- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
0
Posted on 8/2/16 at 10:18 pm to Sentrius
They really need to part ways. The general public has basically said "take our money" as long as you put a respectable story up on the screen. They couldn't even do that. They keep thinking that rebooting is going to save them and it just doesn't work. DC and their studios just keep running out of the trenches into machine gun fire.
This post was edited on 8/2/16 at 10:23 pm
Posted on 8/2/16 at 10:19 pm to RLDSC FAN
Haha. 
Posted on 8/2/16 at 10:24 pm to Sentrius
It is disappointing.
Posted on 8/2/16 at 10:35 pm to Sentrius
quote:Maybe more than that. If WW and JL aren't successful, it'll probably be over. And remember, even though JL will be much lighter than previous installments, Snyder is still the director. It will have to win people over and then some for it to be well received, IMO.
Snyder literally set the entire DCEU back 5-7 years
The only other movie that I think they make is Batman if JL isn't successful. Maybe a WW sequel if people like it. I think we might see the end of Superman for a LONG time if JL fails, which I think that likelihood is high.
ETA: I mean, does anyone honestly see a Zack Snyder film getting well received?
Anyone? What happens if JL fails? Any thoughts? This post was edited on 8/2/16 at 10:51 pm
Posted on 8/2/16 at 11:00 pm to RLDSC FAN
Run for the hills!
Which would be correct it the hills were movie theater seats. Most of us are going to see this movie in the theater regardless right? Just don't go in with expectations. Any apparently.
Which would be correct it the hills were movie theater seats. Most of us are going to see this movie in the theater regardless right? Just don't go in with expectations. Any apparently.
Posted on 8/2/16 at 11:06 pm to Baloo
quote:
Matt Singer's review is a must read. I mean, he f'n hated the film, but he does a really great job of savaging it (bad reviews are almost always more fun to read). He spares no one, as he gleefully tears into every misconceived idea.
LINK /
quote:
The movie is so repetitious it’s like Ayer’s trying to make a postmodern commentary on pointless fetch quests in modern blockbusters.
Ouch.
Posted on 8/2/16 at 11:18 pm to RLDSC FAN
Probably already posted, but. . .
Peter Travers (my favorite critic) destroys David Ayer with his review:
I'm glad. Ayer has shown that he has what it takes to direct high-quality, intelligent movies for adults, yet he stoops to the level of directing a comic book movie.
Peter Travers (my favorite critic) destroys David Ayer with his review:
quote:
Who stole the soul of Suicide Squad? I'd say it's Ayer's willingness to go all limp-dick and compromise his hardcore action bona fides for a PG-13 crowdpleaser that would rather ingratiate than cut deep, or even cut at all.
I'm glad. Ayer has shown that he has what it takes to direct high-quality, intelligent movies for adults, yet he stoops to the level of directing a comic book movie.
Posted on 8/2/16 at 11:19 pm to Freauxzen
Yeah it is kind of funny that a lot of us plan to see it despite freaking out about the bad reviews.
Granted how many of us will want to see it again? In all likelihood the first week or two will be very good in terms of draws, but what about after that?
Granted how many of us will want to see it again? In all likelihood the first week or two will be very good in terms of draws, but what about after that?
Posted on 8/2/16 at 11:21 pm to Patrick_Bateman
Guess there's not enough unfunny, ugly chicks as leads for the critics to blatantly lie and give a shitty movie good reviews. This movie is aimed at 16-30 yr old dudes....DEVILS!
This post was edited on 8/2/16 at 11:23 pm
Posted on 8/2/16 at 11:23 pm to ThoseGuys
quote:This is exactly it. Bad reviews don't ALWAYS mean gloom and doom, but it can't help. Nobody knows for sure if SS will be a failure, but this is a bad thing plain and simple.
Granted how many of us will want to see it again? In all likelihood the first week or two will be very good in terms of draws, but what about after that?
The good thing about it is, they didn't spend BvS money on this. They did spend a lot, though. It will make money, but we'll see how much of a profit it will make. Enough for WB to continue unscathed? We'll see. JL will be the most important movie for DC, though. This post was edited on 8/2/16 at 11:33 pm
Posted on 8/2/16 at 11:34 pm to abellsujr
SS had to be successful and fresh enough to break even and give WW and JL enough of a fighting chance to succeed or at least provide enough of a big cushion in cases JL bombs predictably with Snyder at the helm.
