Criticism without Venom spoilers

Within the rich and varied amalgam of characters, whether they be heroes, villains or antiheroes - as is the case in this case - of the vast universe that surrounds Spider-Man, Venom is probably one of the most loved by the marvelita fandom. That is why, since David S. Goyer announced in a distant 1997 the intention of taking the symbiote to the big screen, enthusiasm, and fear of a resounding failure, have been the order of the day.

Finally, after a good string of rumors, cancellations and reactivations of the project, 'Venom' ended up falling into the hands of a Ruben Fleischer who promised from the first moment an adult story, faithful to the spirit of the character and with an age rating for older people. eighteen years. But these promises ended up falling on deaf ears, deriving the production in a softened product for the adolescent audience from which it has reneged even its star protagonist.

Under this scenario, there was only one question to be asked: Is 'Venom' the new great fiasco of superhero cinema? The answer, sadly, can not be other than a resounding YES; revealing the new Fleischer as one of the worst feature films of his peers since the terrible 'Fantastic 4' by Josh Trank. A dishonorable and incomprehensible achievement, especially if we take into account the great films of the subgenre that we are seeing lately and that are serving as a beacon to many of the filmmakers who try to tackle it.

In this way, 'Venom' enters to play in the infamous league of tapes like the 'Catwoman' of Pitof, the 'Hulk' of Ang Lee or the 'Daredevil' of Mark Steven Johnson; examples of stories of origin that, like many others, share much of their weaknesses with this adaptation to the big screen of the eternal character of David Michelinie and Todd McFarlane, such as first halves full of overexposure and common places that will bore more seasoned in the matter.

But beyond these lapses, forgiven after all for not being excessively serious, 'Venom' reaches a level of embarrassment really unexpected because of his biggest scourge: a deranged, inconsistent and ridiculous tone that seems to suffer from the same bipolarity that Eddie Brock, the protagonist of the film, once owns the symbiote.

This tonal incontinence, which circulates between the darkness that was originally expected from the long, and a grotesque comedy without trace of a minimum intelligence, is reflected in a cast in which the secondary seem to be starring in a film radically opposed to the one that heads a Tom Hardy out of place, completely uncontrolled in the worst role of his career, and who comes to remember the most eccentric Jim Carrey of the late nineties.

With regard to his narrative, peppered with action sequences that reaffirm the solvency of Fleischer in this type of productions, 'Venom' condenses in an insufficient 110 minutes of footage a story full of incongruities, not a few licenses and an excessive rhythm accelerated that transmits the sensation of being in front of an inconclusive product, with a precipitated climax that could be classified as a coitus interruptus.

Opinions about Venom

86% (HobbyConsolas)
2.5 / 5 (Cinema PREMIERE)
3/10 (Espinof)

Although the disaster was seen coming since his promotional campaign began to filter its first advances, 'Venom' is still a huge disappointment. And the fact is that the last superheroic beat of Sony not only had a perfect original material to offer a different and full of personality, but it lets glimpse among its sad mediocrity that its managers were aware of a tremendous potential that, you will know by what, they have thrown away.