Search
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Venom: Let There Be Carnage (2021) in Movies
Oct 7, 2021
Suffers from Sequel-itis
If you ever heard of the term “Sequel-itis” and wondered what a good example of film suffering from this malady would be, look no further than VENOM: LET THERE BE CARNAGE.
The sequel to the surprisingly well made - and well acted - 2018 VENOM that introduced audiences to the (sometimes) villain, (sometimes) anti-hero, VENOM and the human/symbiot that he has bonded to (it makes sense in the first film) - this sequel looks and feels like a quick “money-grab” that is keeping this character “warm” for bigger things (I hope) down the road.
Directed by famed motion capture expert, Andy Serkis, VENOM: LET THERE BE CARNAGE feels like a movie that was directed by a Special FX veteran for this film is long on special effects and short on what makes a film work - plot and character.
And that’s too bad for the 2018 VENOM film was a surprise in that while it had it’s CGI moments (and plenty of them), it also had interesting plot and characters and took full advantage of two of the better actors working today - Tom Hardy and Michelle Williams.
The sequel looked promising enough as both Hardy and Williams were back and Woody Harrelson was cast as the main villain (with Naomi Harris along as the villain’s sidekick) so some of the ingredients were there for a quality sequel.
Unfortunately, this sequel leaned heavily into the CGI-ness of the first film and made the CGI Alien Venom the focal point of the story, relegating the humans to the back. No actor was pushed further to the back than Williams who was stuck with a weak “damsel in distress” arc while Harrelson and Harris take turns over-acting the other making their pair of villains some of the weakest in recent comic-book movies memory.
And then there is the performance of Hardy as Eddie Brock. He is sleepwalking his way through this film, looking like he has very little interest in what is going on and just wants to grab his paycheck and get home.
Some of these sins could be forgiven if the CGI elements - and the battles between Venom and Carnage - are interesting. Unfortunately, they just are not - they are “fine”, but nothing interesting or original, so this film is destined to get washed off the shore (and memory) as quickly as a sandcastle is washed away on a beach.
If you are going to check out this flick, make sure you stay for the “end credits” scene (which is only, thankfully, about 2 minutes into the credits), it is the best part of this film.
Letter Grade: C+
5 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
The sequel to the surprisingly well made - and well acted - 2018 VENOM that introduced audiences to the (sometimes) villain, (sometimes) anti-hero, VENOM and the human/symbiot that he has bonded to (it makes sense in the first film) - this sequel looks and feels like a quick “money-grab” that is keeping this character “warm” for bigger things (I hope) down the road.
Directed by famed motion capture expert, Andy Serkis, VENOM: LET THERE BE CARNAGE feels like a movie that was directed by a Special FX veteran for this film is long on special effects and short on what makes a film work - plot and character.
And that’s too bad for the 2018 VENOM film was a surprise in that while it had it’s CGI moments (and plenty of them), it also had interesting plot and characters and took full advantage of two of the better actors working today - Tom Hardy and Michelle Williams.
The sequel looked promising enough as both Hardy and Williams were back and Woody Harrelson was cast as the main villain (with Naomi Harris along as the villain’s sidekick) so some of the ingredients were there for a quality sequel.
Unfortunately, this sequel leaned heavily into the CGI-ness of the first film and made the CGI Alien Venom the focal point of the story, relegating the humans to the back. No actor was pushed further to the back than Williams who was stuck with a weak “damsel in distress” arc while Harrelson and Harris take turns over-acting the other making their pair of villains some of the weakest in recent comic-book movies memory.
And then there is the performance of Hardy as Eddie Brock. He is sleepwalking his way through this film, looking like he has very little interest in what is going on and just wants to grab his paycheck and get home.
Some of these sins could be forgiven if the CGI elements - and the battles between Venom and Carnage - are interesting. Unfortunately, they just are not - they are “fine”, but nothing interesting or original, so this film is destined to get washed off the shore (and memory) as quickly as a sandcastle is washed away on a beach.
If you are going to check out this flick, make sure you stay for the “end credits” scene (which is only, thankfully, about 2 minutes into the credits), it is the best part of this film.
Letter Grade: C+
5 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Sarah (7798 KP) rated Dunkirk (2017) in Movies
Aug 1, 2017
Brilliant & Very Intense
I have to start off by admitting that Nolan is my favourite director, and although this film is quite different to his previous ones, I'm pleased to say I still loved it.
