|
Post by coldenhaulfield on Apr 19, 2018 17:25:51 GMT
Exactly right. Box office means nothing and RT means even less. The only thing dumber than RT's idiotic "system" is that millions of people take it even remotely seriously. Except box office does mean a lot to studios. It represents what people would pay to see in theaters, and right now that's MCU and Star Wars. It's not Disney's fault that other studios are releasing crap. Yes, filmmaking is an art, but it's also a business. None of that has any bearing on the quality of films. And by that standard, Disney is flooding the market with as much (and, in my view, more) "crap" as anybody. And furthermore, your logic is totally flawed anyway, because the endless sequels/requels/etc from various franchises are being made at the expense of using those key release dates to attempt to launch new franchises. There's no way to tell that they'd necessarily be less successful.
|
|
|
Post by taylorfirst1 on Apr 19, 2018 17:29:29 GMT
Except box office does mean a lot to studios. It represents what people would pay to see in theaters, and right now that's MCU and Star Wars. It's not Disney's fault that other studios are releasing crap. Yes, filmmaking is an art, but it's also a business. Because mass audiences dont know anything about film. They only go to watch 5 movies a year, a couple of MCU films, a fast & furious along with Star Wars and Jurassic World. And all those movies make a killing because they cater to the most average viewer, simplifying stories/dialogue with excess Cgi action.Whilst more artistic projects like Blade Runner 2049 and Annhilation get barely anything. So all of that applies to Wonder Woman too then, right?
|
|
|
Post by ThatGuy on Apr 19, 2018 17:32:03 GMT
Except box office does mean a lot to studios. It represents what people would pay to see in theaters, and right now that's MCU and Star Wars. It's not Disney's fault that other studios are releasing crap. Yes, filmmaking is an art, but it's also a business. Because mass audiences dont know anything about film. They only go to watch 5 movies a year, a couple of MCU films, a fast & furious along with Star Wars and Jurassic World. And all those movies make a killing because they cater to the most average viewer, simplifying stories/dialogue with excess Cgi action. Whilst more artistic projects like Blade Runner 2049 and Annhilation get barely anything. Blame the studios for not getting those movies out there. There are commercials for CBMs every 5 minutes across different companies on tv and even Youtube (I'm counting all major CBMs). X-men and DC movies get as many ads as the MCU. And they are catering to the most average viewer. Fox isn't advertising the acting and the "deep story" when it comes to X-men movies. They are advertising the action and powers. So the same people that are going to see DC and MCU movies are going to see X-men. The original Blade Runner didn't do well back then either. It became a cult classic afterwards.
|
|
|
Post by ThatGuy on Apr 19, 2018 17:32:53 GMT
Because mass audiences dont know anything about film. They only go to watch 5 movies a year, a couple of MCU films, a fast & furious along with Star Wars and Jurassic World. And all those movies make a killing because they cater to the most average viewer, simplifying stories/dialogue with excess Cgi action.Whilst more artistic projects like Blade Runner 2049 and Annhilation get barely anything. So all of that applies to Wonder Woman too then, right? And Days of Future Past.
|
|
|
Post by charzhino on Apr 19, 2018 17:33:19 GMT
There is NO validity about rotten tomatoes anymore. When crap like Last jedi and Ghostbusters get praised to high hill in fear or SJW backlash the integrity has gone from neutral reviewing. And not only that, critics are scared they will be outta a job and MCU films are basically keeping the cinema industry afloat with the revenue they make. Doesnt take a genius to figure out why every MCU movie is thus given favourable reviews and high recommendations because families and kids will buy seats and merchandise. Disney dont care 1 bit about artistic value. RT works on a binary system that's basically "best movie ever" and "worst movie ever". If 9 out of 10 people give a movie "best movie ever", it has a 90% rating. There is no in between nuance to the rating. The main reason that people hated the recent Ghostbusters was that it wasn't the old Ghostbusters (I've never seen the new one). The critics probably looked at it as it's own movie. Same for The Last Jedi. Yes i dont cite RT much but it has been getting more insane. We rarely uses to get 90%+ comic book movies and if we did they were considered the best of the best. But last year and this, weve had Wonder Woman, Logan, Homecoming, Ragnarok and Black Panther get well into the 90s.
