Venom | 5 OCTOBER 2018 | Sony | Tom Hardy is Venom. Social Media reactions coming in

[Kalo]

I actually.. liked this movie.. is it great? no, but Tom Hardy is great in the role and the humor if cheesy is really funny. 

[terrestrial]

As far as I know Rothman is excluded from the Sony/MCU movies. Was he involved in Vernom?

[tonytr87]

Movie's pretty bad, but Hardy's quite entertaining. He single-handedly makes some of the comedy bits work. You know it's a bad movie when the mid-credits scene is the best part. 

[AJG]

21 minutes ago, tonytr87 said:

Movie's pretty bad, but Hardy's quite entertaining. He single-handedly makes some of the comedy bits work. You know it's a bad movie when the mid-credits scene is the best part. 

 

I liked how they spoiled the end credit scene before they actually showed them. A bold choice.

Edited October 5, 2018 by AJG

[tonytr87]

5 minutes ago, AJG said:

 

I liked how they spoiled the end credit scene before they actually showed them. A bold choice.

 

What do you mean exactly?

[KeepItU25071906]

Btw, I'm sure audience (not IMDB, or BOT, or other users) mostly likes it. Yes it will drop next week harder, because of buzz, but it has chance for decent legs.

Edited October 5, 2018 by KeepItU25071906

[Valonqar]

dp

Edited October 5, 2018 by Valonqar

[EarlyDeadlinePredictions]

Based on the reactions online so far people are liking Hardy's Venom portrayal. The rest of the non-Venom stuff is boring and generic. 

 

A sequel will definitely need a budget increase though. 

 

 

[dudalb]

12 hours ago, tonytr87 said:

Movie's pretty bad, but Hardy's quite entertaining. He single-handedly makes some of the comedy bits work. You know it's a bad movie when the mid-credits scene is the best part. 

 The marketing for the movie really did not indicate how much comedy there was isn the film. They were selling it pretty as a straight up horror movie about Venom.

I wonder if some of the negative reaction is because people thought they were victims of "bait and swtich".

Look, people get mad if something is not what they were led to expect. If I order steak in a restaurant, I want steak. If I get Salmon, I am going to be pissed off. It might be excellent Slamon, but it's not what I paid for.

[dudalb]

13 hours ago, terrestrial said:

As far as I know Rothman is excluded from the Sony/MCU movies. Was he involved in Vernom?

ROthman is head of SONY studio. Sort of hard to exclude him from any thing. He has much less input in the SONY/MCU films then he does in the pure SONY films, but he is not excluded.

"Venom" is a SONY film, with minimal involvement from Marvle Studios, and it's up in the air whether it's part of the MCU or not. So you bet Rothman has involvement with "Venom" though how much nobody knows. SInce he calls the shots at SONY, he pretty much chose the level of involvement he wanted with "Venom".

[tonytr87]

We knew it wouldn't be art, but it's also not good entertainment either. 

 

Visit my site for a full review, just trying to gain a humble following...

 

Venom Ain't Art

Edited October 5, 2018 by tonytr87

[Valonqar]

2 hours ago, EarlyDeadlinePredictions said:

Based on the reactions online so far people are liking Hardy's Venom portrayal. The rest of the non-Venom stuff is boring and generic. 

 

A sequel will definitely need a budget increase though. 

 

 

that's what really matters. if people like the character and performance they are more likely to roll with less stellar elements. 

[Jessie]

1 hour ago, dudalb said:

 The marketing for the movie really did not indicate how much comedy there was isn the film. They were selling it pretty as a straight up horror movie about Venom.

I wonder if some of the negative reaction is because people thought they were victims of "bait and swtich".

Look, people get mad if something is not what they were led to expect. If I order steak in a restaurant, I want steak. If I get Salmon, I am going to be pissed off. It might be excellent Slamon, but it's not what I paid for.

only boring people get angry at the fact their silly comic book movie turned out to have unexpected humour in it

[terrestrial]

1 hour ago, dudalb said:

ROthman is head of SONY studio. Sort of hard to exclude him from any thing. He has much less input in the SONY/MCU films then he does in the pure SONY films, but he is not excluded.

