• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

DC Cinematic Universe |OT| Superfriends with Benefits

Status
Not open for further replies.
E

evil solrac v3.0

Member
Effect said:
So it's really going to come down to word of mouth it seems. Which very well might be primarily positive. Was watching the beginning of the Greg Miller review and Tim while he didn't enjoy/love it the way Greg did he was still I think positive about the film in the end. He had his issues and he was clear that he didn't like Man of Steel that much. He still felt people needed to see the film. If the audience is split like that and word of mouth is good and people go back and see it two or three times then I think WB might end up happy.

They know what scores Man of Steel got but they also know what the audience reaction was. It was largely if not the overwhelming majority was positive. The cinema score for it was an A. It sold extremely well on dvd, etc. That doesn't happen if general audiences didn't enjoy it a lot.

I don't think critic reviews are worthless but when it comes to them I largely look at the actual review instead of the scores and try to do so afterward as to not be spoiled. Many people don't read reviews but look at the scores. Just from the small sampling provide you can see some of the negatives are different and some are the same. You can't just look at the score. It's the same with game reviews. Why one person gave it a low score can be different from the next person. Why the positives can be different as well.

When it comes to reviews I can easily spot things where I clearly disagree. If someone doesn't like the fights then I can ignore that part of the review and criticism because I do like that stuff. That's a hard disagreement and that person's thoughts on that subject no longer matter and it goes for other reviews that have a negative opinion of that subject. If I don't see negative statements regarding the acting and dialogue then I can largely believe none of that was a concern. I like to look for things like editing, sound, pacing, direction, how things are shot, etc. These things are largely objective. Many reviews I've read over the years don't even bother with them.

Something like tone and darkness of a film is a personal preference. I don't like comedy all that much. I'm very selective about what I find funny on that front. I know what comedy I don't like as well which I still haven't seen Deadpool. I know I won't like it because I don't like that brand of comedy in other films. I love the Nolan films and it's largely because they're serious and treat the subject matter seriously. I enjoy the Marvel films but I've always had a problem with how they make lite of the situations. It's their style and it works for them but I don't want everything like that. The end of GOTG pissed me off because of what they did. Where as I love The Winter Solider because while there was humor in the film they treated the subject matter with the weight it deserved.

I see the critics but what I'm largely waiting for is audience reaction. People that go to movies they're interested in and to have a good time. Not critics that go see a film because they have to as it's part of their job regardless of their overall interest. That's largely where the disconnect might be coming from. I feel that if many critics weren't reviewing films they would never buy tickets to half the films they actual review just due to not being interested in the first place.

There are very few critics I've read over the years that critique a film significantly better then a non-critic film goer that is able to word their thoughts on a film well. The critic just gets paid and has a platform. They're all opinion pieces in the end. Especially if they're not going to talk about the meat of how the film was actually made.



I think people are going to be really surprised when that film comes out and that's not what it is. It might be a dark comedy but I don't think that is going to be lighthearted at all.
Click to expand...

and that's my problem with critics right there. they set the tone, the agenda, the talking points. one thousand people could have positive things to say about a movie but if a Roger Ebert (just using an example) says the movie is bad and has problems then all of a sudden that's the agreed upon consensus of the movie.

or to use a personal anecdote,this girl at work told me she had never seen any of the star wars movies and was going to marathon then. I already had my opinions about them (hated eps 1-3) but I never once gave her my opinion on them, or told her why she would not enjoy it, she comes back and tells me she loved them, had a few issues but overall was quite pleased with them.
and that's what critics need to be : objective. way too many nowadays inject their personal opinions on both technical issues (I don't like CGI) and personal likes (Superman should always be smiling, movie bad!)
 
D

duckroll

Member
thehypocrite said:
Is he wrong? If Marvel treats them as such why it's the audience expected to act differently?

Some examples of throwaways: IM3, Thor 2, AoU.
Click to expand...

If we're defining "throwaway" as "something I didn't like" then, what is the DCCU? A duology of throwaway films? That's a silly arms race no one will win.

IM3 is a Shane Black buddy cop movie in the IM universe, and it's fun as hell. I don't think it's throwaway at all. One of my favorites.

