|
|
Post by Hauntedknight87 on Jun 28, 2018 16:08:24 GMT
This is the problem. Early RT score are so biased, they might as well have been paid by Disney because they arent going to wide release it to every critic. Its engineered to make MCU movies look spectacular on release, as often is a tagline- Marvel outdoes themselves again! Its bullshit and people flouting the early RT score here as if it were a trophy are complicit in the crime. So how do you explain A wrinkle in time? Did Disney just forget to pay critics then? Apparently so. Also anyone like how the usual jackass's that criticize marvel for not including more women in their films are now upset that marvel is putting more women in films, even giving them an equal amount to the male Co star? Funny how that opinion changed so quick. |
|
|
|
Post by Vassaggo on Jun 28, 2018 16:26:39 GMT
She's definitely critiquing the film through a feminist lens but that's not surprising coming from a feminist website. Whether or not feminists or religious or types of reviewers that review films through a specific lens, rather than generally, should be allowed to factor into the RT might be debatable based on the reviewer in question. However, studios are always going to ensure that critics likely to be "friendly" will be the first ones seeing the screenings, so I wouldn't expect accuracy in early RT scores periodThis is the problem. Early RT score are so biased, they might as well have been paid by Disney because they arent going to wide release it to every critic. Its engineered to make MCU movies look spectacular on release, as often is a tagline- Marvel outdoes themselves again! Its bullshit and people flouting the early RT score here as if it were a trophy are complicit in the crime. I don't know about this. Why would reviewers stake their reputation on giving MCU glowing earlier reviews, but not to other studios? A lot of studios do early critic screening, and that doesn't always go well for the movie. What I think the bias is, is that most critics have liked the previous MCU movies. Maybe not every one, but enough for them to go into the viewing being positive. This tends to make them view the new movie through the prism of positivity. It's the same with Pixar movies. The critics have liked most of Pixar's outings so they view the new ones through that same lens. It would just take one outlier from Marvel to totally ruin this feeling. And while Marvel Studios has had a few missteps (looking at you Dark World) they haven't screwed the pooch yet. Other franchises have screwed the pooch. IMHO X3 and Origins screwed X-Men franchise with Fox. One because we had just gotten Comic Book movies back in the lime light. Two they treated the subject matter so earnestly. With the DCEU we just got Nolan's Trilogy. Which put a lot of pressure. Man of Steel was a middling entry which carried over to BvS. BvS was saddled with so much it had to do right. Bring 3 superheroes together, be the first movie made with creating a Universe, balance out all 4 leads, and have Ben Afleck as Batman. (I love Ben in most things hell his view askew movies were my jam in college.) That started the negative backlash, something MCU has not had to deal with yet. |
|
|
|
Post by summers8 on Jun 28, 2018 17:04:03 GMT
I'm just hoping they don't dumb Ant-man down and make him repeatedly incompetent to make Wasp look even better. If it's done properly I have no problem with it but because these movies are comedic I am wondering if that's what they'll do. They dumbed him down. read the actual non bias reviews, even mcu fanboys like John Campea is struggling to love it.
Also the movie is the lightest and brightest MCU movie to date and we know what that means with marvel's track record? dumb down generic movie in the ranks of gotg and thor 3.
funny huh? did you tell me how disney will adapt the xmen mutant massacre and inferno ago?
|
|
|
|
Post by President Ackbar™ on Jun 28, 2018 17:26:39 GMT
I can't wait for all this "ZOMGZ TEH SJW'S!!111" shit to end. You guys really like beating that dead horse.  |
|
|
|
Post by lenlenlen1 on Jun 28, 2018 17:35:14 GMT
Confirmed: Antman 2 is a SJWs wet dream 
|
|
|
|
Post by scabab on Jun 28, 2018 19:37:01 GMT
funny huh? did you tell me how disney will adapt the xmen mutant massacre and inferno ago? Ant-man isn't X-men... Everyone knew that this movie would be very heavy on the comedy. What does that have to do with another director and writer working on a different series of movies? |
|
|
|
Post by ThatGuy on Jun 28, 2018 19:50:57 GMT
I'm just hoping they don't dumb Ant-man down and make him repeatedly incompetent to make Wasp look even better. If it's done properly I have no problem with it but because these movies are comedic I am wondering if that's what they'll do. Um, they did that in the 1st movie. Hope was always suppose to be better than Scott. That was her whole argument for her being the one to wear the Ant-man suit. She even says in the trailer that he wouldn't have gotten caught if she helped out in Civil War. |
|
|
|
Post by summers8 on Jun 28, 2018 22:49:47 GMT
funny huh? did you tell me how disney will adapt the xmen mutant massacre and inferno ago? Ant-man isn't X-men... Everyone knew that this movie would be very heavy on the comedy. What does that have to do with another director and writer working on a different series of movies? you don't get it do you? antman and most of these comic movies are not supposed to be comedy. their comics are not comedy. the comedy thing is disney's way for appealing to kids and the dumb masses, it has nothing to do with the actual comics stories.
