Zack Snyder's JUSTICE LEAGUE on HBOmax in 2021!

[Pinsir]

If nothing else, I think the post Snyder movies proved there's no media bias against the WB. Wonder Woman, Shazam and Aquaman both proved that.

I always thought it was silly how people would argue Rotton Tomatoes is somehow part of this pro-Disney anti-WB agenda when RT is partially owned by WB. But I guess it was just easier for some to blame Disney for whatever short comings the Snyder movies were perceived to have. Short comings that magially seemed to go away once they stopped making Snyder movies.

That's not really true though, films like Aquaman and Joker have far lower scores than most recent MCU films, which more or less seem to reach a floor of 78%. I actually just randomly stumbled across an article that suggests RT favours safe mediocre films and dissects Jokers aggregate score to prove this (The article is called Joker Proves Rotten Tomatoes is Biased Towards Mediocre Movies) I have a tons of criticisms RT, but the argument I personally find most convincing is that it recommends films with 80-90% film scores that I see are trash and a lot of the films I do like get far lower scores. I do like it when films I like get good reviews because it makes discussing these movies so much easier, but as a metric I don't really care.

It should also be noted that, now that DC films are starting to get good reviews I have started seeing criticism of RT. I remember watching Chris Stuckman's review of BOP, a movie he didn't like, but had received positive RT coverage and he said, basically, the problem with RT is that you can get a film a lot of people gave 5 or 6 out of 10's, but if they still like it the movie can still get a really high RT score. Basically that RT does not reflect the artistic merits of the film. This applies universally to every film, but he only brought it up for this one specifically out of all the reviews I watched from him.

[Jokerz79]

That's not really true though, films like Aquaman and Joker have far lower scores than most recent MCU films, which more or less seem to reach a floor of 78%. I actually just randomly stumbled across an article that suggests RT favours safe mediocre films and dissects Jokers aggregate score to prove this (The article is called Joker Proves Rotten Tomatoes is Biased Towards Mediocre Movies) I have a tons of criticisms RT, but the argument I personally find most convincing is that it recommends films with 80-90% film scores that I see are trash and a lot of the films I do like get far lower scores. I do like it when films I like get good reviews because it makes discussing these movies so much easier, but as a metric I don't really care.

It should also be noted that, now that DC films are starting to get good reviews I have started seeing criticism of RT. I remember watching Chris Stuckman's review of BOP, a movie he didn't like, but had received positive RT coverage and he said, basically, the problem with RT is that you can get a film a lot of people gave 5 or 6 out of 10's, but if they still like it the movie can still get a really high RT score. Basically that RT does not reflect the artistic merits of the film. This applies universally to every film, but he only brought it up for this one specifically out of all the reviews I watched from him.

RT is owned by WarnerMedia and NBCUniversal who parent company is Comcast the same Comcast that made Disney pay more for Fox during the Merger. Does anyone really believe these two companies wouldn't shut RT down if there was some Bias towards Disney/the MCU?

[Jokerz79]

WW given tone and the Alley Scene really took more cues from Superman 78 than any Snyder film.

[Castle]

Got to break it to you, but I've found that it's one of the most forgotten DC movies out there (and when it does come up, its due to the negative points). The Incredible Hulk of the DCUE, if you will.

Also took a gander at several "rank the DC movies" listicles online, and I found that it to be relatively consistent that Man of Steel's best placings were in the lower middle of the lists, with the kindest praise being comments about its wasted potential. It did usually rank better then Snyder's other DCEU installments and Suicide Squad and Joker, to be fair. On the other hand, the likes of Nolan's Batman movies, the first couple Christopher Reeve Superman films, The Lego Batman Movie, Mask of the Phantasm, and Wonder Woman consistently outdid Man of Steel. Even saw Teen Titans Go! to the Movies get better listings when represented.

Anecdotal though it may be, it seems like the DC movie that fits your description best is Wonder Woman. Make of that what you will.



You mean the same people who liked Logan, Birds of Prey, and Deadpool, some of the most un-MCU-like movies ever made? Or maybe it's just some people just recognized that the DECUE started off with some turkeys before they got on track?



Deadpool killed him, though.