Visually spectacular, it was so nice to see real effects for a change as opposed to cgi. Story wise it was also refreshing to see a war film not bogged down with erroneous subplots and romantic side stories. Nolan just jumps straight in to the action & carries on throughout, with an impressive run time of less than 2 hours. Some great casting here, although I feel like Tom Hardy could've been given more to do. Even Harry Styles was well cast & I was expecting him to be awful! Hans Zimmer does his usual great job on the score, building up a lot of tension. Nolan also does a fantastic job making the film quite harrowing without feeling the need to go ridiculously violent and gory. And there are also a few typical Nolan plot movements thrown in which made it slightly more than your average war film.
My only negative would be that a little bit of backstory might have been nice, as I personally don't know a lot about the lead up to Dunkirk, and that could've helped the ignorant like me!
Visually spectacular, it was so nice to see real effects for a change as opposed to cgi. Story wise it was also refreshing to see a war film not bogged down with erroneous subplots and romantic side stories. Nolan just jumps straight in to the action & carries on throughout, with an impressive run time of less than 2 hours. Some great casting here, although I feel like Tom Hardy could've been given more to do. Even Harry Styles was well cast & I was expecting him to be awful! Hans Zimmer does his usual great job on the score, building up a lot of tension. Nolan also does a fantastic job making the film quite harrowing without feeling the need to go ridiculously violent and gory. And there are also a few typical Nolan plot movements thrown in which made it slightly more than your average war film.
My only negative would be that a little bit of backstory might have been nice, as I personally don't know a lot about the lead up to Dunkirk, and that could've helped the ignorant like me!
Kirk Bage (1775 KP) rated Venom (2018) in Movies
Feb 25, 2021
This is the worst kind of relatively big budget popcorn tease – the kind of film that knows its demographic will flood to it regardless of quality, so let’s not even bother trying to make it good. The first sign of this type is a script that is such gibberish you almost start to wonder if you are having a stroke, and Venom has that in spades! Just when you think you have a handle on it, off it goes on a tangent that has nothing to do with anything other than setting up the next CGI shot. Which is the second sign – CGI good enough to pass, but quite obviously not the cutting edge stuff we have already seen years ago in better films. Cheap and nasty. The third sign is a director that can bung a few thrills in the mix but has no care whatsoever for characterisation, pace, plot or sensible motivation. Well done Ruben Fleischer for being the first director to have two films included in my BMTBs, following Zombieland Double Tap – I really can’t split them. The only fun to be had here is watching Tom Hardy amuse himself with a comic book characature so far over the top it hurts. Michelle Williams and Riz Ahmed are horribly wasted and should be ashamed. Just awful stuff!
Sarah (7798 KP) rated Venom (2018) in Movies
Nov 1, 2018
Much better than expected
Considering some of the terrible critics reviews for this I was expecting it to be horrendous, but for the most part it was actually quite enjoyable.
Tom Hardy makes this film. He is fantastic as Eddie Brock and Venom, even if he does go a little ott cringey in parts. He really injects some much needed humour and likeability into this film, without him this really would have been terrible. Some of the CGI is patchy in parts and the final fight scene is overwhelming due to the sheer amount of CGI going on. There's some dodgy editing and an even dodgier script, and the ending feels rather rushed. Riz Ahmed is a great actor but vastly underused, and to echo every other reviews Michelle Williams is absolutely awful. She contributed nothing other than major irritation for the entire film.
I'm not a massive comic person but do recall Venom from comics and some of the earlier Spiderman cartoons, and I'm actually fairly impressed with this origin story and how Venom has been portrayed. Let's face it, they couldn't get much worse than what came out in Spiderman 3. Whilst this film has a lot of faults, it's still very entertaining.
I do wish they'd given this a proper Marvel film though. It already comes across as quite dark, and I think this could've been fantastic had they given it a Deadpool type makeover.
Tom Hardy makes this film. He is fantastic as Eddie Brock and Venom, even if he does go a little ott cringey in parts. He really injects some much needed humour and likeability into this film, without him this really would have been terrible. Some of the CGI is patchy in parts and the final fight scene is overwhelming due to the sheer amount of CGI going on. There's some dodgy editing and an even dodgier script, and the ending feels rather rushed. Riz Ahmed is a great actor but vastly underused, and to echo every other reviews Michelle Williams is absolutely awful. She contributed nothing other than major irritation for the entire film.
I'm not a massive comic person but do recall Venom from comics and some of the earlier Spiderman cartoons, and I'm actually fairly impressed with this origin story and how Venom has been portrayed. Let's face it, they couldn't get much worse than what came out in Spiderman 3. Whilst this film has a lot of faults, it's still very entertaining.
