More Threads

0 Zein, you are not the king. No one ever agreed to it. 0 Zein, you are not the king. No one ever agreed to it. 0 Zein, you are not the king. No one ever agreed to it. 0 Zein, you are not the king. No one ever agreed to it. 0 Zein, you are not the king. No one ever agreed to it. 0 Zein, you are not the king. No one ever agreed to it. 0 Zein, you are not the king. No one ever agreed to it. 0 Zein, you are not the king. No one ever agreed to it. 0 Zein, you are not the king. No one ever agreed to it. 0 Zein, you are not the king. No one ever agreed to it. 0 Zein, you are not the king. No one ever agreed to it. 0 Zein, you are not the king. No one ever agreed to it. 0 Zein, you are not the king. No one ever agreed to it. 0 Zein, you are not the king. No one ever agreed to it. 0 Zein, you are not the king. No one ever agreed to it. 0 Zein, you are not the king. No one ever agreed to it. 0 Zein, you are not the king. No one ever agreed to it. 0 Zein, you are not the king. No one ever agreed to it. 0 Zein, you are not the king. No one ever agreed to it. 0 Zein, you are not the king. No one ever agreed to it. 0 Zein, you are not the king. No one ever agreed to it. 0 Zein, you are not the king. No one ever agreed to it. 0 Zein, you are not the king. No one ever agreed to it. 0 Zein, you are not the king. No one ever agreed to it. 0 Zein, you are not the king. No one ever agreed to it. 0 Zein, you are not the king. No one ever agreed to it. 0 Zein, you are not the king. No one ever agreed to it. 0 Zein, you are not the king. No one ever agreed to it. 0 Zein, you are not the king. No one ever agreed to it. 0 Zein, you are not the king. No one ever agreed to it. 0 Zein, you are not the king. No one ever agreed to it.

Do we need critics?

(This part is mostly rant, so skip below if you want my actual argument)

Sure...if you want to know if the movie you are about to pay for was enjoyed by someone you don't know. That's fine. Do we really need them though? No...but if we did then we surely wouldn't need their 'critiques' before the movie. These morons don't deserve an early screening...do you think they do? I see no logical arguments constructed about plot details because its mostly incoherent banter about stuff like ...

Its got action...cries
Its got a blurry scene...cries
It is dark...cries
It didn't make me chuckle at times...cries
I see action (in a superman film)...cries
He didn't rescue a cat from a tree and make me feel warm...cries
The superman didn't make me laugh...cries
(All real critiques I've seen from the rotten reviews)

Their 'reviews' consist mostly of childish tantrums regarding minor details...whilst completely ignoring the rest of the movie. They say stuff like ...Superman looked like Jesus in one scene. I don't usually advocate using stuff like subliminal messages in films/television, but Jor-El clearly stated in the trailer that "He will be a God to them"...Hmmm lets think of a fairly well known God...maby Jesus?!? Of course they portray Superman like a God...he IS basically a God, so why complain about such a scene with a time span of 5-8 seconds anyways. These critics seam to whine about everything besides the plot, and the way it is set up. Critics ignore the fact that they had to create/edit characters so that they fit in 'almost' perfectly within the flow of the film. All of that work (which is a VERY small sample of it) has gone completely overlooked by these so called critics.

( Actual argument )

You might say..."but their supposed to critique"...in which I respond... "Then critique, and construct a logical argumentation that doesn't include stomping your feet and turning red faced over little details you see on the surface...try looking at the plot and they way it allows for other films (which has been confirmed), Superman is a story and not just one film. Think about the process of storytelling through film and the fact that its supposed to be an 'origin' story...which includes ALOT of other detail if you actually bothered looking at the screen , and listened to them speaking, at the same time, instead of throwing your histy fit" In any event... I suppose it isn't even worth commenting on this site anymore due to its ever growing reputation for providing a shear lack of accuracy. Everyone has at least one film that has been rated low for idiotic reasons. For some 'rotten' reviews the actual critique(s) of the film are very minor, and the review itself mostly consists of positive feedback (well over half of the review usually), yet it is rendered rotten for some reason. People have witnessed this time and time again. I use Man of Steel to express these concerns about the site, but this type of BS has occurred many a time with numerous other films. The tomatometer has 'too' much influence for its relative accuracy. If a movie seams interesting to you, then shouldn't you see it based off of that logic...(rather than this 'tomatometer') ...why do people let this tomatometer decide what to enjoy (It implies good/bad, does it not?).
Rotten tomatos fails R.
06-11-2013 09:37 PM

Thread Replies

Please log in to participate in this forum.

Nathan Ellis

Nathan Ellis

The original post is such a blatant straw man argument. Nothing in your post supports your question or your opinion of criticism at large, only your personal reaction to the consensus. Which in turn would be your critique of criticism anyway, proving that you yourself have a use for criticism. The argument to ?read the comics? is also bogus. I dare the people saying that to actually read a Superman comic, specifically All Star Superman by Grant Morrison. Optimism and selflessness are part of Superman, not excessive moping and destruction. If you ever cared about Supes as a character, then you would be appalled by how Jonathan Kent?s attitude and death were portrayed in this movie. As for the whole, " he was overly destructive and different from current Superman because this was an origin story" bullshit, you're telling me a 30 year old man doesn't know how basic morality works? For fuck's sake, he was more heroic in the movie before he was superman.

Oct 18 - 10:49 PM

Victor Masi

Victor Masi

as always, the only opinions that matter are those of the moviegoer in general. the people who go to see a film have the ability to be their own critic and judge for themselves whether or not the film is good. nuff said

Aug 11 - 09:15 AM

Roy R.

Roy RoyLeer

I agree with most of your points, Titan.

Aug 9 - 02:11 AM

4567TME

Ken B

LA film critics were the driving force behind getting the widely beloved "Brazil" released in 1985. Universal Studios were embarrassed into giving it a wide release after early critic screenings went so well, the LA Film Critics' Circle named it the best of that year.

Aug 2 - 01:24 PM

4567TME

Ken B

We need critics, but RT needs to be more selective of their reviewers. Many who claim to be critics have shown to be poorly incompetent at their professions, but at least almost none of them are Top Critics (exception: Rex Reed).

Jul 22 - 08:02 AM

Daniel Plainview

Maxwell Beacher

Agree with you on this.

Aug 28 - 04:26 PM

Tommy W.

Tommy Wilson

Critics love movies more than anyone and rotten tomatoes' reviews are pretty spot on. Don't cry about MoS citing critic bias without looking at the solid reception Nolan's Dark Knight trilogy received. MoS has well above the critical reception, everywhere, that it deserves. It's real awful, artistically.

Jul 20 - 11:52 PM

Michael Young

Michael Young

I know what you mean, the colour palette of the movie went like this: Grey, Dark Grey and Black.

Aug 31 - 05:01 PM

Phainon T.

Phainon Titan

Let me start by saying that we are talking about a Sci-Fi/Action/Superhero movie that is based on a comic book with the main character being an ALIEN.
Having established the nature of the movie and the story...
Lets see what the so called critics complain about.

1-Too much action
2-Too much CGI
3-No Romance
4-No Humor

Starting with:
1-"too much action"...
This is exactly like saying "there is too much nudity in a porn film",
or
"this comedy made laugh too much, i don't like it".
It's a completely and utter idiotic statement.

2-"Too much CGI"
Here is another utter idiotic statement.
How in the name of Zeus a battle between aliens should be pictured in the era of 3D-HD in the year 2013?
"The MoS would be better of if it was shot in Black & White and the cables were visible and they should search the entire universe to find a real kryptonian to play Fiora so no CGI would needed."
Now that i think of... they should actually kill people and destroy a city or two for the sake of not using CGI.

3-"No Romance" & 4-"No Humor"
That is epic...both statements actually are truly epic.
Just imagine the balls that someone must have to actually say this.
Who in the name of the 1000+ gods that have been recorded through out history told you that Man of Steel is a Comedy - Romance?
Who are the critics that went to the cinema to see Man of Steel and they were expecting to see "romance and humor"?

So based on the critics MoS should be a Comedy/Drama/Romance with very few action and maybe some CGI.....right....

About the OP question:
"Do we need critics?"
We need critics just not this by fact retarded critics that they rate as they see fit.
In my opinion if the director of this movie was someone else (and not Z.Snyder) but the movie was exactly the same, the so called critics would have said better things.

I am not a Superman fan, actually i am not fan of comics at all, but this is preposterous.
SM:Returns better? The Amazing Spider-Man Better? Iron Man 3 better? Avengers better?... No, No, No and No in any way.

Bottom line is this, they either are idiots or the are getting paid to say BS like that.Period.

Jul 10 - 03:55 PM

Justin Daugherty

Justin Daugherty

ugh. wow

"1-"too much action"...
This is exactly like saying "there is too much nudity in a porn film",
or
"this comedy made laugh too much, i don't like it".
It's a completely and utter idiotic statement."

No, it's not. action movies need balance. just like comedies and dramas need balance. if a movie was all punchline and no set up, it'd be terrible. if a movie was all dramatic without any light hearted moments to back it up, it'd be terrible. Similarly, if an action movie is all action and no development, pacing, or reasons why we should care about the action, then there is too much action

"2-"Too much CGI" "

"2-"Too much CGI"
Here is another utter idiotic statement.
How in the name of Zeus a battle between aliens should be pictured in the era of 3D-HD in the year 2013? "

There are plenty of ways. poorly implemented cgi is most certainly not the only way

"Now that i think of... they should actually kill people and destroy a city or two for the sake of not using CGI. "

Yep, cause that's the only way

"3-"No Romance" & 4-"No Humor"
That is epic...both statements actually are truly epic.

Who are the critics that went to the cinema to see Man of Steel and they were expecting to see "romance and humor"?"

That's an equally stupid question. If you read any superman, or watched any of the previous movies, then you might remember a few smidges of romance and humor in them. No, they're not all out romantic comedies, no critic I've seen went into superman expecting a romantic comedy. But just because it's not a romantic comedy doesn't mean there SHOULDN'T be any romance or comedy in it.

"In my opinion if the director of this movie was someone else (and not Z.Snyder) but the movie was exactly the same, the so called critics would have said better things. "

I know it's just your opinion, but it's stupidly thought out. Snyder has gotten great reviews before, and similarly many directors have had critically acclaimed peices, but then they shoveled out shit and critics rightfully called it out. Similarly, directors have gotten better and critics were quick to praise their improvement.

"SM:Returns better? The Amazing Spider-Man Better? Iron Man 3 better? Avengers better?... No, No, No and No in any way. "

On what basis can you claim this? I personally found all those movies better than Man of Steel (especially Avengers, which had *gasp* comedy in it!).

Jul 10 - 09:00 PM

Mackenzie Herren

Mackenzie Herren

It is equally stupid for critics to expect the same qualities of the old film to be in the reboot.

Jul 11 - 04:37 PM

Phainon T.

Phainon Titan

Exactly! Thank you.

Jul 15 - 06:42 AM

Lucas Cabral

Lucas Cabral

But MoS tried to be funny in some points... It just didn't work, FOR ME, it came as unnatural, so fake that made me laugh.

Jul 30 - 07:44 PM

Justin Daugherty

Justin Daugherty

Not just the old film, but the ENTIRE SUPERMAN MYTHOS. But yes, I agree that it's dumb to expect romance and comedy just cause the source material has it, but it's not a complaint that's coming from nowhere like Phainton seems to think.

Aug 19 - 02:34 PM

Phainon T.

Phainon Titan

1-Balanced, According to your likings and what you think it is balanced.
And i'll repeat MoS is an action/Sci-Fi/Adventure movie with ALIENS based on a Comic book.

2-Any suggestions/alternatives then? No?... figures.
For your information and in chance that the retards critics may read it...CGI/Special Effects "IS ART", Period and I don't think that it needs much of brain to understand why.

3-...and that implies that cause the director didn't do what critics wanted/expected = "the movie sucks"...?
Z.Snyder didn't promised any romance or humor and as the Credits say it is "based on", not a 1:1 copy...also is a reboot, alos it is shot in the year 2013, also it is writen by D.Goyer & C.Nolan.

About Z.Snyder and critics...Snyder has got some great reviews??? In what universe exactly?
Dawn of the Dead: 75%
Watchmen: 64%
300: 60%
Man of Steel: 56%
Legend of the Guardians: 50%
Sucker Punch: 23%

Btw...
Pacific Rim: "72%"..Full of CGI? Yes ....Anything to add?
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/pacific_rim_2013/

In what basis? Well let me see...
SM:Returns: The most exiting moment was the Credits.

TASpiderman: Made with target group in mind the 16year old girls and the CGI was made by amateurs and in general was a very very bad movie.

Iron Man 3: Apart from the fact that T.Stark didn't stayed in the IronMan suite more than 3 minutes combined in the entire movie he also did everything to prove that he is the dumbest person on the planet..and if that wasnt enough it had a billion mistakes and idiotic moments that was a direct insult to our intelligence.

Speaking of "insult to our intelligence"......The Avengers...
The Avengers was made for 10 year old kids and for retards.
Just the dialogue between Nick Fury and the "man responsible with the navigation" of that aircraft carrier, that Fury had to explain to the "Captain" that if "1 more turbine goes down we fall" was enough...
apart from that a single arrow almost bring it down (yeah i know the arrow was carrying a 10ton nuke bomb)...
+I dunno at what altitude was at the moment 1000 ft? 500 ft? 100 ft? but the logic behind it was that if it fells to the sea and not in land it will be saved....facepalm....and of course the first move wasnt "to land" ASAP but to go over sea...bloody hell... and what about the gravity in space?... and the uncontrollable hulk that all the sudden could be controlled?...i can go on for ever on how stupid and the Avengers is but the best part is that the epic retarded critics gave it 92%? 92%?...

Jul 15 - 06:41 AM

Brian Padgett

Brian Padgett

I think the comedy in avengers lightened the mood and made the small problems with logic or plot seem less noticeable, all movies have plot holes. Man of steel had plenty as well, but because the tone of the film was serious, they stood out more.

Jul 20 - 03:03 PM

Justin Daugherty

Justin Daugherty

"1-Balanced, According to your likings and what you think it is balanced.
And i'll repeat MoS is an action/Sci-Fi/Adventure movie with ALIENS based on a Comic book. "

....yes, where did I deny this?

"2-Any suggestions/alternatives then? No?... figures. "

If you're too dumb to go look up alternatives to CGI, then frankly you have no right to complain

"For your information and in chance that the retards critics may read it...CGI/Special Effects "IS ART", Period and I don't think that it needs much of brain to understand why."

