RottenTomato critic ratings for CBMs do you think are way too low?

[kedrell]

They improve on Doc Ock in SM2. Recently Ock has depth in the comics but before SM2 Doc Ock was one note and uninteresting (but still my favourite Spidey villain, go figure).

Be glad they put the Conner's dynamic on Doc Ock because you wouldn't have seen the family dynamic of Conner's in a Spidey origin movie, there simply isn't time for it. Lizard needed to be in a sequel and a throwaway villain needed to be in ASM 1. Lizard is too complex a character for an origin movie. That said if Lizard returns they can set up his family to add conflict.

You can call it an improvement. I call it mischaracterization. And I liked what Molina did with the role. My issue is more with what he was told to do with it rather than his acting, which was good.

If they cut out all the useless parents stuff in TASM then they probably would have had time for Conner's family. If his family shows up in a sequel it'll seem out of left field since we saw absolutely nothing of them in the first film.

 

[kedrell]

The scene is beautiful.

Superman pushes his power beyond his limits and ignores Jor El's sacred warning out of deep love for Lois. He's on the verge of tears hoping with all his heart his efforts will bring back the love of his life.

It would undermine the character more if he accepted Lois fate and Jor El's ”rule” when the love of his life lays dead in his arms.

You're not supposed to draw plausibility from the ending. Only that Supes is willing to push his god-like powers beyond it's limits and betray his obligation to his Kryptonian legacy for a single, human Daily Planet reporter covered in dirt.

It may not resonate with people stuck in Nolan's ultra-realistic line of thinking but that doesn't make it a bad ending. It dwelves into fantasy and symbolism to send a heartfelt message about the importance of love. Why fault any movie for that?

It's not like Supes killed someone. That would be way worse.

It's more about all of Jor-El's warnings against doing it coming to nothing. None, zip, nada. No price is paid by Supes for doing that. What a useless subplot then.

 

[kedrell]

Thete are plenty of sympathetic villains in Spider-man. There was no need to morph Dr Ock into yet another father-figure turned kidnaping arch nemesis.

Dr. Ock is not a good person or family man. He's the opposite of Peter Patker the way the Joker is the opposote of Batman.

And giving Dr. Ock a split personality via computer chip is not adding depth It's a cheap ploy that could be used by a forgettable soap opera episode.

Dr. Ock represent pure, calculated evil. Like the scientists who served Hitler. He's not a Green Goblin/Lizard knock off.

I always considered Ock to be the evil version of Peter Parker...only as an adult. Both were science nerds getting picked on in life, both get sudden power yet Ock uses it for his own selfish ends because he didn't have a Ben and May who taught him the whole great power schtick. Spider-man could have been like Ock if not for his upbringing.

 

[spider-neil]

It's more about all of Jor-El's warnings against doing it coming to nothing. None, zip, nada. No price is paid by Supes for doing that. What a useless subplot then.

Totally agree, warnings, warnings not heeded and zero consequences. I'm sorry, but that's rubbish.

People have a lot of problems with ASM but they have set up a great dynamic in the movie. Peter is warned off Gwen by Captain Stacy, a warning Peter ignores (final scene in the movie) there is going to be consequences for ignoring the warning and that is good drama.

 

[spider-neil]

I always considered Ock to be the evil version of Peter Parker...only as an adult. Both were science nerds getting picked on in life, both get sudden power yet Ock uses it for his own selfish ends because he didn't have a Ben and May who taught him the whole great power schtick. Spider-man could have been like Ock if not for his upbringing.

You're in the zone, Kendrell. 100% spot on. It's the reason why I am absolutely LOVING superior, Ock 'IS' Peter but for Uncle Ben's guidance.

 

[kedrell]

The biggest problem for me in TDK is Two-Face, they establish Dent as the 'White Knight' a man who is not afraid to go to any lengths to ensure the safety of the city and the rounding up of criminals but all of that is gone when he loses half his face and girlfriend. Nope, not buying that quick a chance that comes out of left field, either Dent's whole persona was a lie or the character of Two-Face is completely unearned.

