Who didn't see this coming? Civil War reviews are starting to trickle in.

[Samtemdo8_v1legacy]

The fact that this movie is 1% more then Godfather.

And the fact its higher then movies like Lawrance of Arabia, West Side Story, Lord of the Rings Trilogy, and Disney's Fantasia sickens me.

Let's be honest here, if BvS had the same score you would be praising it, and you wouldn't have a problem with the score.

No I would be saying the samething, or at least feeling the samething.

Blockbuster Superhero movies will never be as masterful as the movies I mentioned

 

[Samtemdo8_v1legacy]

The fact that this movie is 1% more then Godfather.

And the fact its higher then movies like Lawrance of Arabia, West Side Story, Lord of the Rings Trilogy, and Disney's Fantasia sickens me.

You mean the system used more to review current movies than to aggregate movies that are older than Internet itself and whose reviews only exist because of archivists, and most didn't even have ratings at the time, is not working right on 50 years old movies... gasp! I hope no one bases his choice between Captain America and West Side Story on rotten tomatoes.

And that using rotten tomatoes (or any rating for that matter) to categorize thousands of movies in a 2 digits aggregation system is pointless because at some point the granularity becomes meaningless while still being too arbitrary?... Who would have thought?

Or maybe you could explain to us what is the meaning of that 1% you find so sickening. What is the difference between a 36% movie and a 37% movie? Clearly a 60% movie is distinctly worst than a 61% movie. Is a 4% movie half as crappy as a 2% movie, or only 2/100 less crappy?

Because Godfather 1 and 2 derserves its RT rating to be 100% because they are objectively perfect films.

It changed filmmaking forever.

 

[Samtemdo8_v1legacy]

The fact that this movie is 1% more then Godfather.

And the fact its higher then movies like Lawrance of Arabia, West Side Story, Lord of the Rings Trilogy, and Disney's Fantasia sickens me.

You mean the system used more to review current movies than to aggregate movies that are older than Internet itself and whose reviews only exist because of archivists, and most didn't even have ratings at the time, is not working right on 50 years old movies... gasp! I hope no one bases his choice between Captain America and West Side Story on rotten tomatoes.

And that using rotten tomatoes (or any rating for that matter) to categorize thousands of movies in a 2 digits aggregation system is pointless because at some point the granularity becomes meaningless while still being too arbitrary?... Who would have thought?

Or maybe you could explain to us what is the meaning of that 1% you find so sickening. What is the difference between a 36% movie and a 37% movie? Clearly a 60% movie is distinctly worst than a 61% movie. Is a 4% movie half as crappy as a 2% movie, or only 2/100 less crappy?

Because Godfather 1 and 2 derserves its RT rating to be 100% because they are objectively perfect films.

It changed filmmaking forever.

That is some top quality bait. I like the use of "perfect" to draw in even the most hardened apathetics.

No I am not baiting. I truly think the 2 movies combined together with in the Godfather Epic makes Godfaher the most objevtively perfect film.

 

[mduncan50]

Sounding familiar at all?

Similarities in origin stories? In comics? Why, I'm flabberghasted!

The point wasn't that they're not similar, but that this has been the Bat's origin for over 25 years. Saying they gave him Strange's origin story comes off as a bit disingenuous.

I'm open to being proven wrong but I was unable to find a comic origin of Batman traveling to the Himalayas to train with a master, having his mind opened to ways of life that he was never aware of, finding out about and then fighting against a plot endangering humanity, and then returning home to use his newly learned skills to fight for the innocent. Again, this is the exact origin of both Doctor Strange in 1965 and Batman Begins forty years later. If you know of comics that follow this origin for Batman, I'd be more than happy to read them, but I was unable to find any.

How about Year One [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Batman:_Year_One] (1987)?

And the idea of the main character being an american that travels to another continent to master esoteric skills is such a pulp fiction trope that it hardly feels fair to blame Batman on it. The first ones I can remember are the Phantom and the Shadow from the 30s, of which Batman is "a take-off". In fact, Nolan's version of Batman origin is more than a little inspired by the Shadow's 1994 film...

