| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't really want to see Thor or Aquaman copying those fighting styles.
I liked the Thor: Dark World opener for this reason. No slug-fest, no acrobatics. Just hit the giant monster with the hammer and it goes down.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
So apparently, the Bluray/DVD version will have a R rated director's cut. I guess they really are trying to make sure no one catches the theatrical release.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So apparently, the Bluray/DVD version will have a R rated director's cut. I guess they really are trying to make sure no one catches the theatrical release.
I wonder how much this announcement has to do with Deadpool's success?
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Saw it last night, with the director and cast. And funnyly with the cast of Gotham.
Ben Affleck had some fun with the child actor playing Bruce Wayne.
He went on stage and said, "I'm BATMAN."
"But you ... You will be BATMAN."
"Whoaa. BATMAN BRAIN FREEZE."
Over all the movie was an 8.5, but Gal Gadot gets 9.5 and can't wait to see more of her.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
So, this movie, which by every available metric should be a huuge turd like Man of Steel, is in the good category?
Also, being a Baron obviously has its benefits, being able to go to high profile screenings with the likes of 2 Oscar Afflek, 5 nom Adams, and the hot girl from Fast 5. /me needs to get in on this feudal gentry somehow...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Saw it last night, with the director and cast. And funnyly with the cast of Gotham.
Ben Affleck had some fun with the child actor playing Bruce Wayne.
He went on stage and said, "I'm BATMAN."
"But you ... You will be BATMAN."
"Whoaa. BATMAN BRAIN FREEZE."
Over all the movie was an 8.5, but Gal Gadot gets 9.5 and can't wait to see more of her.
I'm glad that you thought it was great. I'm hoping that it's good. But oddly enough I cant get excited enough to actually buy tickets for it. I literally cant think of one reason to go see this movie. And I'm the guy that's usually there opening weekend or in a screening with bells on. I have my tickets of Captain America Civil War already and I'm REALLY excited for that but this? Not so Much. And I ENJOYED Man Of Steel...
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Saw it last night, with the director and cast. And funnyly with the cast of Gotham.
Ben Affleck had some fun with the child actor playing Bruce Wayne.
He went on stage and said, "I'm BATMAN."
"But you ... You will be BATMAN."
"Whoaa. BATMAN BRAIN FREEZE."
Over all the movie was an 8.5, but Gal Gadot gets 9.5 and can't wait to see more of her.
I'll check it out with wife, who is essentially Amanda waller with no political power in this timeline.
I'm far more concerned with Affleck as batman. I don't think he can do it. At all.
And yes I am supremely disapponted that there is no Matt Damon Robin.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm far more concerned with Affleck as batman. I don't think he can do it. At all.
And yes I am supremely disapponted that there is no Matt Damon Robin.
1988. They cast Michael Keaton as Batman?? Mr. Mom? I don't think he can can do it. Just because an actor seems like a poor choice doesn't mean they can be great in the part.
Hell, look at Tom Cruise as Lestat.
I'm willing to wait on judgement until I see the final film. But if he shows that look of terror in the nightmare sequence anywhere outside of that dream, I'll be in nerd rage.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hmph.
No Batfleck without Ramon!
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm far more concerned with Affleck as batman. I don't think he can do it. At all.
And yes I am supremely disapponted that there is no Matt Damon Robin.
1988. They cast Michael Keaton as Batman?? Mr. Mom? I don't think he can can do it. Just because an actor seems like a poor choice doesn't mean they can be great in the part.
Hell, look at Tom Cruise as Lestat.
I'm willing to wait on judgement until I see the final film. But if he shows that look of terror in the nightmare sequence anywhere outside of that dream, I'll be in nerd rage.
He also did awesome as Jack Reacher.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm far more concerned with Affleck as batman. I don't think he can do it. At all.
That's funny because he's the ONLY person I have any interest in in that movie at all. I absolutely think that he'll be able to pull off an older, more bitter Batman as well as an aloof, vapid playboy.
I too have heard that he nails it. You know who else totally nails it according to early word? Jessie Eisenberg as Luthor.
|
|
I'm far more concerned with Affleck as batman. I don't think he can do it. At all.That's funny because he's the ONLY person I have any interest in in that movie at all. I absolutely think that he'll be able to pull off an older, more bitter Batman as well as an aloof, vapid playboy.
This is me as well. Affleck is a seasoned actor, who has put in some excellent performances in his day. We forgive things like Gigli and View Askew films for the work he's done elsewhere. Bruce Wayne is an archetype at this point in cinema, with billionaire playboys being a thing. RDJ, who before Ironman was not a highly regarded actor, nailed Marvel's carbon copy of Wayne, and he doesn't have half the presence of Affleck. Behind the cowl, you just have to have a good one-liner with powerful enough eyes to do the job. Bale seems to be a well regarded Batman, and he performed with marbles in his mouth.