no, its not xmen but Ragnarök was not xmen either and it is one of the dumbest jokey mcu movie to date when it should have been giving LOTR a run for its money. that is what the source material required.
also antman , have you seen the terrible cinematography? I believe the when critics say it is the ''brightest'' mcu movie, funny these critics had a problem when it was batman and robin.
|
|
|
|
Post by Skaathar on Jun 28, 2018 23:08:33 GMT
Ant-man isn't X-men... Everyone knew that this movie would be very heavy on the comedy. What does that have to do with another director and writer working on a different series of movies? you don't get it do you? antman and most of these comic movies are not supposed to be comedy. their comics are not comedy. the comedy thing is disney's way for appealing to kids and the dumb masses, it has nothing to do with the actual comics stories.
no, its not xmen but Ragnarök was not xmen either and it is one of the dumbest jokey mcu movie to date when it should have been giving LOTR a run for its money. that is what the source material required.
also antman , have you seen the terrible cinematography? I believe the when critics say it is the ''brightest'' mcu movie, funny these critics had a problem when it was batman and robin.
Yet the first Ironman movie had a number of funny moments (same with the first Thor) even when Disney was not yet involved with these movies. |
|
|
|
Post by scabab on Jun 28, 2018 23:34:43 GMT
you don't get it do you? antman and most of these comic movies are not supposed to be comedy. their comics are not comedy. These aren't comics, they're movies and they can be of any genre they wish to be. The Batman 1966 show was somewhat comedic. Deadpool was comedic. Guardians of the Galaxy was comedic. The two Fantastic Four movies were comedic. New Mutants will be a horror. The Blade movies were part horror. Morbus will likely be horror. Some are down to Earth like The Dark Knight and some are not like Batman Forever. As you said Thor is not X-men. Ragnarok was very different because people didn't think much of the previous two movies. They changed it up and it ended up being far more successful and we'll liked. Batman and Robin had neon lights coming out of neon lights. Batman Forever had neon lights on the goons guns. Batman and Robin was campy and awful from start to finish. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 28, 2018 23:37:07 GMT
They're guaranteed gonna turn Ant-Man into a retard so Wasp can look good by comparison. The cool thing about Wonder Woman is that she didn't have to demean Steve Trevor to prove her worth. She proved it in her actions. Steve was a man of honor and respect. Scott Lang will be a bumbling fool.
|
|
|
|
Post by spooner5020 on Jun 29, 2018 0:38:17 GMT
They're guaranteed gonna turn Ant-Man into a retard so Wasp can look good by comparison. The cool thing about Wonder Woman is that she didn't have to demean Steve Trevor to prove her worth. She proved it in her actions. Steve was a man of honor and respect. Scott Lang will be a bumbling fool. Would you just shut up? No I mean seriously. You bring nothing to the table. You’re just a pathetic little troll who hates everything good. GROW UP YOU PATHETIC LITTLE FUCK. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 29, 2018 0:39:37 GMT
They're guaranteed gonna turn Ant-Man into a retard so Wasp can look good by comparison. The cool thing about Wonder Woman is that she didn't have to demean Steve Trevor to prove her worth. She proved it in her actions. Steve was a man of honor and respect. Scott Lang will be a bumbling fool. Would you just shut up? No I mean seriously. You bring nothing to the table. You’re just a pathetic little troll who hates everything good. GROW UP YOU PATHETIC LITTLE FUCK. Reported! |
|
|
|
Post by ThatGuy on Jun 29, 2018 1:17:57 GMT
They're guaranteed gonna turn Ant-Man into a retard so Wasp can look good by comparison. The cool thing about Wonder Woman is that she didn't have to demean Steve Trevor to prove her worth. She proved it in her actions. Steve was a man of honor and respect. Scott Lang will be a bumbling fool. That's because they based Wonder Woman on Captain America First Avenger. The same way they didn't have to demean Steve Rogers to prove Agent Carter's worth. But like I said before, showing that Hope is better than Scott in this movie doesn't change the characters from the previous Ant-man movie. She continually beat him up in their training sessions. She was also there training him on how to use the Ant-man tech along with her father. She is better than him in every way. And that was shown in Ant-man. So what is the problem?