Again, please point to where I denied this. I said "poorly implemented cgi"

"About Z.Snyder and critics...Snyder has got some great reviews??? In what universe exactly?
Dawn of the Dead: 75%
Watchmen: 64%
300: 60%
Man of Steel: 56%
Legend of the Guardians: 50%
Sucker Punch: 23% "

Erm, are you retarded? I wasn't talking about the review percentage, I was talking about the REVIEWS THEMSELVES

"Btw...
Pacific Rim: "72%"..Full of CGI? Yes ....Anything to add?
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/pacific_rim_2013/ "

You seem to be under the lame assumption that I think all cgi is bad. Once again, go reread my original comment

"In what basis? Well let me see...
SM:Returns: The most exiting moment was the Credits. "

Wow, what a great amount of information. I'm certainly convinced

"TASpiderman: Made with target group in mind the 16year old girls and the CGI was made by amateurs and in general was a very very bad movie. "

Oh, ok, so you DO agree that cgi can be a bad thing. Hypocrite

"Iron Man 3: Apart from the fact that T.Stark didn't stayed in the IronMan suite more than 3 minutes combined in the entire movie he also did everything to prove that he is the dumbest person on the planet..and if that wasnt enough it had a billion mistakes and idiotic moments that was a direct insult to our intelligence."

Once again, amazing plethora of information. And you accuse ME of not naming an examples?

"that Fury had to explain to the "Captain" that if "1 more turbine goes down we fall" was enough...
apart from that a single arrow almost bring it down (yeah i know the arrow was carrying a 10ton nuke bomb)..."

OH NO! It had ONE conversation that pointed out what we already knew? Clearly for retards.

"+I dunno at what altitude was at the moment 1000 ft? 500 ft? 100 ft? but the logic behind it was that if it fells to the sea and not in land it will be saved....facepalm....and of course the first move wasnt "to land" ASAP but to go over sea...bloody hell... and what about the gravity in space?... and the uncontrollable hulk that all the sudden could be controlled?...i can go on for ever on how stupid and the Avengers is but the best part is that the epic retarded critics gave it 92%? 92%?... "

Might as I ask why you hold realism as the gold standard as to what makes a movie good? If I made a very real movie about how I got breakfast this morning, would you enjoy it?

Aug 19 - 02:33 PM

Jacob S.

Jacob Stevenson

I agree with most of your points, Titan. I actually thought the CGI looked great in this film. The action was a bit excessive, and I think the lack of humor robbed the film of the human aspect. Granted Kal-El's not human, but that shouldn't mean that you take humor out of the movie completely. Marvel is able to succeed because they're able to make their characters feel like real people.

Jul 14 - 12:23 AM

Phainon T.

Phainon Titan

I agree but you (Not you personally) can't say that was bad movie cause it lacked humor moments.
To be honest I liked it even more cause it didn't had funny moments and as little as possible romance.
It looked more serious and cold but that is just me i don't expect anyone to understand.

Anyway, the thing is that the critics proved for one more time that they are just a bunch of idiots that they rate movies by taking into considering everything else apart from the actual movie.

Jul 15 - 07:02 AM

Zac W.

Zac Wilson

What about that scene where Clark/Kal totally destroyed that guy's 18 wheeler? Or when Superman destroys the drone & makes a joke about how it "used" to be an expensive piece of equipment? Or when he says he grew up in Kansas & he's about as American as it gets? The light humour is there, mainstream audiences are either just too dumb to notice it or they choose to ignore so they can complain more.

Jul 18 - 08:58 PM

Tommy W.

Tommy Wilson

18 wheeler scene would be funny if it didn't require you to ignore the fact that no one heard an 18 wheeler being impaled by massive logs just 30ft away. The drone "joke" would be funny if it wasn't a spiritual abortion of Supes' character overall and if we didn't already have to ignore scenes like Lois screaming "Clark!" to him in front of a police officer, or all of Smallville knowing who he is now.... or him telling him he's from Kansas. Peoples' complaints about this film are based entirely around the fact that most of the script requires you to not think.

Jul 20 - 11:56 PM

Zac W.

Zac Wilson

Agree with you 100%

Jul 18 - 08:54 PM

Drew Peardon

Drew Peardon

http://youtu.be/NZN1HowUV5Q

Jul 9 - 02:17 PM

Justin Daugherty

Justin Daugherty

Hey, did you like this movie? That's wonderful. Just don't try to abolish critics just because they have a different opinion than you. Yes, it's a shame that people aren't going to go see a movie just cause critics give it a thumbs down, but if Twilight or the recent Transformers movies have taught us anything, it's that regardless of what critics think, movies will still make money.

Did you get that? Critics have little to no sway as to whether a movie succeeds or bombs. So why the militant behavior to abolish all critics anywhere? That seems unnecessarily extreme.

(also, how much you wanna bet that if critics had liked this movie, there'd be no posts here about how critics are useless and need to be abolished? That's because critics are only useful when you agree with them)

Jul 8 - 06:21 PM

Michael Young

Michael Young

I'm loving your posts, you're easily the smartest guy on this page!

Aug 31 - 05:30 PM

Brian Padgett

Brian Padgett

This movie got what it deserved, just because someone doesn't like your favorite film of the week, doesn't make them wrong. I want to know why user reviews aren't being counted anymore

Jul 1 - 09:01 PM

Solid J

Solid J

I saw it and I enjoyed it for the most part. There was a bit too much CGI and action though. My girlfriend and I really felt the length of the movie about halfway in (after the tornado scene). Overall I'd give it a solid 75%. It's not amazing by any means, but it's not awful either. There were some subtle changes and things that were implied such as 'kyrptonite'. (Atmospheric environment changes that resembled Krypton ended up being his 'kryptonite' per se), and several characters being portrayed in different ways. I liked the creepy General Zod intro message and some of the battle scenes were a real treat. (Especially seeing Faora pulverize humans and zip between them with super speed) stuff like that was gold. There was an religious undertone in the beginning as well, which was annoying. The visuals are a bit much, but I felt it was done alright. So long as the second one has more of an emphasis on character interaction and sort of isolates the action scenes to specific events within the movie instead of just quickly cutting between dialogue and long strings of bloated cgi action we should see it do just fine. The perfect Superman film is yet to come, but we're getting there. If Batman can be done so crisply, then I believe Superman can as well. I'd give this a sold 75%. Worth the price of admission and it's a decent time at the movies.

Jul 1 - 11:09 AM

Scott Baxter

Scott Baxter

I think Ricky Gervais said something along the lines of 'critics are either those who have failed or those who are to scared to try' so they decide to spend their time talking about things other people do. There is no point to them, i will watch a movie to make up my own mind rather than take the view of someone else. I have seen Man of Steel a couple times and think its great. Almost every review mentions Christopher Reeve which makes no sense, why is that the basis for any other Superman films? Superman Returns tried to fit in with the Reeve films and it was awful, people seem to be watching Man of Steel from a nostalgic point of view and can't accept anything new. The Donner films are pretty flawed, cheesy and a little boring. They decided not to make Superman a boy scout and had the balls to at least have people query the fact that aliens exist and are on earth rather than everyone just accepting a person who can fly and has super powers. Other criticisms seem to come from a hatred towards the people who made this movie rather than the movie itself, another reason why critics have no purpose. They give an opinion and for some reason a lot of people seem to care about it or take it as gospel.

Jun 29 - 01:39 PM

Rotten tomatos fails R.

Rotten tomatos fails Rt fails

Lol Agreed. A good read, and there is definitely bias...Warner Brothers owns Rottentomatoes lol

Jul 9 - 08:52 PM

Conner Bolt

Conner Bolt

You are spot on, my friend. Critics can't come to grips with the fact that this is a different take on superman, and it doesn't have to be exactly like the old ones. I mean, really guys, can you really take a critic seriously when they are saying that Super Man Returns was better than this? No, that is absurd. Man of Steel is a great movie, and it is sad to see the collection of undeservedly bad reviews on this website discouraging people from going out to see this incredibly enjoyable blockbuster.

Jun 28 - 11:24 PM

Rotten tomatos fails R.

Rotten tomatos fails Rt fails

Cheers ty

Jul 9 - 08:52 PM

John Abella

John Abella

Critics are so kind to this Man of Shit. IMO this deserves 40%

Jun 27 - 11:47 PM

Nada 1.

Nada 1

True

Jul 1 - 05:58 AM

Jack S.

Jack Smith

I think this movie sucks. But Paid Criticism is a useless profession. I mean what is more remembered the movie Citizen Kane or the guy who gave it a bad review? Sure you could say well who needs actors and directors. The difference is that a good director and actor can make a great movie that will be remember for a very long time. Who is going to remember somebody review in 50 year?

Jun 27 - 10:00 PM

Justin Daugherty

Justin Daugherty

What? Who's gonna remember the shelf I stocked at Walmart 50 years later? Does that mean MY job is useless too? This is a very strange and (i suspect) poorly thought out argument. Critics aren't here to be remembered, they're here to keep buisnesses accountable when they shovel out shit without trying and customers mindlessly consume it because they don't know what's better. Critics are there to help people improve, point out flaws and things that they feel should be improved so a director or actor can better themselves.

Jul 8 - 05:55 PM

Elliott Robinson

Elliott Robinson

The fact that Superman Returns received a whopping 75% on Rotten Tomatoes and Man of Steel only received at 56% says a lot about the "Critics". Am I to believe that Thor (77%) , Captain America(79%) , and IRON MAN 2 (73%) were all VASTLY better than Man of Steel? Wanna hear a joke? CRITICS!

Jun 25 - 07:58 PM

Victor Masi

Victor Masi

I agree. I don't think Man of Steel is a bad film at all, but it does have some problems, yet that doesn't get in the way of the overall experience. Thor in my eyes is a near perfect film and one of my favorite films of all time. I love Captain America: the first avenger as well. I highly disagree with many of the consensuses on Rotten Tomatoes and the critics' views, especially if it's a movie I've actually seen. word of advice, don't listen to the critics and actually see a movie before you judge it. Power to the people I say. Down with the elitists. they just don't give a crap for the little guy anymore do they? they don't give two cents for the common man. I'm alright with comedic film critics like Doug walker and Jeremy Jahns, but as for the majority, money talks and bullshit walks. also I found Iron Man 2 and 3 to be very good but not as good as the first, which I find to be a perfect film.

Jun 27 - 02:25 PM

Victor Masi

Victor Masi

it's even worse when they pick apart everything, even when a movie doesn't have anything wrong with it. Raiders of the Lost Ark and several other great films deserve scores of 100% on Rotten Tomatoes because they are really that good.

Jun 27 - 02:27 PM

John Tyler

John Tyler

Man of Steel was fantastic IMO. I think it should have the same 93 percent the original Superman from 1978 has.

Jun 27 - 02:34 PM

Diego Tutweiller

Diego John Rottweiler

That is ridiculous. It got what it deserved. A full hour of retarded explosions and moronic dialogue. I can't see why anyone would like it.

Jun 27 - 02:42 PM

Alex M.

Hipster Elitist Maverick

Opinions, Diego. Opinions.

Jun 27 - 04:44 PM

President Pedro

President Pedro

But Alex this is the internet after all, opinions aren't welcomed here.

Jun 27 - 05:25 PM

Diego Tutweiller

Diego John Rottweiler

Yep.

Jun 27 - 11:08 PM

Victor Masi

Victor Masi

also isn't everyone who goes on the internet blogging and whatnot practically a whiny, prissy, opionated jerk.

Jun 28 - 05:23 AM

Diego Tutweiller

Diego John Rottweiler

I run a blog, but I am an opinionated jerk. I like to think I'm not whiny or prissy, though.

Jun 30 - 11:57 PM

J.D Dean

J.D Dean

I thought 56% percent was pretty generous.

Jul 1 - 01:46 PM

Mackenzie Herren

Mackenzie Herren

Man of Steel is a lot better than 56%. Look at the Avengers. That got a 92%!!! And that movie is just bad. Forced 1 liners. The aliens were a terrible plot device. The original Superman got a 93% despite having one of the most gaping plot holes I have seen in a movie.

Jul 11 - 04:41 PM

Judge Nikhil

nikhil bhardwaj

CAPTAIN AMERICA WAS BETTER THAN MOS.

Jun 27 - 10:29 PM

Victor Masi

Victor Masi

in a sense yes, but Man of Steel isn't a bad movie. the worst Superman film was obviously #4, which had a cheap uninteresting Bizzaro knockoff called Nuclear Man

Jun 28 - 05:26 AM

Nada 1.

Nada 1

RIP!

Jul 1 - 05:59 AM

Ash Gilmore

Ash J. Gilmore

Captain America is one of my favorite superhero films.

Jul 1 - 04:18 AM

Mackenzie Herren

Mackenzie Herren

i hope you are joking.

Jul 11 - 04:38 PM

Dexter Miguel

Dexter Miguel

Lol... Captain America was terrible..........

Jul 15 - 05:41 AM

Michael Young

Michael Young

Because?

Aug 31 - 05:23 PM

Mark Sabbai

Mark Sabbai

If the critics don't don't like the film...then I know I will enjoy it & go watch it anyways.

Jun 25 - 09:51 AM

Þórður Björnsson

Þórður Björnsson

The critics hated Battlefield Earth & Master of Disguise. You telling me you liked those movies?

Jun 30 - 08:43 PM

John Stovall

John Stovall

What we really need is a ratings bar for the critics or their reviews that we could see right up next to their name. Ratings the users give them is what I mean to be perfectly clear. They aren't writing the reviews for some lofty absolute ideals but to give us insight on whether to see a film.

Jun 24 - 09:57 AM

Chris Chambless

Chris Chambless

That's brilliant!

Jul 6 - 01:10 AM

Leonardo Batista

Leonardo Batista

Are the critics here all blind???? Guess not, because If so, they would still have appreciated the great sound effects and music. I guess I saw another movie because the one I saw was AMAZING!!!

Jun 22 - 08:39 PM

Leonardo Batista

Leonardo Batista

90% the critics here are INSANE...this is BS, if they want to see Almodovar all the time, they should not be reviewing movies for the general population

Jun 22 - 08:43 PM

Julian Hinojosa

Julian Hinojosa

Personally I think the critics got Man of Steel wrong . While its not perfect it's not Superman Returns which was to me much more weak. I gave the Man of Steel an 8.5 out of 10. And maybe Superman Returns a 5 or 6. That being said you should always make an informed opinion and remember sometimes critics aren't perfect. One of my favorite things about RT is the fact that they give you majority of critics nationwide and the audience consensuses. That is enough to help me decide sometimes if I want to see a film if I'm on the fence that being said you have to figure there's gonna be times you don't see eye to eye. So trying to micro-dissect a critic panning a film dosen't make sense to me. I'll read and see why people don't like it. But I generally try to see reviews and I'll ask people I know that generally have similar tastes as me. Most importantly if its something I look forward to I just watch whatever the heck I want to watch. You can't discout this website as a whole because they disagree with you...They've got decent stuff here...

