Justice League 4K UHD (2017)

[Ant1010]

Originally Posted by pottyaboutpotter1

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying your opinion is wrong or anything like that. It's just that way too many people online have the attitude of "My opinion is the only right wrong and everyone else is just wrong/stupid/sheep". Not enough people have the ability to step back and consider a film outside their own gut feeling.

And way too many people online have the attitude of "If its certified fresh it has to be good". There are plenty of films that are good that I don't care for enough to watch again. I like to call those one time watches. Sadly the MCU films I hated aren't them. I gave them a shot and they were bad, because RT and the internet praises them means I need to step back and say "hey maybe these are good". Come on man thats ridiculous and that's trying to alter somebody's own opinion to join the masses on the rating. Everybody can't possible say something is good if they truly don't think its good. It doesn't work that way

[BluRayHiDef]

Originally Posted by NegaScott128

Here's the thing about "my opinion is right for me" and "critics don't matter." If it were true, then it means Birdemic and The Godfather are equally good.

In my opinion, in every context my opinion is right and everyone else's is wrong.

[Show spoiler]I'm joking.

[NegaScott128]

Originally Posted by BluRayHiDef

In my opinion, in every context my opinion is right and everyone else's is wrong.

I'm joking.

It's not a joke if it's something you actually believe.

[pottyaboutpotter1]

Originally Posted by Ant1010

And way too many people online have the attitude of "If its certified fresh it has to be good". There are plenty of films that are good that I don't care for enough to watch again. I like to call those one time watches. Sadly the MCU films I hated aren't them. I gave them a shot and they were bad, because RT and the internet praises them means I need to step back and say "hey maybe these are good". Come on man thats ridiculous and that's trying to alter somebody's own opinion to join the masses on the rating. Everybody can't possible say something is good if they truly don't think its good. It doesn't work that way

It's not trying to alter any opinion. It's getting an appreciation for what others may have liked about it that you didn't.

For example, I was not a fan of Batman v Superman. But I can appreciate what some may have liked about it, even if I didn't like those aspects myself. It's all about appreciating film as an art form. You don't have to consider them good, it's about going "Well I didn't like it, but I can see why others would". One person might look at the Mona Lisa and see something horrendous. Another might see a masterpiece. Gaining an understanding of both views allows a greater understanding of the work as a whole to form. Plus it has the added benefit of giving you a greater understanding of what it is you look for in films, which is a valuable tool that will lead to less "wasted" time or money. For example, through my own study I've found I have a fondness for character, atmosphere, sentiment and heart. Which is probably why Spielberg is my favourite director.

I'm not saying you need to consider films you don't like good. But it is possible to not like a film but still recognise it's regarded as good.

It's not about changing opinions. It's about gaining a greater understanding about the work and your own tastes in general.

[Ant1010]

Originally Posted by BluRayHiDef

In my opinion, in every context my opinion is right and everyone else's is wrong.

[Show spoiler]I'm joking.

great job on your BvS/CW video btw.

[Ant1010]

Originally Posted by pottyaboutpotter1

It's not trying to alter any opinion. It's getting an appreciation for what others may have liked about it that you didn't.

For example, I was not a fan of Batman v Superman. But I can appreciate what some may have liked about it, even if I didn't like those aspects myself. It's all about appreciating film as an art form. You don't have to consider them good, it's about going "Well I didn't like it, but I can see why others would". One person might look at the Mona Lisa and see something horrendous. Another might see a masterpiece. Gaining an understanding of both views allows a greater understanding of the work as a whole to form. Plus it has the added benefit of giving you a greater understanding of what it is you look for in films, which is a valuable tool that will lead to less "wasted" time or money.

I'm not saying you need to consider films you don't like good. But it is possible to not like a film but still recognise it's regarded as good.

It's not about changing opinions. It's about gaining a greater understanding about the work and your own tastes in general.

