Were The Critics Looking For Revenge?

[Isildur´s Heir]

Deal with it, the 1st movie is a masterpiece compared to this one, and the 1st movie is pretty bad.

 

[X-Maniac]

Fair enough, but there's no denial over the pure cliche "doom getting the srfer's board" scene, with the BOV shot, eugh!

What would you have wanted to see instead though?

 

[X-Maniac]

Deal with it, the 1st movie is a masterpiece compared to this one, and the 1st movie is pretty bad.

Perhaps you could 'deal with it' too....your particular issue anyway.

You sound like a woman on the Big Brother reality show. All she says is 'Deal with it'....

 

[GreenKToo]

I cant speak for the critics, only for myself. I dont think it sucked, but its no masterpiece either. Its at about the same level as the first one for me.

 

[Nokio]

I had issues with FF2 but the New York Times review tore into FF2 with a vengence. FOX broght this on themselves with that awful 1st film.

 

[Nokio]

Doesn't matter if this movie is better or not.

Boxoffice of this movie sucks. And I think we guys should stop dreaming about a sequel and silver surfer spin off.

I'll withhold judgment on box office numbers until Sunday.

 

[highguard]

^^ Honestly I think the critics really don't get it. A guy a while back in noting that the critics were puzzled that 300 did as well as it did are simply becoming one trick ponies.

They have a view of the genre and it is set up like this: They think all movies should be like Superman the Movie or Batman and Batman Begins.

Frankly this is the Frank Miller, Sin City, Chris Claremont, Xmen mold.

I hated that writers all wanted to make every hero like Wolverine at Marvel and I hate it when critics don't have a clue about the subject that they are writing about.

There was a time when with Marvel every hero had to go through the whole question of when is it justified to kill the villain. In the Avengers this happened during the Galactic Storm saga in the 90s I think, interestingly enough it was Iron Man that was for killing the Supreme Kree dude. This was the effect of the popularity of Wolverine, the little murderous psycho. As expected Cap was against that kind of unilateral exercise of power by heroes (Shadows of Civil War).

In the movies the critics just do not want the Fantastic Four to succeed. Worse they have no clue about the source material. They feel it should not be as light as it was.

Well Fantastic Four succeeded and FF2 will succeed, book it.

Fox should just realize that the fanboys are not as ignorant as the suits might think. Respect the vision of Lee and Kirby and so many other creators like Buscema, Thomas, Byrne, Perez, etc.

They could have had their 80-90 million this past weekend and be laughing at the critics.

Part of me is a little upset at Fox for not respecting the source enough, but I can see that the critics don't have a clue. They tried again and they failed again.

These guys don't want movies like FF and 300 and stuff, everything has to be in a particular mold. That is their problem, they can't see that within the genre there is room for all types. They just need to go buy some comic books and get a clue.

I find myself a little irritated that I am nervous about this weekend's take again. Man this film could have been the motherload. It is unseemly to me that it is just holding its own with the first film.

Guess that is the effect of FF1 and the Galactus controversy.

However World Wide looks like X2 numbers so I can assume that it will follow the Spiderman 3 pattern of huge international numbers as compared to its domestic take.

Go FF.

 

[Spider-Fan]

Critics are not looking for revenge as much as they don't understand the concept of the FF or the SS. That is really what it boils down to.

Has nothing to do with it not being Spider-Man or having a critically panned first movie.

 

[gambitfire]

Critics are not looking for revenge as much as they don't understand the concept of the FF or the SS. That is really what it boils down to.

Has nothing to do with it not being Spider-Man or having a critically panned first movie.

I agree with that, but i agree with LS as well, I can't help it feel critics refused to enjoy this film from the moment they knew it was being filmed.

It's not because I liked it and they didn't therefore they're wrong, it's because I haven't seen justfied reviews explaining what's so bad about it.


For example I hear all these things about plot holes and no development but I don't see any dam examples. In any case those brought up can be countered as seen in previous posts.

 

[Spider-Fan]

I agree with that, but i agree with LS as well, I can't help it feel critics refused to enjoy this film from the moment they knew it was being filmed.

It's not because I liked it and they didn't therefore they're wrong, it's because I haven't seen justfied reviews explaining what's so bad about it.


For example I hear all these things about plot holes and no development but I don't see any dam examples. In any case those brought up can be countered as seen in previous posts.

