BvS All Things Superman and Batman: An Open Discussion - - - - - - - - - - - - - Part 48

[Tra-El]

whoa I am not your pappy

Hahahahaha, yeah man. Everytime I see your name, I get a chuckle. My dads nickname has been Roach his entire life. Some people don't even know his real name.

 

[The Endless]

And now he says MOS is pretty good!!

Imagine if he didn't like it, what would he say then... funny how someone that likes a movie, sound exactly like a hater, maybe is a new way of trolling.

Or maybe people can accept a movie they like does in fact have problems and isn't a flawless masterpiece? Bizarre i know.

 

[jaymes_e06]

If you want a bad movie, Avatar The Last Airbender is an example.

 

[InJustice]

I wish...just once...that people would complain about RT even if they gave their pet film a good score.

I know it'll never happen, but still...

And Implying that MOS is a Blade Runner/Empire Strikes Back situation is just as bad as saying MOS was an overall failure.

Agreed. I'd rather people stop using RT% as point. We're rational people, we can deconstruct a film's flaw/quality and talk about that, instead of relying on RT.

After reading TASM2 RT thread, I swear the fangasm/fan hate for RT makes no sense at all.

 

[hafizbat]

And now he says MOS is pretty good!!

Imagine if he didn't like it, what would he say then... funny how someone that likes a movie, sound exactly like a hater, maybe is a new way of trolling.

I don't think I'm the one trolling here. Personally attacking me because you don't agree with what I said isn't exactly classy. In fact, it sets you up as rather weak-minded and not able to have a good debate.

I used facts to support my point and I did it without personally attacking anyone or their views. And unlike you, I am clearly able to differentiate my personal view of something in order to look at the big picture. Your immature post shows that you're clearly not able to do that.

I'm not afraid to say I thought MoS was decent, and still be able to accept that it was a critical failure and a disappointment.

 

[Lencho01]

If you want a bad movie, Avatar The Last Airbender is an example.

Better bending than the actual film.

I wish...just once...that people would complain about RT even if they gave their pet film a good score.

I know it'll never happen, but still...

And Implying that MOS is a Blade Runner/Empire Strikes Back situation is just as bad as saying MOS was an overall failure.

Box office too.

"A lot of people liked the same film as me!"
"A lot of people saw the same film as me!"

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

I don't think Man of Steel is a masterpiece, it has big issues, issues I hope the new screenwriter can erase in the sequel. Also they need to work on the editing big time, the editing was a hot mess.

 

[snpklsdmbldr]

people who solely rely on RT scores are people who can't think for themselves, they just probably go with the bandwagon.

 

[hafizbat]

Now, now I don't think he is trolling. I've seen trolls in the Henry Cavill thread just today and he doesn't come off as a troll to me.

Sincere no doubt...just misguided.

No really, I am.

Or maybe people can accept a movie they like does in fact have problems and isn't a flawless masterpiece? Bizarre i know.

 

[Tra-El]

Just to clear it up...hafizbat.....

MOS was plenty successful enough to get a sequel...it's what they intended when they started up the franchise again, and the RT stuff, even if lukewarm, wasn't enough to dissuade the plan like it would be for the reviled GL. MOS was getting a sequel one way or another.

Batman isn't there to 'salvage' the franchise....they're just swinging for the fences. It was already a money grab...any franchise is...it's a bigger one with Batman BECAUSE MOS was successful enough to open the doors to the possibility. WB saw it as enough of a success to stay on course and even expand it. The biggest thing since sliced bread? No....but plenty enough to reach even further, not 'panic' as you're making it out.

Nice post, Kal. Thing is, the Box office wasn't even done yet when Bats was announced for the sequel. It was only a month in after Man of Steel's release so WB thought it was the right time to move quickly at CC and confident enough to finally follow through with a Superman/Batman movie in MOS's sequel.

 

[hafizbat]

Just to clear it up...hafizbat.....

MOS was plenty successful enough to get a sequel...it's what they intended when they started up the franchise again, and the RT stuff, even if lukewarm, wasn't enough to dissuade the plan like it would be for the reviled GL. MOS was getting a sequel one way or another.

Batman isn't there to 'salvage' the franchise....they're just swinging for the fences. It was already a money grab...any franchise is...it's a bigger one with Batman BECAUSE MOS was successful enough to open the doors to the possibility. WB saw it as enough of a success to stay on course and even expand it. The biggest thing since sliced bread? No....but plenty enough to reach even further, not 'panic' as you're making it out.

Yeah, I can accept when I'm wrong. It was a bit harsh to say Batman is there to "save" MoS. Everything in this post is right, and I agree. Just got a bit heated, thats all.

Besides, I'd be a hypocrite if I said I'm not thrilled that they're including Batman. Superman is cool, but Batman is Batman.

 

[snpklsdmbldr]

Or maybe people can accept a movie they like does in fact have problems and isn't a flawless masterpiece? Bizarre i know.

all movies have problems, but there is no such thing as a "flawless masterpiece" movie. probably just exaggeration/hyperbole.

 

[Rowsdower!]

What's logic doing here in this thread?!

 

[Marvin]

I wish...just once...that people would complain about RT even if they gave their pet film a good score.

I know it'll never happen, but still...

I maybe Whedon's biggest fan ever and I enjoyed the hell out of avengers but the score on that film is a bit much as far as 'film criticism' and story telling goes. Even whedon has expressed this thoughts on the 'quality' vs intention. I also think various pixar films were scored with momentum on their side(and I enjoy them all).
I also think Blade 3 deserves a 0. I suppose that's different whereas I do love blade, I most definitely hate that film. But it's something.

I dont think anyone's arguing that Man of Steel didn't have a great box office, the issue is that MoS was VERY expensive to make. It had the same budget as The Avengers, so obviously the profit margin for that film is very different than that of Batman Begins or Thor 1 or Cap 1.

The film cost less then ASM and the two films arguably made about the same amount. I would have to live in a world where people consider ASM a financial failure as well given your particular outlook. Similar deal for Ironman2

MOS wasn't Jon Carter though I'm starting to suspect people might see things that way.

Regarding the RT thing...

Out of the Furnace holds a score of 52%. It is by far, one of the best movies of 2013 in my opinion. Stellar acting, story, direction, everything. How it doesn't have a 90+ score is beyond me. Now granted, I'm not saying critics are idiots and their opinions don't matter, but sometimes, I just don't understand what they want out of a movie and the RT score isn't always a barometer of a movie's quality.

Also, if ANY superhero movie ever deserved a rotten overall RT score, it's Thor: The Dark Turd. That movie was lousy.

I loved that film. What a shame about the score. I think it's fickle that we differ to a group of self important opinions in the judgement and reception of art. Truly a silly paradigm imo.

I almost always look at the general audience score when it comes to picking a movie to watch out of the archive.

 

[Kane52630]

I wish...just once...that people would complain about RT even if they gave their pet film a good score.

I know it'll never happen, but still...

And Implying that MOS is a Blade Runner/Empire Strikes Back situation is just as bad as saying MOS was an overall failure.

People who uses RottenTomatoes as a crutch to their argument tends to be very predictable in their movie taste. It's fine if critics hate or dislike a movie you enjoy, I know from many experiences in the past. Nowadays I look at RottenTomatoes after a movie I just watched.

 

[hafizbat]

I maybe Whedon's biggest fan ever and I enjoyed the hell out of avengers but the score on that film is a bit much as far as 'film criticism' and story telling goes. Even whedon has expressed this thoughts on the 'quality' vs intention.

Really? About the Avengers? I'd be interested in reading that if you can find it. Mainly because I feel like if Age of Ultron is the same as TA in terms of storyline and some other aspects, it'll come off as a big disappointment. Whedon's gonna have to take it to the next level, now that the "first time assembly" effect is not there. (I think he will.)

 

[Micromind]

Yeah, because the cash is all that matters...

The Transformers series and the Pirates of the Caribbean franchise make a lot of money too. I don't think anyone thinks of those movies very highly, do they? Big summer CGI blockbusters tend to make a lot of money, and MoS fit that bill.

Other than financially, how can MoS be considered a success? It was panned by the critics. A 56% RT score is nothing to be proud of...considering its lower than Spider-Man 3, X-men 3: The Last Stand, and Ang Lee's Hulk, which last time I checked, were considered massive flops...

Lets not forget that there are 26 comic book films rated higher including EVERY Marvel Studios film.

I honestly don't understand how people here consider it a success. It was terrible, but it made a lot of money. That doesn't make it a success, at least not to me.

Rotten Tomato's Average Top Critic rating provides you a good idea about the perception of professional Critics, who are usually supposed to provide unbiased opinion.

According to RT's average top critic ratings, MOS cannot be termed as "panned movie", maybe as "average blockbuster" at worst.

Man of Steel - 6.2/10

Some movies that have RT top critics ratings below 6.2

Spider-Man 3 - 5.5/10

Iron Man 2 - 5.9/10

The Incredible Hulk - 5.8/10

Thor : The Dark World - 5.4/10


And, Some movies that have RT top critics ratings near 6.2

Thor : 6.3/10

The Wolverine - 6.3/10

Man of Steel - 6.2/10


So, a RT Top Critic rating near 6.2 is not such a bad thing.