Why don't I need to appreciate what others liked and I didn't? what thrill is that going to give me. If we were friends and we saw a movie together and you said you liked it and I said I hated it, we would talk about it and move on. Life would still go on. A lot of film isn't an art form anymore, Directors have limited power to tell there story and vision with so many hats involved. Everything now and days are what makes us the most money. Sadly that is comicbook films, this generation is obsessed with them and we are getting 5-10 per year for the past what? 5-7 years? I'm losing count at this point. Shit Fox alone has like 4 coming out next year. I have too much going on in my life to want to sit down and get a greater understanding on someones taste for film. If that is part of your career then yes i see where you're coming from. But in my life i have zero interest in wanting to know why some random person on the internet hated or loved a film. I read a lot of post in here saying oh the reviews hated this and that now saves me money from seeing it. That person had interest in seeing something and now that interest was altered because reviews on rotten tomato? I know a lot of directors and studios hate that sight because so many people live and die by it. Just look at our convo, you've named dropped 2 websites as a source to back up your claim.

[BluRayHiDef]

Originally Posted by Ant1010

great job on your BvS/CW video btw.

Thanks, mate. I really appreciate your opinion.

[LoSouL]

Originally Posted by pottyaboutpotter1

If you didn't like Star Wars, would you deny saying it's regarded as a good movie?

I'm glad you're taking a step back and adding the qualifier "regarded as"

Your statement would imply that a lot of people like it. That would just be a measure of opinions and not an objective measure of quality.

Any mainstream of popular interest is simply one of many major intersections of minor streams. This metaphorical body of water is not entirely reflective of every other mainstream intersection. It also does not reflect the totality of the minor streams that feed into it. Nor is it at all reflective of the many streams that only intersect elsewhere, or intersect nowhere.

Nothing incontestable is conveyed by putting forward the idea that everything outside a venn diagram of lowest common denominators is bad, while everything inside the overlap is good. From conception that idea would result in an all-encompassing overlap of all interests. This process of elimination would ultimately exclude entire mediums, genres and activities. Leaving only the absolute most popular, lucrative, pervasive and necessary events, services and products in existence to be counted as competitively worthwhile.

Originally Posted by pottyaboutpotter1

but that is an incredibly condescending view of audiences as blind sheep

You take issue with what you see as de-legitimization of opinions but you choose to exalt concentrated cores of audiences as an immutable, agreeable source of divination, discernment and reinforcement in order to conveniently exclude the endless oceans of divergent audience members. You see them as indicative of nothing, and try to de-legitimize any persistent or newfound appreciation of movies that you don't like, which have a consensus you can gleam a sense of validation and authority from. ie:

Originally Posted by pottyaboutpotter1

The reason people talk about BVS more than Civil War is because people on the internet are more vocal when they dislike something rather than when they like something. BVS was a colossal disappointment so of course the internet is still ranting about it. It doesn’t help that a lot of DC movie fans on the internet are either incredibly sensitive and defensive about the movies or are far too up Snyder’s backside that they feel they “have” to defend the movies like they’ve been personally insulted.

And that’s why Civil War isn’t really talked about anymore. Because it was a mostly well received film that many people liked. In fact most of the times it’s brought up online are by some DC fans who, unable to defend their own movies, have resorted to just tearing down other movies.

[LoSouL]

Originally Posted by NegaScott128

Here's the thing about "my opinion is right for me" and "critics don't matter." If it were true, then it means Birdemic and The Godfather are equally good.

Here's the thing about what you just said.

The reason Godfather is good isn't because people say it's good.

[pottyaboutpotter1]

You seem to have completely misunderstood what I'm trying to say. I never presented this as an exact science, but as a measurement of the general opinion. If I accounted for every person who had a differing opinion on every forum out there it would take years to gather a conclusive opinion. When doing audience research you can't account for every diverging opinion. You can only work with the general opinion. A majority of people enjoy these movies, thus a majority regard them as good. The Marvel movies being good movies is the general opinion.

The comment you oh so helpfully quoted of mine about Batman v Superman does not contradict this. The majority opinion of Batman v Superman is that it was a bad film. Any forum on the internet will prove that people love to rant about films they hate. I don't try to de-legitimisie any argument apart from arguments that don't have the data to support it or worse, try and mislead the data. Yes, more people are talking about BVS. But what are those people actually saying? They're saying they don't like it. And my statement about some DC fans remains correct. Take a wander onto the DC Cinematic subreddit for proof.

Accounting for every diverging opinion would mean you'd have to spend years trying to find any conclusive data at all. So we have to work with what we have. If I was doing a study on jam on toast being popular, the data regarding jam is what's relevant. I can say that some people would prefer marmalade, but trying to determine how many people prefer marmalade over jam and accounting for all their individual opinions is irrelevant data and defocuses the original topic.

