadly
Upgrade did it much better
Todd McFarlane Interview: Venom
Leading up to Venom's Blu-ray release, Screen Rant had the opportunity to speak with Todd McFarlane, who co-created the character Venom for Marvel Comics in the early 1980s, along with comic book writer David Michelinie. It wasn't until 1988 that Venom became the character that everyone knows and loves in the comics, and it took several years to get the character onto the big screen.
Although Venom first appeared in live-action in Sam Raimi's Spider-Man 3, Sony Pictures spent 11 years developing a solo movie for the iconic Spider-Man villain, who's now become more of an antihero. Directed by Ruben Fleischer and starring Tom Hardy as Eddie Brock, 2018's Venom movie opened to negative reviews but became an overwhelming box office success, outgrossing every X-Men movie released and landing in the top 5 highest grossing movies of 2018 at the worldwide box office.
Related: Venom's Bad Reviews Completely Misunderstood Venom
It seems like a foregone conclusion that Venom 2 will happen with Hardy back in the role, but in the meantime, we spoke to McFarlane about the first film's depiction of Venom as a character as well as its story, and then even questioned the filmmaker, who's now working on developing his Spawn movie, about what he would like to see in a sequel.
Screen Rant: To start off, leading up to the movie's release, a lot of people were concerned that the PG-13 rating would adversely affect the character or the story - what do you think about that? Did it have an effect on anything?
ADVERTISING
Todd McFarlane: Here's what I think: somebody was putting in $100 million and looking long-term, and the moment they said it was going to be PG-13 - I don't know if you remember, people thought it might be R [and] it was tracking at $35 - $50 million opening; the moment they said it was going to be PG-13, then all of a sudden they bumped up the numbers to $55 - $75 million. So it automatically jumped. And it opened at $80 [million], so it actually beat their expectations. But somebody somewhere down the line must've calculated a little bit that says, "We've got this hybrid deal" - I don't know if any of this happened; I'm just speculating. But I'm a CEO, so [I'm] factoring in what I would have done - that I go, "We've got this hybrid deal and we want to put Spider-Man in someday. We got this deal with Disney... I don't think Disney is gonna put Spider-Man in an R movie."
So you got two choices: you can get Spider-Man to come up to R, to Venom, or Venom, that's R, comes down to PG-13. Why send mixed messages? Why don't we just basically get them both on even planes and they all play in the PG-13 world. Right? Let's just get to where we know we're going to get to eventually, and not send out a mixed message. So, okay... it's a business calculus that I think works, and creatively they were able to pull it off. And they're now looking at a billion-dollar success, so people can say, "Ah, it should've been R" or "Ah, there should've been Spider-Man," and "Ah, they should've have Carnage in the first one." They can say all of that, but if basically the fans think they missed components and it still makes a billion dollars, then I hope on my Spawn movie I make those kinds of mistakes. What happens when they actually put in those components, that some people think they missed along the way? This thing is just going to continue to grow.
ADVERTISING
Screen Rant: And you think they will put in those components?
Todd McFarlane: Oh yeah. I mean, at some point if they don't, it's not going to be for a lack of trying. Why wouldn't somebody figure out - eventually figure out how to get the mythology glued together? And it doesn't have to be... again, I'm thinking long-term business: if number one makes a billion, and then we put Carnage into number two; and number two we don't have to worry about an origin story, so now we can hit the ground running on minute one with Venom. And then number two is like super crazy; we got Woody Harrelson, we got Carnage, it's gonna be super awesome. It's gonna be cooler than Venom number one and then that goes bigger. And then you do a couple more and all of a sudden, by part three or four, or whatever, you go, "Oh, by the way, if you think all that was cool, we got this new guy coming in called Spider-Man, you may have heard of him." [Imitates explosion] And all of a sudden you're in number four and it may be the biggest one yet. Right?
So, they're starting at a billion and - to me, creatively - they've got nowhere to go but up, in terms of what they can do with this thing... they hit it. And they hit it because the fan base is so rapid for superhero movies - not necessarily just specifically Venom or Spider-Man, just superhero movies - that you can do all this and these are the results. What's the movie or TV show that's comic book related in the last six years that hasn't worked? I don't know what it is. They all work; they're all bulletproof right now. So, Sony just wants something and it's gonna run; it's gonna run for a long time now.
Screen Rant: Going back to your Spawn comment, considering Venom's success, does boost your confidence in Spawn, because Venom took several years to make, and the same...