Jun 22 - 08:34 PM

Marc Connolly

Marc Connolly

I don't hinge my opinions on those of another, no matter who they may be, because taste is inherently subjective. I do like some reviewers. These generally tend to be people that I know will look at a movie in a given way--historically, as a product of craft, as an expression of symbolism and timeless themes, as simple entertainment, etc. This make sense for me, because all of these interest me. Regardless, these may only give me an idea of what is to come if I see the film, or more insight into the film after I see it the first time, and add to my level of enjoyment. Trying to quantify the opinions of critics isn't meaningful or helpful for me. Assigning a number is goofy. Not factoring in the audience rating of thousands of viewers in the final site value seems suspicious. In the end, though, I think the critic rating is like so much in western society: It only does damage if you acknowledge it. I chose to just ignore it.

Jun 22 - 03:04 PM

Judge Nikhil

nikhil bhardwaj

Do we need you?

Jun 22 - 08:37 AM

Kedar Arige

Kedar Arige

Critics just hate Zack Synder 300 has 60% and Watchmen has 64% but Man of Steel does not deserve 57& as movies like Superman Returns, Spiderman 3, Indiana Jones and the kingdom of the crystal skull have higher than 57&

Jun 21 - 11:49 AM

Joshua Henderson

Joshua Henderson

I am not surprised at the Watchmen tomatometer actually. I think that's about right personally.

Jun 21 - 12:28 PM

Jake Braden

Jake Braden

Superman Returns, Spiderman 3 and Indiana Jones 4 are all much better than Man of Steel in every way.

Jun 21 - 01:41 PM

Mayo Maya

Mayo Maya

fuck you

Jun 22 - 12:09 AM

Judge Nikhil

nikhil bhardwaj

troll

Jun 25 - 10:59 PM

Troy Hall

Troy Hall

haha, Idiot

Jun 22 - 07:57 AM

Judge Nikhil

nikhil bhardwaj

fuck u

Jun 25 - 10:59 PM

Judge Nikhil

nikhil bhardwaj

u are right Braden

Jun 22 - 08:14 AM

Marc Connolly

Marc Connolly

I generally like Snyder's work, even when the critics don't, but I do have to say that I did not like either 300 or Watchmen, but I think they struggled publicly because of the source material. For example, I think the Watchmen film is very well made and acted, but it's a representation of some pretty dark source material which history shows will not be as well received by the public as maybe a lighter action or adventure story. Personally, I like to enjoy a movie on some level, and for me there was nothing redeeming that came out of the resolution of the Watchmen film. As for 300, I tend not to enjoy stories that steal from and distort history. It's not some rule I have...only that seeing it happen makes me wince.

Jun 22 - 03:22 PM

Joe Thompson

Joe Thompson

The Dark Knight...Evil won...Batman's sort of girlfriend got blown up...The Joker corrupted Harvey Dent. Batman killed Harvey Dent...That's not a light action adventure.

Aug 17 - 11:10 PM

Judge Nikhil

nikhil bhardwaj

Justice league tv series is better than this piece of crap

Jun 21 - 05:56 AM

This comment has been removed.

Joshua Henderson

Joshua Henderson

How dare you two agree with each other.

Jun 21 - 01:34 PM

Judge Nikhil

nikhil bhardwaj

dude i dont like this ABELLA guy

Jun 22 - 08:13 AM

Judge Nikhil

nikhil bhardwaj

i did not ask your opinion Abella

Jun 22 - 08:13 AM

John Abella

John Abella

i'm on your side you dumb maggot fuck...

Jun 22 - 08:40 AM

Judge Nikhil

nikhil bhardwaj

i dont need ur help

Jun 22 - 08:43 AM

Tommy South

Zack Snyder

I only read from the critics that I think are good and that argue their points in a clear and fair manner. I often agree with the critics I respect but sometimes I don't, and that's okay too. I don't really attach much importance to the aggregate RT score and I'm not sure why some people get so offended by these reviews. If you are secure with your own opinions you shouldn't really be too bothered by what the critics say.

Jun 21 - 05:27 AM

Diego Tutweiller

Diego John Rottweiler

500, bitches.

Jun 20 - 06:35 PM

Nada 1.

Nada 1

You are a bitch too.

Jul 1 - 05:59 AM

Diego Tutweiller

Diego John Rottweiler

And you are the anus of the world.

Jul 3 - 09:07 AM

Paul Woodley

Paul Woodley

Also it is only one persons opinion of a film that may not coincide with yours. I really enjoyed The Great Gatsby and Man of Steel. But to come on here and see reviews would put you off. I only come on here after I watch a film which really negates what critics do anyway.

Jun 20 - 09:14 AM

Matthew Storey

Matthew Storey

Ok, let's review how a "critic", "reviews" movies. The process I mean. Most reviewers are traditionally print media based, that has changed a tad in recent yrs. But they come from that background. They are movie "critics" because their editor says so. they don't have to have a single shred of any journalism experience or movie background at all, they are acclaimed as a critic and that is that. So it comes time for the "critic" to see a movie and offer their opinion, what's the process? The production company invites the critics on junkets, they fly, bus or otherwise convey the critic to some structure for a screening. Prior to the screening they often put up the critic in some fine hotel, with good food and all the emenities. The junket often includes goody bags etc. with things not even related to the film in question, (thing the bags celebs get at the Oscars only a little less pricy). They get to see the film at a 'exclusive" screening, also with all the luxury items (drinks and eats). All this the production companies do in hopes of influencing the "critic" into making some quotable blurb they came publish next to release of the film..you know the ones like: "A must see..", "best EVER...", "...a tear jerker" etc. Now if you are that "critic" that is always harsh and never gives out quotable quotes, you soon find that you don't get so many junket offers..if you are you get more and more offers..more so if you are from a publication of note. It don't take a high I.Q. to figure out what to do as a "critic" if you like the luxury life, play ball give the films they want to get a good rating and you get the goodies, don't and you won't. So considering all that, you get the rare journalist, with the honesty and integrity to not take the goodies, has the chops to actually not let their print media background to bias them, actually see the film and UNDERSTAND it, be able to string two sentences together, what have you got? A "actual critic", and after all that is strung together..what's to say the "actual critic" didn't have a rotten day..or actually enjoys the subject matter he is reviewing to bother to give a decent review? Oh and as a side note, do you know who actually owns the web site rotten tomatoes? The parent company I mean....Warner Brothers. No conflict of interest issues there I'm sure.

Jun 19 - 08:52 PM

Stephen Mikalik

Stephen Mikalik

Please learn the difference between a junketeer and a film critic. A junketeer does most of the above you describe plus gets access to stars and the director. Junketeers are the lowest form of "journalist". Few people take them seriously.

Least of all, true professional film critics. Film critics get an email or phone call from the distributor on where & when a (in most cities THE) screening of a movie. These screenings usually occur on a Monday, Tuesday or Wednesday night the week the movie comes out, giving them - at best - two days to find time to write & submit their review, which may or may not be worth enough to pay the electric bill.

So, yes, there are people like you describe above. But they have sold their dignity, reputation and possible soul to get such access.

Jun 19 - 09:08 PM

Matthew Storey

Matthew Storey

Yes, your point is taken also, those are the honest ones, its just to bad they are few and far between. But consider, what makes them a "professional critic" even if they are honest and have some shred of integrity? Is there some professional critic school that accredits them? Is there a vocational school for: film watching as a profession diploma? No. There is only one requirement to be a film critic, and that is publication, they got to convince a editor to give them some print space in the editors paper/magazine/blog etc. (and hopefully they get paid to do so, no matter how meagerly :)) If they are lucky enough, and have juice enough to convince a major publication to actually pay for their opinion, that lends a certain air of respectability, unfortunately many of those critics are the ones that "sell out" at that point, figuring they got's to get da's whilst they can. Quite frankly it's a dirty business, not unlike politics and prostitution..only a little better than the latter in fact, since you don't actually have to sleep with the client to offer a opinion on something they probably know little or nothing about :)

Jun 21 - 01:17 AM

Matthew Storey

Matthew Storey

What do you think on the WB owning Flixster- Flixster owning Rotten Tomatoes thing BTW? Does anyone else find it a little incestuous that a company owns the very institution that is to review and rate the material they put out as I do? Sort of the ludicrousness of Eric Holder going to investigate his own office. I find it a bit less than confidence building when there isn't a outside, independent group offering reviews. But maybe that's just me, maybe I should self investigate my feelings on the matter :)

Jun 21 - 01:25 AM

Stephen Mikalik

Stephen Mikalik

At the Movies was run by Buena Vista Television, which is the syndication arm of Disney. Ebert & Roeper have repeatedly said that they received no pressure to give positive reviews of ANY Disney movies. That is really evident in the Siskel & Ebert reviews of Disney live action movies of the 1990's. RT may be owned by a company that makes movies, but only to take the site's profit, nothing more nothing less.

Jun 21 - 04:33 AM

John Stovall

John Stovall


Here's my take on the critics scores. Trying to be kind.

Tomatometer 85%+: Beautifully and artfully done. technically wonderfully with seep multilayered themes which often illuminate the human condition.. Total crapshoot if its actually fun to watch but most likely not.

Tomatometer 65-85%: as above but less deep and probably more fun .

Tomatometer 45-65%: probably not as deep as above but more likely to have more action. interesting SF or fantasy elements also certain more enjoyable in larger than life way. Most likely to have actual heroes

Tomatometer 25-45%: Technically and thematically most likely just popcorn stuff. As critics often are blind to or don't care about how entertaining a film is, it may still be buckets of fun.
Tomatometer >25%: Either It's a dud, eccentric in away critics don't get or a film that dedicated genre fans will love. .

Jun 19 - 04:21 PM

Cole Jaeger

Cole Jaeger

This is the End and The Avengers do not fit that description. I could think of a ton more.

Jun 19 - 06:50 PM

Rotten tomatos fails R.

Rotten tomatos fails Rt fails

Decent ratio's, but James Cameron's Avatar is too close for comfort to your 85% mark. Avatar sits at an 83%, just barely meeting your description. It only had one theme. Cameron's great, but he just missed it with Avatar. He did hit it successfully with the visuals tho...which he put most of the emphasis on. It was mostly meant to expand the boundaries of film

Jun 19 - 07:27 PM

Rotten tomatos fails R.

Rotten tomatos fails Rt fails

Anyhow the main concern I had regarding this thread, other than its main question, was if its ratings would impact is future development. But since its made over $100m...and the next one has begun development...and it has great audience and IMDB ratings... all is well lol.

Jun 19 - 03:00 PM

Rotten tomatos fails R.

Rotten tomatos fails Rt fails

For a site of this stature...questioning should be permitted. As should anything with this type of power...this is primarily where I am comming from. I probably wont bother doing this again (even though I've gotten overwhelming support for the thread), but questioning...I do believe it is well worth it. Certainly at least once. Not to mention the Senior Editor of Rottentomatoes.com has publically announced that she is a big fan of the film, and she is shocked at its critic ratings.

Jun 19 - 02:53 PM

Diego Tutweiller

Diego John Rottweiler

*it's, *It's, *It's, *Superman, *let's, *maybe, *they're, *to which I respond, *the, *A LOT, *hissy fit, *sheer, *Tomatometer, *seems, *Tomatometer, *Tomatometer.

Your argument is the anus of the world.

Jun 19 - 02:22 PM

Rotten tomatos fails R.

Rotten tomatos fails Rt fails

Your mother had to pull out of the theatre because you were throwing a hissy fit during the movie... didn't she. Were you crying? Or did you just sit there with your arms crossed as everyone else was having a kick ass time. You probably sat there with a red face and teary eyes... while actually thinking people cared about your oppinion lmfao.

Jun 19 - 03:13 PM

Diego Tutweiller

Diego John Rottweiler

*theater, *while, *opinion. You have not learned.

Jun 19 - 05:32 PM

Rotten tomatos fails R.

Rotten tomatos fails Rt fails

It's spelled theatre as well...I expected someone who spent all day spellchecking RT posts to know that. *while is fine as well...

Jun 19 - 07:32 PM

Rotten tomatos fails R.

Rotten tomatos fails Rt fails

You can use RT anywhere in the world...Im arguing with a half wit here...

Jun 20 - 03:47 PM

Rainbow Spirit

Rainbow Spirit

why this mother fucker is still alive? god damn it

Jun 20 - 05:11 PM

Diego Tutweiller

Diego John Rottweiler

Oh, I see. Rainbow Spirit thinks people value his opinion. And by the way, I was being sarcastic, good job catching on to that, fucking geniuses.

Jun 20 - 06:33 PM

Mayo Maya

Mayo Maya

STFU faggot

Jun 22 - 12:10 AM

Diego Tutweiller

Diego John Rottweiler

Hurling homophobic insults at each other now, are we?

Jun 25 - 09:56 AM

Diego Tutweiller

Diego John Rottweiler

Flag spamming my comments, hmm? No matter, here's what I said: "Oh, I see. Rainbow Spirit thinks people value his opinion. And by the way, I was being sarcastic, good job catching on to that, fucking geniuses." And I FUCKING STAND BY IT.

Jun 30 - 11:58 PM

Alberto Balsalm

Alberto Balsalm

Make your own opinions.

Jun 19 - 02:15 PM

Zane B

Chum Chum

And you are going to stop them? Shut the fuck up

Jun 19 - 06:42 AM

Xxon  M.

Xxon Mill

Child, go back to summer camp, your mouth dung is not wanted here.

Jun 19 - 08:15 AM

Rotten tomatos fails R.

Rotten tomatos fails Rt fails

Stop who? Read the question I ask...can you answer it? That is the only reason I made this thread. You'll find that its more of a question rather than a statement...if you noticed the question mark.

Jun 19 - 02:55 PM

Cole Jaeger

Cole Jaeger

Milo & Otis!

Jun 20 - 05:47 AM

Patrick Sewell

Patrick Sewell

You've got to be kidding me, this is hilarious. It's called opinions, stop being mad because yours is not correct in the eyes of most "professionals", people like you have no idea what they're saying or care if a review makes no sense, it could be "Man of Steel is the best Spider man movie, I have ever seen, 10/10" but as long as it agrees that's a good movie who cares, now if a review doesn't like a movie you don't, the critics are morons and you go post a moronic rant. Seriously just move on.

Jun 19 - 02:11 AM

Cole Jaeger

Cole Jaeger

Yes

Jun 19 - 05:32 AM

Xxon  M.

Xxon Mill

Sorry, he's right. You just move on, until you have something real to say.

Jun 19 - 08:17 AM

Ash Gilmore

Ash J. Gilmore

No he's not. Critics can have their own opinions just like audiences can.

Jun 19 - 08:24 AM

John Abella

John Abella

You don't say!

Jun 19 - 08:25 AM

Ash Gilmore

Ash J. Gilmore

I'm replying to Xxon because he thought otherwise you fucking imbecile.

Jun 19 - 08:27 AM

Cole Jaeger

Cole Jaeger

That wasn't his argument

Jun 22 - 08:10 AM

4567TME

Ken B

By disregarding the post as not true, you are essentially denying the fact that not everyone has the same viewpoint. That clearly makes perfect sense!