I do wish they'd given this a proper Marvel film though. It already comes across as quite dark, and I think this could've been fantastic had they given it a Deadpool type makeover.
David McK (3185 KP) rated The Dark Knight Rises (2012) in Movies
Jun 30, 2019
The final part of Christopher Nolan's Christian Bale starring Batman trilogy (after both Batman Begins and The Dark Knight) that takes a large part of its inspiration from the 1990s Knightfall series of graphic novels in introducing the character of Bane: the man who (quote unquote) 'Breaks the Bat'.
As portrayed by Tom Hardy, this version of the character is nothing at all like you might remember from the Batman and Robin abomination: there's no mention of venom (the drug) in this movie, nor is it overstuffed with villains like that earlier movie/portrayal of the character was.
Instead, we have Bane as the primary antagonist throughout, although - in the tradition of Batman Begins - he is later revealed to be but a pawn, with deliberate call-backs to that first movie. While Jonathan Crane/Scarecrow does make a return (in what largely amounts as a camoe) alongside Ra's Al-Ghul (again, largely as a cameo in flashbacks), there's no Joker this time round - probably as a result of the real-world death of Heath Ledger (although I might have preferred even a throw-away line saying why the character wasn't in this!)
We also have Anne Hathaway's take on Catwoman/Selina Kyle, here portrayed more as a cat burglar than the Michelle Pfeiffer version from Batman Returns, and the 'passing on' of the mantle of Gotham's protector to another very-familiar character (who doesn't use his given name until the very end).
As portrayed by Tom Hardy, this version of the character is nothing at all like you might remember from the Batman and Robin abomination: there's no mention of venom (the drug) in this movie, nor is it overstuffed with villains like that earlier movie/portrayal of the character was.
Instead, we have Bane as the primary antagonist throughout, although - in the tradition of Batman Begins - he is later revealed to be but a pawn, with deliberate call-backs to that first movie. While Jonathan Crane/Scarecrow does make a return (in what largely amounts as a camoe) alongside Ra's Al-Ghul (again, largely as a cameo in flashbacks), there's no Joker this time round - probably as a result of the real-world death of Heath Ledger (although I might have preferred even a throw-away line saying why the character wasn't in this!)
We also have Anne Hathaway's take on Catwoman/Selina Kyle, here portrayed more as a cat burglar than the Michelle Pfeiffer version from Batman Returns, and the 'passing on' of the mantle of Gotham's protector to another very-familiar character (who doesn't use his given name until the very end).
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Venom (2018) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019
Do you like time travel
“It feels like a movie born from a different era.” That is the thought that immediately flooded my brain upon leaving the cinema after watching Venom. Now, that’s not necessarily a bad thing of course. Hundreds of amazing films have been born well before superhero films became the successful genre they are today.
Nevertheless, in Venom’s case, what we have is a film that struggles to create a consistent tone throughout its rather succinct running time. But is the film still a success for Sony?
Journalist Eddie Brock (Tom Hardy) is trying to take down Carlton Drake (Riz Ahmed), the notorious and brilliant founder of the Life Foundation. While investigating one of Drake’s experiments, Eddie’s body merges with the alien Venom – leaving him with superhuman strength and power. Twisted, dark and fuelled by rage, Venom tries to control the new and dangerous abilities that Eddie finds so intoxicating.
Director of the absolutely brilliant, Zombieland and its upcoming sequel, Ruben Fleischer seems like the perfect choice to helm a solo movie for Peter Parker’s arch nemesis, but the result is muddled – speckled with excellent moments that are lowered by frequently jarring editing techniques and a brawl for identity. Whether that’s down to studio interference or just a misunderstanding of the source material is up for debate.
Let’s start with the best bit: the cast. Venom’s cast is of such a high quality, it really needs reeling off to be believed. We’ve got Tom Hardy, Michelle Williams and Riz Ahmed all in lead parts. Hardy is his ever-charming self in a role that is vastly different from his portrayal of Bane in The Dark Knight Rises. His ‘bromance’ with Venom is by far the standout of the entire film with witty dialogue and amusing physical comedy. In particular, one scene set in an lobster restaurant had the audience in stitches.
