I want to (or don't want to-- whatever, fuck it) understand where the hardcore Venom fans are coming from when they say that they love this movie:
What made THIS version of Venom so much better than the one in Spider-Man 3? Literally the only thing they got right from the comics in this film is the use of pronouns ("We are Venom") ... And even then, some of the pronoun usage was inconsistent.
-What do we find out about Venom in Spider-Man 3? He's a disgraced, smarmy reporter who loses his love interest and bonds with an alien symbiote to become Venom.
-What do we find out about Venom in his self-titled movie? He's a disgraced, smarmy reporter who loses his love interest and bonds with an alien symbiote to become Venom.
Literally, we get the same, exact amount of characterization in the handful of minutes he was in Spider-Man 3 as in this new, almost 2-hour long movie. How can one movie fuck up SO badly?!
Spider-Man 3's portrayal of Venom is infinitely superior, by the way. Why? Because Spider-Man plays a part in Venom's origin in that movie (as he should!). There's a legit explanation as to why the symbiote bonded with Eddie Brock in that movie-- The symbiote wanted to permanently bond with Peter Parker, and the symbiote became vengeful when Peter separated from it. Then, symbiote found someone else (who is also vengeful of Peter Parker) to bond with. It's weird to say this when talking about fucking SPIDER-MAN 3 of all movies, but that's just storytelling 101 right there ... Venom failed so much harder than Spider-Man 3 did. Fight me, Venom fanboys.
In this movie, the explanation as to why the symbiote bonds with Eddie is because "it's a loser on the planet it came from," so it bonded with someone who is also a "loser." FUCKING WHAT? If the symbiote wanted to bond with a "loser," then why did it reject and kill so many homeless people before bonding with Eddie?! This explanation is nonsensical!
I was honestly nerd raging within the first five minutes of the movie. The introduction to the symbiote in this movie is almost identical to how it was introduced in Spider-Man 3. Same shit, different variables. Dumbass fanboys will probably say that the way the Venom movie did it was better because "hurr durr, they mentioned John Jameson's name, 'cuz comics!" Yeah? And then they killed Jameson immediately after they said his name. What was the fucking point of even name dropping that character if that's all they were going to do with him? Oh yeah, right: Sony thinks that name dropping will be enough to appease the fanboys.
I am legitimately pissed off that this movie made so much money. I don't want bad movies like this to make money. It's telling Sony that THIS low quality shit is okay!
Into the Spider-Verse is truly a miracle of a film. After seeing Venom, I now honestly believe that film being so magnificent was a total accident on Sony's part. lol.