Jul 22 - 08:09 AM

Justin Daugherty

Justin Daugherty

*sigh* why does this always crop up when a popular movie gets bad reviews? Seriously, if you don't agree with the critics, then don't fucking read the reviews. Yes, it's dumb that people base whether they should see a movie or not solely based on Rotten Tomatoes score, no that's NOT a valid reason to say we don't need critics. Even assuming what you said is valid, this means we don't need BAD critics, not that we don't need critics AT ALL.

Jun 19 - 12:22 AM

Yousef Al

Yousef Al

Answer his question....

Jul 9 - 01:30 AM

Justin Daugherty

Justin Daugherty

what? "do we need critics"?

The answer is yes. We need critics. How else are we going to learn?

Jul 9 - 05:00 PM

Diego Tutweiller

Diego John Rottweiler

WHAT MOVIES SHOULD HAVE GOTTEN ON ROTTEN TOMATOES:

Avatar-- 42%
Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull-- 0%
Tim and Eric's Billion-Dollar Movie-- 0%
Hugo-- 6%
National Treasure-- 77%
Man of Steel-- 33%
Die Hard-- 100%
Die Hard V-- 1%
Up-- .000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001%

Jun 18 - 09:00 PM

Jake Braden

Jake Braden

I'm sorry, Hugo, Up and Indiana Jones 4 all > Die Hard

Jun 18 - 09:21 PM

Diego Tutweiller

Diego John Rottweiler

What do you think Curling: The Movie should have gotten?

Jun 18 - 10:02 PM

Jake Braden

Jake Braden

10/10. I can't think of anything more intense than sweeping the nothing in front of a rock

Jun 18 - 10:10 PM

Diego Tutweiller

Diego John Rottweiler

Have you seen the Beatles movie HELP? They play curling with a time bomb in it. It's pretty fuckin' funny.

Jun 18 - 10:18 PM

Jacob S.

Jacob Stevenson

You're either trolling or have a poor taste in movies. Indiana Jones and Die Hard V I can agree with...the rest is just you being lame.

Jun 19 - 08:18 PM

Diego Tutweiller

Diego John Rottweiler

FEE FI FO FUM I SMELL THE BLOOD OF A little bitch.

Jun 20 - 03:51 PM

Judge Nikhil

nikhil bhardwaj

dude Die Hard>Indiana Jones 4

Jun 22 - 08:26 AM

Cole Jaeger

Cole Jaeger

I thought Tim & Eric's Billion Dollar Movie was funny.

Jun 19 - 05:33 AM

Diego Tutweiller

Diego John Rottweiler

It is actually my least favorite movie of all time. I watched it in about 20 minute intervals, because about every 20 minutes I would get up from my iPod and say "That's it, I can't watch this drivel any more."

Jun 19 - 02:17 PM

Max M.

The Dude

The Dark Knight - 100,000,000,000,000,000,000.00000000000%
Pitch Perfect - 0.0000000000000000000000000002%
Skyfall - 73%
Man of Steel - 80%
Iron Man 3 - 83%
Kiss Kiss Bang Bang - 89%
Django Unchained - 92%
Reservoir Dogs, Pulp Fiction, The Departed, Magnolia - 97%
Taxi Driver - 90% (It's in my Top Ten Favorites, but I admit, a little overrated. I should stop using that word.)
Looney Tunes: Back in Action - 83%
Space Jam - 83%
Memento - 98%
Monsters Inc. - 100%
Mr. Popper's Penguins and Yes Man - 79% (you can tell I'm a big Jim Carrey fan)
Bruce Almighty - 85%
The Hunger Games - 60%
Silver Linings Playbook - 78%
Life of Pi - 72%
Marvel's The Avengers - 72% (every good movie I watch it just gets worse and worse)
Lincoln - 83%




The Looney Tunes thing might convince someone I'm a kid, the Jim Carrey thing might convince someone I'm a tool, and the Chris Nolan thing might convince someone I'm a fanboy. Don't give a shit. Although, I am an avid fan of Mr. Nolan, emphasis on the FAN, without a BOY.

Jun 22 - 08:15 AM

Max M.

The Dude

Also,

American Psycho - 90%
Avatar - 69%
Kill Bill Vol. 1/2 - 75% (Sorry everyone)
Captain America: The First Avenger - 90%
Iron Man 2 - 80%
Up - 80%
Zero Dark Thirty - 80%
The Big Lebowski - 95%
Seven Psychopaths - 95%
In Bruges - 90%
Horrible Bosses - 87%
That's My Boy - 45% (I know, right?)
Click, Just Go with It - 60% (I KNOW, RIGHT?!)
Transformers: Dark of the Moon - 60%
Snatch - 90%
Die Hard - 90% (I'm an idiot. I know)
Due Date - 80%
Children of Men - 83% (Only because Michael Caine died. Ooo, spoiler.)
Paul - 81%

Aren't I a fuckin' tool?

Jun 22 - 08:26 AM

Nada 1.

Nada 1

I raped your mother and she deserved a rating of 100%.

Jul 1 - 06:01 AM

Rotten tomatos fails R.

Rotten tomatos fails Rt fails

I would be content with MoS's ratings if Avatar (James Camerons version) recieved around a 40-50%. It has an 83%....Avatar was crap and had ten times the hype of Man of Steel. I mean Iron Man 3 sits at 78%. This fact cannot be mentioned enough times. Some people say that it was the certain 'crowd' of critics that did most of the reviewing for MoS. Well that is true in most cases but the Iron Man 3 crowd is largely the same as MoS's crowd. So it's simply innaccurate (even though alot of critics are currently reversing their rotten score). If you haven't already watched the video on Gray Drake (senior editor of RT) basically saying this then you should check it out for yourself...http://video.foxbusiness.com/v/2479849573001/will-man-of-steel-soar-above-the-competition/?playlist_id=933116614001 ...the vid might take a while. Or you could type in "Man of Steel Fox Business"...the vid is called "Will Man of Steel soar above the competition?"

Jun 18 - 07:29 PM

Stephen Mikalik

Stephen Mikalik

What is this "crowd" of critics you speak of?

Also, in the case of James Cameron's AVATAR, most reviews were positive but not overly positive. The visuals were the centerpiece with a derivative story, which was rightly criticized. I will be the first to agree with you the story was far from great. But my goodness was it beautiful.

Jun 18 - 08:50 PM

Rotten tomatos fails R.

Rotten tomatos fails Rt fails

Im referring to this apparant crowd of niave critics who judge a film adaptation withought reading the damn comics lol. The same crowd of critics that gave Iron Man 3 a 78%. I mean think of the Mandrin....then think of Zod. Yeah...those critics.

Jun 18 - 08:57 PM

Stephen Mikalik

Stephen Mikalik

So let me get this straight: My (would be) enthusiastic reviews of such comic book fare as IRON MAN 3 and THE AVENGERS plus negative reviews of IRON MAN 2 are null & void because I don't read comics?

Jun 18 - 09:08 PM

Brian Harris

Brian Harris

The thing is though, a movie shouldn't require you to read the source material to appreciate it. It should work on it's own merits.

Jun 19 - 07:57 PM

Max M.

The Dude

Brian, that is one of the most intelligent things I've ever heard. It's like saying, "Of course you didn't understand some parts of The Hunger Games film, silly. You have to read the books first, DUH!" The books do not fucking matter.

Jun 21 - 05:58 AM

Stephen Mikalik

Stephen Mikalik

I just love this delusion that film critics don't matter or are "wrong". The only way you can be "wrong" on an opinion is if your facts are wrong. To be "wrong" in film criticism, you have to have seen the wrong movie or not see a movie at all. Being an amateur film critic myself, I reserve my opinion until I see MAN OF STEEL.

That being said, I have used the Tomatometer the same way for almost a decade: as a guideline, not the Bible. If I absolutely WANT to see something, I go barring a score somewhere near my age. Use this as a guideline:

Tomatometer 85%+: See it! See it as soon as it becomes available in your area, some monetary restrictions apply.

Tomatometer 65-85%: Check it out, whenever you get a chance.

Tomatometer 45-65%: Check it out, with some reservations. But if you do, prepare to have discussions, sometimes intense, about your opinion.

Tomatometer 25-45%: Pass, unless you are dying to see.

Tomatometer >25%: Skip. It's a dud.

As it is said, to each his own. But to say critics are useless because "they have given" a second reboot of a superhero franchise and, previously, a first part of trilogy of a single, beloved, fantasy novel? That's wrong.

Jun 18 - 05:50 PM

David Bailey

David Bailey

No, critics are worthless. We don't need ya'll to tell us what to like or not like.

Jun 19 - 07:33 AM

Justin Daugherty

Justin Daugherty

Critics don't tell you what you should like or not, critics lay out what your going to get so you can decide IF you'll like it or not before you buy it.

Jul 9 - 05:02 PM

Ronnie Holliday

Ronnie Holliday

I agree 100%. Anyone who has watched all of the superman movies,cartoons, and comic book knows good and well that Man of Steel was an awesome movie. Made Dark knight rises look like sponge bob square pants

Jun 18 - 03:31 PM

Cole Jaeger

Cole Jaeger

But those people aren't judging the movie as an art form.

Jun 18 - 03:58 PM

Rainbow Spirit

Rainbow Spirit

actually we dont need them, most of them are just parasites and a bunch of frustated directors and actors who can't make it

Jun 18 - 01:51 PM

Lee Augustus

Lee Augustus

dumb fucker

Jul 5 - 08:12 AM

4567TME

Ken B

Care to back up your statement with, y'know, evidence?

Jul 22 - 08:07 AM

Jude F.

Jude Fawley

I'm sorry, I can't believe how bad this movie was... There was a moment at the end of the film where Clark and his mom are reflecting on how it's too bad Pop wasn't around to finally see Clark accept the responsibility--and the weight--of his identity... Mom and son are in what seems to be a legitimately upbeat mood, chipper even. Meanwhile half a city has been pounded into dust (literally), decimating thousands of citizens. Also, the ending: brutality, a brief wail, then a hug from your girlfriend. The whole sequence was almost as bad as "Vader" in Sith.... You know the moment. This flick needs to be watched as a retrospective for how potentially great movies go oh, so wrong: and I say "great" because the first hour was decent, very good even, and when you have this much money and talent there should be no excuse for the careless unraveling I saw. I'm not a hater. I wanted this movie to be as good as anyone, but years ago I also wanted The Phantom Menace to be good... and for a while I told myself it was good, but never again... never again. See Man of Steel another time folks, and when half way around the world (yep, literally) Superman out maneuvers a giant T1000 squid thingy, smashing it, Lois and company instantaneously exclaiming, "He did it!" ...well, when that happens, feel free to laugh.

Jun 18 - 10:00 AM

This comment has been removed.

John Abella

John Abella

The sad thing is these fanboys like Keon Indian guy loved it so much...and went to see it twice...

Jun 18 - 10:00 AM

Ash Gilmore

Ash J. Gilmore

Racist motherfucker.

Jun 18 - 10:03 AM

Anjeli Dubey

Anjeli Dubey

Critics suck

Jun 18 - 08:35 AM

This comment has been removed.

John Abella

John Abella

And then comes this chump who thinks cursing on the Internet makes him tough...

Jun 18 - 08:42 AM

Ash Gilmore

Ash J. Gilmore

I curse in real life too, fuckface.

Jun 18 - 08:43 AM

Ash Gilmore

Ash J. Gilmore

Then why are you on this website if critics suck so much? You do realize this is a critic website.

Jun 18 - 08:45 AM

Rotten tomatos fails R.

Rotten tomatos fails Rt fails

( http://video.foxbusiness.com/v/2479849573001/will-man-of-steel-soar-above-the-competition/?playlist_id=933116614001 ) ......... enough said. The vid might take a while. Basically its the Senior Editor of Rotten Tomatoes (Grae Drake) talking about how the critics got this one wrong.

Jun 17 - 08:44 PM

John Abella

John Abella

First of all, his name is Gray Drake lol...Second of all, how can he say the critics got it wrong, when the critics have different opinions and ratings of MoS?

Jun 17 - 08:50 PM

John Tyler

John Tyler

Shut up, racist.

Jun 18 - 12:31 PM

Nykirnsu 1.

Nykirnsu 1

How is he racist?

Jul 6 - 10:35 PM

Jeffrey Ballesteros

Jeffrey Ballesteros

People tend to forget that Superman knows martial arts, including boxing, hand-to-hand combat, pressure point combat (taught by Batman), and two Kryptonian ones: Torquasm-Rao & Torquasm-Vo.

See DEATH BATTLE - Goku VS Superman for a description of the full extent of the Man of Steel's powers.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oyl97TG8jbA

Jun 17 - 08:40 PM

Migs Rodriguez

Migs Rodriguez

People fail to realize (and I think critics fail to realize this too) is that we all are posting our opinions. Nothing more, nothing less. I enjoyed MoS very much. Doesn't mean other people will feel the same. While I don't have to agree, it doesn't mean I should bash people who didn't. This site is full of that. People think their opinions are facts, which isn't the case. This movie got a rotten rating, but people loved it. They are paying money to see it more than once. To each their own with any movie.

Jun 17 - 08:36 PM

John Abella

John Abella

How do you speak for everyone and say, people loved it? And you even paid money to see it twice?!

Jun 17 - 08:47 PM

Migs Rodriguez

Migs Rodriguez

I was in the theater with other people. They loved it. Not everyone will. Its not a hard concept to grasp.

Jun 18 - 03:38 PM

John Abella

John Abella

The people in your theater are not the only people who watched this and gave this a rotten rating. You stupid homo.

Jun 18 - 11:18 PM

Kevin De Freitas

Kevin De Freitas

Well critics are a part of culture, believe it or not, the world of film wouldn't be nearly as interesting if we don't have the ocassional self-proclaimed prodigious tossers who read too much into lines and tell us how smart they are by stripping appart the content of a piece of work and move it to a purely analytical level taking away all fun and meaning out of it

Jun 17 - 07:57 PM

Rainbow Spirit

Rainbow Spirit

we don't, but disney does

Jun 17 - 05:53 PM

Chuck Nichols

Chuck Nichols

If I followed the advice of movie critics, I would be missing out on a wide array of wonderful movies. Critics take the wonder and magic out of movies with their deadpan heartless negativity. People go into remakes with a preconseption, they want to sit through the movie and constantly compare, and TRY to be disappointed in what they are watching. Why waste the money if you are going to go to the movies with such a negative expectation? No one knows how to watch fims anymore, they are either bitching about the length of the movie (which by the way, if i am paying $10 a ticket, it BETTER be long!)or finding some other fickle item to put them in a stouper. I am really looking forward to seeing Man Of Steel part 2! Life is too short, so just sit back and enjoy the story!

