---
title: "Venom: the reviews"
canonical: "https://film.one/film/venom/reviews"
title_page: "https://film.one/film/venom"
critics_score: 40
critics_reviews: 22
licence: "© Fi1m Ltd. Written by AI under a human editor; checked against sources before publication. Quote with attribution and a link to the canonical URL."
---

# Venom (2018): what the critics said

Critics' score 40 from 22 reviews: 1 positive, 6 mixed, 15 negative.

Most critics find Venom a disappointing superhero film, with muddled storytelling and an uncertain tone overwhelming its comic possibilities. The praise clusters around Tom Hardy, whose physical commitment and odd comic energy give even several hostile reviews something to enjoy. The exchanges between Eddie and Venom are another recurring pleasure: critics often see their bickering as a glimpse of the more entertaining film that the surrounding plot fails to deliver.

Reservations centre on a timid treatment of the premise, rushed character development and action that offers little suspense. The spread is wide, though firmly weighted towards the negative. IndieWire is the clear positive outlier, finding the strangeness funny and the central relationship endearing. Hardy himself divides opinion: The Guardian finds his broad comedy a weakness, while The Hollywood Reporter considers him unusually uninteresting. For many others, he is the main reason the film remains intermittently watchable.

## IndieWire — Michael Nordine

Rating B. 2 October 2018. 

The review finds the film an appealingly strange, often funny departure from the superhero formula. It praises Tom Hardy’s committed dual performance and the uneasy, endearing dynamic between Eddie and Venom.

[Read the review](https://www.indiewire.com/features/general/venom-review-tom-hardy-michelle-williams-riz-azhmed-1202008546/)

## Screen Daily — Tim Grierson

Fi1m's normalised score 64/100 (inferred from the text). 3 October 2018. 

The review’s verdict and specific praise or complaint are not visible in the accessible page text. The article body is blocked by a subscription prompt.

[Read the review](https://www.screendaily.com/reviews/venom-review/5133142.article)

## The New York Times

Fi1m's normalised score 64/100 (inferred from the text). 4 October 2018. 

The page could not be accessed, so the critic’s verdict is unavailable. No specific praise or complaint can be verified from the supplied text.

[Read the review](https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/04/movies/venom-review-tom-hardy.html)

## The Guardian — Peter Bradshaw

Rating C. 3 October 2018. 

Bradshaw finds the film clumsy, dull and dramatically anticlimactic. He singles out Hardy’s broad split-personality comedy and the lack of genuine fun as particular weaknesses.

[Read the review](https://www.theguardian.com/film/2018/oct/03/venom-review-tom-hardy-marvel-spider-man-spin-off)

## Radio Times — Victoria Luxford

Fi1m's normalised score 55/100 (inferred from the text). 3 October 2018. 

The review gives a mixed verdict, finding enjoyable moments but a clunky plot. It singles out Tom Hardy’s performance as a source of enjoyment.

[Read the review](https://www.radiotimes.com/tv/sci-fi/venom-review-tom-hardy-delivers-enjoyable-moments-but-the-plot-is-clunky/)

## RogerEbert.com — Brian Tallerico

Rating 2/4. 3 October 2018. 

The review finds the film a muddled, disappointing superhero outing. It criticizes the story and tone, while noting Tom Hardy’s performance as a saving grace.

[Read the review](https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/venom-2018)

## Evening Standard — Charlotte Osullivan

Rating 2/5. 5 October 2018. 

The critic finds the film lacking in verve and bite. They praise the banter between Eddie and Venom, but fault the sanitized characterization and anonymous CGI battle.

[Read the review](https://www.standard.co.uk/culture/film/venom-review-tom-hardys-superhero-is-saucy-and-macho-but-has-no-verve-a3954131.html)

## Little White Lies — Adam Woodward

Rating 3/2/2. 3 October 2018. 

The review finds the film sanitised, frustrating, and far less exciting than it should be. It praises Hardy’s committed, combustible performance, while faulting the script’s implausibly stupid characters.

[Read the review](https://lwlies.com/reviews/venom)

## Time Out — Joshua Rothkopf

Rating 2/5. 2 October 2018. 

The critic finds the film disappointing and unlikely to satisfy either fans or newcomers. They fault its timid approach and predictable story.

[Read the review](https://www.timeout.com/movies/venom-5)

## Empire — Ian Freer

Fi1m's normalised score 35/100 (inferred from the text). 3 October 2018. 

Freer calls the film a mediocre origin story that fails to bring its anti-hero to life. He singles out the brief moments of lively banter between Eddie and Venom as a glimpse of a more entertaining film.

[Read the review](https://www.empireonline.com/movies/reviews/venom-review/)

## Los Angeles Times — Justin Chang

Fi1m's normalised score 30/100 (inferred from the text). 3 October 2018. 

