Can we make up our own damn mind about Watchmen please?

[SL33TBL1ND]

People don't like when critics use sense. They like when critics call shit like "Titanic" great cinema.

Ah, Titanic. The highest grossing film of all time. Seen by 2,000 13-year old girls who all insisted on sitting through it 300,000 times.

He he he, so true. Anyway today (5th of March) is my birthday and by a remarkable coincidense it is also the aussie release date. Hurah!

 

[Maet]

In this case, I think they are exceptionally bad, because I don't believe they are intended audience for the movie, so why do they have to promote their opinion like it is relevant? Odds are, 95% of them have never read the graphic novel, and they aren't embedded in the culture of comics, let alone appreciate them as an art form.

Good critics will review for anyone. They'll tell you what they think of the Watchmen for the same reason they'll tell you what they think of Hotel for Dogs or The Bratz Movie: Because it's their fucking job. They get paid to watch tripe and formulate occasionally witty but mostly scathing opinions in order to sell newspapers or attract web traffic.

Why is it that only comic book fans seem to get so damn uppity about this? I've never heard a dog lover complain about misrepresentation of dogs in Beverly Hills Chihuahua.

Just because you're the target audience doesn't make your opinion more legitimate over someone who isn't, or ever validate you to begin with. Get over yourself.

 

[Brett Alex]

See, now i'd rather hear your opinion over some buffoon with an over-inflated sense of self-worth. as gamers or comic readers or anything else remotely geek-like, we have a community.

Uh-huh...

So tell us again why you care what people outside the community think?

 

[scotth266]

Sometimes criticism can be a good thing. I honestly will reserve my opinions on this matter until I see the movie next week.

Until then, my thought is that Batman Begins is completely inferior to the Dark Knight. Why is that? Perhaps it was due to the development team paying attention to what they did wrong with the first one, and perfecting it the second time around.

 

[ironfist86]

See, now i'd rather hear your opinion over some buffoon with an over-inflated sense of self-worth. as gamers or comic readers or anything else remotely geek-like, we have a community.

Uh-huh...

So tell us again why you care what people outside the community think?

Because i still live and interact with those outside the community.

In this case, I think they are exceptionally bad, because I don't believe they are intended audience for the movie, so why do they have to promote their opinion like it is relevant? Odds are, 95% of them have never read the graphic novel, and they aren't embedded in the culture of comics, let alone appreciate them as an art form.

Good critics will review for anyone. They'll tell you what they think of the Watchmen for the same reason they'll tell you what they think of Hotel for Dogs or The Bratz Movie: Because it's their fucking job. They get paid to watch tripe and formulate occasionally witty but mostly scathing opinions in order to sell newspapers or attract web traffic.

Why is it that only comic book fans seem to get so damn uppity about this? I've never heard a dog lover complain about misrepresentation of dogs in Beverly Hills Chihuahua.

Just because you're the target audience doesn't make your opinion more legitimate over someone who isn't, or ever validate you to begin with. Get over yourself.

There is no such thing as a good critic by your standards. it is impossible to review to everyone's individual tastes.
you miss the whole point of what i am saying - that they are getting paid for this. if a movie is obviously targeted with comic lovers in mind, why the bombardment of non-comic lovers giving us their paid opinion? some is fine, but it seems that with the success of Dark Knight comes a whole new level that comic movies need to be compared to.

example - anybody can golf, right? but say, you consider yourself a golfer, someone who does this regularly or as a profession, and there is a new course opened up around the corner. you want to know how it plays. who would you rather go to for an opinion - A. the local drunk who plays a round once a month, and thinks that his shit don't stink or B. someone with an authority over the sport, maybe a former Tour player or someone like you, who plays often?

and obviously, dog lover's don't care about certain mediums in which they are represented.

no, it might not make it more legitimate, but then again, i don't get paid to spout my random tripe. well, not yet, anyways.
and why exactly should i get over myself? i love me.

 

[Madrak the Red]

Boy, I really hope it doesn't suck. Moreover I hope they think I'm 18. Or that my parents allow me to go. Which hopefully they will. I bet it's the Rorschach bit that's the messiest.

It sucks to be 16 right now. And it comes out TOMORROW AND I CAN'T SEE IT. AND I HARDLY SEE ANYTHING AT THE CINEMA. (cries).

Anywho, I usually reserve my opinions for after the film. Or I usually think that a film will rule, and then be heartbroken. But I liked Indy 4, so whatever. No disapointments, as of yet (no big ones, at least).

