|
Neurolimal posted:How does the belief that critics want a generic lighthearted hero movie fit with the fact that Jessica Jones and Daredevil saw unanimous praise? Well it doesn't, but it's now an easy go-to thing so people can draw those lines between DC/Marvel and by extension they can say that really DC is heady material for grown-ups and Marvel is for kids. I mean, "no fun" is a very vague term, but it can be emblematic of the material failing to engage at all.
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2016 10:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 14:15 |
|
|
TFRazorsaw posted:Let me guess. The destruction of Krypton is global warming? The Krypton birthing system a substitute for the government controlling our pasts and futures? Who is Zod supposed to be in this metaphor because he's simultaneously against the archaic Kryptonian leadership and our hero Jor-El. There's an in-universe documentary on the MoS bluray (2 disc edition) that said Krypton became destabilized because the kryptonians keep digging into the crust for resources and to built cities, something like that.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2016 11:19
|
|
|
Or you could just watch the movie, the first thing Jor-El says to the council: "Do you not understand, Krypton's core is collapsing, we may only have a matter of weeks. I warned you, harvesting the core was suicide." I mean poo poo, even their moon is shown to be collapsed from harvesting it. Not only is Krypton shown to be a dark future of Earth, but Zod is literally trying to turn Earth into Krypton.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2016 11:47
|
|
|
TFRazorsaw posted:Let me guess. The destruction of Krypton is global warming? The Krypton birthing system a substitute for the government controlling our pasts and futures? Who is Zod supposed to be in this metaphor because he's simultaneously against the archaic Kryptonian leadership and our hero Jor-El. There's an entire movie about the fictional planet Krypton, and the people from there. It's called Man Of Steel. I recommend it. The Krypton people essentially let the economy determine such things as their genetic codes, in the hopes that it would result in an efficient utopia. Instead, they only exaggerated existing problems. People became drones of a deeply-entrenched caste system, and set to work mindlessly consuming all the planet's resources. Zod was nearly driven mad by the contradiction of being programmed to defend a system that's self-destructive. His solution was to purify the system by creating a fascist dictatorship. Zod's fascism is a metaphor for fascism. Krypton is a metaphor for Earth.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2016 12:18
|
|
|
axelord posted:When people think of a super hero movie they think of a fun action movie. It's ok to say in a review hey this isn't what your getting in this movie. In what universe is Man of Steel hard sci-fi?
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2016 12:50
|
|
|
I'm excited for this film 's aftermath and the never-ending debate that it will spawn here. My eyes glaze over when I see Man of Steel brought up but it'll be fun until Civil War's reviews come out.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2016 13:41
|
|
|
It always seems to me that complaints about these movies not being "fun" stem from a confusion between the watcher's feelings and the characters'. It's like someone tells you that Diablo just isn't fun, and you ask them why, and they remind you how dark and dreary and violent everything is, and how much suffering and death is onscreen all the time, and how few and far between the jokes are, and since when do necromancers shoot bone spears? They're just supposed to forecast the future by examining remains. And furthermore,
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2016 13:48
|
|
|
Neurolimal posted:How does the belief that critics want a generic lighthearted hero movie fit with the fact that Jessica Jones and Daredevil saw unanimous praise? Films and television are different mediums. Arrow reinvigorated television superheroes and started out as a much more Daredevil like "gritty" show. Daredevil just makes an already established and well received tone and takes it one step further by making it "mature audiences" on top of that. Also television is, when it's not HBO/Starz, pretty much always all tell and very little show. The budget difference and shooting time difference means generally more pedestrian shooting in general, which takes a ton away from the visual aspects of the story. That means that almost everything relies almost purely on words on the paper as opposed to, say, imagery that tells a thousand words like this:  Every once in a while, you'll get pretty good looking shots of, say, The Punisher sitting at a bench with a carnival wheel shutting off in front of him, but it's rare for the show, whereas those "telling" shots can make up the entirety of a movie. This generation of Rotten Tomatoes critics doesn't come from the place that, say, Ebert did, where they care about/understand the visual nature of film making, by and large. That means there's an over-focus on plot, dialogue, and expectations, and very little on visuals and meaning. Nolan managed expectations well with Batman Begins. People wanted a more down to earth Batman that was more like the modern comics after the Schumaker (sic) era, and we got that. He also mixed a lot of visual interest in, as well, but it was balanced with an over-explaining script that was all like FEAR FEAR FEAR THIS IS WHATS HAPPENING ON SCREEN FEAR NOW HERES A JOKE, that helped to drive the modern reviewer along, while still having a level of subtext and visual depth. Dark Knight continued this by fulfilling expectations of giving a dynamic Joker that people loved to watch (and told jokes meant to make the audience laugh for half of his lines), while still maintaining that balance. Dark Knight Rises is where Nolan shifted a bit - he subverted expectations with every character, especially Batman, and upped the visual aspects another level, with less dialogue put it -just- to entertain. And it was received the least well and started turning off more critics and audiences, who started to negatively compare it with Marvel films, which were more like the mold of Begins. Snyder has less dialogue than Nolan, has very, very few obvious jokes in movies, relies far more on visuals, etc. which is a further swing to the opposite level and continues/heightens the trend that DKR started. It's easy to see why there would be a different reception among a group of people that generally see things a bit differently than what the movies are focusing on/trying to appeal to.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2016 13:57
|
|
|
Genuinely curious: Why are people getting upset that this film isn't getting more positive reviews?
