|
Post by scabab on Nov 16, 2017 14:35:05 GMT
It was riding on Dark Knight's coattails. People who liked that film were more willing to ignore TDKR's problems for the sake of Dark Knight. Nah there's been plenty of highly acclaimed movies were the follow up hasn't been treated to such an extent. Everyone loves Lord of the Rings and was hugely hyped for The Hobbit but that was never held in such high regard. Even amongst superheroes movies Iron Man and The Avengers got huge acclaim, with similar RT % scores but it didn't stop their sequels from being considered somewhat disappointing.
|
|
|
Post by ArArArchStanton on Nov 16, 2017 14:35:43 GMT
Why? These the scores that are out now. Why can't we discuss them? It's not like it's getting great reviews and I'm trying to bash them. It's actually getting bad reviews and I'm simply discussing what's happening. Because the score isnt final and could still achieve fresh rating. And you've done this before in your thread you made about Thor Ragnarok being highest rated CBM ever until the score dropped. But we can discuss what the scores are now. I think it's pretty clear what the trend is don't you? It's not like it's going to wind up as a 70.
And Thor is still one of the very highest rated ever. Again it's not like it dropped to 70. The response is still the same. That hasn't changed.
|
|
|
Post by charzhino on Nov 16, 2017 14:36:42 GMT
As Iron man 3 was riding on Avengers success. Thats the only reason it made a billion. Nah, it was a good enough story on its own. It wasn't a direct continuation of the Avengers story, aside from Tony having the PTSD. TDKR was entirely a continuation of TDK. Doesn't matter, Tony Stark was still the lead and back then people wouldn't have known the difference between Stark as a solo film and Avengers as a group. They went to see Iron Man 3 in droves simply off the success of The Avengers.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Nov 16, 2017 14:38:22 GMT
It was riding on Dark Knight's coattails. People who liked that film were more willing to ignore TDKR's problems for the sake of Dark Knight. Nah there's been plenty of highly acclaimed movies were the follow up hasn't been treated to such an extent. Everyone loves Lord of the Rings and was hugely hyped for The Hobbit but that was never held in such high regard. Even amongst superheroes movies Iron Man and The Avengers got huge acclaim, with similar RT % scores but it didn't stop their sequels from being considered somewhat disappointing. Hobbit came out 9 years after LOTR ended, and there was negativity around the project because they thought it was just a cheap-cash in that betrayed the source material.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Nov 16, 2017 14:39:41 GMT
Nah, it was a good enough story on its own. It wasn't a direct continuation of the Avengers story, aside from Tony having the PTSD. TDKR was entirely a continuation of TDK. Doesn't matter, Tony Stark was still the lead and back then people wouldn't have known the difference between Stark as a solo film and Avengers as a group. They went to see Iron Man 3 in droves simply off the success of The Avengers. Uh-huh, and neither Iron Man nor Iron Man 2 had anything to do with it? If it was purely on Avengers hype then that hype would've died down as soon as it came out and the first wave of viewers realized it wasn't a direct continuation of the Avengers story.
|
|
|
Post by ArArArchStanton on Nov 16, 2017 14:43:23 GMT
Well everyone knows The Dark Knight Trilogy is on another level from the Captain America trilogy, which includes The Dark Knight Rises being better than Civil War as was pointed out. If you consider those two to be on the same level (which they aren't) then really Thor is on the same level as the Synder trilogy (which they aren't). The Thor trilogy is overall improved on the Synder trilogy as The Dark Knight trilogy is to the Captain America trilogy. Which was answered and ignored twice because you only seem interested in the Synder trilogy being the worst. No everybody doesn't know that. The cap series is easily comparable, and TDKR isn't better than Civil War as pointed out by the TDKR being controversial and Civil War being universally praised. And it's sort of odd that you're a moderator but use phrases like "everybody knows", and "which they aren't" to try and solidify a point. I would just think somebody in that position would want to engage in validating a case rather than making appeals to authority.
