Welp, I don't know about anything else Shauner's saying, but this here is a damn fine argument to put up.
Mark, you cannot say you haven't dismissed people's criticisms of BvS as just 'nonsense', because I've seen and read you do it.
You can't possibly hope to mount a cohesive and cogent argument against someone who is critical of Snyder, when you simply dismiss their opinion as invalid, just because you don't like it.
M1ll3r's new rule: I'm only going to pay attention to journalists around this subject if they display a decent level of objectivity and critical faculty towards it. Those demonstrating constant positivity or negativity can be safely ignored, as confirmation bias destroys any credibility they might otherwise have.
Except this is all nonsense. I was very critical of MOS, and anyone who is really informed about my opinions would be aware I argued extensively about this on a podcast or two. I likewise have pointed out lots of flaws in TDK and TDKR over the years.
I dismiss opinions that are poorly stated, are exaggerated, are personally hostile, are factually inaccurate, are lazy, etc. I have not remotely dismissed all criticism of BvS, so this is a perfect example of what I'm talking about -- you're making simplistic, false claims here about me and what I said and what it means, so yes your position is therefore nonsense. That doesn't remotely mean I say ALL positions that disagree with me are nonsense. Just YOURS, at the moment, and the one you quoted, since they are full of bogus claims and exaggerations and rooted in a consistent aggressiveness and hostile tone (which started from certain folks before I even entered these discussions, by the way).
You can have all the opinions you want -- but that doesn't make them well-thought-out, informed, or valid. If you're arguments against a film are weak, shallow, and demonstrate a lack of general awareness or appreciation for filmmaking and storytelling, go right ahead and have all the opinions you want but they're gonna be bad. Opinions aren't all inherently equal just because people shout them loud enough, folks. Sorry.
I'll happily argue and defend my position on any of the films I've praised, and I'll put my arguments up against yours or anyone else's any day of the week. I put mine in writing, in detail, defending my analysis of the films and precisely why I like or love certain aspects (or dislike others, as may be the case). I go into great detail making my case, and when someone debates it with me I happily take time to go into deep discussion to defend my positions not just with adjective-laden assertions and praise but with specific arguments about the craft and storytelling and themes, why I think they work, why I think the complaints and criticisms are too simplistic or missing deeper points, etc. Any claim that I'm on a "bandwagon" for the DCU, Snyder, or Nolan is lazy, uninformed, simplistic, and dishonest, period. And you can repeat it as often as you want, but it'll STILL be nothing but lazy, uninformed, simplistic, dishonest claims.
I'm also largely positive about the MCU. Why? Because it deserves it. And if you think you're somehow being deeper or more careful by ignoring people who are "too positive" then you're merely being reactionary, the same as ignoring people who are always negative about something. What matters is whether people demonstrate an ability to defend their positions, and whether you tend to agree with them or not. What matters if whether people are being HONEST in their assertions of opinion and analysis.
I'll always say what I think about a film, based on assessing the many things that go into making a movie and my enjoyment of it and my ability to articulate those honest assessments and feelings -- you're obviously free to just dismiss it because you think I like too many things, or because you resent what I like or don't like, or whatever reason you want of course, but if you're resorting to knee-jerk reasoning that ignores the actual content and analysis, then guess what? You're nothing but precisely what you pretend to oppose, someone who isn't interested in the real substance or truth or credibility of claims and reviews, but rather just looks at whether people say something a certain number of times or if you like what you think they're saying.
Anyone else who wants to make cheap, empty, weak claims that I somehow am not honest about my assessments of these films -- largely because you don't like what I said, as opposed to offering any serious counter-assessment of what I said -- can just refer to this post and my others, and to my actual body of work analyzing these films. I don't care if you agree or disagree with my reviews, frankly -- I stand by them, and will defend them -- but if you want to accuse me of being less than honest and of not offering considered assessments of movies, you're wrong and I'll very bluntly tell you so.