Thor 2 is mediocre garbage.

AoU is a disappointing follow up, overcooked, and doesn't really achieve what it sets out to do, but there are fun moments. Maybe. If anything, the disappointment is unforgettable, so it's hardly a throwaway film.
 
J

jackdoe

Member
evil solrac v3.0 said:
and that's my problem with critics right there. they set the tone, the agenda, the talking points. one thousand people could have positive things to say about a movie but if a Roger Ebert (just using an example) says the movie is bad and has problems then all of a sudden that's the agreed upon consensus of the movie.

or to use a personal anecdote,this girl at work told me she had never seen any of the star wars movies and was going to marathon then. I already had my opinions about them (hated eps 1-3) but I never once gave her my opinion on them, or told her why she would not enjoy it, she comes back and tells me she loved them, had a few issues but overall was quite pleased with them.
and that's what critics need to be : objective. way too many nowadays inject their personal opinions on both technical issues (I don't like CGI) and personal likes (Superman should always be smiling, movie bad!)
Click to expand...
I disagree. A critic should be able to offer their personal opinions on a movie and any issues they have with a film. The real problem is when people use it as an end all, be all to decide whether they want to watch a movie, whether they liked a movie, or as a definitive argument point that a movie is bad.
 
N

N7Commander95

Member
duckroll said:
If we're defining "throwaway" as "something I didn't like" then, what is the DCCU? A duology of throwaway films? That's a silly arms race no one will win.

IM3 is a Shane Black buddy cop movie in the IM universe, and it's fun as hell. I don't think it's throwaway at all. One of my favorites.

Thor 2 is mediocre garbage.

AoU is a disappointing follow up, overcooked, and doesn't really achieve what it sets out to do, but there are fun moments. Maybe. If anything, the disappointment is unforgettable, so it's hardly a throwaway film.
Click to expand...

I don't mind Iron Man 3. Its funny in, like, a legitimate way. It's Downeys least quippy flick, and is tons of fun

My major issue is that it makes no real sense within the context of the MCU. I know this is Pedantic, but shit like the suit breaking, the technology, character motives, hell even the time frame. It just doesn't really fit very well
 
D

Draconian

Member
The only Iron Man movie I'd call good is the first one. The second is completely forgettable, the third has too many nonsensical and dumb ideas in it.
 
I

IconGrist

Member
Oh for fucks sakes, there's another MoS thread in OT and it starts out with this:

"It sucks. You know it sucks, we probably disagree about how it sucks, how much it sucks, what parts suck more than others, but in the end, we can't escape that it's a fairly poorly composed movie in nearly every front."
 
K

kylecoley182

Banned
The Icon said:
Oh for fucks sakes, there's another MoS thread in OT and it starts out with this:

"It sucks. You know it sucks, we probably disagree about how it sucks, how much it sucks, what parts suck more than others, but in the end, we can't escape that it's a fairly poorly composed movie in nearly every front."
Click to expand...

but i didn't think it suck
 
E

evil solrac v3.0

Member
jackdoe said:
I disagree. A critic should be able to offer their personal opinions on a movie and any issues they have with a film. The real problem is when people use it as an end all, be all to decide whether they want to watch a movie, whether they liked a movie, or as a definitive argument point that a movie is bad.
Click to expand...

well it's one thing to say "the CGI in superman was bad, the people looked to be made out of putty and the animation was awful" versus "I don't like CGI, it looks dumb, give me practical effects instead"
I think one is clearly a critic of a piece of media and the other sounds like a personal grudge or vendetta against a certain style.
 
T

thehypocrite

Member
duckroll said:
If we're defining "throwaway" as "something I didn't like" then, what is the DCCU? A duology of throwaway films? That's a silly arms race no one will win.

IM3 is a Shane Black buddy cop movie in the IM universe, and it's fun as hell. I don't think it's throwaway at all. One of my favorites.

Thor 2 is mediocre garbage.

AoU is a disappointing follow up, overcooked, and doesn't really achieve what it sets out to do, but there are fun moments. Maybe. If anything, the disappointment is unforgettable, so it's hardly a throwaway film.
Click to expand...

