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

[Autonet]

That is such a dumb defense. These uppity film critics have it out for Nolan, yet rated his batman trilogy so highly. They have it out for comic book movies yet avengers is one of the best reviewed films of the year. Got it.

The excuses people are making around here are ridiculous to the point where y'all's are justifying bad reviews as a good thing.

Pretty much this.

 

[Tony Stark]

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

S IS FOR HOPE

The problem is the ratio of bad to good hasn't improved, it's gotten worse. To give you a point of reference it has about as many rotten reviews as Dark Knight Returns had in total and 2/3'rd of what Iron Man 3 had in total.

It can certainly get back to fresh status, but it's not getting back to 70%.

Yesterday I posted (when it was at 65%) that best case scenario was 70-73%, worst case was 55-59%, There's only going to be about 170-180 more reviews, I know of several rotten reviews that have not been posted like Roeper's, so it's got to post a lot more positive reviews to offset the bad ones.

at this point:

Best case: 63-65%

Worst case: 55%-57%

 

[Ozymandias]

I've noticed that Critics' Choice has Man of Steel at 84/100. Can someone explain to me the difference in critics between them and Rotten Tomatoes? Does CC consist of more bloggers?

http://www.criticschoice.com/opening-soon/

 

[Silver Surfer]

Let's all take a deep breath and calm down. Let's wait for the GA word of mouth, if it's as bad as the reviews then we can start panicking.

 

[ThreadPool]

Best thing from that ridiculous Yahoo! article.

 

[Mjölnir]

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!

I wouldn't call it a bomb for critics. It's still positive for more than half of them so I'd say it's gotten a mixed reception among critics.

 

[-JKR-]

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

See? I know you're phrase is not to be taken seriously, but why should someone hate opinions? Because they're different from yours? I thought The Amazing Spider-man was a poor excuse of a movie, which didn't bring anything remotely interesting or fresh to the table; and I found Marc Webb's direction to be quite bland and soporific. The hipster/"typical modern teen indie drama" feel didn't help, either.

 

[Sockin]

If you do a Twitter search of "man of steel" the second smart search keyword that comes up is "man of steel sucks" oof. Not great for WOM. I'm going tonight though and I'm pretty stoked about it.

 

[Motown Marvel]

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.

That is not the reason the score is low. The score is low because the film doesn't work, in the opinion of the critics. Stop blaming other movies for the faults of MOS. everyone is willing to accept a different take on superman, but it has to work. If it doesn't work, people will be critical of it and they will reference previous incarnations where the character does work. But it's not the previous incarnations fault that the new incarnation doesn't work.

 

[Eggyman]

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.

So only positives came out before the embargo lifted ... not surprising. Misleading but not surprising.

 

[Tim_Riggins]

I've noticed that Critics' Choice has Man of Steel at 84/100. Can someone explain to me the difference in critics between them and Rotten Tomatoes? Does CC consist of more bloggers?

http://www.criticschoice.com/opening-soon/

Is someone could answer this , it would be cool.

About the Batman movies, I say they try something different, because I don't even consider them as superhero movies, but rather as crime/drama movies in a way, the first time in my opinion that superhero movies were truly respected and seen as something MORE.

 

[GremlinZilla89]

Right here and now: The critics are wrong on this one.

I went to a 12:05 showing after work last night and while I was still very much looking forward to it, I had the mixed reviews in the back of my head.

I can safely say most of the main criticisms are simply mind-boggling. As in, I simply can't understand where they are coming from. This movie is mythic, epic, personal and grand all at the same time. I never once felt disconnected by the narrative or editing. If anything it made for a more evocative and immersive viewing experience and set itself apart from the CBM pack. You are with Clark on his journey and by the time ***** hits the fan (and boy, does it ever) you are invested.

The film takes ample time to set the mood and tone for the action to come. I'm actually surprised critics aren't complaining the film is too BORING for most of the runtime because the narrative takes its time.
The cast is uniformly great. No, Lois and Clark don't have the lions share or screentime, but their chemistry and connection felt more real than the Bruce/Rachel relationship in TWO Batman films. It's kinda like the Thor romance. While the love story in Thor felt rushed, the chemistry between the two saved it. Thats what it's like for me in MOS except we get a bit more meat to the love story.
Shannon is awesome as Zod. I feel like people need their CBM villains to all be on the level of The Joker. That's highly unfair imo. No, Shannon isn't the next Joker but he is PLENTY intense. He has awesome presence and the empathy of the character really works in the films favor. You understand where this guy is coming from, but you know he has to be stopped.
What I really loved about the film is the duality of the father figures. It's the emotional backbone of the film. Clark going between the two is great to watch. While some may not like the a certain moment in the film in regards to one of these figures, I feel it worked within the context of the film and was a great emotional pay-off.

And yes, the action is INSANE. Like, pump your fists, and scream "Hell ya" insane. It's the most intense and in your face action in any superhero movie, and hell, of most any big event movie for that matter! And that is not a bad thing imo. The action doesn't eat up any more screentime than the Avengers, so have no fear on that department either.

So please people do me a solid and RELAX! No, not all of you are going to love it (when does that ever happen?), but I can say with all seriousness and without snark or venom that the critics are simply off the boat on this film. Is it flawless? No. Although I think the Lois/Clark relationship worked overall, the film did feel like it wanted to do more with them and I did want more. I also felt it could have benefited more from Clarks teen years, but that's just more of a nitpick than anything else. The major flaw of pacing and development critics are harping on simply goes over my head. What are they talking about? This is one of the best CBM ever.

