Umbra is kinda like Venom lol

[Bombarder0]

When I saw the new movie I was like

that boi eddie is the operator

and venom da umbra 

xDDDDD succ me

[AXCrusnik]

That's nice, mijo.

[(PSN)ChiefDevilEggs]

Add ability to bite off heads, then we’ll talk...

[AzureTerra]

except Venom is cool and useful

[Bombarder0]

So many Umbra haters in one post m8

[Mahna]

So umbra is all up in Mister Dax's ass?

[LarryYourWaiter]

I heard the movie was awful..?

[(XBOX)Graysmog]

2 hours ago, (PS4)ChiefDevilEggs said:

Add ability to bite off heads, then we’ll talk...

It was pretty funny how they couldn't just show Venom actually biting off people's heads.

Guess they had to keep that PG-13 rating to rake in whatever views they could for that garbage.

"Oh, but Venom's a misunderstood good guy!"

Pfft. Okay, sure, he doesn't just randomly go on murder sprees like Carnage (well, as often, anyways). Yet he's far from good or misunderstood, he absorbs or just outright eats people on a whim. That's what we in the business call "messed up". 

That whole movie was just like the Slenderman movie, obviously the guys haven't ever read the source material or even actually had any grasp of the character's personality whatsoever. I mean, at least Venom wasn't five years too late, I guess.

Edited October 18, 2018 by (XB1)Graysmog

[RetroNomad]

17 minutes ago, (XB1)Graysmog said:

It was pretty funny how they couldn't just show Venom actually biting off people's heads.

Guess they had to keep that PG-13 rating to rake in whatever views they could for that garbage.

"Oh, but Venom's a misunderstood good guy!"

Pfft. Okay, sure, he doesn't just randomly go on murder sprees like Carnage (well, as often, anyways). Yet he's far from good or misunderstood, he absorbs or just outright eats people on a whim. That's what we in the business call "messed up". 

That whole movie was just like the Slenderman movie, obviously the guys haven't ever read the source material or even actually had any grasp of the character's personality whatsoever. I mean, at least Venom wasn't five years too late, I guess.

Real talk? I was really hoping, despite the HILARIOUS marketing that Sony would grow some and let it be a good representation of Venom riding on the coat tails of Deadpool and just let it be a mature , R Rated villain film if not an anti-hero film....

And then I saw that PG-13 rating and nope.jpged out.

They had something cool going for them here, but as per usual they have no idea what to do with an IP.

Edited October 18, 2018 by RetroNomad

[Loza03]

I mean... the Operator's the one trying to bond to Umbra.

Just saying.

[Guest]

6 hours ago, LarryYourWaiter said:

I heard the movie was awful..?

I've heard that it's not as awful as everyone expected, just painfully mediocre.

[SneakyErvin]

So they based Venom on the S#&$ty non-Brock version that eats people yet used Brock as the host?

What?

[(PSN)dursereg]

1 hour ago, SneakyErvin said:

So they based Venom on the S#&$ty non-Brock version that eats people yet used Brock as the host?

What?

I agree, Eddie Brock has a morale code .

[SneakyErvin]

1 minute ago, (PS4)dursereg said:

I agree, Eddie Brock has a morale code .

Yeah Eddie is a true superhero down to the core, except for that little pet peeve that he wants to kill Parker/Spider-Man. I mean it isnt uncommon for Venom to completely ditch the idea of trying to kill Parker if he sees innocents in need of rescue instead. There is a reason why Venom hates many of the other symbiotes because they are more or less cold blooded psychopaths, not to the extent of Carnage but still.

Really sad they went the "cannibalistic" route with Eddie, it is on the same level of character butchery as Dr. Doom in Fant4stic, which caused me to not watch that movie. I expected more from Sony though.

[Alaeacus]

2 hours ago, SneakyErvin said:

Really sad they went the "cannibalistic" route with Eddie, it is on the same level of character butchery as Dr. Doom in Fant4stic, which caused me to not watch that movie. I expected more from Sony though.

Um, except for the fact that Eddie Brock's Venom has, on many many MANY occasions, in the comic books straight up bitten off people's limbs.  Brock's Venom even accidentally ate a brain once.  If you consider "being source material accurate" as "character butchery", you're probably exactly the type of person who shouldn't be making decisions about comic movies in Hollywood.  

Sony could have done a better job at showing Brock feeling guilt or remorse about it, but the movie itself is a pretty terrible movie in many other respects anyway so it doesn't really matter.  Sony has a history of sh*tty movies (especially comic book movies) so if you really "expected more" from Sony, than you simply don't know how sh*tty Sony always has been.  