Unfortunately, Michelle Williams, one of our most talented actresses is wasted in a thankless role as Brock’s girlfriend, Annie. She’s supposed to be a lawyer, but apart from a few lines of dialogue explaining that fact, she’s completely by-the-numbers WAG. Riz Ahmed suffers a similar fate. His Carlton Drake is so pantomime villain-esque, you half expect him to start twirling a moustache.
Then there’s the film itself. The special effects rarely rise above adequate and the cartoonish CGI used to create Venom himself is frankly, quite poor. You’re never under the illusion that the symbiote could be real, it just looks far too machine generated. With a budget of $100million, this is wholly unacceptable. It’s also noisy and pretty ugly to look at, constantly murky with a muddy colour palate that tries desperately to be edgy and cool – it fails.
Venom feels totally and unequivocally outdated and from a different age
The plot is typical origins story which is to be expected, but there’s very little to thrill or surprise and the first hour is poorly paced. It’s not until we see Venom in his full form that things get out of the gate and Venom finds its footing.
Part buddy-comedy, part superhero flick and part body horror, Venom struggles to maintain a consistent identity. Much like the titular antihero, the film feels like a parasite, latching onto different genres until it finally finds one that fits its needs.
This is a real shame as there are moments of brilliance here. The dialogue between Venom and Brock is great and while the story isn’t anything out of the ordinary, an origins plot for an antihero rather than a traditional superhero is an inspired choice. The lack of Tom Holland’s Peter Parker really doesn’t matter too much, though I can’t help but be disappointed that these two may never meet on film.
Finally, the bizarre decision to aim for a PG-13 rating in the US has inexplicably landed it with a 15 certification here in the UK. 15 rating superhero films include Deadpool and its sequel, Logan and Watchmen. If you’re hoping for gore to the standard of those, you’ll be very dissatisfied. Despite all his head-chomping glory, Venom doesn’t even have a hint of the red stuff.
In the end, despite its best efforts, Venom just comes out very ‘meh’. In a world populated by standout superhero movies like Captain America: Civil War, Spider-Man: Homecoming and Thor: Ragnarok, Venom feels totally and unequivocally outdated and from a different age. Thankfully, it’s not Catwoman levels of bad, maybe X-Men: The Last Stand levels of average.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2018/10/04/venom-review-do-you-like-time-travel/
Nevertheless, in Venom’s case, what we have is a film that struggles to create a consistent tone throughout its rather succinct running time. But is the film still a success for Sony?
Journalist Eddie Brock (Tom Hardy) is trying to take down Carlton Drake (Riz Ahmed), the notorious and brilliant founder of the Life Foundation. While investigating one of Drake’s experiments, Eddie’s body merges with the alien Venom – leaving him with superhuman strength and power. Twisted, dark and fuelled by rage, Venom tries to control the new and dangerous abilities that Eddie finds so intoxicating.
Director of the absolutely brilliant, Zombieland and its upcoming sequel, Ruben Fleischer seems like the perfect choice to helm a solo movie for Peter Parker’s arch nemesis, but the result is muddled – speckled with excellent moments that are lowered by frequently jarring editing techniques and a brawl for identity. Whether that’s down to studio interference or just a misunderstanding of the source material is up for debate.
Let’s start with the best bit: the cast. Venom’s cast is of such a high quality, it really needs reeling off to be believed. We’ve got Tom Hardy, Michelle Williams and Riz Ahmed all in lead parts. Hardy is his ever-charming self in a role that is vastly different from his portrayal of Bane in The Dark Knight Rises. His ‘bromance’ with Venom is by far the standout of the entire film with witty dialogue and amusing physical comedy. In particular, one scene set in an lobster restaurant had the audience in stitches.
Unfortunately, Michelle Williams, one of our most talented actresses is wasted in a thankless role as Brock’s girlfriend, Annie. She’s supposed to be a lawyer, but apart from a few lines of dialogue explaining that fact, she’s completely by-the-numbers WAG. Riz Ahmed suffers a similar fate. His Carlton Drake is so pantomime villain-esque, you half expect him to start twirling a moustache.
Then there’s the film itself. The special effects rarely rise above adequate and the cartoonish CGI used to create Venom himself is frankly, quite poor. You’re never under the illusion that the symbiote could be real, it just looks far too machine generated. With a budget of $100million, this is wholly unacceptable. It’s also noisy and pretty ugly to look at, constantly murky with a muddy colour palate that tries desperately to be edgy and cool – it fails.
Venom feels totally and unequivocally outdated and from a different age
The plot is typical origins story which is to be expected, but there’s very little to thrill or surprise and the first hour is poorly paced. It’s not until we see Venom in his full form that things get out of the gate and Venom finds its footing.