They are throwaways cause the themes treated on each of them bear no weight on what comes after. IM3 Peppers saves his ass, Tony destroyed all their armors, in AoU ha has an even more ridiculous armor and Peppers nowhere to be found.

Thor 2 a movie so dumb that nothing that came after even reference it and in AoU we get a pulled by the hairs scene of Thor going to a cave to take a bath....or something.

AoU Cap and IM get to talk about their differences and come to an understanding but now they wanna kill each other on Civil War?
 
J

jackdoe

Member
evil solrac v3.0 said:
well it's one thing to say "the CGI in superman was bad, the people looked to be made out of putty and the animation was awful" versus "I don't like CGI, it looks dumb, give me practical effects instead"
I think one is clearly a critic of a piece of media and the other sounds like a personal grudge or vendetta against a certain style.
Click to expand...
Again, I disagree. I mean the latter argument is pretty much one major complaint of the Star Wars prequels by fans and it is used as legitimate criticism when discussing those movies. Again, that's fine as criticism. The reviewer doesn't like that kind of film and the review reflects that.
 
BadAss2961

BadAss2961

Member
duckroll said:
If we're defining "throwaway" as "something I didn't like" then, what is the DCCU? A duology of throwaway films? That's a silly arms race no one will win.

IM3 is a Shane Black buddy cop movie in the IM universe, and it's fun as hell. I don't think it's throwaway at all. One of my favorites.

Thor 2 is mediocre garbage.

AoU is a disappointing follow up, overcooked, and doesn't really achieve what it sets out to do, but there are fun moments. Maybe. If anything, the disappointment is unforgettable, so it's hardly a throwaway film.
Click to expand...
Call it bad, but the last thing you could accuse Man of Steel of being is throwaway. Not with how much we've talked about it. BvS is going to be the same way, for better or worse.

IM3, Thor 2, and AoU were throwaway in how they came and went like a fart in the wind. They're just different shades of mediocre-at-best movies that no one really loved or cares to talk about anymore. But as always, it's just on to the next one.

Green Lantern and Superman Returns are DC examples of something similar. Most people forget those movies happened.
 
N

Ninjimbo

Member
Error said:
Apocalypse is going to do well, critics love Singer's X-men films.
Click to expand...
Oh I don't know about that one and I love Singer's X-Men movies -- they're the best Marvel movies! The CGI in Apocalypse looks bad though and the action looks stilted. I know those aren't Singer's strengths but that's what's being highlighted in the trailers and it don't look hot. I'm worried.

Why can't he just highlight Fassbender and Mcavoy instead? Seriously, they hold the new X-Men movies together. Best duo.
 
T

T-Rex.

Banned
Just woke up and checked the reviews... yikes. Goddamnit. Word of mouth seems to be generally positive so it's quite weird. Ah well, I'll watch it and make my own mind up. I really liked Man of Steel, despite its flaws, so I can't see myself hating this.
 
R

ReiGun

Member
Deadpool is the only X-Men movie since First Class that didn't have horrible marketing campaign. The movies themselves are fine, but my stars, Fox has no idea how to sell them.
 
D

duckroll

Member
BadAss2961 said:
Call it bad, but the last thing you could accuse Man of Steel of being is throwaway. Not with how much we've talked about it. BvS is going to be the same way, for better or worse.

IM3, Thor 2, and AoU were throwaway in how they came and went like a fart in the wind. They're just different shades of mediocre-at-best movies that no one really loved or cares to talk about anymore. But as always, it's just on to the next one.

Green Lantern and Superman Returns are DC examples of something similar. Most people forget those movies happened.
Click to expand...

There have been 10 Iron Man 3 threads after the initial release of the movie. In almost every Marvel thread, people love bringing up Iron Man 3, and there are debates about whether it is good or bad. The Mandarin thing bothers the shit out of some people to this day. I would say you're wrong about that. AoU came out last year, seems a bit soon to be throwing shade, but whatever, you're what you are. You can't help it. One day you'll grow up and realize how silly all of this was. :)
 
T

TropicalFish

Member
What on earth happened in here?