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2016 14:05
|
|
|
Just saw Batman v Superman. It's about as dumb a movie as I expected it to be. Everything story element you came to expect from the trailers is there and little else. It's worse than Man of Steel. The plot reminds me of Amazing Spider-Man 2 in terms of shoehorned characters, overly-long and flashy fight scenes, stiff and hammy acting, and an attempt to rush a shared universe into existence. I wanted to give this movie a chance, because Man of Steel was OK and the studio appeared confident. But it disappoints. It's not as bad as Fantastic 4, but not as good as Man of Steel. Kurzon fucked around with this message at 14:09 on Mar 23, 2016 |
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2016 14:05
|
|
|
Davros1 posted:Genuinely curious: Why are people getting upset that this film isn't getting more positive reviews? No one is upset  At least not from what I've been reading here, unless you meant just in general. There are a lot of salty folk in the DCEU subreddit though.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2016 14:09
|
|
|
Davros1 posted:Genuinely curious: Why are people getting upset that this film isn't getting more positive reviews? I am happy that it isn't.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2016 14:11
|
|
|
Ferrinus posted:I am happy that it isn't. I personally can't wait for discussions to blow up in the CBM thread for the next 3 years 
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2016 14:12
|
|
|
Yoshifan823 posted:"Y'know, Room was a very well acted movie, but I feel like it wasn't 'fun' enough." There is no reality where a movie like batman v superman is even nominated for an Oscar or anything other than a people's choice award/mtv movie award. Sure the movie doesn't have to be fun, but it should at least be good.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2016 14:13
|
|
|
Davros1 posted:Genuinely curious: Why are people getting upset that this film isn't getting more positive reviews? Personally? I didn't love MoS but I liked what I saw about this movie in the trailers so I'm bummed that, even ignoring the "be like Marvel" reviews, there seems to be a general sense that it's overstuffed and too precipatory of the next movies and the main conflict justification is kind of flimsy - sounds like the elements that made Amazing Spider 2 and Ultron slogs. Still planning to see it myself though. And not everyone is upset, there were plenty of slightly eye-rolling "good, critics trashing it makes me want to see it MORE" counter-culture responses when the initial reviews hit. Although I doubt a bunch of 99% reviews would've upset them either.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2016 14:13
|
|
|
teagone posted:I personally can't wait for discussions to blow up in the CBM thread for the next 3 years It's insane how much extra value Cinema Discusso has added to my expenditures on movie tickets.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2016 14:14
|
|
|
Outside of this forum, where you aren't seeing it, there are a lot of sports team type movie fans that are rooting for Team DC and want it to win over Team Marvel, combined with a lot of people who want to see their favorite characters on screen doing well. From a personal level, the only reason I would "care" about critical and box office reception to this is that if this movie fails, it might kneejerk WB into taking a more Marvel like approach to their film-making, which would be terrible, since you would have four or more of the blockbuster slots per year taken up by movies that all have practically the same tone. I think some others here might share that worry, but outside of that, I don't think anyone cares.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2016 14:14
|
|
|
Meanwhile in that other thread:
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2016 14:34
|
|
|
SIR FAT JONY IVES posted:Meanwhile in that other thread: This is what we human beings refer to as a joke.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2016 14:36
|
|
|
I cannot believe that Batman and Superman don't even fight, the spoilers were wrong!