Plus, to be considered a good Batman, Affleck really only has to beat Clooney and Kilmer's Bats.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Eh...individually yes. but I generally find that Rotten Tomatoes broadly can provide a good judge of a movie.
With the exception of Ben Affleck/Batman (which seems to be the one element that everyone thinks is awesome), most of the reviews seem to suggest that this movie doubles down on the grim tone and "heroism is for losers" angle of Man of Steel.
This very spoilery Review makes me think I am better off staying home and waiting to see Civil War in a few weeks.
|
A lot of the reviews I have read say that the first half is disjointed. Scenes don't flow good from one to the next one. I wonder if this is the same thing that went on with the Watchmen movie, also directed by Synder.
Synder was forced to edit the theactial cut by like 30 minutes to keep it at a 2.5 hour run time. The scenes didn't flow well and it seemed like a longer drawn out movie. The Blu Ray came out as the directors cut with the 30 minutes put back in. It was a better movie with the added time because it flowed better.
They already said the Blu Ray of BvS will be an R rating with about 30 minutes put back in. So maybe it's the same type of thing.
Audience score is 85%, also audience is comprised of about 120.000 people.
Critics are idiots.
Those reviews were in the 90's at first. Lets see what that Audience score is after two weeks in wide release. I think the more people see the movie the lower that audience score is going to get. And I honestly dont see that critic score getting above 60%.
Doesnt mean that it wont make tons of money THIS weekend. But lets see how much it drops off by from the first to second weekend and then from the second to third. A movie like Deadpool was a great example of a movie having legs based on a combination of good word of mouth and pretty decent reviews.
Saw it last night at the midnight release here. Was unimpressed. Had all the elements of a great movie (stylish, good music, strong cast, visually spectacular), but fell short for me in the same way Man of Steel did... it's way too unrelentingly grim and moody.
High points for me were Ben Affleck and Jeremy Irons. I'll happy watch a Batman solo movie featuring those two. Gal Gadot was really good as Wonder Woman as well, so I'm interested to see how they do her origin film next year (pretty sure it's due next year).
Biggest issue for me was that this version of Batman apparently doesn't really care too much about killing people. They never really call attention to it, but once I'd noticed that there was basically no way people were getting out of what was happening alive, I couldn't stop seeing it. He's got a stupidly high body count of mooks by the end of it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
most of the reviews seem to suggest that this movie doubles down on the grim tone and "heroism is for losers" angle of Man of Steel.Maybe it's just that I grew up reading the Greek myths/epics/plays, but I don't understand why this is supposed to be a negative. Morally flawed protagonists in an unrelenting world worked well enough for Homer, and Hesiod, and Aeschylus, and Sophocles (for some plays...less so for others), and Euripides (see the same caveat of Sophocles). Media wasn't hurt by the enormous faults of the title character and her husband--the characters' flaws drive the whole play. Odysseus' flaws and the grim world of the Odyssey works well. Even the handful of Athenian tragedies which do have a virtuous protagonist (e.g., Sophocles' Antigone) tend to have them surrounded by an otherwise grim/dark world and cast.
I get that Superman and Batman originated in the culture of 1930s and 1940s White America, and that they were originally written in a different style. I don't get the recent trend where people just assume that all grim works of fiction are automatically terrible (or assume that the awful-ness of dark fiction is somehow self-evident).
I don't think it's so much that fans have issues with characters having flaws, even major flaws. It's just that the "grim-dark world" is a poor match for many DC characters, especially given the current popularity and acceptance by most viewers of many comic tropes. That Batman comes off the best is not a surprise because, of the characters presented, his character best fits a grim and gritty background. But when Superman is described as a complete @#$hole in several reviews, where he is normally considered a character of hope and optimism, is a sign of a bad mismatch.
And then there is just the whole thing that if I am going to plop my but in a theater seat and watch a superhero movie, turns out most times I don't really want a depressing colorless slog. The fact that Zach Snyder is deadset on presenting the entire DC Universe in this sort of grim dark way gives me severe reservations of the viability of the whole affair.
Audience score is 85%, also audience is comprised of about 120.000 people.
Critics are idiots.
No, they are not. They just have different standards than the average member of the audience, whose opinion generally boils down to "I had fun" or "I did not have fun". That does not tell anything to anyone.
Critics are usually exposed to a wider variety of movies (music, art, what have you) than the average audience member, even if their individual knowledge of the matter differs in composition.
So if a majority of critics say that a movie is not that good and qualifies why, I'm bound to trust their verdict rather than the one of the general public.
|
|
If I wanted to know about a movie's artistic value, I'd ask a critic. If I wanted to know about a movie's fun value, I most certainly wouldn't ask a movie critic.
Those reviews were in the 90's at first. Lets see what that Audience score is after two weeks in wide release. I think the more people see the movie the lower that audience score is going to get. And I honestly dont see that critic score getting above 60%.
