Marvel fan here, I don't really read much D.C so I was wondering why people think this was terrible? I watched this last night and wasn't expecting a masterpiece and really wouldn't be watching 'capeshit' for that purpose. I watched expecting sci-fantasy with passable special effects and action sequences which is exactly what I got. Best character was by far Diana Prince, y'know that scene where she was having an argument with Bruce Wayne about why they shouldn't resurrect Superman? I thought oh here we go feminist virtue signalling she will be proven objectively correct, I was pleasantly surprised when that perspective was ultimately subverted. Other than Steppenwolf invading Russia and terraforming it into an alien landscape and nobody batting and eyelid, I thought the film wasn't as bad a everybody makes out. So Sup Forums the question is why did it get slated?
Why do people think this was so bad?
Other urls found in this thread:
It was ok. Like the very definition of ok. One notch above bad. Because it was so painfully average, nobody gave a shit.
>feminist virtue signaling
Fuck off
Are there any psychological studies on the effect of acting like an idiot for long terms of time? I'm wondering if playing dumb too much eventually makes it so you're not longer playing because you've mutated your brain chemistry.
You mean besidess the unfinished cgi, cuts made weeks before release, scenes were inexperienced actors like Gadot had to make rushed what would fuck even good actors, characters acting out of character, Snyder shilling for his superman making everyone else look bad etc?
>I watched expecting sci-fantasy with passable special effects and action sequences which is exactly what I got.
Chad's aren't even trying with the concern trolling these days.
Because DC's films have developed a negative reputation and people bandwagon on to that. This film has a number of problems but it does much more good than harm for the DC movie universe. Hopefully they let Johns play the Feige role and develop a real plan going forward. Cutting that thing they do where they don't really want TV and film sharing characters would also help a lot.
>I was wondering why people think this was terrible?
I'll take a stab at it and say the people who slag off on this bit of kino mostly made the mistake of actually watching it.
His only plan was "stop listening to Hack Snyder WB executives"
Is a good plan though
>Why do people think this was so bad?
It wasn't that bad. But it was the straw that broke the camel's back. When DC movies 'hit' they're pretty enjoyable, but when they MISS... they're not just bad they sap you of your will to live.
People are tired of being saps.
Horrible story, horrible casting, horrible costumes, horrible color filters, horrible acting, horrible directing, horrible pacing.
Do you think the masses will remember who this guy is in future media?
Horrible characters, horrible script (a damn mcguffin),horrible cgi, horrible villain, horrible characters
>Because DC's films have developed a negative reputation and people bandwagon on to that.
OP here, yep I think this is exactly what it is, herd mentality. The film was OK it wasn't as bad everybody made out it to be.
No.
Lol no. Can't believe you even typed that out.
It was better than the rest of the movies the DCEU has put out, first one that felt like a comic come to life without all the pretentious theater art crap shoved into it
The movie was bad, but I actually think it was just plain better at BvS.
In fact what brings it down is continuity. You know the thing a shared universe has it going for it?
As someone who adores the Justice League, I know these characters deserve better in their first foray.
That said I actually don't think it's the worst movie ever or anything of the sort.
Or, you're a faggot with god awful taste and the movie was bad and you're jumping on the bandwagon of people supporting it.
>The movie was bad, but I actually think it was just plain better at BvS.
IE this turd doesn't smell as bad as this other turd
>you're jumping on the bandwagon of people supporting it.
Ah error coco, I only just watched it last night and formed an opinion on that basis.
Right. You only watched it after the entire rest of the planet judged it and you could pick which side to be on for maximum shitposting.
I don't remember any of the villains from any of the IM movies. I'd even forgotten that AIM was involved in one of them until someone at a party of geeks said something like, "well they wasted Zemo on . . . like they wasted AIM on Iron Man" and even then I had to look it up in the MCU Wikia.
Though I was not saying it was great or terrible, it was watchable, distinctly average and I don't feel like I wasted my time watching it. Being average doesn't mean bad.
>I don't remember any of the villains from any of the IM movies
Then you must have early onset Alzheimer
Anything is watchable. Snuff films are watchable.
I mean watchable as in it held my interest, if it was just bad I would have turned it off after 5 minutes.
This describes Avengers too.
>herd mentality
Like you faggots pushing this shite as "kino" for months on end, did you mean?
Then go make a thread about that movie and cry about it in there.
