Moviebob's Text Review of Batman v Superman and oh boy he is ANGRY!!!

[Crazy Zaul]

I wanna watch reviews of this movie, but they all say they have massive spoilers because there are some genuinely surprising moments in it. I still get the idea anyway though, mess of overdone CGI action, no plot etc.

 

[Samtemdo8_v1legacy]

Then he should have placed Man of Steel in a top 10 most disappointing movies of 2013, not worst.

Just as I did not judge your list of which Marvel movies are best and why, I am going to suggest that the person making the list gets the right to define the terms and conditions which make a movie worse than another.

And I have he right to say that I think he badly misconstructed his placement of Man of Steel as number 1 worse movie of all time because he found it "dissipointing" and despite the fact he did said good things about MOS in his review.

Besides when I think "Worse movies of the year" I think of movies like this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ywaR-Lq_ayk

 

[Something Amyss]

I'll be honest, reading that is an exercise in giving me a migraine, and quite easily. It hurts me to know that shit writing like that can be passed of as any form of valid review or journalism.
Ranting isn't the issue, its the lack of any actual structure and the overuse of descriptive terms. The headache-inducing run-on sentences.
If I were a patron of his work, I'd easily cancel any further funds to that. I expect better from Bob, even if I'm not a fan of his work. Its just low quality work, and its extremely disappointing.
I don't hate his work either, I just stopped caring about it after he departed from Escapist. Unlike LRR, who I still follow, he just didn't garner enough love from me to follow him. Partially due to what I saw as a degeneration of his work ethic, instead of giving a smart analysis of the work he devolved into being pissed off and ranting without much in the way of structure. Instead of intelligent teardowns we get pedantic rants punctuated with smart language that only comes off as a mask for the drop in quality of content.
If its intentional, its still a drop from his original format and quality and I'm not sold on it. I much prefer the smarter analysis of our "new" reviewer, Marter.
Leave the sarcastic coarse uber-nerdy reviews to Yahtzee. At least he's got the skill to make it interesting.

Honestly, I'm not really seeing any difference. I stopped watching MB long before he left The Escapist, and the videos people have shared enough to make it into my own personal echo chamber seem to be pretty much the same as before he left. This seems like another one of his rant videos. The ones that were most popular when he was a contributor here and the ones that have remained the most popular since.

I don't know, maybe it's just me.

 

[Imperioratorex Caprae]

I'll be honest, reading that is an exercise in giving me a migraine, and quite easily. It hurts me to know that shit writing like that can be passed of as any form of valid review or journalism.
Ranting isn't the issue, its the lack of any actual structure and the overuse of descriptive terms. The headache-inducing run-on sentences.
If I were a patron of his work, I'd easily cancel any further funds to that. I expect better from Bob, even if I'm not a fan of his work. Its just low quality work, and its extremely disappointing.
I don't hate his work either, I just stopped caring about it after he departed from Escapist. Unlike LRR, who I still follow, he just didn't garner enough love from me to follow him. Partially due to what I saw as a degeneration of his work ethic, instead of giving a smart analysis of the work he devolved into being pissed off and ranting without much in the way of structure. Instead of intelligent teardowns we get pedantic rants punctuated with smart language that only comes off as a mask for the drop in quality of content.
If its intentional, its still a drop from his original format and quality and I'm not sold on it. I much prefer the smarter analysis of our "new" reviewer, Marter.
Leave the sarcastic coarse uber-nerdy reviews to Yahtzee. At least he's got the skill to make it interesting.

Honestly, I'm not really seeing any difference. I stopped watching MB long before he left The Escapist, and the videos people have shared enough to make it into my own personal echo chamber seem to be pretty much the same as before he left. This seems like another one of his rant videos. The ones that were most popular when he was a contributor here and the ones that have remained the most popular since.

I don't know, maybe it's just me.

Might be that I'm just used to his videos and seeing it in written format shows the flaws of his style to me so much clearer. TBH I tapered off of watching his stuff a decent time prior to his departure, but the time since then has really blurred the timeline in general for me. I won't say I didn't like some of his content, I thought The Big Picture had some interesting stuff. But his movie reviews were not something I enjoyed all that much. I'm for criticism, I'm even for satirical or hyperbolic criticism, but his just felt more like something the Simpsons' Comic Book Guy would produce, and not in the satirical vein.

 

[babinro]

It doesn't matter how the movie is viewed by critics because IT WILL MAKE MONEY REGARDLESS.

