1/6 Hot Toys BvS: Dawn of Justice-Wonder Woman

Collector Freaks Forum

Help Support Collector Freaks Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
:goodpost:

It's like people can't accept that, like it or not, it's a bad film.

I'd like to hear your reasons why, other than parroting popular opinions like, "uhhh bad pacing" (which it isn't if you actually follow the movie) and "too dark" (A welcome addition after years of trite, Marvel shlock flooding the market).
 
But for those who did like it, their perspective is the exact opposite (Like it or not, it's a good film. It's like people can't accept that). So who's to dictate whose opinion is "right"? Rhetorical question, because the answer is nobody, it's all subjective. Just because someone's opinion is that it's bad doesn't make it a "fact" that it's a bad film, simply because that's what YOU thought because conversely, someone who thought it was good can easily say it's a "fact" that it's good simply because that's what THEY thought.

Because things don't work like that. My cars pretty ****. I like it. Some of the artists I listen to aren't particularly gifted, but I like them. If I liked BvS, I'd still be able to admit that it's a bad film. Works the other way too, of course.
 
Because things don't work like that. My cars pretty ****. I like it. Some of the artists I listen to aren't particularly gifted, but I like them. If I liked BvS, I'd still be able to admit that it's a bad film. Works the other way too, of course.

If you genuinely think/thought something is/was good, why do you have to admit that it's bad simply because that's what other people think?

If someone genuinely thought it was good, it doesn't make them wrong simply because you genuinely thought it was bad. It's still subjective.
 
I'd like to hear your reasons why, other than parroting popular opinions like, "uhhh bad pacing" (which it isn't if you actually follow the movie) and "too dark" (A welcome addition after years of trite, Marvel shlock flooding the market).

My issue is that it could have been so much better.
 
I'd like to hear your reasons why, other than parroting popular opinions like, "uhhh bad pacing" (which it isn't if you actually follow the movie) and "too dark" (A welcome addition after years of trite, Marvel shlock flooding the market).

I didn't see the movie--I'll see it on cable for free, as I don't intend to shell out money for Zack Snyder's wrong-headed version of Superman (I saw Man of Steel and I dislike this Superman intensely.) However, Deven Faraci at Badass Digest, a reviewer who I always find thoughtful even when I disagree with him, basically eviscerated this movie in his review. And in a follow-up article he listed ten questions the movie made him ask. For those who have seen the movie and want to defend it, here's a link to the article, and I'd love to hear your answers to Faraci's questions.
 
So even though I genuinely thought it was good, I have to admit that it was actually a bad film because that's what some other people thought?

No. You're missing the point. My car is almost as old as me. Things go wrong on it all the time. It's not good, because it has a lot of issues. It doesn't work as efficiently as more modern cars. Those are facts. It's a bad car, and that's that. However, I'm still allowed to like it. You're allowed to like BvS, but that doesn't make it good, in the same way my car isn't good just because I like it.
 
No. You're missing the point. My car is almost as old as me. Things go wrong on it all the time. It's not good, because it has a lot of issues. It doesn't work as efficiently as more modern cars. Those are facts. It's a bad car, and that's that. However, I'm still allowed to like it. You're allowed to like BvS, but that doesn't make it good, in the same way my car isn't good just because I like it.

No, I got the point, I know precisely what you're saying. However, what I glean that you're essentially saying is one is allowed to like BvS, but they have to concede that it's not good, because in your opinion it's a "fact" that it wasn't good. Is that correct?
 
I didn't see the movie--I'll see it on cable for free, as I don't intend to shell out money for Zack Snyder's wrong-headed version of Superman (I saw Man of Steel and I dislike this Superman intensely.) However, Deven Faraci at Badass Digest, a reviewer who I always find thoughtful even when I disagree with him, basically eviscerated this movie in his review. And in a follow-up article he listed ten questions the movie made him ask. For those who have seen the movie and want to defend it, here's a link to the article, and I'd love to hear your answers to Faraci's questions.

Why didn’t Superman clean up the World Engine?

He had more important things to do, like actually save people.

Why is Lex Luthor equipping his death squads with ‘experimental bullets’?

so Lois could have an investigative journalist story arc.

Why does anyone think Superman shot a whole bunch of people in Africa?