>IE this turd doesn't smell as bad as this other turd
I mean, to be fair, this one went the extra mile and had bits of corn in it.
> first one that felt like a comic come to life without all the pretentious theater art crap shoved into it
Oh looks, its one of those casual fags who think comics are a genre and not a medium. MoS & BvS did feel like comics, they felt like some of my favorite comics--Whatever Happened To The Man of Tomorrow, For The Man Who Has Everything, Birthright, The Dark Knight Returns, Superman: Ending Battle, Joe Casey's entire run on Superman, O'Neil's Batman--I could go on.
Just admit you are a casual that doesn't actually read comics.
BvS was a great movie though. Only casuals who don't read comics think it was bad because "WHAT, SUPERMAN ISN'T ACTING LIKE HE DID IN THE DONNER MOVIES?!?!"
I read all of those and disagree with you that MoS or BvS come even close to these.
I'lll even point out how The Dark Knight Returns (which the BvS fight was clearly referenced in the coreography) had much better dialogue, character motivation and all the extra action scenes added by Snyder and crew felt like they didn't get the point of the original fight at all (Batman depowers Superman right away instead of waiting the perfect moment to do so, Batman hits Superman with a fucking toilet)
Don't call other casuals for disliking a clearly inferior adaptation of the source material for being a shitty movie, mate.
>I'lll even point out how The Dark Knight Returns (which the BvS fight was clearly referenced in the coreography) had much better dialogue, character motivation and all the extra action scenes added by Snyder and crew felt like they didn't get the point of the original fight at all (Batman depowers Superman right away instead of waiting the perfect moment to do so, Batman hits Superman with a fucking toilet)
But it wasnt an adaptation of The Dark Knight Returns, in fact its clearly a reconstruction where The Dark Knight Returns is a deconstruction.
And you dont actually point out how it has better dialogue or any of the other things you listed, you just said they are as a fact without proving it.
>felt like they didn't get the point of the original fight at al
Because this fight has an entirely different point than the one in The Dark Knight Returns--which is why the movie is not called The Dark Knight Returns. To compare the two is disengenious since there is very little borrowed from the comic fight other than Batman having a metal suit and him using kryptonite (which in the comic, he has Green Arrow use, he doesnt even use it himself and he is intentionally tryint to lose there)
You didnt really make a point in your post. You are just saying its not like a comic it was never trying to be like. You somehow think a visual reference = the same story/motivation.
Actually make points and comparisons next time.
Oh good, I can copy pasta my reply!
Yep, those are all the comics that Snyder looked at (didn’t read lol) when he decided to make a comic book movie to throw in his theater school professor’s face when he told him that he had very limited talent.
But seriously, BvS was like a 14 year old telling his casual friends all about these cool must read DC comics while completely missing the point. JL was like some kid grew up watching JL/U and wanted to make that into a live action film.
>I read all of those and disagree with you that MoS or BvS come even close to these.
I disagree with your disagreement. It pretty clearly does a complete thematic/motivational reversal of The Dark Knight Returns, borrows a lot of their Luthor from Secret Origin (I know it wasnt listed in the post you were responding to, but still), takes the whole Superman meddling in African politics thing from Birthright, and has Superman's whole idea of "mayby my very presence is casuing more harm than good" from Whatever Happened To The Man of Tomorrow.
And thats just off the top of my head. Of course you are going to say something like WELL IT ISNT 100% EXACTLY LIKE THE PANELS FROM THE COMICS SO IT DOESNT COUNT!!!
Is Snyder-Intern the new Negative Ladderbro?
To be fair, you gotta have a high IQ to understand Snyder films...
I disagree. BvS felt like someone who has read all the history of these characters and their landmark books and forging something new while using the same elements and ideas.
>JL was like some kid grew up watching JL/U and wanted to make that into a live action film.
Lol, what? So you are saying JL felt like it was made by someone who was not at all familiar with the source material and instead based their entire understanding of the characters off of the most OP versions of Batman and one of the angriest/grumpiest version of Superman?
Can we stop with the "mcguffins are always bad" meme? The mcguffin plot line isn't bad, the problem is that it's being overused in today's films, particularly cape films.
Mcguffins aren't bad simply for existing, you're totally misinterpreting the critique the trope. It's in its over abundance, not in its use ever.
its amazing that you guys cant actually make any arguments so you just resort to tired memes
Weak, pathetic bait
Fake news. Nobody says JL is kino. BvS is kino though and people are right to say so.