Todd McFarlane: It doesn't boost MY confidence. I always like me. Nobody likes Todd more than me. But what it does is it helps add to the resume when you walk into a room and you go, "Hey, wanna do Spawn?" And they go, "Why would we do Spawn?" And then you go, "Oh, I also helped create this other character called Venom." And then you can... 'cause you know every single trailer is going to start with that. Right? "From the co-creator of Venom comes..." Right? Boom. And then people across the country and internationally go, "I don't know what Spam is or Sprawn is, or Spore is or whatever, but I know what Venom is." And so, I'll get value from the success of Venom by the person that was there on day one with it. Cool, I'll take it.
ADVERTISING
Screen Rant: I'm really excited for Spawn, and it's great that you're in control of that. But on Venom, it did take several years to make, so do you think it was adapted properly, with regards to the character and the story? Or would you have done something different?
Todd McFarlane: Look, here's a simple question: if you're asking me if I would go darker, I'd go darker with Mary Poppins. Winnie the Pooh I'd make darker. I'm bent on dark. But that's my personality; it doesn't mean that it...
Screen Rant: Works for everyone?
Todd McFarlane: Yeah, doesn't mean it works for every character. [Laughs] So, I'd go, "Winnie the Pooh? Oh sh*t, just wait till I do what I can do with him." It doesn't matter. If I knew I was going to drop $100 million, I would try to figure out how can I creatively entertain the world and get my money back. I mean there's that component that we can't dismiss, because that's a big risk for people, and then there's probably another hundred million in marketing. So you have to sit there and go, "What's working and how is this gonna go?" And we eventually want to get Spider-Man, so, of course, we gotta get there.
Screen Rant: So you would've gone darker, personally?
Todd McFarlane: Yeah, I mean, like I said, give me Mary Poppins and I'd go R-rated. [Laughs] So, shoot.
Screen Rant: In Venom, was there anything that stuck out to you, that you felt proud of - be it a character or story element?
Todd McFarlane: Here's what was important to me. I co-created with the writer, so I was a visual guy. Right? I designed that guy to be big and bulky, and gnarly and nasty. Because he was a villain when we created him; he was a villain to Spider-Man. All I wanted to see was a biga** villain. Not villain, but just character. I want the silhouette to be big. Because... you remember Spider-Man 3?
ADVERTISING
Screen Rant: Oh yeah.
Todd McFarlane: Venom was in that too. He wasn't very big. He was, like... a little bit bigger than Topher Grace, but not much. But to me, I was like, "Come on, I just want to see my big guy." In my mind, I'm being selfish now. Nobody has to satisfy Todd. But I was just being selfish. I was there when the preview came out and I was sitting with everybody else, and I saw in the trailer he was going to be big. But I think he needs to be the biggest thing on the screen, and he needs to be able to swallow Tom Hardy and his character up. That's what the character is. He's not the size of a man; he's a big monster. And they put a visual monster on-screen. It's cool.
ADVERTISING
Screen Rant: Since you had drawn the original design, what's your opinion on the lack of a spider symbol on his chest?
Todd McFarlane: You know what, would it have been cool? Yeah, sure it would. Why they did it? I don't know if it's a legal reason or whatever else. I don't know, they had the white veins and stuff on him. To me, Venom isn't necessarily the spider on the chest, Venom is more about the eyes and the teeth. To me, they got that. So in the future are they going to be able to put the spider on it? I don't know. As a matter of fact, I talked to the director. I guess I should've asked that. I don't know if it was a legal reason or not. But it might've sent a mixed message because again they were just trying to establish him being his own character. Because one of the criticisms, you know, early on - from the fans, way before the movie - was how can this character exist without Spider-Man? To me, I thought it was a ridiculous question. Because, of course, the character can stand on his own. Of course, the character MUST stand on his own. Because if this character can only exist because of another character, then it's a half-character. It's not a fully formed character.
ADVERTISING
Screen Rant: Considering how much money Venom's made, it seems obvious that they'll make a sequel, so what would you want to see in it? Carnage or...
Todd McFarlane: Yeah, that's what I would. I think it's the next, natural move in the mythology. So, to me, when you think about Venom, you sort of think about three different things: Venom, Carnage, and Spider-Man. Those are the three, right? Been plenty of conversations about Spider-Man, so now the next logical one is Carnage, which we just saw it; they teased it. And they made a billion without him, and I go, shoot, here we go. And they hit the second movie with Eddie Brock being Venom in minute one. They don't have to now spend half a movie to get to the origin; it's done, they've set the table. They just get to rock and roll with Venom. Dude, if I'm a filmmaker, I'm going, "Thank you. Thanks for setting the table, let's rock." We get two hours of fun.
- BY MANSOOR MITHAIWALA
- – ON DEC 18, 2018
- IN INTERVIEWS
Leading up to Venom's Blu-ray release, Screen Rant had the opportunity to speak with Todd McFarlane, who co-created the character Venom for Marvel Comics in the early 1980s, along with comic book writer David Michelinie. It wasn't until 1988 that Venom became the character that everyone knows and loves in the comics, and it took several years to get the character onto the big screen.
