Venom

Venom has had a really hard path to getting made. 

There's the obvious, significant issue that he doesn't exist as part of the MCU where our current Spider-man/Peter Parker exists. Currently there's a very complicated agreement around that character looming over Marvel (and Tom Holland) but I wouldn't be surprised if Disney outright buys the character given how successful he's been. 

So in a world where Sony's last Spider-man film was The Amazing Spider-Man 2 (which I enjoyed more than most), there's now Venom -- stuck and unable to mention the character at all, but still representing one of the web-swinger's most iconic villains.

Even for someone as well-versed in all of this understanding as myself, it still confuses me and I'm unsure of where they'll go with it in the future but hey, I'm not the creative director at Sony, am I?

Along the path to creation, Venom earned some good will with fans by announcing Tom Hardy as the titular character, Eddie Brock, and all but promising a violent, horror-esque R-rated flick. 

Then they released the first trailer WAY too soon and it all began to fall apart. That first trailer was one of the most forgettable I've ever seen and many people couldn't garner any excitement for it until Venom was actually revealed. Shortly around then, it was announced the film would be PG-13 and despite the character looking great, the wind was out of their sails again. 

Unfortunately for us all, and for whatever non-Spider-man-Spider-universe Sony was trying to create, the film is just as troubled as its path to release. 

For starters, this feels like a film that exists in a vacuum of time, specifically one before the MCU was created. Some people like to s**t on the MCU, but it's films like Venom that should remind them of what many superhero films were like before. It feels decidedly early 2000s which plays oddly (and almost nostalgically). A good reason for this is the story, courtesy of no fewer than 5 writers, where it feels nonsensical and nearly non-existent. We don't even meet our true villain, Riot, until there's only about 20 minutes left. It's an origin story of sorts, but it begins to paint a clear picture that there are distinct parts of the film that are its best, and others that are flat-out worthless. 

So that's what Bane looked like without the mask...

Additionally, our villain is pretty awful. I don't think that blame lands solely on Riz Ahmed's shoulders (though I do think he was the wrong casting choice), but more so his demeanor. I never got the sense he was a true villain who was capable of killing people, but still just felt like an actor assigned to a job. Furthermore, his "view" of himself escalates quickly from a tech guru trying to find a breakthrough cure to "I'm a god and the savior of mankind." He's also quite generic which usually needs a strong group of heroes to balance out or hide. Ahmed isn't the only poor casting choice as nearly every person other than Hardy feels off. Michelle Williams looks pained to be in each scene, smiling through gritted teeth, Jenny Slate feels misplaced and on the precipice of providing a good joke that never comes, and Reid Scott (VEEP) is...well...actually I enjoyed his character. He's fine. 

CGI ripped straight from 2002!

Much like the story and villain, Venom's action is lame too, especially at the end. There are moments of awesome sprinkled throughout - mainly in a motorcycle chase - but it's clear that these filmmakers don't have the inventiveness or deft touch behind the camera that exists in the MCU. Outside of a few moments, it's the typical SMASH! BANG! POW! that drives me nuts in films like this, and even worse is that it's not filmed all that well nor does it have great CGI. Speaking of early 2000s, the CGI feels similar here with obvious greenscreen in moments and ultra-fake looking versions of Ahmed and Hardy within their symbioats (sp?). Oh and that supposed R-rating? It would have helped here as there are many moments that feel "edited" down to avoid blood/gore/etc.

If you're this far into the review, you may surprised to learn that I actually didn't hate Venom. Shockingly, it somehow almost trips into being entertaining pretty consistently, especially once Venom+Brock find one another. It's far funnier than I would have imagined and those moments represent probably the only "good" parts of the script. The interaction between a fully-dedicated Tom Hardy and Venom are weird, odd, but oddly endearing too. Hardy was the only perfect casting choice here and I fear that without him, Venom would have been an utter disaster. He's got some great comedic timing and just the right amount of "fish out of water" behavior to make this situation work. Him in full-Venom mode also looks great and the voice of Venom himself booms loudly in theater speakers, equal parts menacing and funny when it needs to be. Pair all that "good" stuff with an out-of-place pretty darn good original score and theme and you've got all the elements to save a movie from utter disaster. 

Cant lie -- this is pretty awesome

Venom ends up being a very weird half success/half failure. Parts of it are utterly awful and stuck in a time when superhero films deserved to be scoffed at. Other parts of it make me want to see more of this character and Hardy, especially in the MCU and interacting with Tom Holland. There's enough to "save" here and move forward with, but it wouldn't ever require me to watch this film again. 

CONS

• Nonsense, useless story created by at least 5 people
• Poor casting choices outside of Hardy
• Bad/terrible CGI for everything other than Venom
• Boring and cliched climax
• Mostly forgettable action -- often poorly filmed too
• R-rating would have helped

PROS

• Surprisingly pretty consistently funny
• Tom Hardy was a perfect casting choice
• Venom and Brock's "chemistry" and banter is fun and deserves to be explored further (in the MCU? *fingers crossed)
• Venom looks and sounds great
• A couple cool action bits. Literally. Two. 
• Better-than-expected original score

Rath's Review Score | 6/10