>if I disagree with it, its bait!!
wow, i'm sorry you cant accept people having different opinions than you. your life must be suffering.
>GRRR IT'S BAD BECAUSE I SAY SO!!!!
because we have better taste than you
and don't try to cover by lying and saying you're a marvel fan DChump
Cause it was shit.
No, almost all critics, and most of the audience agree that is was mediocre at best
Your opinion mister/miss anonymous user means SHIT
...
> and most of the audience agree that is was mediocre at best
Every statistical representation we have of the audience reaction says otherwise. 63% audience rating on Rotten Tomatoes means most of the audience liked it. And pic related agrees with that idea. Meanwhile all you have is your "gut" feeling or anicdotes, no actual statistical evidence to back it up.
I always say that there comes to a point where irony is indistinguishable from being genuine. If someone acts like an idiot all the time, does it really matter if they're pretending or not?
Just boring. I just don't care enough about it to feel positive or negative
Ok tiercapeshit but "ok" is not acceptable for the biggest pop culture IP in the fucking world
>all of a sudden RT scores matter
Just give it up man, you like the movie and that’s fine, but the majority of everyone else thought it was shit, and no matter how loud you scream that’s not going to change
BvS was a shit movie though. Only casuals who don't read comics think it was good because "WOW, SUPERMAN ISN'T ACTING LIKE HE DID IN THE DONNER MOVIES!!!"
>is too retarded to understand the difference between audience rating and critic ratings
>still doesnt have any proof that the majority didnt like it
o im laffin, you keep going with your lack of evidence though.
while I appreciate what you were trying to do, your argument doesnt make any sense because casuals would be far more familiar with Superman's Donner version than anything else, and have no reason to think that acting against that would be a positive.
Idiots like you are why Sup Forums gets a bad rep.
Are you really pretending that 63% on audience is not an extremely low score?
They had to release a version of the film with added footage to “fix” the movie because it was so bad, that alone is evidence enough.
Are you really pretending that above 50% isnt a majority?
He don't act like any superman except alternate versions of the character created to be very different from mainstream on
By that logic, every single movie with an extended edition is bad--so you're saying LOTOR is bad. Gotcha.
While I agree that theaterical version is worse than the extended version-- and that doesnt mean the extended version isnt great--your reasoning is absolutely atrocious.
How many times are we going to have this thread? WB fucked up, and now we're stuck with this shit film series that's constantly being retooled thanks to one asshat who only knows how to frame a shot
>because casuals would be far more familiar with Superman's Donner version than anything else, and have no reason to think that acting against that would be a positive.
The success of the Dark Knight trilogy, paired with the failure of Superman Returns garnered a desire amongst a particular group of mainstream audiences to have the next depiction of Superman be more dark and gritty, in the same way Nolan did for his version of Batman. That's why his name was featured heavily in the marketing, to lure in casuals with the idea that this new Superman was going to in the next TDK trilogy, realism and grit included.
Not true at all. He acts shy like Secret Origins Superman, with the same reluctance to actually speak to the public and the same feeling of belonging from his relationship with Lois, and has the same trepidations as Secret Identity (yes, yes I know, not canon, but its fucking Kurt Busiek) and Whatever Happened To The Man of Tomorrow's Superman (in that his main inner struggle is whether or not his presence is causing more harm than good in the long run).
In MoS he literally destroys the car of a bully making unwanted advances on a woman JUST like Action Comics #1.
I strongly disagree. The 10 season success of Smallville, with all of its corniness, says otherwise.
Where is your proof?
Yeah, but when the LotR was coming out with extra footage, the company wasn’t apologizing saying that this extra footage will help fix the film. See the difference?
Show me one place where WB apologized and literally said "it will fix the film."
>moving the goalposts
LMAO, you're pathetic.
Well there's the first trailer for Man of Steel, with it's dull colour pallet, somber music and the title card "and producer Christopher Nolan, director of the Dark Knight trilogy." Coming off The Dark Knight Rises release with that in your trailer would be a very heavy indicator to the audience that you'll be trying to emulate the success of TDK with these new films.
youtube.com
>I don't remember any of the villains from any of the IM movies.
This is the "Marvel films aren't memorable" faggot.
If you were to make a thread saying something nice about an Iron Man villain, he'd be shit-posting full force laying out in detail how terrible they were in the movie.
Really an utter waste of oxygen.