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2016 14:40
|
|
|
SIR FAT JONY IVES posted:Meanwhile in that other thread: Hes' kidding you doofus
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2016 14:40
|
|
|
Basebf555 posted:This is what we human beings refer to as a joke. I know, it sort of highlights the differences, this thread takes itself super seriously, the other thread is just joking.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2016 14:41
|
|
|
People always cross-post stuff between these threads. Are there a lot of posters that don't just read both? It's all the same people.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2016 14:42
|
|
|
Blaming the bad reviews of BvS on not being light and fluffy like The Avengers seems kind of off base when Days of Future Past, which was super doomy gloomy and killed the poo poo out of people, got positive reviews pretty much across the board. As near as I can tell the next X-Men movie is basically about the end of the world nightmare that Batman sees in BvS actually happening. They're going Super Turbo Helldoom, and it at least looks like everyone is on board with that too?
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2016 14:48
|
|
|
Tezzor posted:I think "I did not enjoy watching this movie" is a legitimate criticism of a movie, especially a big superhero movie. You're not making The Act of Killing here. You're making a movie where the flying alien in the cape punches the grumpy man in the bat costume, and even if every word of apologism for Zack Snyder was the God's honest truth, most members of the audience aren't the bored jaded half-bright nerds in black t shirts they've been cranking out six to a ton since the early 90s who are seeking to spend $11 on a nihilistic deconstruction of the political suppositions inherent to the act of hunky alien/bat weirdo fight scenes 100% agree with this. "I did not enjoy watching this movie" is a perfectly valid, if shallow, criticism. It's a movie about a flying alien in tights versus a grumpy manchild in a batsuit. Why does every movie need to have thought-provoking symbolism and commentary about the human race? Will the general public really care about any of that?
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2016 14:51
|
|
|
Jonny_Rocket posted:100% agree with this. Why is "the general public" a barometer here. We're not talking about how much money the movie potentially makes.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2016 14:54
|
|
|
Jonny_Rocket posted:100% agree with this. It works as a criticism when its one of my best friends, who's taste in movies I know very well, so when they say they didn't enjoy a movie I can infer why that would be. On an internet forum where you're swapping opinions with people who are mostly strangers, "I did not enjoy it" doesn't give people anything to go on as far as interpreting your opinion and discussing it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2016 14:56
|
|
|
sean10mm posted:Blaming the bad reviews of BvS on not being light and fluffy like The Avengers seems kind of off base when Days of Future Past, which was super doomy gloomy and killed the poo poo out of people, got positive reviews pretty much across the board. It's because Zack Snyder didn't direct The Usual Suspects.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2016 14:56
|
|
|
Darko posted:Why is "the general public" a barometer here. We're not talking about how much money the movie potentially makes. It's not about money - it's about the potential to change the public's perception of the DC Movie Universe. Not a lot of people (outside of Cinema Discussion) that I know liked Man of Steel or Green Lantern. If this movie turns out to be really good, it has the potential to change the general movie going audience's perception about DC films (in theory). People will start to have more faith in the "DC Brand" in its subsequent spin-offs and solo films. Basebf555 posted:On an internet forum where you're swapping opinions with people who are mostly strangers, "I did not enjoy it" doesn't give people anything to go on as far as interpreting your opinion and discussing it. I agree, which is why I said it's a shallow, but valid, criticism.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2016 14:59
|
|
|
Toady posted:The DC Cinematic Universe subreddit is on suicide watch. I don't know why people care about the critic reviews. If they personally like the movie then that is all that matters. There are people that love the Transformers franchise that Michael Bay created and they think they are the best movies ever. Who gives a poo poo? Movies are personal experiences in my opinion and there are certain things that everyone should be agreement on (such as bad acting, CGI, technical problems, to just name a few) but otherwise if someone likes a movie then they like it. Critics are usually giant dipshits anyways.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2016 15:03
|
|
|
Jonny_Rocket posted:I agree, which is why I said it's a shallow, but valid, criticism. Ok so its valid, but also completely worthless and a waste of the time it takes to post it. Still valid though!
