Venom Sony Revives 'Venom' Solo Movie - Part 4

[Lantern Venom]

2 weeks from today---the Lethal Protector arrives!

 

[Ihmago]

The Venom we see in the comics now, while having his own adventures, still ties back to his origin with Spider-Man.

How does Venom current adventures ties back to his origin with Spiderman? 'cause i'm reading them and im not seeing it. He doesn't hate Spiderman anymore, he doesn't even know who spiderman is anymore.

I understand the hype from some posters in this thread, but you all have to realize - this is a Sony Pictures superhero movie at the end of the day. The studio that produced the clunky turds that were the Amazing Spider-Man films. Temper your expectations a notch or two and I'm sure you can enjoy a bit of it, but Sony set the review embargo so close to the release date for a reason.

Oh you dont have to reminds us.. everytime someone say it's excited about the Venom movie the next 20 comments are about how he shouldnt be 'cause its made by Sony and how much its gonna suck.

 

[Ihmago]

They were all Sony made. SM3 was also Raimi made just like SM1 and SM2. there is no pattern that can be blamed on one individual depending on when something is good or bad.

The reasoning here seems to be this: When a movie is bad, it's because of Sony but when it's good, it's thanks to the Director, and Sony had absolutely nothing to do with it.

 

[GuestStar2004]

I haven't followed the History of Venom but i am almost certain there has been a dozen different takes on Venom.

 

[ehh]

How does Venom current adventures ties back to his origin with Spiderman? 'cause i'm reading them and im not seeing it. He doesn't hate Spiderman anymore, he doesn't even know who spiderman is anymore.

Because this iteration of Venom originated with Peter Parker? Why are you having a hard time understanding that?

The reasoning here seems to be this: When a movie is bad, it's because of Sony but when it's good, it's thanks to the Director, and Sony had absolutely nothing to do with it.

Uh... no. Sony had very little to do with the success of Homecoming other than making a deal with marvel. In fact, why do you think they made a deal with Marvel in the first place? They were failing with the character. Obviously there are multiple factors in why a movie failed or succeeded, but we can see a trend with Sony. The more influence they have over the film, the worse it does.

 

[ehh]

I haven't followed the History of Venom but i am almost certain there has been a dozen different takes on Venom.

All of those takes on Venom (using Eddie Brock) still tie his origin to Peter Parker. Then you have versions like "Agent Venom" which is Flash Thompson.

 

[Infinity9999x]

The dialogue and everything still just seems kind of ham-handed.

"The guy that you work for is an evil person"

Also how bluntly Eddie just segues into accusing Drake of killing people, and how bluntly Drake threatens Eddie, presumably still on camera.

It just all feels on-the-nose.

And yea, Hardy's accent sounds kind of garbled. He's done American accents before that sounded better than this.

I'm no accent expert, but I have had to learn quite a few, and I find the criticism of Hardy's accent fairly silly. As I've pointed out before, most people have no idea what an "authentic" accent sounds like to begin with, and second, as someone who currently lives in NYC, I have heard people speak like that. There's tons of people who have muddled accents/dialects for a variety of reasons. Speech impediments, old injuries, or just personal history. They moved multiple times to various regions during their formative years, they were best friends from people who grew up in another area etc.

I don't have really any faith in this film. But when I see people start going off on the dialect, then it's fairly clear that I think people are just looking for something to tear down.

 

[Ihmago]

Uh... no. Sony had very little to do with the success of Homecoming other than making a deal with marvel. In fact, why do you think they made a deal with Marvel in the first place? They were failing with the character. Obviously there are multiple factors in why a movie failed or succeeded, but we can see a trend with Sony. The more influence they have over the film, the worse it does.

Who said anything about Homecoming???

 

[GuestStar2004]

I think the point is Sony suck and marvel is awesome.

 

[ironwez20]

How does Venom current adventures ties back to his origin with Spiderman? 'cause i'm reading them and im not seeing it. He doesn't hate Spiderman anymore, he doesn't even know who spiderman is anymore.



Oh you dont have to reminds us.. everytime someone say it's excited about the Venom movie the next 20 comments are about how he shouldnt be 'cause its made by Sony and how much its gonna suck.

Yea so? This is a venom origin movie. That means it should tell the story of why venom is who he is . But they are skipping that all together and ignoring why he’s venom in the first place .
The only reason he became a lethal protector is cause of the deal he made with Spider-Man to leave him alone but he eventually cane back. His whole existence is and always will be heavily connected to Spider-Man.