No Batman: Year One has Bruce Wayne returning to Gotham after being away for years training. That's a specific as it gets. It's been a while since I've really read it in depth, and I just skimmed it to confirm, but yeah, no details beyond that. And I'm not talking about an "American that travels to another continent to master esoteric skills" plot, I gave you a very specific plot that applies to both Doc Strange and Batman Begins.

 

[hermes]

The fact that this movie is 1% more then Godfather.

And the fact its higher then movies like Lawrance of Arabia, West Side Story, Lord of the Rings Trilogy, and Disney's Fantasia sickens me.

You mean the system used more to review current movies than to aggregate movies that are older than Internet itself and whose reviews only exist because of archivists, and most didn't even have ratings at the time, is not working right on 50 years old movies... gasp! I hope no one bases his choice between Captain America and West Side Story on rotten tomatoes.

And that using rotten tomatoes (or any rating for that matter) to categorize thousands of movies in a 2 digits aggregation system is pointless because at some point the granularity becomes meaningless while still being too arbitrary?... Who would have thought?

Or maybe you could explain to us what is the meaning of that 1% you find so sickening. What is the difference between a 36% movie and a 37% movie? Clearly a 60% movie is distinctly worst than a 61% movie. Is a 4% movie half as crappy as a 2% movie, or only 2/100 less crappy?

Because Godfather 1 and 2 derserves its RT rating to be 100% because they are objectively perfect films.

It changed filmmaking forever.

"Objectively perfect" belongs to films about as well as it belongs to burgers.

And while I do agree they are great films, "changing film making" is hardly a qualification for quality. You know what other movies changed film making at their time? L'Arroseur Arros, Le Voyage dans la Lune, The Birth of a Nation, Godzilla, Bonnie and Clyde, Easy Rider, Jaws, Star Wars, Heaven's Gate, Lord of the Rings, Harry Potter, Avengers. They are all very influential, but I leave it to you to decide which one of those are perfect...

 

[K12]

I've been looking forward to this for quite a while. A sequel to one of the best Marvel films plus all the interesting emotional character stuff that "Age of Ultron" didn't have any time for. I really hope someone dies (for realzies I mean).

 

[DefunctTheory]

Spoiler

The fact that this movie is 1% more then Godfather.

And the fact its higher then movies like Lawrance of Arabia, West Side Story, Lord of the Rings Trilogy, and Disney's Fantasia sickens me.

You mean the system used more to review current movies than to aggregate movies that are older than Internet itself and whose reviews only exist because of archivists, and most didn't even have ratings at the time, is not working right on 50 years old movies... gasp! I hope no one bases his choice between Captain America and West Side Story on rotten tomatoes.

And that using rotten tomatoes (or any rating for that matter) to categorize thousands of movies in a 2 digits aggregation system is pointless because at some point the granularity becomes meaningless while still being too arbitrary?... Who would have thought?

Or maybe you could explain to us what is the meaning of that 1% you find so sickening. What is the difference between a 36% movie and a 37% movie? Clearly a 60% movie is distinctly worst than a 61% movie. Is a 4% movie half as crappy as a 2% movie, or only 2/100 less crappy?

Because Godfather 1 and 2 derserves its RT rating to be 100% because they are objectively perfect films.

It changed filmmaking forever.

I think there's two problems here.

1. There is no such thing as an entirely, objectively good thing of art, whether it be movies, paintings, or rule 34 pictures depicting breast the size of small moons. Certain parts of it (The shot direction, for example) maybe objectively good or bad, but the thing as a whole cannot be.

2. You're attempting to use Rotten Tomatoes for something it was never intended to be used for. It's rating system was designed to give people a rough idea of how many people liked the film. That's it. The percentages displayed doesn't even reflect the actual scores the movies got - It only reflects how many people liked them in some way overall. If a movie gets an 80% rating, it means 80% of the people who submitted a review score gave it 3.5 stars or better. That's it.