Slippery slope fallacy
|
Vendor - Fantasiapelit Tampere
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Saw it last night, while it was good in my opinion it could have been a lot better. Lots of great scenes and acting is top notch. Affleck was great Batman AND Bruce Wayne. Biggest suprise to me was Lex Luthor. Eisenberg nailed the role of silver-age Lex the mad scientist. I can see why people would be off-putted by his performance but I enjoyed it.
Overall, "a diamond in the rough" is best words to describe it.
If I wanted to know about a movie's artistic value, I'd ask a critic. If I wanted to know about a movie's fun value, I most certainly wouldn't ask a movie critic.
Those reviews were in the 90's at first. Lets see what that Audience score is after two weeks in wide release. I think the more people see the movie the lower that audience score is going to get. And I honestly dont see that critic score getting above 60%.Slippery slope fallacy
I tabulated Rotten tomato scores for the 2 big universes and DC movies, at least the more recent movies that have existed since Rotten Tomatoes.
Obviously the below data and my own commentary only reflect general opinions, and it's perfectly fine if you go see this and think its the best thing ever. I mostly offer this to those on the fence on seeing this movie or are otherwise concerned about the DCEU. Remember, if you don't like the direction these movies are going in, the only way you can show it is by not seeing it in theaters.
Here is the data for those interested:
Fox
Deadpool = 84%
X-Men: Days of Future Past = 91%
The Wolverine = 70%
X-men: First Class = 87%
X-men Origins-Wolverine = 38%
X-men: The Last Stand = 58%
X2: X-men United = 86%
X-men = %81
Fantastic Four (reboot) = 9%
MCU
Antman = 80%
Avengers: Age of Ultron = 75%
Guardians of the Galaxy = 91%
Captain America: Winter Soldier = 89%
Thor: The Dark World = 66%
Iron Man 3 = 79%
The Avengers = 92%
Captain America: First Avenger = 79%
Thor = 77%
Iron Man 2 = 72%
The Incredible Hulk = 67%
Iron Man = 94%
DC movies (not enough DCEU movies for direct comparisons, so pooling recent big budget releases)
Batman v Superman = 33%
Man of Steel = 56%
The Dark Knight Rises = 87%
The Dark Knight = 94%
Batman Begins = 85%
Green Lantern = 26%
Looking through those ratings, basically every single MCU movie has gotten a fresh rating. The lowest rating is Thor: Dark World at 66%, while Avengers has the highest at 92%. That seems consistent with my own views and general sense online of people's appraisal of the movies. Even the weak efforts tend to be mostly weak against other MCU movies, and are still solid
Fox is more variable but has more fresh vs rotten rankings. Of the 9 movies that as originally conceived were part of their shared universe, only 3 have rotten ratings: Last Stand (58%), Wolverine Origins (38%) and the F4 reboot (9%), the latter so bad it caused the abortion of the proposed X-men and F4 crossover movie, and basically jettisoning that movie from the universe. Their highest rated is Days of Future Past, at 91%. Again that seems overall to reflect the views of people into these movies...if anything opinions have soured even more on some of those, with many considering Origins and Last Stand abominations that wrecked the series..a view apparently the studio and Bryan Singer agree with given they used time travel to wipe those from existence effectively.
So far, of recent movies only the Nolan Batman films have gotten fresh ratings, with the Dark Knight having the highest rating of any of the movies whose scores I looked up (94%), so it's not like you can say there is some sort of conspiracy against DC. So far both entries in the DCEU have gotten rotten ratings, and in fact B vs S is now down to 33%, so the score has worsened since just yesterday. I admit...DC is handicapped in the sense that their output has been incredibly limited. Batman is the only character they have supported so of course the sample size is much smaller. Still, to start off the DCEU with two sets of movies that overall are not viewed favorably is worrying. I will also throw in there that, assuming that the score for B vs S doesn't drop further, B vs S currently has the lowest score of any of the movies I examined, only surpassed by the F4 reboot and Green Lantern. If that doesn't raise eyebrows and cause hesitation, I don't know what will. At the very least, I think the data shows that critical consensus is not simply a factor of artistic direction or subject matter.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Depends what you're looking for. The general public may be a better choice when it comes to "Will I enjoy seeing the movie", which is generally what I'm interested in. The critics may be right on some grander artistic level, but there are plenty of works that I acknowledge as artistic masterpieces, but don't actually like. And plenty of more formulaic things that I greatly enjoy.Audience score is 85%, also audience is comprised of about 120.000 people.
Critics are idiots.
No, they are not. They just have different standards than the average member of the audience, whose opinion generally boils down to "I had fun" or "I did not have fun". That does not tell anything to anyone.
Critics are usually exposed to a wider variety of movies (music, art, what have you) than the average audience member, even if their individual knowledge of the matter differs in composition.
