|
Post by seahawksraawk00 on Nov 17, 2017 19:26:27 GMT
To every DC fanboy on here. Your franchise just made bad movies. That's all it is. First off, if critics were truly biased, then why did Wonder Woman get a 92% on RottenTomatoes if they're biased? Think about that one for a little bit. Also, the picture DC-Fan is spreading around here to convince people that it's proof critics are biased!?! You are a moron, as usual DC-Fan , considering you have no idea how RT works. First off they're from two different critics, so you can't even compare. But also, the Thor review is marked Fresh because the writer of that review marked it Fresh. RT gather the reviews in two ways; either critics post them, or the staff from RT finds them and posts them. When critics add their reviews to RottenTomatoes themselves, they have the option of adding a Fresh/Certified/Rotten mark. But when they don't mark it or if RT gathers the review, they'll decide if it's Rotten or Fresh. Generally for critics, there's a rating threshold RT follows that anything 3.5/5 or higher is Fresh and anything lower is Rotten. You really want to break down the numbers, that 3.5/5 can be converted to 2.8/4. So in both the Thor review and the Justice League review, if they were both posted by the critics but didn't mark it Fresh or Rotten, then RT will immediately mark them Rotten because they're below 2.8/4. But clearly in Thor's case, the author marked it Fresh himself, because obviously to him, his 2.5/4 rating is Fresh, which is completely subjective on his part. He chose to mark it Fresh because he had a good time, but if you actually took the time to read the actual review, he was very critical of the film as well. Here are a couple excerpts from it. Meanwhile, in the Justice League review. That came from Peter Travers from Rolling Stones, who on his own site, gave it a 2.5/4. So either Pete actually gave it that Rotten mark because he truly thinks it's Rotten, or RT did it because his rating is lower than 2.8/4. So as usual, DC-Fan 's proof is a crock of shit and he's a fuckin' troll as usual who can't get over the fact that the MCU is still successful and that the general consensus is that Thor is a better movie than Justice League.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 17, 2017 19:37:43 GMT
Nobody ever mentions the critics that are demonstrably biased in favor of the DCEU. I wonder why that is?
|
|
|
Post by scabab on Nov 17, 2017 19:43:15 GMT
I don't think they're biased, I do find some things odd though. www.rottentomatoes.com/m/superman_man_of_steel/Man of Steel has an average rating of 6.2/10. Among Top Critics, the average is a 6.1/10. www.rottentomatoes.com/m/thor_the_dark_world/Then you have Thor Dark World which also has an average rating of 6.2/10 but among Top Critics it has an inferior average of 5.3/10. www.rottentomatoes.com/m/the_incredible_hulk/The Incredible Hulk again has the exact same average rating of 6.2/10 with an inferior Top Critics average of 5.6/10. So Man of Steel has the exact same overall average rating but a superior average among Top Critics and yet Man of Steel has a 55% but Thor Dark World has a 66% and Incredible Hulk has a 67%. Technically Man of Steel has the overall best reviews of the three on average yet it's the one that comes up short.
|
|
|
Post by kuatorises on Nov 17, 2017 19:57:19 GMT
I don't think the DC fanboys themselves even believe that at this point.
|
|
|
Post by CowherPowerForever on Nov 17, 2017 20:16:28 GMT
This is nonsense that idiots like you will use as some lame argument. Grow up, please.
And for the record, RT fans are loving the movie. The difference between fan and critic opinion is gigantic.
|
|
|
Post by seahawksraawk00 on Nov 17, 2017 20:54:20 GMT
This is nonsense that idiots like you will use as some lame argument. Grow up, please. And for the record, RT fans are loving the movie. The difference between fan and critic opinion is gigantic. Tell that to DC-Fan. He's the one bitching and moaning like a fuckin child about the reviews and calling them biased
|
|
|
Post by damngumby on Nov 17, 2017 21:58:55 GMT
I think you'll find that all of Russo's 2.5 score are tomatoes and all of Peter Travers 2.5 scores are bug splats.