As an academic, I have learned through trial and error that going too "broad" leads to inconclusive data and unfocused research.

I think the problem here is that you've gravely misunderstood what I'm trying to say or, more likely, have read your own interpretation into what I'm saying and ignored my actual point. I never claimed all Marvel movies were good. I said they were widely regarded as good. I suppose it is easy to paint someone's argument as "biased" and claim them to be trying to de-legitmise things they don't agree with but that's honestly not what I'm doing.

[NegaScott128]

Originally Posted by LoSouL

Here's the thing about what you just said.

The reason Godfather is good isn't because people say it's good.

So what makes it good? If I think it's bad, it's just as valid as you saying it's good, right?

[EbonDragon]

Originally Posted by NegaScott128

Here's the thing about "my opinion is right for me" and "critics don't matter." If it were true, then it means Birdemic and The Godfather are equally good.

For some people, that may be, though unlikely. That doesn’t make it false. (Though, I would heavily question their tastes)

[Pieter V]

Kodak 35mm film supports the naturalistic look and VFX/CG creation of Warner Bros. Pictures’ Justice League

https://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/B...tId=4295004623

[trippledx3]

Is there any more hints to wether this film will be dark like batman v superman or marvel-ish like wonderwoman? Other than the "fun" trailers?

[EbonDragon]

Originally Posted by trippledx3

Is there any more hints to wether this film will be dark like batman v superman or marvel-ish like wonderwoman? Other than the "fun" trailers?

Social media embargo lifted today. Most word is positive to mixed positive, one negative reaction so far. Word is: fun, humorous but still dark. Balanced tone, uneven story and it has heart. Villain is forgettable but the heroes shine and each gets their moment. Generally, every reaction apart from the one negative one looks forward to more from the characters and the universe after what they’ve seen here.

[pottyaboutpotter1]

I've noticed the general word is pretty much "better than expected" but that the film is still just "okay", "a mixed bag" and a mess when it comes to narrative and character development. The CGI is also being criticised.

I think this means the film is enjoyable but isn't really anything special. The more positive responses I've noticed are coming from those more predisposed to liking a DC film from a quick check on profiles (there's even a few DC employees posting positive responses!).

The more general reaction seems to be a bit more mixed leaning slightly positive.

The film will probably be functionally fine, but nothing special. The reviews should shed further light on the film's actual quality since it's hard to condense one's entire opinion to 200 characters.

Also let's not forget that the first reactions for Batman v Superman were incredibly positive.

I suppose what I'm saying is that these reactions should not be taken as a strong indication of the film's quality.

[EbonDragon]

Originally Posted by pottyaboutpotter1

I've noticed the general word is pretty much "better than expected" but that the film is still just "okay", "a mixed bag" and a mess when it comes to narrative and character development. The CGI is also being criticised.

I think this means the film is enjoyable but isn't really anything special. The more positive responses I've noticed are coming from those more predisposed to liking a DC film from a quick check on profiles (there's even a few DC employees posting positive responses!).

The more general reaction seems to be a bit more mixed leaning slightly positive.

The film will probably be functionally fine, but nothing special. The reviews should shed further light on the film's actual quality since it's hard to condense one's entire opinion to 200 characters.

Also let's not forget that the first reactions for Batman v Superman were incredibly positive.

Those positive BvS reactions were from fan screenings though, not critics. Generally on point though with regards to JL. We’ll have to wait for those reviews to know more. Of note though, quite a few of the positives come from people who hated or disliked previous DC offerings so we shouldn’t disregard that aspect.

[pottyaboutpotter1]

Originally Posted by EbonDragon

Those positive BvS reactions were from fan screenings though, not critics. Generally on point though with regards to JL. We’ll have to wait for those reviews to know more. Of note though, quite a few of the positives come from people who hated or disliked previous DC offerings so we shouldn’t disregard that aspect.

That is true. But the general reaction still seems to be very "meh" as opposed to Wonder Woman. I think the reviews will give a better indication of what the film is actually like.

[Laserdisk]

Originally Posted by pottyaboutpotter1

That is true. But the general reaction still seems to be very "meh" as opposed to Wonder Woman. I think the reviews will give a better indication of what the film is actually like.

And yet that was declared a hot mess for a long time....

[pottyaboutpotter1]

Originally Posted by Laserdisk

And yet that was declared a hot mess for a long time....

And yet it was only rumours that referred to it as a mess.