Deadpool is the only X-Men movie since First Class that didn't have horrible marketing campaign. The movies themselves are fine, but my stars, Fox has no idea how to sell them.
Click to expand...
Pretty much. I'm excited for Apocalypse but its marketing campaign has been the pits so far.
 
A

Anth0ny

Member
ReiGun said:
Deadpool is the only X-Men movie since First Class that didn't have horrible marketing campaign. The movies themselves are fine, but my stars, Fox has no idea how to sell them.
Click to expand...

It's true. Amazing they haven't figured that shit out yet.

The marketing team behind Deadpool better get a huge fucking raise. And they should be working on Apocalypse.

Now if you'll excuse me, I'm going to cry myself to sleep while listening to this
 
T

thehypocrite

Member
I went to rotten tomatoes, I see legit criticism I also see a lot of dumb shit.

Examples of legit criticism:
Editing
Pacing

Dumb criticism:

Overly Serious
Not fun
No Jokes
CGI


Like how dare a director make a film based of comics with a serious tone? That's forbidden apparently in the eyes of some critics. That's probably the same thing that happened to watchmen.

Not fun? What does that even mean? It isn't a comedy? No quips? Superman and Batman should be jokesters?

CGI: This may be the dumbest of them all as most people have a real issue determining what's CGI and what's not. Plus guess what nobody cares (general audience). Its like if people started to complain about Hollywood movies being spoken in English regardless of the characters being played are from the alien planet of Bebibu 7654, 3 thousand light years away. Is just the nature of the beast with a superhero blockbuster to have CGI.

Critics are able to pontificate and make all the demands but apparently make none of the concessions they afford to other movies in the medium.

Feeling good about my tickets.
 
N

N7Commander95

Member
thehypocrite said:
I went to rotten tomatoes, I see legit criticism I also see a lot of dumb shit.

Examples of legit criticism:
Editing
Pacing

Dumb criticism:

Overly Serious
Not fun
No Jokes
CGI


Like how dare a director make a film based of comics with a serious tone? That's forbidden apparently in the eyes of some critics. That's probably the same thing that happened to watchmen.

Not fun? What does that even mean? It isn't a comedy? No quips? Superman and Batman should be jokesters?

CGI: This may be the dumbest of them all as most people have a real issue determining what's CGI and what's not. Plus guess what nobody cares (general audience). Its like if people started to complain about Hollywood movies being spoken in English regardless of the characters being played are from the alien planet of Bebibu 7654, 3 thousand light years away. Is just the nature of the beast with a superhero blockbuster to have CGI.

Critics are able to pontificate and make all the demands but apparently make none of the concessions they afford to other movies in the medium.

Feeling good about my tickets.
Click to expand...
I know right? I'm a fan of critics, and I respect that film criticism shouldn't be 'objective'

But when your criticism is 'too many Oscar winners' I don't even know how to respond
 
F

Father_Brain

Banned
ReiGun said:
Deadpool is the only X-Men movie since First Class that didn't have horrible marketing campaign. The movies themselves are fine, but my stars, Fox has no idea how to sell them.
Click to expand...

I assume you mean to include First Class, right?

And the FF marketing was a colossal debacle, even if better marketing could never have saved that one. The first photo of the cast in full costume was "leaked" by someone taking an Instagram selfie... in front of the poster. Which was already up, at his local theater, even though Fox hadn't released that photo directly online, and I'm not sure they ever did.
 
BadAss2961

BadAss2961

Member
duckroll said:
There have been 10 Iron Man 3 threads after the initial release of the movie. In almost every Marvel thread, people love bringing up Iron Man 3, and there are debates about whether it is good or bad. The Mandarin thing bothers the shit out of some people to this day. I would say you're wrong about that. AoU came out last year, seems a bit soon to be throwing shade, but whatever, you're what you are. You can't help it. One day you'll grow up and realize how silly all of this was. :)
Click to expand...
That seems pretty low. I know Man of Steel laughs at that figure.

