Good Movies That Are Bad (According to Critics)
- Thread starter Teal
- Start date
I did read and you just ignored what I was trying to say being a jerk about it.
Superman is still flawed and deals with a lot of issues. He's still just a normal guy. Man of Steel doesn't do anything for Superman. It's terribly written and it doesn't get Superman. Neither do you.
I'm not asking for the perfect realization of Superman, I only ask for it to stay true to his character. And he is a boy scout. If you don't understand that then like I said, you're not a fan of Superman. Fighting a super powered psycho with complete disregard for the city and world he claims to protect, is not f#cking Superman and that's not a flawed man, that's a goddamn super powered nut who's fighting more selfishly than anything.
Makes me so mad to see Goyer still staining superheroes with his terrible writing. I know well damn most of us fans can come up with a real Superman movie.
I bet the next film won't even have him answering for the stuff that happened in Metropolis. They're just gonna pretend it's all honkey dorey and Superman is the hero to them all. :facepalm:
he does kill people in certain superman origin stories. like superman earth one (which the movie is primarily based on).
i actually really thought about that solution for quite some time. but the only issue i see with that is, zod is a tactical genius and skilled fighter. the only reason i think superman got zod in that headlock was because he has more control over his powers than zod does and is stronger. helping him win the battle by the skin of his teeth.
but yeah. the movie takes a very unconventional look at superman and takes EVERYTHING from his history and not just taking the classic and popular version of the character and that's why the movie fails in so many people's eyes.
First of all I didn't read it because this is not a conversation worth pages of subject matter unrelated to the thread.
Second, you need to calm down. It is just a comic book movie and character, works of fiction that have no presence in the real world, I don't care how much you like the character.
Last. I read your reply after I posted mine. It's kinda nuts. You really do over idealize the character to the point of 'we need to get off this subject.'
Star Wars: Clone Wars
i love it. it's what i wished the prequels were. It has all the elements of the prequels while maintaining the charm and adventure of the original trilogy. but a lot of folk didn't like it. so...yeah
i love it. it's what i wished the prequels were. It has all the elements of the prequels while maintaining the charm and adventure of the original trilogy. but a lot of folk didn't like it. so...yeah
Why the flying f*ck are we arguing about Man of Steel like we've got something to prove? Saying "you clearly don't UNDERSTAND Superman" just instigates bickering. Cut that out, we don't need that.
EDIT: For the record, I liked the movie. I'm not going to bother getting in-depth about the why because I don't want to get involved in a gigantic argument. I want to end the fights, not start them.
EDIT: For the record, I liked the movie. I'm not going to bother getting in-depth about the why because I don't want to get involved in a gigantic argument. I want to end the fights, not start them.
I also liked first one. Second though....UGH it's like 2 completely different movies.
The action in Ghost Rider 1 is too inconsistent and barely understandable. It takes the whole 'protagonist comes back stronger' trope too close to heart. I'm not making an overstatement. Let's recap all of Blaze's encounters with the supporting villains.
-In his first transformation as Ghost Rider, Blaze rides his bike in an attempt to take down Blackheart only to be crushed by one of the Fallen Angels (who is like an earth elemental, I guess). He does beat himself back to consciousness and wraps the angel with his chain, killing him.
-His second encounter is with this Wind Elemental, who just like the first angel, overpowers him at first but eventually is defeated by the Rider.
-Third angel drags him underwater but just when we think the Rider is finished, he magically revives himself and kills him.
The fights play like old-school duels, back in Andrew Jackson's day. Literally. Bad guy inflicts pain to good guy, good guy inflicts pain to bad guy and kills him at the spot. After the third fight is over, you'll really start to hate this pattern. While Ghost Rider 2 didn't do any justice, I think the chase scene at the end of the movie was the highlight of the franchise. It was non-stop action, just what I like in movies.
In a completely unrelated note, guys, only talk about movies that got bad reviews not the ones that got hated by the fans. Superman Returns has a fresh rating. Scott Pilgrim has a fresh rating. They don't count.
-In his first transformation as Ghost Rider, Blaze rides his bike in an attempt to take down Blackheart only to be crushed by one of the Fallen Angels (who is like an earth elemental, I guess). He does beat himself back to consciousness and wraps the angel with his chain, killing him.
-His second encounter is with this Wind Elemental, who just like the first angel, overpowers him at first but eventually is defeated by the Rider.
