Wonder Woman Is a Disjointed Disaster (Says DC Insider)

Status
Not open for further replies.
sad thing is these days it doesn't matter if it's a disjointed disaster or not, people are going to see it anyways. and those people are going to find a million things to complain and/or argue about, even if it's good.

it's a comic book movie, quality barely matters. BvS was the shittiest movie possible and still made a billion dollars.
 

dabig2

Member
If RT's standards were improving than why is Doctor Strange at 89%? Does it not have the same problems as all other marvel movies? Bad villains? throwaway female leads? Like why was Rachel MacAdams even in the movie? But i guess being formulaic isnt deserving of a negative review?

Dr. Strange was simply a fun movie that was greater than the sum of its parts. Not because of "quips" or any other buzzwords you fools like to throw around in these kinds of threads, but because it simply was a well-made and acted movie that set out to do what it wanted - to entertain and awe. And RT says that it largely succeeded with around 89% of critics who watched it. That's all that number means.

And no, being formulaic itself isn't worthy of a negative review. For me, 99% of everything I watch is formulaic down to its constituent parts.
 
There is a very special distinction in saying that BvS and SS are medicore movies with flaws vs they are outright bad movies which is what the scores suggest. I have written rants on the flaws of BvS (SS i dont care much about because it's just a fun movie to waste two hours on) so I am in agreement with nearly all of your concerns. What bothers me is when people just trash these movies like they are the worst movies they have ever seen. There was a thread earlier this month about X-Men apocalypse where someone thought that was the worst movie they had seen that year. People just need to watch more movies because if you look at the movies that end up in the 20s in rotten tomatoes you will see shit like Fifty shades of grey with the twilight movies and Daredevil in the 40s and 50s.

I have always conceded that BvS is fucking flawed. But it doesnt belong anywhere near those awful movies.

I always thought this was a hilariously awful argument because you're basically asking people to watch more bad movies. Like who's gonna benefit from that?
 

LionPride

Banned
sad thing is these days it doesn't matter if it's a disjointed disaster or not, people are going to see it anyways. and those people are going to find a million things to complain and/or argue about, even if it's good.

it's a comic book movie, quality barely matters. BvS was the shittiest movie possible and still made a billion dollars.
Ha! It didn't, which is a gigantic disappointment because everyone expect it to make a cool Billion. It failed there.
I always thought this was a hilariously awful argument because you're basically asking people to watch more bad movies. Like who's gonna benefit from that?
You wanna know what has a good Extended cut? Daredevil. Made that movie good
 
Or he just knows that Philly SUCKS and got out as soon as the opportunity arose.

*big boot*


Still shocks me that a movie with Batman and Superman, 2 of the most recognizable heroes around, can't make more than a billion.

It was way too nihilistic to get the kids to keep coming back and those repeat family audiences. I liked that aspect of it though. Look at the list of movies lionpride posts below and just how different tonally this was from all of that.

Plus batman and superman are more of a NA thing. Over time they'll get bigger and bigger worldwide
 

LionPride

Banned
Or he just knows that Philly SUCKS and got out as soon as the opportunity arose.

*big boot*


Still shocks me that a movie with Batman and Superman, 2 of the most recognizable heroes around, can't make more than a billion.
It is amazingly shocking that it didn't make a quick billion. Like how.

Movies that made more than BvS: The Secret Life of Pets, The Jungle Book, Rogue One, Zootopia, Finding Dory, and of course Civil War. Two of those movies should definitely not have made more than a movie staring Batman and Superman

Well I mean he admits he watched SS just to waste 2 hours of life.

Anything to distract from the pain.
Are you saying, he might be a SUCKER FOR PAIN
 
Noooo, I really want Wonder Woman to be good. :(

Sure my expectations aren't high (I honestly haven't liked any of the DC cinematic universe movies so far), but I still had a tiny bit of hope for it.

Hopefully these rumors are overblown and the movie will turn out well, but either way I'm definitely not seeing this day one.
 
Mark Hughes just dropped this about the recent rumors

https://www.facebook.com/MarkHughesFilms/posts/10211357449122778

So, what he's saying is there was a rumor on a show, the enthusiast press took the rumor out of the show, rewrote a story (poorly) around the rumor, other members of said enthusiast press then ran that story (also poorly rewritten, maybe with attribution, probably without) and at no point during this relentless cycle did anyone involved with any of these outlets take the time to reach out to anyone even tangentially involved with the original rumor?

So biz as usual with the entertainment wing of the online news world.

People crying about fake news like they haven't been riding the training wheels version of it the last ten years for a peek at a Batman costume or whatever.
 
Fake News (like most shitty things on the internet) started in the enthusiast press.

