Support NeoGAF

[OléGunner]

Do people genuinely troll the Nolan Batman trilogy films as pure shit or is that a Gaf meme I missed? :/

 

[Experien]

Do people genuinely troll the Nolan Batman trilogy films as pure shit or is that a Gaf meme I missed? :/

I only liked Batman Begins tbh. The other two were messes.

 

[TheMan]

i had high hopes for this one...sigh

 

[spekkeh]

This doesn't make any sense. Why would critics have a bias for Marvel? What reasoning is there for that?

I keep seeing hurt DC fans postulate this theory, and they never offer any explanation for it beyond 'Marvel movies have a higher RT'.

Marvel movies aren't all critically acclaimed, and with Age of Ultron/Thor 2, this was proven true. With those two particular films, sure they didn't get 33%, but they were competently made, scripted, paced, and edited films, and little more than that. They were average blockbusters, like Ghostbusters. They're not bad enough to warrant a sub-50s rating, but they're not good enough to get above 60s/70s. They're passable to decent. 66% is not a good rating, it's 7% from being Rotten, lol.

Only with truly good MCU films like CW, TWS, or GOTG, do critics start giving it high ratings, because they're actually good films.

I'm not a DC fan, in fact I haven't even watched any of the new films. When I say I find a number of the Marvel films befuddlingly overrated, I mean exactly that. I can't imagine why some movies like Avengers score much higher than other competently made blockbuster films like Transformers, being only marginally better. Also mind you that 66% does not mean a 6.6 it means 66% actually positively recommends it, which is highly unusual for summer blockbusters pre Marvel era.

 

[Gorillaz]

Do people genuinely troll the Nolan Batman trilogy films as pure shit or is that a Gaf meme I missed? :/

Batman Begins was the best one in the series and it could be said it gets a little worse in each one

 

[tomtom94]

Nolan's Batman trilogy is great but TDKR is definitely a film made by a man who's fed up of making comic book movies.

 

[Anth0ny]

Snyder will save it with Justice League!

already given up on wonder woman? :O

This doesn't make any sense. Why would critics have a bias for Marvel? What reasoning is there for that?

I keep seeing hurt DC fans postulate this theory, and they never offer any explanation for it beyond 'Marvel movies have a higher RT'.

Marvel movies aren't all critically acclaimed, and with Age of Ultron/Thor 2, this was proven true. With those two particular films, sure they didn't get 33%, but they were competently made, scripted, paced, and edited films, and little more than that. They were average blockbusters, like Ghostbusters. They're not bad enough to warrant a sub-50s rating, but they're not good enough to get above 60s/70s. They're passable to decent. 66% is not a good rating, it's 7% from being Rotten, lol.

Only with truly good MCU films like CW, TWS, or GOTG, do critics start giving it high ratings, because they're actually good films.

fanboys gotta cling to something to keep sane

basically the posts come down to "but thor 2 was horrible! not a 60! marvel bias confirmed!"


even though thor 2 was fine. I know no one knows how rotten tomatoes works, but thor 2 has an average score of 6/10. batman v superman has a 5/10. it's not that big a difference, guys. relax.

 

[Azoor]

Do people genuinely troll the Nolan Batman trilogy films as pure shit or is that a Gaf meme I missed? :/

The first two are still a fantastic examples of the genre. They're better than all Marvel's entire filmography with the possible exception of The Winter Soldier.

 

[Monochromaticx]

HAHAHAHAHAHA
where is that hero movies prediction thread, where people were saying this and bvs will top 2 films of the year. LMAO

 

[Yeezus H. Christ]

I'm not a DC fan, in fact I haven't even watched any of the new films. When I say I find a number of the Marvel films befuddlingly overrated, I mean exactly that. I can't imagine why some movies like Avengers score much higher than other competently made blockbuster films like Transformers, being only marginally better. Also mind you that 66% does not mean a 6.6 it means 66% actually positively recommends it, which is highly unusual for summer blockbusters pre Marvel era.

The fact that you can't imagine why Avengers score much higher than Transformers really illustrates how much your opinion deviates from critics and the general public.

So just say you don't agree with critics, not that they have a bias. By claiming they have a bias, you're discrediting their opinions - for which you have no reason to other than having just a differing viewpoint.

When in fact, critics are actually the ones least biased, because they have no investment in comic book shit whatsoever. I find it pretty ironic that hardcore fanboys are calling them out for bias, haha.

