Whether “Venom: The Last Dance” is worth watching depends almost entirely on who you are. If you’re a dedicated fan of the Venom trilogy or someone who enjoyed the chaotic, comedic tone of the previous films, the answer is yes—audiences rated it 79 percent on Rotten Tomatoes, describing it as “a truly thrilling send-off.” If you’re a film critic or someone who expects tightly plotted screenplays and coherent storytelling, the answer is decisively no—critics scored it just 40 percent, citing a “convoluted” screenplay that confuses tonal ambitions. This nearly 40-point gap between critic and audience scores tells you everything: this film is designed for franchise loyalists, not for people seeking a well-crafted narrative.
The film arrived in theaters on October 25, 2024, as the conclusion to Tom Hardy’s Venom saga. It grossed $405.5 million globally, making it a commercial success despite being the lowest-grossing entry of the trilogy domestically. The split verdict reflects a fundamental truth about this movie: it knows exactly what it is and doesn’t try to be anything else, which is precisely why some people love it and others found it aggravating.
Table of Contents
- Should You Watch This If You’re Not a Venom Fan?
- Tom Hardy’s Performance and What Drives the Audience Love
- Box Office and Commercial Performance
- How This Sequel Compares to Its Predecessors
- The Screenplay and Tonal Issues That Critics Identified
- What Audiences Actually Responded To
- International Reception and Where It Played Best
Should You Watch This If You’re Not a Venom Fan?
Probably not. The film carries a Metacritic score of 42 and an IMDb rating of 6.0 out of 10—numbers that reflect widespread critical skepticism. If you haven’t seen the first two venom films or haven’t invested in these characters, the reviews suggest you won’t find enough here to justify the runtime. Critics specifically targeted the screenplay for trying to juggle too many tonal registers without successfully landing any of them.
This isn’t a case where a film is simply “too weird” or “too ambitious”—it’s a case where the attempt to blend dark superhero storytelling with comedy and emotion misfires according to professional reviewers. That said, the film performs significantly better than other recent Marvel-adjacent releases from the same window. It outperforms 2024’s “Madame Web” (11% critics), 2022’s “Morbius” (15%), and 2018’s original “Venom” (30%). The only Venom film it underperforms is “Let There Be Carnage” (57%), which had a tighter focus and more cohesive direction. If your threshold for “watchable” is simply “better than recent Marvel failures,” the bar is cleared.
Tom Hardy’s Performance and What Drives the Audience Love
Tom Hardy received consistent praise from critics, even those who disliked the film overall. His portrayal of Eddie Brock and his dynamic with the Venom symbiote carries genuine charisma and unexpected comedic timing. Reviewers noted that Hardy’s performance is one of the few elements that works consistently throughout the film, suggesting that if you’re watching for character work rather than plot coherence, you’ll find something worth your time here. However, this raises a significant limitation: one strong performance cannot carry a film that struggles in other areas.
Hardy’s work elevates the material, but it can’t fix structural problems with the screenplay. Think of it like watching a concert where the lead vocalist is exceptional but the band is out of sync—the talent is there, but the overall experience is diminished. Audiences seemed willing to forgive the film’s narrative shortcomings because Hardy’s entertaining presence kept them engaged. Critics, viewing it with expectations around plot and character development, couldn’t make the same allowance.
Box Office and Commercial Performance
Commercially, the film succeeded while simultaneously showing signs of trilogy fatigue. It earned $405.5 million globally, with $118.5 million domestically and $287 million internationally. The opening weekend broke down to $51 million domestically and $124 million internationally—a split that reveals audience enthusiasm exists primarily outside North America. China alone contributed $84.3 million to the global total, positioning the film as the third-largest Hollywood title of 2024 in that market.
The warning here is in the domestic numbers. The $51 million opening weekend represents the lowest domestic opening of the Venom trilogy, suggesting that American audiences showed less enthusiasm for another entry in this series. The film compensated through strong international performance, particularly in China, indicating that the Venom character resonates more powerfully with global audiences than with domestic viewers. For someone deciding whether to watch, this commercial split matters: the film was made to appeal to international markets, which may influence its pacing, humor, and cultural references.
How This Sequel Compares to Its Predecessors
The critical consensus positions “The Last Dance” as a middle ground in quality compared to the first two films. The original “Venom” (2018) received brutal reviews (30%) but found an audience, partly because it was the first film introducing Hardy’s interpretation. “Let There Be Carnage” (2021) improved on critical reception with 57%, offering a more focused storyline.
“The Last Dance” falls between these two at 40%, suggesting a step backward from the second film’s approach. The practical implication: if you watched “Let There Be Carnage” and found it satisfying, you’re taking a risk with this sequel. The film apparently abandons some of the narrative discipline that made the second entry work better with critics. Conversely, if you enjoyed the first Venom’s chaotic energy and didn’t require perfect storytelling, this third film might appeal to you more since it embraces that same undisciplined, character-driven approach rather than trying to tighten the formula.
The Screenplay and Tonal Issues That Critics Identified
The specific criticism leveled at the screenplay is that it suffers from “convoluted tonal ambitions.” This phrase means the film attempts to be simultaneously a dark superhero story, a comedy, a romance, an action film, and an existential meditation on Venom’s nature—but it doesn’t fully commit to any of these registers. The result is a film that shifts between serious moments and jokes without a clear sense of when each tone is appropriate. A practical limitation to know: if you prefer films with consistent tone and clear thematic focus, you will likely experience “The Last Dance” as frustrating rather than entertaining.
The film doesn’t maintain a coherent emotional through-line, which is what allows critics to dismiss it despite acknowledging Hardy’s performance. Some viewers describe this inconsistency as part of the film’s charm—the 79% audience score suggests many found the tonal chaos fun. Others, particularly those expecting a climactic trilogy conclusion with real stakes and emotional weight, found it disorienting. The warning is that you won’t know which experience you’ll have until you’re in the theater.
What Audiences Actually Responded To
The 79 percent audience score (based on over 5,000 verified ratings) reveals what viewers actually enjoyed. Audiences described the film as “hilarious,” praised its ’90s aesthetic and energy, and called it a “truly thrilling send-off.” This suggests people who watched it were entertained by the spectacle, the comedy, and the character dynamics, even when narrative logic faltered. The word “hilarious” appears repeatedly in audience reviews, indicating that the comedic elements landed successfully with viewers, even if critics found them tonally inappropriate.
This audience enthusiasm carries a specific implication: the film plays differently depending on your mindset walking in. If you’re prepared for a fun, absurd romp featuring a wisecracking alien symbiote, you’ll likely enjoy it. If you’re expecting a story with genuine narrative stakes and emotional resonance, you’ll likely find the comedy undercuts those moments. The 40-point gap between critic and audience scores isn’t because the film is objectively bad—it’s because professional reviewers and paying audiences have fundamentally different expectations about what a concluding chapter in this trilogy should deliver.
International Reception and Where It Played Best
The film’s strongest performance came from international markets, with $287 million of its $405.5 million total coming from outside North America. China’s $84.3 million contribution specifically indicates that the film’s particular style of humor and action plays exceptionally well with audiences outside the United States and Canada. This has practical implications for understanding its reception: critical discourse in English-language outlets may not reflect how the film actually performed or was received globally.
The international box office success, combined with the audience approval rating, tells you the film achieved exactly what it set out to do—entertain franchise fans and international audiences with a character-driven, action-heavy conclusion. The critical pan, meanwhile, reflects the specific standards of professional film criticism in North America. Neither verdict is wrong; they’re simply responses to different questions about what a film should be.