Edited October 18, 2018 by AlMcFly

[SneakyErvin]

22 minutes ago, AlMcFly said:

Um, except for the fact that Eddie Brock's Venom has, on many many MANY occasions, in the comic books straight up bitten off people's limbs, fully digesting several.  If you consider "being source material accurate" as "character butchery", you're probably exactly the type of person who shouldn't be making decisions about comic movies in Hollywood.  

He's only had a run in with the hunger, which was a short run and really only involved two people, a random thug aswell as a doctor torturing him. This was soley based around brains aswell and not something that popped up early on in his stories. The symbiote has had a longer run with the brains during the period when it broke off with Eddie, after the brain nibble incident at the bar which Eddie wanted no part of.

So it is far from canon to include it as a part of his early origin story since it isnt something he does on a regular basis. He does maim the criminals, but he does not eat them. Brains is the only thing he has had a taste for and Brock made that stop early on after re-merging with the symbiote by introducing it to chocolate. IIRC Mac Gargan was the one that let the brain eating escalate after the symbiote merged with him after Eddie and it parting ways. And the only reason he wanted brains was due to an enzyme.

And the movie is supposed to be the origin story, long before the hunger even becomes a thing he needs to struggle with. It was said to be based around the origin but with a twist not requiring Parker and instead connecting it directly to the Lethal Protector storyline.

It would be all ok if they introduced his cannibalistic struggles waaaaay later down the line and not in the first movie about him. It has become a black mark for the character, something that also screwed him up for fans when Marvel Heroes introduced him as a playable character with horrible voiceline and skills not fitting Eddie Venom. The cannibalistic side was only covered in a few magazines and was of a far deeper meaning than people understand, but it became one of those "cool" things that people rather focus on than the actual character prior to the short lived hunger era.

Edited October 18, 2018 by SneakyErvin

[Alaeacus]

31 minutes ago, SneakyErvin said:

It would be all ok if they introduced his cannibalistic struggles waaaaay later down the line and not in the first movie about him.

Fair enough.  I mean, it's probably a tough call.  Directors always want to introduce as many deep themes into a movie as possible, but often times completely miss the point of that theme to begin with.  I'm not even fully convinced that the studio thought this would garner a sequel.  Even though they put sequel bait in the movie, I think any reasonable executive or manager would read the script of this movie before any filming begins and immediately say "Yeah, this is going to be a trash movie.  No sequel future for this one."  

I feel bad for Tom Hardy.  Imagine being contractually obligated to a movie, but not realizing it's going to be garbage until after already obligated.  Like Mark Hamill and The Last Jedi.  He was contractually obligated by Disney to promote the movie and say nice things about it, even though it's clear that he hated every single thing about it.  Doesn't want to be sued by Disney.  

Tom probably just wanted to break out into the Marvel universe bandwagon in some way but chose a poor option.  There are plenty of Marvel characters he'd be much better at playing.  

Edited October 18, 2018 by AlMcFly

[SneakyErvin]

32 minutes ago, AlMcFly said:

Fair enough.  I mean, it's probably a tough call.  Directors always want to introduce as many deep themes into a movie as possible, but often times completely miss the point of that theme to begin with.  I'm not even fully convinced that the studio thought this would garner a sequel.  Even though they put sequel bait in the movie, I think any reasonable executive or manager would read the script of this movie before any filming begins and immediately say "Yeah, this is going to be a trash movie.  No sequel future for this one."  

I feel bad for Tom Hardy.  Imagine being contractually obligated to a movie, but not realizing it's going to be garbage until after already obligated.  Like Mark Hamill and The Last Jedi.  He was contractually obligated by Disney to promote the movie and say nice things about it, even though it's clear that he hated every single thing about it.  Doesn't want to be sued by Disney.  

Yeah I think they missed the whole point as to why Eddie Venom goes to the point of wanting to eat people at time and just threw it in there as a "Venom thing". What disturbs me the most is that it doesnt seem like Hardy is a genuine Venom fan or have full knowledge about the character outside of the magazines the producers told him to read. I've read him saying the more gorey and to him best parts were cut out to fit the pg13 tag, this leads me to believe that there is even more people-munching going on by Venom in this "origin" story.

Would have been great if they made this movie titled Venom, with no munching etc. then the second could be called Lethal Protector, going up against Carnage and the gang, then after that a final movie called the Hunger, which has him face off against some supervillains while also trying to control the symbiote and avoid eating people. But I guess that is too much to ask from movie producers, they rather cram most small gimmick things into the first movie and hope that it gets recieved well, if it does there is room for a sequal.

