Ongoing Sci-Fi, Comic Book Movie Thread v2

[Nadal Fan]

You do realize DC put out a film that grossed a billion dollars, won 2 Oscars and was nominated for best picture just last year right? And also a little movie named Shazam that was great, came out in 2019. Didn't like WW84, that's cool they have 7 films in active development hopefully you will like the next one.

[Johnny Makarov]

Originally Posted by Locke

I would contend that 'Birds of Prey' is a film that they screen to torture Political Dissidents.

That movie alone probably set modern feminism back by about a decade.

For a guy who has an overthetop hate on for DC movies you sure watch a lot of them. haha

[Johnny Makarov]

Originally Posted by trackercowe

I still get pumped for Man of Steel when it's on television. In terms of rewatchability I don't think any other DCEU movie hits that level. I haven't watched Aquaman or Shazam since release. Mindless entertainment, but nothing memorable.

Alison confirmed Gadot helped to make this decision.

In an interview with CBR, Wonder Woman star Gal Gadot revealed the important character development behind the weapon switch: Diana's desire for peace. "This is part of the reason to why we decided that she shouldn't have a sword or a shield," Gadot explained. "Diana is not aggressive. She's not there to fight. She's a peacemaker. Also, she has the higher understanding that people are not bad, per se... We're all the same."

Read More: Why Diana Doesn't Use Her Sword or Shield In 'Wonder Woman 1984' | https://screencrush.com/gal-gadot-wo...edium=referral

I had to turn off WW84 after15 mins. What a ridiculous opening. I thought I liked the first one but after watching it the 2nd time it went from an 8/10 to a 6/10.

Also they should have put this from the comic into the movie.

Eff this pg crap for 10 year olds, which is like 90% of the crap Marvel and DC puts out.

[Nadal Fan]

They did that with Superman and people lost their minds , even though it was 100% the right move

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Of course they did, because it's Superman. Wonder Woman is not the same character. I'm not a big DC guy, but my understanding is that the Amazons, and WW by extension, are fairly militaristic in the comics and not opposed to killing.

For example, in various alternate realities, Superman is far more willing to hurt bad guys and Wonder Woman is totally on board with that, thus giving me the impression that the only reason she isn't killing more people in the normal DC universe is that Superman and Batman are around to go "no, Diana, I know they're evil jerks but we still don't tear their limbs off; that just isn't how we do things." Am I wrong?

[Hemi-Cuda]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

Yet when it launched it had a certified fresh rating from early critics?

Proof if proof were still needed that the movie review business is a total sham at this point. It's almost impossible to tell if a movie is actually any good anymore.

The Last Jedi is when professional reviews jumped the shark for me, there is no way that movie gets a 90% on Rotten Tomatoes if it isn't made by Disney and doesn't have Star Wars in the name. Just a disgusting display of pandering on most of those reviews

[Fuzz]

How are people still paying money to watch WW84 after reading reviews? I may watch the train wreck at some point, but I wouldn't pay money to do it.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

How are people still paying money to watch WW84 after reading reviews? I may watch the train wreck at some point, but I wouldn't pay money to do it.

Well, clearly fans of these films are not the sharpest tools in the shed.

I like a good train wreck from time to time, but yeah, I'm not going to pay for it.

The fact that this went on streaming rather than a major theatrical release might have saved the torches and pitchforks from some angry mobs.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Johnny Makarov

For a guy who has an overthetop hate on for DC movies you sure watch a lot of them. haha

This is the thing. I dont have an 'over the top' hatred for DC Movies. Dont get me wrong, I do hate them. Because they're bad.

They've got some great characters, they have mountains of top-quality source material aaaand....this is the best they can do?

I dont think there is anything that disappoints me more in movies than wasted potential.

Careful there...

[Nadal Fan]

It really depends on the writer and the story. Ive read WW comics where she saves the day with a sword and violence, but I've also read stories where she saves the day with words and love. And very early on she saves the day with bondage and tieing people up ..........or getting tied up. So so much bondage in the early issues

[Nadal Fan]

Maybe people want to watch a movie for themselves and make up their own mind if they like it? You shouldn't let critics dictate what you enjoy. Critics initially hated classics like The Thing , The Shining, and Batman Returns.