Jun 17 - 04:22 PM

Demond Lasseter

Demond Lasseter

After the way that the critics slandered Man of Steel I won't be placing any emphasis on anything that professional critics have to say ever again.

Jun 17 - 03:55 PM

Fred Sanford

Fred Sanford

Anything between say a 40-70 rating is a crap shoot... you might like it you might not. Where it's helpful is when you get those 30 or less ratings... those will no doubt suck.

Jun 17 - 12:04 PM

Todd StPierre

Todd StPierre

I agree these critics are complaining about minor crap,this was a good movie for what it was supposed to be.

Jun 17 - 11:14 AM

Cole Jaeger

Cole Jaeger

People should learn to respect critics opinions but also see that what the critics are saying does not need to bother them if they disagree.

Jun 16 - 07:50 PM

Patric McLeod

Patric McLeod

Amen. Although, Zod was a good character. The only flaw was the the Phanton Zone was a different DIMENSION, and would not have been opened by the planet Kyrpton's blowing up. Zod was very good i his acting: menacing, ruthless and homicidal. much better than Terrence Stamp.
And mr. Marlett: the first two movies were 'fun' Superman movies, not GOOD Superman movies. i liked them too, but they weren't realistic portrayals of Superman, although they got Clark Kent stupendously good. And I was likely a lot older than you when I saw them, and had been reading Superman for 17 years at that point. Bandon Routh was the best at portraying Superman's nobility: his chief character trait, which, in comic book history, made him revered through the cosmos. Christopher Reeves' Superman was likable. That's fine, but it wasn't really Superman's big thing. Cavill showed Superman's learning how to use his powers and his developing moral center, courtesy of Kevin Costner, but he was just a bit too unhappy. On the other hand, the screen play made him HAVE to be unhappy, because he was worried about how the world would see him, and he'd lived there all his life, and didn't know he was an Alien. So, given the script, it was reasonable that he'd be a bit conflicted. Especially,since, in the comic books, he was "out" as Superboy while still in Smallville. (Yet another twist in the movie story, where he doesn't "come out" until he's 28 or so.

Jun 16 - 03:07 PM

Robert Benson

Robert Benson

"The only flaw was the the Phanton Zone was a different DIMENSION, and would not have been opened by the planet Kyrpton's blowing up." First off, what science to you base that on? And second of all, if you pay attention, the "gateway" is anchored outside the Phantom Zone. Krypton's blast destroyed the anchor, thus opening the tear in space that the anchor is creating.

Jun 16 - 06:15 PM

Robert Benson

Robert Benson

I can explain MofS near 60% number on Rotten. First off; Clark was raised in a Red State, and we can't have that. He is moral. The super bad chick said "history has taught us that evolution always win; but Superman wins in the end, thus so does morality and we can't have that in this day and age. The moment Clark walked into a church, that alone cost him 20 points from the critics because, we'll...we can't have characters in a movie getting advice from priests, not in this day and age.

Jun 16 - 03:06 PM

Rotten tomatos fails R.

Rotten tomatos fails Rt fails

I think I'll just balance your arguemt a bit, but I do think you have a legitimate argument (they REALLY could have left out the priest scene). Ok so not to straw man your argument in a negative way, but you're basically saying that MoS is republican/conservative bias, and thats why the liberal media gave it those scores. Well they changed one of the leading white characters to a Black guy (Perry White)...and rewrote one one of the known male characters to be female (Jenny Olson). Superman is supposed to be portrayed as a godly figure, but he is referred to as an alien mostly. So if he is supposed to portray Jesus then don't forget that he did he kill a person and cause utter destruction(something superman was forbidden from doing with past versions)...not a very good Jesus. The whole him being raised in Kansas was sorta in the comics so yeah.

Jun 16 - 08:30 PM

Jermain Jackson

Jermain Jackson

Right so his battle with Doomsday, in the comics, the animated film Superman Doomsday, his fights in his other animated movies, the tv show and countless comics didn't show Metropolis getting wrecked. While not on the level in this movie (A much bigger budget). Destruction still happened.

Jun 17 - 11:34 PM

Rotten tomatos fails R.

Rotten tomatos fails Rt fails

If you think Man of Steel has too much action.....http://i.imgur.com/xyd5StF.gif

Jokes aside, the Senior Editor of Rottentomatoes.com has stated that she "is shocked at the 58% rotten score." Not even the Senior Editor of RT agrees with its score...check it out for yourself ( http://video.foxbusiness.com/v/2479849573001/rotten-tomatoes-weekend-box-office-preview/?playlist_id=2418215023001 ) or type in ( Grae Drake Man of Steel critic). You may have to refresh the vid a couple of times.

Jun 16 - 01:05 PM

Mad Madder

Mad Madder

With Man Of Steel's ratings, it seems to me that, Rotten Tomatoes is a place for ROTTEN REVIEWS

Jun 16 - 12:37 PM

Ocram Immorto

Ocram Immorto

Pretty much.

Jun 18 - 09:15 PM

Grand M.

Grand Mesa

Since the "critics" are paid for what they do, and considering how much the audience and the critics CAN differ..........I have made the decision to trust the critic's "tomato meter" over the audience because too many KIDS access this site. And I would also like to know ahead of time if a film stinks and I don't want to waste my time with.
I will wait for Superman to come out on rental THEN I'll come back here and see just how far you people are off...........

Jun 16 - 12:25 PM

John Stovall

John Stovall

experience has taught me jus t the opposite. Given my personal elitist tendencies, its hard to admit but I agree with the audience far far more. In fact with action, SF, Superheroes, a lower score often means a more entertaining movie. That being said I think they have let their preconceptions cloud their judgment with "man of Steel. IMO it is an excellent film on the level of Thor, captain America or the 1st Iron man.

Jun 17 - 08:26 PM

Rotten tomatos fails R.

Rotten tomatos fails Rt fails

If you saw Avatar...then you have absolutely no reason to skip out on this one. Its ten fold better in every aspect...the critics simply didnt 'watch' this movie...they looked at it. If they paid attention to the details then they wouldn't have been disappointed (Alot of critics are actually going back on their word). In any event this is big screan 'worthy' in every sense of the word.

I urge you to actually read the rotten reviews, because you'll find very little rotten aspects of the movie mentioned in the review itself.

Jun 17 - 08:41 PM

Rotten tomatos fails R.

Rotten tomatos fails Rt fails

This thread along with its subject matter should conclude rather concisely with the words of Grae Drake (Senior Editor of Rottentomatoes.com). Either use this link ( http://video.foxbusiness.com/v/2479849573001/will-man-of-steel-soar-above-the-competition/?playlist_id=933116614001 ) ..or type in ( Man of Steel Fox Business ) the article is titled "Will 'Man of Steel' soar above the competition?"

Jun 16 - 12:18 PM

Max M.

The Dude

Critics are people we deserve, but not the ones we need right now.

Jun 16 - 11:56 AM

Grand M.

Grand Mesa

...............well.........that makes a hell of a lot of sense!

Jun 16 - 12:17 PM

Max M.

The Dude

I'm sayin' critics are helpful and spot-on most of the time, but I think they were a bit off on Man of Steel because I thought it was pretty cool.

Jun 16 - 12:29 PM

Jacob S.

Jacob Stevenson

Sometimes critics can be helpful. I thought the movie Chronicle was going to be terrible when I saw the trailers, but then I saw the reviews on here and decided to give it a go. I was glad I did.

Jun 16 - 10:50 AM

Robert Benson

Robert Benson

And now some reviewers are walking back their negative tones. One just wrote "I didn't say it was awful but..." BUT you gave it a rotten rating.

Jun 16 - 08:34 AM

Codex Meridian

Codex Meridian

I'm not a fanboy but I'm disappointed with MOS getting rotten reviews. I finally watched the film around 3 days ago. And you know what? The critics are right to some degree. And I respect their expert opinion.

Jun 16 - 08:18 AM

Grand M.

Grand Mesa

Sounds like you are mature enough to either like it or not. So you tend to listen to the critics more so than THIS audience.

Jun 16 - 12:29 PM

Judge Nikhil

nikhil bhardwaj

fanboy is angry

Jun 16 - 02:52 AM

Craig Stamper

Craig Stamper

Do we need critics? Oh no, not at all. All you really need is a massive corporate marketing campaign to condition you. Especially since you're so accustomed to mediocrity, you wouldn't know what to do with an objective review. P.S. The only consistent "lack of accuracy" on this site (for people over the age of say, 10, or those who are literate) is in the audience ratings. They're absurdly skewed to favorable by rabid fans of every film, however atrocious.

Jun 16 - 01:41 AM

Jermain Jackson

Jermain Jackson

No review is objective, it is all subjective

Jun 17 - 11:39 PM

Ash Gilmore

Ash J. Gilmore

THIS

Jun 18 - 01:03 PM

4567TME

Ken B

THANK YOU.

Jul 22 - 08:06 AM

Patric McLeod

Patric McLeod

I read the review by Kaplan and Kaplan and her biggest complaint was the film was too long. This is a review?!?! And how old are some of these critics? I'm 62, and when we went to the movies, we wanted it to last all afternoon (double feature or no!). And she writes: " Seriously, the final clash between Superman (Henry Cavill) and General Zod (Michael Shannon) is SO lengthy that it borders on ridiculous. I don't care how much of a superhero that you are, how many times can you get thrown, kicked, punched, shot and basically half-beaten to death before it becomes monotonous? To top it off, the destruction of much of Metropolis is unnerving."
The absurdity of that is, to use a colloquial "awesome." A fight between two completely invulnerable beings (although Superman, who should have been able to withstand being hit with an aircraft carrier, spends too much time clearing his head from that car that one of the baddies hit him with: the real Superman would've shrugged it off. And by "real," I mean the comic book Superman, which i've been reading since 1961) is not going to end in 10 minutes. Ms. Kaplan needs to find her genre and stick with it. A complaint is not a review: it's just personal, subjective annoyance, like a 15-year old who says," O God, I was there for-EV-er." And they were there for 1/2 hour. ADHD is alive in Ms. Kaplan's life.
Man of Steel was good, but not great. Yet I didn't mind its lack of greatness: NONE of the Superman movies have been "Great." I saw Chris Reeves in the first one in 1978, and thought he was nice and personable, but too damn slow. The Man of Steel got one thing right: the speed at which Superman can move (although his reaction time was annoying). Superman can circle the earth in a split second, so it was nice to see people moving so fast they were there one second and not the next (although it didn't happen often enough, and mostly, it was the bad Kryptonian female warrior who did this best!).
Having Amy Adams track Superman by his having done heroic things when he was young was, initially, infuriating, but her humanity when she found out his identity, made it a better movie than when I heard she was going to find out who Superman was and where he ived when he was young. NOT LIKE THE COMIC BOOK. AT.ALL.
Otherwise, it was cool. And, given that Zod wanted to destroy Metropolis, I hardly fine Kaplan's comments even remotely intelligent. It followed the plot: destroy the earth and re-populate it with Kryptonian terra-formed features. Duh! Did she follow the dialogue.
Many of the critics obviously know nothing about Superman other than the other movies. And this supposed clash between his two fathers???? Strictly an artifact from "Smallville," the first (stupid) show to place Jor-el and Jonathan Kent as adversaries. In the comic book, Jor-el was never, EVER seen. He was dead. He stayed dead. He never even made an appearance in any timeline, any dimension Superman visited in the past 52 years I've been reading him. Nada. This whole, "torn between two fathers" is a contemporary device for people who have to have the usual patriarchal clash ("I'm your dad." "NO I"M your dad." God, please make the next screen writer be someone who's actually read Superman for at least the last 30 years, so we can get the script right. Thank you, God.

Jun 15 - 10:53 PM

Ash Gilmore

Ash J. Gilmore

Wow. No need to write an essay.

Jun 15 - 10:57 PM

Craig Stamper

Craig Stamper

Your comments are a good example of how awful this film is and precisely which type of viewer would actually like it: Someone concerned with "the speed at which Superman can move". This film completely re-invents Superman, and in the most adolescent, unimaginative manner, but you can't even see that because you are operating on a wholly superficial, trivial level.

Jun 16 - 01:48 AM

Robert Benson

Robert Benson

This movie isn't awful; Green Lantern and Ghost Rider were awful. The fact it is doing so well is proof that your comments are not as widely held as you might think.

Jun 16 - 01:59 AM

Leo Veloso

Leo Veloso

Man of Steel is GREAT!!

Jun 16 - 05:12 AM

Leo Veloso

Leo Veloso

Man of Steel is GREAT!!

Jun 16 - 05:12 AM

John Stovall

John Stovall

Sounds like you yourself missed all the meaning updates of his character. The power level was not the issue. This was a deep multilayered treatment with lots of complex and interesting characters

Jun 16 - 08:09 AM

Jacob S.

Jacob Stevenson

You said that you didn't like how slow Superman reacted sometimes. I took this is as he still hasn't grasped how much power he really has. After all, he's been trying to keep it a secret his entire life. As for the fighting, while I liked how it wasn't some quick fight, it eventually did become a bit exhausting on an emotional level. But whatever. It wasn't as bad as some people have said, but it wasn't as great as a lot of people were hoping it to be. I think if Nolan or any other director who is better at making a movie flow than Snyder is, then we would have gotten the great the film we were hoping for.

Jun 16 - 10:44 AM

Jack Ninivaggi

Jack Ninivaggi

Man of Steel is a good movie that falls short of being a great movie due to a lack of character development and emotional depth.. But what it lacks in story and characters it makes up for with awesome action and a well chosen cast. Amy Adams and Kevin Costner, and Michael Shannon are the highlights. I especially loved Amy Adam's portrayal of Lois Lane. Despite its failure to connect to the audience on an emotional level, I still highly recommend it, especially if you're looking for some summer popcorn fun.

Jun 15 - 09:35 PM

John Stovall

John Stovall

Lack of character development and emotional depth. We saw a different movie. This actually my problem with lots of the complaints. Give me real complains not just unobservant watchers. Lois for example connected way better with me than MargoKidder's version. If you think Zod and Clark had no emotional depth you just weren't watching the movie IMO.

Jun 16 - 08:13 AM

Anjeli Dubey

Anjeli Dubey

There was so much character development and emotional depth!

Jun 18 - 09:00 AM

Ash Gilmore

Ash J. Gilmore

That's what John said... Are you replying to Jack?

Jun 18 - 01:04 PM

Ocram Immorto

Ocram Immorto

It actually HAD emotional depth, the character development was the only flaw.

Jun 18 - 09:17 PM

Alfred Borden

Alfred Borden

Not enough character development? Anyone who knew nothing about Superman knew more after watching MOS as apposed to Superman Returns. Brian Singer literally assumed everyone would or should know about Superman & said Oh hum hum Returns is a sequel to Superman 2 from 1980. We've got critics saying (Zack Snyder should know that not everyone knows about Superman)? yet they rated Superman Returns higher than MOS? It's blatant bias and hatred of Zack Snyder.

