Venom Movie Pushed Forward on a Wave of Unoriginality
Then buzz it up
August 12th, 2008 at 11:30 by Ian Dransfield
Another day, another decision to remake/sequelise/spin-off an existing movie. This time it’s Venom’s turn.
Yes, for those that saw Spider-Man 3 - he’s the one played by Topher Grace off That 70s Show. He’s the one that should have been one of the best villains in comic movie history, but instead ended up being a complete rush job, thus making one of Spider-Man’s greatest foes actually a big pile of crud.
|Plus he appared to die in the film, so how Sony are going to play this we don’t really know. Time machine? A ‘he’s dead or is he OR IS HE’ angle? Ignoring the film, thus rendering his appearance in the Spider-Man movie worthless? Which it was.
It’ll probably be the third. And we bet Sam Raimi will be happy about that, after being forced to incorporate Venom into his movie in the first place.
Ah, Hollywood.
While it’s not new news that a Venom film is in the pipeline, it has just come about that Sony are pushing for the picture to be released quicksmart. Obviously wanting to ride the wave of popularity created by the successes of both Iron Man and The Dark Knight and seeing that there is, maybe, a place in the mass market for the darker side of comic books, the company have been more or less forced to play their hand.
While a script was already written for the movie, the execs have apparently decided it isn’t up to par and have sent out the word that they’re looking for a new one. The hecklerspray script is on its way, guys! Though we’re sure they’ll pick some no-talent arseclown to pen the bloody thing and it will all go wrong, leaving comic book geeks around the world frothing at the eyeballs.
It’s just that… well… they’ll get it wrong, won’t they? They’ll make Venom into some kind of pansy, or will hamfistedly force in some relatability to the character to try and make the audience sympathise with his plight.
Or they’ll probably make him pink and shoot flower-coated puppies out of his anus as he travels the galaxy bringing happiness and free rainbows to everyone.
Not that we’re cynical or anything - we just can’t see how Sony expect to work it.
Certainly, the popular character’s co-creator, Todd McFarlane thinks they can make it work.
“You don’t want to scare the kids, because the kids love the character,” he said.
“But I think you could add a little bit of a creep factor. I mean, it never bugged me to watch Frankenstein as a kid, so you could have a little bit of it, as long as you have a good story backing it up.”
The Dark Knight is a very dark, depressing film with one of the finest portrayals of a truly twisted mentalist ever seen - but Batman is still a good guy. Iron Man isn’t that dark, and he’s a good guy too. The announced X-Men Origins: Wolverine is sure to tread this same gritty, dark path but - again - Wolverine is a good guy. Conflicted, capable of being a bit maniacal yes - but still a good guy.
Sony will not be able to make major blockbuster work if it’s about a bad guy. The mass-market they so crave just won’t buy into it - they seem to forget that people are idiots. And if the most recent Spider-Man movie was anything to go by, not only will it be a flop, it’ll be shit too.
We’re just saying.
Related and recent:
- More Spider-Man Flicks After Spider-Man 3?
- Dunst Blurts Out Spiderman 3 Villains
- Mel Gibson Movie Apocalypto Four Months Late
- Young Frankenstein Getting Turned Into Cash-In Musical
- Everyone Is Anna Nicole Smith’s Baby-Daddy, More Or Less
- Die Hard 4 To Have The Very Worst Film Title In History
- Downright Dynamite Downloads Of The Week: The Servant, Rogue Wave, Paul Simon…
- SLACKERJACK - Mighty Rodent
August 12th, 2008 at 12:51 pm
The mists are clearing… I see… I see The Crow. But with an alien symbiote suit… I see a vigilante angle…
I DON’T see Carnage. Or the pathetic shrieking noise which was Venom’s only audio contribution to Spiderman 3.
Die Hard 4’s really good, by the way.
August 12th, 2008 at 7:19 pm
they could go all out and put in some weird Madame web angle in there, like she portals him thru time.
i also read that topher grace isnt in the running to star in this.
Carnage or Anti-venom would be an awesome addition to this. but i fear itll go the way of spiderman3 (rubbish)
die hard 4 was a let down!
August 13th, 2008 at 12:31 am
ya because you know a lot about ‘HOLLYWOOD’ all the motion picture studios/writers and producers all collectively sit around a camp fire with comic books saying MOVIE YES or MOVIE NO.
perhaps your dumbass story should be titles, why can’t WRITERS create original content to sell to studios……
give an idiot a website on the internet you know it all…. while the reality of those who have a brain know better than your weak reporting.
August 13th, 2008 at 1:20 am
might just be that as Venom is portrayed in several books by Diane Duane as a vigilante who has a penchant for actually killing his targets they might go with that, still a ‘good guy’ but lots of bloody ripping and tearing?
August 13th, 2008 at 1:22 am
Although, in the comic books, Venom wasn’t really a bad guy. Sure he starts out as a maniacal killer, but he’s really only a bad guy out to get Peter Parker/Spider-Man by the belief that it was the web-slinger’s fault for ruining “their” lives.
But in reality, Eddie Brock just wanted to do good, protect people. And because of the symbiote twisting his hate and anger, his vigilante style showed no mercy to those who he believed to be villains.
This at least, according to my memory of the comic books.
August 13th, 2008 at 5:05 am
COULDN’T AGREE MORE. It’s just too hard to make a movie that revolves around the villain. “Day of the Jackal” (both the novel and the film) and its remake are notable for this plot style, but you will not get a script that advanced for a comic book adaptation. It’s much easier to just assume that the majority of moviegoers don’t know who Venom is supposed to be, and so they’ll retcon him to being a troubled hero or something.
And the fanboys will still pay to come, too, because, “Hey, it’s VENOM!”
August 13th, 2008 at 6:28 am
The Venom movie is going to be produced by Marvel Studios. They’re the ones that rebooted The Incredible Hulk by basically ignoring the first movie because it did not fit properly into the continuity that they wanted. Sam Raimi will probably not be involved and they’ll probably get good writers that know a thing or two about Spider-Man and Venom. Topher Grace shouldn’t return because he doesn’t fit what Eddie Brock looks like, at all. Spider-Man 3 will likely be entirely ignored for this movie because Marvel Studios didn’t produce that movie and is not likely to have many involved with the current Spider-Man movie franchise involved in this movie. Also, there are plenty of story arcs that this movie could be based off of, or something completely new, in which Venom could act as an anti-hero, most likely with Carnage as the villain.
November 24th, 2008 at 3:27 am
the only way it would work would be to have these hollywood writers & directors get off their ass & read a few of the venom story lines in the amazing spider man series from his origin to his quest to destroy peter parker. hes main thing is to kill peter not really spider man. the suit hates peter for rejecting it & eddie brock hates peter for ruining his carrer. the comic get really dark & he’s the only character from the spider man universe to get his own spin off comics actually quite a few. so marvel knows that he has a big fan base. thats why they made sami put him in sm3. imagen if the commercials of sm3 had the sandman in them & no suit or hint of venom… they onlt made all that money cuz people coulndnt wait to see venom come to life & they killed him after a few minutes in the film.