 

[vareon]

I agree with critics that it's a mess, but it's a mess with characters that actually get to be characters instead of brooding bros of BvS. I think it needs a little bit more stronger script for it to be truly great.

But yeah, go ahead and watch. Have a good time.

 

[YesNOnoNOYes]

I think some things have started to fatigue critics, like the "big bad from the sky" third act or thoughtless destruction porn glossing over civilians. The difference is that Marvel movies have reacted to that and begun changing things up in that regard (Ant-Man, Civil War), while BvS and SS are still moving on that same track.

But more than that, I also think movies like the first Iron Man and the first Thor have a sense of charm and personality that, say, Snyder's last two movies don't have. And that holds up better than any aged genre tropes.

I mean, at the end of the day, quality is quality. Deadpool and Civil War broke out with good reviews because they were good. BvS did not get good reviews because it wasn't good. If Suicide Squad is getting bad reviews, I'm willing to bet it has more to do with because it's also not a good movie, than any other subconscious reason going through critics' heads.

bolded part rings true to me

i was never a huge comic book fan, most of it wasn't that accessible to me growing up as a girl in the 90s, but thor drew me in. the thor franchise was my entry point to mcu and i see a lot of my friends also felt similar

i now LOVE all of comic book stuff, be it MCU, DC, Sony, Fox, etc.

but i had to start somewhere and I think Thor converted a lot of good faith in certain subsection of audience that previously wasn't a target market

idk. at the time avengers dropped, hulk and capn america wasn't doing v well but iron man and thor were carrying enough charms, as you say.

i think DC should have taken a more patient approach to establishing their 5 years movie schedule, tbh. they seem fumbling at the feet trying to catch up to where they aren't even ready for.

 

[CosmicGroinPull]

This explains a lot.

If that's the way they've been operating they deserve all these rotten tomatoes up the ass, and then some.

That should be the tagline on every DC movie forward.

"It's not as bad as you think it is."

+There's a good movie somewhere in the cutting room floor. Wait for the extended edition.

 

[Jobbs]

Just go for it

After having a pretty shitty last four days, I would love to have some genuine good feels bro. Please indulge me.

I'll start by saying that while I generally dislike most of the Marvel movies and don't like the direction they've taken, I did like a couple of them. Iron Man 1 was alright (2 and 3 were abysmal), and Winter Soldier reached the soaring heights of being a decent movie. Thor, Ant Man, and both Avengers movies were *absolutely* terrible.

Civil War is the most recent one, though, so it's what I'll use to contrast against BvS.

I'll boil it down to two things: Tone, and the wrong kind of silly. I don't know what to feel while watching Civil War (or most Marvel movies). We have sad collateral damage of civilians, grieving mothers of dead victims guilting Tony Stark, we have the UN and the politics and the angry revenge stuff but we also have this bizarre cartoon fight in the middle that neither makes sense or takes itself seriously. They even call time out when someone actually gets hurt. It's stupid. The tone of the movie is all over the place. I don't know what to feel.

I could argue that the plot makes little sense and most of the characters aren't behaving logically, and that the whole movie could have been avoided if Cap and Tony just sat and talked for 5 minutes.. But that's the least of this snorefest's problems.

I'll concede that BvS also has some plot problems, but it has a consistent tone. The major criticisms leveled against BvS are usually that it doesn't make much sense, that it's too gritty/dark/angry, and that Superman isn't the beacon of endless hope or whatever that Superman "should" be based on the comics. I'll address those one at a time.

• I don't care that it doesn't make total sense. Civil War makes far less sense because not a single character behaves reasonably or plausibly in that movie, all in service of some circus show where all the avengers will play fight eachother. Meanwhile, I'm okay with the "Joker-esque" adaptation of Lex Luther who just wants to make Batman and Superman fight because it's amusing to him. I'm a-okay with that.
  
• It's too dark/gritty. I think this is a common misunderstanding of the movie (or maybe I just understand it differently from most people, but all I can do is give my take).
  
  I should start by saying that it's basically a built in requirement that all super hero movies are silly/dumb. There's no way for them not to be. The premise mandates it. It's just how it is.
  
  BvS is absolutely funny and silly, but it is those things in a much more subdued way. I never saw the movie as taking itself very seriously. I got more genuine laughs out of this movie than any Marvel movie. I laughed when Lex Luther sat in the wheelchair. I laughed when the flash came out of the thing to warn Batman about whatever. I laughed when Batman or Superman growled at the other. I laughed when they kept saying "Martha". I laughed when the scenes of Superman actually saving people and stuff were portrayed as sad and burdensome. Some of this may be unintentional comedy, but I genuinely enjoyed it, and that's what really matters, right?
  