And Sony destroyed people’s trust in there franchise so of course people are skeptical. Like I keep telling sm7. Sony can’t be trusted after 3 **** ups. They almost ruined the brand and now they are rushing out venom after they made a deal with marvel. Sure they can show pretty trailers and all that but they did it before. If the execution is bad then it doesn’t matter and judging by that clip the dialogue is pretty bad

 

[ironwez20]

I think the point is Sony suck and marvel is awesome.

Nope. I got one could care less about the mcu before spidey joined. But Sony does suck. They are not a good studio to handle the character.

 

[Infinity9999x]

Yea so? This is a venom origin movie. That means it should tell the story of why venom is who he is . But they are skipping that all together and ignoring why he’s venom in the first place .
The only reason he became a lethal protector is cause of the deal he made with Spider-Man to leave him alone but he eventually cane back. His whole existence is and always will be heavily connected to Spider-Man.

And Sony destroyed people’s trust in there franchise so of course people are skeptical. Like I keep telling sm7. Sony can’t be trusted after 3 **** ups. They almost ruined the brand and now they are rushing out venom after they made a deal with marvel. Sure they can show pretty trailers and all that but they did it before. If the execution is bad then it doesn’t matter and judging by that clip the dialogue is pretty bad

The assessment of the film so far I agree with. The trailers aren't inspiring much hope in me. But, to be fair, I think trailers are about as helpful as say...a horoscope. Sometimes they offer information that happens to be useful, most of the time they're just fluff. I've seen too many bad films with great trailers, and too many great films with meh or cruddy trailers to really care what a trailer shows me anymore.

However, I disagree that Venom, by nature, HAS to have an origin that connects him to Spider-man. The original comic book origin was horrible. Like, really, really, reallllllllllllllllly stupid. It was one of the laziest origins of a villain I had read. Most people don't realize how bad it is because the 90's toon origin of Venom has more or less become the accepted baseline of the character, when that cartoon actually went leaps and bounds ahead of what the comics did to make Brock more than a paper thin character.

So the idea that someone would come along and completely re-write the origin is something I'm fine with. It's happened before to great effect. Mr. Freeze was a joke until TAS completely overhauled him. The problem I have isn't the approach, it's that I don't trust the creative team at Sony to be able to deliver a quality product.

 

[Ihmago]

I think the point is Sony suck and marvel is awesome.

yeah, i mean im not a Sony fanboy or anything, i think Spiderman 3 and Amazing Spider-man 2 were awfull movies and like i've said before, even though i like what i've seen so far about Venom my expectations for the movie are not that high. But they've made good movies before (Spiderman 2 is still one of my favourites CBM ever), maybe they can do it again.
I also think its funny when ppl say "Sony is doing it for the money", of course they are doing it for the money!! Do they really believe other studios make comic book movies out of love the characters? 'cause that's delusional.

 

[Infinity9999x]

yeah, i mean im not a Sony fanboy or anything, i think Spiderman 3 and Amazing Spider-man 2 were awfull movies and like i've said before, even though i like what i've seen so far about Venom my expectations for the movie are not that high. But they've made good movies before (Spiderman 2 is still one of my favourites CBM ever), maybe they can do it again.
I also think its funny when ppl say "Sony is doing it for the money", of course they are doing it for the money!! Do they really believe other studios make comic book movies out of love the characters? 'cause that's delusional.

This is true. Disney didn't acquire Marvel studios because Iger simply loves him some Iron Man. They want to make money.

The difference is in how they view this investment. Sony has proved, unfortunately, that Spider-man 1 and 2 are exceptions to the rule when it comes to how they try to cultivate a franchise. Disney/Marvel put the work in to build a shared universe, because they realized that maintaining brand quality will equal more money over a longer period of time. And Disney realized that, to do this, they had to establish a level of consistent quality, and naturally that then lead them to hire people that they believed understood the level of quality the brand they had needed to operate at. Which essentially equates to hiring people who love the property out of a desire that they will handle the property the best and make you more money over a long period.

Sony has not shown this foresight. They've proven to be incredibly reactionary. (WB has as well). In fact, nearly every other company which has tried to establish a shared universe has shown reactionary thinking when it comes to their brands. They saw the Avengers money and all went "we want that!" Without realizing that Disney understood you needed to earn that. You don't get to Avengers money without establishing the quality of your brand and building the audience excitement for a shared universe. All of Sony's actions post SM2 have shown them to go for the quick buck.