It's just how each critic rolls.
|
|
|
Post by justanaveragejoe on Nov 17, 2017 22:02:31 GMT
I don't think they're biased, I do find some things odd though. www.rottentomatoes.com/m/superman_man_of_steel/Man of Steel has an average rating of 6.2/10. Among Top Critics, the average is a 6.1/10. www.rottentomatoes.com/m/thor_the_dark_world/Then you have Thor Dark World which also has an average rating of 6.2/10 but among Top Critics it has an inferior average of 5.3/10. www.rottentomatoes.com/m/the_incredible_hulk/The Incredible Hulk again has the exact same average rating of 6.2/10 with an inferior Top Critics average of 5.6/10. So Man of Steel has the exact same overall average rating but a superior average among Top Critics and yet Man of Steel has a 55% but Thor Dark World has a 66% and Incredible Hulk has a 67%. Technically Man of Steel has the overall best reviews of the three on average yet it's the one that comes up short. Thor 2 and The Incredible Hulk just got more positive reviews from critics than Man of Steel at the end of the day. I do agree, Man of Steel is on par with those 2.
|
|
|
Post by damngumby on Nov 17, 2017 22:03:36 GMT
And for the record, RT fans are loving the movie. The difference between fan and critic opinion is gigantic. Let's see how the fan opinion fares after a couple weeks. Right now, it's mostly DC fanboys who have rushed out to see the movie.
|
|
|
Post by CowherPowerForever on Nov 18, 2017 3:47:42 GMT
This is nonsense that idiots like you will use as some lame argument. Grow up, please. And for the record, RT fans are loving the movie. The difference between fan and critic opinion is gigantic. Tell that to DC-Fan. He's the one bitching and moaning like a fuckin child about the reviews and calling them biased My comment is for both sides of this stupity.
|
|
|
Post by CowherPowerForever on Nov 18, 2017 3:49:34 GMT
And for the record, RT fans are loving the movie. The difference between fan and critic opinion is gigantic. Let's see how the fan opinion fares after a couple weeks. Right now, it's mostly DC fanboys who have rushed out to see the movie. That argument is just silly. Please, if we used that nonsensical logic cinemascore wouldn't be so popular with box office insiders to track the legs of a movie.
|
|
|
Post by President Ackbar™ on Nov 18, 2017 3:54:04 GMT
Anyone who has actually seen JL, should be aware of just how bad it is.
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Nov 18, 2017 4:52:36 GMT
I don't think they're biased, I do find some things odd though. www.rottentomatoes.com/m/superman_man_of_steel/Man of Steel has an average rating of 6.2/10. Among Top Critics, the average is a 6.1/10. www.rottentomatoes.com/m/thor_the_dark_world/Then you have Thor Dark World which also has an average rating of 6.2/10 but among Top Critics it has an inferior average of 5.3/10. www.rottentomatoes.com/m/the_incredible_hulk/The Incredible Hulk again has the exact same average rating of 6.2/10 with an inferior Top Critics average of 5.6/10. So Man of Steel has the exact same overall average rating but a superior average among Top Critics and yet Man of Steel has a 55% but Thor Dark World has a 66% and Incredible Hulk has a 67%. Technically Man of Steel has the overall best reviews of the three on average yet it's the one that comes up short. If you think that's odd, this is even more odd: RT posting fake reviews of Justice League.
You're going to have to reconsider your stance on RT not being biased against DC when RT has now been exposed as posting fake reviews of Justice League using the account of someone who hadn't posted his review.
|
|
TheHiawatha
Sophomore
@thehiawatha
Posts: 118
Likes: 35
|
Post by TheHiawatha on Nov 18, 2017 5:22:48 GMT
I don't think they're biased, I do find some things odd though. www.rottentomatoes.com/m/superman_man_of_steel/Man of Steel has an average rating of 6.2/10. Among Top Critics, the average is a 6.1/10. www.rottentomatoes.com/m/thor_the_dark_world/Then you have Thor Dark World which also has an average rating of 6.2/10 but among Top Critics it has an inferior average of 5.3/10. www.rottentomatoes.com/m/the_incredible_hulk/The Incredible Hulk again has the exact same average rating of 6.2/10 with an inferior Top Critics average of 5.6/10. So Man of Steel has the exact same overall average rating but a superior average among Top Critics and yet Man of Steel has a 55% but Thor Dark World has a 66% and Incredible Hulk has a 67%. Technically Man of Steel has the overall best reviews of the three on average yet it's the one that comes up short. I think with the case of "Man of Steel," it was either "love it or hate it." The ones who liked it REALLY liked it, while the ones who didn't like it REALLY despised it. I think with the other two, there was a lot more gray area involved, as in mixed-positive or mixed-negative. Still pretty impressive that the worst reception any MCU film has gotten is a general pass of approval with critics as a whole, even if not acclaimed. And they've been on a roll with Phase 3, which I think is in part due to Kevin Feige now calling ALL the shots of the MCU vs having to answer to Perlmutter first.
