BvS BvS Rottentomatoes score - how important will it be, and what do you hope for? - Part 6

[mrmajors60]

I have yet to see the movie, but lets all remember that warner brothers does have a history of meddling in proporties so the editing could be the fault of wb. but I will have to wait and see until tomorrow night

 

[Mjölnir]

I've read bad acting for a few. The two I am hearing the most about are Cavill and Eisenberg but the only ones I am hearing universal praise toward are Gabot and Affleck. That said, the acting critiques tend to focus on direction. Cavill, for example, how many critics have said that he is being restrained by the character's direction and the joyless tone of the film? That falls on Snyder.

Beyond that, the style of the film (colors, tone, etc) are coming under a lot of scrutiny. All of that falls on the director also.

Editing is getting torn apart...the director has, at least, a hand in it (most directors have considerably more than a hand in editing).

My point is, people take issue with more than just story.

Gadot has gotten some criticism as well, for example from some of the Collider Movie Talk people. She did have some iffy line deliveries so I think Cavill was better than she was, especially since he had much more to carry. Lex will be a huge divider but that's not an issue with a less capable actor, like the one just mentioned, but the choice in how to present the character's personality. Personally I'd say that the only one pretty much coming off scot-free is Affleck.

 

[JOE]

But... can it reach the 20's?

How low can you go?

 

[Matt]

Probably the same reason people feel the need to hang around here and repeatedly bash the movie, when the majority of them haven't even seen it yet! Sorry, but pot and kettle much?

No, the difference is, people are talking about how the critical reaction could impact the movie and other movies in the DCEU. No one is sitting around saying "HAHAHAHAHA THIS MOVIE SUCKS! TAKE THAT!" People are having productive conversations about what the reviews are, what they say, and what that means. Then you have Tim coming in and repeatedly screaming how critics are wrong, how they don't matter, etc. It is circular and, if anything, derails the conversation in this thread.

 

[GR8GODZILLAGOD]

How low can you go?

 

[SM71]

How low can you go?

Omg I almost cried laughing at this

 

[BMCAABY]

every negative review I have seen from RT says it has little humor. Since when was superhero movies the go to place for some solid comedy? ..

Quite ridiculous, and every one of the reviews compare it to other movies. It is a standalone film, you cannot compare it with anything else! It's a different take!

 

[JC00]

So Jimmy Kimmel said it was great. Kevin Smith, a big comic book fan loved it, and Michael Strahan also said it was great. And 80 percent of audience in RT loved it. Most fans who saw it here loved it.

But yet we listen to what 95 critics in RT say??

Who are these great people that their opinions matter over the rest??

It's made for fans and most fans who saw it so far loved it. So I'll lean towards them.

Jimmy Kimmel and Michael Strahan are talk show personalities, it's in their best interest to say a movie was good. They arent going to have actors from a movie on their show and say the movie sucked.

Kevin Smith, come on, guy was part of the BvS promotion. He did a BvS preview special with Johns.


The audience score is mostly from fanboys voting and yet it's come down 5% in the last day

 

[Stark Bauer]

At this point I wonder if DC will embargo all reviews for JL until the movie comes out. I would have preferred to have gone in the movie cold, as in having not watched any trailers teasers and not read any reviews or seen the tomatometer. No matter what my expectations have been affected. I will try my best to go in to see this on Sunday with an open mind and most of all an open heart.

 

[SM71]

No, the difference is, people are talking about how the critical reaction could impact the movie and other movies in the DCEU. No one is sitting around saying "HAHAHAHAHA THIS MOVIE SUCKS! TAKE THAT!" People are having productive conversations about what the reviews are, what they say, and what that means. Then you have Tim coming in and repeatedly screaming how critics are wrong, how they don't matter, etc. It is circular and, if anything, derails the conversation in this thread.

It's called a "discussion." But since it has a low RT score, there isn't any room for the positive flip side, that discussion can only be comprised of negative aspects apparently

Did you ever think maybe he has a point? Or for you has every 'good' movie had 'good' RT ratings and vice versa? Must be nice to never have to think and make up your own mind

 

[Tony Gunk]

I've read bad acting for a few. The two I am hearing the most about are Cavill and Eisenberg but the only ones I am hearing universal praise toward are Gabot and Affleck. That said, the acting critiques tend to focus on direction. Cavill, for example, how many critics have said that he is being restrained by the character's direction and the joyless tone of the film? That falls on Snyder.