Part buddy-comedy, part superhero flick and part body horror, Venom struggles to maintain a consistent identity. Much like the titular antihero, the film feels like a parasite, latching onto different genres until it finally finds one that fits its needs.
This is a real shame as there are moments of brilliance here. The dialogue between Venom and Brock is great and while the story isn’t anything out of the ordinary, an origins plot for an antihero rather than a traditional superhero is an inspired choice. The lack of Tom Holland’s Peter Parker really doesn’t matter too much, though I can’t help but be disappointed that these two may never meet on film.
Finally, the bizarre decision to aim for a PG-13 rating in the US has inexplicably landed it with a 15 certification here in the UK. 15 rating superhero films include Deadpool and its sequel, Logan and Watchmen. If you’re hoping for gore to the standard of those, you’ll be very dissatisfied. Despite all his head-chomping glory, Venom doesn’t even have a hint of the red stuff.
In the end, despite its best efforts, Venom just comes out very ‘meh’. In a world populated by standout superhero movies like Captain America: Civil War, Spider-Man: Homecoming and Thor: Ragnarok, Venom feels totally and unequivocally outdated and from a different age. Thankfully, it’s not Catwoman levels of bad, maybe X-Men: The Last Stand levels of average.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2018/10/04/venom-review-do-you-like-time-travel/
Chris Sawin (602 KP) rated Venom: Let There Be Carnage (2021) in Movies
Dec 14, 2021
Tom Hardy's performance. (2 more)
Better CGI than the first film.
The film is stupidly fun.
It is REALLY dumb. (2 more)
Shriek is a wasted character.
Woody Harrelson's "hair."
Idiotic Gold
Venom was an unlikely hit for Sony Pictures making over $850 million worldwide – despite being a sloppy mess of a film.
Written by Jeff Pinkner (Jumanji (2019), The Dark Tower), Scott Rosenberg (Con Air, Gone in 60 Seconds), and Kelly Marcel (Cruella, Fifty Shades of Grey), the first Venom film boasted cheesy 90s dialogue, ugly, blobby CGI/special effects sequences, and a wacky performance from Tom Hardy.
However, its sequel – Venom: Let There Be Carnage – is essentially the restaurant/lobster tank sequence from the first film stretched across 90-minutes of absurdity.
If you revisit Venom before watching Venom: Let There Be Carnage – and more specifically, the end credits sequence from the first film – the difference between the two is almost night and day. At the end of the last film, Eddie showed a calm, confident demeanor totally confident in his demeanor when interviewing Cletus Kasady (Woody Harrelson).
However, in the actual sequel itself, Eddie is back to looking sick, sweating profusely, and constantly fidgeting while talking to Cletus, obviously showing signs that his attempts to keep Venom under control have taken a toll on him.
Meanwhile, it seems as though the filmmakers couldn’t decide on how to style Harrelson’s red-haired wig for the film, as it humorously changes in appearance nearly every time Cletus is on screen.
Not learning anything from Anne’s (Michelle Williams) decision to leave him in the first film, Venom: Let There Be Carnage sees Eddie attempting to cover Cletus as a way to right his struggling journalism career.
But after Cletus gets a taste of Eddie’s blood, he becomes Carnage, the unpredictable and murderous son of the symbiote.
Kelly Marcell is the only writer from the first film to return, but the sequel mark’s Tom Hardy first feature film writing credit. Hardy contributed a ton of material regarding the intricacies of Venom and Eddie’s relationship – and it shows, as because they obviously know each other very well, the two drive each other crazy and argue like an old married couple.
For example, Venom is sick of eating chickens and being restrained by Eddie’s rules, and throws weird, symbiotic tantrums when he doesn’t get his way, acting very much like a child who isn’t able to play with their favorite toy or eat their favorite candy.
What’s intriguing about Venom and Eddie’s relationship is that it’s complicated, to say the least. There are homosexual undertones in the film, with Venom seemingly having his own ‘coming out party’ and even confessing his love for Eddie, but most of the film’s romantic undertones deal with both Eddie and Venom’s desire to win back Annie – the former because he’s still in love with her, and the latter because he wants Eddie to be happy, as the two humans are better together than they are apart.
It’s not as awkward as Eddie and Venom having a baby in the comics, but it’s still a peculiar way to go about exploring their relationship. Yet, it kind of works with the overall hectic and fast paced nature of the film.
