>Shill review successful!
>$5000 has been paid into your account!
Guardians of the Box Office
>>youtube.com
This is hilarious, you can see the panic in the shill's eyes and voice when the other fag starts talking.
>everyone was telling jokes from start to finish
set engines to warp factor quip overload.
...
...
DUDE ... ME AND YOU.... RIGHT NOW .... MEME OFF!
Kek, I love how DC fanboys were actually getting their hopes up that this movie would get bad reviews because a handful of early reviews were kinda lukewarm. Talk about setting yourself up for disappointment.
>Vol. 2 is filler, to be sure, but if you like the flavor of these movies, you'll enjoy this second bite.
>Where the original Guardians felt fresh, Vol. 2 now feels familiar -- sometimes pleasantly so and sometimes not.
>Vol. 2 is filler, to be sure, but if you like the flavor of these movies, you'll enjoy this second bite.
>In its best moments, the movie is irresistible escapism of the highest order, a scrappy, wisecracking cousin to Star Wars circa 1977. However, Vol. 2 can cruise on autopilot for a touch too long at times.
>It stands out more than some of the more routine films of the MCU, but whereas the first can still fairly fight it out in the top few, this is decidedly more middle of the road.
These are "fresh" reviews, according to rottentomatoes.
>Talk about setting yourself up for disappointment.
it's what DC fanboys do best
Where do you see the problem with that? Those quotes you posted clearly state it's an enjoyable movie with flaws and that's exactly what the scores reflect.
BABY FUCKING GROOT
BABY
GROOT
GROOT GROOT BABY
BROOT GABY
WE HAVE THE 1 (ONE) AND ONLY BABY GROOT
B A B Y G R O O T
GROOT
MOTHERFUCKING BABY GROOT
baby groot
DCucks on suicide watch.
>7.2/10
>fresh
When does this site considers something rotten, 5/10?
I think so
Lower than 6/10
They're mixed at best. Certainly not positive reviews. That's the inherent problem with rotten tomatoes scoring, which is either fresh or rotten, and criticism doesn't work like that. There are a lot of reviews that are in the fence, and who knows who picks what's to be considered fresh and what's to be considered rotten. To choose an easy target, if I say, "Transformers is not a bad movie but fans are gonna like it", would you consider it a positive or a negative review?
That's the problem I have with the amount of faith put in the rottentomatoes percentage score. People are getting too lazy to even read a fucking review and just look at the big flashy number which not only does not determine if a movie is good or not, it's even deceptive to whether it's gotten a good, a bad or a mixed reception amongst the critics.
>>$5000 has been paid into your account!
spotted the 3rd worlder
>7.2/10
>not positive
are you dumb or did the videogame reviews where "less than 9/10 = shit" ruin your brain?
Did I like it?
>youtube.com
>they split the reviews so they can give two different fresh tomatoes
HAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHA
i would shill this movie for $5000 who can i call?
>Film Gob
hello rebbit
Holy shit
>worse reviews
Means it'll be better than the first. Good.
Reminder that Warner Bros owns 30% share of Fandango and Rotten Tomatoes
Guardians Of The Galaxy carters to people who want something similar to Star Wars but without having to watch horribly boring shit.
Shills confirmed guys, it's happening
It was 93 before, it actually is dropping
What kinda retarded rating system would consider a 7/10 rotten? 5/10 literally means average on a 1-10 scale.
>I can't see the difference between a 7 or a 9 movie.
>It was 93 before
Yeah, and not all that long ago, either.
>5/10 literally means average on a 1-10 scale.
And yet anything below a 6 is considered rotten.
That's not the point though. Neither a 7 nor a 9 movie are anywhere close to rotten. Not sure why you are arguing that only almost perfect movie scores should be considered fresh.
It's 2 different reviews by 2 different people from the same site
You can argue about that (although it's not so uncommon, Forbes for instance does that all the time), but it's not 1 review written by 2 people and then split
WHY DOES IT KEEP DROPPING
HAS BASED GUNN LET US DOWN
LETS FORM A PRAYER CIRCLE GUYS
They are so in the open about this...its almost worth praising...about their shilling.
Also, one of them is from Games Radar and the other from the Total Film magazine, they just lumped into 1 article
The same review by the same guy twice. FUCKING. TWICE.
It's over. The gig is up. Goodbye Rotten Tomatoes, we never knew you
I know you guys just like being retards to shitpost, but still
don't be rude to tourists
At 1:40. Yeah we know about splitting the review so they can cash two disney checks, but this is worse
Why do you hate this film so much?
Marvel wins again and there's nothing you can do about it
Yeah they can, they can call everyone shills.
It's called Karma, and she is the bitch. Long overdue in my opinion, too, after the unbelievably lopsided praise Civil War got. It's barely distinguishable from Weekend at Ultron's to me.
