@theamazingspidey: Exactly. I was so surprised to see it get a 15 rating in the UK because it does alienate a large part of their audience. That may or may not harm their box office but I suppose deadpool did well although that may have been for different reasons.
Also, I'm sorry but this was far too funny not to post. Please, don't kill me.
Eh. I don't think box office is a gigantic concern. From firsthand experience, everyone at school (even the non-comic book fans) are watching the film. It's also the most talked about film on Twitter.
Who's making these gifs? And what film/video is that from (the head of Evans?)
Superman isn't a good choice. Scientifically speaking the ionizing radiation of a nuke would sap the non ionizing radiation from his cells AKA his power source. Several versions of Supes have been proven susceptible to this, and I don't know if the mainstream version has ever been tested against a nuke, but we already know he's susceptible to Kryptonite and that works on the same concept. Radiation should be added to the list of Superman's weaknesses, or perhaps just replace it with Kryptonite.
Because people have no Minds of there own. I know two people who didn't see it because of reviews and both of them enjoyed it once seeing it and it wasn't the ultimate addition...
That's a tall order, seeing as 27% is already low af.
Indeed, LOL. It's not a certainty, but on the morning I woke up and glanced at the reviews for BvS, they sat in the better half of the 40s range. A bar which Suicide Squad has yet to reach.
That and I didn't see anyone comparing BvS to F4. Which I've seen someone do to Suicide Squad. Not to say they're accurate, only that the critical reception of the film has not been tracking well.
I KNEW IT!!!! Though I'll have to see it for myself to see how it really is (especially seeing that know critic seemed to point this out with AoU), but ever since they announced reshoots I suspected we might have another AoU on our hands (tonal wise, that is).
Yeah. The reshoots were even rumoured to inject "more fun" into the film, which Jai Courtney covered up by correcting it as "more action." Either way, I wouldn't be surprised if it back fired.
They're trying to hard to be something they're not. They've established they're tone and their niche within the market, but now they're trying to turn that all around, only to see it blow up in their face.
I can't help but feel bad for the guys in DC, though. BvS set out to be a thought provoking epic, and polarised it's audience and didn't turn in as much box office as Warner Bros hoped.
They add a full dose of detrimental destruction humour and fun into the film, and they are faced with criticism for it.
I hate to be that guy, but... if DC made a movie of Thor 2's quality, it probably would've gotten shitty reviews. There are double standards at play.
Definitely. The fan reception for both Thor movies, IM 2 & 3, and shoot, even AoU wasn't much different from MoS and only some of them were slightly better than BvS (the only reason BvS seemed worse is because it is a much bigger film than any of them), yet MoS and BvS received worse critical reception.
It didn't use to be that way a few years ago. That's why TF was able to, and still is able to bring in the big bucks.
I guess Transformers like Pirates of The Caribbean is one of those franchises that arent really effected by bad reviews.
It's because those franchises came out at a time in which people saw movies for themselves, or at least relied on the opinion of a friend, someone they knew and who had similar taste, not some random guy or gal on the internet.
That's a tall order, seeing as 27% is already low af.
Indeed, LOL. It's not a certainty, but on the morning I woke up and glanced at the reviews for BvS, they sat in the better half of the 40s range. A bar which Suicide Squad has yet to reach.
That and I didn't see anyone comparing BvS to F4. Which I've seen someone do to Suicide Squad. Not to say they're accurate, only that the critical reception of the film has not been tracking well.
I KNEW IT!!!! Though I'll have to see it for myself to see how it really is (especially seeing that know critic seemed to point this out with AoU), but ever since they announced reshoots I suspected we might have another AoU on our hands (tonal wise, that is).
Yeah. The reshoots were even rumoured to inject "more fun" into the film, which Jai Courtney covered up by correcting it as "more action." Either way, I wouldn't be surprised if it back fired.
They're trying to hard to be something they're not. They've established they're tone and their niche within the market, but now they're trying to turn that all around, only to see it blow up in their face.
Basically, Jared Leto as The Joker is a generic gangster, story suffers from editing problems (remind you of another DC film that came out this year?), story and villains are trash, tone is inconsistent, and characters are often underdeveloped, but performances are charismatic, character interactions are great, some of the humour is good as is some of the action beats.
Jesse's Lex was chastised and I loved his performance, so I've still got hope for Leto. Story and character in BvS were regarded by most people as trash, then again I appreciated the story and characterisation in that film, so I've still got my reservations.
This was still devastating to see.
I predict this'll wind up with a lower RT rating than BvS. Considering BvS reached 46% at it's first day, something this film is struggling to do.
That's a tall order, seeing as 27% is already low af.
tone is inconsistent,
I KNEW IT!!!! Though I'll have to see it for myself to see how it really is (especially seeing that know critic seemed to point this out with AoU), but ever since they announced reshoots I suspected we might have another AoU on our hands (tonal wise, that is).
Log in to comment