And that's what most people are pinpointing when they say Sony is "only in it for the money." Because you're right, all studios are only in it for the money. But Sony is in it for the easy buck. The quick buck. They've never understood that they should be looking to build a franchise that has consistent quality, because it will equal more money. They took all the wrong lessons from what Marvel has done, because they're only looking at the massive payout from Avengers. When they should be looking at not the one gross of any one Marvel film, but how much Marvel has made over a decade. Because that kind of thinking gets them to focus on quality.

Unfortunately, I don't think they have the right people to allow this kind of thought to happen.

 

[Venom'sDad]

I'm glad to hear someone outside of myself say, " they don't mind the approach at Venom's origin...versus Sony's trust factor".

I've been a staunch advocate of how zvenom orgin can be effectively done, without Spiderman, initially....while trying to convey my understanding of what Sony is trying to build here, even though i truely wish they would have seeked help from some of writers that at one time, if not currently, with Marvel to help build their Universe.

 

[Infinity9999x]

I'm glad to hear someone outside of myself say, " they don't mind the approach at Venom's origin...versus Sony's trust factor".

I've been a staunch advocate of how zvenom orgin can be effectively done, without Spiderman, initially....while trying to convey my understanding of what Sony is trying to build here, even though i truely wish they would have seeked help from some of writers that at one time, if not currently, with Marvel to help build their current universe

Yeah, it’s what I’ve been saying for a while. Venom’s comic origins have always been incredibly flimsy. It would be one thing if the movie writers were ignoring years of great material, but that’s not the case.

The approach to this film, while not the first track I would take in an ideal world, is not an inherently flawed concept. It’s the ability of Sony to execute even a basic story to a level of quality that I sincerely doubt, because of the mentality I outlined above. They haven’t exhibited the desire to put the work in to maintain their film brands. And it shows. There’s a reason their company has been struggling the past few years.

 

[SM71]

See, if anything IMO, Disney/Marvel show more care for/interest in money, in the fact that they don't necessarily care about making incredible, transcendent movies, only movies that are good-decent enough, follow the blueprint, and expand the 'brand.' They/that may be more forward thinking, planned out, ect., but to me it's forward thinking about future revenue and BO. They don't take chances, they don't do anything crazy or original or inspiring. They make good movies, and basically churn out BO guarantees, not unique, artistic film achievements.

This is my main gripe about Marvel. They get all this praise (which they deserve regarding certain things), but it's praise for the wrong things. They essentially get lauded for 'playing it safe,' something Feige has literally admitted to, which I think is an extremely dangerous precedent to set. I'm all for praising them, but not when it comes at the expense of other studios getting slammed for trying to do anything different. I get that these other studios may sometimes make bad movies, but it's usually more from the result of trying to do something new or different or unique, basically trying too hard. And I think that's bad for the industry.

It's why I really hate the 'quick buck' criticism that gets levied on other studios all the time

TASM movies may have been bad, but they really did try to shoot for the stars.. They assembled all-star casts, all star crews, and Hans Zimmer even put together an all-star band for the score/soundtrack for 2. While I personally loved those films, I understand why they're widely hated/disliked, but it wasn't from Sony looking for a 'cash-grab.' It was the result of the creators/filmmakers trying so hard to make something great (you can see the passion in those two movies, esp. from Webb and Garfield) that it just didn't all come together apparently.

Sony has been trying to make this Venom movie for a decade+, so I don't understand how it's a "quick cash grab"

 

[AndrewGilkison]

See, if anything IMO, Disney/Marvel show more care for/interest in money, in the fact that they don't necessarily care about making incredible, transcendent movies, only movies that are good-decent enough, follow the blueprint, and expand the 'brand.' They/that may be more forward thinking, planned out, ect., but to me it's forward thinking about future revenue and BO. They don't take chances, they don't do anything crazy or original or inspiring. They make good movies, and basically churn out BO guarantees, not unique, artistic film achievements.

This is my main gripe about Marvel. They get all this praise (which they deserve regarding certain things), but it's praise for the wrong things. They essentially get lauded for 'playing it safe,' something Feige has literally admitted to, which I think is an extremely dangerous precedent to set. I'm all for praising them, but not when it comes at the expense of other studios getting slammed for trying to do anything different. I get that these other studios may sometimes make bad movies, but it's usually more from the result of trying to do something new or different or unique, basically trying too hard. And I think that's bad for the industry.