 

[mduncan50]

Spoiler

The fact that this movie is 1% more then Godfather.

And the fact its higher then movies like Lawrance of Arabia, West Side Story, Lord of the Rings Trilogy, and Disney's Fantasia sickens me.

You mean the system used more to review current movies than to aggregate movies that are older than Internet itself and whose reviews only exist because of archivists, and most didn't even have ratings at the time, is not working right on 50 years old movies... gasp! I hope no one bases his choice between Captain America and West Side Story on rotten tomatoes.

And that using rotten tomatoes (or any rating for that matter) to categorize thousands of movies in a 2 digits aggregation system is pointless because at some point the granularity becomes meaningless while still being too arbitrary?... Who would have thought?

Or maybe you could explain to us what is the meaning of that 1% you find so sickening. What is the difference between a 36% movie and a 37% movie? Clearly a 60% movie is distinctly worst than a 61% movie. Is a 4% movie half as crappy as a 2% movie, or only 2/100 less crappy?

Because Godfather 1 and 2 derserves its RT rating to be 100% because they are objectively perfect films.

It changed filmmaking forever.

I think there's two problems here.

1. There is no such thing as an entirely, objectively good thing of art, whether it be movies, paintings, or rule 34 pictures depicting breast the size of small moons. Certain parts of it (The shot direction, for example) maybe objectively good or bad, but the thing as a whole cannot be.

2. You're attempting to use Rotten Tomatoes for something it was never intended to be used for. It's rating system was designed to give people a rough idea of how many people liked the film. That's it. The percentages displayed doesn't even reflect the actual scores the movies got - It only reflects how many people liked them in some way overall. If a movie gets an 80% rating, it means 80% of the people who submitted a review score gave it 3.5 stars or better. That's it.

Perfect example would be using the Godfather films. First Godfather has a Tomatometer score of 99% fresh. But one person didn't like it. From the site blurb, he found Brando to be quite sub-par. Is he wrong? No, it's his opinion. He subjectively did not like it, because watching a movie is a subjective experience. Just like someone who enjoyed a bad movie isn't wrong. If you enjoyed it, then it did its job. Then you look at Part II and the Tomatometer drops a little bit to 97% fresh. Does that make it an objectively worse film? I mean if you look at it "objectively" since it had two bad reviews, it was twice as bad as the first one, right? Funnily enough though, when you look at the average scores Part I garnered a 9.2/10 whereas Part II received 9.5/10. So is Part II objectively better, even though twice as many people that reviewed it didn't like it? Or maybe that just doesn't matter, and "did you like it" is the only thing that matters in the end?

 

[Pyrian]

Can we stop arguing about unhatched eggs now that it's gotten one "rotten" review and dropped to 94%?

 

[DefunctTheory]

Can we stop arguing about unhatched eggs now that it's gotten one "rotten" review and dropped to 94%?

Yes. Now we can discuss the obvious DC sympathizer trying to bomb the movie's score. I bet he hates Freedom and likes to smell his own farts and is ugly.

 

[Chanticoblues]

Can we stop arguing about unhatched eggs now that it's gotten one "rotten" review and dropped to 94%?

Yes. Now we can discuss the obvious DC sympathizer trying to bomb the movie's score. I bet he hates Freedom and likes to smell his own farts and is ugly.

I just checked the critic's previous ratings. He also gave 'Marvel's Agent Carter: Season 2' a negative review. It looks like you're right.

Now how do we kidnap his kids?

 

[mduncan50]

Can we stop arguing about unhatched eggs now that it's gotten one "rotten" review and dropped to 94%?

Yes. Now we can discuss the obvious DC sympathizer trying to bomb the movie's score. I bet he hates Freedom and likes to smell his own farts and is ugly.

LOL I predict a lot of hate from those that don't quite understand sarcasm.

 

[mduncan50]

New review, but apparently it is as much for the concession stands as it is for the movie.