Going off critic reviews and from Rotten tomatoes you would think Joker is just an average movie, which it clearly isn't.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Nadal Fan

Maybe people want to watch a movie for themselves and make up their own mind if they like it? You shouldn't let critics dictate what you enjoy. Critics initially hated classics like The Thing , The Shining, and Batman Returns.

Going off critic reviews and from Rotten tomatoes you would think Joker is just an average movie, which it clearly isn't.

Are you talking to me? Because thats exactly what I've been advocating.

You cant trust critics anymore, and everyone is going to like different things, thats entirely fine.

But then you can also sit back and say..."wow...that movie was bad."

Regardless of how much other people loved it or how much money it made.

I'd trust half the people in this thread more than a paid, professional critic.

[Cecil Terwilliger]

Originally Posted by Nadal Fan

Maybe people want to watch a movie for themselves and make up their own mind if they like it? You shouldn't let critics dictate what you enjoy. Critics initially hated classics like The Thing , The Shining, and Batman Returns.

Going off critic reviews and from Rotten tomatoes you would think Joker is just an average movie, which it clearly isn't.

One of these things is not like the others.

[Harry Lime]

Hey, you watch your yap about Batman Returns, you. It's going into the Smithsonian.

[Cecil Terwilliger]

Originally Posted by Harry Lime

Hey, you watch your yap about Batman Returns, you. It's going into the Smithsonian.

The only redeeming quality of Batman Returns is Michelle Pfeifer as catwoman. Damn she was good.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Nadal Fan

Maybe people want to watch a movie for themselves and make up their own mind if they like it? You shouldn't let critics dictate what you enjoy. Critics initially hated classics like The Thing , The Shining, and Batman Returns.

Going off critic reviews and from Rotten tomatoes you would think Joker is just an average movie, which it clearly isn't.

Oh, I don't mean critic reviews, I mean the type that are posted in this forum. Other than you, I think it has been universally panned here as a disaster. I don't trust critics one bit. I understand wanting to watch it yourself, which I'll probably do eventually. I don't understand paying $30 to do it.


The imdb reviews are not good either...
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt7126948...ws?ref_=tt_urv

[Rhettzky]

Originally Posted by Nadal Fan

You do realize DC put out a film that grossed a billion dollars, won 2 Oscars and was nominated for best picture just last year right? And also a little movie named Shazam that was great, came out in 2019. Didn't like WW84, that's cool they have 7 films in active development hopefully you will like the next one.

What a weird post. And why would anyone want anything to do with 7 more DC films when they clearly don't have an idea of what they are doing?

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

I understand wanting to watch it yourself, which I'll probably do eventually.

I'm not sure I will. I still haven't seen Justice League or Aquaman or Suicide Squad or Birds of Prey, and I don't really see that there's any need to.

It's not like the MCU where there are a few bad movies sprinkled among the quite good ones that you kind of have to sit through because they're semi-necessary viewing if you want to watch the other quite good ones. Here, the few that are worth seeing don't have any prerequisite movies to watch.

[Locke]

As a general rule I avoid movies that are below 6.0 on IMDB because you can kind of rely on those to regress to the mean and give you an idea about the quality of a movie.

Sitting at 5.6 right now and thats propped up by a lot of "Professional" 8s and 9s from the early screenings.

I'm with Fuzz. I'm going to watch this movie, if for no other reason than to bask in the trainwreck, but I'm sure as hell not renting it for $30.

And its sounding more and more like Jenkins was the weakest link here. Which does not bode well for Star Wars.

[Harry Lime]

I don't understand the career trajectory of some of the big players in Hollywood right now. Jenkins did Monster, then a series of one-off television gigs, landed Wonder Woman (good for her) and now a huge remake of Cleopatra followed by Star Wars. That's quite a leap.

It feels like she's following in the footsteps of Roberto Orci, Alex Kurtzman and David Benihoff in people who must talk just a fantastic game. To a lesser extent JJ Abrams and Snyder Cut are in this group as well, as people how are propped up not based on work in the field, or outstanding achievement.

Why is sci-fi and fantasy a dumping ground?