  Meanwhile, when Spiderman was like "LOL time to make like an ATAT and swing around this guy duuuude hahahah" or whatever bullshit stupid crap happened I didn't laugh at all. They may as well have the characters throw pies in eachother's faces. Nothing in the movie is funny. It's all stupid, but stupid in the wrong way, and the shit cherry on top is I don't know what to feel because the tone is all over the place and nothing makes any sense.
  
• Superman isn't the beacon of hope that he's "supposed" to be and he's kind of an asshole. I don't care. Superman is the dumbest superhero I can think of. He's a character designed for babies. "So, like, this guy has a cape, and he's invincible, and he flies, and he can fly into outer space, and he can lift buildings with his endless strength, and he has laser eyes and x-ray vision, and, and.." It's dumb. I thought Schneider's interpretation of this ridiculous character was as good as any.

And most of all, let's not let it be forgotten that Ben Affleck is the best live action Batman ever -- And it's not even close. I know a couple of things about Batman and I thought this was thoroughly nailed and I enjoyed every minute of him on screen. The workout montage was absolutely epic, too, and that alone was better than any Marvel movie to date.

 

[OléGunner]

I only liked Batman Begins tbh. The other two were messes.

Batman Begins was the best one in the series and it could be said it gets a little worse in each one

Ahh ok.
It's just really rare that I read or hear others saying that those movies are shit until this thread so I was taken aback.

I think that's a bit exaggerated is all but fair play to you if you don't enjoy them.
Thought I really missed a meme haha.

The first two are still a fantastic examples of the genre. They're better than all Marvel's entire filmography with the possible exception of The Winter Soldier.

I think only TDKR is a bit of a misstep but on the whole I'm also of the opinion that the trilogy is some of best super hero movie stuff we've ever got!

 

[Skiptastic]

Is it BvS bad? Becuase that wasn't actually that bad.

I didn't see BvS, so that's probably not helping my understanding of things, but it's pretty bad.

Do people genuinely troll the Nolan Batman trilogy films as pure shit or is that a Gaf meme I missed? :/

A bit of both, I believe.

 

[Ithil]

From my understanding in this thread. All comic book movies suck except the ones that I like.

Good enough for me

Batman Begins best Superhero film and AS2 worst. Take my opinions as facts, I'm trust worthy.

I don't even see bullet points. Only bullet points can be fact.

 

[ElBoxyBrown]

Ayer deserved beter. This movie could have been a pleaser.

 

[Expendable.]

Here's our take -- not a disaster but it comes awfully close.

[Review] Suicide Squad

When it comes to most films, the concept of a hero and a protagonist are one in the same, and so the two are assumed to be synonyms. The truth is that a protagonist is the main focus of a story, the person through whom the narrative flows, and the hero is the person who is trying to achieve the morally virtuous goal. It is entirely possible to take a villain — a bad guy — and make him or her into the protagonist of a story without compromising the inherent wickedness in them that makes them a compelling counterpoint to the heroes we are used to.

If only someone had explained this to writer-director David Ayer then the narrative promise of Suicide Squad might not have been lost in a sea of reluctant hero clichés and banal superhero action set pieces.

 

[Raguel]

In May, Ayer's more somber version and a lighter, studio-favored version were tested with audiences in Northern California. "If there are multiple opinions that aren't in sync, you go down multiple tracks — two tracks at least," says an insider. "That was the case here for a period of time, always trying to get to a place where you have consensus." Those associated with the film insist Ayer agreed to and participated in the process. Once feedback on the two versions was analyzed, it became clear it was possible to get to "a very common-ground place." (The studio-favored version with more characters introduced early in the film and jazzed-up graphics won.) Getting to that place of consensus, however, required millions of dollars worth of additional photography.

Well...that sounds familiar...

 

[Anth0ny]

BvS is absolutely funny and silly, but it is those things in a much more subdued way. I never saw the movie as taking itself very seriously. I got more genuine laughs out of this movie than any Marvel movie. I laughed when Lex Luther sat in the wheelchair. I laughed when the flash came out of the thing to warn Batman about whatever. I laughed when Batman or Superman growled at the other. I laughed when they kept saying "Martha". I laughed when the scenes of Superman actually saving people and stuff were portrayed as sad and burdensome. Some of this may be unintentional comedy, but I genuinely enjoyed it, and that's what really matters, right?

you're weird

though I did laugh at the ultimate cut when jimmy olsen has his brains blown out

i'm weird

 

[ArtHands]

Interesting tidbit in an article about the behind the scene problems of Suicide Squad by The Hollywood Reporter:



That's a whole lot of money. I think it's possible but not very likely.