You proposed Ninja turtles as worse I believe. Ok, that's fair I guess, I don't know, I haven't seen it. Does that count as a comic?
|
|
|
Post by ArArArchStanton on Nov 16, 2017 14:45:24 GMT
Why? These the scores that are out now. Why can't we discuss them? It's not like it's getting great reviews and I'm trying to bash them. It's actually getting bad reviews and I'm simply discussing what's happening. Because you're asking a silly question built off a foolish premise, the freshness score maybe leaked but did the grades? I didn't see that just that RT had it at 48% then 51%, which for one thing showed the score was still in flux and on an upswing, and it didn't give away the average score, a score which could easily be above a 6/10, much like how MOS isn't a "fresh" film but has positive grade.
Also 48%-51% is at worst hit or miss, not overwhelming in either direction much like MOS, sure BVS wasn't great and got mostly negative reviews but even then the bad reviews weren't saying this is absolute horseshit, as seen by it having a much higher grade than %, so maybe wait till the scores and grades get revealed and consider more than if it's "fresh" or "rotten" given that those labels mean jack fucking shit.
Or you know don't and just look to rile people up but if you do know you cant criticise DC Fan or others when they do it without being a hypocrite, because there is no point to this other than to rile people up.
Edit: Just saw the video was put up though their not showing the score on RT yet, it apparently got 43% but still no grade from what I gather as fuck watching that video with those annoying twats, turned it off after 30 seconds...fuck they annoyed me.
No 48-51 is a problem. Hit or miss isn't what they were going for or what it needed to be or what it should have been.
The Metacritic score is at 49 now, so that's an actual grade.
This is a perfectly valid discussion at this point.
|
|
|
Post by DSDSquared on Nov 16, 2017 14:48:45 GMT
This is insane and has gone off topic. I see idiot DCEU fans that praised crap like BvS saying movies like Captain America are terrible. It would be hilarious if it were not so sad. The FACT is that the DCEU has pretty much sucked so far. Why does this get debated so much? BvS and SS are not better than ANY MCU movie. Seriously this should not even be debated. TMNT? The first one was great. Captain America? TWS is maybe the best comic book movie ever. Punisher? Not perfect but Jane's Punisher was like Citizen Kane next to BvS.
|
|
|
Post by DSDSquared on Nov 16, 2017 14:50:03 GMT
The first TMNT movie was great though, none of Snyder's are. The first one was pretty good. So was Man of Steel though. The second and third ones were just absolutely awful though. Batman vs Superman wasn't great but it sure as hell wasn't as bad as them. I will take the cheesy fun of TMNT 2 over BvS any day.
|
|
|
Post by scabab on Nov 16, 2017 15:02:14 GMT
Well everyone knows The Dark Knight Trilogy is on another level from the Captain America trilogy, which includes The Dark Knight Rises being better than Civil War as was pointed out. If you consider those two to be on the same level (which they aren't) then really Thor is on the same level as the Synder trilogy (which they aren't). The Thor trilogy is overall improved on the Synder trilogy as The Dark Knight trilogy is to the Captain America trilogy. Which was answered and ignored twice because you only seem interested in the Synder trilogy being the worst. No everybody doesn't know that. The cap series is easily comparable, and TDKR isn't better than Civil War as pointed out by the TDKR being controversial and Civil War being universally praised. And it's sort of odd that you're a moderator but use phrases like "everybody knows", and "which they aren't" to try and solidify a point. I would just think somebody in that position would want to engage in validating a case rather than making appeals to authority.
You proposed Ninja turtles as worse I believe. Ok, that's fair I guess, I don't know, I haven't seen it. Does that count as a comic?
