Venom 2 Trailer Finally Out

[Kareeah_Indaga]

Link.

Mrs. Chen returns!

[Palanan]

I'm...

...sure those who enjoyed the first movie will find things to like about this one, too.

[Clertar]

Just last week in another thread there was quite a bit of consensus that the MCU started to overcome their "villain problem" about 5 years ago, when they grew out of their formula for the antagonist being a bad guy version of the hero.

Somehow Sony thought that doing just that in both of their Venom movies was a good idea. We'll just have to wait and see how it turns out, I guess.

[Kareeah_Indaga]

Just last week in another thread there was quite a bit of consensus that the MCU started to overcome their "villain problem" about 5 years ago, when they grew out of their formula for the antagonist being a bad guy version of the hero.

Somehow Sony thought that doing just that in both of their Venom movies was a good idea. We'll just have to wait and see how it turns out, I guess.

In Sony’s defense, this one is also supposed to include

Spoiler

Show

Shriek, I think is her name - supervillain lady with sound-based powers.

And Carnage is easily Venom’s most notable adversary after Spider-man himself, and Spidey’s tied up in the MCU. He was going to show up at some point.

[Tvtyrant]

Just last week in another thread there was quite a bit of consensus that the MCU started to overcome their "villain problem" about 5 years ago, when they grew out of their formula for the antagonist being a bad guy version of the hero.

Somehow Sony thought that doing just that in both of their Venom movies was a good idea. We'll just have to wait and see how it turns out, I guess.

Yeah but Carnage is genuinely Venom's most famous enemy. The problem as I see it is they already did "opposing symbiote" last movie, they might have wanted to do something different for an inbetween movie.

[LaZodiac]

Yeah but Carnage is genuinely Venom's most famous enemy. The problem as I see it is they already did "opposing symbiote" last movie, they might have wanted to do something different for an inbetween movie.

The difference is in personality. Whats his name was a military commander. Carnage is a serial killer. That will lead to some variance!

Anyway the opening being them making breakfast together, but having absoltuely no synergy because they're chaos idiots is hilarious. Love these two.

[Talakeal]

In Sony’s defense, this one is also supposed to include

Spoiler

Show

Shriek, I think is her name - supervillain lady with sound-based powers.

And Carnage is easily Venom’s most notable adversary after Spider-man himself, and Spidey’s tied up in the MCU. He was going to show up at some point.

That’s not a spoiler for anyone who saw the trailer.

[SunsetWaraxe]

Just last week in another thread there was quite a bit of consensus that the MCU started to overcome their "villain problem" about 5 years ago, when they grew out of their formula for the antagonist being a bad guy version of the hero.

Somehow Sony thought that doing just that in both of their Venom movies was a good idea. We'll just have to wait and see how it turns out, I guess.

Did the MCU actually do that though? WandaVision and Falcon & the Winter Soldier suffer from this in varying degrees. Hopefully future MCU movies avoid the trope

Having said that, I am not sure how you do a Carnage origin film without Venom.

[Psyren]

Yeah I agree, I always thought making Riot the villain and sticking to the "formula" (intro villain is dark reflection of hero with same/similar powerset) in the first one was a mistake, and this is a big reason why - now we have Carnage, not just Venom's most famous bad guy but one of the most well-known villains (certainly "darker reflection villains") in Marvel period, having a much duller impact because of it.

Having said that, I do think Woody Harrelson as Kasady is brilliant.

As for who the villain in the first should have been - I link to Nando probably a lot more than is healthy but he really does have a lot of solid takes. Rather than type at length about his proposed revamp, I'll put it here for those who might want to see for themselves:

[Clertar]

So essentially an MCU Iron-man villain

I think that the antagonist in Venom's first movie should have been... well, Spider-man. Just play the story straight, have Venom develop from villain to anti-hero in a Spider-man movie with Tom Holland, with the usual emotional beats. And then give Venom its spin-off movie, this time as a main character. That worked really well in the NetflixMCU with Daredevil and Punisher, another classic Marvel anti-hero.