 

[Ph0t0n1c Ph34r]

Just by judgeing wjo is directing it, I think it will be terrible. Still, I loved the comic so mutch that I'm going to see it anyway,so If I'm a hypocrite, so be it.

 

[nathan-dts]

I'm looking foward to a Moviebob video on this. I find that he and myself have similar preferences from his past videos.

 

[Maet]

There is no such thing as a good critic by your standards. it is impossible to review to everyone's individual tastes.
you miss the whole point of what i am saying - that they are getting paid for this. if a movie is obviously targeted with comic lovers in mind, why the bombardment of non-comic lovers giving us their paid opinion? some is fine, but it seems that with the success of Dark Knight comes a whole new level that comic movies need to be compared to.

example - anybody can golf, right? but say, you consider yourself a golfer, someone who does this regularly or as a profession, and there is a new course opened up around the corner. you want to know how it plays. who would you rather go to for an opinion - A. the local drunk who plays a round once a month, and thinks that his shit don't stink or B. someone with an authority over the sport, maybe a former Tour player or someone like you, who plays often?

and obviously, dog lover's don't care about certain mediums in which they are represented.

no, it might not make it more legitimate, but then again, i don't get paid to spout my random tripe. well, not yet, anyways.
and why exactly should i get over myself? i love me.

Your example is broken. Film critics are people who like film, not comic fans who watch comic book films so they can get pissy. To make your example work would be to say that a person (movie goer) asks a sports fan (general critic) what they think of the golf course as opposed to asking a pro golfer (genre biased critic) who would obviously be slanted. My point is that a good critic will have a neutral head regardless of personal feelings.

Comic book adaptations play in the film medium, not the other way around. That's something you don't seem to understand.

 

[Skalman]

Yeah, they say the comic can't be portrayed as a movie, but hey?
It can't be worse than that pathetic attempt to make The Hitchhikers Guide to The Galaxy into a movie...

...Right?

 

[Mr.Switchblade]

Lately, it seems you can't go anywhere without critics telling you what they think about Snyder's attempt at producing the holy grail of comic book/graphic novel movies. I've always thought that critics were irrelevant, talentless hacks (those that get paid to share their opinions, that is). In this case, I think they are exceptionally bad, because I don't believe they are intended audience for the movie, so why do they have to promote their opinion like it is relevant? Odds are, 95% of them have never read the graphic novel, and they aren't embedded in the culture of comics, let alone appreciate them as an art form. I keep hearing how it is just an overly-expensive cult film for fanboys, or that we won't be able to stomach the changes, but whatever happened to letting us decide for ourselves? And haven't we earned the right to have one big-budgeted movie be targeted directly to us, with our satisfaction in mind? Think of the millions, nay - billions of dollars of revenue comic book fans have generated for Hollywood over the last decade, and all of the shitastic movies we've endured (X3, FF2, Spidey 3 & Superman Returns - more of a letdown than truly shitty). Haven't we earned the right to tell the general public to shut their yaps and follow our lead on this one but let us at least see the damn movie first?

Maybe you guys should stop pretending watchmen is crafted out of solid gold and realize its all been done before.

 

[KeyMaster45]

The funny thing is that on rottentomatoes, it has a favorable rating overall, but in top critics? 30%. It was 0% a day ago. Critics just need to shut up about thus sort of thing.

To get this out of the way. Rotten tomatoes pisses me off, especially when its referenced in wiki topics. There are some movies that were really good, but because 4 or 5 people didn't like it and ran to rotten tomatoes to piss and moan about it's got a bad rating.

With that aside.

My english teacher had us read watchmen for our class, the subject is counter cultures so when the comics culture came round why not study a comic that's got a movie comming out soon. After reading watchmen and seeing a few trailers for it, I think they've really done it justice. I'm not a very picky movie goer, a movie's gotta be pretty bad for me not to like it. Though I must say I never did warm up to the spider man trilogy.

I'm not a comic book fan, so maybe that will give me more of an impartial opinion when I judge the movie.

 

[The Rogue Wolf]

People don't like when critics use sense. They like when critics call shit like "Titanic" great cinema.

And herein lies an enormous part of the problem. Views like this are the standard.

"Critics who like things I hate are idiots. Critics who hate things I hate are brilliant. I can't possibly be wrong about the things I hate, because I'm smart and I know what things are good and what things suck."

