It’s been a hard week for fans of the big screen superhero genre. Henry Cavill, the DCEU’s picture-perfect Superman, was fired from the blockbuster mega-franchise in lieu of extending his existing contract. Warner Bros officially started filming the first of their three(?) non-canonical Joker solo movies — this one starring Joaquin Phoenix — confirming beyond a shadow of a doubt that they really don’t have any idea what the Hell it is that they’re doing and that any potential upswing in movie quality (via hopefuls Aquaman, Shazam! and Wonder Woman 1984) will be short-lived aberrations. And the long-rumored changes to Venom, Sony’s Spider-Man-less Spider-Man spinoff (that may or may not somehow also be a sequel to last year’s Alien knockoff Life), will be rated PG-13, rather than its time-and-time again promised hard R rating.
Although probably inevitable, given the movie studio’s many rankling issues that have beleaguered its bottom line for years, it comes as a low blow to franchise fans that had anticipating everything that could be done with this particular franchise, if only given the narrative leniency that an R rating would allow for. After all, despite being based in the four-color panels of Marvel Comics, Venom always possessed an insidious edge that was unlike anything else that the comic publisher put forth in its pages.
In the most explicit terms possible, Venom was not Spider-Man. He was his perfect, direct opposite: an alien supervillain born of his most self-serving and violent tendencies. Possessing his every power (and then some), he often acted as Spidey’s darkest half: a frequent supervillain and occasional anti-hero that killed, maimed and generally did whatever the Hell he wanted to do at any given point of time.
It only made sense that a movie based on the character would be rated R, especially in the wake of Deadpool (2016), Logan (2017) and Deadpool 2 (2018) proving the economic and artistic viability of that rating within the genre. Then again, it only made sense that a Venom movie would prominently feature Peter Parker, to whom his origins are inseparably tangled. But here we are: not Spider-Man, no R rating. Funny how that works.
It has been obvious to anybody willing to own up to it that Venom was never going to be a good movie. Even ignoring the absence of character-defining nemesis Spider-Man and Sony’s confused stance on whether or not their movie ties into the MCU (spoiler alert: it doesn’t), it was always going to be terrible. The title character’s design looks like a wet, roughly man-shaped turd who gargles his lines through a mouthful of phlegm. The special effects, even as of the release of the most recent trailer, oscillate between unfinished and hopelessly inept. The pallet-swapped villain (a very dark gray instead of a swampy black) promises to be visually indistinguishable from the protagonist he’s invariably going to throw down with in the film’s third-act climax. And I still have no idea what Tom Hardy is supposed to sound like when dressed down in his Eddie Brock persona.
The PG-13 Rating — which ensures that all of the best violence, that the movie’s been selling itself with for months, will be cut down to virtually nothing — merely confirms this. And when the film is eventually shaved down to as close to 90 minutes as Sony can get it, so as to cram exactly as many screenings into a day as possible and thus wring the film of every last scent that it’s worth, it will merely act to confirm it again. Venom is going to be terrible, and there’s nothing that any of us (nor, as it turns out, Sony) can do about it.
Not sure if you are ignorant or just following the trend, but I’ve been a reader of Spider-Man comics for from 1980 to 2000, and Venom was NEVER the most violent character in the books. Venom TALKED about eating people, but that never happened and most of his murders were via asphyxiation using the suit’s tendrils. You want gore and bloodshed, I suggest you look towards Punisher, Wolverine, Deadpool, etc.
Brock is a college educated, award winning journalist (unlike you), not the Hulk or Sabretooth. Is Venom violent? Yes. Is he a rampaging unstoppable whirlwind of death? No. Venom is not the “opposite of Spider-man”. In fact, Venom tries to avoid innocent death just as much as Spidey. Venom goes out of his way to stage battles with Spider-Man where there are fewest innocent bystanders. Point is, PG-13 is EXACTLY where Venom, and ALL superhero movies, SHOULD be. Even Deadpool should have been toned down for a PG-13 release. Why? Comics and their movies should be for kids. Unfortunately, the movie, comics, and toy industries are letting men get away with not growing up. They perpetuate the manchild behavior so we get a bunch of whiny, entitled fools like the writer of this article.
Hopefully this movie does really well, so clowns like you will finally realize that not EVERYTHING has to be the BS Nolan universe. Movies CAN be fun!
Calm down Webz. Let’s back this up a tad too, since I’ve been a reader of Spider-Man in the past as well. Eddie Brock was NOT an award-winning journalist, at least not so much that he was lauded in the comics for it, and in fact he was disgraced after Spider-Man caught a villain that Brock had apparently exposed. Even in the ill-fated Spider-Man 3 with Topher Grace he was exposed as a fraud.
Also, Venom has in fact eaten people. There was a point in the comics where he was actually eating Asgardians. But aside from that you’re right about one thing, he’s NOT the most violent Spider-Man villain, that distinction belongs to Carnage, since even Deadpool tends to need a reason to kill people, whereas Carnage does not. You might want to pick up a few back issues and keep reading Webz, and unless you can do our job then please take the negativity elsewhere.
Happy Trails
Write for a nameless, low rent blog? A chimp with a keyboard can do that. Just read the author of this post, or any other articles here. Also, in the comics, Brock repeatedly has mentioned his ranking in the journalistic world. He was a top investigative reporter. Respected by his peers and others in the industry. Even Peter Parker, a nobody photographer for a tabloid (still better than TVO) knew who he was. He was basically the Marvel Comics version of Bob Woodward.
Also, the movie crew has repeatedly said the movie is based on 1990’s Venom. Particularly Lethal Protector. Venom in that timeframe did NOT eat people. That was added later by talentless hacks that could probably still write better than TVO authors.
The problem isn’t so much the errors of journalism. That’s all over the internet. Journalism is dead, It’s the fact that morons are writing off films, like Venom. and giving Oscars to others, like Black Panther, before they are released. Rather than trying to play god, why not objectively WAIT and see how the market decides the movies will perform?
All you manchildren are sooooo butthurt that Sony DARES make a Marvel movie without Marvel that you’ve already judged and executed it before it came out.
It’s sad and telling when Donald Trump has more integrity than you.
If this site is so low rent then what are you doing here? Are you a writer or one of the many that believe their knowledge is greater because they’ve read comic books and watched TV? Just curious.
Thank google news for the site hit. Saw the pretentious headline and decided to find out who thought they were god of what is or isn’t terrible. And yes, I’ve been a published writer by more than low rent blogs. Anyone with a cpu and an internet connection can blog. But I’m done with this discussion. The writer of the article is too chicken to defend his piece of crap, and Tom is just another low rent blogger free of real accomplishment. Enjoy your tiny pond, big fishies.
Happy writing then Webz, hopefully someone will hear of you eventually…