It's why I really hate the 'quick buck' criticism that gets levied on other studios all the time

TASM movies may have been bad, but they really did try to shoot for the stars.. They assembled all-star casts, all star crews, and Hans Zimmer even put together an all-star band for the score/soundtrack for 2. While I personally loved those films, I understand why they're widely hated/disliked, but it wasn't from Sony looking for a 'cash-grab.' It was the result of the creators/filmmakers trying so hard to make something great (you can see the passion in those two movies, esp. from Webb and Garfield) that it just didn't all come together apparently.

Sony has been trying to make this Venom movie for a decade+, so I don't understand how it's a "quick cash grab"

The TASM movies had more ambition than movies like Infinity War and Black Panther? On what planet is that remotely true?

If any franchise was trying to do "the Marvel formula" it was Sony with the TASM movies. They spent the majority of ASM2 setting up spinoff movies like Sinister Six because they were trying to ape a popular formula after seeing how successful someone else was with it. Where is the innovation in that? I don't get it.

They've been trying to make a Venom movie for years (or Avi Arad has been trying to make it for years, rather) because of the "popularity" of the character from the 90's, not because of any great story to be told. Have we seen anything "innovative" about this movie in what they've shown so far? "Evil corporation doing bad experiments on people" is as formulaic as it gets.

 

[ironwez20]

See, if anything IMO, Disney/Marvel show more care for/interest in money, in the fact that they don't necessarily care about making incredible, transcendent movies, only movies that are good-decent enough, follow the blueprint, and expand the 'brand.' They/that may be more forward thinking, planned out, ect., but to me it's forward thinking about future revenue and BO. They don't take chances, they don't do anything crazy or original or inspiring. They make good movies, and basically churn out BO guarantees, not unique, artistic film achievements.

This is my main gripe about Marvel. They get all this praise (which they deserve regarding certain things), but it's praise for the wrong things. They essentially get lauded for 'playing it safe,' something Feige has literally admitted to, which I think is an extremely dangerous precedent to set. I'm all for praising them, but not when it comes at the expense of other studios getting slammed for trying to do anything different. I get that these other studios may sometimes make bad movies, but it's usually more from the result of trying to do something new or different or unique, basically trying too hard. And I think that's bad for the industry.

It's why I really hate the 'quick buck' criticism that gets levied on other studios all the time

TASM movies may have been bad, but they really did try to shoot for the stars.. They assembled all-star casts, all star crews, and Hans Zimmer even put together an all-star band for the score/soundtrack for 2. While I personally loved those films, I understand why they're widely hated/disliked, but it wasn't from Sony looking for a 'cash-grab.' It was the result of the creators/filmmakers trying so hard to make something great (you can see the passion in those two movies, esp. from Webb and Garfield) that it just didn't all come together apparently.

Sony has been trying to make this Venom movie for a decade+, so I don't understand how it's a "quick cash grab"

What are u talking about? The amazing Spider-Man movies were made purely for money and no love was put into them at all they made those films to keep to the rights. The second film was even worse they tried to make a billion dollar film but failed. They should of listened to the fans and did spidey 4 or mcu reboot but they were so greedy.

And yea they’ve been trying to get this film off the ground but why now? When they made a deal with marvel. They no venom is popular and it’s clearly a cash grab if you can’t see that I don’t know what to tell you. Everything about the movie is rushed so that they can establish venom. The asm2 was as coperate as it gets. Setting up films that nobody wanted and trying to copy the marvel formula. They didn’t care about shooting for the stars.

Disney has and had a plan like them or not they know what they want. Sony just like WB saw what marvel was doing and said “ dur let’s make a universe with one character”

 

[ironwez20]

Also these are the same people who are making films from obscure spidey characters and villains to create a universe comprised around one character. To say Sony isn’t trying to get money is idiotic. They could care less about the property they have. These idiots made an emoji movie

 

[SM71]

Ha alright. I disagree, but I concede. While I still believe Disney/Marvel is just as greedy, if not more, than Sony, you've all provided enough support for your case

And Starlord that's a dopee avatar. I thought the 'reveal' they did today was pretty cool

 

[SM71]

What are u talking about? The amazing Spider-Man movies were made purely for money and no love was put into them at all they made those films to keep to the rights. The second film was even worse they tried to make a billion dollar film but failed. They should of listened to the fans and did spidey 4 or mcu reboot but they were so greedy.

And yea they’ve been trying to get this film off the ground but why now? When they made a deal with marvel. They no venom is popular and it’s clearly a cash grab if you can’t see that I don’t know what to tell you. Everything about the movie is rushed so that they can establish venom. The asm2 was as coperate as it gets. Setting up films that nobody wanted and trying to copy the marvel formula. They didn’t care about shooting for the stars.

