TMOS Reviews Thread - Non Spoiler Review and Discussion - Part 6

[slimshady247]

Could go back up to 60%.

 

[TheFlamingCoco]

It says 59% on mine.

All I can say is wow....just wow. I know its a figure and isn't an accurate reflection of the quality of a movie but I never thought in a million years that MOS would be worse then SR.

I mean there is clear daylight between the scores of both movies. I'm still gonna go see this for myself because I cant believe that this movie is that bad...not from everything I have seen and the direction they have taken.

This is beyond weird.

Word. Let's hope this film is being flamed for not being yet another "classic" Superman movie, and isn't a bad adaptation in general

 

[Notrip]

OR maybe Critics are getting fed up with Comic-book movies and will start to be more critical of them. I thought Iron Man 3 was a start. Can't imagine Wolverine or in fact Pacific Rim

 

[macphisto96]

Is the agenda against Nolan what made the Batman movies such critical success and why no movie he's directed has failed to become certified fresh?

Is the lack of respect for superhero cinema why almost all superhero movies get certified fresh? The Batman trilogy, all of the MCU (but TIH which is still fresh), all Spider-Man and X-Men movies (apart from #3 in both cases), etc.

I'm guessing that guy doesn't really know what he's talking about when it comes to the critics. I hope he's right about the movie though.

I think it has more to do with an agenda against Snyder.

But he's right that they have an agenda against superhero films. Notice that he qualified the statement? If it's "serious" and not fluff, they don't like it. Batman was an exception, but he has no superpowers. Avengers was a popcorn flick. It didn't explore complex issues. Nor did X-Men.

Batman elevated that under Nolan and, as Jett says, he wishes it changed it but it did not. We can't have a serious superman. We need to have a wisecracking hero like Iron Man who lets us have fun - not one that actually has us delve into questions of identity, loneliness, and purpose.

I've read a bunch of the reviews and I think most of their points are silly. There are also a lot of contradictions between different reviewers. They all tried their best to find something not to like. If a reviewer walks in and basically decides at the beginning that they won't like the film if it doesn't have A, B, and/or C then there's a problem.

 

[Poeman]

 

[FlawlessVictory]

I guess we now know why the embargo was lifted so late. It seems anytime there is a review embargo that is lifted just a few days before a movie is released it is because it got bad reviews.

 

[Gavan]

Let's hope it doesn't harm the box office too much. Didn't seem to hurt the Transformers movies, though it pains me to mention that series, it's become a shorthand for dumb actionfest.

And I don't think many of those critics who gave them rotten reviews were G1 purists like they seem to be now with the Reeve films.

 

[FlawlessVictory]

 

[Tim_Riggins]

Beyond weird indeed, another review a couple of posts before wishing there were more moments like in Superman Returns..... What the hell? Can't wait to see it to see what the problem (if there is one) is.

 

[JOE]

People are getting really worried about 59%, I'm not... I'm worried it goes even lower.

 

[DodgeThis]

New guy here and been lurking for a while. I know where all dissappointed with the critics in RT but why beleive them? I know for sure that it shattered the box office in the Phillippines.

http://movies.yahoo.com/news/man-steel-shatters-philippines-box-office-record-142031329.html

So it's probably not as great an accomplishment as turning back time to save the woman he loves, but Superman shattered box office records in the Philippines this week.
"Man of Steel," a rebooted version of the defender of truth, justice and the American way, easily navigated cultural barriers to rack up the equivalent of $1.7 million on 466 screens across the Southeast Asian country this week. Warner Bros. said that accounted for 90 percent of the box office market share.
It marks the biggest opening day ever for a movie in the Philippines.
The film opens in the United States on Friday. Some industry observers predict it will gross roughly $100 million over the weekend.
In other box office news, "This is the End" continued to out-perform projections, racking up $7.8 million domestically on its first full day of release. The apocalyptic comedy's distributor is revising its estimates upwards and now predicts the film will generate in the mid-$30 million range through the weekend.
The comedy follows A-list actors like Seth Rogen and James Franco as they try to survive the end of the world. It opened on Tuesday night.

So cheer up guys!

 

[Tim_Riggins]

True that only BB, TDK and TDKR actually tried something different with the superhero movie, the rest is pop corn stuff, however good. Come on, this lower than TIH, X-Men The Fricking Last Stand?

 

[Gavan]

Hasn't RT only posted around half or less than half of the usual number of reviews?

S IS FOR HOPE

 

[Eggyman]

I can't imagine its score going higher. It's been on a steady decline for a couple of days. Could, and probably will, get worse.

 

[FlawlessVictory]

Hasn't RT only posted around half or less than half of the usual number of reviews?

S IS FOR HOPE

Yes, which means it can still go way down.

 

[TheFlamingCoco]

OR maybe Critics are getting fed up with Comic-book movies and will start to be more critical of them. I thought Iron Man 3 was a start. Can't imagine Wolverine or in fact Pacific Rim

I actually thought Iron Man 3 was fairly assessed. The trouble about blaming "superhero fatigue" is that that theory will go down the window when something like Avengers 2 happens. That being said, many critics are complaining that it wasn't the film they expected to see, and having a thin plot.

As for a less-than-complex plot, most origin stories have simplistic plots. As long as the character arc is good, I won't care about that nitpick.

