“I’ve had one of those things… up my ass!” exclaims Tom Hardy, in his terrible “American” accent, somewhere in the middle of “Venom.” Just one of the awful, laughable moments, “Venom” is a mediocre superhero movie that neither offends nor impresses. Don’t let the advertising or the script’s half-hearted attempts convince you otherwise – “Venom” is just another superhero movie in a year that’s delivered better and a genre that’s no stranger to worse.

After a dreadful, CGI-heavy prologue, we meet Eddie Brock (Hardy), the world’s best journalist. He’s got it all—the apartment, the girlfriend (played by an underwritten Michelle Williams), the award-winning news(?) show—that is, until he winds up on the wrong side of Carlton Drake (Riz Ahmed), our evil, pseudo-Elon Musk and head of the “Life Foundation.” If all these elements sound trite and half-baked, that’s because they are. Yet “Venom” just keeps on chugging through, until a disgraced Eddie winds up back at the Life Foundation and accidentally bonds with one of their alien “symbiotes.”

Unfortunately, “Venom” ends up being a failure on pretty much every level. The script is actual garbage, filled to the brim with bad dialogue, nonsensical characters and structural issues. But the key problem is that we never get a sense of who Brock is, although the paper-thin villain doesn’t fare much better. Meanwhile, director Ruben Fleischer (“Zombieland”) doesn’t show much inspiration in the action sequences, clunky car-chases and choppily edited fight scenes. There are no stakes, and the special effects make everything feel weightless, especially in the “climax.”

The person responsible for bringing “Venom” to life ends up being one of the weakest links. This isn’t the first time Tom Hardy has lent his immense talent to big budget projects (see “Mad Max,” “Inception”), and while there’s something admirable about his commitment here, it doesn’t come together into anything other than a bad performance. Aside from whatever his voice is doing, Eddie Brock is neither compelling nor likable as he waddles across the frame. No, thank you.

So what is “Venom” trying? Basically, superhero movies have been dipping their toes into other genres the past few years. “Logan” is an awesome neo-western, “Winter Soldier” envisioned itself as a seventies spy-thriller, and Sony’s last superhero outing, the excellent “Spider-Man: Homecoming,” was a John Hughes-esque high school comedy. “Venom,” meanwhile, tries to play into the horror genre—to poor results. Instead of being “scary,” the movie settles for “occasionally creepy;” you get the sense that Fleischer’s instinct to veer towards body-horror have been shackled by a studio-mandated PG-13 rating. “Venom’s” more disgusting aspects are either ignored or relegated to a cheap punchline. What could have been a refreshing, Deadpool-type anti-hero is relegated to generic, low-stakes fluff.

But then again, perhaps this should come as no surprise: This is the same studio that brought us the “Amazing Spider-Man” movies. For those who don’t follow the behind-the-scenes minutia of superhero movies (or have a day job), the rights to “Spider-Man”—along with the characters he’s associated with, like “Venom”—have been Sony property since the nineties. But after Sony’s failure with the ironically titled “Amazing” franchise, they’ve given Spidey back to Marvel (which is how he was able to appear in “Infinity War”). But “Venom” proves the Sony that made the “Amazing Spider-Man” is alive and well. After all, they greenlit a “Venom” movie that doesn’t include Spider-Man (the freaking focal point of the character!).

But there were also some smart producers in the room: “Venom” clocks in at a mere hour and fifty-two minutes, which is the best thing about it. The movie was just barely entertaining enough to keep me happy, making this the closest anything in the superhero genre has come to replicating the fun of a “Fast & Furious” flick. Again, it’s not good, but I didn’t hate it. Has “Venom” been cut-to-hell? Yes. But the resulting stupidity is… kind of enjoyable.

But the fact that this even exists is maybe the most remarkable thing here. Sony’s been “developing” this thing since 2008, and it feels like just yesterday we got that trash-fire of a first trailer (a solid representation of what would follow). Not only does “Venom” exist, it’s probably getting a sequel, considering the mid-credits set-up and the massive opening weekend. Even with bad writing, acting, directing and special effects, “Venom” is better than a “Suicide Squad” or a “Batman v. Superman.” But I can’t recommend it.