What are your most memorable comic films? That all would now depend on why you find Man of Steel so easily forgotten. The study does not lie though. Man of Steel is always still talked about by those who liked it or hated it, either way it struck a chord. It is not among a flavour of the week kind of comic film. They say art is supposed to be polarizing.
There are thousands out there that ranks man of steel over Wonder Woman and The Dark Knight Rises just to drop that in. Forget all those cooperate website rankings from watchmojos.


I would put Birds of Prey more in the MCU camp. Logan and Deadpool are movies many people don’t like because those movies showed what MCU lacks and many people did not like that. Logan and Man of Steel have a lot more in common.

We won, this is reflected in the movies while Snyder is reduced to a non-canon mini-series on HBO Max.

Aquaman’s director wants to step things up for the second film. He is done with trying to make Aquaman light and funny.

Suicide Squad and Wonder Woman 2 are not out yet.

[Castle]

RT is owned by WarnerMedia and NBCUniversal who parent company is Comcast the same Comcast that made Disney pay more for Fox during the Merger. Does anyone really believe these two companies wouldn't shut RT down if there was some Bias towards Disney/the MCU?

How does RT get dropped on this thread. Anyway, what guys need to understand about RT is the site is just a vessel. its not RT, its critics constantly telling people MCU films that Disney sees mindless fun escapism is what is the best thing ever in the genre by marketing their RT scores?

MCU movies can portray itself as mindless fun escapism, that is what works for Disney... fine. but those type of films should not be getting the same or better RT scores that Logan or TDK or Spiderman 2 have from other studios or the comic films that came out after B&R and had to prove these films could be more than mass consumers empty box entertainment, this is what we call bias.

When its MCU, fans always use RT as a defence mechanism, when it DC, fans are more into movie making or a director's work, How else do you think Snyder has so many fans from DC and Non DC?

Those that hated Man of Steel in 2013, hated Iron Man 3 a lot more for many more good reasons. If Iron Man 3 has a higher score than Man of Steel, that is an objective bias from critics posting their reviews on RT. There is no other explanation.

[XPac]

That's not really true though, films like Aquaman and Joker have far lower scores than most recent MCU films, which more or less seem to reach a floor of 78%. I actually just randomly stumbled across an article that suggests RT favours safe mediocre films and dissects Jokers aggregate score to prove this (The article is called Joker Proves Rotten Tomatoes is Biased Towards Mediocre Movies) I have a tons of criticisms RT, but the argument I personally find most convincing is that it recommends films with 80-90% film scores that I see are trash and a lot of the films I do like get far lower scores. I do like it when films I like get good reviews because it makes discussing these movies so much easier, but as a metric I don't really care.

It should also be noted that, now that DC films are starting to get good reviews I have started seeing criticism of RT. I remember watching Chris Stuckman's review of BOP, a movie he didn't like, but had received positive RT coverage and he said, basically, the problem with RT is that you can get a film a lot of people gave 5 or 6 out of 10's, but if they still like it the movie can still get a really high RT score. Basically that RT does not reflect the artistic merits of the film. This applies universally to every film, but he only brought it up for this one specifically out of all the reviews I watched from him.

So the arguement is that RT, which partially owned by WB, has a bias AGAINST WB movies in favor of Disney. Does that really make sense? Are they really going to go out of their way to prop up Disney movies while crapping on their own?

I think it's easier to buy that the scores they are getting are the scores they are getting. If the metric is flawed then it's flawed... but that shouldn't necessarily mean it's flawed in a way to where the WB is actively trying to hurt itself in favor of a competitor.

[Pinsir]

RT is owned by WarnerMedia and NBCUniversal who parent company is Comcast the same Comcast that made Disney pay more for Fox during the Merger. Does anyone really believe these two companies wouldn't shut RT down if there was some Bias towards Disney/the MCU?

Yes? Just because a company owns something doesn't mean they impose a coherent, top-down policy to further economically embolden their other properties. These companies are so large they house various industries within themselves that are competing with one another. The people who make DVDs and run WB tv channels are at odds with the people who run HBO Max for instance. Not to mention it would look pretty if they did.

[SiegePerilous02]

So the arguement is that RT, which partially owned by WB, has a bias AGAINST WB movies in favor of Disney. Does that really make sense? Are they really going to go out of their way to prop up Disney movies while crapping on their own?

