Batman V: Superman Dawn of Justice

[BurtReynolds]

rank the movie critics.

[tragabigzanda]

Whenever there's active promotion on the part of somebody else, whenever I see somebody all dolled up for a fancy photograph and someone's handing out flyers or whenever there's active promotion for something like that, as an imposition on my day, I hate all those people and I want them to fail. I have a visceral reaction to advertising and promotion. There's just something about salesmanship that grates on me on a very base level and I react very negatively towards it. I want those people to suffer and I want their enterprises to fail.

[LetMeSleep]

Platy kinda liking it is the only thing keeping me afloat.

Can somebody really not enjoy this type of movie though? Even the slightest bit of enjoyment could be had considering its two iconic characters that we all have loved in one way or another.

"Fuck that was terrible but i got to hang out with batman and superman for 4 hours"

I can not enjoy this movie, no problem.

I didn't even enjoy the trailor

[BurtReynolds]

Platy kinda liking it is the only thing keeping me afloat.

Can somebody really not enjoy this type of movie though? Even the slightest bit of enjoyment could be had considering its two iconic characters that we all have loved in one way or another.

"Fuck that was terrible but i got to hang out with batman and superman for 4 hours"

The slightest bit of enjoyment is great, but not if its wrapped in 2 hours of shit. Why sit through 3 hours of a Transformers movie just to see Optimus ride a robot dinosaur? just give me Optimus riding the Robot Dinosaur and roll credits. My ideal Transformers movie is about 15 minutes long but worth the full price of a ticket.

[@SkitchP]

Platy kinda liking it is the only thing keeping me afloat.

Can somebody really not enjoy this type of movie though? Even the slightest bit of enjoyment could be had considering its two iconic characters that we all have loved in one way or another.

"Fuck that was terrible but i got to hang out with batman and superman for 4 hours"

The slightest bit of enjoyment is great, but not if its wrapped in 2 hours of shit. Why sit through 3 hours of a Transformers movie just to see Optimus ride a robot dinosaur? just give me Optimus riding the Robot Dinosaur and roll credits. My ideal Transformers movie is about 15 minutes long but worth the full price of a ticket.

Yeah. Id pay for that.

[Strat]

Platy kinda liking it is the only thing keeping me afloat.

Can somebody really not enjoy this type of movie though? Even the slightest bit of enjoyment could be had considering its two iconic characters that we all have loved in one way or another.

"Fuck that was terrible but i got to hang out with batman and superman for 4 hours"

The slightest bit of enjoyment is great, but not if its wrapped in 2 hours of shit. Why sit through 3 hours of a Transformers movie just to see Optimus ride a robot dinosaur? just give me Optimus riding the Robot Dinosaur and roll credits. My ideal Transformers movie is about 15 minutes long but worth the full price of a ticket.

That's a good point. Transofrmers was terrible. The one with mark whalberg was physically exhausting to even watch.

[@SkitchP]

Platy kinda liking it is the only thing keeping me afloat.

Can somebody really not enjoy this type of movie though? Even the slightest bit of enjoyment could be had considering its two iconic characters that we all have loved in one way or another.

"Fuck that was terrible but i got to hang out with batman and superman for 4 hours"

The slightest bit of enjoyment is great, but not if its wrapped in 2 hours of shit. Why sit through 3 hours of a Transformers movie just to see Optimus ride a robot dinosaur? just give me Optimus riding the Robot Dinosaur and roll credits. My ideal Transformers movie is about 15 minutes long but worth the full price of a ticket.

That's a good point. Transofrmers was terrible. The one with mark whalberg was physically exhausting to even watch.

it really was. I think i live tweeted how it felt like it was going on forever.

[BurtReynolds]

we should really have an art criticism thread.

-White's writing can be interesting, but he's utterly useless to me as a film critic.
-He's an essayist masquerading as a film critic.
-He uses movies as an excuse to rant about whatever in society is irking him that day, arbitrarily taking minor (or nonexistent) aspects of a movie, expanding its importance, and then ranting about it or celebrating it.
-Whether he's contrarian by nature or choice, he's definitely contrarian.