Most Marvel movie discussion just breaks down to "rank the MCU!" once the honeymoon is over, where everyone busts out their list and that's pretty much the end of it.
T-Rex. said:
Just woke up and checked the reviews... yikes. Goddamnit. Word of mouth seems to be generally positive so it's quite weird. Ah well, I'll watch it and make my own mind up. I really liked Man of Steel, despite its flaws, so I can't see myself hating this.
Click to expand...
About a 100 critics might not feel it, but so far the fans do. The movie looks like a love letter to all of us that wanted this event forever and followed it these past 3 years or so.

It all comes down to word of mouth and how the general audience feels about it.
 
A

Anth0ny

Member
thehypocrite said:
I went to rotten tomatoes, I see legit criticism I also see a lot of dumb shit.

Examples of legit criticism:
Editing
Pacing

Dumb criticism:

Overly Serious
Not fun
No Jokes
CGI


Like how dare a director make a film based of comics with a serious tone? That's forbidden apparently in the eyes of some critics. That's probably the same thing that happened to watchmen.

Not fun? What does that even mean? It isn't a comedy? No quips? Superman and Batman should be jokesters?

CGI: This may be the dumbest of them all as most people have a real issue determining what's CGI and what's not. Plus guess what nobody cares (general audience). Its like if people started to complain about Hollywood movies being spoken in English regardless of the characters being played are from the alien planet of Bebibu 7654, 3 thousand light years away. Is just the nature of the beast with a superhero blockbuster to have CGI.

Critics are able to pontificate and make all the demands but apparently make none of the concessions they afford to other movies in the medium.

Feeling good about my tickets.
Click to expand...

I could see "bad CGI" as a legit criticism but the bolded are ridiculous. You could describe the dark knight trilogy in the exact same way, and those three films are masterpieces.
 
E

evil solrac v3.0

Member
jackdoe said:
Again, I disagree. I mean the latter argument is pretty much one major complaint of the Star Wars prequels by fans and it is used as legitimate criticism when discussing those movies. Again, that's fine as criticism. The reviewer doesn't like that kind of film and the review reflects that.
Click to expand...

then that doesn't make you a legitimate critic. it doesn't matter what you personally like or don't like. if your job is to be a theater or movie or game critic or art or music, even if you personally don't like a certain genere you have to put it aside and grade the damn thing on it's merits and it's technical achievements!

I read a lot of those rotten tomatoes reviews. it read like a list of people that want Hollywood to make only certain types of movies and for these silly comic book movies to disappear forever and never be spoken of again. screw that noise.
 
T

thehypocrite

Member
N7Commander95 said:
I know right? I'm a fan of critics, and I respect that film criticism shouldn't be 'objective'

But when your criticism is 'too many Oscar winners' I don't even know how to respond
Click to expand...
That was hilarious. People need to go deeper than the scores to see if the critics views reflect their tastes, if they'll pay attention to the critics opinions in the first place.
 
P

PBY

Banned
evil solrac v3.0 said:
then that doesn't make you a legitimate critic. it doesn't matter what you personally like or don't like. if your job is to be a theater or movie or game critic or art or music, even if you personally don't like a certain genere you have to put it aside and grade the damn thing on it's merits and it's technical achievements!

I read a lot of those rotten tomatoes reviews. it read like a list of people that want Hollywood to make only certain types of movies and for these silly comic book movies to disappear forever and never be spoken of again. screw that noise.
Click to expand...
Youre asking for an objective standard that is a fiction. I want reviewers to be themselves and just tell me how a film connected with them personally.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Ben Affleck, Henry Cavill, Gal Gadot, and Ezra Miller - not in new DC
21
2K
NahaNago replied
Suicide Squad: Kill The Justice League |OT| Sent to Die
18 19 20 21 22
1K
65K
T-0800 replied
Suicide : Squad; Kill The Justice League | Review Thread
Analysis Review 4 5 6 7 8
355
32K
Certinty replied
Suicide Squad won't be the last game in the Arkham series, says DC Boss
Game Dev
31
2K
Torrent of Pork replied
Variety: When Superman and Batman Copyrights Expire in a Decade, Will It Be Kryptonite for DC?
20
2K
Skyfox replied
Top Bottom