And I hated the coin tossing,
'I want to kill you'
*toss*
'Heads, darn!'
*toss*
'Heads, darn!'
*toss*
'Heads, darn!'
*toss*
'Tales!'
BANG!!

The sequence with TF in the car where he tossed a coin for the boss and then the driver infuriated me. He should have tossed the coin and when he lost he should have got out the car. That is the character of Two-Face.

I agree. It's where the movie states things that are complete BS. Madness, no matter what the Joker might have you think, is not like gravity. Anyone with even the barest understanding of human psychology could tell you that. It isn't a simple thing to loose one's mind. This is where Batman TAS is leaps and bounds better explained. Harvey has an actual mental handicap there that he's learned to live and cope with which actually makes him susceptible to his becoming Two-Face when a significant tragedy happens to him. In TDK it just happens more or less because the movie needs him to turn. It's missing some key logical components. It's like asking us to believe that 1+1+1=4. Something is missing.

 

[spider-neil]

I agree. It's where the movie states things that are complete BS. Madness, no matter what the Joker might have you think, is not like gravity. Anyone with even the barest understanding of human psychology could tell you that. It isn't a simple thing to loose one's mind. This is where Batman TAS is leaps and bounds better explained. Harvey has an actual mental handicap there that he's learned to live and cope with which actually makes him susceptible to his becoming Two-Face when a significant tragedy happens to him. In TDK it just happens more or less because the movie needs him to turn. It's missing some key logical components. It's like asking us to believe that 1+1+1=4. Something is missing.

I agree. BTAS do a far more believable plausible job of establishing Dent's psychosis.
The should have dumped the boat scene and with the time they saved they should have peppered Dent's instability throughout the movie so when he becomes TF it's EARNED.

Despite all that I still think TDK is the best superhero movie ever but I would say 90-95% of that for me is because of the Joker.

 

[Spider-Aziz]

They improve on Doc Ock in SM2. Recently Ock has depth in the comics but before SM2 Doc Ock was one note and uninteresting (but still my favourite Spidey villain, go figure).

11 years before the release of Spider-Man 2, he had an old crush dying from AIDS, and he worked hard trying to make a cure for the illness to her, and his backstory was provided
And before that he actually loved May Parker, and really knew when to behave like a sofisticated gentleman

 

[kedrell]

I agree. BTAS do a far more believable plausible job of establishing Dent's psychosis.
The should have dumped the boat scene and with the time they saved they should have peppered Dent's instability throughout the movie so when he becomes TF it's EARNED.

Despite all that I still think TDK is the best superhero movie ever but I would say 90-95% of that for me is because of the Joker.

I never understood the Joker love but then he's not a character I ever liked anyway. I generally dislike cackling villains(Joker, Green Goblin). It's just too lowest common denominator for my taste when you take the easy route and essentially make him a laughing hyena in order to make him more popular.

 

[spider-neil]

I never understood the Joker love but then he's not a character I ever liked anyway. I generally dislike cackling villains(Joker, Green Goblin). It's just too lowest common denominator for my taste when you take the easy route and essentially make him a laughing hyena in order to make him more popular.

I think Ledger is electric as Joker. Sure, the fact that an agent of chaos has the most well executed and elaborate plan ever doesn't make a lick of sense but I love the performance.

 

[kedrell]

I thought his acting was fine, in fact the acting across the board in that film was fine. Too bad that's not the sole thing I base a critique off of. My issue with the Joker in the film was never a problem with Ledger. It was always with the Nolans and Goyer as writers and what they actually had the character doing in the film.

 

[spider-neil]

I thought his acting was fine, in fact the acting across the board in that film was fine. Too bad that's not the sole thing I base a critique off of. My issue with the Joker in the film was never a problem with Ledger. It was always with the Nolans and Goyer as writers and what they actually had the character doing in the film.

It's a fair comment.

 

[Senator Pleasury]

^The worst part of the spinning the world back gag is that he'd been warned about it at least 3 times by his father. He did it anyway and.......NOTHING! All is well. I guess Jor-El was full of it on that one.

Not only that but apparently Superman let the people he had rescued at their own fate now.