-RT's qualifications are suspect.
-Nearly all RT critics are writers. That alone is an inherent bias and problem.
-I don't think most professional newspaper film critics are hired for their special insight into movies. Its all writing ability, entertainment value. And how would the editor that hires said critic have the necessary experience to judge any other way?
-Hot takes and snark get work, not brilliant analysis of movies.
-Most of us (not LV) would tend to agree with the general consensus of RT on any given film, but its hardly a reliable measure to go by. Too many factors involved. Too much leeway.
-it's fun to check out and compare with different critics though.

-I just realized art critics have a lot more value to me after the fact (as entertainment) than as a reliable gauge of a movie's quality beforehand.

[Jorge]

The fact that RT boils down reviews that may be nuanced and engage with the film in a number of different ways to a "Yes" or "No" answer is part of the reason why it drives me bonkers that people bring up RT scores all the goddamn time now.

[LoathedVermin72]

I don't think criticism should be used as a means of guaging a movie's quality beforehand. Criticism as consumer guide is stupid. You should be seeing what you want and deciding for yourself.

Good criticism is about analysis and insight, be it about the work itself, cultural, or both. Pauline Kael was right when she said everything else is just advertising.

[stip]

It's very difficult to read what I've seen of white (maybe this is only his event film reviews) and not imagine that he is at least subconsciously motivated on part by a desire to repudiate whatever the popular opinion happens to be, so as to demonstrate his own superiority by standing apart from it.


That is not to say one can only like BVS for those reasons. Obviously that's nonsense. And clearly this guy is into snyders aesthetic, but that isn't what seems to be motivating his review.

White has been writing art/cultural criticism for decades. His ideology and what he values in art are distinct and coherent. Always have been. I don't think it's at all surprising that a gay black Christian conservative has a radically different viewpoint than other film critics, who tend to be white liberals. He is naturally positioned differently, not deliberately.

Fair point, but his reviews feel like they are picking fights no one else has asked for, or are pre-written so that the film will match the point he already wanted to make (burt's observation about his value as an essayist as opposed to a critic), which gives him a distinctly contrarian feel, even if it is something be layered over a coherent viewpoint

[stip]

I don't think criticism should be used as a means of guaging a movie's quality beforehand. Criticism as consumer guide is stupid. You should be seeing what you want and deciding for yourself.

Good criticism is about analysis and insight, be it about the work itself, cultural, or both. Pauline Kael was right when she said everything else is just advertising.

Sure, but if you can't see everything or you want to draw a larger conclusion about the general perception of a works quality you could do a lot worse than a critical aggregator, for as imprecise as it is.

[stip]

The fact that RT boils down reviews that may be nuanced and engage with the film in a number of different ways to a "Yes" or "No" answer is part of the reason why it drives me bonkers that people bring up RT scores all the goddamn time now.

That's a problem. A movie like Antman got a higher score than its quality merited.

But again, in the absence of something better...

[LoathedVermin72]

I don't think criticism should be used as a means of guaging a movie's quality beforehand. Criticism as consumer guide is stupid. You should be seeing what you want and deciding for yourself.

Good criticism is about analysis and insight, be it about the work itself, cultural, or both. Pauline Kael was right when she said everything else is just advertising.

Sure, but if you can't see everything or you want to draw a larger conclusion about the general perception of a works quality you could do a lot worse than a critical aggregator, for as imprecise as it is.

DISAGREE

[stip]

What's better?

[LoathedVermin72]

What's better?

I suppose if you are too busy to see all the movies you want, it seems reasonable if you find one or a few critics who you trust and relate to. But I guess aggregators are fine if you have no taste

[BurtReynolds]

If movie reviewers are a 10th as corrupt as video game reviewers, its hard for me to put a lot of faith in aggregators. I know for a fact that some of the sources metacritic uses are total BS. But film critics are probably a little more trustworthy.

[Will]

This sucked.

[LoathedVermin72]

If movie reviewers are a 10th as corrupt as video game reviewers, its hard for me to put a lot of faith in aggregators. I know for a fact that some of the sources metacritic uses are total BS. But film critics are probably a little more trustworthy.

Emphasis on "a little"

[Jorge]

It's about ethics in film journalism