Almost all the terrible journalistic habits that have been developed in the last 20+ years can be traced back to the entertainment news boom of the late 90s/early 2000s. Every single shitty, stupid, irresponsible practice has its genesis in people getting worked up over some stupid bit of pop-culture.

Eventually the rest of the legitimate media, late to the party, absorbed those shitty practices and made them their own, because it was proven the large majority of the readers online were amenable to this horseshit, and would reward them for it.
 

gamz

Member
So, what he's saying is there was a rumor on a show, the enthusiast press took the rumor out of the show, rewrote a story (poorly) around the rumor, other members of said enthusiast press then ran that story (also poorly rewritten, maybe with attribution, probably without) and at no point during this relentless cycle did anyone involved with any of these outlets take the time to reach out to anyone even tangentially involved with the original rumor?

So biz as usual with the entertainment wing of the online news world.

People crying about fake news like they haven't been riding the training wheels version of it the last ten years for a peek at a Batman costume or whatever.

Or use your common sense.
 
No weapon formed against the City of Philadelphia shall prosper. I will laugh at all of you disgraceful shits when the Sixers take the NBA on the Broad shoulders of Ben Simmons and Joel Embiid. So it was written and so it shall be.

Also we have Rocky. You don't.

Trust the process.
 
No weapon formed against the City of Philadelphia shall prosper. I will laugh at all of you disgraceful shits when the Sixers take the NBA on the Broad shoulders of Ben Simmons and Joel Embiid. So it was written and so it shall be.

Also we have Rocky. You don't.

Trust the process.

If we had a war between cities, not only would Philly win, we'd pee on the ashes of our enemies
 

gamz

Member
No weapon formed against the City of Philadelphia shall prosper. I will laugh at all of you disgraceful shits when the Sixers take the NBA on the Broad shoulders of Ben Simmons and Joel Embiid. So it was written and so it shall be.

Also we have Rocky. You don't.

Trust the process.

Is this the newest WW rumor?
 

LionPride

Banned
No weapon formed against the City of Philadelphia shall prosper. I will laugh at all of you disgraceful shits when the Sixers take the NBA on the Broad shoulders of Ben Simmons and Joel Embiid. So it was written and so it shall be.

Also we have Rocky. You don't.

Trust the process.
You have an aged boxer who will die soon, da GOAT in Embiid and a 6'9 PG who can't shoot so he was to play PF

Philly, much like Baltimore and Pittsburgh, sucks
 

Monocle

Member
Dr. Strange was simply a fun movie that was greater than the sum of its parts. Not because of "quips" or any other buzzwords you fools like to throw around in these kinds of threads, but because it simply was a well-made and acted movie that set out to do what it wanted - to entertain and awe. And RT says that it largely succeeded with around 89% of critics who watched it. That's all that number means.

And no, being formulaic itself isn't worthy of a negative review. For me, 99% of everything I watch is formulaic down to its constituent parts.
Yep.
 

LionPride

Banned
Dr. Strange was simply a fun movie that was greater than the sum of its parts. Not because of "quips" or any other buzzwords you fools like to throw around in these kinds of threads, but because it simply was a well-made and acted movie that set out to do what it wanted - to entertain and awe. And RT says that it largely succeeded with around 89% of critics who watched it. That's all that number means.

And no, being formulaic itself isn't worthy of a negative review. For me, 99% of everything I watch is formulaic down to its constituent parts.

Lies detected = zero

I do wish Rachel McAdams had more to do tho, like that is a prime example of a love interest who exists just to be a love interest.
 

VanWinkle

Member
Not going to believe some random "insider." But this wouldn't surprise me whatsoever at this point in the DCEU. Would I be disappointed? Extremely. But certainly not surprised.
 
Fake News (like most shitty things on the internet) started in the enthusiast press.

Almost all the terrible journalistic habits that have been developed in the last 20+ years can be traced back to the entertainment news boom of the late 90s/early 2000s. Every single shitty, stupid, irresponsible practice has its genesis in people getting worked up over some stupid bit of pop-culture.

Eventually the rest of the legitimate media, late to the party, absorbed those shitty practices and made them their own, because it was proven the large majority of the readers online were amenable to this horseshit, and would reward them for it.

"Fake News" has been a thing since before the days of news papers. We've had dissenting opinions, or straight up character assassination, since before the Mayflower left Plymouth. There's nothing new there. This rumor being given the title fake news?

Calling it a rumor I can understand..I'm sure we'll disagree. But this "fake news" business is a bit much. Imo, of course.
 

7Th

Member
Really hope JL does less than a billion; ideally it will do less than BvS. Warner needs to rethink their strategy, cancel their current messy universe and reboot.
 

LionPride

Banned
Really hope JL does less than a billion; ideally it will do less than BvS. Warner needs to rethink their strategy, cancel their current messy universe and reboot.

