Venom - Cartoon, Movie Or Comic?

[Miyamoto Musashi]

Hank voices Moe the bartender

 

[Ed Liu]

Guys, please stay on-topic for this thread. Discussing why you thought Venom was better or worse in Spider-Man 3 is fine, but arguing over where to assign credit or blame for it and why is irrelevant.

So everyone calm down and go read Ask Road Rage Venom and start smiling again.

That being said, I think I'd have to say that Venom of the movies is my personal favorite, though that's really just because I haven't seen any of the animated versions and my exposure to to him in the comics was well after he hit the "overexposed, overhyped, underdeveloped" stage during the go-go comics 90's. Topher Grace was one of the better things in Spider-Man 3, even though I still felt like the whole Venom storyline was really badly forced into the movie.

Really, though, Venom isn't one of my favorite Spidey villains. I'd have preferred to see SM3 go with the Lizard myself.

-- Ed

 

[ESE150]

The movie version of Venom did more to hurt Peter in 15 minutes than Comic Venom has done in his entire existence, by killing Harry. He did something permanent and striking, which comic Venom never did.

He WASN'T aiming at killing Harry. Harry jumped in front when Venom was trying to kill Peter. The comic version of Venom was a much better villain for the reasons stated by Jordo.

Yeah, well, a character we don't care about kills another character we've STOPPED caring about (when he died, someone in the audience behind me said "how many times is this guy gonna die?"....his death scene was met with HUGE laughter from the crowd.)
So Venom does hurt to Peter in 15 minutes in the movie, so what? He also DIES in 15 minutes. So I guess that cancels that out huh? I mean, at least the comic book Venom lasted for longer than one night?-Jordan

Just because that scene didn't work for you and someone else who was in the audience, it doesn't mean it didn't for anyone else. The fact that Harry died by sacrificing himself for Peter was enough for me to care about him. And yes, he had previously acted as a jerk to Peter and MJ. But if I was Peter, I would forgive him for the following reasons:
1.He believed Peter had killed his father
2.He was half-insane since the moment he went throught the process that made him the New Goblin
3.He sacrified for Peter despite the ugly scar that Peter made to his face
And WHEN was the other scene with him being killed? He was only knocked by Spider-Man, but never implied to die.

That said, the movie was a huge let-down. Venom deserved more screentime. I would have loved to see him show his sick sense of humour by toying around with Peter's loved ones. Also Venom teaming-up with Sandman rather than keeping Spidey for himself was out of character. And how on earth did he come to know about the Sandman's daughter?

Plus they were able to weed out what didn't work in respect to Venom and offer an alternative and better solution. I still prefer the animated origin of the character over the mainstream comic version though overall I prefer the Ultimate Venom origin the most. I just prefer if all that alien junk stays out of Spider-Man regardless of giving us the used-to-be-awesome Venom.

I HATE the Ultimate origin because of the following reasons:
1.Venom's symbiote WASN'T the same piece that was used by Spider-Man. I always loved how in the mainstream origin, the symbiote had to be used by Spidey to copy his abilities, and then it would pass them to Eddie. It was original and made Venom more of a evil twin.
2.Peter wore the symbiote for far too few time. I loved how in the comics he wore it for some time and it gave him enhanced strenght and super-powers. That would make his to dump it harder, as he had to get used again to his original power level.
3.The comics and cartoon versions of the symbiote seemed to be somewhat more intelligent, making the fact that Spidey was wearing it creepier to me.

 

[Jordo]

And WHEN was the other scene with him being killed? He was only knocked by Spider-Man, but never implied to die.

Well I can't speak for the anonymous random movie goer behind me, but the gist of what he said was basically (in a quick, exaggerated way) stating a serious problem with the movie. It's repetitive. How many tearful Harry-at-death's-door scenes can there be? How many times before we STOP caring? How many times should Sandman look at a photo of his daughter before we GET IT ALREADY? The movie is full of terrible structure and repetitiveness...It's really bizarre. A big floppy mess.


-Jordan

 

[Anwar]

That's what you get for removing most of the scenes that develop Sandman, and forcing in two major characters that had no real reason to be in the movie.

 

[Spider-Man]

Really, though, Venom isn't one of my favorite Spidey villains. I'd have preferred to see SM3 go with the Lizard myself.

Ed, how do you think Venom got built up to be such a big character. Was it because maybe he hit at the right time in the comic industry? If I recall correctly, there were some different plans for Venom before it was decided that Brock would be the one under the symbiote. Is there anywhere on line where this information might be available?

And if that is too off-topic for this thread then I'll try to swing it back by asking: Out of the animated Venoms, which one was better? The Spider-Man: The Animated Series version or the Spider-Man Unlimited version?

 

[Miyamoto Musashi]

venom in tas is way better in character and figure, but in the colouring area the one from unlimitied got better plenty

 

[Ed Liu]

Ed, how do you think Venom got built up to be such a big character. Was it because maybe he hit at the right time in the comic industry? If I recall correctly, there were some different plans for Venom before it was decided that Brock would be the one under the symbiote. Is there anywhere on line where this information might be available?

I think there were a lot of things that led to Venom becoming such a big deal in the comics, and as much of it was luck as design. I think he hit at a time when comics were beginning to experiment with more extreme content, so characters like Venom and Lobo at DC could do a lot more than they would have been able to even a few years earlier. Venom was one of the harbingers of the whole grim-n-gritty thing on the Marvel side, since he was a lot more extreme than even characters like the Green Goblin, and the audiences of the era ate that stuff up.

It also seems like at the time, the people writing comics were more focused on the printed material and not with cross-marketing. Even though the comic companies were all seeking that almighty dollar (and tried to grab it in silly and often self-destructive ways), they seemed to be seeking it through publishing, not movie and toy licenses. Excepting stuff like G.I. Joe or Transformers, of course.

The fact that Venom got associated so strongly with Todd McFarlane and Erik Larsen and a lot of the other hot artists of the era didn't hurt, I'm sure, and neither did the fact that Venom hit at just about the peak of the comics speculator boom. It was also a time when the comic companies were perfectly happy to pack the stands with more and more product, most of which took something successful and beat it into the ground mercilessly. Just about anyone with a modicum of popularity would show up all over the place. Time was you couldn't pick up a single Marvel comic that didn't have Spider-Man, Venom, Wolverine, Ghost Rider, or the Punisher in it.

Now, of course, we're much better off...

-- Ed

 

[GregX]

Here's a very good essay on Venom, and how he came to be, and well, everything that is wrong with the character.

http://www.spideykicksbutt.com/DarkSideoftheSpider/DarkSideoftheSpider.html