Also, Scott was always a bumbling fool.
|
|
|
|
Post by summers8 on Jun 29, 2018 6:24:55 GMT
you don't get it do you? antman and most of these comic movies are not supposed to be comedy. their comics are not comedy. These aren't comics, they're movies and they can be of any genre they wish to be. The Batman 1966 show was somewhat comedic. Deadpool was comedic. Guardians of the Galaxy was comedic. The two Fantastic Four movies were comedic. New Mutants will be a horror. The Blade movies were part horror. Morbus will likely be horror. Some are down to Earth like The Dark Knight and some are not like Batman Forever. As you said Thor is not X-men. Ragnarok was very different because people didn't think much of the previous two movies. They changed it up and it ended up being far more successful and we'll liked. Batman and Robin had neon lights coming out of neon lights. Batman Forever had neon lights on the goons guns. Batman and Robin was campy and awful from start to finish. More pathetic excuses. what you are saying is kind of like a teacher trying to use cheap and nonsense ways to justify why he gave a student an A when he deserves an F. for a dumb reason like...the student has a crush on me.
these are not comics? um, do you think these excuses would have worked for Harry Potter or LOTR movies if they were made into nothing more but CGI kids comedy and the excuse is, well these are the movies, the books are fantasy. its called an adaption, do you know what an adaption is? it is also called comic book movies. mcu movies are now disney movies.
OMG, so your best excuse for thor 3 not actually been been Ragnarök is because the past films were struggling, so when you struggle you answer is to get dumber and act more childish? is that what they taught you in school
see why most people say mcu movies are damaging cinema. true batman and robin was awful, so are most of the mcu movies.
|
|
|
|
Post by Nicko's Nose on Jun 29, 2018 6:30:44 GMT
These aren't comics, they're movies and they can be of any genre they wish to be. The Batman 1966 show was somewhat comedic. Deadpool was comedic. Guardians of the Galaxy was comedic. The two Fantastic Four movies were comedic. New Mutants will be a horror. The Blade movies were part horror. Morbus will likely be horror. Some are down to Earth like The Dark Knight and some are not like Batman Forever. As you said Thor is not X-men. Ragnarok was very different because people didn't think much of the previous two movies. They changed it up and it ended up being far more successful and we'll liked. Batman and Robin had neon lights coming out of neon lights. Batman Forever had neon lights on the goons guns. Batman and Robin was campy and awful from start to finish. see why most people say mcu movies are damaging cinema.
Except most people do not say that. |
|
|
|
Post by summers8 on Jun 29, 2018 6:31:32 GMT
They're guaranteed gonna turn Ant-Man into a retard so Wasp can look good by comparison. The cool thing about Wonder Woman is that she didn't have to demean Steve Trevor to prove her worth. She proved it in her actions. Steve was a man of honor and respect. Scott Lang will be a bumbling fool. That's because they based Wonder Woman on Captain America First Avenger. The same way they didn't have to demean Steve Rogers to prove Agent Carter's worth. But like I said before, showing that Hope is better than Scott in this movie doesn't change the characters from the previous Ant-man movie. She continually beat him up in their training sessions. She was also there training him on how to use the Ant-man tech along with her father. She is better than him in every way. And that was shown in Ant-man. So what is the problem?
Also, Scott was always a bumbling fool.
If memory serves me well, wonder woman came before the Capitan America and the plot of the wonder woman movie was already used in justice league that ran from 2000-2005. the first avenger came out in 2011
Funny, mcu fans not only do not understand English, now they don't know how to calculate basic mathematics. In the mcu world 2011 came before 2002-2005 and 1992 came before 1981. LOL. Scott in not a bumbling fool in the comics. Disney's MCU scott is, this is the only way disney can sell toys.
|
|
|
|
Post by summers8 on Jun 29, 2018 6:33:06 GMT
see why most people say mcu movies are damaging cinema.
Except most people do not say that. Most people say so. only mcu fans and kids don't.
though when most of these kids grow up, they come to same conclusions.
|
|
|
|
Post by Nicko's Nose on Jun 29, 2018 6:34:47 GMT
Except most people do not say that. Most people say so. only mcu fans and kids don't.
Yeah, no. |
|
|
|
Post by Skaathar on Jun 29, 2018 7:02:58 GMT
Except most people do not say that. Most people say so. only mcu fans and kids don't.
though when most of these kids grow up, they come to same conclusions.
Liar. |
|
