Iron Man 3 vs Man of Steel

Started by -Pr-39 pages

That's how I feel about Reynolds and Hal.

Reynold's isn't a great actor to begin with. IMO.

Originally posted by Golgo13
Reynold's isn't a great actor to begin with. IMO.

Great? No. Good? Yes, imo. I thought he was exactly the kind of actor they needed for Hal.

Just a shame that they had a crappy script.

They should have hired better writers and got more input from DC's creators. It looks like the same people are going to produce GL 2 😱

Originally posted by Golgo13
You didn't like Hugo's performance? It's up there with the best villain performances, IMO. Unfortunately, he couldn't save the movie.

Just felt like they could've done alot more with the character

movie wasn't that bad.

Originally posted by Golgo13
It's all a matter of opinion. I don't even agree with most critics, anyway.

Apparently a lot of movie goers disagree with you on Green Lantern that's why it's box office numbers are below Cap and Thor. 58 critics on RT agree with you while 163 disagree with you. Both Thor and Cap have better ratings and box office sales than GL has to do with solid stories and characters.

Should'eve stuck with that Green Lantern: Secret Origin which they were using not just some of it.

Originally posted by WhiteWitchKing
Apparently a lot of movie goers disagree with you on Green Lantern that's why it's box office numbers are below Cap and Thor. 58 critics on RT agree with you while 163 disagree with you. Both Thor and Cap have better ratings and box office sales than GL has to do with solid stories and characters.

And? I don't care what critics have to say. I disagree with most of them. Cap and Thor were nothing special and it shows. They're ratings aren't anything special.

Who the **** cares about RT anyway people act like that place is the voice of the world.

I honestly can't understand how anyone would rate GL as being better than Cap or Thor.

When it wasn't butchering the lore, it was being needlessly convoluted.

Technically, Cap was a better movie, I just enjoyed GL a little more. I'm not debating whether it was a good movie, because it was not, it's just my opinion.

Originally posted by Kazenji
Who the **** cares about RT anyway people act like that place is the voice of the world.

I wasn't speaking about RT. I barely go there. IMDB is where I get my movie needs.

Originally posted by Golgo13
Technically, Cap was a better movie, I just enjoyed GL a little more. I'm not debating whether it was a good movie, because it was not, it's just my opinion.

Okay, I guess...

Not everyone is going to have the same view points, PR. Come on.

What?

Meaning not everyone likes Cap or Nolan's Batman or whatever.

Originally posted by Golgo13
Meaning not everyone likes Cap or Nolan's Batman or whatever.

I never said everyone had to.

I'm one of the few people who actually doesn't think as highly of Nolan's work as most.

Originally posted by Golgo13
And? I don't care what critics have to say. I disagree with most of them. Cap and Thor were nothing special and it shows. They're ratings aren't anything special.

Of course you don't, nobody is saying you should have an opinion. But Cap and Thor were obviously more special seeing as how both got ratings above 70%, backed by box office numbers surpassing GL, while GL got 26% . Obviously there were more favorable opinions by movie goers and critics for Thor and Cap over GL. So yes, it was as bad as people made it out to be and it shows in ratings and box office $$$. You just have a different taste then most.

Originally posted by Kazenji
Who the **** cares about RT anyway people act like that place is the voice of the world.

People who don't want to spend time and money to find out a movie is sh!tty. Not every movie is a must see, that's why they're are critics who's job it is to watch and review these movies. While not accurate all the time, it does a give useful insights and an average of differing opinions of those who actually saw the movie. It's no different then going onto a message board like this to gauge everyone's opinion and decide whether you would want to see a movie you never heard of or are on the fence about.

And the thing with critics their personal tastes also comes into all, What they like in movies etc and of course everyone is different.

Originally posted by Kazenji
And the thing with critics their personal tastes also comes into all, What they like in movies etc and of course everyone is different.

Which is why RT is better since it's a collective meter and not any one critic deciding on a movies rating. The range of critics opinion is similar sample of the public whole. You've have your stuck up and easily satisfied critics along the those in between affecting the rating. No different than the public whose taste in film some what mirrors that.