Rate Batman v Superman

Rate Batman v Superman Dec 4, 2017 19:27:15 GMT Salzmank likes this

Quote

Post by lenlenlen1 on Dec 4, 2017 19:27:15 GMT

Dec 4, 2017 6:32:39 GMT reelreviews2 said:

Nov 15, 2017 0:24:07 GMT lenlenlen1 said:

People who want to give it 0/10 are jerks. Yep.

Lets play nice and put it somewhere realistic in the middle.

Does it HAVE to be an extreme when it comes to you and the DCEU? sheesh

At least two of us here (eattheeloi and myself) want to rate the movie a 0/10. That is our HONEST opinion of this worthless stinking turd. We're not doing it to be "jerks". You asked our opinion so we're giving you the hard truth. If the movie had ANY redeeming qualities, I would say so. It doesn't.

The fact Batfleck v. Psuedoman even exists is a slap in the face to fans of these characters, and even to movie audiences in general. It is truly tragic they managed to screw up Batman and Superman's first on screen appearance together on the big screen so badly that it makes Batman & Robin look good in comparison. At least that movie you can have fun mocking how dumb it is.

I'm not going to rate it "somewhere in the middle" because I don't think its an "average" movie. I am certainly objective and don't rate all movies 0 or 10. I rated Star Wars: The Force Awakens a 6/10 because it was decent and fun, but ultimately shallow and pointless. I'll rate Valerian and the City of a Thousand Planets a 5/10 because it looks stunning visually and has some clever quips but is a lame predictable action movie that is a waste of time. The Howling II get a 4/10 because its an embarrassing mess but has a great theme song, a clever premise, and Christopher Lee's gravitas is his first and only werewolf movie.

Batfleck v. Pseudoman is complete garbage and insults me by the very fact that it exists and WB gave Hack Snyder and David Goyer MORE money to continue their "vision" for Superman AFTER they screwed it up so badly in the first place. A 1/10 is too good for this pile of dung and implies the movie did something right 10% of the time. It didn't. It FAILS on ALL levels.

0/10

So you're saying that the movie didn't have ANY redeeming qualities AT ALL? NONE WHATSOEVER?

For example: It didn't have nice cinematography, it didn't have nice editing, a nice action scene, a nice performance by at least one actor, a moment in the movie (even if only one fleeting moment) that you thought was kinda cool, nothing at all? I mean you didn't even like Batman beating up the criminals, for crying out loud?

Lots of lots of people work on a movie and lots and lots of moving parts go into a movie, and to say that ALL of that was crap is just being an asshole. I'm sorry but when you see a movie that is made on this level there are multiple things that go wrong and multiple things that go right. You can say you didn't like the overall movie, it wasn't for you, fine, but to give it an absolute zero tells me that you are allowing your irrational hatred of the thing to take over your brain.

Movies made on this level always have amazing production values. Most of the time that's how these movies get the audiences they get. Even dreck like the Transformers and Pirates of the Caribbean franchises have things about them that attract audiences, and that even I can say "Okay, that part was kinda cool". Its not like this movie was Tommy Wiseaus The Room!

You and eattheeloi are just being jerks.