No, you're asking for a product review here, not an critic review. That's not how it works. Ask any actual critic working in the field now if it matters what they personally like or don't like, and you'll get a resounding yes. Taste and personal opinion is what makes critic reviews worth reading. They are personal reflections on art and entertainment, and open discussions about the work. Getting hung up on scores of consensus, and demanding objective standards is only logical if we're talking about a vacuum cleaner or fridge.
-
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.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
DC Cinematic Universe |OT| Superfriends with Benefits
- Thread starter Penguin
- Start date
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
No, you're asking for a product review here, not an critic review. That's not how it works. Ask any actual critic working in the field now if it matters what they personally like or don't like, and you'll get a resounding yes. Taste and personal opinion is what makes critic reviews worth reading. They are personal reflections on art and entertainment, and open discussions about the work. Getting hung up on scores of consensus, and demanding objective standards is only logical if we're talking about a vacuum cleaner or fridge.
This x10000. This is what gaming reviews used to be like mostly like 10 years ago - and it made not only for this weird environment where "good" games "had" to get good reviews, but most reviews were also just unreadable.No, you're asking for a product review here, not an critic review. That's not how it works. Ask any actual critic working in the field now if it matters what they personally like or don't like, and you'll get a resounding yes. Taste and personal opinion is what makes critic reviews worth reading. They are personal reflections on art and entertainment, and open discussions about the work. Getting hung up on scores of consensus, and demanding objective standards is only logical if we're talking about a vacuum cleaner or fridge.
I assume you mean to include First Class, right?
Yeah I just couldn't word it right cause I'm tired.
More_Badass
Member
I don't know if it's because Marvel has practically had free reign on screens since 2013 (and I enjoy most of the MCU movies), but it's kind of disappointing that there seems to be this template now of what comic book movies should be. Personally the more grounded serious DC films are a nice contrast to Marvel's filmsI 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.
And funnily enough, with Suicide Squad, these movies are already more comic book-y than MCU, between them embracing the supernatural and the Arkham-style Batman
bishopcruz
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."
Yep, and the arguments don't get better from there. I get not liking the tone of the movie, I get thinking there was too much action (I disagree for the most part, but I get it.) I get wishing there was more character development, I even get not liking where they took the Pa Kent stuff. I get all of that.
What I don't even bother arguing with anymore are the snarky bits of either willfully misreading parts of the movie, or just putting a ridiculous spin on the events of the movie just to make your point. For example, whenever I see someone say "Johnathan died to save a dog." as an actual argument, I know that I'm done.
thehypocrite
Member
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.
They didn't even said it was bad, just that there was too much for their tastes.
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.
You see how all this makes you sound right? Everything is a competition and your biased view on reality paints it the way you see it. If there were enough DCCU movies to rank, that'll be what most people talk about too. And I'm sure you wouldn't have a problem with it, because clearly you like DC stuff and love to take potshots at Marvel stuff. Am I wrong? It's all childish shit in the end, so why throw rocks in a glass house? We're all watching silly superheroes punch each other and fly around, no need to treat it like some battleground.
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.
If you don't like the genre, then it's probably best to pass the review on to someone in your magazine or newspaper or website and get them review it. You wouldn't give a guy who hates Assassin's Creed the AC review.
Discotheque
Banned
If you don't like the genre, then it's probably best to pass the review on to someone in your magazine or newspaper or website and get them review it. You wouldn't give a guy who hates Assassin's Creed the AC review.
that's a slippery ass slope. film critics are film critics. the moment you start handing it off to fans of the genre then sooner or later they start hiring hack youtube personalities on professional publications and devin faraci gets to write for the times or something.
lol no thanks.
JaeRoar just posted his review. He's like the ultimate DC fanboy so this should be a fun watch. I think he's cried tears of joy at every trailer.
I haven't watched it and it doesn't seem to say in the description but there may be spoilers involved.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lxz3MEj8fPA
Edit: He clarifies no spoilers.
I haven't watched it and it doesn't seem to say in the description but there may be spoilers involved.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lxz3MEj8fPA
Edit: He clarifies no spoilers.