Captain America First Avenger doesn't compare to Batman Begins. Captain America Winter Soldier doesn't compare to The Dark Knight. The only real fair comparison is The Dark Knight Rises to Civil War but again as pointed out, it got better reviews and audiences far prefer it. It was more controversial due to the expected high standards and what it followed but the evidence I pointed out which is the most notable that you can point out is that The Dark Knight Rises is better. Infact to add to it. Civil War got 16 Award wins and 63 nominations. The Dark Knight Rises got 38 Award wins and 103 nominations. So was considerably more successful at the awards. Ninja Turtles was actually originally a comic. Most think of it as the old 80's cartoon but yes it is a comic first.
|
|
|
Post by dazz on Nov 16, 2017 15:03:59 GMT
The first one was pretty good. So was Man of Steel though. The second and third ones were just absolutely awful though. Batman vs Superman wasn't great but it sure as hell wasn't as bad as them. I will take the cheesy fun of TMNT 2 over BvS any day. I cant help but smile when Tokka and Rahzar hug Shredder, the whole mama thing gets me every time, also Turtles + Vanilla Ice oh hells yeah, go ninja go ninja go.
|
|
|
Post by DSDSquared on Nov 16, 2017 15:10:13 GMT
No everybody doesn't know that. The cap series is easily comparable, and TDKR isn't better than Civil War as pointed out by the TDKR being controversial and Civil War being universally praised. And it's sort of odd that you're a moderator but use phrases like "everybody knows", and "which they aren't" to try and solidify a point. I would just think somebody in that position would want to engage in validating a case rather than making appeals to authority.
You proposed Ninja turtles as worse I believe. Ok, that's fair I guess, I don't know, I haven't seen it. Does that count as a comic?
Captain America First Avenger doesn't compare to Batman Begins. Captain America Winter Soldier doesn't compare to The Dark Knight. The only real fair comparison is The Dark Knight Rises to Civil War but again as pointed out, it got better reviews and audiences far prefer it. It was more controversial due to the expected high standards and what it followed but the evidence I pointed out which is the most notable that you can point out is that The Dark Knight Rises is better. Infact to add to it. Civil War got 16 Award wins and 63 nominations. The Dark Knight Rises got 38 Award wins and 103 nominations. So was considerably more successful at the awards. Ninja Turtles was actually originally a comic. Most think of it as the old 80's cartoon but yes it is a comic first. I love the Nolan trilogy, but the bottom line is that it is not part of the DCEU. They are Nolan movies and he is a genius. Also, it is a bit unfair to say TWS does not compare to TDK. Both are my two favorite comic book movies and both are awesome in their own way. TWS definitely has better action.
|
|
|
Post by Tristan's Journal on Nov 16, 2017 15:10:32 GMT
The first one was pretty good. So was Man of Steel though. The second and third ones were just absolutely awful though. Batman vs Superman wasn't great but it sure as hell wasn't as bad as them. I will take the cheesy fun of TMNT 2 over BvS any day. I take BvS over raccoon turds and ninja turtles any day.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Nov 16, 2017 15:11:29 GMT
Captain America First Avenger doesn't compare to Batman Begins. How? I'd say it does, it just doesn't forget that the movie is about Cap while Dark Knight decided to be about Joker and Dent. And at least in Winter Soldier it was believable that the villains were as powerful and omnipotent as they were. Thanks to its boosters and the audience realizing this was the Swan Song of those movies.
|
|
|
Post by DSDSquared on Nov 16, 2017 15:11:48 GMT
I will take the cheesy fun of TMNT 2 over BvS any day. I take BvS over raccoon turds and ninja turtles any day. Well that is you I guess. BvS is above all boring, which is crazy for a movie like that.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Nov 16, 2017 15:12:05 GMT
I will take the cheesy fun of TMNT 2 over BvS any day. I take BvS over raccoon turds and ninja turtles any day. You also take slop like "Martha" over Drax's musings on the nature of beauty and truth.
|
|
chasallnut
Sophomore
@chasallnut
Posts: 506
Likes: 158
|
Post by chasallnut on Nov 16, 2017 15:14:01 GMT
Captain America First Avenger doesn't compare to Batman Begins. How? I'd say it does, it just doesn't forget that the movie is about Cap while Dark Knight decided to be about Joker and Dent. And at least in Winter Soldier it was believable that the villains were as powerful and omnipotent as they were. Thanks to its boosters and the audience realizing this was the Swan Song of those movies.
|
|
|
Post by dazz on Nov 16, 2017 15:19:53 GMT
Because you're asking a silly question built off a foolish premise, the freshness score maybe leaked but did the grades? I didn't see that just that RT had it at 48% then 51%, which for one thing showed the score was still in flux and on an upswing, and it didn't give away the average score, a score which could easily be above a 6/10, much like how MOS isn't a "fresh" film but has positive grade.