So if a majority of critics say that a movie is not that good and qualifies why, I'm bound to trust their verdict rather than the one of the general public.
I repeatedly found that the general public's sense of enjoyment and mine differ wildly.
|
|
I saw it last night, and I have to say it was... okay. My spoiler free take on it:
It's mostly a Batman movie, that also has Superman in it. Which is fine by me since I love Batman and don't really care for Superman. Wonder Woman is also in it, but I don't see why they couldn't save her for later, she doesn't really do much in the movie. And I can't recall her having a single conversation with Superman in the entire movie.
The plot is all over the place, I just got a feeling that they were trying to do too much at once.
What really annoyed me was the climactic last act of the movie, the fights just dragged on and on and one carried into another. The last act just felt like half the movie, which is a shame because I really liked a lot of the first 45 minutes.
I just think they should have taken their time with their movie series, put some of this stuff off until later movies.
If I wanted to know about a movie's artistic value, I'd ask a critic. If I wanted to know about a movie's fun value, I most certainly wouldn't ask a movie critic.
Those reviews were in the 90's at first. Lets see what that Audience score is after two weeks in wide release. I think the more people see the movie the lower that audience score is going to get. And I honestly dont see that critic score getting above 60%.Slippery slope fallacyI tabulated Rotten tomato scores for the 2 big universes and DC movies, at least the more recent movies that have existed since Rotten Tomatoes.
Obviously the below data and my own commentary only reflect general opinions, and it's perfectly fine if you go see this and think its the best thing ever. I mostly offer this to those on the fence on seeing this movie or are otherwise concerned about the DCEU. Remember, if you don't like the direction these movies are going in, the only way you can show it is by not seeing it in theaters.
Here is the data for those interested:
** spoiler omitted **
Looking through those ratings, basically every single MCU movie has gotten a fresh rating. The lowest rating...
Thank you. I did a similar analysis and was about to post it before I realized any actual data that I posted would probably be dismissed by Hama as well. The movie hasnt even opened wide yet so stands to reason that two weeks out those Rotten Tomatoes ratings would be more solid (for good or for ill).
But whatever like I said I cant muster up the excitement for it and after hearing about it from someone who was at a screening last night here in NYC I think I'm right for avoiding it.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Over all the movie was an 8, but Gal Gadot gets 9.5 and can't wait to see more of her.
Woof!
Please consider this is an official RETRACTION!
Full disclosure, On the Sunday screening I was coming from Ultra (a three day music event in Miami) and I calculate I had three hours sleep in 55 hours. Total. Still made the New York showing, and further there was LOTS of wine in the pre party leading to the movie.
Lastly I left the actual movie for about 50 mins (I was told 50, it seemed like 20 mins to me at the time) to ... hang with my lady friend in the bathroom. Like I said a lot of wine.
So took a group to a press screening Tuesday, and whoa does this movie not stand up to a second screening!!!
Its still a fun movie but I would have to grade it a 6.5 overall, if you want to enjoy the movie more sneak a bottle of wine with you to see it (or even better yet, some Sake).
Man I hate Jesse Eisenberg in this movie, because Jesse Eisenberg ALWAYS plays Jesse Eisenberg in all his movies.
Gal Gadot still gets a 9 from me though!
|
|
I repeatedly found that the general public's sense of enjoyment and mine differ wildly.
This right here.
I found Nolan's Dark Knight/Batman movies to be deadly dull, and Green Lantern to not only be watchable, but fun and re-watchable. (As in, I actually *have* rewatched and enjoyed Green Lantern, and haven't had the slightest urge to rewatch the Dark Knight movies.)
What 'fans' love and hate, and what I love and hate seem to be on entirely different worlds, sometimes.
Still, it's a superhero movie. I'll see it once on general principle, even if it's just on Netflix.
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 8
|
Yeah, I think 6.5 is fair.
I didn't like the depiction of Batman. He comes off as a bit of a dolt, and as a blunt instrument. I like my Batman with a little more finesse and subtlety. That's no dig on Affleck though, I thought he did fine (and actually really I liked him as Bruce).
Superman's motivation in the first half of the movie seemed really forced, and didn't make a lot of sense. I was also confused by the whole "Desert" plot. Maybe I missed something?
The government situation was also confusing.
Scene two, Luthor has one of the government people by the balls, to the point where he not only gets away with making unreasonable demands for access to the kryptonian junk, but he also force feeds the guy a jolly rancher.
Scene three, government lady is like "hey, you know that favor you asked for? Not gonna do that. We are antagonistic toward each other now!" leaving Luthor apparently frustrated (even though he doesn't give a s+!$ and just imports the stuff anyway).
How do we go from "Luthor can get anything from the government he wants by asking" to "Luthor is frustrated because the government won't give him what he wants"?