"Venom" is a SONY film, with minimal involvement from Marvle Studios, and it's up in the air whether it's part of the MCU or not. So you bet Rothman has involvement with "Venom" though how much nobody knows. SInce he calls the shots at SONY, he pretty much chose the level of involvement he wanted with "Venom".

I know 😉

There is/was a kind of agreement that he gets not to be involved with the MCUs (based on his work ar FOX in the past, bad experiences...) around the time he got the job at Sony, with ~ fired as studio boss Amy Pascal remaining as producer for the common MCUs at least (not sure about non-MCU Marvel movies, hence my question)

 

If he is not excluded for non MCU movies... in my POV not good. He is a way too involved studio boss, fancies himself as able/knowledgeable/qualified producer.....

Example: one at the Wolverine movies where he changed the set's colour scheme to a bright... ~ mood/impression changing .... over the weekend without even informing the director, completely missing the story's needs.

IMHO he should stay with administration work. As he is also in question for his... questionable behaviour around staff.... maybe he should retire (he will not do so - obviously)

 

[Fullbuster]

So, what's the expected OW?

[dudalb]

2 hours ago, terrestrial said:

I know 😉

There is/was a kind of agreement that he gets not to be involved with the MCUs (based on his work ar FOX in the past, bad experiences...) around the time he got the job at Sony, with ~ fired as studio boss Amy Pascal remaining as producer for the common MCUs at least (not sure about non-MCU Marvel movies, hence my question)

 

If he is not excluded for non MCU movies... in my POV not good. He is a way too involved studio boss, fancies himself as able/knowledgeable/qualified producer.....

Example: one at the Wolverine movies where he changed the set's colour scheme to a bright... ~ mood/impression changing .... over the weekend without even informing the director, completely missing the story's needs.

IMHO he should stay with administration work. As he is also in question for his... questionable behaviour around staff.... maybe he should retire (he will not do so - obviously)

 

I think Rothman was a crappy choice for the SONY job and agree with everything you say about him but he is head of SONY films, he has the power the comes with that job,and nothing you or I can do about it will change that.

I have no idea of the details about the MCU/SONY deal, but I do know it probably lessens Rothman's power as far as the SONY/MCU films go.

But Venom is pretty much a SONY production, and Rothman probably had as much say as he wanted in the making of that film. Yes, he certainly delegated a lot of power to the producers...a studio head has to do that, he just does not have the time to personally produce every film his studio makes...but he can take back that delegated power whenever he chooses.

[dudalb]

19 minutes ago, Fullbuster said:

So, what's the expected OW?

Between 65 and 70 Million.

[Fullbuster]

9 minutes ago, dudalb said:

Between 65 and 70 Million.

 

That sounds a bit low, on the other hand it's a spin-off so it seems good for what it is.

[SteveJaros]

Thanks to A-List, I had a choice of seeing Venom for "free" in IMAX 2D or regular 3D today, and chose the latter.

 

Should have chose the former, the 3D effects were IMO muddy and didn't add to the presentation. It didn't help that the film was "meh" all around. On one hand, it is fast paced and the story is easy to follow. On the other, none of the characters, human or the venom monsters, grabbed me in any way. If this was an actual Marvel production, I think they decided to not put much effort in to a film that will only profit Sony, LOL. 

Two things: there are two end credit scenes, one literally at the very end, and they are worth sticking around for. Also, the movie is short. The official run time is 1:52 but the film itself is really only about an hour and a half, the credits take a LONG time, LOL. 

C+

 

 

Edited October 5, 2018 by SteveJaros

[dxmatrixdt]

if Venom is aimed at 'just pleasing' audiences, does that mean that home platform sales will be limited?

Edited October 5, 2018 by dtairdryZid