You should. In the end, you don't want reviews coming from only people who would give the game a good review any way. The real problem is when the pool of critics lean heavily one way or the other and don't reflect an accurate sample of the audience who may be interested in the product. That's when you have cases where critical response completely differs from user response.If you don't like the genre, then it's probably best to pass the review on to someone in your magazine or newspaper or website and get them review it. You wouldn't give a guy who hates Assassin's Creed the AC review.
that's a slippery ass slope. film critics are film critics. the moment you start handing it off to fans of the genre then sooner or later they start hiring hack youtube personalities on professional publications and devin faraci gets to write for the times or something.
lol no thanks.
No not fans exclusively. It's the same the other way around. If you're a hardcore fan who can't review the movie subjectively (whether that be from a love of the material or a hate) it's not a fair review.
If you don't like the genre, then it's probably best to pass the review on to someone in your magazine or newspaper or website and get them review it. You wouldn't give a guy who hates Assassin's Creed the AC review.
Bad example. I would say that if a reviewer has no interest in open world games at all and doesn't care to put in the effort to play the game much, then the reviewer probably shouldn't review an Assassin's Creed game. On the other hand, if the reviewer simply disliked previous Assassin's Creed games, there's no reason to exclude said reviewer from the possibility of reviewing the next one. Even if the conclusion you get from the review is "this is the 10th entry of a series which comes out every year and are pretty much identical, what the fuck did you expect?!", that in itself is a discussion point worth considering - is a series that has gone on that long with the same formula absolutely a good thing? Maybe it is to you, maybe it might make you reconsider how you see the franchise.
More_Badass
Member
Depends on why he hated the past games. If the new games improved on those reasons, his opinions and impressions are pretty important.If you don't like the genre, then it's probably best to pass the review on to someone in your magazine or newspaper or website and get them review it. You wouldn't give a guy who hates Assassin's Creed the AC review.
I don't know if it's because Marvel has practically had free reign on screens since 2013 (and I enjoy most of the MCU movies), but it's kind of disappointing that there seems to be this template now of what comic book movies should be. Personally the more grounded serious DC films are a nice contrast to Marvel's films
And funnily enough, with Suicide Squad, these movies are already more comic book-y than MCU, between them embracing the supernatural and the Arkham-style Batman
Completely agreed. DC has always had that darker edge to it: From kicking off the modern, dark age of comics with Dark Knight Returns to kicking off the modern, dark age of comic book films with Batman Begins. I'm pretty sure this "derp it's too serious" criticism is just coming from people who don't know how to articulate their complaints properly.
I didn't like Man of Steel, but it's not because it was "too dark". It goes FAR beyond that.
In another universe, Chris Nolan says "fuck it, I'm down to take over the DC CU" and he's pumping out 85%+ RT movies again and again and again... that are serious, grounded and almost completely devoid of humour. And no one (well, outside of a vocal minority) is complaining about that because the dude can direct the FUCK out of a movie.
N7Commander95
Member
I have to say that the review thread is an absolute shit show. I probably got spoiled on a minor point, but jesus are spoilers flying around willy nilly there.
I haven't even touched that place. I hope all that bile stays there
I have to say that the review thread is an absolute shit show. I probably got spoiled on a minor point, but jesus are spoilers flying around willy nilly there.
I guess people feel because the movie didn't turn out so great that typical GAF spoiler protocol doesn't apply. It's shitty.
More_Badass
Member
At least for me, I'm familiar with Marvel/DC comics, but my favorite characters are Punisher (MAX) and Batman and I mainly read Image comics. And I love gritty crime fiction and neo-noir thrillers. So I'm already kind of biased to the more grounded "grittier" atmosphere (grittier compared to MCU).Completely agreed. DC has always had that darker edge to it: From kicking off the modern, dark age of comics with Dark Knight Returns to kicking off the modern, dark age of comic book films with Batman Begins. I'm pretty sure this "derp it's too serious" criticism is just coming from people who don't know how to articulate their complaints properly.
I didn't like Man of Steel, but it's not because it was "too dark". It goes FAR beyond that.
In another universe, Chris Nolan says "fuck it, I'm down to take over the DC CU" and he's pumping out 85%+ RT movies again and again and again... that are serious, grounded and almost completely devoid of humour. And no one (well, outside of a vocal minority) is complaining about that because the dude can direct the FUCK out of a movie.
The Driver
Member
It's also pretty lame to see people who haven't seen the movie distort stuff to make it sound like Batman kills freely in this and uses guns, all context and Bat film history free of course.