It's a huge aspartame rush of a film: a giant irresistible snack, not nutritious, but very tasty.

 

[mduncan50]

Puts a certain other superhero vs superhero movie to shame.

This is the cinematic superhero showdown you've dreamt of since childhood, precisely because that's everything - and all - it wants to be.

Calling this 'the best Marvel movie' is equivalent to proclaiming 'this is the best Dorito I've ever tasted.'

Wait...wtf was that last one? Okay, so I had to look further into that review, and I'm glad I did, because I find it amazing how one can give a movie a positive review while so stubbornly missing the point of it. From calling Captain America a Fascist to introducing Black Panther as the one "whose special power is that he has little tiny nails to scratch you with" it is an infinitely entertaining hot mess.

 

[Gorrath]

Puts a certain other superhero vs superhero movie to shame.

This is the cinematic superhero showdown you've dreamt of since childhood, precisely because that's everything - and all - it wants to be.

Calling this 'the best Marvel movie' is equivalent to proclaiming 'this is the best Dorito I've ever tasted.'

Wait...wtf was that last one? Okay, so I had to look further into that review, and I'm glad I did, because I find it amazing how one can give a movie a positive review while so stubbornly missing the point of it. From calling Captain America a Fascist to introducing Black Panther as the one "whose special power is that he has little tiny nails to scratch you with" it is an infinitely entertaining hot mess.

I see people use the word fascist a lot and many of them don't seem to know what it means.

 

[DefunctTheory]

From calling Captain America a Fascist

Wait, what? Why? Captain America starts his career by punching Hitler in the face, has been pretty consistently anti-Fascist America, and even spent an entire movie fighting against a Neo-Nazi American splinter group. His last movie ended when he tore down SHIELD for Christ sake.

I know the name 'America' can throw people for a loop, but really? Fascist?

 

[Erttheking]

From calling Captain America a Fascist

Wait, what? Why? Captain America starts his career by punching Hitler in the face, has been pretty consistently anti-Fascist America, and even spent an entire movie fighting against a Neo-Nazi American splinter group. His last movie ended when he tore down SHIELD for Christ sake.

I know the name 'America' can throw people for a loop, but really? Fascist?

Fascist is the buzz word to say that this person who disagrees with you is evil while maintaining a facade of intellectualism.

OT: Looking forward to this movie, glad that it's good.

 

[mduncan50]

From calling Captain America a Fascist

Wait, what? Why? Captain America starts his career by punching Hitler in the face, has been pretty consistently anti-Fascist America, and even spent an entire movie fighting against a Neo-Nazi American splinter group. His last movie ended when he tore down SHIELD for Christ sake.

I know the name 'America' can throw people for a loop, but really? Fascist?

The crux of his belief comes from the fact that Cap is doing what he is enforcing his ideal of what is right rather than following every command of his government. Like Gorrath said, people use that word without knowing what it actually means. Seems like a catch-all for anyone who's political views you don't agree with these days.

 

[minkus_draconus]

Honestly, that's what I never understand about the whole "fanboi" debate. Just because I like Marvel, I must want DC to fail? Definitely not. I would much rather have two great superhero fanchises than one. Besides, competition is good; it forces both sides to improve and diversify.

I think it's less "if you like one than you must hate the other" and more "if don't think that every movie that DC/Marvel made is the best movie ever, then it can only be because you are a fanboy and shill of Marvel/DC". I think some people just invest so much of themselves into their fandoms of things that if at any time the thing they love is seen as less than perfect, or seen as not being as good as something else, that it becomes very personal to them, and they find a need to come up with a reason that other people say those things because they know that it's not true. And to be clear, when it comes to comic book movies there are plenty of these people on both sides.

I never understood this mindset about comics because of how frequently writers and artists move around. I have always had characters from both Marvel and DC who I liked and while I might not like one or two people running them I don't want either to fail because I would lose something.

Heck I never understood this when it was video games or computers people were banging on about.