|
|
|
Post by justanaveragejoe on Apr 19, 2018 17:34:33 GMT
Except box office does mean a lot to studios. It represents what people would pay to see in theaters, and right now that's MCU and Star Wars. It's not Disney's fault that other studios are releasing crap. Yes, filmmaking is an art, but it's also a business. Because mass audiences dont know anything about film. They only go to watch 5 movies a year, a couple of MCU films, a fast & furious along with Star Wars and Jurassic World. And all those movies make a killing because they cater to the most average viewer, simplifying stories/dialogue with excess Cgi action. Whilst more artistic projects like Blade Runner 2049 and Annhilation get barely anything. That is true that more artistic project don't get butts in the seats, but that doesn't mean mass audiences won't go see them. Films like Gravity, La La Land, and The Greatest Showman just to name a few did particularly well at the box office.
|
|
|
Post by charzhino on Apr 19, 2018 17:35:27 GMT
Because mass audiences dont know anything about film. They only go to watch 5 movies a year, a couple of MCU films, a fast & furious along with Star Wars and Jurassic World. And all those movies make a killing because they cater to the most average viewer, simplifying stories/dialogue with excess Cgi action.Whilst more artistic projects like Blade Runner 2049 and Annhilation get barely anything. So all of that applies to Wonder Woman too then, right? Wonder Woman has its own reasons for its success, mainly being artificial boosters (R.I.P formershmd) from the feminist crowd
|
|
|
Post by charzhino on Apr 19, 2018 17:37:32 GMT
So all of that applies to Wonder Woman too then, right? And Days of Future Past. Is a perfect example. A film which is dialogue driven without much spectacle in action with the main lead Xavier shown addicted to needles. Not exactly family friendly, and would seem boring to kids - who in turn loved GOTG which is why it made way more money.
|
|
|
Post by Hauntedknight87 on Apr 19, 2018 17:37:47 GMT
There's really no settling an argument like that. If someone likes one franchise over another than that's their right. Of course it's their own right, but nobody can argue with a fact. If you take things like ratings seriously, sure. Fine. But other people don't take those ratings that seriously, that's mostly fanboys/girls who do. So again if the users on this site don't those serious, your not going to change their minds.
|
|
|
Post by justanaveragejoe on Apr 19, 2018 17:42:47 GMT
Is a perfect example. A film which is dialogue driven without much spectacle in action with the main lead Xavier shown addicted to needles. Not exactly family friendly, and would seem boring to kids - who in turn loved GOTG which is why it made way more money. But again, did people went to see DOFP because of the deep character struggle of Xavier being addicted to needles or because of the cool action scenes? Fox and Marvel are appealing to the same demographic. Also dialogue driven? LMAO, I think you're giving X-Men too much credit. X-Men films are not Oscar bait films.
|
|
|
Post by Hauntedknight87 on Apr 19, 2018 17:44:26 GMT
There's really no settling an argument like that. If someone likes one franchise over another than that's their right. Yes, but they don't have to belittle the people who disagree with them. I love fantasy but I dislike Harry Potter but you don't see me on the Harry Potter board trying to tear the movies and their fans down. I agree. Which is why I've ask countless times if we could lay off the personal insults. I made a thread calling for a truck and it unfortunately turned into another fight thread with me being called a faggot at the end of it. And you wanna know who started the fights? The usual Marvel and DC suspects.
|
|
|
Post by ThatGuy on Apr 19, 2018 17:49:25 GMT
RT works on a binary system that's basically "best movie ever" and "worst movie ever". If 9 out of 10 people give a movie "best movie ever", it has a 90% rating. There is no in between nuance to the rating. The main reason that people hated the recent Ghostbusters was that it wasn't the old Ghostbusters (I've never seen the new one). The critics probably looked at it as it's own movie. Same for The Last Jedi. Yes i dont cite RT much but it has been getting more insane. We rarely uses to get 90%+ comic book movies and if we did they were considered the best of the best. But last year and this, weve had Wonder Woman, Logan, Homecoming, Ragnarok and Black Panther get well into the 90s. Again. That's because of the binary system. Also, wouldn't CBMs getting those higher scores be a good thing? If most of the critics like a movie not to say it isn't the "worst" movie, that would account for it being that high. Not that the movie is the best movie or even compared to other movies. They aren't looking at Logan vs Black Panther when they vote. They are only looking at Logan. Logan gets 92% then that's how many people voted fresh out of all the people that voted. More people are saying "You should see this" than not to. RT is not giving an actual critical score, but telling you the percentage of people that liked it vs not liking it.
|
|
|
Post by ThatGuy on Apr 19, 2018 17:54:27 GMT
Is a perfect example. A film which is dialogue driven without much spectacle in action with the main lead Xavier shown addicted to needles. Not exactly family friendly, and would seem boring to kids - who in turn loved GOTG which is why it made way more money. He's addicted to a fictional superhero serum. It wasn't something like heroin. And he went cold turkey with no side effects. That was family friendly. It was just another thing to get rid of Xavier's powers so he wouldn't save the day. They've done it in every X-men movie. Singer even said it was hard trying to figure out how to de-power him.