Also 48%-51% is at worst hit or miss, not overwhelming in either direction much like MOS, sure BVS wasn't great and got mostly negative reviews but even then the bad reviews weren't saying this is absolute horseshit, as seen by it having a much higher grade than %, so maybe wait till the scores and grades get revealed and consider more than if it's "fresh" or "rotten" given that those labels mean jack fucking shit.
Or you know don't and just look to rile people up but if you do know you cant criticise DC Fan or others when they do it without being a hypocrite, because there is no point to this other than to rile people up.
Edit: Just saw the video was put up though their not showing the score on RT yet, it apparently got 43% but still no grade from what I gather as fuck watching that video with those annoying twats, turned it off after 30 seconds...fuck they annoyed me.
No 48-51 is a problem. Hit or miss isn't what they were going for or what it needed to be or what it should have been.
The Metacritic score is at 49 now, so that's an actual grade.
This is a perfectly valid discussion at this point.
Not really DC especially has shown an ability to overcome the critics, it doesn't need to be a hit with them but a hit with fans, which I have heard from the critics I give a damn about say this is a film for fans, but people unaware of the characters they may have issue with it, compare that to BVS which still made a killing in the theatres & that was not liked that much by even the fans, so a film critics are hit & miss about with a built in fanbase which critics do say will probably like this then DC are fine.
Also keep in mind this which I didn't realise until a months or so ago RT doesn't include all critics, most of the ones I listen to aren't considered by RT, so even with their score it's not the be all end all, Metacritic I don't really pay attention to and don't know how they come to their score so I dunno how valid that score is.
Also your point on is this the worst trilogy define a trilogy, do you mean worst 3 film run by a single director in CBM's? if so then by default yes because I think only Nolan has done 3 connected CBM's other than Snyder so by default Snyder loses, Gunn & the Russo's still have one more film, Singer's done 4 with a decade between the first 2 and the last 2.
But if you just mean a 3 movie run regardless of director then no, Batman in the 90's were worse, sure Returns was fine but the nipple duology is fucking heinous, also what about the final 3 Crow films, I like Crow 3 but 2 & 4 are shit.
I think the worst trilogy maybe marvel unconnected trilogy of Howard the Duck, Punisher & Captain America between 85-90 is the worst, though I love Howard the Duck for it's awfulness personally, but they are bad films, or y not Fox's Fan 4 trio of shit, sure Fan4stic is a reboot but still 3 films 3 bombs, atleast MOS is a good film.
|
|
|
Post by scabab on Nov 16, 2017 15:26:19 GMT
It has the better story, the better acting, the better characters, the better musical score, the better and more consistent tone, better action scenes, better use of practical effects, it was also a somewhat revolution part movie for its genre. Captain America was alright but it was a mostly generic by the numbers superhero movie. Well that doesn't really matter because the way they did things in The Dark Knight was clearly the right direction to take it in considering its still seen as the best superhero movie of all time. With what is now one of the most iconic movie villains ever. Yeah you already said this multiple times before. I got it the first time you said it.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Nov 16, 2017 15:39:05 GMT
It has the better story, the better acting, the better characters, the better musical score, the better and more consistent tone, better action scenes, better use of practical effects, it was also a somewhat revolution part movie for its genre. All subjective. So was Begins. Combo of nostalgia and Ledger's death making it be considered bad taste to criticize the movie. His character was lazily written, but we've been over this.
|
|