Seems like you guys [Mike and Jay] approach superhero movies (I don't think this happens when you're talking about...

>Seems like you guys [Mike and Jay] approach superhero movies (I don't think this happens when you're talking about other genres) with too many pre-conceived notions of what superhero movies should be and should look like, which in turn prevents you from "buying" the world each individual film is trying to "sell" most of the time. When they happen to align with your visions of what that should be, based on some superhero movies you liked in the past, you call them good despite the numerous flaws and issues it might have, and when they don't you blow the problems out of proportion and ignore the good in them. Each hero is different and has MANY iterations. Christopher Reeve's Superman is just A Superman, not THE Superman, for instance, just like Robert Downey Jr.'s Iron Man is not THE Iron Man.

Is he right about the RLM people? Are they hacks when it comes to reviewing superhero flicks?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=-R1Q8U80fQI
youtube.com/watch?v=7FYTc55nGEI
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

It's really more that 60 years of movies based on comic books has shown what does and doesn't work.

source?

But those use comic books as source materials and comic books have shown you can have thousands of different successful stories.

You can literally have all kinds of stories like a Batman Noir, a Batman Beyond, a campy and colorful 60's Batman, a grimdark modern day Batman, a space Batman that dodges omega beams from a space overlord etc.

There isn't a formula.

>each individual film

Unless you're talking about shit like Ghost Rider, or Spawn, both Marvel and DC have a very, VERY particular style they enforce on all of their movies. DC atleast has a chance to subvert this still, but i doubt it.

Dudes probably posting his own Youtube Comment.

Just one youtube comment in their video that caught my attention.

Sounds like the dude doesn't know the definition of "genre." It's like saying people judge hip-hop with preconceived notions and by the albums of the past so we shouldn't point out that Blake Shelton's latest album isn't a good rap album.

If you're going to be "art" critic at least learn the basic vocabulary and foundations before engaging in debate.

Yes this is 100% true.

Nah dude, each IP has a very different style, Batman stories are very different from Superman stories, Ww stories, Green Lantern etc.

But music is probably the most subjective thing there is, music reviews are cringeworthy and should just stick with production quality and use of recording tools.

You realize the underlying economic factors create two wildly different ecosystems in which a film and comic can flourish right?

A semi-popular comic run based on some wacked out scenario with 1 writer / colorist could be a studio sinking disaster on film.

And this inherently influences the creators and the product itself.

Wait, wait, hol up -- so you be sayin'... they have different opinions than me?

Show me someone who thinks the DC movies don't look alike, and i will show you a liar. Or a mongoloid.

And? I'm not saying you can or should translate every story to movie format, I'm saying that you can make all kinds of superhero stories work on-screen.

The same people that praise Cap America's Winter Soldier also praises Dr. Strange and Guardians of the Galaxy 2, which deal with very diffferent subjects and have very different tones. And guess what, they'll love when they're all fighting a giant purple man together.

There is no formula.

I think he means that they don't have any consistency when talking about these movies.

But you have to agree that defining genres is what helps us compare artistic works and gives us a common basis to work from. You wouldn't really judge Grown Ups with 2001 A space Odyssey outside of anything other than production quality because they're trying to achieve different things. It's easier to talk about comedies and compare Grown Ups with other examples of the genre because they have way more in common and have pretty much the same goal.

Of course categorization isn't perfect but the abuse doesn't take away the use. Logan is a super hero movie by subject and plot. Thematically, it's a western, tonally, a drama. So it's hard to pigeonhole it cleanly into one category. It's an example of what happens when you start abandoning the basis genre, you get something else that doesn't exactly resemble what it's supposed to be. But that's not always bad.

They're hacks when it comes to reviewing period. I don't know why everyone on Sup Forums dickrides them.

>a campy and colorful 60's Batman
There's already an Adam West Batman movie.

youtube.com/watch?v=-R1Q8U80fQI

There is a formula, you're just blinded by the character hats / CGI monster at the end to notice.