But anyways, if the main character and the script are good, the villain doesn't matter that much. Who even remembers who the villain of the first Deadpool was? When the script has to lean on the villain factor in order to work, the script already has a problem (which, granted, sometimes a really cool villain will be able to mask successfully).

[Rater202]

...I hope they go for the R rating.

The original movie was supposed to be R Rated but didn't end up being so, but...

You can't PG Carnage. You cna't even do PG 13 Carnage.

It's not... It can't be done. You can't do Carnage without butchered bodies dripping with blood and bile.

Excepting AXIS(wherein Carnage was magically turned good... Without actually making him not a sociopath) every good Carnage story doesn't play him as a supervillain. They play him as a serial killer.

You read a Carnage story for the same reasons you watch a horror movie. Nobody thinks that Freddy Krueger or Jason Vorhees are such good, well-rounded, and interesting characters. You watch those movies in order to experience fear, and thus adrenaline, vicariously without actually being in danger yourself.

And that's the kind of thing that Carnage is best for. He starts out as a slasher killer and gradually evolves into something more... Lovecraftian. At the end of the day, Cletus Kassady...

I'll let the man explain it himself.

Did you know that my mother went through electroshock treatments when she was pregnant with me? This was before they would sedate you for that kind of thing. And then, you know... I died minutes after I was born... went to Hell... came back... That's a whole thing. I've had therapists try to tell me these "early traumas" led to me being the way I am. I've heard it all, you know... I'm this way because of abuse, because of video games, or sex and violence on TV, because of guns and knives and the wickedness of this mean old world. But what none of them get... is those things didn't make me what I am. I am made... of them. I am abuse. I am sex and violence. I am the guns and the knives and the wickedness of this whole sick @#$%#&% world... You know my name. Now SCREAM it.

In the comics, the first thing Kassady did after getting his symbiote and escaping from Prison was to look through the phonebook until he found someone with a funny name, then track that person down and murder them. Just for giggles, he might have will picked someone at random.

[Psyren]

So essentially an MCU Iron-man villain

Yeah, something Sony doesn't actually have

Again though the key benefit is that, unlike Riot, Smythe would give us a villain who can exploit Venom's weaknesses without worrying about them himself - starting a big fire for example, or using sound waves. And thus Venom would need to be a bit more tactical. Or more accurately, Eddie would need to be tactical instead of relying on his physique and symbiote, while Venom would need to actually learn to step back and cooperate with his host instead of being a constantly rampaging id. It would show that, in the end, the most dangerous part of the symbiote relationship isn't the axe-crazy childlike alien, but the clever human at the center.

And heck, making his droids spider-themed could have also been a way to get Venom into a comic-accurate outfit without a Peter connection (yet).

I think that the antagonist in Venom's first movie should have been... well, Spider-man. Just play the story straight, have Venom develop from villain to anti-hero in a Spider-man movie with Tom Holland, with the usual emotional beats. And then give Venom its spin-off movie, this time as a main character. That worked really well in the NetflixMCU with Daredevil and Punisher, another classic Marvel anti-hero.

The hero vs. anti-hero conflict only really works though when there's a "real villain" for them to team up against at the end, usually one who manipulates the two into conflict in the first place. Daredevil and Punisher had two for this purpose - Kingpin and the Hand, with the latter also serving as the catalyst for Daredevil's conflicts with another villain-turned-antihero (Elektra.) Had it merely come down to Matt vs. Frank, there would've been little tension or stakes, and no real build-up for that matter.

The same is true for Venom and Spidey - you would still need a "real villain" that would require the two of them to take on, if you're going to use Venom as an antihero later (rather than the full villain he was in SM3).

But anyways, if the main character and the script are good, the villain doesn't matter that much. Who even remembers who the villain of the first Deadpool was? When the script has to lean on the villain factor in order to work, the script already has a problem (which, granted, sometimes a really cool villain will be able to mask successfully).