The sequel also features an overall improvement in CGI and special effects, with Venom appearing more detailed in both the black, sleeker, and shinier parts of his body and his head, while his teeth have so much more detail than they did in his first outing.
Carnage being red also allows the audience to decipher what’s occurring on screen so much easier than in the first film, whose final fight between Venom and Riot is a horrid mess of two gray and black symbiotes that kind of just mashes them together into an indistinguishable blob of CGI and hopes that the audience’s imagination can do most of the heavy lifting.
Notably, there’s also a ton of fire in Let There Be Carnage, an ambient background addition which adds additional light sources and makes the action so much easier for your eyes to process.
The transformation sequences are special effects masterpieces because they have almost a werewolf kind of aspect to them – those in-between animations of Tom Hardy’s and Woody Harrelson’s faces being half transformed go a long way.
In particular, Carnage’s introduction is a pretty incredible display, as he causes a ton of mayhem and kills a massive amount of people. However, there is one lame aspect of Carnage’s CGI appearance, which is the goofy ‘tornado’ he turns into to as he violently sweep across his prison block – thankfully, however, it’s a simple thing to look past.
As for the Shriek (Naomie Harris)/Officer Mulligan (Stephen Graham), her entire side story is ultimately unnecessary. Shriek is only included in the film because of her ability to scream, and thus hurt symbiotes (due to their weakness to loud sounds).
Harris also uses a really stupid raspy voice for the role and is basically wasted overall in both her talents as an actor and as a meaningful character.
Venom: Let There Be Carnage never tries to be anything other than a dumb superhero film, but if you hated the first film, the sequel won’t make you feel any differently about Marvel’s lethal protector.
Hardy, in dual roles, is what makes these films worthwhile in the slightest, as his intricately comical self-chemistry is insane. The film also boasts what feels like an accelerated pace that moves the story from action sequence to action sequence before coming to an end rather quickly, leaving Venom: Let There Be Carnage to stand as one of those a special kind of stupid blockbuster endeavors that, every so often, strikes idiotic gold.
The sequel is a definite improvement over the first film in the sense that it totally embraces its stupidity resulting in a comic book film that feels light, silly, and amusingly psychotic all at the same time.
Oh, and in case you’re wondering – yes, the end-credits sequence is as worthwhile as the internet has made it out to be.
Written by Jeff Pinkner (Jumanji (2019), The Dark Tower), Scott Rosenberg (Con Air, Gone in 60 Seconds), and Kelly Marcel (Cruella, Fifty Shades of Grey), the first Venom film boasted cheesy 90s dialogue, ugly, blobby CGI/special effects sequences, and a wacky performance from Tom Hardy.
However, its sequel – Venom: Let There Be Carnage – is essentially the restaurant/lobster tank sequence from the first film stretched across 90-minutes of absurdity.
If you revisit Venom before watching Venom: Let There Be Carnage – and more specifically, the end credits sequence from the first film – the difference between the two is almost night and day. At the end of the last film, Eddie showed a calm, confident demeanor totally confident in his demeanor when interviewing Cletus Kasady (Woody Harrelson).
However, in the actual sequel itself, Eddie is back to looking sick, sweating profusely, and constantly fidgeting while talking to Cletus, obviously showing signs that his attempts to keep Venom under control have taken a toll on him.
Meanwhile, it seems as though the filmmakers couldn’t decide on how to style Harrelson’s red-haired wig for the film, as it humorously changes in appearance nearly every time Cletus is on screen.
Not learning anything from Anne’s (Michelle Williams) decision to leave him in the first film, Venom: Let There Be Carnage sees Eddie attempting to cover Cletus as a way to right his struggling journalism career.
But after Cletus gets a taste of Eddie’s blood, he becomes Carnage, the unpredictable and murderous son of the symbiote.
Kelly Marcell is the only writer from the first film to return, but the sequel mark’s Tom Hardy first feature film writing credit. Hardy contributed a ton of material regarding the intricacies of Venom and Eddie’s relationship – and it shows, as because they obviously know each other very well, the two drive each other crazy and argue like an old married couple.
For example, Venom is sick of eating chickens and being restrained by Eddie’s rules, and throws weird, symbiotic tantrums when he doesn’t get his way, acting very much like a child who isn’t able to play with their favorite toy or eat their favorite candy.