Jun 20 - 12:30 AM

John Abella

John Abella

The tomato meter does not decide for you...You choose if you watch or not and this site is only a guide from a collection of opinions...Please don't make stupid topics again...

Jun 15 - 08:34 PM

Daniel Stewart

Daniel Stewart

Please don't make stupid replies again. Just coincidentally saw you posted on another thread how this movie was borderline unwatchable. That would put you in the minority and means that your opinion is in the minority. So if your opinion is that of the minority, keep your mouth shut because you really don't have the right (or intellect) to call ANYTHING stupid.

Jun 16 - 01:07 AM

John Abella

John Abella

Quite possibly the dumbest comment I've read here...

Jun 16 - 01:27 AM

Max M.

The Dude

I agree. Daniel, I'm sure you have the minority opinion on at least one movie.

Jun 16 - 06:05 AM

Hipster Elitist Nyland

Hipster Elitist Nyland

Daniel, what you had to say was pretty embarrassing. You can't be that stupid.

Jun 16 - 08:17 AM

Ash Gilmore

Ash J. Gilmore

I literally fell out of my chair after reading that comment, Chase. Nice. Daniel what the hell are you talking about?

Jun 16 - 08:22 AM

Hipster Elitist Nyland

Hipster Elitist Nyland

Lol That was probably the dumbest thing I've read on this site. It's right up there with the "goblin boobies" shit we had to endure in the forum for The Hobbit.

Jun 16 - 08:24 AM

Ash Gilmore

Ash J. Gilmore

That really brings me back, man. Haha. Yeah that comment was in a whole different galaxy of dumb. I kind of feel bad because everyone is going to refer to this comment whenever he tries to make an argument lol.

Jun 16 - 08:31 AM

Ash Gilmore

Ash J. Gilmore

*Takes me back

Jun 16 - 08:31 AM

Hipster Elitist Nyland

Hipster Elitist Nyland

I don't feel bad. If you're that ignorant, then you deserve to be ridiculed lol.

Jun 16 - 08:33 AM

Diego Tutweiller

Diego John Rottweiler

Yep, this Daniel guy is the anus of the world.

Jun 16 - 10:24 AM

Ocram Immorto

Ocram Immorto

There are a billion anuses of the world.

Jun 18 - 09:19 PM

Jake Weilheimer

Jake Weilheimer

is that to say that minorities have no right to speak their mind? such an unintelligent and classless remark

Jun 16 - 12:27 PM

Diego Tutweiller

Diego John Rottweiler

If that were true, half of my reviews would be taken down.

Jun 16 - 03:59 PM

Cole Jaeger

Cole Jaeger

So if your opinion is a minority, you don't have the right to opinions?

Jun 16 - 08:09 PM

Robert Benson

Robert Benson

Kal-L's life on Earth is told in flashback, so that when you get to the end, you understand why he has chosen to stay hidden for all these years.

This is nothing new, of course. But I think they do a great job with Kevin Costner telling him to hide his abilities, because humans are afraid of what they can't understand...and Jorel's telling him to be an inspiration to the people of Earth; which path should he take?

Lois is strong woman in this movie. Not some cigarette chomping reporter who just wants to bed down with Superman instead of doing her job...being a reporter. Kidder's Lois was a bimbo...

As for the scifi angle? Krypton was never meant to be some ice world; only Donner's movies did that, and it was good for those movies...but this movie shows us a krypton from the comics, and how a great society allows technology to bring them to great heights and to great dispare. THIS is Superman...and I can't wait for the next movie...

Jun 15 - 08:33 PM

Benjamin Marlatt

Benjamin Marlatt

What's with all the hate toward the first two Superman films? Superman III, IV, and Returns certainly sucked, but the first two were great, and the first one in particular is one of my favorite films of all-time. That being said, I still loved this film. It's a completely different take on the character, so I don't compare it to the other two, but it still sits in good company with them.

Jun 15 - 08:24 PM

Jacob S.

Jacob Stevenson

The problem is a lot of critics are comparing this movie to the original ones and bemoaning the difference in tone. It's freaking stupid.

Jun 16 - 10:47 AM

Joshua Henderson

Joshua Henderson

Let's just say this. Without the critics I would maybe have spent my money on The Last Airbender (because I am a fan of the show). Thank goodness I didn't.

Jun 15 - 06:26 PM

Robert Benson

Robert Benson

By your same logic then; Spielberg thanks you for seeing The Crystal Skull

Jun 16 - 02:18 AM

Joshua Henderson

Joshua Henderson

Hey. I didn't hate the movie that much. My main problem is that it was very unrealistic. But I never saw it in theaters so Speilberg should avoid thanking me. I also didn't check out reviews from Rotten Tomatoes then. I checked out user reviews from Flixster so I was surprised to find out that it was positive from Rotten Tomatoes.

Jun 16 - 05:58 AM

Claudine Jones

Claudine Jones

THANK you. Reviewers=meh

Jun 15 - 06:18 PM

Pc Starters

Pc Starters

I saw the movie and I have to watch it again to understand the concepts. This 57% by critics is total crap because they don't understand the world of superman. According to me the movie is above 80%. And all this critics kneeled before Zod and gave such horrible review

Jun 15 - 03:49 PM

John Stovall

John Stovall

I have to agree with you for my crowd, a superhero movie or SF movie having a lower critic score usually tells us its better. Much as the elitist in me hates to admit it, the audience scores are much more accurate if it will be an entertaining movie.

Jun 16 - 08:16 AM

Jake Weilheimer

Jake Weilheimer

agreed.. because a critic needs to critique.. and audience simply wants to enjoy the film, usually through a more accepting scope

Jun 16 - 12:29 PM

Chris Westergaard

Chris Westergaard

It was this movie that made me decide maybe I shouldn't pay attention to what the "critics" say anymore. I though Man of Steel was a BLAST.

Jun 15 - 03:27 PM

Leo Veloso

Leo Veloso

"There is a lot of so called "superman" fans(critics) that claim that this is a tedious action film that doesn't have Donner's influence anywhere in it. I say, that if you want to take the contrariety route then they simply need to stop giving reviews based off of that. Reeve's superman is for those who loved superman before 1986. Why 1986? Well, if you are a comic book fan everyone knows that "the Dark Knight Returns" made superman into a political "yes" man, that turned superman into a cold, dark enforcer. But..... As always, critics overlook things like this and think the Man of Steel was trying to break traditional convention and sabotage "their" version of superman they loved(the kitty cat saving one). While overlooking the superman that exists today.
Read more at http://www.comicbookmovie.com/superman_movies/news/?a=81601#rlL7RkUiwMW4VFvH.99 "

Jun 15 - 10:31 AM

Marcus Ciubal

Marcus Ciubal

Sometimes critics are not analyzing movies at all. It is okay for the audience to express disappointment since it's superficial for them and all they want is 'entertainment', I understand them. But critics rant about the theme w/o understanding the underlying situation. They are to make legit reviews, not news article opinions.

Okay, here. Yes I was disappointed with Man of Steel, but not to the point of cursing superman forever. I blame Snyder's direction, coz he doesn't know how to fix scenes, and how to materialize it and mold it. He's just good in visuals. The scenes were inconsistent in texture, some are rough, some are smooth. The Memento-style in the middle didn't work out, and the action scenes were too much. But with the motive of pulling Kent to our level, being more relatable, being more of a 'man' rather than 'super', I immediately understood Nolan and Goyer's goal regarding the film, it's just that they have entrusted it to the hands of mere experience in handling such stories. The script, if fixed maybe by Nolan himself, could have pulled this to the likes of The Dark Knight. It was like a jumbled script of Batman Begins.

Jun 15 - 10:15 AM

Carolina Alvarenga

Carolina Alvarenga

i dont need critics

Jun 15 - 10:13 AM

4567TME

Ken B

So why are you here?

Jul 22 - 08:05 AM

John Tyler

John Tyler

We don't need critics, but we don't need audiences either. We just need to watch a film and judge whether it's good or bad. That's the whole point of watching a movie.

Jun 15 - 09:52 AM

Cole Jaeger

Cole Jaeger

Well someone has to say if it's worth your time. But people should have different ways of discovering that. If the critics don't work for you, don't listen to them. But I wouldn't want to take a risk on everything I go to see. Sometimes critics need to tell people not to see horrid movies or to check out really good ones.

Jun 16 - 08:11 PM

Tcha Dawei Yang

Tcha Dawei Yang

No you don't need the critics... But if RT was only about audience reviews, you wouldn't know if a movie is good or bad because people who don't care about the movie wouldn't review it.

Jun 15 - 09:24 AM

John Stovall

John Stovall

So only people interested in the genre would review it? How awful!

Jun 17 - 08:28 PM

Leo Veloso

Leo Veloso

I really loved this movie. Level Batman Begins. I really think that the critics are ashamed to admit that a Snyders film is good

Jun 15 - 08:02 AM

Francis Albert Sabater

Francis Albert Sabater

A bunch of old fags who didn't read the comic book. Ofcourse they don't know what is happening and shit. So the joke is on them.

Jun 15 - 03:28 AM

Luis Ho

Luis Ho

I lost my confident over this site, they could have caused a major flop to this great movie. this is a movie that deserve a good rating, it's the superman movie that we were all expecting and waiting. Glad i didn't listen and watched it. it was fantastic movie

Jun 15 - 03:23 AM

Gimhana Fernando

Gimhana Fernando

Well,I for one do not "let the tomato meter decide what movie to enjoy".We do agree most of the time,but if you consider reviews by individuals,then there is no single critic or movie pundit that I completely trust.
I would have liked to noted the late Roger Ebert as a reliable critic but he has made some decisions regarding films that I simply cannot concur with:
Clockwork Orange -2/4
Reservoir Dogs - 2.5/4
Thor - 2.5/4
Spider Man - 2.5/4
The Omen - 2.5/4

And yet he gave movies like Diary Of A Wimpy Kid 3.5/4.Logic,where art thou?

Do we NEED critics?I say no,we can appreciate and enjoy movies without them quite well.
Does their work enhance our understanding and love of films?Of course they can,but not always.Again,I use Roger Ebert's work as an example,cause when he got it right,he wrote magnificently and analyzed even better.

IMDb has no critics,and that site is a garbage pit.So atleast they serve as an outlet for us to relieve our frustrations,instead of exerting it on each other.And that is not so bad.

Jun 15 - 03:19 AM

Alfred Borden

Alfred Borden

The critics say Superman is generic? all CGI? no character development? bad acting? no depth? been there done that? then why is Avatar rated in the 80s & Avengers in the 90s? The Spiderman reboot has a ton of CGI & yet again for the 4th time the villain repents at the end. I guess the been there done that didnt stop its fresh rating though. The mildly entertaining Thor is rated fresh. The disapointing & boring Captain America is damn near 80 percent fresh. The donut eating, drunk DJing Ironman 2 is rated fresh. The disco dancing Spiderman 3 is fresh. For people who wanted the old Superman theme music & red trunks back - Ironman 3 is rated fresh even though the director took his primary arch nemesis & turned him into a drunken clown actor. So the critics want more character development? Batman Begins had an almost perfect cast (except for Katie), incredible acting, layers of intertwining stories, and an incredible villain but yet it is rated lower than Avengers by the same critics that are saying Man Of Steel has too much action & not enough depth? Can anyone seriously defend that with a straight face? The blatant hatred for Zack Snyder is staggering. I thourougly enjoyed Man Of Steel &
went into it for the same reason I went into Avengers. To sit back & endulged in a visual vest. MOS suprised me though with the heartfelt moments in between the action & also on Krypton. The whole audience clapped when the credits started to roll. I am definitley going to see it again.

Jun 15 - 02:03 AM

Judge Nikhil

nikhil bhardwaj

its not always necessary that movie with a darker tone will always be good when compared to movies with a lighter tone.I m not sayin this movie is crap , but the problem with critics and to some extent with the fans are that they expected too much from this movie,given the fact,chris nolan is the writer of the movie and they wanted it to be as good as his other work.ONE more thing instead of hiring this piece of crap director Zack Snyder,studios could have hired someone better , wat i mean to say is a storyteller in the same blood of tarantino,nolan paul thomas anderson.this movie got 57% bcoz of nolan and in next SM movie,his role will be limited he wont be writer but a executive producer,next movie will be worse than this

Jun 15 - 06:41 AM

Judge Nikhil

nikhil bhardwaj

superman returns is a better than this one

Jun 15 - 06:42 AM

Shane Borg

Shane Borg

Ha, and I suppose beaches is your favorite film.

Jun 15 - 09:48 AM

Hipster Elitist Nyland

Hipster Elitist Nyland

What?

Jun 16 - 08:18 AM

Shane Garis

Shane Garis

Superman Returns was pussy campy bullshit.

Jun 18 - 12:44 PM

JLSupermanRocks

Kal Stauffer

Yeah critics here are ridiculous, I used to half care what they thought... but now I don't. I just look at trailers or hear what "real" people suggest and then I go and see a movie and decide for myself if I liked it.

Jun 15 - 01:13 AM

Judge Nikhil

nikhil bhardwaj

i saw this, screw this, superman1&2,superman returns for life

Jun 14 - 10:39 PM

Shane Borg

Shane Borg

Good you can keep em this superman is for less campy fair.

Jun 15 - 09:49 AM

Judge Nikhil

nikhil bhardwaj

i saw this, screw this, superman1&2,superman returns for life

Jun 14 - 10:39 PM

That Guy W.

That Guy Whose Name Will Not Be Told

Just because the critics view the movie differently than most audiences do, doesn't make them wrong. They, like all of us, have their own opinions, and they are all entitled to their own opinions, just like us.
There is no such thing as a right or wrong opinion. There are only opinions you either agree or disagree with.

Jun 14 - 10:34 PM

John Stovall

John Stovall

True but I honestly think critics look at movies from a different point of view that is not relevant to most audiences and so their input really isn't helpful They look at them from a technical , work of art manner and in fact what they value often makes for a less heroic and interesting film.

Jun 16 - 08:20 AM

John Bacon

John Bacon

They definitely look at them more as a work of art. A lot of audiences just want to be entertained for 2 hours and can live with mediocrity.

Jun 17 - 10:34 AM

Alvaro Feliu

Alvaro Feliu

i havent seen it yet, but i have the feeling that most of the critics just hate it for some reason, maybe the reeves desease.. dont get me wrong, i loved the first two sm movies, and reeves played the part on both, but thats not superman, critics are fixated on the idea that a good supes movie should be the one that best follows up with the old ones, well, we know how that attempt turned back in 2006, thats the only reason i can imagine superman returns getting a much higher score on the tomatometer...

Jun 14 - 10:15 PM

Kevin P.