This is getting ridiculous. If it does indeed end up in the freaking 30s on RT something more is going on here. Most of the complaints I hear are actually positives to me and I don't understand how being too serious can be a valid criticism. You wanted a lighter movie going in and it didn't satisfy you? That's a you problem and has nothing to do with the films quality. This is all so strange. I have a hard time believing BvS is as bad as other movies currently sitting in the 30s but I guess I'll find out Friday.
I'm glad I haven't ventured into that review thread. I've remained mostly spoiler free besides that one instance.
Anyways, this tomato meter thing has gotten out of hand. I was reading Time's review of BvS which is listed as negative and the critic doesn't even bash the movie. She goes on to praise a lot of aspects from the movie. Ultimately she complains about the movie's tone for being too serious and dark. It's an even handed review and it goes down as a negative? Weird.
Anyways, this tomato meter thing has gotten out of hand. I was reading Time's review of BvS which is listed as negative and the critic doesn't even bash the movie. She goes on to praise a lot of aspects from the movie. Ultimately she complains about the movie's tone for being too serious and dark. It's an even handed review and it goes down as a negative? Weird.
This is getting ridiculous. If it does indeed end up in the freaking 30s on RT something more is going on here. Most of the complaints I hear are actually positives to me and I don't understand how being too serious can be a valid criticism. You wanted a lighter movie going in and it didn't satisfy you? That's a you problem and has nothing to do with the films quality. This is all so strange. I have a hard time believing BvS is as bad as other movies currently sitting in the 30s but I guess I'll find out Friday.
It may be a case of score deflation like we've seen with some movies with a really high RT% but avg score closer to 7. The same thing happened with MoS where the % was in the 50s but the score was above 6. BvS' avg score probably won't drop below a 5 even if the % is below 50
Movie's been steadily dropping since it's high of 42, rotten reviews are still pouring in faster than positive ones. Eventually it'll become too much and it'll settle on this score in the 30s.
Honestly I figured with all the trailers and everything, people would know going in it's a serious movie that takes itself seriously, I hope they were shocked by the tone or anything.
She probably choose the review as rotten, I believe RT asks that when you submit the review.
This is getting ridiculous. If it does indeed end up in the freaking 30s on RT something more is going on here. Most of the complaints I hear are actually positives to me and I don't understand how being too serious can be a valid criticism. You wanted a lighter movie going in and it didn't satisfy you? That's a you problem and has nothing to do with the films quality. This is all so strange. I have a hard time believing BvS is as bad as other movies currently sitting in the 30s but I guess I'll find out Friday.
Honestly I figured with all the trailers and everything, people would know going in it's a serious movie that takes itself seriously, I hope they were shocked by the tone or anything.
I'm glad I haven't ventured into that review thread. I've remained mostly spoiler free besides that one instance.
Anyways, this tomato meter thing has gotten out of hand. I was reading Time's review of BvS which is listed as negative and the critic doesn't even bash the movie. She goes on to praise a lot of aspects from the movie. Ultimately she complains about the movie's tone for being too serious and dark. It's an even handed review and it goes down as a negative? Weird.
She probably choose the review as rotten, I believe RT asks that when you submit the review.
GringoSuave89
Banned
This is getting ridiculous. If it does indeed end up in the freaking 30s on RT something more is going on here. Most of the complaints I hear are actually positives to me and I don't understand how being too serious can be a valid criticism. You wanted a lighter movie going in and it didn't satisfy you? That's a you problem and has nothing to do with the films quality. This is all so strange. I have a hard time believing BvS is as bad as other movies currently sitting in the 30s but I guess I'll find out Friday.
it's not. at all.
evil solrac v3.0
Member
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.
well I don't. either be fair to the movie or find someone who is.
No, you're asking for a product review here, not an critic review. That's not how it works. Ask any actual critic working in the field now if it matters what they personally like or don't like, and you'll get a resounding yes. Taste and personal opinion is what makes critic reviews worth reading. They are personal reflections on art and entertainment, and open discussions about the work. Getting hung up on scores of consensus, and demanding objective standards is only logical if we're talking about a vacuum cleaner or fridge.
a film is a product. it's not tangible but it's there to be consumed. I'm not hung up on scores, I'm hung up on personal taste and bias getting in the way of giving a fair shake to a movie.
I'm glad I haven't ventured into that review thread. I've remained mostly spoiler free besides that one instance.