What’s intriguing about Venom and Eddie’s relationship is that it’s complicated, to say the least. There are homosexual undertones in the film, with Venom seemingly having his own ‘coming out party’ and even confessing his love for Eddie, but most of the film’s romantic undertones deal with both Eddie and Venom’s desire to win back Annie – the former because he’s still in love with her, and the latter because he wants Eddie to be happy, as the two humans are better together than they are apart.
It’s not as awkward as Eddie and Venom having a baby in the comics, but it’s still a peculiar way to go about exploring their relationship. Yet, it kind of works with the overall hectic and fast paced nature of the film.
The sequel also features an overall improvement in CGI and special effects, with Venom appearing more detailed in both the black, sleeker, and shinier parts of his body and his head, while his teeth have so much more detail than they did in his first outing.
Carnage being red also allows the audience to decipher what’s occurring on screen so much easier than in the first film, whose final fight between Venom and Riot is a horrid mess of two gray and black symbiotes that kind of just mashes them together into an indistinguishable blob of CGI and hopes that the audience’s imagination can do most of the heavy lifting.
Notably, there’s also a ton of fire in Let There Be Carnage, an ambient background addition which adds additional light sources and makes the action so much easier for your eyes to process.
The transformation sequences are special effects masterpieces because they have almost a werewolf kind of aspect to them – those in-between animations of Tom Hardy’s and Woody Harrelson’s faces being half transformed go a long way.
In particular, Carnage’s introduction is a pretty incredible display, as he causes a ton of mayhem and kills a massive amount of people. However, there is one lame aspect of Carnage’s CGI appearance, which is the goofy ‘tornado’ he turns into to as he violently sweep across his prison block – thankfully, however, it’s a simple thing to look past.
As for the Shriek (Naomie Harris)/Officer Mulligan (Stephen Graham), her entire side story is ultimately unnecessary. Shriek is only included in the film because of her ability to scream, and thus hurt symbiotes (due to their weakness to loud sounds).
Harris also uses a really stupid raspy voice for the role and is basically wasted overall in both her talents as an actor and as a meaningful character.
Venom: Let There Be Carnage never tries to be anything other than a dumb superhero film, but if you hated the first film, the sequel won’t make you feel any differently about Marvel’s lethal protector.
Hardy, in dual roles, is what makes these films worthwhile in the slightest, as his intricately comical self-chemistry is insane. The film also boasts what feels like an accelerated pace that moves the story from action sequence to action sequence before coming to an end rather quickly, leaving Venom: Let There Be Carnage to stand as one of those a special kind of stupid blockbuster endeavors that, every so often, strikes idiotic gold.
The sequel is a definite improvement over the first film in the sense that it totally embraces its stupidity resulting in a comic book film that feels light, silly, and amusingly psychotic all at the same time.
Oh, and in case you’re wondering – yes, the end-credits sequence is as worthwhile as the internet has made it out to be.
JT (287 KP) rated The Drop (2014) in Movies
Mar 10, 2020
A brooding English debut feature from Michaël R. Roskam who cooks up a simmering pot of dramatic intrigue.
Tom Hardy plays Bob Saginowski a quiet unimposing figure who helps to tend the bar of his cousin Marv (James Gandolfini‘s last film before he sadly passed away). The bar is the main dropping off point for all money collected from mob owned businesses. The location of the bar changes each night.
When the bar is held up the money stolen belongs to the Chechen mob who want it back putting Bob and Marv in a tight spot. The setting is the streets of Brooklyn where age old mafioso have been replaced by a more brutal foe. In this instance in the form of the Chechen mob.
One night Bob finds a puppy in a bin and upon rescuing it meets Nadia (Noomi Rapace) who has a hidden past of her own, one that Bob refuses to question. The puppy will certainly tug at your heart strings but it’s Hardy’s spot on Brooklyn accent and good natured personality that wins through. Even when he’s harassed by Matthias Schoenaerts’s Eric Deeds he remains calm.
Deep down however we known that something inside him is going to snap, it’s just trying to predict the moment when it will happen. This makes for an engaging thriller with a twist ending that is more than satisfying.
The Drop is a slow burn that builds from the outset. It’s great to see Gandolfini on screen one last time and such a disappointment that he is no longer with us.
Tom Hardy plays Bob Saginowski a quiet unimposing figure who helps to tend the bar of his cousin Marv (James Gandolfini‘s last film before he sadly passed away). The bar is the main dropping off point for all money collected from mob owned businesses. The location of the bar changes each night.
When the bar is held up the money stolen belongs to the Chechen mob who want it back putting Bob and Marv in a tight spot. The setting is the streets of Brooklyn where age old mafioso have been replaced by a more brutal foe. In this instance in the form of the Chechen mob.
