The way Anno has defended TDKR on this forum and others is admirable. He deserves a medal or Atleast a hug from Warner Brothers...
I really love the comments that say that critics from website is as credible as a fake salesmen. That's basically ign in a nutshell... And gamespot.... And gametrailers..... And Destructoid..... And Kotaku.... And Red Letter Media... And.... Well, you get the point.
I also like how movies like The Dark Knight Rises and Man of Steel can get away with the criticisms of The Amazing Spiderman. Apparently, they give full pardon on both films because it has the name "Christopher Nolan" in it.
^Man of Steel has a Rotten 55% on Rotten Tomatoes from critics and The Dark Knight Rises was not as well received as it's predecessor.
EDIT: IMO Man of Steel was just as flawed as AMS but in opposite ways. While I think the script and editing for AMS were absolute crap and that Marc Web's direction and charm is what kept it a float, I think the the script and story for Man of Steel was brilliant but the direction and style was terrible. It was too much of Nolan (using him instead of Snyder because he does this with all of his movies) trying to tell the audience his movie is awesome instead of letting it be awesome on its own.
I thought the script was the worst part of MOS. A lot of the dialogue was wonky (meaning at times downright corny and seemed apparent that it was written, part of writing good dialogue is making it believable that someon thought of it right on the spot, but I can't believe that Clark's mom thought of that whole symbolic island metaphor on the spot, I mean who says things that like?) not to mention the heavy handed symbolism, the skulls, Superman reaching for the sun, the 9/11 imagery of that woman being trapped under the rubble. Also, while watching the movie it seems pretty epic, but once you think about the movie afterwards, you begin to realize that not all that much really happened in the movie. I also thought that none of the characters in the movie were particularly fleshed out, or given any personality really. It was a pretty mediocre script IMO, and time again Goyer shows that he can't write romance to save his life. That hot joke at the end also was a cringe worthy play at a laugh.
I thought the script was the worst part of MOS. A lot of the dialogue was wonky (meaning at times downright corny and seemed apparent that it was written, part of writing good dialogue is making it believable that someon thought of it right on the spot, but I can't believe that Clark's mom thought of that whole symbolic island metaphor on the spot, I mean who says things that like?) not to mention the heavy handed symbolism, the skulls, Superman reaching for the sun, the 9/11 imagery of that woman being trapped under the rubble. Also, while watching the movie it seems pretty epic, but once you think about the movie afterwards, you begin to realize that not all that much really happened in the movie. I also thought that none of the characters in the movie were particularly fleshed out, or given any personality really. It was a pretty mediocre script IMO, and time again Goyer shows that he can't write romance to save his life. That hot joke at the end also was a cringe worthy play at a laugh.
Another bad part, Jonathan tries to convince Clark not to be a hero and that leads to his death. The entire movie, Clark becomes Superman and saves everyone.... WUT.
I almost walked out at the part, had I not been my friends ride I would have. I was a bit peeved at first by Cavil's poor impersonation of a rebellious teenager, that was only the tip of the iceberg. First off, why'd they leave the dog behind in the first place? If he's willing to risk his life to save this animal why didn't he just take him out right away? Second I know this is the same guy that suggested Clark leave a bunch of kids to drown in a bus but if he cared about his father he wouldn't have let him die imo.
I also didn't get why Jor-El didn't shoot Zod? Like he shot all of his soldiers that he knocked down, but then when he beats Zod he doesn't shoot him for the sake of the story.

I almost walked out at the part, had I not been my friends ride I would have. I was a bit peeved at first by Cavil's poor impersonation of a rebellious teenager, that was only the tip of the iceberg. First off, why'd they leave the dog behind in the first place? If he's willing to risk his life to save this animal why didn't he just take him out right away? Second I know this is the same guy that suggested Clark leave a bunch of kids to drown in a bus but if he cared about his father he wouldn't have let him die imo.
I also didn't get why Jor-El didn't shoot Zod? Like he shot all of his soldiers that he knocked down, but then when he beats Zod he doesn't shoot him for the sake of the story.
I thought both the TDK and TDKR teasers are mediocre to bad.