If SS turns out to be relatively pedestrian in both film quality and reaction, the stakes have been raised higher for WW to really knock it out of the park.
All in all, Snyder should be fired immediately once JL is done no matter how it turns out. He's not a trustworthy asset and has proven he cannot make even decent films with the most story driven characters there is in Superman, Batman, and Wonder Woman.
If SS turns out to be relatively pedestrian in both film quality and reaction, the stakes have been raised higher for WW to really knock it out of the park.
All in all, Snyder should be fired immediately once JL is done no matter how it turns out. He's not a trustworthy asset and has proven he cannot make even decent films with the most story driven characters there is in Superman, Batman, and Wonder Woman.
Posted on 8/2/16 at 11:43 pm to abellsujr
quote:
he good thing about it is, they didn't spend BvS money on this. They did spend a lot, though. It will make money, but we'll see how much of a profit it will make. Enough for WB to continue unscathed? We'll see.
I still think these movies are a gold mine for studios. BvS was trashed but still made just under 900 million dollars worlwide. A well received BvS easily makes 1.2-1.5 billion. What studios have to do is reign in these budgets, they've completely spiraled out of control. I still can't believe Sony put up 150 million for that Ghostbusters remake. Lmao!
Posted on 8/2/16 at 11:47 pm to Patrick_Bateman
quote:
I'm glad. Ayer has shown that he has what it takes to direct high-quality, intelligent movies for adults, yet he stoops to the level of directing a comic book movie.
I'm not understanding why that's a bad thing??
Posted on 8/3/16 at 12:01 am to RLDSC FAN
quote:Yea, I keep thinking about it and Man of Steel was so panned by a lot of people, it made $600 million, and WB still thought it was OK to start a universe out of it.
I still think these movies are a gold mine for studios.
That has to mean that they probably will continue regardless, but it's disappointing how much money and quality they're leaving on the table. Mostly quality. I guess we will just continue to go down this road everytime a DC movie is released. Critics hate it, some fans love it, some hate it, some will freak out and start petitions
, and yet people will still see it and the movie will still make a profit. This is just what DC will be from now on. 
Posted on 8/3/16 at 12:12 am to Sentrius
quote:
I still can't get over how Warner Brothers thought it was a good idea to hire a talentless hack who sees storytelling as an obstacle
Agreed.
Somehow people thought watchmen was good and he has been living off that for too long.
Posted on 8/3/16 at 12:19 am to jeff5891
Some people thought 300 was good also. Even if people do believe that, why they thought it was a good idea for him to do Superman, I will never know. I would rather Singer any day of the week. He just needed a better cast and more action in his movie. Maybe a different suit. Superman Returns was no masterpiece, but I think he had the heart of Superman better figured out than Snyder.
But I think JJ Abrams would have been my first choice. He wrote a Superman movie back in the day that WB passed on. It would have been nice to see that, IMO.
Don't get me wrong, I love the action in Man of Steel, but it could have been a much better film with some legitimate heart.
But I think JJ Abrams would have been my first choice. He wrote a Superman movie back in the day that WB passed on. It would have been nice to see that, IMO.
Don't get me wrong, I love the action in Man of Steel, but it could have been a much better film with some legitimate heart.
Posted on 8/3/16 at 12:24 am to abellsujr
quote:
I would rather Singer any day of the week
If I had to choose btw Singer, Snyder and Raimi,. I might choose the bullet.....
quote:
it could have been a much better film with some legitimate heart.
How many people had to die here bc superman refused to stop the tanker with his hands???
Posted on 8/3/16 at 12:28 am to jeff5891
quote:I know. WTF is wrong with me talking about things I actually liked in Superman Returns. I fricking hated that movie.
If I had to choose btw Singer, Snyder and Raimi,. I might choose the bullet.....
These fricking bad reviews have me all screwed up again. Posted on 8/3/16 at 12:44 am to Patrick_Bateman
quote:
Probably already posted, but. . .
Peter Travers (my favorite critic) destroys David Ayer with his review:
quote:
Who stole the soul of Suicide Squad? I'd say it's Ayer's willingness to go all limp-dick and compromise his hardcore action bona fides for a PG-13 crowdpleaser that would rather ingratiate than cut deep, or even cut at all.
I'm glad. Ayer has shown that he has what it takes to direct high-quality, intelligent movies for adults, yet he stoops to the level of directing a comic book movie
So it's basically Captain America Civil War?
Page 10 of 24
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News