A key concern for Warners executives was that Suicide Squad didn't deliver on the fun, edgy tone promised in the strong teaser trailer for the film. So while Ayer pursued his original vision, Warners set about working on a different cut, with an assist from Trailer Park, the company that had made the teaser.

That's referring to the reshoots right?

 

[Insane Metal]

33% on RT... ouch.

 

[Oersted]

TDKR was a failure at a higher level (compared to other superhero movies.)


The twist was done poorly, that death scene and that "Everyone!" part were stupid.

Being on a higher level made the disappointing parts more disappointing.

 

[Strangelove77]

All the cops run underground and get trapped.
Hahahaha.
What the fuck.

 

[Keasar]

Man, DC can't catch a break, I really hope the Wonder Woman movie turns out fine.

 

[LosDaddie]

Wow. This thread has grown since last night.

I wonder if SS was too far along once the BvS backlash began to really "save" the movie. Considering the reception to BvS and SS is almost the same, I have to imagine the guidance the directors got from WB was the same.

I'm still going to watch this movie, but I'll probably wait until next weekend when I'm back from vacation.

I'll start by saying that while I generally dislike most of the Marvel movies and don't like the direction they've taken, I did like a couple of them. Iron Man 1 was alright (2 and 3 were abysmal), and Winter Soldier reached the soaring heights of being a decent movie. Thor, Ant Man, and both Avengers movies were *absolutely* terrible.

Civil War is the most recent one, though, so it's what I'll use to contrast against BvS.

I'll boil it down to two things: Tone, and the wrong kind of silly. I don't know what to feel while watching Civil War (or most Marvel movies). We have sad collateral damage of civilians, grieving mothers of dead victims guilting Tony Stark, we have the UN and the politics and the angry revenge stuff but we also have this bizarre cartoon fight in the middle that neither makes sense or takes itself seriously. They even call time out when someone actually gets hurt. It's stupid. The tone of the movie is all over the place. I don't know what to feel.

I could argue that the plot makes little sense and most of the characters aren't behaving logically, and that the whole movie could have been avoided if Cap and Tony just sat and talked for 5 minutes.. But that's the least of this snorefest's problems.

I'll concede that BvS also has some plot problems, but it has a consistent tone. The major criticisms leveled against BvS are usually that it doesn't make much sense, that it's too gritty/dark/angry, and that Superman isn't the beacon of endless hope or whatever that Superman "should" be based on the comics. I'll address those one at a time.

• I don't care that it doesn't make total sense. Civil War makes far less sense because not a single character behaves reasonably or plausibly in that movie, all in service of some circus show where all the avengers will play fight eachother. Meanwhile, I'm okay with the "Joker-esque" adaptation of Lex Luther who just wants to make Batman and Superman fight because it's amusing to him. I'm a-okay with that.
  
• It's too dark/gritty. I think this is a common misunderstanding of the movie (or maybe I just understand it differently from most people, but all I can do is give my take).
  
  I should start by saying that it's basically a built in requirement that all super hero movies are silly/dumb. There's no way for them not to be. The premise mandates it. It's just how it is.
  
  BvS is absolutely funny and silly, but it is those things in a much more subdued way. I never saw the movie as taking itself very seriously. I got more genuine laughs out of this movie than any Marvel movie. I laughed when Lex Luther sat in the wheelchair. I laughed when the flash came out of the thing to warn Batman about whatever. I laughed when Batman or Superman growled at the other. I laughed when they kept saying "Martha". I laughed when the scenes of Superman actually saving people and stuff were portrayed as sad and burdensome. Some of this may be unintentional comedy, but I genuinely enjoyed it, and that's what really matters, right?
  
  Meanwhile, when Spiderman was like "LOL time to make like an ATAT and swing around this guy duuuude hahahah" or whatever bullshit stupid crap happened I didn't laugh at all. They may as well have the characters throw pies in eachother's faces. Nothing in the movie is funny. It's all stupid, but stupid in the wrong way, and the shit cherry on top is I don't know what to feel because the tone is all over the place and nothing makes any sense.
  