|
|
|
Post by woozlewuzzle on Nov 18, 2017 5:27:37 GMT
To every DC fanboy on here. Your franchise just made bad movies. That's all it is. First off, if critics were truly biased, then why did Wonder Woman get a 92% on RottenTomatoes if they're biased? Think about that one for a little bit. Also, the picture DC-Fan is spreading around here to convince people that it's proof critics are biased!?! You are a moron, as usual DC-Fan , considering you have no idea how RT works. First off they're from two different critics, so you can't even compare. But also, the Thor review is marked Fresh because the writer of that review marked it Fresh. RT gather the reviews in two ways; either critics post them, or the staff from RT finds them and posts them. When critics add their reviews to RottenTomatoes themselves, they have the option of adding a Fresh/Certified/Rotten mark. But when they don't mark it or if RT gathers the review, they'll decide if it's Rotten or Fresh. Generally for critics, there's a rating threshold RT follows that anything 3.5/5 or higher is Fresh and anything lower is Rotten. You really want to break down the numbers, that 3.5/5 can be converted to 2.8/4. So in both the Thor review and the Justice League review, if they were both posted by the critics but didn't mark it Fresh or Rotten, then RT will immediately mark them Rotten because they're below 2.8/4. But clearly in Thor's case, the author marked it Fresh himself, because obviously to him, his 2.5/4 rating is Fresh, which is completely subjective on his part. He chose to mark it Fresh because he had a good time, but if you actually took the time to read the actual review, he was very critical of the film as well. Here are a couple excerpts from it. Meanwhile, in the Justice League review. That came from Peter Travers from Rolling Stones, who on his own site, gave it a 2.5/4. So either Pete actually gave it that Rotten mark because he truly thinks it's Rotten, or RT did it because his rating is lower than 2.8/4. So as usual, DC-Fan 's proof is a crock of shit and he's a fuckin' troll as usual who can't get over the fact that the MCU is still successful and that the general consensus is that Thor is a better movie than Justice League. A Marvel fan is not pleased.
|
|
|
Post by scabab on Nov 18, 2017 5:51:46 GMT
|
|
|
Post by merh on Nov 18, 2017 7:28:45 GMT
307 total reviews. 52 top critics. 252 total reviews. 47 top critics www.rottentomatoes.com/m/the_incredible_hulk/The Incredible Hulk again has the exact same average rating of 6.2/10 with an inferior Top Critics average of 5.6/10. So Man of Steel has the exact same overall average rating but a superior average among Top Critics and yet Man of Steel has a 55% but Thor Dark World has a 66% and Incredible Hulk has a 67%. Technically Man of Steel has the overall best reviews of the three on average yet it's the one that comes up short.[/quote] So is WB trying to jinx DC?
|
|
Lee
Sophomore
@neo
Posts: 327
Likes: 177
|
Post by Lee on Nov 18, 2017 9:14:37 GMT
WB/DC should make good movies like they did it before. Burton's Batman movies, TDK-Trilogy, V for Vendetta and Watchmen. These movies are so much better, than the actual DCEU.
|
|
|
Post by poelzig on Nov 18, 2017 9:19:13 GMT
WB/DC should make good like they did it before. Burton's Batman movies, TDK-Trilogy, V for Vendetta and Watchmen. These movies are so much better, than the actual DCEU. Wonder Woman was good though. I haven't seen JL yet but your post is pretty valid. I liked most of those movies better than the small pool of DCEU movies so far.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 18, 2017 9:49:50 GMT
I hate all of you
|
|