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2016 15:04
|
|
|
I said come in! posted:I don't know why people care about the critic reviews. It's because some people are too dumb to form an opinion for themselves. Some. Not all. But a lot.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2016 15:09
|
|
|
Davros1 posted:Genuinely curious: Why are people getting upset that this film isn't getting more positive reviews? If I'm upset, it's because I have yet to find a review that actually tells me if I would enjoy this movie (having enjoyed Man of Steel). Darko posted:Why is "the general public" a barometer here. We're not talking about how much money the movie potentially makes. And again, RottenTomatoes is not a barometer for the general public either. Go look up the Transformers RT scores for proof of that.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2016 15:16
|
|
|
Jonny_Rocket posted:It's not about money - it's about the potential to change the public's perception of the DC Movie Universe. Not a lot of people (outside of Cinema Discussion) that I know liked Man of Steel or Green Lantern. So... it is about money.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2016 15:19
|
|
|
Basebf555 posted:Ok so its valid, but also completely worthless and a waste of the time it takes to post it. Still valid though! If he explained why he didn't enjoy it, we would have some insight worthy of discussion. It's still a valid point, even though he didn't back it up. Art is subjective - we all interpret and enjoy art in our own individual way. There isn't a really a "right" or "wrong" way to enjoy a film - regardless, there's no point arguing and we should get back to the film itself. Ferrinus posted:So... it is about money. I was referring more to the general public's perception of the DC brand and image. If you're going to be that pedantic with details, then yes, it ultimately has to do with money (keeping customers due to faith in the brand, etc).
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2016 15:28
|
|
|
The drat DC brand.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2016 15:29
|
|
|
Jonny_Rocket posted:
I've seen a shitton of Superman/BvS style of merchandise so if anything they're not harming that brand. If anything it's just a different tactic to get the same result as the MCU. For the latter, they try to make films that virtually no one oppose, but very few people actually love and devote themselves to either (obviously there are exceptions, this is the internet). For DC, they make films that are inherently polarizing - if you like it, you'll probably love it; if you don't like it, it's probably the worst thing you've ever seen (again, exceptions apply). You might have fewer people buying things, but they might buy more of it per person. And again, DC isn't that stupid either. They realize there's a market for a fun and (for lack of a better term) "kiddie" Batman and co. That's why they greenlit the Lego Batman movie as well. computer parts fucked around with this message at 15:37 on Mar 23, 2016 |
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2016 15:34
|
|
|
The lengths people will go to excuse all the well-recieved darker comic movies and shows to protect their narrative that everyone who doesn't like MoS or BvS are stubborn luddites who wont tolerate a Serious Mature Movie For Adults is amazing. I've been reading YCS, and the people trying to excuse voting for a candidate they actively dislike are jumping through fewer hoops than posters in here. Ferrinus posted:The drat DC brand. We're talking about a subsidy of Time Warner, not outsider art.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2016 15:39
|
|
|
Neurolimal posted:The lengths people will go to excuse all the well-recieved darker comic movies and shows to protect their narrative that everyone who doesn't like MoS or BvS are stubborn luddites who wont tolerate a Serious Mature Movie For Adults is amazing. That isn't what's happening though. People are saying "this isn't how Batman is!!! He isn't like this in the comics!!!!!!!!!!!" and then other people are using examples to explain that yes, he is like that in the comics (and other movies) too. Y'all need to chill. Not everything is a  conspiracy
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2016 15:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 14:15 |
|
|
Neurolimal posted:The lengths people will go to excuse all the well-recieved darker comic movies and shows to protect their narrative that everyone who doesn't like MoS or BvS are stubborn luddites who wont tolerate a Serious Mature Movie For Adults is amazing. Again, shows have poo poo to do with movies. It's like saying "critics have praised these darker comic books like Preacher, why don't they like this dark movie?" It's a nonsensical comparison because there's a large medium switch with large inherent differences and expectations with the medium. edit: And i actually doubt BvS is "dark" because other movies called "dark" like The Dark Knight are silly and light as hell. I think that the post-Ebert reviewers can't explain themselves correctly, which is a problem.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2016 15:44
|
|