• Superman isn't the beacon of hope that he's "supposed" to be and he's kind of an asshole. I don't care. Superman is the dumbest superhero I can think of. He's a character designed for babies. "So, like, this guy has a cape, and he's invincible, and he flies, and he can fly into outer space, and he can lift buildings with his endless strength, and he has laser eyes and x-ray vision, and, and.." It's dumb. I thought Schneider's interpretation of this ridiculous character was as good as any.

And most of all, let's not let it be forgotten that Ben Affleck is the best live action Batman ever -- And it's not even close. I know a couple of things about Batman and I thought this was thoroughly nailed and I enjoyed every minute of him on screen. The workout montage was absolutely epic, too, and that alone was better than any Marvel movie to date.

Posts like this one fuel me. Especially the last sentence.

Thank you for this. 👍🏾

 

[AlfredX1990]

So, how long until the DC universe is rebooted?

About 3 hours

 

[Jobbs]

Posts like this one fuel me. Especially the last sentence.

Thank you for this. 👍🏾

Fueled with anger or happiness or what?

and np

 

[Fuchsdh]

I'll start by saying that while I generally dislike most of the Marvel movies and don't like the direction they've taken, I did like a couple of them. Iron Man 1 was alright (2 and 3 were abysmal), and Winter Soldier reached the soaring heights of being a decent movie. Thor, Ant Man, and both Avengers movies were *absolutely* terrible.

Civil War is the most recent one, though, so it's what I'll use to contrast against BvS.

I'll boil it down to two things: Tone, and the wrong kind of silly. I don't know what to feel while watching Civil War (or most Marvel movies). We have sad collateral damage of civilians, grieving mothers of dead victims guilting Tony Stark, we have the UN and the politics and the angry revenge stuff but we also have this bizarre cartoon fight in the middle that neither makes sense or takes itself seriously. They even call time out when someone actually gets hurt. It's stupid. The tone of the movie is all over the place. I don't know what to feel.

I could argue that the plot makes little sense and most of the characters aren't behaving logically, and that the whole movie could have been avoided if Cap and Tony just sat and talked for 5 minutes.. But that's the least of this snorefest's problems.

I'll concede that BvS also has some plot problems, but it has a consistent tone. The major criticisms leveled against BvS are usually that it doesn't make much sense, that it's too gritty/dark/angry, and that Superman isn't the beacon of endless hope or whatever that Superman "should" be based on the comics. I'll address those one at a time.

• I don't care that it doesn't make total sense. Civil War makes far less sense because not a single character behaves reasonably or plausibly in that movie, all in service of some circus show where all the avengers will play fight eachother. Meanwhile, I'm okay with the "Joker-esque" adaptation of Lex Luther who just wants to make Batman and Superman fight because it's amusing to him. I'm a-okay with that.
  
• It's too dark/gritty. I think this is a common misunderstanding of the movie (or maybe I just understand it differently from most people, but all I can do is give my take).
  
  I should start by saying that it's basically a built in requirement that all super hero movies are silly/dumb. There's no way for them not to be. The premise mandates it. It's just how it is.
  
  BvS is absolutely funny and silly, but it is those things in a much more subdued way. I never saw the movie as taking itself very seriously. I got more genuine laughs out of this movie than any Marvel movie. I laughed when Lex Luther sat in the wheelchair. I laughed when the flash came out of the thing to warn Batman about whatever. I laughed when Batman or Superman growled at the other. I laughed when they kept saying "Martha". I laughed when the scenes of Superman actually saving people and stuff were portrayed as sad and burdensome. Some of this may be unintentional comedy, but I genuinely enjoyed it, and that's what really matters, right?
  
  Meanwhile, when Spiderman was like "LOL time to make like an ATAT and swing around this guy duuuude hahahah" or whatever bullshit stupid crap happened I didn't laugh at all. They may as well have the characters throw pies in eachother's faces. Nothing in the movie is funny. It's all stupid, but stupid in the wrong way, and the shit cherry on top is I don't know what to feel because the tone is all over the place and nothing makes any sense.
  
• Superman isn't the beacon of hope that he's "supposed" to be and he's kind of an asshole. I don't care. Superman is the dumbest superhero I can think of. He's a character designed for babies. "So, like, this guy has a cape, and he's invincible, and he flies, and he can fly into outer space, and he can lift buildings with his endless strength, and he has laser eyes and x-ray vision, and, and.." It's dumb. I thought Schneider's interpretation of this ridiculous character was as good as any.