Anyways, this tomato meter thing has gotten out of hand. I was reading Time's review of BvS which is listed as negative and the critic doesn't even bash the movie. She goes on to praise a lot of aspects from the movie. Ultimately she complains about the movie's tone for being too serious and dark. It's an even handed review and it goes down as a negative? Weird.
Someone was saying here that the reviewer gets to select if they want it shown as fresh or rotten when it gets submitted
N7Commander95
Member
The internet is going to unbearable for the next month lol
The Driver
Member
The reviews sting but it's to be expected. I knew there was gonna be a lot to argue about even if Marvel hadn't already established the tone/structure people expect for these flicks but it sucks the movie isn't just getting graded on something valid like wonky pacing or editing (which is true) but on sillier things such as lack of humor or self-seriousness I mean, I think there is more humor in this than any of the Nolan trilogy and you didn't hear those complaints as loudly back then.
All I can say is, I hope WB and DC still succeed. I'm definitely more a DC guy now but I still love Marvel and it sucks that it appears some people won't let this battle shit go and seem to think there is only one good way of doing a cbm. I want both universes to flourish, but let them do it their own ways.
All I can say is, I hope WB and DC still succeed. I'm definitely more a DC guy now but I still love Marvel and it sucks that it appears some people won't let this battle shit go and seem to think there is only one good way of doing a cbm. I want both universes to flourish, but let them do it their own ways.
well I don't.
Then you shouldn't be talking or commenting about critic reviews ever again. Sorry.
The internet is going to unbearable for the next month lol
I think you mean "until Suicide Squad comes out" and if that gets the critical thrashing that BvS is getting than hoo boy.
That seems fair. Honestly, reading her review it doesn't seem like she had any major problems other than the tone of the movie. She complains about heavy handedness (which I actually like) and the grim aspects that haunt both Bruce and Clark characters.Someone was saying here that the reviewer gets to select if they want it shown as fresh or rotten when it gets submitted
Idk. It read like a fair assessment with the hint that if you dig this kind of stuff, you'll really dig this movie.
evil solrac v3.0
Member
Then you shouldn't be talking or commenting about critic reviews ever again. Sorry.
well my opinion is that a critic needs to be fair and impartial to the art he is reviewing. that's all I've been trying to articulate all night.
WB needs to put someone in charge of these properties that gets the characters at a fundamental level and kick out Snyder and his wife, before it's too late.
I mean this 'brain trust' thing obviously it's not going to work and they can't offer another divisive movie in JL because it dooms your entire slate and may damage the brand for a long time.
the 'brain trust' reads like too many hands on the kitchen. It's what doomed Green Lantern.
I mean this 'brain trust' thing obviously it's not going to work and they can't offer another divisive movie in JL because it dooms your entire slate and may damage the brand for a long time.
the 'brain trust' reads like too many hands on the kitchen. It's what doomed Green Lantern.
Yeah, my daughter and I are so excited and no amount of complaining about this movie taking itself too seriously or lacking jokes will dampen that enthusiasm. I know what to expect going in and really think I'll enjoy it. Most of my favorite movies take themselves seriously so I'm good.it's not. at all.
I'll add that if it's a MoS situation (high audience scores with low critical acclaim) which I expect to be I won't be ashamed to speak positively about it when I run into condescending people who hated it. I do it now with MoS.
thehypocrite
Member
If it bombs they will adjust if it makes bank they'll continue. That's how Hollywood works.WB needs to put someone in charge of these properties that gets the characters at a fundamental level and kick out Snyder and his wife, before it's too late.
I mean this 'brain trust' thing obviously it's not going to work and they can't offer another divisive movie in JL because it dooms your entire slate and may damage the brand for a long time.
the 'brain trust' reads like too many hands on the kitchen. It's what doomed Green Lantern.
DecoReturns
Member
So would be it be okay to take my little cousin?
This dark tone is making me reconsider, I don't even let them watch TDK or TDKR because it would be to much for them.
Batman Begins was kinda okay for them
This dark tone is making me reconsider, I don't even let them watch TDK or TDKR because it would be to much for them.
Batman Begins was kinda okay for them
Smokey_Run
Member
I think you mean "until Suicide Squad comes out" and if that gets the critical thrashing that BvS is getting than hoo boy.
I'm starting to lean towards it being inevitable now. I just don't think the darker tone flies with critics. I think it only worked for Nolan because they looked like other serious movies, if that makes any sense.
