People can bring up critics and trust me before i saw the actual film i did quite a bit but MOS has probably one of the biggest disconnects ever between critics and audiences.
Its audience support is through the roof no matter which way you measure it either financial or through things like audience ratings on rotten tomato or IMDB.
Hell the transformers films made a lot of money despite bad reviews but compare their audience ratings on things like IMDB and RT to MOS? MoS blows them away.
People can bring up critics and trust me before i saw the actual film i did quite a bit but MOS has probably one of the biggest disconnects ever between critics and audiences.
Its audience support is through the roof no matter which way you measure it either financial or through things like audience ratings on rotten tomato or IMDB.
Hell the transformers films made a lot of money despite bad reviews but compare their audience ratings on things like IMDB and RT to MOS? MoS blows them away.
Audience ratings on RT:
TF1 - 89%, 4.1/5
MOS - 82%, 4.2/5
T"Challa;26139285 said:Bays Transformers have a huge disparity between critic and audience ratings..huge. But you don't see people around here praising those films do you? And its the same people who used the 'box-office doesn't equal quality' argument against IM3 that are now doing a u-turn and using that argument to support MOS. Its just funny.
T"Challa;26139285 said:The reason i bring up critics is because of just how bad the scores were. If it was in the 70's or high 60's no one would really care but its rotten. look at every possible list you can find about top films of the year, decade, all time, IMDB top 250, Rollingstone etc. .and try to find me a film in any of those lists that have a rotten rating or below 60 metacritic score. Like it or not, those ratings closely mirror film quality in general.
Bays Transformers have a huge disparity between critic and audience ratings..huge. But you don't see people around here praising those films do you? And its the same people who used the 'box-office doesn't equal quality' argument against IM3 that are now doing a u-turn and using that argument to support MOS. Its just funny.
Terribly bad: Superman never makes a proper introduction to the world,
the world only knew about a group of Kryptonians. Pa Kent teaches his son NOT to help people, he even died to make his point.
Lois Lane gets Superman's identity really easy and before even meeting Superman or Clark Kent as a reporter.
All Smallville knows of Clark's powers.
And to top it all: "I think he's kind of hot."
I'll agree the Mandarin twist was "****ing hilarious".
Too bad it SHOULDN'T have been.
Well, critics and B.O. tell us that Iron Man 3 was the better movie. And I didn't like all of MOS, but I easily put MOS over IM3.
Not to mention the door is still open for the 616 Mandarin to show up yet...
A Mandarin that's an American white guy with lava powers(thus getting rid of the rings) is like a Dr. Doom who's got no armor, isn't eastern European and is an American CEO with electrical powers. You've taken away about 90% of what makes him who he is.
And let me be clear, I don't think what they did in IM3 was terrible just on it's own. It was sorta clever. But it was terrible because of who they were screwing over to do it. If they'd done it with Mallen then I'd be hunky dory about it all.