And most of all, let's not let it be forgotten that Ben Affleck is the best live action Batman ever -- And it's not even close. I know a couple of things about Batman and I thought this was thoroughly nailed and I enjoyed every minute of him on screen. The workout montage was absolutely epic, too, and that alone was better than any Marvel movie to date.

...and that's all, like, your opinion, man, and one that is evidently not shared by the majority of the critics or the public. Clearly DC can try to cater to fans of their movies like you all they want, but it won't bring them money or success.

 

[Yeezus H. Christ]

workout montage better than any marvel movie to date

30 seconds of Affleck lifting weights better than any marvel movie to date

uh

whew, that's an opinion alright

 

[Raguel]

workout montage better than any marvel movie to date

30 seconds of Affleck lifting weights better than any marvel movie to date

uh

whew, that's an opinion alright

Its a strange opinion but its definitely an opinion. Woof. God speed to you, wherever you may go.

 

[YesNOnoNOYes]

well, i do think ben affleck's batman is the prettiest batman ever. bale's batman was goodlooking too, but he had griminess to it, whilst affleck's batman was just very beautiful, like a teen heartthrob turned late-forties good looks.

i mean, just look at how he wears his hair and them expensive suits if the training montage isn't your thing. he's just so pretty.

 

[Raguel]

well, i do think ben affleck's batman is the prettiest batman ever. bale's batman was goodlooking too, but he had griminess to it, whilst affleck's batman was just very beautiful, like a teen heartthrob turned late-forties good looks.

i mean, just look at how he wears his hair and them expensive suits if the training montage isn't your thing. he's just so pretty.

Maybe Marvel films should have more training montages bc apparently it makes the movies infinitely better.

 

[Baron von Loathsome]

I dunno, guys, we haven't seen what FutureXmDCcomicsZone thinks yet.

Thor 2 is ok, please redirect your anger to the real bad Marvel movie:

Spoiler

Iron Man 3 > 2 > 1

Iron Man 1 is overrated.

 

[Galactic Specter]

I'll see it for myself this week, here's hoping it's better than that garbage fire "Batman v Superman".

 

[rdytoroll]

Shame about the review score but I'm still gonna see it, I really liked Batman v Superman too despite its lukewarm reception. Gonna watch the Ultimate Edition later today

Also, why do so many people hate Thor 2? That movie was really fun, just as good as the first one

 

[YesNOnoNOYes]

Shame about the review score but I'm still gonna see it, I really liked Batman v Superman too despite its lukewarm reception. Gonna watch the Ultimate Edition later today

Also, why do so many people hate Thor 2? That movie was really fun, just as good as the first one

it didnt have any training montage :3

 

[Blader]

I'll start by saying that while I generally dislike most of the Marvel movies and don't like the direction they've taken, I did like a couple of them. Iron Man 1 was alright (2 and 3 were abysmal), and Winter Soldier reached the soaring heights of being a decent movie. Thor, Ant Man, and both Avengers movies were *absolutely* terrible.

Civil War is the most recent one, though, so it's what I'll use to contrast against BvS.

I'll boil it down to two things: Tone, and the wrong kind of silly. I don't know what to feel while watching Civil War (or most Marvel movies). We have sad collateral damage of civilians, grieving mothers of dead victims guilting Tony Stark, we have the UN and the politics and the angry revenge stuff but we also have this bizarre cartoon fight in the middle that neither makes sense or takes itself seriously. They even call time out when someone actually gets hurt. It's stupid. The tone of the movie is all over the place. I don't know what to feel.

I could argue that the plot makes little sense and most of the characters aren't behaving logically, and that the whole movie could have been avoided if Cap and Tony just sat and talked for 5 minutes.. But that's the least of this snorefest's problems.

I'll concede that BvS also has some plot problems, but it has a consistent tone. The major criticisms leveled against BvS are usually that it doesn't make much sense, that it's too gritty/dark/angry, and that Superman isn't the beacon of endless hope or whatever that Superman "should" be based on the comics. I'll address those one at a time.

• I don't care that it doesn't make total sense. Civil War makes far less sense because not a single character behaves reasonably or plausibly in that movie, all in service of some circus show where all the avengers will play fight eachother. Meanwhile, I'm okay with the "Joker-esque" adaptation of Lex Luther who just wants to make Batman and Superman fight because it's amusing to him. I'm a-okay with that.
  
