Aquaman's Critical Reception Thread (Rotten Tomato and Metacritic)

Do you think Critics are being too harsh on Aquaman? Do you agree with some?

  • Total voters
    21
SomeOldGuy said:
I will accept complaints about using cgi in Aquaman to film underwater scenes just as soon as the critic making that complaint shows me the GotG review they wrote complaining about using cgi to film outer space scenes instead of putting the actors in orbit.
Click to expand...

Right?! That is just inconsistent. You cannot be fine with one and drag another. These people are supposed to be pros.
 
73%
Average Rating: 6.3/10
Reviews Counted: 94
Fresh: 69
Rotten: 25
 
SomeOldGuy said:
I will accept complaints about using cgi in Aquaman to film underwater scenes just as soon as the critic making that complaint shows me the GotG review they wrote complaining about using cgi to film outer space scenes instead of putting the actors in orbit.
Click to expand...

That's a poor comparison. Hollywood films use very large water tanks to film underwater scenes. It's been done for decades and is ol hat for Hollywood. So it's not absurd to suggest or prefer that method of the dry set cgi method. Hollywood has never filmed in space, and probably wont be able to for a long time, if ever. So no one would suggest a GOTG film be shot in space.
 
Marvolo said:
That's a poor comparison. Hollywood films use very large water tanks to film underwater scenes. It's been done for decades and is ol hat for Hollywood. So it's not absurd to suggest or prefer that method of the dry set cgi method. Hollywood has never filmed in space, and probably wont be able to for a long time, if ever. So no one would suggest a GOTG film be shot in space.
Click to expand...

Could it be practical to shoot underwater though? We're talking about a movie with characters that live underwater. It's not the same as shooting just one underwater scene. Actually BvS had a scene with Aquaman underwater and honestly, it looked awkward. You could tell Momoa was holding his breath. I didn't get the feeling that he actually lived underwater. Now imagine if he was talking with other people. It would look cringe worthy. With CGI, actors can look and act naturally.

I think complaints about not shooting underwater are silly. I mean Marvel creates CGI settings not just for space, but places that actually exist on earth. Like the cliff scene in Ragnarok or the waterfall scene in Black Panther.
 
I personally am not a big fan of cgi but I accept it in scenarios where it makes obvious sense. Shooting a few scenes in a tank is one thing, but Aquaman would need half the film underwater and I am jus not sure it would make any sense to even try it. Hell filming peopling talking would be a PITA and probably look hideous. Not to mention the size of the tanks needed to show the battle scenes...

Now if people want to complain about the quality of the cgi I can listen to that. Not all cgi is created equal. I complained about awful cgi in all movies whether I like them or not.

Sometimes it seems movies are able to get away with some spotty CGI and sometimes it is ignored when it comes to critics. That isnt a Marvel vs. Disney thing, that is more just critics ignoring it when they like a film.
 
Claude_Speed said:
I think complaints about not shooting underwater are silly.
Click to expand...
And you’re not wrong. If anyone wants a more down-to-Earth example, no one was complaining that Disney’s The Jungle Book was shot completely on a soundstage in Los Angeles. “They should have filmed it in a real jungle, they’ve filmed in jungles for years,” said no critic ever. Using cgi to do the underwater stuff is perfectly legit.
 
SomeOldGuy said:
And you’re not wrong. If anyone wants a more down-to-Earth example, no one was complaining that Disney’s The Jungle Book was shot completely on a soundstage in Los Angeles. “They should have filmed it in a real jungle, they’ve filmed in jungles for years,” said no critic ever. Using cgi to do the underwater stuff is perfectly legit.
Click to expand...
I was totally gonna bring up Jungle book lol
 
72%
Average Rating: 6.2/10
Reviews Counted: 96
Fresh: 69
Rotten: 27
 
Crap here comes the panic. I will be done with this thread soon. If it gets real bad I might be done with this forum soon. I dont have the energy for trolls anymore.
 
Eh, I am glad it didn't open to 30% or 40%. People love it, it's making money, I don't care how low these morons bring it down on RT :)
 
Here's a blurb of the recent rotten review (I'm not giving them clicks)
"People will be very cross that I don't "get" what was trying to be done, or that I didn't catch the comic references - but you know what? Get in the sea."

I mean really guys....let's just stop wasting time on these people :funny:
 
It's really bad when people start saying things like that "atleast It's making money" or "it's for the fans", in any case stop being so insecure guys.
 
I am not insecure...I just dont have time for the inevitable war that will start. I figure if it hits 70% trolls will show up and have their way and I got better things to do with my time :)
 
I read that one earlier lol. He's an idiot. Anyway, guys, we are still in good position here relax.
 
dhandler01 said:
I am not insecure...I just dont have time for the inevitable war that will start. I figure if it hits 70% trolls will show up and have their way and I got better things to do with my time :)
Click to expand...

Yeah they are there already :lmao: Don't leave, this section is tons of fun!
 
I already saw the film and I love it, I dunno why you accusing me of being a hater or something like that. Just stop being so dramatic about the RT score.
 
dhandler01 said:
I personally am not a big fan of cgi but I accept it in scenarios where it makes obvious sense. Shooting a few scenes in a tank is one thing, but Aquaman would need half the film underwater and I am jus not sure it would make any sense to even try it. Hell filming peopling talking would be a PITA and probably look hideous. Not to mention the size of the tanks needed to show the battle scenes...

Now if people want to complain about the quality of the cgi I can listen to that. Not all cgi is created equal. I complained about awful cgi in all movies whether I like them or not.

Sometimes it seems movies are able to get away with some spotty CGI and sometimes it is ignored when it comes to critics. That isnt a Marvel vs. Disney thing, that is more just critics ignoring it when they like a film.
Click to expand...

I actually don't think it makes good sense to shoot in actual water, based on the footage they had of Aquaman in BvS. That was Momoa in water and it was very obvious that it was a human in water, as we get affected by the pressure so you see it on the skin and not least the eyes. It doesn't look natural, which is obvious since water is not our natural environment. Aquaman should be entirely visually unaffected by being in water, just like how characters like Superman and Thor don't get affected by the wind in their faces when they fly.

I have no way to comment on the quality of the CGI as I haven't seen the film (I doubt it will be an issue though), but to use CGI was very much the right move in my opinion, and I said so already after seeing BvS.
 
71%
Average Rating: 6.2/10
Reviews Counted: 98
Fresh: 70
Rotten: 28
 
It would have been better if WB had delayed the embargo and the rollout of reviews by a week. If the movie was opening this weekend, it would be going in with a mid 70s score, now there's likelihood it drops in the 60s, with a small shot of being rotten, by the time it releases and most people check its RT to decide whether or not to go.
 
This can be still rotten? Seems really unlikely at 100 reviews.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Staff online

Members online

Total: 5,111 (members: 10, guests: 5,101)

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
202,346
Messages
22,088,991
Members
45,887
Latest member
Elchido

Share this page

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"