E X P O S E D
>It's called Karma
No, it's called Triggered.
2 threads had to die for your shitty triggered threads. What do you hope to accomplish? Everybody is STILL gonna watch it.
But if you really know the rule of rottentomatoes. If it's at 86% this early, there is only downway from here
MoS was at 93% on early paid reviews
Oh, I skipped that one because the guy is annoying
>Everybody is STILL gonna watch it.
Can you at least pretend you're not a shill?
Hope this movie bombs.
It's going to break 1 billion
It's not even my thread. I hope to see you in the next thread blasting a DC movie white-knighting just this hard. Not saying that you don't, mind you. I've enjoyed films from both franchises, but after the bullshit they pulled with Iron-Spider, I legitimately think I'm done.
ANOTHER POSITIVE REVIEW
Yes, I'm a shill. I get paid $7000 a day to make 1 post in a triggered thread.
I feel sorry for your parents.
>MCU MOVIE
Great visuals, but story is kinda lacking 9/10
>DCEU
Great visuals but story is kinda lacking
2/10 DCucks on suicide watch
You mean when HDrip comes out and everyone shitpost about it on Sup Forums
it's working!
Neither side has great visuals unless your eyes are set to child of videogame
Welcome to Disneyland
>86%
Old news.
> I legitimately think I'm done.
That's fair enough. I'm not "white-knighting" amything. I don't like Marvel or DC. Every movie gets false votes now months before they come out, singling out this is retarded imo.
and now you know the truth
Movies I was thinking were Dr strange and sepuku crew
>I feel sorry for your parents.
Why? They know I'd never go to see a children movie about a dancing tree and much less defend that piece of shit on the internet. I may download it down the road but I wouldn't hold my breath even on that
also old news we 85% now
Why do people keep comparing GOTG to Star Wars? Guardians is quippy, jokey, and self aware. Star Wars plays itself straight the entire time with a few jokes here and there. Maybe Nu-Wars by Disney is like GOTG, but not the OT.
Because it was more like Star Wars than TFA was.
>almost as fun
Glowing praise, indeed.
What are some great examples of pure unfiltered shilling?
Silly
Sup Forums shills get paid $0.05 for post
It's the big reviewers that get paid $7000
This will never, ever get old.
>Yes, I'm a shill
Oh it shows
That is all true
"Fun" space adventure, Star Lord is kinda Han Solo like.
Marvel BTFO
>our heroes dutifully beat up the aliens while quipping to each other about this and that, but there never seems to be anything actually at stake
This has to be ironic. No one can lack self awareness this much
highest grossing movie of all time
On Sup Forums warner
It was true when "The Avengers" came out, and when "16 Hours of Ultron" came out, too.
If you're truly that blind to irony and lacking in self-awareness, I'd advise you to look into that, because there's a good chance that there are some Buddhists in the world who wouldn't even be able to see you.
Not exactly a selling point for me.
Comedy.
Gold.
I don't care about irony or "hurr but they did the same!"
It's true. And if you hate Avengers or any other MCU crap because of those same reasons but defends the Justice League trailer, you also lack the self awareness.
>he thinks that's shilling
Only Disney and Marvel are capable of it, user
you are confusing shitposting with actual shilling
>already a consensus with only 40 something reviews
but sure, no shilling or bias AT ALL!
>that last sentence
They're basing that off a trailer. A. Trailer.
They actually went and saw "Avengers" and "Lunch Break at Ultron's" and still gave them glowing reviews. They're already warming up to shit on a movie they haven't even seen.
This desu
Regular movies don't get a consensus until nearly 200 reviews at its premiere date
You might also wonder why most of Marvel movies look like shit with their enormous budget
Wrong. DC is the only one that needs to shill as there movies keep getting shit on. They have to shill like mad to get people to go see it.
Marvel can put out shit, and people will still see it because they've built up enough good rep. DC on the other hand has no good rep. There movies keep getting progressively worse.
Same thing happened to BvS which is why the consensus is far more positive than the 27% warrants, idiot
>i-i-its shitposting
Hmm
Were you around for the Dredd shilling or the first purge flick? Or were those "shitposting" too, plebs?
It's apparent that both side are buying reviews. You must be an idiot if you think one side is better than the other
>both sides do it
>IT'S BIASED
fucking retard
...
Marveldrone at its absolute damage control.
>D-d-dc pay for reviews tooo
>the mods had to put up a sticky
The answer is just make a Disney general and force them to shill away there. That's how we contained the GoT problem and it worked
Ouch...thats pretty savage
Dude, you don't draw 2.4 billion in your franchise's first three films without a considerable amount of good will from the public.People like these characters and more and more people are coming to understand the sort of story DC is telling. It's considerably more interconnected and lore-based.
I am not the guy that you replied to, you mong