Suicide Squad and Batman vs Superman are in the top 10 highest grossing movies of 2016. I wouldn't reboot anything unless Wonder Woman and Justice League are critical AND commercial failures
 
"Fake News" has been a thing since before the days of news papers.

I'm talking about the reckless dissemination of disinformation specific to this era, not just garden variety propaganda. The ways in which people are misinformed (and allow themselves to be misinformed) via online news services (and "news" services) in the current day is what I'm talking about.

It's a cousin to basic tabloid bullshit of the kind we're all familiar with from the 80s/90s, but definitely a thing specifically rooted to internet "news" and "reporting."

People's ability to discern good info from bad got seriously muddied by the very same practices that cause people not to tell the difference from an aggregator putting their own spin on a poorly reported story and the story's original source. It's a combination of a wealth of easily obtainable "information" and a lack of willingness to fucking read anything.

Say what you will about the tabloid machinery of the 80s/90s, but at least its readers took the time to sit down with those fuckin' rags and pore over em.

The fact this is a story, that grew into an even bigger story, with about 90% of the story's "reporters" not even doing the bare minimum to double-check with any of the story's sources is a problem that came from a large number of "journalists" having come up through messageboards and blogs, not researching shit, not reaching out to anyone, and making up their own words for phenomena that is pre-existing.

Hence why fake news is being called fake news.
 

LionPride

Banned
Can we at least agree that Wonder Woman is the Philadelphia Eagles of the DCCU?

What does that even mean in this context? Like Wonder Woman hasn't had a good eight year run or a decent three year run followed by mediocrity followed by more mediocrity with a small hope spot

She does have the best theme tho
 
What does that even mean in this context? Like Wonder Woman hasn't had a good eight year run or a decent three year run followed by mediocrity followed by more mediocrity with a small hope spot

She does have the best theme tho
No, I'm not talking about the comics, just the movies.
 
I'm talking about the reckless dissemination of disinformation specific to this era, not just garden variety propaganda. The ways in which people are misinformed (and allow themselves to be misinformed) via online news services (and "news" services) in the current day is what I'm talking about.

It's a cousin to basic tabloid bullshit of the kind we're all familiar with from the 80s/90s, but definitely a thing specifically rooted to internet "news" and "reporting."

People's ability to discern good info from bad got seriously muddied by the very same practices that cause people not to tell the difference from an aggregator putting their own spin on a poorly reported story and the story's original source. It's a combination of a wealth of easily obtainable "information" and a lack of willingness to fucking read anything.

Say what you will about the tabloid machinery of the 80s/90s, but at least its readers took the time to sit down with those fuckin' rags and pore over em.

The fact this is a story, that grew into an even bigger story, with about 90% of the story's "reporters" not even doing the bare minimum to double-check with any of the story's sources is a problem that came from a large number of "journalists" having come up through messageboards and blogs, not researching shit, not reaching out to anyone, and making up their own words for phenomena that is pre-existing.

Hence why fake news is being called fake news.

The bolded never was or will be my thing. I can kinda see where you're coming from. Just having a hard time taking funny book news to serious to call it a thing that is actually going to affect minorities, women, and those in need. Buy yeah. In the end, I get you..

Her costume sometimes has birds on it. Like the Eagles.

Maybe that's it?

lol..Don't help that fool!
 
The bolded never was or will be my thing. I can kinda see where you're coming from. Just having a hard time taking funny book news to serious to call it a thing that is actually going to affect minorities, women, and those in need. Buy yeah. In the end, I get you..

But that's what I'm getting at. People got used to consuming information in this way because it wasn't serious when it started. It was just entertainment bullshit. For a lot of people, a lot of this political shit still is just entertainment to them. It's sports. Its a storyline like on their favorite Netflix show. They got used to consuming legitimate information about real people and real lives in the exact same way they ate up whatever stupid fucking rumors about some Batman set pics.

A lot of news outlets have devalued the practice of vetting their information because they discovered a lot of their readers don't give a shit, because they're not really reading. Both sides learned to roll in that direction via the rise in online reporting in the late 90s/early 2000s, when people who didn't know shit about shit carried just as much weight, if not more, than people who knew how to actually do the work correctly.

I'm just as complicit as anyone, by the way. I've practiced some of this bullshit myself, on both the reading and the writing side. Which is shitty.

But I'm not equating Batmans to Inauguration Protests or anything - I'm saying the mechanisms that have led to our lazy-ass media servicing confirmation biased readers are not only the same as in the entertainment media field, I'm saying they more or less started there, and filtered outwards to other branches. (Gamergate is a particularly relevant example)

It's hard to complain about how shitty the news is when you reward shitty news with repeated views of their lazy, irresponsible reporting, or even worse, when you carry the water for those irresponsible outlets as if they're worth time and eyeballs.

It's not much of a leap sideways from one terrible aggregator to another.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom