Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Aquaman' started by Ozbridge, Nov 28, 2018.
51% top critics, woohoo~
Why should we care about critics ? Is this because they're somehow influential for certain people ? I mean, I trust the director because of his work on F&F, I saw the trailer that looked good without revealing too much. I went, I liked the movie and this is it. I have my own opinion about it. Opinion I feel is constructed enough.
why bother with critics ?
Yes, they might. And they should. If a critic is that concerned about how his review will be immortalized on RT, he should adjust his original rating accordingly. Problem solved. It seems to me, it’s in RT’s own interest to have the appearance of consistency. And a 6/10 score that’s - nevertheless - recorded as “rotten” is inconsistent.
The ultimate purpose of a fresh or rotten tomato is to recommend a movie or not. The grey area is that 6/10 spot. You could rate a movie 6/10 and not like it or not want to recommend it to others. You could also see a "turn off your brain" action film that you rated 6/10 but thought it was enjoyable enough to recommend others to see it. I get why they leave the flexibility there, but I wouldn't say the tomato meter is inaccurate because of that. Nobody writes a review with the intention of a rotten rating, but when enters a 6/10 and sees a fresh tomato come up leaves it. They'd change it to 5.5 or even 5.9 if they wanted to show it was borderline.
Rotten Tomatoes is very tricky. People can interpreted how it works in broad and flexible way, including critics themselves.
Fresh or rotten could be if a critic likes/ dislikes the movie, recommended it or not, 'isn't feeling it but think it excels in some ways', 'not really like it but will tell people to watch it', 'liked it but won't watch it again', 'doesn't agree/ likes with the few things even though the movie was competently made', etc.
That's why many festival or Oscar movies actually have lower RT percentage than more popular blockbuster movies, even though they have higher average rating score.
Sometimes, if critics didn't submit their ratings or scores, RT staff will be the one who decided it. They would consider it based on how the review feels, amount of pro and cons, or how it leans to.
Mark Hughes had an experience about it.
When Suicide Squad was released, there's one critic who wrote that he gave it and another movie 2,4/4 ratings and not the Fresh/ Rotten rating. SS is considered Rotten and the other movie was Fresh (I should bookmarked it then, I can't find it). So perhaps back then RT staff considered SS to be Rotten based on the amount negatives or if the review feels negative (even if the critics themselves actually meant it to be more positive).
This isn't a 'conspiracy to take down DC!!11' or whatever that some internet crowd said.
But it's all subjective, definitely.
If they try MM, they will probably have to throw in other heroes, too.
MM is even less know than Plastic Man.
I voted no on the poll. I’d say it’s been more or less far, critically. It’s a fun film, but the plot is tissue thin, and the characterisations are extremely two dimensional. It succeed like gangbusters as a spectacle, but fails on other levels. 6 or 7 out of 10 is about right.
i thought critics said it didnt had an eco message nor impact
Yeah, Aquaman movie is promoting social awareness about issues that Oceans face. The movie also had an ecological message.
Aquaman movie has done more for Ocean ecosystem awareness than any other Marvel or DC movie.
The environmental element of this movie is one of the things that I found disappointing. Not because they didn't bring it up, but because of how they addressed it.
What I appreciated was it being a part of Orm's motivation and the way it factored into his first aggressive steps toward the surface. The visuals at two different parts of the movie illustrating the damage surface dwellers had done were also a nice touch. Having Mera and Arthur discuss it further worked for me as well. But it was all talk. It didn't go anywhere.
Arthur, as this bridge between land and sea who fights for both, doesn't ultimately do anything about the environment or serve as a bridge in any way (he protects both sides but doesn't reconcile the two). One can assume he will eventually, but since it was such a huge plot point at the start of the film, not returning to it in any significant way felt off. As a superhero and leader, to protect land and sea, he has to do more than just kick ass and speak to animals. He has to discuss these issues with regular citizens of both worlds and with their leaders. I also wasn't sure how I felt about Atlantis acting as the arbiters of environmental conservation given we don't know how their advanced society deals with its waste (trash, energy, etc.) and we see them using various sea creatures as beasts of burden without them being able to consent (only Arthur can talk to them).
So, overall the environmental message came off as half-baked and had less of an impact as a result. Awareness is great. Action is better. Don't get me wrong. I'm about 75% okay with how it was handled. However, where I feel it was lacking did interfere with my appreciation and enthusiasm.
The message was there and they could have handled it better but not just that, Aquaman movie promotion included tie-ups with other groups that are dedicated to raising awareness about Ocean clean-up and other environmental activities, so movie was involved in many different ways.
Aquaman is Joining Forces with the Ocean Conservancy - Graphic Policy
Join the wave
The stuff outside the movie is just plain awesome. I love that this film's promotion included environmental awareness and, as a side note, Jason's and some of the other cast members' connection to their Polynesian heritage. It's wonderful.
To be fair, when has an environmental message not been half baked? I don’t know that I’ve ever seen a character offer an actual solution beyond recycling in 80’s movies.
While that may be true, that doesn't make it any less disappointing when the trend continues. I at least would have liked a final scene with surface and sea dwellers joining together to clean up the trash Orm's first tidal wave attack left on shores or incorporating something in the final montage or post-credits sequence that hinted at Arthur doing something about it, however small.
Yeah, they could have used some kind of denouement. Betting on a MOS scenario as they use the attack on the surface as an “issue” in 2quaman.
Today, the movies got nomination from Hollywood’s costume and hair & makeup guilds.
Had to vote yes.
Aquaman is by no means inferior to every single MCU movie.
Aquaman was a very fun and entertaining movie.
It didn't really need an environmental message.
It doesn't need but you would be surprised at the number of people who were looking forward to it that includes, Critics, Marine biologists, Fans and general moviegoers. Thanks to Wan for including it in the movie without sounding preachy.