That's just the state of movie goers at the moment. No amount of awful press and terrible reviews could stop the new Fantastic Four or Michael Bay's version of TMNT from making money. There's absolutely no way a film featuring Batman is going to flop.

Millions of people will see a movie they know is going to suck.
Nearly all of them will complain it was a ripoff.
Then they'll pay full price to see sequel in 2 years so the cycle can continue.

People want the movie industry to change but they refuse to let it happen because they keep supporting the stuff they hate.

 

[JimB]

I have the right to say that I think he badly misconstructed his placement of Man of Steel as number one worst movie of all time because he found it "disappointing" and despite the fact he did said good things about Man of Steel in his review.

First, I assume this is probably a typo, but he has never said Man of Steel is the worst movie of all time. He said it's the worst movie of whatever year it came out.

Second, you do indeed have the right to say you think he built the list wrong, but seriously, dude, you're saying to him, "You are wrong about what you think is the worst movie of the year. I know better than you do what you think is the worst movie and why."

 

[Something Amyss]

Might be that I'm just used to his videos and seeing it in written format shows the flaws of his style to me so much clearer. TBH I tapered off of watching his stuff a decent time prior to his departure, but the time since then has really blurred the timeline in general for me. I won't say I didn't like some of his content, I thought The Big Picture had some interesting stuff. But his movie reviews were not something I enjoyed all that much. I'm for criticism, I'm even for satirical or hyperbolic criticism, but his just felt more like something the Simpsons' Comic Book Guy would produce, and not in the satirical vein.

Yeah, I watched TBP for a lot longer, in part because I grew up with a lot of the same stuff he did. And he's from Boston, where I got a lot of my TV channels, so even likely watched it on the same stations and such. He had some interesting points, but I didn't like his taste in movies or his approach most of the time. Still, his rants seemed to be the popular ones, so maybe I'm just singling them out.

 

[Something Amyss]

No amount of awful press and terrible reviews could stop the new Fantastic Four or Michael Bay's version of TMNT from making money. There's absolutely no way a film featuring Batman is going to flop.

Fantastic 4 earned 160 million worldwide on a production budget of 120 million. Since that number doesn't include promotion, there's a very good chance it lost money.

Sometimes a movie looks so bad not enough people see it.

 

[DrownedAmmet]

I used to kind of like his stuff until I read his Amazing Spider-Man 2 review. I had never been more insulted by the tone of a review than that, he just seemed like such a petulant snob, who seemed to take some sick, masochistic pleasure in the movie failing to live up to his expectations
When he actually likes a movie, though, he can be pretty insightful and entertaining. His "Really that Good" reviews of Independence Day and Die Hard are great deconstructions of what made those movies work

 

[DudeistBelieve]

Damn, now I really want mail his book to a psychologist and hear what observations can be percieved from it.

It's something I almost want to buy a copy of to read, not for entertainment, but to understand what is going through his mind. I mean just look at this oddity.

I got about 20 seconds into the video before getting disgusted with the clever douchebag reading it.

ya know, Fuck movie bob, but as if any of us here are normal well-adjusted human beings. He's an asshole but I'd to think it's independent of that.

 

[Ihateregistering1]

It doesn't matter how the movie is viewed by critics because IT WILL MAKE MONEY REGARDLESS.

That's just the state of movie goers at the moment. No amount of awful press and terrible reviews could stop the new Fantastic Four or Michael Bay's version of TMNT from making money. There's absolutely no way a film featuring Batman is going to flop.

Fantastic Four was considered a huge failure critically and financially. Not like "Pluto Nash" levels of failure, but pretty damn huge.
http://www.cinemablend.com/new/Incredible-Amount-Money-Fantastic-Four-Might-Lose-76407.html

 

[Cicada 5]

Funny that I didn't hear any complaints about his Pixels review.

I will admit, Bob does irk me with his fanboying/fanrage at times, but that's usually when he brings up a dead horse to beat. Here, I can't complain about the review. I had high hopes for Batman v Superman, and while Bob's review is hyperbolic, most reviews seem to line up with what he's getting at. Web reviewers like Chris Stuckman are far more informative and level-headed than Bob, but damn if Bob isn't entertaining.

That said, if we're still dredging up Batman v Superman 3-5 years from now when Bob reviews movies, then yes, the irritation levels might get a bit much.

There were complaints about his Pixels review as well.

 

[Pseudonym]

He comes off as a spoiled fanboy that is saying (WAH this isn't how I want my DC movie ) then an impartial critic.