I view it as the reverse - a good script includes a compelling villain. Yes, other aspects can compensate for lacking one, but in Deadpool's case making the villain utterly inconsequential is a deliberate subversion of the genre. Venom isn't a parody like Deadpool is, so copying the aspect of having a villain whose motivations are irrelevant and whose connection to the main character is all but nonexistent would fall much flatter.

[Starbuck_II]

...I hope they go for the R rating.

The original movie was supposed to be R Rated but didn't end up being so, but...

You can't PG Carnage. You cna't even do PG 13 Carnage.

It's not... It can't be done. You can't do Carnage without butchered bodies dripping with blood and bile.

Excepting AXIS(wherein Carnage was magically turned good... Without actually making him not a sociopath) every good Carnage story doesn't play him as a supervillain. They play him as a serial killer.

You read a Carnage story for the same reasons you watch a horror movie. Nobody thinks that Freddy Krueger or Jason Vorhees are such good, well-rounded, and interesting characters. You watch those movies in order to experience fear, and thus adrenaline, vicariously without actually being in danger yourself.

And that's the kind of thing that Carnage is best for. He starts out as a slasher killer and gradually evolves into something more... Lovecraftian. At the end of the day, Cletus Kassady...

Cartoon Carnage in the past was PG 13 and worked really well in Spiderman TV shows.
1) Venom Returns (Spiderman Animated Series)
First it introduces a serial killer just throwing grenades at cops for fun. Even when they corner him, he reveals he strapped himself with a bomb. Venom spawns a baby due to Dormammu. Venom isn't the worshipping type but the new symbiote will be.
2) ◾Unlike Venom, Carnage refers to himself as "I" instead of "we". Spider-Man explained that it is because Cletus Kasady's insane mind was able to completely bond to the symbiote.

[Tyndmyr]

Did the MCU actually do that though? WandaVision and Falcon & the Winter Soldier suffer from this in varying degrees. Hopefully future MCU movies avoid the trope

Having said that, I am not sure how you do a Carnage origin film without Venom.

Thanos was perhaps the big, much beloved exception. GotG also didn't really stick to the mirror formula in either case, and both of those were pretty great.

I do agree that this is a hard one to avoid, though. Here's hoping it has the same fun scenery chewing feel as the first...which, if we're being honest, was kind of weak in the villain department.

[Magic_Hat]

All I'm saying, this film better be rated R, and there had better be some serious carnage in a film with a character named Carnage.

[Kareeah_Indaga]

For those interested, there’s a director’s commentary on the trailer.

[dps]

All I'm saying, this film better be rated R, and there had better be some serious carnage in a film with a character named Carnage.

Sony and Marvel are going for a blockbuster; there's almost no chance this will come out rated R.

While I agree that an R-rated movie would be appropriate to the source material, I don't entirely agree with you that you can't do Carnage well with a PG-13 rating, because what you can imply and suggest goes beyond what you can show. The problem is, not having it come out rated R is going to be a business decision, not a creative decision.

[Kareeah_Indaga]

Sony and Marvel are going for a blockbuster; there's almost no chance this will come out rated R.

While I agree that an R-rated movie would be appropriate to the source material, I don't entirely agree with you that you can't do Carnage well with a PG-13 rating, because what you can imply and suggest goes beyond what you can show. The problem is, not having it come out rated R is going to be a business decision, not a creative decision.

+1 this, I suspect they’d have put more blood in the trailer if they were making it R rated.

[Thales]

A year ago, some random Tumblr user posted this. This matches up really well to what actually happened — is this really coincidence?

[Delicious Taffy]

Let's just collectively lower our expectations right to the ground, regarding this movie's hypothetical rating. They ain't gonna make it R-rated, because that's not what's been selling with these comic movies. I'm not saying it can't sell or that anyone else is saying it can't sell, but I'll eat my entire hat if Venom 2 has that big letter R on the poster.