Chang finds Venom a weak, joyless franchise effort that falls short of its promise. He praises Tom Hardy’s gleefully physical performance but faults the film for sanitizing its premise and feeling cut short.

[Read the review](https://www.latimes.com/entertainment/movies/la-et-mn-venom-review-20181002-story.html)

## Variety — Owen Gleiberman

Fi1m's normalised score 30/100 (inferred from the text). 2 October 2018. 

Gleiberman finds the film generic and exhausting, with Hardy’s performance often more mannered than compelling. He praises the dazzling visual effects but says they amount to diverting eye candy without much purpose.

[Read the review](https://variety.com/2018/film/reviews/venom-review-tom-hardy-michelle-williams-1202965030/)

## Vulture — David Edelstein

Fi1m's normalised score 30/100 (inferred from the text). 5 October 2018. 

Edelstein finds the film largely unmemorable, with Tom Hardy’s performance its main reason to watch. He praises Hardy’s amiable, flexible comic energy but faults the film for unclear rules and a lack of suspense.

[Read the review](https://www.vulture.com/2018/10/movie-review-venom.html)

## Slant Magazine — Jake Cole

Rating 1/4. 4 October 2018. 

Cole finds the film rushed and clumsy, with its action-heavy finale undermining the moments of eccentricity that briefly enliven it. He praises Tom Hardy’s jittery comic performance, especially Eddie’s lobster-tank scene.

[Read the review](https://www.slantmagazine.com/film/venom-2018/)

## The Hollywood Reporter — Todd McCarthy

Fi1m's normalised score 10/100 (inferred from the text). 2 October 2018. 

McCarthy dismisses the film as an unimaginative, irredeemable entry in the Marvel universe. He complains that Eddie Brock is unconvincing as a journalist and finds Tom Hardy’s performance unusually uninteresting.

[Read the review](https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-reviews/venom-review-1148836/)

## /Film — Josh Spiegel

Rating 4 out of 10. 4 October 2018. 

Spiegel finds the film outdated and largely lifeless, despite its lead actor’s efforts. He singles out Tom Hardy’s strange, entertaining performance as the film’s bright spot.

[Read the review](https://www.slashfilm.com/561430/venom-review/)

## Den of Geek — Don Kaye

Rating 2/5. 3 October 2018. 

Kaye considers the film a tonal and creative failure, with a rushed story and little character development. He singles out the clashing humor and attempted gravitas as especially poorly handled.

[Read the review](https://www.denofgeek.com/movies/venom-review-tom-hardy-marvel/)

## NME — Alex Flood

Rating 2/5. 2 October 2018. 

The review finds Venom dated, confused and ultimately disappointing. It singles out the darkly comic chemistry between Tom Hardy and the voice of the symbiote as a glimpse of what the film could have been.

[Read the review](https://www.nme.com/reviews/venom-film-review-2385964)

## Consequence — Clint Worthington

Fi1m's normalised score 30/100 (inferred from the text). 4 October 2018. 

Worthington finds the film a dull, incoherent tonal mess, despite occasional entertainment value. He singles out Tom Hardy’s bizarre, manic performance as the film’s one compelling feature.

[Read the review](https://consequence.net/2018/10/film-review-venom/)

## The Ringer — Adam Nayman

Fi1m's normalised score 30/100 (inferred from the text). 8 October 2018. 

Nayman finds the film neither good nor enjoyably bad, criticizing its timid, overly sentimental approach. He praises Tom Hardy’s comic vocal ability but says the material never lets him fully shine.

[Read the review](https://www.theringer.com/2018/10/08/movies/venom-deadpool-bad-movie)

## Eye for Film — Andrew Robertson

Fi1m's normalised score 20/100 (inferred from the text). 25 October 2018. 

The critic finds the film run-of-the-mill and not worth recommending. They fault its tonal shifts and failure to make its parts cohere, despite some enjoyable moments from Tom Hardy.

[Read the review](https://www.eyeforfilm.co.uk/review/venom-2018-film-review-by-andrew-robertson)

## The Wrap — Alonso Duralde

Fi1m's normalised score 10/100 (inferred from the text). 3 October 2018. 

The critic finds the film a loud, illogical dud that wastes its talented cast. They single out the muddled plotting and overabundance of CGI as major flaws, while briefly praising a striking moment at the Transamerica Pyramid.

[Read the review](https://www.thewrap.com/venom-film-review-tom-hardy-michelle-williams/)

---
© Fi1m Ltd. Written by AI under a human editor; checked against sources before publication. Quote with attribution and a link to the canonical URL. Our review: https://film.one/film/venom.md