All the complaints about the movie from the critics seem to stem from things that are core concepts of the FF. I don't think it is hate for this movie as much as they hate the concept itself. Roeper showed me this when he was trying to sound like he knew comics, but at the same time called the FF second string and made a comment about how the Surfer serves a being who appatantly eats planets, and he said that in a mocking fashion. Most critics semm to be like this with the FF and most comic book movies. Ebert made fun of the concept of the Sandman for crying out loud.

 

[DACrowe]

I do think that it is a little bit silly to think critics are conspiring against this movie. It is true they do compare it to other standards in the genre. But when you have Star Wars, Independence Day will come under scrutiny.

I doubt it is tone as the first two X-Men were very dark and serious and got great reviews (as did Batman Begins) but the Spider-Man movies (the first two at least) were light and crowd pleasing entertainment.

They just want good writing and filmmaking. When they don't get it they ***** a lot louder than the mainstream. But they'll lavish Casino Royale for example, so does bashing DAD make them hate Brosnan? Quite the opposite, it was just a bad movie. Same with when critics give great reviews to say Mask of Zorro as a crowd pleaser but hate its sequel. Pirates 1 vs. its respective sequels.

It's when movies fial to live up to their potential or predecessors or peers that critics destroy it. And while I enjoy FF2 and do not think it is a bad movie, I think there is nothing wrong with holding up to movies in the same genre (and even same tone aka Sam Raimi's Spidey movies) and not taking it if it pales in comparison.

 

[Gilpesh]

Critics were not looking for revenge. But they weren't going to set the bar lower just cause there was some pretty explosions and T&A.

Unless you want to start calling FF a "special" franchise that needs their own critics. Heck... you could even make a Special Oscars... for those movies that were born different but still want to compete.

 

[chaseter]

The critics aren't vengeful...they are just pompous, fake wannabees, or old geezers, or the knowledgeable non-biased movie patrons...but the latter are few and far between. I am tired of seeing 20 somethings that have their own website from daddy's cash and think they are suddenly movie critics. Or people that write for NoWhere News and think they have an established background in cinema. Too many people seem to be scared to accept a popcorn movie for what it is and have fun than bash a movie that isn't automatically Oscar worthy for best picture.

 

[coreymb16]

^^ Honestly I think the critics really don't get it. A guy a while back in noting that the critics were puzzled that 300 did as well as it did are simply becoming one trick ponies.

They have a view of the genre and it is set up like this: They think all movies should be like Superman the Movie or Batman and Batman Begins.

Frankly this is the Frank Miller, Sin City, Chris Claremont, Xmen mold.

I hated that writers all wanted to make every hero like Wolverine at Marvel and I hate it when critics don't have a clue about the subject that they are writing about.

There was a time when with Marvel every hero had to go through the whole question of when is it justified to kill the villain. In the Avengers this happened during the Galactic Storm saga in the 90s I think, interestingly enough it was Iron Man that was for killing the Supreme Kree dude. This was the effect of the popularity of Wolverine, the little murderous psycho. As expected Cap was against that kind of unilateral exercise of power by heroes (Shadows of Civil War).

In the movies the critics just do not want the Fantastic Four to succeed. Worse they have no clue about the source material. They feel it should not be as light as it was.

Well Fantastic Four succeeded and FF2 will succeed, book it.

Fox should just realize that the fanboys are not as ignorant as the suits might think. Respect the vision of Lee and Kirby and so many other creators like Buscema, Thomas, Byrne, Perez, etc.

They could have had their 80-90 million this past weekend and be laughing at the critics.

Part of me is a little upset at Fox for not respecting the source enough, but I can see that the critics don't have a clue. They tried again and they failed again.

These guys don't want movies like FF and 300 and stuff, everything has to be in a particular mold. That is their problem, they can't see that within the genre there is room for all types. They just need to go buy some comic books and get a clue.

I find myself a little irritated that I am nervous about this weekend's take again. Man this film could have been the motherload. It is unseemly to me that it is just holding its own with the first film.

Guess that is the effect of FF1 and the Galactus controversy.

However World Wide looks like X2 numbers so I can assume that it will follow the Spiderman 3 pattern of huge international numbers as compared to its domestic take.

Go FF.

Man, you don't know how BAD I wanted that to happen.