Kevin Pitman

If you look back throughout the decades, critics have always given their reviews, but the true test to a movie's life is time itself. You can look up actual old reviews from classic films that were in newspapers back in the 1930's and onward. There were nasty, hateful reviews for Wizard of Oz, Casablanca, Star Wars, pretty much everything... it just shows that reviews are meant to stir conversation. Sometimes, the poor reviews are spot-on.... sometimes a movie is dismissed because at the time, the reviewers were expecting something else, or were surprised. The truly good films will be the ones we call classics in 20 or 50 years, regardless of the reviewers.

Jun 14 - 09:43 PM

That Guy W.

That Guy Whose Name Will Not Be Told

Actually, The Wizard of Oz, Casablanca and Star Wars are very well-received during their time of release. If you want some real examples of movies that were poorly received during their release but was positively received several years later, go to this website:

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/VindicatedByHistory

Jun 14 - 10:37 PM

Judge Nikhil

nikhil bhardwaj

once upon a time in the west,major dundee got bad reviews @their release got studios removed many scenes in theatrical release but when restored version of these movies came,now regarded as one of the best of all time

Jun 15 - 06:32 AM

Judge Nikhil

nikhil bhardwaj

once upon a time in the west,major dundee got bad reviews @their release got studios removed many scenes in theatrical release but when restored version of these movies came,now regarded as one of the best of all time

Jun 15 - 06:32 AM

John Stovall

John Stovall

The critics most often aren't looking for an entertaining film. In fact some of the factors that make it an entertaining film often make it less of a work of art in their eyes. Not just for Superman but pretty much all around I feel this way. All to often they review films they have no interest in the subject material and it shows. Even the late great Roger Ebert had this problem. In his review of Thor he did admit he had little interest in the film at least. That explains wht is review got several important facts about the movie dead wrong. I'm not talking subjective stuff here. For example he thought Sif killed the destroyer with her sword
That being said if two movies are equal and have equal audience scores. I am more likely to see the one with a lower critic score because its more likely to be heroic and fun.

Jun 14 - 08:30 PM

Adam Gunn

Adam Gunn

so basically they're in another realm of picking apart the film.. a great way to represent thoughts to the public. sheesh.

Jun 14 - 08:50 PM

Cole Jaeger

Cole Jaeger

Well entertainment is a major factor in all films. Critics are just able to enjoy movies that sacrifice some entertainment for the sake of art. Often times if you're able to appreciate the artistry it makes the movie more entertaining. A movie cannot be good if it is just entertaining and it cannot be good if it isn't entertaining at all. A movie like The Turin Horse holds my attention even though it's not entertaining but for the general audience they would see nothing worth watching.

Jun 16 - 07:46 PM

Lance Reyner

Lance Reyner

simple the critics are asshats and not true Superman fans.

Jun 14 - 08:21 PM

Cole Jaeger

Cole Jaeger

Are you saying that all critics should be superman fans?

Jun 16 - 07:46 PM

Adam Gunn

Adam Gunn

the critics need to lighten up and just enjoy a movie for what it is.. this was a gripping movie, not a laughter train... it delivered. amazing cast, amazing score, good script, a visual treat.. I am sitting here 4 hours later still in the movie...

Jun 14 - 08:15 PM

Nick Monson

Nick Monson

The critics are wrong on this one this is one of the best superhero comic movies I've seen. The critics are upset because there is too much action? Why go see a superman movie then if u don't want to see action? Unless u just wanted to see another superman returns which wasn't horrible but very boring. This is obviously a movie for the fans and the action seems were the best I've seen in any movie period. It was a great movie despite all the negative critics. Those critics all ready knew what they thought of the movie before they even walked in the theatre.

Jun 14 - 07:50 PM

JLSupermanRocks

Kal Stauffer

Well put good sir... also Superman Returns was pretty good (it was,) but Man of Steel... WAS Amazingly Awesome! :)

Jun 15 - 01:15 AM

Javis Carrillo

Javis Carrillo

You know what I haven't seen the movie, but your argument is right, these movie makers don't sleep, don't do things, so they can do what thyey like, or a project they have always wanted to do, and for what,for some morons come and critic the job of someone, and the only good critic, whom arguments are very valis, is gone, so why should we listen the other critics?

Jun 14 - 06:26 PM

Jackson Eckert

Jackson Eckert

Could someone translate this for me, please?

Jun 14 - 06:54 PM

Alfred Borden

Alfred Borden

Hahaha

Jun 15 - 02:08 AM

Nykirnsu 1.

Nykirnsu 1

I think he was saying how rude it is for critics to give a bad review when the filmmakers have given up months they could be spending on their own artistic projects to make money-making, Hollywood schlock. A terrible argument, because these are movies with huge budgets made, usually, by competent professionals who should by able to do better. These aren't kids' homemade films where it's impressive that they got made at all; there's no reason not to complain about bad Hollywood movies. Not to mention the fact that critics would usually rather filmmakers work on their personal projects since their often more interesting movies.

Jul 6 - 11:16 PM

Hipster Elitist Nyland

Hipster Elitist Nyland

What the actual fuck did I just read?

Jun 16 - 08:19 AM

Chris Bliss

Chris Bliss

The Critics are high as a f''g kite on this one - This movie was well done - Maybe the critics hate Zack Snyder.

Jun 14 - 06:10 PM

Turambar29

Ryan B

I wholeheartedly agree; nitpicking to the point of missing the movie itself, and seemingly according to a script. Did someone put out a memo describing what the complaining should look like? I saw the same thing with John Carter (wish we were getting more of that, too), and decided that I seem to like the opposite of what movie critics like.

Jun 14 - 04:45 PM

Jackson Eckert

Jackson Eckert

I just saw it, and I'll give my two cents. I think the critics have valid points, but overall, I think it was really great. First and foremost, though, I have one overarching criticism, and that's a criticism of the person who formulated this thread. I think the biggest pitfall of modern movie criticism is that people aren't intelligent enough to fully understand what they're saying. The above text very clearly indicates a lack of understanding on multiple levels. I will repeat that most critics have made valid points regarding the shortcomings of this movie, including the lackluster writing, somewhat dour tone, and the in-your-face imagery of the film. Every opinion is an opinion, but I feel like most unbiased, moderately intelligent and well-informed viewers will notice it and find it somewhat off.

Let me reiterate: I loved the movie overall. Was it perfect? No, but it was satisfying. I'll tell you what's caused all the disappointment over this movie, because I experienced it just like everyone else. With all the buildup to this movie--all those amazing trailers, the fanboy hype, and all the tea leaves pointing to this movie being incredible--everyone, including myself, wanted this movie to do well. It's fun to be a part of movie history, witnessing the birth of a cinematic monument, and I'm willing to bet that many people wanted Man of Steel to be that monument, much like the Dark Knight was five years ago. Personally, I naively envisioned a high 90's tomatometer and a consensus that read something like this: "The grandaddy of all superheroes is masterfully reborn in the grandaddy of all superhero movies." Let's be honest; that'd be awesome, and I don't think anyone's expectations were unfounded. Christopher Nolan's name has been on some pretty awesome movies, including what is arguably the greatest superhero film made to date in The Dark Knight, and Zack Snyder is certainly capable of delivering a satisfying action flick. We got caught up in the hype, though, becoming biased, expecting this movie to be so much more than it turned out to be.

So we're disappointed. Okay, that's natural; nothing wrong with it. But let's not use the critics as scapegoats for our own disappointment. They may not always be right, they may at times hold unpopular opinions, but one would hope that the majority of them are, above all, rational and unbiased moviegoers. I'd much rather be disappointed along with the critics than read rave reviews from a load of biased fanboys who were aligned with what I had hoped. Wouldn't the disappointment then be that much worse?

Grow up and don't blame the critics. I can't abide people pouting about a disappointing movie and flaunting their lack of intelligence and maturity by blaming others. Especially if they don't know the difference between "their" and "they're." So there.

Jun 14 - 04:44 PM

Grand M.

Grand Mesa

Jackson....I like what your saying and when I see this flick, I will watch it with an open mind even though I read what was said here on RT. But I am not an admirer of Nolan although I thought Batman Begins was about the best and I liked the one with Keaton also. He loves close-up with a lot of action...........so close up you don't know what's going on. This is a film technique when a director has a moment of just filling up time. That in itself pisses the hell out of me because I feel cheated with a cheap trick. Inception I was cringing all the way through and just got me so pissed that the hairs on my neck were standing up. If a film is good, I'll give it fair recognition but when the story gets lost and the director pulls shit out of nowhere, I sour real fast. I truly feel this guy is way overrated.
I'll be back Jackson and will look you up to tell you if I can align with you on this flick. I have no problem disagreeing but when it comes to the bubblegum kid remarks, I go ballistic.

Jun 19 - 04:47 PM

Jackson Eckert

Jackson Eckert

I'm glad you missed the point of what I was saying...

Jun 30 - 10:19 PM

Andy Edwards

Andy Edwards

I feel badly for people who gauge this movie based on reviews they read because they will really miss out.

Jun 14 - 04:38 PM

Beleg72

s long

just back from seeing this and I enjoyed it, its a good film just not great -like I was hoping but still a solid good film. It seems to me that all the negative views of the 'professional' critics is because they expected amazing and only got good, so they marked it rotten-this is unfair on the film and it deserves to have score at least 20% higher than its got. Though the UKs 2 big film Magazines- Empire and total film both gave it 4 out of 5 so some critics can give an objective score not based on hype & expectations, its just a pity so many others cannot.

Jun 14 - 02:56 PM

Tom Peterson

Tom Peterson

I am going to make an attempt to justify movie critics.

First off, the profession seems to attract a certain kind of personality, in particular, one that whines, has an affection for the melodramatic vernacular, and quite possibly one who feels they have a lot of authority and has found an outlet to suspend that feeling.

Secondly, they are people who have the duty to watch more movies than you can imagine, even the silly stuff you would not have dared seen on face value (ie John Carter), so obviously that is going to affect how they judge a film.

As for their critique of Superman, I was honestly surprised that a lot of them were looking for the light hearted Superman that had more humor and more fun. But as critics, their opinions need to be based on something less 'opinion-ated' for reliability, and that happened to be the historic image of Superman.

To be fair, critics can't go out an give everything a 100% on the tomatometer, or else there couldn't be any 'Great' or 'Legendary' films. But honestly, this Zach Snyder and Christopher Nolan style should have been expected.

I thought the movie Cloud Atlas was the best film of all time, but it only got a 67% on this website, and that was when I came to understand that all reviews need to be taken with a grain of salt and a glass of aged wine, and I believe a lot of people will learn the same thing when they find out this awesome movie was a 'let-down' on rotten tomatoes.

Jun 14 - 02:03 PM

Shane Garis

Shane Garis

My sense is the critics wanted the campy, corny styled Superman that you would expect from Disney studios. The negative reviews are very revealing as to how good this will be. What's negative to them is a positive to the many who want to see Superman done the right way. I can't wait to see this movie, these assclown critics have reinforce what I already expected to be true. That Zach Snyder along with Chris Nolan pulled off only what a dream team like this duo could do, and that is they made a proper Superman movie. Rotten Tomatoes has become one of my least favorite sites in existence, it's accuracy can not be trusted, I will trust user reviews from fans of Superman over the useless, pompous, out of touch douchbags that are commonly referred to as movie critics.

Jun 14 - 12:17 PM

John Stovall

John Stovall

My sense the same thing form the reviews. I actually don't trust critic reviews for anything heroic or science fiction that isn't either campy or pretentiously heavy.
As I've mention my entire social crowd considers a lower critic score on these sorts of films appositive. I think it would be nice if the users could rate the critics.

Jun 16 - 08:24 AM

Shane Garis

Shane Garis

I agree that would be a nice option.

Jun 18 - 12:30 PM

Juanito C. Egdod

Juanito C. Egdod

I read one critic say something like he didn't like man of steel because "Mr. Nolan ruined Batman". I stopped reading and went to see the movie and i loved it. it's not perfect but it's not as rotten like what the majority of critics would say.

Jun 14 - 09:53 AM

Logan Darnell

Logan Darnell

It is quite obvious they were hoping for a comedy flick with Adam Sandler as both Superman and Lois Lane.
All joking aside... I think that audiences should be what judge movies. Everything would be a bit less biased without all these early screening film snobs taking a pretentious overly-artistic take on the film. I love artistry as well, but I think that they are going about it the wrong way.

Jun 14 - 01:40 AM

Jacob S.

Jacob Stevenson

Just saw the movie. The pieces were there to make a great movie, but it underwhelmed. Still thought it was good, though, and I definitely recommend it.

Jun 14 - 01:36 AM

Shane Corey

Shane Corey

I think the Critics need to go shove it, this was far and away better than Superman Returns which scored higher than Man of Steel, I would venture to say it is the second best superhero movie of all time, and from past superhero movies like spider-man and Batman, the sequels are always better, i.e. The Dark Knight and Spider-Man 2 and I think The Man of Steel will be no different.

Jun 14 - 01:03 AM

Brendan Sullivan

Brendan Sullivan

This was great and the critics by far are idiots.

Jun 14 - 12:38 AM

4567TME

Ken B

Yes... God forbid someone have a different viewpoint than you!

Jul 22 - 08:03 AM

Andy Edwards

Andy Edwards

This movie was so good it set a bar to which superhero movies will be measured. All the critics who rated this as rotten (you know who you are) have lost your credibility entirely and I will never take your opinion seriously again.

Jun 14 - 12:29 AM

Leo Veloso

Leo Veloso

FACT: If Man of Steel had a scene where Superman saved a cat from a tree, it would have a 100% on Rotten Tomatoes.

Jun 14 - 12:23 AM

Brendan Sullivan

Brendan Sullivan

FACT: most critics want boring movies like before midnight.

Jun 14 - 12:39 AM

Aaron U.

Aaron Uppal

Why in the hell would you try and knock Before Midnight in an attempt to redeem Man Of Steel? Have you even ever seen any of the "Before" series? The reason they are so highly regarded by critics and audiences alike, are because they are beautiful films, it has nothing to do with their lack of action scenes. And you couldn't be more wrong anyway. If a movie is good, it's good, regardless of the genre. Seeing as critic ratings mean so much to you, check out the ones for Die Hard and 13 Assassins on here, and I think you'll find that critics have no problem appreciating a goo action film when they see one.

Jun 14 - 03:44 AM

Ash Gilmore

Ash J. Gilmore

THIS.

Jun 14 - 04:46 AM

Hipster Elitist Nyland

Hipster Elitist Nyland

Wow, Aaron. I couldn't have said that better myself.

Jun 14 - 09:56 AM

Bazooka Jew

Bazooka Jew

You have posted...with magnificence.

Jun 14 - 10:22 PM

Ash Gilmore

Ash J. Gilmore

He probably hasn't even seen Before Midnight.

Jun 15 - 01:18 AM

Tcha Dawei Yang

Tcha Dawei Yang

Thanks Aaron ! You're totally right.

