re: Man of Steel embargo ends tonight (MOS Review Thread) + MOS2 being fast-tracked

quote:

---

Gentlemen, just go watch the movie and chill out.

---

THIS

quote:

---

t's not like any of us are NOT going to see the movie based on a review.

---

Yeah but I want reviews to be awesome so that I can fap hardcore. My current fapping to the anticipation of this movie is average at best because of these god damn critics.

quote:

---

League Champs

---

Link to any of those?

quote:

---

Link to any of those?

---

Justin Craig was spot on with After Earth, Hangover3, and Into Darkness

I was just stirring the pot. But using the same reasoning, it's funny how people are bashing critic's opinions of a movie they haven't seen yet.

ETA: I don't plan on seeing it. It's just funny watching all the super fans struggle against the slowly declining RT percentage.

If these critics were bringing up valid criticisms - like inconsistencies in the plot, bad acting, pacing problems, etc. - then I wouldn't be criticizing them.

However, most of the negatives aren't even negatives, and it's just them bitching because the movie isn't like every other plodding overacted film full of faux drama, dragging dialogue and uninteresting characters that they love to suck off.

When you go see an action movie, you expect to see a lot of action. You can't do see an action movie and then bitch about there being a lot of action. That's not a valid criticism. That'd be like going to an R-Rated film and then bitching because there is foul language/violence/nudity. You have to get in the right frame of mind before you go to a movie. You have to ask yourself, what is this director trying to accomplish?

Tarantino, Brad Bird, and Spielberg all make great movies, but they each make different types of movies. If you go in trying to compare them on the same level, to each other, or expect them to be something that they simply aren't trying to be, then that's on the critic, not the movie. That's my problem with these reviews and the critics they come from. I don't care that you enjoyed 1978's Superman. I don't care that you liked Superman Returns. I don't care that you think Superman didn't need a reboot. I don't care how you feel about the previous works from a director/writer/producer/etc. You check those feelings at the door and view the film in a vacuum. I know it's hard to be objective when viewing a film, but you have to focus on the general aspects of a film when criticizing it (Did it deliver what it promised? Plotholes? Pacing? Acting? Sound? etc.).

If you have a problem with the story in the sense that you would have liked something to happen differently, then put that separately from your official review. For example, I didn't like that in Star Trek Into Darkness (spoiler coming) the writers killed off Pike. I enjoyed Greenwood's work at Pike, but if I were writing a review on the movie, I'd put that aside and critique what I saw, rather than what I would have done.

But then again, I'm not a pretentious douchebag who likes to show off the extent of my vocabulary when writing a critique of a movie, but that's just me.

I know I can do a better job writing reviews, but I have a job nor am I pretentious douche who can sit around all day on my iPad at Starbucks and criticize a movie just because it's budget cost more than a cup of Starbucks coffee to make.

You used four sentences when two would have sufficed. Grammar usage on a message board is meaningless in terms of being able to give an effective movie review.

:-)