Disney has and had a plan like them or not they know what they want. Sony just like WB saw what marvel was doing and said “ dur let’s make a universe with one character”

Ok last thing. While the existence of those movies may have been credited strictly to Sony needing to keep the rights, you're crazy if you don't at least think the people/team Sony hired to make those movies didn't pour a ton of effort, heart and passion into them. AG basically cried talking about playing the role, Webb was incredibly passionate and thoughtful about everything, especially the Peter/Gwen relationship, and Zimmer pulled out every stop imaginable to make one of the greatest scores he could (to which I still think he succeeded, the music in that film is spectacular). The finished product may not have lived up to their expectations, but I'm so sick of hearing the blatant hate against a film where regardless of motive, people put their hearts into it. I guess bashing Sony is alright though, I just really liked the creative team

 

[Infinity9999x]

Ok last thing. While the existence of those movies may have been credited strictly to Sony needing to keep the rights, you're crazy if you don't at least think the people/team Sony hired to make those movies didn't pour a ton of effort, heart and passion into them. AG basically cried talking about playing the role, Webb was incredibly passionate and thoughtful about everything, especially the Peter/Gwen relationship, and Zimmer pulled out every stop imaginable to make one of the greatest scores he could (to which I still think he succeeded, the music in that film is spectacular). The finished product may not have lived up to their expectations, but I'm so sick of hearing the blatant hate against a film where regardless of motive, people put their hearts into it. I guess bashing Sony is alright though, I just really liked the creative team

I don't deny that the immediate creatives love the property, even with ASM. The problem is from the creative influence from the higher ups at Sony. The people who have control over the direction of the content. The forced "we need to worldbuild!" attitude is one of the big problems with ASM2.

I agree that Disney is just as greedy as Sony. They're simply smarter. Instead of chasing one giant box office for one film, they're chasing consistency. Because they knew that consistently putting out a solid product will lead to greater profit over a longer period of time.

To put it in simplest terms: They didn't rush. Sony, WB, they did, and have. And that's why they've continued to fail.

 

[ironwez20]

Ok last thing. While the existence of those movies may have been credited strictly to Sony needing to keep the rights, you're crazy if you don't at least think the people/team Sony hired to make those movies didn't pour a ton of effort, heart and passion into them. AG basically cried talking about playing the role, Webb was incredibly passionate and thoughtful about everything, especially the Peter/Gwen relationship, and Zimmer pulled out every stop imaginable to make one of the greatest scores he could (to which I still think he succeeded, the music in that film is spectacular). The finished product may not have lived up to their expectations, but I'm so sick of hearing the blatant hate against a film where regardless of motive, people put their hearts into it. I guess bashing Sony is alright though, I just really liked the creative team

So? People say pretty words and put passion behind a film all the time. Look at the new Star Wars film. Yea they worked hard but doesn’t change the fact the choices they made suck and it was headlined by a horrible studio and producers. The creative team may of had good intentions but the studio made the worst Spider-Man franchise to come out in recent years. Yea it could been different but it ended up being trash cause of the people on top being greedy. Stop with the comparisons to Disney. Disney had a sound plan . Sony has no plan. Disney said “ let’s make money by building up our characters”

Sony “ let’s throw everything we have in the movie to build a congested universe with one character “

 

[Infinity9999x]

So? People say pretty words and put passion behind a film all the time. Look at the new Star Wars film. Yea they worked hard but doesn’t change the fact the choices they made suck and it was headlined by a horrible studio and producers. The creative team may of had good intentions but the studio made the worst Spider-Man franchise to come out in recent years. Yea it could been different but it ended up being trash cause of the people on top being greedy.

Ehhh, Star Wars being a different beast, as the idea that those creative decisions being poor ones is far more divisive. It wasn’t a TASM2 or SM3 situation. I also think it’s fairly rich to say that it’s headlined by a horrible studio, when Disney also headlines Marvel....so yeah. Not the best example.

Again, the point that all studios are greedy is a valid one. What made Sony fail was that they were greedy and lazy. They didn’t want to put in the required work to get to where Marvel was.

With Star Wars, they’re more guilty of poor organization. They weren’t trying to rush a shared universe, they just didn’t plan their films as thoroughly as they should. That’s not indicative of greed so much as an outdated approach to the films. The way they’ve made these films has been similar to how George did the OT. He was famously deciding on major plot points as he made those films. However, audiences have higher expections now, and that approach hasn’t served them the best.