Beyond that, the style of the film (colors, tone, etc) are coming under a lot of scrutiny. All of that falls on the director also.

Editing is getting torn apart...the director has, at least, a hand in it (most directors have considerably more than a hand in editing).

My point is, people take issue with more than just story.

Seeing Cavill ooze charisma in UNCLE and then practically nothing but standing and scowling as Superman annoys me to no end.

 

[redfirebird2008]

I can't believe anyone is using the excuse that this movie is "for the fans". Yeah, the same movie where [BLACKOUT]Batman is a killer[/BLACKOUT] was totally made for the fans. And it is a completely different set of circumstances than in the Burton and Nolan films.

I think I'm more disturbed by Snyder's comments about disguising a wolf (Watchmen ideas) in sheep's clothing (BvS iconic characters). Watchmen is great, but it's a deconstruction of the genre. JLA or World's Finest should be a celebration of it. Very strange to shoehorn Watchmen ideas into this.

http://blogs.wsj.com/speakeasy/2016/03/21/zack-snyder-on-how-batman-v-superman-is-like-watchmen/

Snyder sees his new movie as “a little bit” of a continuation of themes and concepts he explored in “Watchmen,” his 2009 adaptation of the groundbreaking graphic novel by Alan Moore which deconstructed the notion of superheroes. “It’s all about the ‘why’ of superheroes: the political why, the religious why, the philosophical why,” Snyder says.

But now he can play with those ideas using actual iconic characters instead of ones such as Nite Owl and Dr. Manhattan, which represent archetypes of iconic characters. “Once you’ve absorbed that material, there’s no way it doesn’t resonate with you, especially when you’re dealing with characters like Batman and Superman and Wonder Woman, who are basically the trinity,” Snyder says. “In some ways, this will be, I hope at it’s really best, the impossible version of ‘Watchmen’.”

 

[SM71]

every negative review I have seen from RT says it has little humor. Since when was superhero movies the go to place for some solid comedy? ..

Quite ridiculous, and every one of the reviews compare it to other movies. It is a standalone film, you cannot compare it with anything else! It's a different take!

THANK YOU. This. 100x this

 

[Tony Gunk]

By the way guys, it's barely even a 'divisive' film any more, in fact it's now becoming a firm stance, one that says it's just not a good film.

 

[titansupes]

Seeing Cavill ooze charisma in UNCLE and then practically nothing but standing and scowling as Superman annoys me to no end.

I hear ya.

 

[Rowsdower!]

That's what I find so perplexing. From everything I'm reading, it's the story that is causing the bad score.

Acting is good.
Score is good.
Cinematography is good.
Action is good.

The bad is the story seems disconnected and sloppy. Why is Snyder getting all of this hate? He should have some, but not all.

Yeah, I mean, if the writing is god-awful, then Terrio deserves some if not most of the blame. Snyder certainly does too I'm sure, but a bad script is a bad script and very difficult to turn into a good movie.

That said, I haven't seen the film yet, so this is all speculation. But I'm worried we have another Green Lantern on our hands here.

 

[Matt]

Gadot has gotten some criticism as well, for example from some of the Collider Movie Talk people. She did have some iffy line deliveries so I think Cavill was better than she was, especially since he had much more to carry. Lex will be a huge divider but that's not an issue with a less capable actor, like the one just mentioned, but the choice in how to present the character's personality. Personally I'd say that the only one pretty much coming off scot-free is Affleck.

I think Gadot is going to get off pretty easily. She didn't have much to work with and people are praising Warners for finally embracing a female superhero. The true test of her mettle will be her own movie next year.

Cavill, as you said, had much more to carry but that also, in many ways, works against him. He is the face of the movie (alongside Affleck) and people seem to like Affleck...so that means the blame will be put on Cavill.

As for Eisenberg....yeah...he is definitely going to take the biggest lumps. Like you said, some will love him, some will hate him. Frankly, I don't see him coming back to the role (by choice). Eisenberg protects his image like a lioness protects her cubs. He wants to be a credible, critic darling. He wants to win Oscars, he wants to be renowned. He wants to be in the class of Leo DiCaprio and the likes. He is willing to do bad movies for paychecks (Now You See Me and its sequel, for example). But at the same time, he tries to keep those low key. I think he did this movie to get some mainstream cred and the big paycheck...it made sense in his eyes...comic books are hot, look at the praise Ledger and Hiddleston and other villains are getting in these. He could do the big budget without hurting his reputation. Now that it has...I think he might step back (kind of like how Clooney stepped back from big budget movies after B&R).