You say you can make all kinds of superhero stories work. I the 30+ years of comic movies with the last 10/15 of them being literally multiple annually, with fairly stock standard plots, with little to no artistic variation aside from 'bright' marvel and 'dour' DC is evidence to the contrary.

Maybe in another 30 years you'll be right and we can re-examine how RLM reviews capeshit then. But i doubt it.

>their dumb skits

I can't ever get past that shit to watch their reviews.

Sure, the problem comes when you immediately write off an entire movie or aspects of it because they're not what you think they should be or what that genre is supposed to look like, which is what I think the RLM folks do. It's not about preferring one style or one way of doing a superhero story, it's about only giving a chance when you think it's "right".

They don't seem open-minded at all.

I don't think their sole problem is that Snyder's movies are too dark. Nolan's Dark Knight movies are pretty dark, but they're better executed than Snyder's, so they liked those (well, they only reviewed TDKR but from that review you can guess they liked the previous ones too).

Yes, I'm saying it works just as much as a dark gritty nolan movie, while some people think there's only one way to do Batman.

>when you immediately write off an entire movie

They've literally never done this and if you think they have you're a braindead fanboy.

There are lots of things you can do with a standard "hero's journey", which has been a popular type of story since Ancient Greece. You can boil down every story to "protagonist starts in one place and ends in another place, after learning a lesson and changing", but there are plenty of ways of starting, developing and ending hero or superhero stories.

>Gadot was good because her shit acting actually fits the fish out of water character she was supposed to play

RLM is okay.

Replace
>pre-conceived notions of what superhero movies should be and should look like
and
>Visions of what that should be

with "TASTES" and the idiocy of this comment becomes apparent.

Their problem is that they think certain heroes have to have certain types of stories. They're ok with gritty Captain America if it's told a certain way, but aren't ok with gritty Wonder Woman (yes, they liked the movie but thought it was too gritty and violent, despite having no knowledge of the source material) because they FEEL it SHOULD tell a certain story, instead of letting the director tell their own interpretation of it.

What's the inherent problem of a dark take on Superman, for instance, which is something they brought up in this review? Sure, Snyder didn't please them and may have fucked up in many ways, but to me their problem with that concept starts with the fact he's not '78 Superman.

It's funny because they act like the "Not muh _____" people despite not reading comic books or being invested in any way to the genre.

The way Wonder Woman is written plays to Gadot's weakness as an actress. So her performance is just alright.

Them praising Gal Gadot's performance in WW is mind-boggling. They even defended the "I believe in Love" lines and her defeating the God of War with love. for Christ's sake. And I say that as someone who liked the movie and thought she was at her best when interacting with Chris Pine.

She was literally the same character from BvS and acted the exact same way. The only difference is that she had more screentime. She's a terrible actress.

I'm saying their problem with Snyder isn't ONLY the grimdark direction, it's that he's not doing the concept a justice. They said that BvS had some legitimately interesting stuff in marketing trailers, like Supes being a godlike alien and that challenging the humanity as a whole, but Zach doesn't really make the concept work.

You don't even need to be that reductive to see how all this capeshit is similar to one another. There's a reason why people across the board (not just RLM) see Comic Book Movies as a Genre unto itself despite minor variation in themes and settings. It's because, like other genres, it has internal consistencies and similarities, from the camera work, to the characters, to the story, to the score.

You're saying this isn't the case because... Comics have variety therefore comic movies must too. To which i see the last 30 years of this being observably incorrect and call you a fuckwit for making such a dumb assertion.

You're clearly a buttmad DC fangay.

Taste doesn't make you completely write off movies or ignore problems in other ones when you're supposed to professionally review something. It only makes you enjoy/dislike something more or less.

You're simply choosing to acknowledge the similarities and ignore the many differences between the movies, my dude.

Also, if I was a DC fanboy I should be more than happy with their WW review, since they said it was better than more than half of the Marvel movies, right?

They know the flipside to that argument is "dude, turn off your brain and just enjoy it." They review movies, comic book movies have source material that they, even in passing, are aware of. Only an autistic idiot would go into a wonder woman movie in 2017 and not have preconceived ideas about the character as a whole, including how she has been handled in the last 5 years of her source medium.

