Fant4stic: Reborn! - - - Part 37

[Snow Queen]

was it also Fox that said they would no longer attend Comic Con because of leaked teaser? Maybe they're going full on "confidential" from now on. They haven't even dropped the Apocalypse teaser even though everyone's seen it already...

I haven't.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

What conspiracy theory?

It's not a secret that media outlets are loving hating on this movie.

Where are all these good movies that get hated on? I love Man of Steel. Never bought into the conspiracy theories. I could tell the problems people had with it. Didn't necessarily agree with all of them, but that doesn't change that most critics reviewed it rationally.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

Which media outlets are against this film because most of the geek websites I've been on seem to be doing everything in their power to defend, defend, defend.

 

[The Guard]

Give us an example.

WATCHMEN comes to mind.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

No reviews will not help this film. People know what no reviews mean now. This didn't boost the box office of other awful films.

 

[The Guard]

I don't think most of the general public really cares.

I doubt most people will even realize there was a review embargo.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

WATCHMEN comes to mind.

Bad example. It has a 65% RT score, with a 190 positive reviews and 104 negative. I personally don't think it is good, but that is beside the point.

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/watchmen/

So are you going to bring a real example?

 

[DarthSkywalker]

I don't think most of the general public really cares.

I doubt most people will even realize there was a review embargo.

Based on what?

 

[DigificWriter]

You seem to be unfamiliar with the reasoning of why later film embargoes exist; this article written by a film critic could help explain: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/marshall-fine/why-embargo-movie-critics_b_2859089.html

Portion from extended post linked in the critic's article getting more bluntly to the point:


Basically, strong movies tend to get review embargoes lifted earlier than others - it creates early buzz and builds hype, especially nowadays where articles will pop up to alert everyone about the latest blockbuster's early reception. Embargoes that are released the day before or especially the day of (again, especially intended big summer movies) are done so to play down the film's quality, at least in the eyes of the studio execs. How is there a financial benefit from playing down positive reception?

That article doesn't bother to explain why or how there's any correlation between the quality of a film and when reviews of said film are allowed to be posted. It simply makes the claim that such is the case, and, for me, that's really not good enough.

We'll see what happens with Fantastic Four, though.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

That article doesn't bother to explain why or how there's any correlation between the quality of a film and when reviews of said film are allowed to be posted. It simply makes the claim that such is the case, and, for me, that's really not good enough.

We'll see what happens with Fantastic Four, though.

No proof is good enough for you. You always spin every single piece of bad news. I call myself a DC shill but you just take the cake when it comes to this film.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

That article doesn't bother to explain why or how there's any correlation between the quality of a film and when reviews of said film are allowed to be posted. It simply makes the claim that such is the case, and, for me, that's really not good enough.

We'll see what happens with Fantastic Four, though.

It is not good enough for you? Why I wonder.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

No proof is good enough for you. You always spin to every single piece of bad news. I call myself a DC shill but you just take the cake when it comes to this film.

Come next week, if this film does review horrible they already have a defense. The critics were out for this one. They were always going to review it badly.

 

[Krystal]

Honorable members of Chiefs of staff--- it is true the soviets have declared war and invaded Manchuria, we have been forced out of the Phillipines and Burma. Yes are cities burn to the ground under relentless attack. Also all our cariers have been sunk along with all our battleships. But do not give up, our brave kamikazes shall turn the tide.
Even now I hear that a LONE B-29 bomber approaches from the east--- clearly we have decimated the American bomber fleet for them to send one lone plane.
---August 6, 1945
Seventy years to the day from when this movie opens for Thursday showings.
Just can't decide who is more out of touch.

 

[DigificWriter]

No proof is good enough for you. You always spin to every single piece of bad news. I call myself a DC shill but you just take the cake when it comes to this film.

That article offers interesting insight and 'informed opinion', but doesn't contain anything that I would be able to consider empirical evidence/proof that there is actually any correlation whatsoever between a film's quality and whether or not there's an embargo placed on when reviews of said film can be posted/printed.

 

[Son of Coul]

That article doesn't bother to explain why or how there's any correlation between the quality of a film and when reviews of said film are allowed to be posted. It simply makes the claim that such is the case, and, for me, that's really not good enough.

We'll see what happens with Fantastic Four, though.

It's not a scientific formula that setting a late embargo automatically equals a bad movie. It's meant to explain the executives' thought process and reasoning in doing so, that being that they don't have confidence in the quality of the movie themselves. Out of curiosity, why else do you think they'd hold off so long for this movie and not other releases? i could understand disregarding it if Fox just embargoed all their movies across the board for the day preceding release, but such is not the case here.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

Come next week, if this film does review horrible they already have a defense. The critics were out for this one. They were always going to review it badly.

Yep the defense is already being mounted. The critics were against the film from the start for some reason.

Lets see, the film is starring critically acclaimed actors from film and television and is directed by a guy with a film that has an 85% rating on Rotten Tomatoes. Yep, the critics will be so biased.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

The embargo means Fox thinks the movie sucks. If they thought it was good, why would they want the incredible reviews they expect hidden?

WB thought MoS was going to be reviewed great. They were wrong, but their embargo showed confidence. Same for movies like Inside Out and The Winter Soldier, which basically had little to no embargoes. This is the exact opposite.

 

[The Guard]

Yep the defense is already being mounted. The critics were against the film from the start for some reason.

Lets see, the film is starring critically acclaimed actors from film and television and is directed by a guy with a film that has an 85% rating on Rotten Tomatoes. Yep, the critics will be so biased.

Because all the overwhelmingly negative media attention this film has been getting will have no impact on critics?

Come on now.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

The embargo means Fox thinks the movie sucks. If they thought it was good, why would they want the incredible reviews they expect hidden?

WB thought MoS was going to be reviewed great. They were wrong, but their embargo showed confidence. Same for movies like Inside Out and The Winter Soldier, which basically had little to no embargoes. This is the exact opposite.

Not a word in this post is incorrect.

At the very least it has to be acknowledged that Fox themselves believe that the film blows. I don't see how we can't all agree on that.

 

[Big Bang]

Doubt that would happen even if this fails commercially.

Only because I don't see Fox giving up a comic book property. What I could see? Fox attaching a proven director to the sequel OR striking a deal like Sony has with Marvel, which is probably the least risky because they have them in another cinematic universe. Without risking the X-Men.

If Fox continues to try to attach FF to X-Men, then they are really risking X-Men. Truth be told, FF are already damaged goods from two bad films, and a third awful film is not exactly going to turn those fortunes around.

Now when the GA hear "From the studio that brought you X-Men Days of Future Past", this mess is going to come to mind. It would be in Fox's best interest to drop this as far from the X-Men franchise as they can if they wish to keep that train running. Trade the damaged goods for TV rights, financial settlements, etc and move on. THAT would be the least risky bet for Fox at this juncture.

 

[Brutalitops]

Because all the overwhelmingly negative media attention this film has been getting will have no impact on critics?

Come on now.

So you've resorted to conspiracy theories in order to defend this movie? Seriously?

 

[Krystal]

Not fair! Baghdad Bob knew he was spouting nonsense.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Because all the overwhelmingly negative media attention this film has been getting will have no impact on critics?

Come on now.

I am still waiting for an example of this. You still haven't given one.

 

[The Guard]

Nor will I.

I don't need to prove an opinion or a thought about something.

 

[Kanon]

What negative media attention? I haven't seen anything bad other than the TV spots. Journalist are being really professional about this, most of them with a "wait and see" approach