9/10

 

[Tim_Riggins]

So only positives came out before the embargo lifted ... not surprising. Misleading but not surprising.

No, not only positives, there were some negatives too, but very positive overall, and people who praised it weren't just fanboys or anything, it's not because it's previews that people lose their ability to judge something appropriately.

 

[Anjow1060]

I just saw the news.

Everyone ok?

Death toll? Injuries?

- Jow

 

[TheFlamingCoco]

That is not the reason the score is low. The score is low because the film doesn't work, in the opinion of the critics. Stop blaming other movies for the faults of MOS. everyone is willing to accept a different take on superman, but it has to work. If it doesn't work, people will be critical of it and they will reference previous incarnations where the character does work. But it's not the previous incarnations fault that the new incarnation doesn't work.

That's probably true. http://dorkshelf.com/2013/06/13/man-of-steel-review/
This review criticized the writing (and film as a whole), but praised the direction from Zack.

 

[Silver Surfer]

"In Man of Steel, the first victims are fun and wonder" - Globe and Mail‎

These guys aren't pulling any punches.

 

[danoyse]

If you do a Twitter search of "man of steel" the second smart search keyword that comes up is "man of steel sucks" oof. Not great for WOM. I'm going tonight though and I'm pretty stoked about it.

That happens with nearly every movie, I wouldn't worry too much about that.

 

[hitmanyr2k]

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?

I don't think it's superhero fatigue at all. I think it's "brooder" fatigue. Everything has to be so serious and dark these days. We had three Batman movies with this but that was understandable since it's the nature of the character. Now "mope" and "gloom" seem to be trendy. Now Spider-man is doing it. Now Superman is doing it. Wolverine? Probably. It seems only Marvel is bucking that trend and having a balance with humor where things don't get so serious.

 

[mace1]

by TransformersINC


quote-

It's funny that all the negative reviews sound like positives to me. Too much action? Want. It's an action movie with depth (they say that's a negative because action movies aren't supposed to be "deep")? Want. Not cheesy enough? Want. Not like the Chris Reeve films? Want.

 

[TheFlamingCoco]

^ Yep. I saw a lot of TA sucks

 

[macphisto96]

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.

I don't think there's a conspiracy, but that doesn't mean individual critics don't push the Rotten button because of several factors - including how hyped the film is.

X-Men didn't really deal with anything serious. You can say it dealt with minorities, but it did it very differently in an unbelievable and popcorn fashion. I enjoyed the first two (actually liked most of Last Stand too).

But there always is a question for any viewer as to what their expectation were coming in. Just by reading the reviews themselves, you can tell the problem with most of the critics is the critics themselves - they had bad expectations.

Many of them wished Superman would quip more one liners and that's the reason why it got a lukewarm review. That the Robert Downey effect. But that's not Superman. If you want a Superman movie with zingers then you're setting yourself up to not enjoy it.

Too much action? Avengers didn't have too much? If you didn't criticize Avengers for action a year ago then you're being inconsistent as a critic. Maybe because Avengers didn't ask them to deal with more serious subject matter?

But I saw similar things with some of the lukewarm reviews of Into Darkness too. Those alleged "plot holes" that many critics attacked were not plot holes at all. Indeed, if you actually pay attention to the movie, you understand where it's coming from.

I just find it funny that a lot of these critics get paid for their opinions, even though their opinions are often out of line with a lot of the public at large. Shouldn't they care more about how the public will view the film than the lens they see it through?

There's a combination of things at work here. Superhero fatigue - maybe a bit. Marketing fatigue - probably wouldn't surprise me if some critics lash out because of the marketing effort. Dislike of movies that try to make superheroes relatable (again, Batman is not super).

Yet this is all imposing the critic's outside perspective on the review instead of letting the movie speak for itself. And it doesn't just go for Man Of Steel. You may find critics that may agree with a film's political outlook call it fresh while they knock down one they disagree with. But do those political opinions matter inside the film? I know I can watch a film and enjoy it even if it may portray something I disagree with because I can separate my opinions from the film and enjoy it on its own merits.

A lot of these critics cannot.

 

[ThreadPool]

"In Man of Steel, the first victims are fun and wonder" - Globe and Mail‎

These guys aren't pulling any punches.

Well, fun is a jerk, and I don't much like wonder.

 

[TheFlamingCoco]

by TransformersINC


It's funny that all the negative reviews sound like positives to me. Too much action? Want. It's an action movie with depth (they say that's a negative because action movies aren't supposed to be "deep")? Want. Not cheesy enough? Want. Not like the Chris Reeve films? Want.

Yep. But if it comes across as cold, mean-spirited and tedious, I will be sad.

 

[Hyde]

Back up to 60%!

 

[-JKR-]

by TransformersINC


quote-

It's funny that all the negative reviews sound like positives to me. Too much action? Want. It's an action movie with depth (they say that's a negative because action movies aren't supposed to be "deep")? Want. Not cheesy enough? Want. Not like the Chris Reeve films? Want.

You people don't really understand what the reviews say, do you? The action is said to be too much for its own good. It is described as overlong and tiring; and the movie is mostly described as HEAVY and too SOMBER, while failing to be actually DEEP (and this is also due to the fact that attempts at something deeper get eaten up by the overlong action at the end).