DC Extended Universe (POST NO SPOILERS HERE!)

[keeen]

I love the guy on the far right and how uncomfortable he looks. Like a teenage boy trying to force a smile for an embarrassing family photo.

Yeah, that guy definitely looks like he's said some mean things about Snyder online. Awkward!

[batnbreakfast]

I wonder how you get invited to test screenings? I'd love to go to one!

Yeah, I'd like to know how it works as well. You probably have to go to NY or LA for it?

[Bukdiah]

Yeah, I'd like to know how it works as well. You probably have to go to NY or LA for it?

That sounds about right. I was doing some googling and found out that they would be showing on weeknights and you'd have to find a person to give you a pass for a screening going on. It's all very luck based, but there are some sites you can register for to get invitations. Was perusing this reddit thread

https://www.reddit.com/r/movies/comm...reening_of_an/

[Clark_Kent]

Zero. Both those films directors were signed on before they even had a script.

This is false. What ended up as Batman '89 was a film that was in the making for nearly a decade. Multiple scripts and actors were attached (including WB wanting Bill Murray as Batman at one point). Obviously Burton put it on a certain path when he signed on, but it was still something WB had been trying to get done since 80 or 81.

Batman Begins was similar; WB wanted a Batman movie and over several years it changed hands from Wolfgang Peterson's Superman vs Batman, to a Batman: Year One draft by Frank Miller to, finally, Christopher Nolan's pitch.

The point is these things happen all the time. The only reason it's news here is because it's Batman, and it's cool to hate on the DCEU for things that happen to every studio.

[LordTrump]

This is false. What ended up as Batman '89 was a film that was in the making for nearly a decade. Multiple scripts and actors were attached (including WB wanting Bill Murray as Batman at one point). Obviously Burton put it on a certain path when he signed on, but it was still something WB had been trying to get done since 80 or 81.

Batman Begins was similar; WB wanted a Batman movie and over several years it changed hands from Wolfgang Peterson's Superman vs Batman, to a Batman: Year One draft by Frank Miller to, finally, Christopher Nolan's pitch.

The point is these things happen all the time. The only reason it's news here is because it's Batman, and it's cool to hate on the DCEU for things that happen to every studio.

I still remember that crappy Year One script pitch that sounded nothing like the comic. Lol Big Al

[capNthor]

Wasn't Dr. Strange, like, terrible?

IMG_0297.jpg

Naw

[Lightning Rider]

IMG_0297.jpg

Naw

Critic consensus is pretty useless when debating the merits of a movie.

[capNthor]

Critic consensus is pretty useless when debating the merits of a movie.

It's not, but ok. I guess we can throw out audience consensus, box office, cinemascore, and every other measurable metric then.

[Lightning Rider]

It's not, but ok. I guess we can throw out audience consensus, box office, cinemascore, and every other measurable metric then.

That's gauging how popular something is. How good something is, is largely subjective, though I do think there are objective metrics for aspects of movie-making and other artforms.

Not that I think Dr. Strange was anywhere close to terrible.

[capNthor]

That's gauging how popular something is. How good something is, is largely subjective, though I do think there are objective metrics for aspects of movie-making and other artforms.

Not that I think Dr. Strange was anywhere close to terrible.

You think critics are giving this film positive reviews because they value it as 'popular'?

[Lightning Rider]

You think critics are giving this film positive reviews because they value it as 'popular'?

No. Someone asked if Dr. Strange was terrible, and you provided evidence that it was popular, which is a related but separate thing.

[capNthor]

No. Someone asked if Dr. Strange was terrible, and you provided evidence that it was popular, which is a related but separate thing.

Film journalists judge movies on their creative and artistic merits, not popularity. Evidence of popularity would be amount of twitter mentions.

97% of critics praised Hunt for the Wilder People for its artistic and creative merits.Hunt For the Wilderpeople is certainly not one of the most popular films of the year. Batman V. Super Man was panned by majority of film journalists, Wilderpeople is certainly not more popular then BvS.

[Lightning Rider]

Film journalists judge movies on their creative and artistic merits, not popularity. Evidence of popularity would be amount of twitter mentions.

I'm not arguing that journalists judge on popularity, I'm arguing that you're answering a subjective question by pointing to the opinions of others.

[BatmanJones]

Or maybe we'll defend the DCEU movies that we consider good? You know? With those "subjective opinions" about which you were just talking?

Show us a DCEU movie that we actually consider bad, and we'll call it bad. Show us a movie we don't consider bad, and we'll defend it from the people who keep on trying to convince us that it really was bad.

Most of the "defender mob" have openly admitted that most, if not all, the DCEU movies could be better. I have yet to meet a DCEU fan who calls any of the first three DCEU movies "perfect." Meanwhile? We are constantly beset by other fans who want to say that these movies are utterly without merit and that we are objectively wrong in liking them.

This tends to provoke a strong response from people.

You'd never hear that from me. I've said many times here that I believe art is subjective and that anyone's opinion is right because it's the one that they have. It hasn't stopped posters here ascribing false motives or paper tiger arguments as to why I was wrong to dislike BvS so much. I'm told I want DC movies to be like Marvel movies, that I want superhero movies to be simplistic, that I don't like complicated stories, that I don't like dark things, that I don't like deep movies... Each a dismissive and insulting argument and each of which accusation would be hilarious to anyone that knows me since I make my living as the artistic director of an experimental theatre that is known for its dark, complicated, even obtuse productions.

I've never said someone was wrong for liking the movie. I'm happy for the people that did. I wish I were one of them. I tried really hard to love that movie. After hating it at a preview before the review embargo lifted (which meant I expected to LOVE it), I bought the extended cut and watched it three more times trying to love it or at least see what others saw in it. I've waited almost my entire life for that movie. Actively. I'm 48 and I remember telling my mother when I was 5 how much I wanted to see a movie with Batman and Superman in it. And my enthusiasm for such a film never wavered a bit until I actually saw the one they made. I hated how much I hated it. Having been so disappointed it's just insult to injury to be accused of all sorts of made up reasons why I failed to understand it. I understood it fine. I just found it incredibly boring. And there is no movie in the world that could make me more excited than a movie with those two characters sharing the screen unless they added Wonder Woman. Which they did. I still found it so bad as to feel like a colossal mistake. But that's not me telling you you're wrong (as so many tell me whenever I post about the movie here) because I don't do that. If I say it was bad I presume it's clear that I'm only stating my own subjective opinion as I don't have an objective one. No one does.

[Confuzzled]

IMG_0297.jpg

Naw

90% for Doctor Strange and 27% for Batman v Superman is the best evidence that the Rotten Tomatoes percentage system can be very misleading. The site's average score (7.3/10 for Strange which translates to 73% and 4.9/10 for BvS) represents the score that is more accurate for both films IMO (I would have rated BvS higher than 49%-50% but at least that score is much better than the stench of a meagre 27%).

The average score should be the percentage as well. The site has a strange method of calculating Rotten/Fresh percentages which tend to result in these inaccurate but more dramatic looking numbers.