Man of Tomorrow
Superhero
- Joined
- Sep 25, 2008
- Messages
- 5,877
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 31
It blows my mind about how incompetent DC/WB are at making superhero movies that don't involve Batman. I think Watchmen being good was a miracle.
This pisses me off. Not only because Green Lantern's first big-screen outing is apparently crappy, but because DC/WB will go back to hiding behind Batman. The chances of a Flash movie are slim to none now.
And as for the responses to critics and the score on Rotten Tomatoes: If the score were sitting at 80% right now, everybody in this thread--haters and apologists alike--would be saying what a great sign that is. People only dismiss critical reviews when they bash something they love or prop up something they hate.
Yup...and when the critical consensus is against what many hoped and dreamed for...then the people who take these signs are all the sudden "sheep."
It's all pretty immature.
Bleeding Cool mentions that the movie opens the door for other superheroes to appear and interact with eachother, establishing a DC Movieverse, especially when it comes to Amanda Waller and the Department of Extranormal Operations.
Bleeding Cool mentions that the movie opens the door for other superheroes to appear and interact with eachother, establishing a DC Movieverse, especially when it comes to Amanda Waller and the Department of Extranormal Operations.
They will make a Flash movie and if that fails too they will never make a tentpole flick about a superhero whose name isn't Batman or Superman.
The guy said "If they can just lighten up a little." I think you're missing his point. GL was never going to be some dark-ass movie. I'm sure it's been made for all ages. I hope it's good, I hope it is a lot of fun, guess I'll find out this weekend!From the Bleeding Cool review:
I love it. So anyone who's familiar with the comic book but doesn't like the movie is apparently a cynic according this guy. Could it be that maybe fans of the comic book just wanted something better than the shallow tripe they're apparently being offered here instead?
And I'm sorry, but the original Trilogy, Batman '89, and Donner's Superman were not kids movies. They appealed to kids, yes, but they were deeper films than just "kids movies," definitely marketed towards people of all ages.
And as for the responses to critics and the score on Rotten Tomatoes: If the score were sitting at 80% right now, everybody in this thread--haters and apologists alike--would be saying what a great sign that is. People only dismiss critical reviews when they bash something they love or prop up something they hate.
Yup...and when the critical consensus is against what many hoped and dreamed for...then the people who take these signals are all the sudden "sheep."
It's all pretty immature.
As opposed to people hating a movie that isn't released yet because a "tomatoe meter" says to?
Yeah, they spent about 150 mil on marketing alone.apparently this film cost over $300mill
is that true?
apparently this film cost over $300mill
is that true?
No one expects Batman to have a scale as large as that, nor did the production crew constantly reference SW like they were about to unleash a whole new cinematic marvel.seems kinda unfair. I mean given there is a big sequence at the end.
People let their expectation define their objectivity. There was no "Death Star" sequence in either of the Batman movies either just a big action scene.(if even that).