Also, nostalgia elevated SR into solid critical levels. Is it any surprise that the reverse might be true against MOS' favor?

 

[Mjölnir]

I think it has more to do with an agenda against Snyder.

But he's right that they have an agenda against superhero films. Notice that he qualified the statement? If it's "serious" and not fluff, they don't like it. Batman was an exception, but he has no superpowers. Avengers was a popcorn flick. It didn't explore complex issues. Nor did X-Men.

Batman elevated that under Nolan and, as Jett says, he wishes it changed it but it did not. We can't have a serious superman. We need to have a wisecracking hero like Iron Man who lets us have fun - not one that actually has us delve into questions of identity, loneliness, and purpose.

I've read a bunch of the reviews and I think most of their points are silly. There are also a lot of contradictions between different reviewers. They all tried their best to find something not to like. If a reviewer walks in and basically decides at the beginning that they won't like the film if it doesn't have A, B, and/or C then there's a problem.

I don't buy any agendas at all. Why is that more believable than that Zack Snyder's directing isn't what all the critics want?

I'm sure there's a conspiracy against Uwe Boll as well...

The superhero bit doesn't make that much sense either. I think X-Men take up serious issues about minorities, they just aren't as dark as Batman (but neither is MoS from what I can see).

And of course critics are going to have different problems with movies. They aren't trained super serum critics that all have the same opinion. They are people that are interested in movies and express their personal opinions.

I don't expect the majority of critics to like all the movies I like. I feel it would be pretty arrogant of me to think that they would if it wasn't for an agenda.

 

[-JKR-]

And regarding the nostalgia and comparisons to the Richard Donner version: Did it EVER come to your mind that maybe the fact that reviewers keep mentioning the 1978 version as the better one, because THAT movie worked, and maybe this DOESN'T (as much) - as a movie! And not as a take on the character.

It's just a possibility. If I were to review The Amazing Spider-man, for example, I'd probably drop a line about how Sam Raimi did it better. But that's NOT because I can't accept a new, different take on the material, but simply because while I think that Raimi's first two Spider-man films are two great movies, The Amazing Spider-man simply isn't.

See the mindset there? That's no bias.

And I'm the first one who thought, after Superman Returns' release, that whoever would make the next movie should distance themselves from the previous cinematic iteration started with Donner, and deliver something more akin to our times and sensibilities. So a fresh take was definitely the right way. Maybe Man of Steel simply doesn't deliver.

I'm always just talking hypothetically, but I find it funny how 90% of the people here exclude such a possibility, and come up with the most out there excuses for the mixed reaction from critics.

 

[JOE]

Cavil is getting some heat with the recent reviews I've been reading, wow. Everyone who's seen it on the hype, for the most part, said Cavil is strong in the roll.

 

[Tim_Riggins]

What's crazy is that it seems that it's only rotten reviews now, such a contrast with the early highly positive buzz from all those who saw it in advance, there was a lot of those.

 

[Tra-El]

People are getting really worried about 59%, I'm not... I'm worried it goes even lower.

Does it even matter? It's a bomb for critics. So be it. Read the negatives. Snyder didn't give them the rich love story and cackling humor most old-timers are use to and this is a completely different Superman that we've NEVER seen since 1978. Some people just can't let go of a past era where they are literally riding the coattails off of with no swing. They can't judge Superman as a new and improved character. They just can't wrap their minds around this new world with new merit and it hurt the critical rating.

I was never bothered by any drop. I've been waiting for this caliber of Superman for years. I get it tonight and so do others who want to see a SERIOUS Superman kick all kinds of ass!

 

[Tim_Riggins]

And regarding the nostalgia and comparisons to the Richard Donner version: Did it EVER come to your mind that maybe the fact that reviewers keep mentioning the 1978 version as the better one, because THAT movie worked, and maybe this DOESN'T (as much) - as a movie! And not as a take on the character.

It's just a possibility. If I were to review The Amazing Spider-man, for example, I'd probably drop a line about how Sam Raimi did it better. But that's NOT because I can't accept a new, different take on the material, but simply because while I think that Raimi's first two Spider-man films are two great movies, The Amazing Spider-man simply isn't.

See the mindset there? That's no bias.

TASM is great, in my humble opinion, tone works Opinions, I hate thoseeeeeeeeeeeee

 

[Gavan]

At least it's certain the score is only that low because people keep comparing it to the previous films and their expectations, largely colored by the previous films.

Whatever its own failings, it surely doesn't deserve that low?!

I'm more bewildered than anything now.

And regarding the nostalgia and comparisons to the Richard Donner version: Did it EVER come to your mind that maybe the fact that reviewers keep mentioning the 1978 version as the better one, because THAT movie worked, and maybe this DOESN'T (as much) - as a movie! And not as a take on the character.

Nah I still think it's more of the nostalgia talking. Those films have their own failings, even taken as part of their time.

 

[JOE]

True that only BB, TDK and TDKR actually tried something different with the superhero movie, the rest is pop corn stuff, however good. Come on, this lower than TIH, X-Men The Fricking Last Stand?

How is the Nolan trilogy the only movies that tried something different with superhero movies?

 

[TheFlamingCoco]

^ As for the positive buzz and negative reviews, this is true of several movies. Preview screenings tend to "soften" people, so they believe the movie is better than it is.