• It's too dark/gritty. I think this is a common misunderstanding of the movie (or maybe I just understand it differently from most people, but all I can do is give my take).
  
  I should start by saying that it's basically a built in requirement that all super hero movies are silly/dumb. There's no way for them not to be. The premise mandates it. It's just how it is.
  
  BvS is absolutely funny and silly, but it is those things in a much more subdued way. I never saw the movie as taking itself very seriously. I got more genuine laughs out of this movie than any Marvel movie. I laughed when Lex Luther sat in the wheelchair. I laughed when the flash came out of the thing to warn Batman about whatever. I laughed when Batman or Superman growled at the other. I laughed when they kept saying "Martha". I laughed when the scenes of Superman actually saving people and stuff were portrayed as sad and burdensome. Some of this may be unintentional comedy, but I genuinely enjoyed it, and that's what really matters, right?
  
  Meanwhile, when Spiderman was like "LOL time to make like an ATAT and swing around this guy duuuude hahahah" or whatever bullshit stupid crap happened I didn't laugh at all. They may as well have the characters throw pies in eachother's faces. Nothing in the movie is funny. It's all stupid, but stupid in the wrong way, and the shit cherry on top is I don't know what to feel because the tone is all over the place and nothing makes any sense.
  
• Superman isn't the beacon of hope that he's "supposed" to be and he's kind of an asshole. I don't care. Superman is the dumbest superhero I can think of. He's a character designed for babies. "So, like, this guy has a cape, and he's invincible, and he flies, and he can fly into outer space, and he can lift buildings with his endless strength, and he has laser eyes and x-ray vision, and, and.." It's dumb. I thought Schneider's interpretation of this ridiculous character was as good as any.

And most of all, let's not let it be forgotten that Ben Affleck is the best live action Batman ever -- And it's not even close. I know a couple of things about Batman and I thought this was thoroughly nailed and I enjoyed every minute of him on screen. The workout montage was absolutely epic, too, and that alone was better than any Marvel movie to date.

It sounds like you just more ironically enjoy these kinds of movies, then, which is why Marvel's more relatively flippant approach rubs you the wrong way. Which is fine, obviously, but I think it's also pretty clear that everything you laughed at in that movie is not actually meant to be funny. BvS IS meant to be grim and gritty and serious, and the fact that you read that all as funny and silly I think is a pretty fundamental failure on the movie's part, even if it ended up being the same reason you liked it more than most people.

 

[Raguel]

It sounds like you just more ironically enjoy these kinds of movies, then, which is why Marvel's more relatively flippant approach rubs you the wrong way. Which is fine, obviously, but I think it's also pretty clear that everything you laughed at in that movie is not actually meant to be funny. BvS IS meant to be grim and gritty and serious, and the fact that you read that all as funny and silly I think is a pretty fundamental failure on the movie's part, even if it ended up being the same reason you liked it more than most people.

What is strange is that the tone of bat v supes waa praised and yet it seems as it was completely misinterpreted by the poster. I mean, different strokes I guess

 

[Glass Shark]

I agree with critics that it's a mess, but it's a mess with characters that actually get to be characters instead of brooding bros of BvS. I think it needs a little bit more stronger script for it to be truly great.

But yeah, go ahead and watch. Have a good time.

Are you kidding? There is practically nothing in the way of characterization in this movie. Everyone is a caricature at best. They spend the most time on the least interesting characters, and the motivation they attempt to give a few members of the squad is paper thin. There are no arcs, no redemption. Every character is defined by what they've done rather than who they are, and some of them are so underused they might as well not exist.

 

[DeathoftheEndless]

Do people genuinely troll the Nolan Batman trilogy films as pure shit or is that a Gaf meme I missed? :/

I don't think they're pure shit, but I wouldn't say they're great either. Like most Nolan movies, they're littered with exposition and theme-speak. The characters suffer because they explain their character's motivations more often than they have believable conversations. Even with that, the characters will sometimes do something that doesn't make any sense. The plots are overly complicated and very few scenes last longer than a couple of minutes.

There's a bunch of other stuff, but that's the gist of why I'm not a big fan.

 

[ViewtifulJC]

The workout montage was absolutely epic, too, and that alone was better than any Marvel movie to date.

That was a great joke post, Jobbs.

You shouldn't have signed it.