If it bombs they will adjust if it makes bank they'll continue. That's how Hollywood works.
It'll make money, but not the kind of money they wanted or even an event like this (Superman and Batman on a live action movie for the first time) deserved.
WB needs to put someone in charge of these properties that gets the characters at a fundamental level and kick out Snyder and his wife, before it's too late.
I mean this 'brain trust' thing obviously it's not going to work and they can't offer another divisive movie in JL because it dooms your entire slate and may damage the brand for a long time.
the 'brain trust' reads like too many hands on the kitchen. It's what doomed Green Lantern.
Bruce Timm. Surely he's about done drawing pin up girls now.
WB needs to put someone in charge of these properties that gets the characters at a fundamental level and kick out Snyder and his wife, before it's too late.
I mean this 'brain trust' thing obviously it's not going to work and they can't offer another divisive movie in JL because it dooms your entire slate and may damage the brand for a long time.
the 'brain trust' reads like too many hands on the kitchen. It's what doomed Green Lantern.
Everyone always says Bruce Timm but I wouldn't mind Paul Dini in that role. I'm not a huge Geoff Johns fan but you'd think he'd act as WB's Feige. Maybe he is and he just sucks at being an advocate for the source material, I'm not sure.
Bruce Timm. Surely he's about done drawing pin up girls now.
wont stop. can't stop.
His pin up art is off the chain.
Bruce Timm. Surely he's about done drawing pin up girls now.
Yeah he comes to mind, I mean he already did a shared universe. His Superman was a bit weak but still pretty much in character. He gets these characters, even Batman had humor in his shows.
He isn't, Snyder is the one that calls the shots for everything IMO. Charles Roven is the link between WB and Snyder's film company, same as Greg Silverman basically two WB suits. They have Johns for his comic book knowledge but ultimately the one that decides what goes and what doesn't is definitely Snyder.Everyone always says Bruce Timm but I wouldn't mind Paul Dini in that role. I'm not a huge Geoff Johns fan but you'd think he'd act as WB's Feige. Maybe he is and he just sucks at being an advocate for the source material, I'm not sure.
well my opinion is that a critic needs to be fair and impartial to the art he is reviewing. that's all I've been trying to articulate all night.
And I'm telling you that your opinion is not shared by literally anyone in the field. There is no such thing as fair and impartial when we're talking about things which is basically a matter of taste. Even technical elements are a matter of taste. Do you like shakeycam? Do you prefer fast cuts or long takes? Is non-linear storytelling bad editing or unique design? There's nothing fair and impartial when you approach things like this. You cannot review music, artwork, films, etc without it being an expression of your personal preference and an interpretation of quality based on your personal definition. Saying things like a movie is boring, the pacing is off, or even that the music doesn't fit the scenes, are not fair and impartial comments, they are statements of how the elements perform against personal taste and expectations, which vary from person to person.
I haven't even touched that place. I hope all that bile stays there
I will say this about that thread: The title updates are hilarious. Bravo to the mod doing them.I guess people feel because the movie didn't turn out so great that typical GAF spoiler protocol doesn't apply. It's shitty.
I agree. It worked with Nolan because his movie had no metahumans or powerful superheroes. If you want to make a movie about superpowered beings it better be light and have a ton or jokes otherwise critics will accuse it of trying too hard and taking itself too serious. It's disappointing but unfortunately the climate we're in.I'm starting to lean towards it being inevitable now. I just don't think the darker tone flies with critics. I think it only worked for Nolan because they looked like other serious movies, if that makes any sense.
The internet is going to unbearable for the next month lol
Next month? MOS shit threads never stopped.
And I'm telling you that your opinion is not shared by literally anyone in the field. There is no such thing as fair and impartial when we're talking about things which is basically a matter of taste. Even technical elements are a matter of taste. Do you like shakeycam? Do you prefer fast cuts or long takes? Is non-linear storytelling bad editing or unique design? There's nothing fair and impartial when you approach things like this. You cannot review music, artwork, films, etc without it being an expression of your personal preference and an interpretation of quality based on your personal definition. Saying things like a movie is boring, the pacing is off, or even that the music doesn't fit the scenes, are not fair and impartial comments, they are statements of how the elements perform against personal taste and expectations, which vary from person to person.
I think he's just saying people should try to a certain degree to give everything as fair a shake as possible.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.