 

[kedrell]

Not only that but apparently Superman let the people he had rescued at their own fate now.

I always thought he understood there was a previous version of himself that was still doing all that stuff.

 

[Senator Pleasury]

I always thought he understood there was a previous version of himself that was still doing all that stuff.

Never thought of that actually. But then again this other version would still be there somewhere?

 

[kedrell]

Never thought of that actually. But then again this other version would still be there somewhere?

For a few minutes until it went back in time. But yeah, now the past version of himself has no reason to since Lois is ok. I guess past Supes could see that and understand that he needed to travel back anyway just to avoid a paradox. Time travel in movies NEVER makes 100% sense.

 

[spider-neil]

I always understood it like this;

There are two rockets, 1 heading to (A) and the other heading to (B).
Superman takes care of (A) by throwing it into space but can't get to rocket (B) in time.
Death and destruction.

Superman then flies back in time, rather than reversing the Earth (as visualised) which would break the Earth in two.
Rocket (A) isn't on earth because Superman had already thrown it into space, the time travel only effects things actually on the Earth (the area Superman is encompassing with his flying).
Rocket (B) damage is fixed because it never actually happened.

 

[Spider-Aziz]

^Thought of it like that
Forgot the past self

 

[The Joker]

They improve on Doc Ock in SM2. Recently Ock has depth in the comics but before SM2 Doc Ock was one note and uninteresting (but still my favourite Spidey villain, go figure).

Doc Ock has had depth for decades. Did you ever read Spider-Man Unlimited #3 back in the 1993 for example, where you saw his terrible childhood, his abusive parents, and how he once had a woman he loved but lost etc? It really drew on the parallel between him and Peter. He was a lonely science nerd, bullied and with no friends, unpopular with girls, grew up in middle class New York, acquired his powers through a science accident etc.

I know they made some changes to Doc Ock, but he was very faithful to the comics in many other areas: http://molinaock.blogspot.ie/

The biggest problem for me in TDK is Two-Face, they establish Dent as the 'White Knight' a man who is not afraid to go to any lengths to ensure the safety of the city and the rounding up of criminals but all of that is gone when he loses half his face and girlfriend. Nope, not buying that quick a chance that comes out of left field, either Dent's whole persona was a lie or the character of Two-Face is completely unearned.

Oh come on. He was horribly disfigured, betrayed, and the woman he loved was murdered, and you don't buy that he mentally snapped over that? There's people who have snapped for less than that in real life.

It wasn't a quick fix where he went crazy because of some green gas that turns you nuts like Green Goblin, or resurrected by cats like Catwoman in BR, or even something shallow like doing it because he felt cheated out of money.

He suffered real loss, and was left horribly mutilated. If that wouldn't damage someone's psyche then I don't know what would. It's better motivation than half of the comic book villains.

You even saw preludes to it when he kidnapped one of Joker's men in an ambulance, tied him up in a back alley and terrorized him with a gun. That was just because Rachel had been threatened. It's like if he could do that just because she was threatened then imagine what he would do if she was murdered.

I think Ledger is electric as Joker. Sure, the fact that an agent of chaos has the most well executed and elaborate plan ever doesn't make a lick of sense but I love the performance.

He was lying when he said he wasn't a schemer. Just like he was lying to Batman when he told him where Dent and Rachel were and he had to choose which one to save. Batman never had a choice. He was tricked. Same as how Joker lied when he told Dent that he had nothing to do with Rachel's death just because he was in jail at the time.

Joker is a liar and manipulator and says what ever he has to in order to get what he wants.

 

[metaphysician]

^ I think you're glossing over and trivializing the extent to which Avengers delved into the characters. It was a highlight of the film without question, and I think you're also missing the fact that the action itself was a method Whedon used to explore that depth. Every conflict in the movie up to and including the climax was relevant to each characters sensibilities, and the climax itself reflected their cohesion and growth as a team. The easy way out would've been to show the Avengers battling Loki and his cronies endlessly & aimlessly for 2 hours, but such was not the case. Taking the action at face value is missing the message, to a degree.