Because everyone who was actually at the terrorist compound is either dead or working for Luthor. People just saw Superman come in and when he left a bunch of people were dead.

Why does Lex Luthor blow up the Senate hearing and kill his assistant?

To show that Superman could have saved those people that he didn't, also Lex is a sociopath who doesn't care about anyone except himself.

Why does Superman stop Batman in the middle of clearly chasing bad guys and let the bad guys get away?

Because he doesn't approve of Batman's methods and this was his way of telling him to stop his crusade.

Why is the Knightmare in this movie at all?

To show the audience Batman's fear that if he doesn't stop Superman this'll happen.

Why does Superman fight Batman if he doesn’t want to fight Batman?

Because he expected to beat him fairly quickly and didn't count on Batman's ingenuity.

Why does Lois Lane go back for the spear?

Because she and everyone else who saw what happened in Metropolis two years before assumes that anything that fires lazers out it's eyes and flies is probably Kryptonian in origin.

Why does Lex Luthor create Doomsday, and why does he put his blood in the Matrix?

Again, because he's a sociopath who doesn't care how many people die so long as his goal is achieved. He blew up capitol hill just because someone wouldn't let him have his way.

Why didn’t Wonder Woman kill Doomsday?

Because she was restraining it with her lasso, did this guy even watch that end scene?

seriously, **** these arm-chair idiots. Just because they were lazy and couldn't follow any sort of character development or plot points that don't revolve around quips or dance-offs like in their precious marvel movies.
 
No, I got the point, I know precisely what you're saying. However, what I glean is that you're essentially saying is one is allowed to like BvS, but they have to concede that it's not good, because in your opinion it's a "fact" that it wasn't good. Is that correct?

Yes. You can break this film down and pick out an infinite number of issues. No film is free from flaws, but when one has so many it and it becomes majorly detrimental it cannot possibly be seen as a 'good film'. People who's job it is to break films down and comment on their success have been tearing this apart, not because Disney 'paid them' or because they 'hate DC' but because it simply wasn't very good.
 
Sewol, you are trying to reason with people who think their opinions are facts and who are at the bottom of the barrel when it comes to sustained coherent thinking.
Most of them do not have a single original thought about this movie as is demonstrated by their recurrent quoting from one or two reviewers, using the exact same vocabulary every time.
That's probably why they found the straightforward story hard to follow, too difficult for them.
 
No. You're missing the point. My car is almost as old as me. Things go wrong on it all the time. It's not good, because it has a lot of issues. It doesn't work as efficiently as more modern cars. Those are facts. It's a bad car, and that's that. However, I'm still allowed to like it. You're allowed to like BvS, but that doesn't make it good, in the same way my car isn't good just because I like it.

Those are facts about your car. Great. But if someone said the entire design, color, model and look of your car is the ugliest thing ever made Becuase they liked a different color or design or manufacturer that would be an accurate comparison. Your "fact" argument is off the mark. People are not arguing about any Facts(except things like "batman doesn't kill" which isn't a fact given he had killed in comic and film before and you can prove he has weather you want to accept it or not). The arguments used to say it's bad are OPINION. And to equate that to car reliability is silly.

Some reviewer saying the film is bad or paced wrong or the acting is bad are NOT facts. Those are the exact opposite of fact, they are opinion.

Your argument is that it's bad Becuase someone says it's bad. Those are not facts. That is not a truth. It's a bloody opinion. And if someone thinks it's good they are not wrong.

And even the "facts" you used are off. Lots of older cars are worth more then new cars. Even rusted out non running ones. A shell with no engine of a Shelby cobra original that's 50 years old and has no wheels cost more then a brand new mustang gt model year 2016. So even your facts, are not actually facts. They are opinion.
 
Why didn’t Superman clean up the World Engine?

He had more important things to do, like actually save people.

Why is Lex Luthor equipping his death squads with ‘experimental bullets’?

so Lois could have an investigative journalist story arc.

Why does anyone think Superman shot a whole bunch of people in Africa?

Because everyone who was actually at the terrorist compound is either dead or working for Luthor. People just saw Superman come in and when he left a bunch of people were dead.

Why does Lex Luthor blow up the Senate hearing and kill his assistant?