|
|
|
Post by charzhino on Apr 19, 2018 17:55:17 GMT
Is a perfect example. A film which is dialogue driven without much spectacle in action with the main lead Xavier shown addicted to needles. Not exactly family friendly, and would seem boring to kids - who in turn loved GOTG which is why it made way more money. But again, did people went to see DOFP because of the deep character struggle of Xavier being addicted to needles or because of the cool action scenes? Fox and Marvel are appealing to the same demographic. The same reason people went to see the dark knight. Theres not much action in that either, its heavily charactet and story based. Gotg had all sorts of action and colourful sequences. They aren't appealing to the same audience at all. Dialogue and character driven yes compared to the average comic book flick.
|
|
|
Post by justanaveragejoe on Apr 19, 2018 17:59:18 GMT
But again, did people went to see DOFP because of the deep character struggle of Xavier being addicted to needles or because of the cool action scenes? Fox and Marvel are appealing to the same demographic. The same reason people went to see the dark knight. Theres not much action in that either, its heavily charactet and story based. Gotg had all sorts of action and colourful sequences. They aren't appealing to the same audience at all. Dialogue and character driven yes compared to the average comic book flick. Well, in that case, both statements are true.
|
|
|
Post by charzhino on Apr 19, 2018 18:02:46 GMT
He's addicted to a fictional superhero serum. It wasn't something like heroin. Its an allegory for heroin. Hes clearly shown in the film holding the needle to his vein, Hank talks about him taking too much. You really think parents will be happy seeing kids watch their hero injecting themselves out of desperation to relieve real world pressures? Then you missed the point. Even when he got his powers back, he didnt use them to stop Raven or Magneto with his helmet. He gave up his control freak attitude and gave Mistique the free choice of dropping the gun through the offering of hope, a human power advised from his future self.
|
|
|
Post by justanaveragejoe on Apr 19, 2018 18:06:37 GMT
He's addicted to a fictional superhero serum. It wasn't something like heroin. Its an allegory for heroin. Hes clearly shown in the film holding the needle to his vein, Hank talks about him taking too much. You really think parents will be happy seeing kids watch their hero injecting themselves out of desperation to relieve real world pressures? Considering that the movie made $747 million, I don't think parents didn't mind.
|
|
|
Post by ThatGuy on Apr 19, 2018 18:14:30 GMT
He's addicted to a fictional superhero serum. It wasn't something like heroin. Its an allegory for heroin. Hes clearly shown in the film holding the needle to his vein, Hank talks about him taking too much. You really think parents will be happy seeing kids watch their hero injecting themselves out of desperation to relieve real world pressures? Then you missed the point. Even when he got his powers back, he didnt use them to stop Raven or Magneto with his helmet. He gave up his control freak attitude and gave Mistique the free choice of dropping the gun through the offering of hope, a human power advised from his future self. And they kept making a point of what was in the needle. To let parents and kids know that it wasn't a real drug. Also, it being an allegory for heroin isn't a good thing either. With how he kicked it at the end, with no side effects, people would think they can kick a needle drug like that too. Um, that's besides the point. It was still a reason for him not to have powers through out the movie and win the day. He still used his powers at the end of the movie. He still had a couple telepathic conversations with Mystique and even found out what she was planning.
|
|
|
Post by scabab on Apr 19, 2018 18:18:27 GMT
I enjoy them all. I think they've all come out with some good movies and then weaker ones though you'd be kidding yourself if you didn't acknowledge the balance isn't exactly in DC's favour.
Superhero fans are damn lucky that they've made all these movies and they've still been going strong since 2000. They're spoilt really.
In the 90's you had a few Batman movies which ranged from good to awful and Blade and aside from that you had Steel, the Justice League TV movie, a Fantastic Four movie that was so bad it didn't release and a straight to video Captain America movie.
Now you've got everything from Avengers and Justice League to Deadpool and Guardians of the Galaxy and they're actually good movies too.
Some are dark, light, serious, comedies, R rated, PG-13, grounded, fantastical etc which is all good too because if they didn't vary then people have grown tired of the same thing years ago.
|
|
|
Post by Skaathar on Apr 19, 2018 18:21:29 GMT
LOL...Rotten tomatoes.nice to see there is about 3% of the mcu fans that still hold on to rotten tomatoes as evidence mcu is good. rotten tomatoes rates gotg 2, iron man 3, avengers age of ultron as better than Road to perdition and gladiator right? and they rated black panther higher than TDK, DOFP, Logan, BB, SIN CITY right? LMAO. Why, what metric would you prefer to use?
|
|