This, totally this. A lot of people overlook, intentionally or otherwise, all the little subtleties in Avengers, particularly the ways how every character is internally consistent with their own past development.

 

[spider-neil]

Oh come on. He was horribly disfigured, betrayed, and the woman he loved was murdered, and you don't buy that he mentally snapped over that? There's people who have snapped for less than that in real life.

It wasn't a quick fix where he went crazy because of some green gas that turns you nuts like Green Goblin, or resurrected by cats like Catwoman in BR, or even something shallow like doing it because he felt cheated out of money.

He suffered real loss, and was left horribly mutilated. If that wouldn't damage someone's psyche then I don't know what would. It's better motivation than half of the comic book villains.

You even saw preludes to it when he kidnapped one of Joker's men in an ambulance, tied him up in a back alley and terrorized him with a gun. That was just because Rachel had been threatened. It's like if he could do that just because she was threatened then imagine what he would do if she was murdered.

We're not talking about just anyone though, we are talking about the beacon of Gotham, someone even Batman himself looked up to, someone who didn't run when Judges and police commissionaires were getting blown away.
I don't think THAT type of man would lose his sanity even when pushed to the edge but as I said you go with it but I didn't feel that psychotic break was earned.

Look at Training Day, you ABSOLUTELY buy Denzil losing his freaking mind but I just feel that with Two-Face, I was thinking 'Really?' even though I was loving what I was watching.

 

[The Joker]

We're not talking about just anyone though, we are talking about the beacon of Gotham, someone even Batman himself looked up to, someone who didn't run when Judges and police
commissionaires were getting blown away.

I don't think THAT type of man would lose his sanity even when pushed to the edge but as I said you go with it but I didn't feel that psychotic break was earned.

That's the whole point. He wasn't the great incorruptible guy everyone thought he was. Case in point with how he reacted when Rachel was threatened. Do you know of many D.A.'s who abduct suspects and then tie them up and terrorize the with a gun?

Bruce was wrong to put all his faith in Dent like he did, and he paid the price by taking the fall for Dent's crimes. That was his penance.

How many times have you heard in the news of people who seemingly snapped and killed someone? People who neighbors and friends always thought were good, decent, honest people. It happens all the time. For far lesser reasons than what Dent had. Good people have killed just because they were desperate for shallow things like money.

I agree they could have spent more time showing it, but the motives they gave him for snapping were rock solid. Death and facial mutilation could make the sanest of minds go crazy.

Look at Training Day, you ABSOLUTELY buy Denzil losing his freaking mind but I just feel that with Two-Face, I was thinking 'Really?' even though I was loving what I was watching.

Never saw it so I can't comment.

 

[kedrell]

That's the whole point. He wasn't the great incorruptible guy everyone thought he was. Case in point with how he reacted when Rachel was threatened. Do you know of many D.A.'s who abduct suspects and then tie them up and terrorize the with a gun?

But....it was a total bluff. That takes all the teeth out of it. He was never out of control and he was never going to shoot the guy. In that scene it was Batman who was the one that didn't know what the hell he was talking about. Dent KNOWS it's a 2-headed coin. There was no element of chance involved.

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

I think Two Face is symbolic of the dark side of politics and the justice system.

He wanted to be a noble white knight and savior of the city but ultimately instead of him changing the system, the system changed him.

TDK covers the external reasons for this but completely avoids the internal weaknesses and supression involved within the noble members of society that make corruption inescapable to some extent.

Why Nolan avoided such a fertile allegory for the inner demons facing society's ”white knights” is anyone's guess.

 

[The Joker]

But....it was a total bluff. That takes all the teeth out of it. He was never out of control and he was never going to shoot the guy. In that scene it was Batman who was the one that didn't know what the hell he was talking about. Dent KNOWS it's a 2-headed coin. There was no element of chance involved.

That's not the point. He abducted a suspect, took him to a back alley, tied him up, and terrorized him with a gun. This is not standard noble D.A. behavior. Could you see Jim Gordon or any other decent public servant doing that? No. It was a prelude to the kind of dark side Dent had when something he cared about was threatened, let alone taken from him altogether.