I think it's easier to buy that the scores they are getting are the scores they are getting. If the metric is flawed then it's flawed... but that shouldn't necessarily mean it's flawed in a way to where the WB is actively trying to hurt itself in favor of a competitor.

There is also stuff like Aladdin getting a rotten score, so it's not like Disney is immune.

The metric and nature of the reviews can be flawed, but there is no larger conspiracy theory going on here. If RT is biased towards safe and mediocre movies, why do Parasite, the Lighthouse, Midsommar, the Witch, and Saint Maud (really excited for this one) all have high scores? Maybe Joker is just a divisive movie that some view as not being as smart as it thinks it is? I don't always agree with the Red Letter guys, but they did have the assessment that it was "Baby's first Taxi Driver" and not that deep.

[Pinsir]

So the arguement is that RT, which partially owned by WB, has a bias AGAINST WB movies in favor of Disney. Does that really make sense? Are they really going to go out of their way to prop up Disney movies while crapping on their own?

I think it's easier to buy that the scores they are getting are the scores they are getting. If the metric is flawed then it's flawed... but that shouldn't necessarily mean it's flawed in a way to where the WB is actively trying to hurt itself in favor of a competitor.

Alright, this is becoming a bit of a talking point, so I decided look up who owned RT when and where. This is a direct quote from Bing, "Since January 2010, Rotten Tomatoes has been owned by Flixster, which was in turn acquired by Warner Bros. in 2011. In February 2016, Rotten Tomatoes and its parent site Flixster were sold to Comcast's Fandango. "

So, WB didn't own RT when BvS or SS came out, the tent pole films that got critically lambasted and threw the DCEU off the track (At the time MoS had low 60-ish fresh rating, which has now become rotten as a result of reviews being added years after its release. It should also be noted that the 'low' score wasn't that much of an outlier at the time).

[SiegePerilous02]

Alright, this is becoming a bit of a talking point, so I decided look up who owned RT when and where. This is a direct quote from Bing, "Since January 2010, Rotten Tomatoes has been owned by Flixster, which was in turn acquired by Warner Bros. in 2011. In February 2016, Rotten Tomatoes and its parent site Flixster were sold to Comcast's Fandango. "

So, WB didn't own RT when BvS or SS came out, the tent pole films that got critically lambasted and threw the DCEU off the track (At the time MoS had low 60-ish fresh rating, which has now become rotten as a result of reviews being added years after its release. It should also be noted that the 'low' score wasn't that much of an outlier at the time).

Just because they didn't own it doesn't mean we need to look into any deeper meaning for why those got lambasted. Perhaps the most straightforward answer (they weren't generally deemed to be good movies) is the right one?

And I'd say the steep second weekend drop for a movie that had the first cinematic meeting between Superman and Batman plus the debut of Wonder Woman did more to throw things off track than the RT score.

[Pinsir]

Just because they didn't own it doesn't mean we need to look into any deeper meaning for why those got lambasted. Perhaps the most straightforward answer (they weren't generally deemed to be good movies) is the right one?

And I'd say the steep second weekend drop for a movie that had the first cinematic meeting between Superman and Batman plus the debut of Wonder Woman did more to throw things off track than the RT score.

I fully agree that Snyder's films probably would not receive rave reviews even if RT didn't favour safe, mediocre films. All I'm saying is that criticisms of RT are bespoke from Zach Snyder's films.

[SiegePerilous02]

I fully agree that Snyder's films probably would not receive rave reviews even if RT didn't favour safe, mediocre films. All I'm saying is that criticisms of RT are bespoke from Zach Snyder's films.

Like I said, I don't think they do or else the films I listed previously wouldn't have high review scores.

[WebLurker]

What are your most memorable comic films? That all would now depend on why you find Man of Steel so easily forgotten.

Well (in no particular order), the original Spider-Man movies, Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse, Captain America: The Winter Solider, the Guardians of the Galaxy films, Wonder Woman, Batman: Mask of the Phantasm, X-Men 1, 2, First Class, Days of Future Past, and Logan stand out as movies remembered for being good.

Never seen them (yet), but the first couple Christoper Reeve Superman movies, the Tim Burton and Christopher Nolan Batman movies, and Men in Black remain milestones or part of pop culture one way or another.