 

[SM71]

Why do some people find it so hard to believe that someone can like a film that has bad reviews. Or that a film with bad reviews could still actually be good, and that critical consensus doesn't align with audiences'?

 

[Rowsdower!]

Seeing Cavill ooze charisma in UNCLE and then practically nothing but standing and scowling as Superman annoys me to no end.

Have you seen it yet? Or are you just going by the trailers? I'm not knocking you, I'm just asking because I'm HOPING that they let Cavill use more of his natural charm in the actual movie. Because yeah, the trailers mostly have him scowling or looking internally tormented.

 

[Matt]

It's called a "discussion." But since it has a low RT score, there isn't any room for the positive flip side, that discussion can only be comprised of negative aspects apparently

Did you ever think maybe he has a point? Or for you has every 'good' movie had 'good' RT ratings and vice versa? Must be nice to never have to think and make up your own mind

Drop the attitude. That's not what he is doing. Even the film's defenders were annoyed with him yesterday. He isn't taking part in the discussion. He has been coming in here saying people are "projecting", that the reviews mean "nothing" and that people who dislike the movie simply "aren't getting it" or it is too far over people's heads. That type of condescending attitude is low level trolling. Rather than reprimand him we all tried to have fun with it, add some levity to this thread (heaven forbid). But since folks like you are getting butt hurt, it seems like we will just have to shut it down all together.

 

[Kanon]

So, the dislike consensus is (I haven't read details on reviews since I haven't watched the movie): The pacing is weird, specially at the beggining, hard to follow, plot holes, and motivations unclear. The good is the acting, the setup for JL and WW.

Also on the bad side I think is Superman not being boy scout Superman, but that's inherited from MoS so I don't care (though I don't like it). It does render the phrase "day vs night" senseless...

 

[GR8GODZILLAGOD]

So, the dislike consensus is (I haven't read details on reviews since I haven't watched the movie): The pacing is weird, specially at the beggining, hard to follow, plot holes, and motivations unclear. The good is the acting, the setup for JL and WW.

Also on the bad side I think is Superman not being boy scout Superman, but that's inherited from MoS so I don't care (though I don't like it). It does render the phrase "day vs night" senseless...

I've actually been hearing the setup for JL in the film is pretty shoehorned in.

 

[Matt]

Why do some people find it so hard to believe that someone can like a film that has bad reviews. Or that a film with bad reviews could still actually be good, and that critical consensus doesn't align with audiences'?

Because it is very very rare for a movie that is universally panned (and make no mistake, it is time to call a duck a duck. At this point this movie is universally panned) to turn out good. It happens, yes. But it is very rare.

And yes, people like bad movies. They have their fans. I love Last Action Hero. I also accept that it is a bad movie that just happens to click with me. I am not so condescending or arrogant to claim that others have it wrong and I am so brilliant that I see something that is going over everyone else's head.

 

[Stark Bauer]

I think I'm more disturbed by Snyder's comments about disguising a wolf (Watchmen ideas) in sheep's clothing (BvS iconic characters). Watchmen is great, but it's a deconstruction of the genre. JLA or World's Finest should be a celebration of it. Very strange to shoehorn Watchmen ideas into this.

http://blogs.wsj.com/speakeasy/2016/03/21/zack-snyder-on-how-batman-v-superman-is-like-watchmen/

I think you nailed it. Superman Batman and WW are not the Watchmen tonally, or in any way, shape or form. I don't think Snyder understands what makes these characters lovable and appealing to the general public. He seems to present the version of these characters that make them appealing to himself only. It's situations like these where I can see the logic in the thinking of Marvel Studios' think tank to bounce off ideas and filter what a specific character is/isn't as well as what kind of tone a specific movie should have e.g. Should ______ be a straight up action movie or a political thriller/heist/space opera/set in the real world or Asgard etc.. Plus having someone that really gets the spirit of each and every character like Kevin Feige/Jeph Loeb helps with universe building and keeping everyone on the same page and going for the same vision.

Long story short finding something that works and uniting under that.

 

[Kanon]

I've actually been hearing the setup for JL in the film is pretty shoehorned in.

I was under the impression that, it was a detriment for the movie, as it lessened to a preview for JL (same criticism for MCU sometimes), but it was cool, with surprises, and WW was badass.