[The Glyphstone]

Let's just collectively lower our expectations right to the ground, regarding this movie's hypothetical rating. They ain't gonna make it R-rated, because that's not what's been selling with these comic movies. I'm not saying it can't sell or that anyone else is saying it can't sell, but I'll eat my entire hat if Venom 2 has that big letter R on the poster.

Deadpool got away with it twice and made a substantial return on profit margins, why can't Venom?

[Delicious Taffy]

Deadpool got away with it twice and made a substantial return on profit margins, why can't Venom?

At the risk of being repetitive just one comment later:

I'm not saying it can't

[The Glyphstone]

You aren't saying it can't, but you are saying it won't. I'm asking why you think so, when the primary underlying justification - that R-rated comic book movies don't sell - is disproven by Deadpool's box office returns, and Logan, not to mention the runaway billion-dollar success of the Joker movie despite its hard-R rating as well. The latter has even been specifically cited by the directors in why they might consider making LTBC R-rated as well.

https://www.newsweek.com/marvel-veno...ible-r-1590156

A better argument might be that Sony flinches due to their desire to have a PG-13 sequel vs. movie with Spider-Man later on, but on sheer numbers, the idea that R-rated comic book movies don't make bank isn't supported at all anymore.

[JadedDM]

The first movie was PG-13, correct? It seems unlikely then that the sequel will be rated R. Can anyone name a precedent for that? A film having a PG-13 rating, then its sequel being bumped up to R?

[Kitten Champion]

The first movie was PG-13, correct? It seems unlikely then that the sequel will be rated R. Can anyone name a precedent for that? A film having a PG-13 rating, then its sequel being bumped up to R?

Not typically, off the top of my head I think the Tom Clancy Jack Ryan movies have oscillated in their ratings up and down over time... if you consider that a series. Usually it's the other way around though, you get a successful R movie which in turn became PG-13 in their sequel. Alien to Aliens and Terminator to Terminator: Judgement Day for instance.

Although, Logan was a sequel, of sorts.

[Palanan]

Originally Posted by Kitten Champion
Usually it's the other way around though, you get a successful R movie which in turn became PG-13 in their sequel. Alien to Aliens and Terminator to Terminator: Judgement Day for instance.

Not sure what you mean here regarding Alien and Aliens, since both movies were rated R on their release.

[Kitten Champion]

Not sure what you mean here regarding Alien and Aliens, since both movies were rated R on their release.

Oh, it was where I live.

[dps]

You aren't saying it can't, but you are saying it won't. I'm asking why you think so, when the primary underlying justification - that R-rated comic book movies don't sell - is disproven by Deadpool's box office returns, and Logan, not to mention the runaway billion-dollar success of the Joker movie despite its hard-R rating as well. The latter has even been specifically cited by the directors in why they might consider making LTBC R-rated as well.

https://www.newsweek.com/marvel-veno...ible-r-1590156

A better argument might be that Sony flinches due to their desire to have a PG-13 sequel vs. movie with Spider-Man later on, but on sheer numbers, the idea that R-rated comic book movies don't make bank isn't supported at all anymore.

The point isn't that R-rated movies don't or can't make money, it's that, all else being equal, PG-13 movies will make more money.

[Talakeal]

The first movie was PG-13, correct? It seems unlikely then that the sequel will be rated R. Can anyone name a precedent for that? A film having a PG-13 rating, then its sequel being bumped up to R?

The Matrix.

[The Glyphstone]

The point isn't that R-rated movies don't or can't make money, it's that, all else being equal, PG-13 movies will make more money.

That's a fair point as the conventional wisdom in the past, but I'm saying that there is a new growing trend for directors of comic movies to be willing to risk bucking that trend. They have recent success stories from peers to show their profit-hungry studio overlords, which makes it easier to get that degree of creative freedom.