To show that Superman could have saved those people that he didn't, also Lex is a sociopath who doesn't care about anyone except himself.

Why does Superman stop Batman in the middle of clearly chasing bad guys and let the bad guys get away?

Because he doesn't approve of Batman's methods and this was his way of telling him to stop his crusade.

Why is the Knightmare in this movie at all?

To show the audience Batman's fear that if he doesn't stop Superman this'll happen.

Why does Superman fight Batman if he doesn’t want to fight Batman?

Because he expected to beat him fairly quickly and didn't count on Batman's ingenuity.

Why does Lois Lane go back for the spear?

Because she and everyone else who saw what happened in Metropolis two years before assumes that anything that fires lazers out it's eyes and flies is probably Kryptonian in origin.

Why does Lex Luthor create Doomsday, and why does he put his blood in the Matrix?

Again, because he's a sociopath who doesn't care how many people die so long as his goal is achieved. He blew up capitol hill just because someone wouldn't let him have his way.

Why didn’t Wonder Woman kill Doomsday?

Because she was restraining it with her lasso, did this guy even watch that end scene?

seriously, **** these arm-chair idiots. Just because they were lazy and couldn't follow any sort of character development or plot points that don't revolve around quips or dance-offs like in their precious marvel movies.

Okay, let's see here. Keep in mind that I'm admitting upfront that I didn't see the movie.

Why didn’t Superman clean up the World Engine? "He had more important things to do, like actually save people," was your answer. Except the events of Man of Steel happened 18 months ago. You're saying that Superman couldn't find an afternoon free to clean up a piece of dangerous alien technology that any old bad guy out there--like say, Luthor--could get his hands on and cause havoc with? Really?

Why is Lex Luthor equipping his death squads with ‘experimental bullets’? "So Lois could have an investigative journalist story arc," you said. Except that answer is basically a criticism, not a defense, of the movie. You're admitting the bullets were a plot contrivance.

Why does anyone think Superman shot a whole bunch of people in Africa? "Because everyone who was actually at the terrorist compound is either dead or working for Luthor. People just saw Superman come in and when he left a bunch of people were dead," you said. Yeah--a bunch of people were dead of bullet wounds. Why would anyone assume Superman is suddenly using guns?

Why does Superman stop Batman in the middle of clearly chasing bad guys and let the bad guys get away? "Because he doesn't approve of Batman's methods and this was his way of telling him to stop his crusade," you said. You mean by letting bad guys with automatic weapons get away? Sorry, that makes no sense at all.

Why does Lex Luthor create Doomsday, and why does he put his blood in the Matrix? "Again, because he's a sociopath who doesn't care how many people die so long as his goal is achieved. He blew up capitol hill just because someone wouldn't let him have his way," was your answer. Okay--let's say Doomsday kills Superman. What's Lex's plan for when Doomsday then goes around trying to kill everyone else in the world, including Lex? Who's going to stop Doomsday then?
 
Just because they were lazy and couldn't follow any sort of character development or plot points that don't revolve around quips or dance-offs like in their precious marvel movies.

Yeah. Because everyone who doesn't like BvS doesn't like it because they only like Marvel.
 
Those are facts about your car. Great. But if someone said the entire design, color, model and look of your car is the ugliest thing ever made Becuase they liked a different color or design or manufacturer that would be an accurate comparison. Your "fact" argument is off the mark. People are not arguing about any Facts(except things like "batman doesn't kill" which isn't a fact given he had killed in comic and film before and you can prove he has weather you want to accept it or not). The arguments used to say it's bad are OPINION. And to equate that to car reliability is silly.

Some reviewer saying the film is bad or paced wrong or the acting is bad are NOT facts. Those are the exact opposite of fact, they are opinion.

Your argument is that it's bad Becuase someone says it's bad. Those are not facts. That is not a truth. It's a bloody opinion. And if someone thinks it's good they are not wrong.

And even the "facts" you used are off. Lots of older cars are worth more then new cars. Even rusted out non running ones. A shell with no engine of a Shelby cobra original that's 50 years old and has no wheels cost more then a brand new mustang gt model year 2016. So even your facts, are not actually facts. They are opinion.

So there are no bad films, and no good ones?
 
Back
Top