A Venom movie without Spider-Man?
That's like a Joker movie without Batman.
A Lex Luther movie without Superman.
A Ghidorah movie without Godzilla.
You get the idea.
That's like a Joker movie without Batman.
A Lex Luther movie without Superman.
A Ghidorah movie without Godzilla.
You get the idea.
I just read everything on Wikipedia about this film, and I really don't buy him suddenly turning good. Venom has NEVER been a good guy, EVER. He was ALWAYS out for himself. Plus, you can't really get behind a creature as repulsive and disgusting as that.
shareI have no problem with him being good but I think it doesn't work very well unless he's bad first. The most interesting thing about this character seems like it would be his journey to find a moral compass. That's barely an issue in this one and what little is presented is done so comically.
shareDoes that include the Lethal Protector series? Because while Venom was by no means a less violent character, he and Eddie famously decided to protect the innocent in that arc; that series served as the main inspiration for this film btw. Furthermore, there has been several stories where Venom ends up teaming up with the good guys (a bunch of times with his archenemy, Spider-Man) in order to bring down worser villains. Sure, Venom rarely has trouble going back to his old ways, but... he’s NEVER been good? That is incorrect. Admittedly he cares about himself more than anyone. Nevertheless, he has done some good deeds and, at times, has been selfless.
When it comes to the film, granted it would’ve made a lot more sense if this Venom was first made a villain for his big screen debut. But due to certain constraints, creative decisions, the fact that the movie is based on the aforementioned Lethal Protector ... we got a Venom whom, thanks to Eddie, set out to defend good people from the start. So yes, they changed up his origins for his debut solo film and wanted to make a character audiences could root for from the start. Though a film that focused more on Eddie’s moral compass would’ve been more appropriate and compelling, I think the direction they ultimately went with worked for this film. To me it didn’t feel completely unfaithful to the character... they just “sorta” sped things up.
After all, at the end of the day this is the Venom known as the... Lethal Protector! As for not being able to get behind a beastly creature like that, believe it or not but people do. Kids, comic fans, anyone. Venom’s friggin cool.
What's the Lethal Protector series? Please keep in mind that not everyone out there has read every single comic or watched every single cartoon that exists about Spider-Man or his enemies.
shareThe first Venom series in comics....which a lot of this was based on.
shareYou said you read everything though. Heh.
But anyway, it’s a 1993 Venom series (his first solo series) where Eddie moved to San Francisco and decided to turn into a hero. This series is “arguably” the reason the film was made possible.
You will note the revision I wrote that I read everything about THE MOVIE, not everything on Venom, because frankly, I could care less about him. He's hideous, he's evil, and nothing he does can redeem all the bad stuff he did throughout Marvel comic history. Sorry, but he's always gonna be a disgusting, 2nd-rate villain in my book.
shareWell, fair enough I suppose. To each his own.
No one is gonna deny he’s disgusting, but many people love him for different reasons. And considering this movie has been a big success, it shows Venom has always been one of the most famous and beloved Spidey/Marvel villains.
My problem is since Spider-Man has nothing to do with his origin, why does he still look like him? Also does he still have the webbing, if so, then why? (Haven't seen it yet)
shareNo, he does not have webbing in the film and they don't explain why he resembles a brute version of black Spider-Man.
share