Although Venom first appeared in live-action in Sam Raimi's Spider-Man 3, Sony Pictures spent 11 years developing a solo movie for the iconic Spider-Man villain, who's now become more of an antihero. Directed by Ruben Fleischer and starring Tom Hardy as Eddie Brock, 2018's Venom movie opened to negative reviews but became an overwhelming box office success, outgrossing every X-Men movie released and landing in the top 5 highest grossing movies of 2018 at the worldwide box office.
Related: Venom's Bad Reviews Completely Misunderstood Venom
It seems like a foregone conclusion that Venom 2 will happen with Hardy back in the role, but in the meantime, we spoke to McFarlane about the first film's depiction of Venom as a character as well as its story, and then even questioned the filmmaker, who's now working on developing his Spawn movie, about what he would like to see in a sequel.
Screen Rant: To start off, leading up to the movie's release, a lot of people were concerned that the PG-13 rating would adversely affect the character or the story - what do you think about that? Did it have an effect on anything?
ADVERTISING
Todd McFarlane: Here's what I think: somebody was putting in $100 million and looking long-term, and the moment they said it was going to be PG-13 - I don't know if you remember, people thought it might be R [and] it was tracking at $35 - $50 million opening; the moment they said it was going to be PG-13, then all of a sudden they bumped up the numbers to $55 - $75 million. So it automatically jumped. And it opened at $80 [million], so it actually beat their expectations. But somebody somewhere down the line must've calculated a little bit that says, "We've got this hybrid deal" - I don't know if any of this happened; I'm just speculating. But I'm a CEO, so [I'm] factoring in what I would have done - that I go, "We've got this hybrid deal and we want to put Spider-Man in someday. We got this deal with Disney... I don't think Disney is gonna put Spider-Man in an R movie."
So you got two choices: you can get Spider-Man to come up to R, to Venom, or Venom, that's R, comes down to PG-13. Why send mixed messages? Why don't we just basically get them both on even planes and they all play in the PG-13 world. Right? Let's just get to where we know we're going to get to eventually, and not send out a mixed message. So, okay... it's a business calculus that I think works, and creatively they were able to pull it off. And they're now looking at a billion-dollar success, so people can say, "Ah, it should've been R" or "Ah, there should've been Spider-Man," and "Ah, they should've have Carnage in the first one." They can say all of that, but if basically the fans think they missed components and it still makes a billion dollars, then I hope on my Spawn movie I make those kinds of mistakes. What happens when they actually put in those components, that some people think they missed along the way? This thing is just going to continue to grow.
ADVERTISING
Screen Rant: And you think they will put in those components?
Todd McFarlane: Oh yeah. I mean, at some point if they don't, it's not going to be for a lack of trying. Why wouldn't somebody figure out - eventually figure out how to get the mythology glued together? And it doesn't have to be... again, I'm thinking long-term business: if number one makes a billion, and then we put Carnage into number two; and number two we don't have to worry about an origin story, so now we can hit the ground running on minute one with Venom. And then number two is like super crazy; we got Woody Harrelson, we got Carnage, it's gonna be super awesome. It's gonna be cooler than Venom number one and then that goes bigger. And then you do a couple more and all of a sudden, by part three or four, or whatever, you go, "Oh, by the way, if you think all that was cool, we got this new guy coming in called Spider-Man, you may have heard of him." [Imitates explosion] And all of a sudden you're in number four and it may be the biggest one yet. Right?
So, they're starting at a billion and - to me, creatively - they've got nowhere to go but up, in terms of what they can do with this thing... they hit it. And they hit it because the fan base is so rapid for superhero movies - not necessarily just specifically Venom or Spider-Man, just superhero movies - that you can do all this and these are the results. What's the movie or TV show that's comic book related in the last six years that hasn't worked? I don't know what it is. They all work; they're all bulletproof right now. So, Sony just wants something and it's gonna run; it's gonna run for a long time now.
Screen Rant: Going back to your Spawn comment, considering Venom's success, does boost your confidence in Spawn, because Venom took several years to make, and the same...
Todd McFarlane: It doesn't boost MY confidence. I always like me. Nobody likes Todd more than me. But what it does is it helps add to the resume when you walk into a room and you go, "Hey, wanna do Spawn?" And they go, "Why would we do Spawn?" And then you go, "Oh, I also helped create this other character called Venom." And then you can... 'cause you know every single trailer is going to start with that. Right? "From the co-creator of Venom comes..." Right? Boom. And then people across the country and internationally go, "I don't know what Spam is or Sprawn is, or Spore is or whatever, but I know what Venom is." And so, I'll get value from the success of Venom by the person that was there on day one with it. Cool, I'll take it.