One night Bob finds a puppy in a bin and upon rescuing it meets Nadia (Noomi Rapace) who has a hidden past of her own, one that Bob refuses to question. The puppy will certainly tug at your heart strings but it’s Hardy’s spot on Brooklyn accent and good natured personality that wins through. Even when he’s harassed by Matthias Schoenaerts’s Eric Deeds he remains calm.
Deep down however we known that something inside him is going to snap, it’s just trying to predict the moment when it will happen. This makes for an engaging thriller with a twist ending that is more than satisfying.
The Drop is a slow burn that builds from the outset. It’s great to see Gandolfini on screen one last time and such a disappointment that he is no longer with us.
LoganCrews (2861 KP) rated Fonzo (Capone) (2020) in Movies
Jul 4, 2021
What's the scariest thing to reckon with: mortality, humanity, or yourself? Tom Hardy plays a constipated bulldog with a pinch of Beetlejuice in this utterly beguiling Frankenstein's monster of a film which can only be described as 𝘎𝘰𝘵𝘵𝘪 (2018) hopped up on a bunch of prescription medication. I think the major takeaway from this is that Trank makes a tedious gangster movie - but a pretty fuckin' sweet horror/fantasy curio. Right off the bat I admire it for being so scene-to-scene fascinating based solely on how wholeheartedly unique it is; I expected no less from Trank than an auteurist stamp as big, original, and defined as this. Yes this is wonderfully experimental, yes this is very uncomfortable - seasoned with bodily fluids, a good amount of violence, and the sort of medical anguish which starts out grim and only gets more merciless as it continues... however, it also doesn't amount to too much. Hardy's grotesque turn here is memorable but 80% of the time it's reduced to staring off into the distance making various faces. It also has a similar issue to Barry Levinson's 𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘞𝘪𝘻𝘢𝘳𝘥 𝘰𝘧 𝘓𝘪𝘦𝘴 in that the show-stealing macabre nightmare segments are just *crying* to break out more than the seemingly stock, incompetently structured narrative. However this was still super cool just on principle alone, and as someone who is sick of rote biopics it's nice to see one of them not be afraid to try something unquestionably different for a change (especially by dragging such a historic, opulent figure through the mud the whole time). Plus one of these are finally under an hour-45, go figure!
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Star Trek - Nemesis (2002) in Movies
Sep 28, 2021
This film should have worked. They had four years to work up the film: the biggest gap between movies in the series to date. The sets and special effects deployed are a notable improvement on “Insurrection” and are, at times, very impressive. It’s a movie that has personal angst for Picard; an epic space battle; and the death of a major character. And a young Tom Hardy turns in a memorable performance, belying what was to come: it’s interesting that this is only Hardy’s third feature (following his debut in “Black Hawk Down” just the year before!). It’s also a full NINE years before he won the BAFTA Rising Star award!
And yet it’s just not very engaging: I find myself fiddling with my phone while its on, which is never a good sign. Gone are any of the comic asides that have tended to lighten the mood of these films: this is dark and plot-heavy throughout. It’s even got a ‘mind-rape’ scene that is quite disturbing.
Naturally, the Enterprise insurance premium has taken another hammering by the end of the film. You can just imagine the discussion back in space dock… “no mate…” – sucking air in through his front teeth “…that whole front bumper’s gonna have to be replaced, and that’ll cost you a pretty packet”!
Combined with poor marketing and fierce competition (the film opening in the same month as “Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers”), this ended up with the worse financial performance of any of the Trek movies (in terms of budget to return ratio). And it killed the franchise. The only option was to be a full reboot: something that was to take another seven years to happen.
And yet it’s just not very engaging: I find myself fiddling with my phone while its on, which is never a good sign. Gone are any of the comic asides that have tended to lighten the mood of these films: this is dark and plot-heavy throughout. It’s even got a ‘mind-rape’ scene that is quite disturbing.
Naturally, the Enterprise insurance premium has taken another hammering by the end of the film. You can just imagine the discussion back in space dock… “no mate…” – sucking air in through his front teeth “…that whole front bumper’s gonna have to be replaced, and that’ll cost you a pretty packet”!
Combined with poor marketing and fierce competition (the film opening in the same month as “Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers”), this ended up with the worse financial performance of any of the Trek movies (in terms of budget to return ratio). And it killed the franchise. The only option was to be a full reboot: something that was to take another seven years to happen.