Critics critique. It's what they're PAID to do. They are not going to use YOUR taste in movies; they're going to use THEIRS. If the fact that a critic pans a movie you love (or vice versa) bothers you so much, I think that- to paraphrase the Bard- the issue lies not with the critics, but within yourself.

 

[ironfist86]

Your example is broken. Film critics are people who like film, not comic fans who watch comic book films so they can get pissy. To make your example work would be to say that a person (movie goer) asks a sports fan (general critic) what they think of the golf course as opposed to asking a pro golfer (genre biased critic) who would obviously be slanted. My point is that a good critic will have a neutral head regardless of personal feelings.

Comic book adaptations play in the film medium, not the other way around. That's something you don't seem to understand.

i don't think it is broken at all, but that may just be where we differ on the subject. i wouldn't see a pro golfer's review as slanted, simply knowledgeable. i see and respect where you are coming from. i was more complaining about film critics who are broad and will review anything. not every movie fits into every genre, so i think critics should stick into genres that they love and enjoy watching.
send a lonely person to watch a sappy romantic comedy? of course they are going to hate it.
give a fat person Wii Fit and tell them to review that? of course they are going to hate it.

people love to hear other people *****, which is obvious by this thread and many others.
i guess at the end of the day it really doesn't matter because i'm going to pay to see the movie anyways. hell, i paid the equivalent of $20 in London to see the opening of X3. i can see where an average movie goer might have liked it, but i wish i heard a comic fan critic the movie first.

 

[crystaltron]

this is why, in the case of a movie like this, I just avoid the reviews anyway. I made one exception considering it was someone I'm kind of a fangirl for... but otherwise, I'll go see it and make up my own mind regardless of critics reviews.

 

[Lavi]

Note, they really didn't read the graphic novel. I've found things said about it that show a very shallow reading at best >.<

I'll go to see it, and it better be epic ._. and if not I'll just go read it again and write 50 essays.

 

[Brett Alex]

See, now i'd rather hear your opinion over some buffoon with an over-inflated sense of self-worth. as gamers or comic readers or anything else remotely geek-like, we have a community.

Uh-huh...

So tell us again why you care what people outside the community think?

Because i still live and interact with those outside the community.

We have a community. Your words. You have now automatically excluded anyone who is not in the community.

What is the community? Does it mean you have to like or appreciate Watchmen? Does it mean you have to know the history of its development?

Bullshit.

Any opinion from within the community is not going to be that of the mainstream general public (ie. the large majority of any audience for anything).
As a major release movie, it should be able to stand on its own two feet. Not everyone who goes and sees it will have read or even heard of the graphic novel. By the same token, not every reviewer will have read it. So you see, the critics are not reviewing it for you. They are reviewing it for the people who have never picked up any comic or graphic novel. (The idea of reading a comic as a prerequisite for seeing a film is ridiculous anyway.)

So basically, deal with it.

Yes, you can make up your own damn mind about Watchmen. No one is forcing you to listen to any critics.

But if you really need someone to assure you that it will be a good movie, go and look up reviews from fans of the graphic novel.

 

[ironfist86]

See, now i'd rather hear your opinion over some buffoon with an over-inflated sense of self-worth. as gamers or comic readers or anything else remotely geek-like, we have a community.

Uh-huh...

So tell us again why you care what people outside the community think?

Because i still live and interact with those outside the community.

We have a community. Your words. You have now automatically excluded anyone who is not in the community.

What is the community? Does it mean you have to like or appreciate Watchmen? Does it mean you have to know the history of its development?

Bullshit.

Any opinion from within the community is not going to be that of the mainstream general public (ie. the large majority of any audience for anything).
As a major release movie, it should be able to stand on its own two feet. Not everyone who goes and sees it will have read or even heard of the graphic novel. By the same token, not every reviewer will have read it. So you see, the critics are not reviewing it for you. They are reviewing it for the people who have never picked up any comic or graphic novel. (The idea of reading a comic as a prerequisite for seeing a film is ridiculous anyway.)

So basically, deal with it.

Yes, you can make up your own damn mind about Watchmen. No one is forcing you to listen to any critics.

But if you really need someone to assure you that it will be a good movie, go and look up reviews from fans of the graphic novel.

Chill out, cupcake. You're looking for a fight where there isn't one.
I haven't automatically excluded anyone.
Some opinions are the same within and without communities, i.e. the Dark Knight and Iron Man.
This is dumb. The movie kicked ass. I guess you can consider it "dealt with".