 

[The Kid]

damn lightning. paranoid much? These flicks as mediocre and carelessly put together as they are aren't probably an afterthought to most critics who rightfully bashed the lame first film. (I havnt seen the second and don't ever want to) There are much bigger fish to fry than yet another sequel at a time when hollywood's overrun with them.

 

[gambitfire]

Wait i swear i've seen you more than once in another thread putting the film down and you havn't even seen it?!


....

 

[Casius--J]

I just dont think the critics get these kind of films, as people have already posted. They tend to look towards superman returns and batman begins for the mould of a comic book movie. Where as i enjoyed BB although the action could've been better, i really did not like superman, for me that was the most disappointing comic book film i've seen!

With the FF, it should be an light entertaining family film and imo thats what we got. Their stories have always been lighter than most other comic books, so i didnt feel let down with this movie.


But seriously, who actually cares what critics have to say???

 

[Nokio]

I just dont think the critics get these kind of films, as people have already posted. They tend to look towards superman returns and batman begins for the mould of a comic book movie. Where as i enjoyed BB although the action could've been better, i really did not like superman, for me that was the most disappointing comic book film i've seen!

With the FF, it should be an light entertaining family film and imo thats what we got. Their stories have always been lighter than most other comic books, so i didnt feel let down with this movie.


But seriously, who actually cares what critics have to say???

Superman Returns got great reviews from all over, but yet it failed becasue the masses was bored to tears. Sometimes trying to make a Superhero film artsy takes away from it. This what happened with SR.

 

[Nokio]

I agree with that, but i agree with LS as well, I can't help it feel critics refused to enjoy this film from the moment they knew it was being filmed.

It's not because I liked it and they didn't therefore they're wrong, it's because I haven't seen justfied reviews explaining what's so bad about it.


For example I hear all these things about plot holes and no development but I don't see any dam examples. In any case those brought up can be countered as seen in previous posts.

Yeah I think most of them did exactly that. The reviewer on BET was fair gave it a good review even though he complained about how awful the 1st one was and questioned why FOX would make a sequel to a bad film. That was the only positive review i saw, well as positive that can expected cause he ragged on the F4 themselves and called them the most boring of Superheroes and said that the SS is what made the film and gave them something to do. He went on to say what character will they pair the f4 for the next sequel, cuase it's the only way they'll succedd next time.

When I read stuff like this it just makes me furious. This is all FOX's fault for their treatment of the F4 in the 1st film. The F4 are not boring and don't need guest stars to help them succeed. I don't want to see this as an option to do a f4 movie. Reading that article about when Story mentioned using the Black Panther maybe for a 3rd just didn't sit right with me. Even though it'll be cool to see other Marvel heroes in a movie, but it should be about the F4 and not have other heroes guest star to boost their appeal. I suspect this is what FOX may try and do.

 

[Lightning Strykez!]

damn lightning. paranoid much? These flicks as mediocre and carelessly put together as they are aren't probably an afterthought to most critics who rightfully bashed the lame first film. (I havnt seen the second and don't ever want to) There are much bigger fish to fry than yet another sequel at a time when hollywood's overrun with them.

Paranoid? Me? Of course not.

I'm just posing questions to the board to get some good, quality conversation going on these boards...I like "thinking threads" and the users here are thinking people. That's all.

Besides, you haven't even seen the film, yet you say it sucks. Tell me that's not "paranoid" my friend.

 

[dark_b]

so if the critics would love it then fans wouldnt care right?

if critics hate the movie hten htey are bad....if htey love it then they are good.

 

[Lightning Strykez!]

so if the critics would love it then fans wouldnt care right?

if critics hate the movie hten htey are bad....if htey love it then they are good.

Way to oversimplify the questions posed in my original post. We are specifically discussing if critics who bashed the first film walked into this one with an open mind or not.

 

[dark_b]

Way to oversimplify the questions posed in my original post. We are specifically discussing if critics who bashed the first film walked into this one with an open mind or not.

why do i have a feeling that you think that my post was for you?
did i quote you?

 

[Kelly]

Well dark b, when you don't quote someone then it is usually one of two things....you are talking about the original post of the thread, or you are talking about the post above yours.....of which, both are from LS and basically saying the same thing.....anyone would think the same thing...

 

[dark_b]

Well dark b, when you don't quote someone then it is usually one of two things....you are talking about the original post of the thread, or you are talking about the post above yours.....of which, both are from LS and basically saying the same thing.....anyone would think the same thing...

i was talking to all fans.