Even with the feeding etc. I dont think Venom is as shamefully poorly done as the mockery that Dr. Doom along with the whole Storm family is in Fant4astic. You still know it is Venom, they've just taken a bunch of shortcuts from all over his 616 timeline and crammed it into a Parkerless origin story. Even that parts takes away a large part of Eddies/Venoms personality and reason for why they bond.

edit: And yeah, Hamill is a great example, well Ford too. You really got the feeling that both of them didnt want much to do with the new trilogy. Hence why their characters ended the way they did. As much as I enjoy many things from Disney, like the MCU for the most part, Pirates and so on, I think they've done a piss poor job with their Star Wars movies, except for Rogue One which I really enjoyed. I mean episode 1-3 blows the new SW trilogy out of the water and makes Jar-Jar look like an extremely well developed character with a massive purpose.

Edited October 18, 2018 by SneakyErvin

[Alaeacus]

2 minutes ago, SneakyErvin said:

Yeah I think they missed the whole point as to why Eddie Venom goes to the point of wanting to eat people at time and just threw it in there as a "Venom thing". What disturbs me the most is that it doesnt seem like Hardy is a genuine Venom fan or have full knowledge about the character outside of the magazines the producers told him to read. I've read him saying the more gorey and to him best parts were cut out to fit the pg13 tag, this leads me to believe that there is even more people-munching going on by Venom in this "origin" story.

I agree with you.  It's possible that he became jaded during the filming and just put out a half-assed performance for the rest of the filming.  This happens in movies sometimes with certain actors.  Jared Leto put everything he had into his Joker interpretation, but then immediately began trashing the movie because he thought dozens of hours he got on camera were ultimately cut out of the movie completely.  Hugo Weaving gave his professional performance for Red Skull, but later admitted he really disliked the role itself from the beginning (so he probably wasn't giving his best effort).  

It's also possible that the writers simply wrote Eddie as such a bad character that Tom had difficulty becoming the role.  In 2018, a script should NEVER even make it to production level if it hasn't been vetted by many many comic consultants first.  

[SneakyErvin]

Just now, AlMcFly said:

I agree with you.  It's possible that he became jaded during the filming and just put out a half-assed performance for the rest of the filming.  This happens in movies sometimes with certain actors.  Jared Leto put everything he had into his Joker interpretation, but then immediately began trashing the movie because he thought dozens of hours he got on camera were ultimately cut out of the movie completely.  Hugo Weaving gave his professional performance for Red Skull, but later admitted he really disliked the role itself from the beginning (so he probably wasn't giving his best effort).  

It's also possible that the writers simply wrote Eddie as such a bad character that Tom had difficulty becoming the role.  In 2018, a script should NEVER even make it to production level if it hasn't been vetted by many many comic consultants first.  

Ah yeah Joker. I really did not like his Joker at all, it was like the rest of the movie pretty bland and looked like something from the time the first Mummy movie was released. As for Red Skull which was already an impressive character in the Cap movie, I'd kill for a Weaving performance with more effort put into it. It would be stellar.

I'm also not surprised if the character writing or script in general was bad for Venom, it was announced in july(?) 2017 without actors ready and already had a release date set in stone at the time for october 2018. That is a very short time to find actors and produce a great movie. I mean look at Captain Marvel, people are *@##$ing about it already and it's been in the making for a long time now. I feel that *@##$ing is unjust since it is based on a minimal trailer and peoples hate for Brie Larson (no idea why). 

[OneYenShort]

Honestly, I find Warframe is more like a serious Invader Zim, not so much a tie into Venom.

We have a messed up ship OS that goes off on tangents called Ordis.   Might as well be Grrrr.

The operator uses warframes.  Zim has his computer/spider backpack.

The you have the operators aka Zim as well as the other Irkens, some are goof balls, some are serious.  Kind of like how your random players are.

Zim comes from a race called Irken.  What do we have? Orokin. 

[rune_me]

5 hours ago, SneakyErvin said:

So they based Venom on the S#&$ty non-Brock version that eats people yet used Brock as the host?

What?

Even worse, there's no Spider-man relation what so ever.

Venom without Spider-man doesn't even make sense.

[(XBOX)Dabnician]

You mean Mirage with the Sigyn Skin is kinda like venom.

[SneakyErvin]

1 hour ago, rune_me said:

Even worse, there's no Spider-man relation what so ever.

Venom without Spider-man doesn't even make sense.

Indeed. Without Parker/Spidey there would be no Venom to begin with. The proper thing to do would have been skipping the origin story of Venom or just shown it as memory flashbacks with spidey in some of them, then just centered the movie around Venom and Carnage. That would have been a great standalone movie with hints at his actual origin. This kinda just feels like a Sony version of X-Men Origins: Wolverine.

Atleast it doesnt have an eye laser shooting mockery of Deadpool in it.