 

[rdytoroll]

I'm satisfied if Suicide Squad ends up being more entertaining than X-Men Apocalypse. Can't be too hard

 

[Oddduck]

This quote from David Edlestein's review sums up one of my biggest problems with "Suicide Squad".

The movie advertises itself as a suicide mission where not everyone will make it out alive. But Warner Bros needs 90% of Suicide Squad's characters to remain alive so they can appear in future solo films, spinoffs, and sequels, for Batman, The Flash, etc. So the film never fully lives up to its premise of feeling like a "suicide mission".

But the makers of Suicide Squad can’t fully commit to their premise because they’re afraid that the mainstream PG-13 audience can’t handle it. The “worst of the worst” turn out to be rather sweet underneath, and the “suicide” part of the title means zip, nada. Many of The Dirty Dozen and The Magnificent Seven die in the course of their “suicide” missions, but DC and Marvel can’t bear to part with copyrighted characters that have the potential for multiple spinoffs. So the climactic battles are just CGI in a void — sound and fury signifying nothing.

 

[BlizzKrut]

This doesn't make any sense. Why would critics have a bias for Marvel? What reasoning is there for that?

I keep seeing hurt DC fans postulate this theory, and they never offer any explanation for it beyond 'Marvel movies have a higher RT'.

Marvel movies aren't all critically acclaimed, and with Age of Ultron/Thor 2, this was proven true. With those two particular films, sure they didn't get 33%, but they were competently made, scripted, paced, and edited films, and little more than that. They were average blockbusters, like Ghostbusters. They're not bad enough to warrant a sub-50s rating, but they're not good enough to get above 60s/70s. They're passable to decent. 66% is not a good rating, it's 7% from being Rotten, lol.

Only with truly good MCU films like CW, TWS, or GOTG, do critics start giving it high ratings, because they're actually good films.

Oh you want an explanation? I was reading through the RT's reviews yesterday, and lots of them (not all) made comparisons to Marvel flicks, in my honest opinion, it's unfair to compare an established "universe" that has been running for years with something that's just started, it's also unprofessional to derive from talking about the movie to compare it with something else, a movie should be reviewed on its own.

 

[spookyfish]

Are you kidding? There is practically nothing in the way of characterization in this movie. Everyone is a caricature at best. They spend the most time on the least interesting characters, and the motivation they attempt to give a few members of the squad is paper thin. There are no arcs, no redemption. Every character is defined by what they've done rather than who they are, and some of them are so underused they might as well not exist.

"Wait 0-o ... YOUR mom's name is Martha TOO???"

Seems about right.

 

[Yeezus H. Christ]

Oh you want an explanation? I was reading through the RT's reviews yesterday, and lots of them (not all) made comparisons to Marvel flicks, in my honest opinion, it's unfair to compare an established "universe" that has been running for years with something that's just started, it's also unprofessional to derive from talking about the movie to compare it with something else, a movie should be reviewed on its own.

Er, why would it be unfair to compare two clearly competing cinematic universes, both of which are incredibly similar and release fairly close to one another?

And why is it unfair to compare them just because Marvel is 'established'? Do we have to wait for DC to hit their stride or something before comparisons can be made? Doesn't that actually go against evaluating a movie on its own merit, by giving allowances to it because it takes place in the early stages of the universe? You're contradicting yourself.

What if DC keeps making shit movies even past JL, what then? Is it still unfair to compare them even if their version of the Avengers has been made?

 

[Vice]

Oh you want an explanation? I was reading through the RT's reviews yesterday, and lots of them (not all) made comparisons to Marvel flicks, in my honest opinion, it's unfair to compare an established "universe" that has been running for years with something that's just started, it's also unprofessional to derive from talking about the movie to compare it with something else, a movie should be reviewed on its own.

Movies don't exist in a vacuum. If you aren't able to compare them to anything else then you won't have much to say. Even comparing them, at least in the case of BvS, to previous DC films ends up with them coming up short. If the only way for DC films to look better to critics is to ignore the last 100+ years of film then there's a problem.

 

[Yeezus H. Christ]

Comparisons are just comparisons, and don't indicate any bias whatsoever. If I'm evaluating action sequences in Transformers, noting how cluttered and jumbled they are as opposed to James Cameron's smooth, comprehensible scenes, then I'm not biased for comparing them. It's just a means of getting my point across. In Marvel/DC's case, their movies are so similar in terms of concept, plot structure, material source, and the market they occupy, that it's a lot easier to explain why DC's storytelling/character-building sucks by comparing to Marvel's own.