All iterations are valid for reference and ridicule, and each person will have their own interests in mind when watching or discussing the topic. Thats the whole premise behind an internet based review system, you are hearing THEIR opinion on the flick, not a general concensus that can be manipulated easily for desired outcome.

I personally hate the SJW-ism infestation of comics, I still like John Stewart as Green Lantern the most. I would talk about how cool he is as a character in the same breath as I shit on wonder woman describing mansplaining while using the lasso of truth. It would boggle an idiots mind, and rightfully so, as they are idiots. Thats the real conundrum here: do you even respond to idiots? should you? what happens if you do when you know you shouldn't?

These are the real questions. Questions mike and his gang probably spend alot more time on than you want to believe.

???

Did you even watch it, everytime her actings brought up Mike is basically like "uh, nah, she wasn't that good" And he shits all over the 'love' thing.

What? Mike and Jay literally wanted more of that Love message. And both were ok with her acting and praised in it, Mike was just a little less excited than Jay.

>I still like John Stewart as Green Lantern the most
He's the worst Green Lantern, even worse than gay Alan Scott from Earth 2 and Power Ring from Earth 3.

>They review movies, comic book movies have source material that they, even in passing, are aware of. Only an autistic idiot would go into a wonder woman movie in 2017 and not have preconceived ideas about the character as a whole, including how she has been handled in the last 5 years of her source medium

They had trouble grasping the idea that she uses a sword and stabs people, though. Their pre-conceived idea of the character goes back to '70s campy WW.

Because the 'many differences' are skin deep, relative to the core, central similarities.

Going with that analogy should 808s and Heartbreaks have been panned for veering away from traditional hip-hop?

But hip hop all sounds so different. A critic who says Chance the Rapper is bad because it doesn't sound like Public Enemy is a hack critic. Your analogy is bad.

FUCK OFF WITH THIS SHIT

>Them praising Gal Gadot's performance in WW is mind-boggling.

Perfect casting, they figured out the character of WW requires little acting talent.

The ending of Wonder Woman turning into a "CGI Zach Snyder nightmare" has nothing to do with their preconceived notions of what the movie should be. It's a criticism of what the movie is.

No they had problems grasping that the message they got from the movie was love and understanding thru wonderous acts, then solving all your problems with a sword to the chest. All evidence they were presented with in the movie made the end result confusing to them. Then again, they refuse to "turn off your brain and just enjoy it."

Sounds like your pre-conceived idea is hurting your argument. They complain that capeflicks stick too closely to the playbook they have created and want more out of it, or even the attempt. They lauded what it did right but thought that the lackluster finale just kinda washes all the innovation away. Mike has said time and again that he is obsessed with structure. They created and nurtured a specific structure, then just abandoned it for a flashy bad ass ending.

Still my favorite. I only know him from the justice league cartoon and he was a complex character in that, a cartoon. He puts more emotion and conviction into his "darkest night" monologue than Hal Jordan ever did.

I'm sure if you starting eating fecal matter exclusively you would develop a taste for specific types of fecal matter over another. At the end of the day you are still eating shit.

terrible analogy

super hero movies aren't necessarily a genre in itself, they can be comedy, drama, action film etc.

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

youtube.com/watch?v=7FYTc55nGEI

The problem isn't that the Snyder movies are "different". Mike & Jay really like TDK for example.
And they always praise when movies do something unique.
But MoS doesn't do that. It's just Snyder trying to imitate a Nolan Batman movie.

Comic book-bred millenial man children are some of the most volatile fanbases out there. If you don't adhere to their preconceived expectations you WILL get crucified. Likewise if you give them exactly what they want and what they expect they'll huff the sweat off your balls.

>yes, they liked the movie but thought it was too gritty

They complained about the cheap stupid desaturation filter that makes everything look like shit.

Just compare Snyder shit to a competent gritty movie like Saving Private Ryan.