For "memorable because of how bad they were," the rest of the Christopher Reeve Superman movies, Batman and Robin, all the Fantastic 4 films, Green Lantern, BvS, X-Men Origins: Wolverine, and Spider-Man 3 (I think a defense of this movie can be made, but it's flaws are memorable) stand out.

I'd also make a case that the Avengers movies (except for Age of Ultron have or will be on the "memorable" list, if nothing else because of their places in histor.

The study does not lie though. Man of Steel is always still talked about by those who liked it or hated it, either way it struck a chord. It is not among a flavour of the week kind of comic film. They say art is supposed to be polarizing.

What "study?" You talk about how Man of Steel has staying power, but you don't really provide any info or context. From my experience, Man of Steel was pretty quickly supplanted by BvS as being the case study for Snyder's take on Superman and when it does come up, it's usually in regards to what it did wrong. All that said, I've yet to see it being remembered in any great capacity, either as the gold standard or as one of the greatest of the bombs.

There are thousands out there that ranks man of steel over Wonder Woman and The Dark Knight Rises just to drop that in. Forget all those cooperate website rankings from watchmojos.

Didn't actually consult WatchMojo.

I would put Birds of Prey more in the MCU camp.

Don't really see it, but you do you.

Logan and Deadpool are movies many people don’t like because those movies showed what MCU lacks and many people did not like that.

Both were praised for being different then most of the MCU movies, and a lot of us who like the MCU also liked them (never saw Deadpool, but I do think Logan deserves a place with the best of the best in the genre). Dunno where you've been living, but they are not disliked movies at all.

Logan and Man of Steel have a lot more in common.

How so?

[Jokerz79]

Well (in no particular order), the original Spider-Man movies, Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse, Captain America: The Winter Solider, the Guardians of the Galaxy films, Wonder Woman, Batman: Mask of the Phantasm, X-Men 1, 2, First Class, Days of Future Past, and Logan stand out as movies remembered for being good.

Never seen them (yet), but the first couple Christoper Reeve Superman movies, the Tim Burton and Christopher Nolan Batman movies, and Men in Black remain milestones or part of pop culture one way or another.

For "memorable because of how bad they were," the rest of the Christopher Reeve Superman movies, Batman and Robin, all the Fantastic 4 films, Green Lantern, BvS, X-Men Origins: Wolverine, and Spider-Man 3 (I think a defense of this movie can be made, but it's flaws are memorable) stand out.

I'd also make a case that the Avengers movies (except for Age of Ultron have or will be on the "memorable" list, if nothing else because of their places in histor.



What "study?" You talk about how Man of Steel has staying power, but you don't really provide any info or context. From my experience, Man of Steel was pretty quickly supplanted by BvS as being the case study for Snyder's take on Superman and when it does come up, it's usually in regards to what it did wrong. All that said, I've yet to see it being remembered in any great capacity, either as the gold standard or as one of the greatest of the bombs.



Didn't actually consult WatchMojo.



Don't really see it, but you do you.



Both were praised for being different then most of the MCU movies, and a lot of us who like the MCU also liked them (never saw Deadpool, but I do think Logan deserves a place with the best of the best in the genre). Dunno where you've been living, but they are not disliked movies at all.



How so?

IMO the big heavy hitters of live action comic book films that cultural and industry impact are Superman (1978), Batman (1989), X-Men (2000), X2, Raimi Spider-Man Films, Nolan Batman Trilogy, Iron Man, Avengers (2012), Guardians of the Galaxy (2014), Wonder Woman, Deadpool, Logan, Infinity War, Black Panther, and Endgame.

While I love Superman II, Winter Soldier, and DOFP I don't see them as Cultural or Industries Gamechangers.

[WebLurker]

IMO the big heavy hitters of live action comic book films that cultural and industry impact are Superman (1978), Batman (1989), X-Men (2000), X2, Raimi Spider-Man Films, Nolan Batman Trilogy, Iron Man, Avengers (2012), Guardians of the Galaxy (2014), Wonder Woman, Deadpool, Logan, Infinity War, Black Panther, and Endgame.

While I love Superman II, Winter Soldier, and DOFP I don't see them as Cultural or Industries Gamechangers.

That's fair. I was including some stuff that might not be as "important" but seems to be fondly remembered as well-made films alongside the milestones and game changers.