ADVERTISING
Screen Rant: I'm really excited for Spawn, and it's great that you're in control of that. But on Venom, it did take several years to make, so do you think it was adapted properly, with regards to the character and the story? Or would you have done something different?
Todd McFarlane: Look, here's a simple question: if you're asking me if I would go darker, I'd go darker with Mary Poppins. Winnie the Pooh I'd make darker. I'm bent on dark. But that's my personality; it doesn't mean that it...
Screen Rant: Works for everyone?
Todd McFarlane: Yeah, doesn't mean it works for every character. [Laughs] So, I'd go, "Winnie the Pooh? Oh sh*t, just wait till I do what I can do with him." It doesn't matter. If I knew I was going to drop $100 million, I would try to figure out how can I creatively entertain the world and get my money back. I mean there's that component that we can't dismiss, because that's a big risk for people, and then there's probably another hundred million in marketing. So you have to sit there and go, "What's working and how is this gonna go?" And we eventually want to get Spider-Man, so, of course, we gotta get there.
Screen Rant: So you would've gone darker, personally?
Todd McFarlane: Yeah, I mean, like I said, give me Mary Poppins and I'd go R-rated. [Laughs] So, shoot.
Screen Rant: In Venom, was there anything that stuck out to you, that you felt proud of - be it a character or story element?
Todd McFarlane: Here's what was important to me. I co-created with the writer, so I was a visual guy. Right? I designed that guy to be big and bulky, and gnarly and nasty. Because he was a villain when we created him; he was a villain to Spider-Man. All I wanted to see was a biga** villain. Not villain, but just character. I want the silhouette to be big. Because... you remember Spider-Man 3?
ADVERTISING
Screen Rant: Oh yeah.
Todd McFarlane: Venom was in that too. He wasn't very big. He was, like... a little bit bigger than Topher Grace, but not much. But to me, I was like, "Come on, I just want to see my big guy." In my mind, I'm being selfish now. Nobody has to satisfy Todd. But I was just being selfish. I was there when the preview came out and I was sitting with everybody else, and I saw in the trailer he was going to be big. But I think he needs to be the biggest thing on the screen, and he needs to be able to swallow Tom Hardy and his character up. That's what the character is. He's not the size of a man; he's a big monster. And they put a visual monster on-screen. It's cool.
ADVERTISING
Screen Rant: Since you had drawn the original design, what's your opinion on the lack of a spider symbol on his chest?
Todd McFarlane: You know what, would it have been cool? Yeah, sure it would. Why they did it? I don't know if it's a legal reason or whatever else. I don't know, they had the white veins and stuff on him. To me, Venom isn't necessarily the spider on the chest, Venom is more about the eyes and the teeth. To me, they got that. So in the future are they going to be able to put the spider on it? I don't know. As a matter of fact, I talked to the director. I guess I should've asked that. I don't know if it was a legal reason or not. But it might've sent a mixed message because again they were just trying to establish him being his own character. Because one of the criticisms, you know, early on - from the fans, way before the movie - was how can this character exist without Spider-Man? To me, I thought it was a ridiculous question. Because, of course, the character can stand on his own. Of course, the character MUST stand on his own. Because if this character can only exist because of another character, then it's a half-character. It's not a fully formed character.
ADVERTISING
Screen Rant: Considering how much money Venom's made, it seems obvious that they'll make a sequel, so what would you want to see in it? Carnage or...
Todd McFarlane: Yeah, that's what I would. I think it's the next, natural move in the mythology. So, to me, when you think about Venom, you sort of think about three different things: Venom, Carnage, and Spider-Man. Those are the three, right? Been plenty of conversations about Spider-Man, so now the next logical one is Carnage, which we just saw it; they teased it. And they made a billion without him, and I go, shoot, here we go. And they hit the second movie with Eddie Brock being Venom in minute one. They don't have to now spend half a movie to get to the origin; it's done, they've set the table. They just get to rock and roll with Venom. Dude, if I'm a filmmaker, I'm going, "Thank you. Thanks for setting the table, let's rock." We get two hours of fun.
you never seen the dark knight rises with Bane. bruh..
bruh do yourself a favor and peep that shit..
the fight scenes with batman got me into this comic movie shit...
right in time for black panther and infinity wars now these bgol muthafuckas got me hype
for that endgame shit...
but chea peep dark knight rises bruh... get some popcorn sit back.. and enjoy a dope ass super hero flick..
fuck batman tho bane was that dude!!!
You talking about the wrong catwoman smh
huh...?
I didnt see where cat woman was even mentioned...
I just thought he meant he didnt peep marvel movies in general....
did I miss something bruh??