-Third angel drags him underwater but just when we think the Rider is finished, he magically revives himself and kills him.
The fights play like old-school duels, back in Andrew Jackson's day. Literally. Bad guy inflicts pain to good guy, good guy inflicts pain to bad guy and kills him at the spot. After the third fight is over, you'll really start to hate this pattern. While Ghost Rider 2 didn't do any justice, I think the chase scene at the end of the movie was the highlight of the franchise. It was non-stop action, just what I like in movies.
In a completely unrelated note, guys, only talk about movies that got bad reviews not the ones that got hated by the fans. Superman Returns has a fresh rating. Scott Pilgrim has a fresh rating. They don't count.
Hansel and Gretel:Witch Hunters
-Of course the critics would have bashed this because it's a silly genre film, but that's what makes it so fun. It surprised the hell out of me because I didn't expect it to be really enjoyable walking in.
What makes it good is that it gives no f#cks. It has a silly premise and runs with it with pride just having a blast. It's gory, Gretel swears like a sailor, some exciting action, and it also has cool steampunk weaponry. It's reminds me a lot of of Raimi's Evil Dead films being in that tone and spirit. It's cheesy and silly, but it also knows it and doesn't give a f#ck what you think about it.
It's like a fun comic book. The whole thing about Hansel being a diabetic with his lack of insulin shots being his kryptonite is also a pretty amusing and ingenious element.
If you've been waiting on a sequel to Army of Darkness, Hansel and Gretel:Witch Hunters is probably the next best thing and it is just a silly good time.
-Of course the critics would have bashed this because it's a silly genre film, but that's what makes it so fun. It surprised the hell out of me because I didn't expect it to be really enjoyable walking in.
What makes it good is that it gives no f#cks. It has a silly premise and runs with it with pride just having a blast. It's gory, Gretel swears like a sailor, some exciting action, and it also has cool steampunk weaponry. It's reminds me a lot of of Raimi's Evil Dead films being in that tone and spirit. It's cheesy and silly, but it also knows it and doesn't give a f#ck what you think about it.
It's like a fun comic book. The whole thing about Hansel being a diabetic with his lack of insulin shots being his kryptonite is also a pretty amusing and ingenious element.
If you've been waiting on a sequel to Army of Darkness, Hansel and Gretel:Witch Hunters is probably the next best thing and it is just a silly good time.
Character depth, quality of the story writing, acting ability? Pretty sure these are universal ideas of "good". Whether these add up to peoples perception is another thing entirely, after all it's opinion.
Haha this what I thought of too, such a low critic score. I mean it's dumb but the production values are great, I like to watch it. Sam Neill! XP He does a similar role in The Mouth of Madness.
Vergil'sBitch
I am Nero's Mom & Obsessed fan girl
I'll go and check that out.
And I've just realized, it's D.J. not T.J. ... :facepalm:
It's a matter of opinions after all @Innsmouth.
RED 2
Score: 42 out of 100 in RottenTomatoes. 47 out of 100 in Metacritic.
While it's true that RED 2 relied too much on the familiar formula that made the first RED a watchable one, there's more to it than that. Besides the returning cast (consisting of Willis, Malkovich, Mirren, Cox, Louise-Parker) we got Lee Byung Hun, a very talented South Korean actor, Catherine Zeta-Jones, who plays an awesome femme fatale and Anthony Hopkins in his most insane role ever. Critics say that RED 2 didn't manage to capture the feeling of the first movie, but I strongly disagree. It's got everything the first movie had and then some. I have no idea why it got a score of 40, but it definitely deserved to be among the fresh-rated movies.
That being said, I felt the ending was kinda rushed.
RED 2
Score: 42 out of 100 in RottenTomatoes. 47 out of 100 in Metacritic.
While it's true that RED 2 relied too much on the familiar formula that made the first RED a watchable one, there's more to it than that. Besides the returning cast (consisting of Willis, Malkovich, Mirren, Cox, Louise-Parker) we got Lee Byung Hun, a very talented South Korean actor, Catherine Zeta-Jones, who plays an awesome femme fatale and Anthony Hopkins in his most insane role ever. Critics say that RED 2 didn't manage to capture the feeling of the first movie, but I strongly disagree. It's got everything the first movie had and then some. I have no idea why it got a score of 40, but it definitely deserved to be among the fresh-rated movies.
That being said, I felt the ending was kinda rushed.