 

[The Endless]

all movies have problems, but there is no such thing as a "flawless masterpiece" movie. probably just exaggeration/hyperbole.

Of course. But the way some react to people who dare criticise films they like, you'd think they consider them flawless masterpieces.

 

[Juha Bach]

Lets be honest. This movie is extremely likely to be panned by critics. Am not even remotely confident that they will like it. But you know what? It doesnt matter. What matters is your own opinion. Simple.

 

[Marvin]

Snyder of all people, following up Nolan's batman interpretation...with Batfleck as an actor. Critics are no doubt already rolling up their sleeves.

Really? About the Avengers? I'd be interested in reading that if you can find it. Mainly because I feel like if Age of Ultron is the same as TA in terms of storyline and some other aspects, it'll come off as a big disappointment. Whedon's gonna have to take it to the next level, now that the "first time assembly" effect is not there. (I think he will.)

1.
https://movies.yahoo.com/blogs/movie-talk/joss-whedon-disses-own-megahit-calls-avengers-haphazard-194951460.html

2.
http://www.nme.com/filmandtv/news/director-joss-whedon-on-the-avengers-i-dont-think/283508

To answer your question, I think he'll make improvements in the sequel. But as for it's critical score, why that film sits higher than the matrix...is a matter of opinion I suppose. But I liked it.

 

[Micromind]

I think people are using the term "panned movie" very loosely here, a few examples of movies that were really "panned" are-

After Earth, Transcendence, Lone Ranger.

I don't think that MOS sequel is going to join that list.

 

[Psycho_Sith]

Dammit all...this continuation thread started off funny & light-hearted. Then what?! The same old, tired *****ery, friggin' hater-fest starts in with the most off-the-wall "proof why MoS sucked".

Here's a frickin' news flash - critics are there solely to *criticize* things; to find the gripes and the nitpicks to write about to help sell s**t.

You think an OSHA Inspector is there to be an industry's 'buddy'?? No, their sole purpose is to nitpick and gripe about all the small stuff that's "out of regulation".
...i.e. critics are full of s**t.

I don't want to know what a frickin' food critic thinks about steak, I wanna eat that damn steak myself.

 

[The Endless]

Dammit all...this continuation thread started off funny & light-hearted. Then what?! The same old, tired *****ery, friggin' hater-fest starts in with the most off-the-wall "proof why MoS sucked".

Here's a frickin' news flash - critics are there solely to *criticize* things; to find the gripes and the nitpicks to write about to help sell s**t.

You think an OSHA Inspector is there to be an industry's 'buddy'?? No, their sole purpose is to nitpick and gripe about all the small stuff that's "out of regulation".
...i.e. critics are full of s**t.

I don't want to know what a frickin' food critic thinks about steak, I wanna eat that damn steak myself.

The question is... would you have this same stance if MoS had 96% rating on RT?

 

[Mikelus]

I don't think I'm the one trolling here. Personally attacking me because you don't agree with what I said isn't exactly classy. In fact, it sets you up as rather weak-minded and not able to have a good debate.

I used facts to support my point and I did it without personally attacking anyone or their views. And unlike you, I am clearly able to differentiate my personal view of something in order to look at the big picture. Your immature post shows that you're clearly not able to do that.

You're contradicting yourself, your insults here are far worse, but I'm not going to whine, I'm too old for that.

Using your terms, "weak-minded" people rely too much on RT scores, several of us have shown how flawed their system is and how fickle critics can be. Of course MOS has flaws, also TDKT, Avengers, Star Wars, etc... You can find flaws, errors or things you don't like in practically every film, just the way it is, that's life.

 

[113]

Snyder of all people, following up Nolan's batman interpretation...with Batfleck as an actor. Critics are no doubt already rolling up their sleeves.



1.
https://movies.yahoo.com/blogs/movie-talk/joss-whedon-disses-own-megahit-calls-avengers-haphazard-194951460.html

2.
http://www.nme.com/filmandtv/news/director-joss-whedon-on-the-avengers-i-dont-think/283508

To answer your question, I think he'll make improvements in the sequel. But as for it's critical score, why that film sits higher than the matrix...is a matter of opinion I suppose. But I liked it.

Yeah, the moment I walked out of Avengers I knew it would be a movie that wouldn't stand the test of time and I put it on my Top5 list just by default but I fully anticipate it continuing to drop over the next few years. It was a very entertaining movie and really was the perfect summer flick to kick off the movie season in 2012 but it's gotten more love than it deserves imho. I'm not a big Joss Whedon fan (gasp) and it felt very much like a Whedon film in the worst ways possible. I'm glad that even he recognizes it's shortcomings and he definitely needs to step his game up for Age of Ultron.