A part of being a critic is occasionally saying 'whaa, this movie is bad'. Of course that is 'partial' to the movie, the whole point of most reviews is to tell the audience what you think about the movie/game/book/ whatever. I don't really know what 'partial' means in this context and why it would be a good thing.

As for the anger, Bob has a certain style that involves getting overly angry, like redlettermedia, angryjoe and to some degree AVGN and Jim Sterling. Given how effectively all these people can turn their anger into entertainment I'm fairly certain that they can calm down if they want to. It's a style that I wouldn't take alltogether seriously. Not only that but in this case some effort has clearly been taken to write out a proper script for this and to string the words together in a way that not everyone can. You don't have to like that style, you don't have to like rants, but I think it is unfair to say this was a bad review. It was a good rant and that was what it was intended to be. Sometimes a review can be a rant.

 

[aegix drakan_v1legacy]

Soooo, having watched the review, he made a lot of good points as to why it's terrible.

But on the other hand, it feels like he was doing a really bad job ape-ing Razorfist's overly verbose ranting style and it came of kinda lame.

Like, we get the movie sucks, we get the plot is bad, we get that they seem to have fundamentally misunderstood Superman, could you...you know either make the rant amusing to listen to, or make it more tightly focused?

Anyway, sussing out the cheese from the crap and cross referencing other reviews leads me to the conclusion that the movie is indeed most likely to be horrible. Got the info that I wanted out of the review, thanks.

 

[Politrukk]

Can't quote since I'm on my phone, but funny he says he wasn't that angry since Transformers, apparently he forgot about new Spiderman 2.

which was ridiculous to be so petty about, a lot of people agree Garfield fit the bill perfectly for Spiderman.

 

[Imperioratorex Caprae]

Yeah, I watched TBP for a lot longer, in part because I grew up with a lot of the same stuff he did. And he's from Boston, where I got a lot of my TV channels, so even likely watched it on the same stations and such. He had some interesting points, but I didn't like his taste in movies or his approach most of the time. Still, his rants seemed to be the popular ones, so maybe I'm just singling them out.

I can see where you're coming from. Reviews-wise I didn't honestly care for his taste in films either. I gave him a hefty amount of leeway because I figured maybe I was missing something. Its because I've friends who're in the industry (not critics but legit filmmakers) that I had some issues with his presentation. Something about his background that he's stated about films and his involvement in making them or writing them strikes me as bitter. Like a failed scriptwriter/filmmaker turned critic so they can relentlessly hammer people more successful than them, rightly or wrongly. Something about that attitude doesn't sit well with me.
Its not that I feel he doesn't deserve to be a critic but I do feel there should be some responsibility on the critic to recognize their own personal bias and address it openly, else they come across as disingenuous or pretentious.
As I say I've no issue with criticism, but sometimes I feel there's a line between honest criticism and a rant laden down by bias and hate-bashing.
*shrug*

 

[elvor0]

I have always said, In Zack Snyder I Trust To Make Awesome Action.

I've never found his action scenes to be anything more than bloated and self-important, with his fast-slow style taking precedence over making an actual statement about anything the camera captures. About the best I can say for his ability to shoot action sequences is: They're competently framed and I am generally aware of what's happening in relationship to where.

I dunno, MoS didn't have much of that slow-fast stuff. I think there's one time when they're fighting in Smallville but otherwise it was all at normal speed. While Snyder is plodding to mediocre in most other areas but he's certainly a favourite when it comes to comic book style action sequences. I wouldn't pick him to direct a regular action movie, but the cinematography feels like you're watching a comic book unfold in the way it's framed and sometimes leaves shots hanging. MoS was perhaps the only time I've walked out of a cinema having been blinded by the action sequences to the movies quality.

I think regardless of whether or not you /enjoy/ Snyders work, his action sequences are still very memorable and distinct as being his. I've seen 300 only once, when it came out, but I still really vividly remember THAT fight scene. Perhaps if Snyder could direct the action sequences in a comic book movie while someone else handles the rest of it, that'd be awesome.

 

[JimB]

I dunno, Man of Steel didn't have much of that slow-fast stuff.

He incorporated it into the Kryptonians' fighting style, having them strike a punch in a static pose, then blur to the next static pose. Variant on the usual motif.

I think regardless of whether or not you enjoy Snyder's work, his action sequences are still very memorable and distinct as being his.

The time I fell half off the front porch and landed nuts first on the edge of a two-by-four is pretty fucking memorable too. That it is memorable does not mean I have to appreciate it.