Jun 15 - 08:38 AM

Andrew Settlemire

Andrew Settlemire

I saw this movie tonight and enjoyed it. That said, I completely understand where some of the negative reviews are coming from. My suggestion to the OP is this: If you don't value the opinion of most critics, maybe there is a critic out there that you can appreciate... and use that critic as your guide.

Jun 13 - 11:29 PM

Bradley Timm

Bradley Timm

First of all if you hate critics so much, why you on a critic site? Secondly, critics are people who got their jobs because there aren't just fans they are passionate about the process of filmmaking, and they are highly knowledgable about film history and most importantly can relay their opinions thoughtfully and specifically point out the reasons why they thought a film faltered, or shined. They are natural extensions of the medium. If we all settled for garbage Michael Bay movies then we would never raise a bar, and we would keep getting terrible Michael Bay movies, and we need people who can communicate these things so that we, the moviegoer, can maybe save a few bucks and a couple hours by unanimously warning us that something was poorly madee. So shut up.

Jun 13 - 10:15 PM

Ash Gilmore

Ash J. Gilmore

Except Cole Smithey. Cole Smithey is a fuckin' idiot.

Jun 14 - 12:36 AM

Max M.

The Dude

I don't have anything against him.

Jun 14 - 04:13 AM

Gimhana Fernando

Gimhana Fernando

Smithey gets it wrong more often than he gets it right.
But does get it right.
He gave these films A+:

The Godfather
A Clockwork Orange
Reservoir Dogs
Blade Runner
2001: A Space Odyssey

But I can't remember any other correct calls he made.

I still remember,however,the C- he gave Saving Private Ryan and that (In Done Corleone voice) I do not forgive.

Jun 15 - 03:26 AM

Luis Ho

Luis Ho

they give superman return a 76% and 56% to MOS? that's the big W-T-F

Jun 15 - 03:28 AM

Shane Borg

Shane Borg

First off this is not a critic site. It should be called opinion site. These are people that failed to get into the film business and now climb on a soap box to tell the world about how they should be listened to because of some douche bag insight they have cause they went to so cal for film. Give me a bread. And why don't you shut up b rad.

Jun 15 - 10:15 AM

Hipster Elitist Nyland

Hipster Elitist Nyland

Give you a bread? Would you like wheat or rye?

But seriously, this is a site dedicated to critic reviews. If you don't know that, then you shouldn't be posting.

Jun 16 - 08:21 AM

Esteban Durán Fonseca

Esteban Durán Fonseca

No, we don't. We are independent critics.

Jun 13 - 10:13 PM

Khrev Kingsley

Khrev Kingsley

Learn the difference between "seems" and "seams", as well as "their" and "they're", and I will consider your argument that all major critics are "morons".

Jun 13 - 06:28 PM

Daniel G.

Daniel Ganser

Why you gotta bust balls? This is an internet forum, not 6th grade english. Ardent arsehole.

Jun 13 - 09:49 PM

Robert Jones-Bussing

Robert Jones-Bussing

Oh boy everyone, two or more words were misspelled! Now his argument is completely null and void because somehow, two or more mistakes in grammar and spelling indicates hypocrisy in the OP, who is the real moron!

Khrev's logic, ladies and gentlemen.

Jun 14 - 12:33 AM

Khrev Kingsley

Khrev Kingsley

That's not at all what I said. There are far more than one or two grammatical mistakes in the Op's post. I did not say the Op was a moron, those are your words. I simply said I would be more likely to consider his arguments if they were well written. You and the poster before you have both resorted to name-calling for no apparent reason other than to prove your own immaturity. Hence, why I would have more respect for a professional journalist, even though I disagree with his or her opinion, than I would either of you two, or the Op.

Jun 16 - 06:17 AM

Indy Noor Primera

Indy Noor Primera

They should seriously ban Butthurt fanboys from threads.

Jun 13 - 05:50 PM

punkindj@att.net

Debra Jackson

People need or like critics as long as their opinions are the same as their own. If the critics love a movie a fan is passionate about then the fan is happy. If they don't like the film then they get mad. Just like a lawyer. Everyone hates them until they need one. I read reviews, but never let the opinion of someone I DON'T KNOW decide for me if I see a movie or if I like one. Sad that people depend on what unknown people think and let that drive their decision. Damn think for yourselves. Critics are just people like all of us that go to see a movie. They just write down their feelings. We are all critics. All of us go out and tell friends if we like a film or encourage someone to see one we loved. Sometimes they do and other time nope. So do we need critics.. NOPE but they are their if you want to listen to their opinions.

Jun 13 - 05:32 PM

Jason Marcel

Jason Marcel

Asking if we need critics is like asking whether we need free speech.

Of course we need critics. The good ones can enlighten us and expand our minds.

Jun 13 - 04:40 PM

Ron Petersen

Ron Petersen

I have to wonder if the original poster is aware he is criticizing critics. Are there any critics present to criticize his criticizing critics?

Jun 13 - 04:39 PM

Marvin Singleton

Marvin Singleton

I got it!!!! From now on you can only post a movie review if it's positive, this will help avoid hurting the feelings of other people before they're seen a movie.

Jun 13 - 04:50 PM

Nykirnsu 1.

Nykirnsu 1

But what if someone's expecting a movie to be bad? Then they'll be offended when the critics all unanimously say it's good.

Jul 6 - 11:22 PM

Marvin Singleton

Marvin Singleton

Okay I don't understand why people complaining about critics are even reading anything on RT.

Jun 13 - 04:23 PM

Ron Petersen

Ron Petersen

It's simple. They feel the temple of Nolan has been desecrated by published opinions.

Jun 13 - 04:34 PM

Marvin Singleton

Marvin Singleton

Oh no, we can't have that.

Jun 13 - 04:43 PM

Robert Jones-Bussing

Robert Jones-Bussing

I feel that the generic "Nolan" argument is invalid in this case. Not everyone who has a problem with the critics (like the OP) is a Nolanite. I fail to see why this argument even matters anyway; he presents some decent points.

But, I am perusing the Rotten Tomatoes forums, so flawed arguments and poor logic are to be expected.

Jun 14 - 12:37 AM

Alistair

Garet Cahoon

I'm feeling a good solid 89% from user ratings with a 4.4 average so we should be fine.

Jun 13 - 04:10 PM

Alex M.

Hipster Elitist Maverick

Do we need critics? No. Can their opinions be helpful sometimes? Yes. Is it better to just see a movie and form your own opinion? Yes.

Jun 13 - 03:58 PM

Esteban Durán Fonseca

Esteban Durán Fonseca

Sometimes they don't make a good job.

Jun 13 - 10:14 PM

Max M.

The Dude

What do you mean "they don't make a good job"? Okay, here. You said Silver Linings Playbook and Perks of Being a Wallflower were awful. Fuck you. You didn't make a good job in rating those two, didn't you? Don't you feel offended? If you do, I'm sorry. I'm just saying that you saying the critics aren't good at film criticism, presumably because they liked SLP and PBW, is your opinion, and maybe in reality they're actually pretty good at it. But who's to say that? Not me. That's why I said maybe.

Jun 14 - 03:02 AM

Esteban Durán Fonseca

Esteban Durán Fonseca

I said that movies were overrated. That's all. :D But, I'm not a critic, so, I can talk whenever I want.

Jun 14 - 02:51 PM

Hipster Elitist Nyland

Hipster Elitist Nyland

"Sometimes they don't make a good job."

Am I missing something? What does that even mean?

Jun 14 - 09:58 AM

Max M.

The Dude

They're not always spot on, but they're pretty good too, in my opinion.

Jun 14 - 03:03 AM

Joshua Hernandez

Joshua Hernandez

58% vs 87%. I'd say the critics fell off this time.

Jun 14 - 12:10 PM

Max M.

The Dude

Yeah, kinda. Out of 100, I would've given at least a 70 and at best a 75.

Jun 14 - 09:46 PM

Christopher Brockhan

Christopher Brockhan

I just read a review that ended with "It was good. It needed to be great." 3 out of 5 stars. "Rotten"

w t f...

so now it can only be considered a good movie if its a great movie? Its only watchable if its LEGENDARY? My god, if you enjoyed it, then its good. Then it deserves to be labeled as such on this DAM SITE.

So many reviews actually say good points after good point about this film... then say "but it should've delved deeper" or something. Ugh.

If it had, you'd be saying "whats the reason for a 150 minute superman?" oh wait... read that in a superman returns. You know, that movie that tried to be a bit campy, and human, and failed failed failed... yet is rated above 75% on this site. Such bs. I haven't even seen the movie and I am upset at the hipocricy of these critics...

Jun 13 - 03:41 PM

Stefen Echols

Stefen Echols

Okay I enjoy the Fast and Furious movies. But giving Fast 6 a 72% percent and then shitting all over the Man of Steel movie for being too serious is absolutely ridiculous. Critics literally make no sense what so ever.

Jun 13 - 03:13 PM

Sean Plemmons

Sean Plemmons

Man, I totally agree and was just about to say the same thing. Are these critics wanting me to believe that 'Fast 6' is SIGNIFICANTLY better than 'Man of Steel'? Really?! Sorry, but I have to call bullshit. I haven't seen it yet (seeing it on Saturday), but I can GUARANTEE that it is not a worse movie than 'Fast 6'. I have seen major criticisms over that fact that the movie has too much action and 'disaster porn'. Too much action?! For a super-hero movie? Give me a fucking break. If Zod and Supes didn't have a knock-down, drag-out, uber-brawl---I for one would be EXTREMELY disappointed. Those shots in the trailer are some of the things that excited me the most! We FINALLY get to see Superman fight like he does comics. Does every superhero have to be a comedian? So, it's not chock full of laughs, that makes it worse than 'Fast 6'? These critics make me sick. I hope people ignore them and go see the movie.

Jun 13 - 03:48 PM

Stefen Echols

Stefen Echols

I agree with literally everything you just said. Just because the dont crack jokes the whole movie like the Avengers doesnt mean its not a great movie. Such horse shit

Jun 13 - 03:52 PM

Payton Kiesewetter

Payton Kiesewetter

The Tomatometer rating isn't supposed to be used to determine which is better. The 72% rating means more critics recommended it than the 52% of critics that recommended Man of Steel. This doesn't mean that overall critics thought F&F6 was overall better, especially since the two movies don't have too much in common with each other. One's a sci-fi comic book movie, the other is an intentionally goofy over-the-top popcorn action film.

Besides, have you seen both movies? How do you know which one is better? Who knows, Man of Steel could be far worse than F&F6!

Jun 13 - 06:46 PM

bennett g.

bennett galef

Usually the Critics' Consensus is very close to the actual feeling you will get from the film. It is rare that it is wildly different, though of course it does happen.

Jun 13 - 02:23 PM

John Stovall

John Stovall

I guess for you for me not at all . With science fiction, fantasy ,action or superhero movies not even vaguely. With more traditional films they do OK even if they're not really interested in how entertaining the film is.

Jun 16 - 08:28 AM

Greg Dinskisk

Greg Dinskisk

I am a critic... But I don't think them (us) critics should tell you what to watch. I think they're for analyzing a film, telling the people whether or not they liked the film, and articulating why. I find it ridiculous that people judge movies before they come based on RottenTomatoes or metacritic scores, or that people take other people's opinions like a personal blow.

Jun 13 - 01:56 PM

Greg Dinskisk

Greg Dinskisk

I think it goes without saying (but for those that are curious) that yes, I think the world needs film critics the same way the world needs social media experts: they tell the people their version of things, try to get their word out, and hope to make sure those they're talking/writing to understand their message. Do we NEED social media experts in a hunter-gatherer sense? No. Are they nice and useful? Yes.

Jun 13 - 01:58 PM

This comment has been removed.

Hipster Elitist Nyland

Hipster Elitist Nyland

Dude, really? No one is reading all that.

Jun 13 - 01:23 PM

Daniel G.

Daniel Ganser

Now I wanna know what he said.

Jun 13 - 09:50 PM

Hipster Elitist Nyland

Hipster Elitist Nyland

It was a verbose dissection of...something...and something about his film school...I dunno. I wasn't paying attention.

Jun 14 - 09:59 AM

w@velength

In Your Dreams

Um, yes, the world needs professional movie critics. Stop being butthurt because you bought into the hype of another crap film and got your feelings hurt by the sad reality that people older and wiser than you called it out as the shit that it is. If people like you controlled movie scores then there would be no room for variation or disagreement in the world, just stale, boring, consensus

Jun 13 - 12:14 PM

Hipster Elitist Nyland

Hipster Elitist Nyland

Even though I agree with the gist of what you're saying for a change, must you always be a jerkoff all the time?

Jun 13 - 12:23 PM

Diego Tutweiller

Diego John Rottweiler

Once again, Chase Nyland hits the nail right on the head.

Jun 13 - 01:13 PM

Hipster Elitist Nyland

Hipster Elitist Nyland

It's like he thinks he's doing us a favor by "telling it like it is" but nobody supports him because he comes off as a toolbag in everything he does.

Jun 13 - 01:25 PM

Hipster Elitist Nyland

Hipster Elitist Nyland

And most of the time, he's wrong.

Jun 13 - 01:26 PM

Alex M.

Hipster Elitist Maverick

Yeah, he seems to enjoy coming off as a jackass. I guess I would be angry if anything he said was even remotely offensive to me.

Jun 13 - 06:53 PM

Diego Tutweiller

Diego John Rottweiler

Yeah, don't you hate it when people act like assholes on the internet while trying to prove a point? So glad I never do that...

Jun 13 - 09:09 PM

Max M.

The Dude

Yeah...you sure don't. *weak, forced chuckle*

Jun 14 - 03:05 AM

Hipster Elitist Nyland

Hipster Elitist Nyland

nyuk nyuk nyuk

Jun 14 - 10:00 AM

All-Knowing Panda

The Panda

I love critics, they have spared me from countless awful movies and also help me to prepare my expectations. Like now I know not to go into man of steel expecting anything more than a generic Snyder action film.

Jun 13 - 10:00 AM

Cameron Ballanfonte

Cameron Ballanfonte

Well, in that case, the critics led you wrong. The film is more than that. The movie has a lot of great action scenes, but it also has a lot of heart and is as far from doom and gloom as you can get. The villain is as dark as you can get, but Superman himself? Ray of hope.

Jun 13 - 02:39 PM

Shane Garis

Shane Garis

Just sounds to me like you lack the freedom to think and judge anything yourself, instead allowing others to do that for you, pretty sad.

Jun 14 - 12:26 PM

Neerja Jetly

Neerja Jetly

the person who started this thread is complaining about why there are so many intelligent people than him

Jun 13 - 09:27 AM

Cameron Ballanfonte

Cameron Ballanfonte

Nice way of calling the OP stupid for just having an opinion. Since he's reacting to the way this film has been recieved, i can see why he feels that way. I saw a preview screening of the movie, and I either saw a completely different movie than the critics, or the are too in love with the past to give Man of Steel a chance. Hell, one of those reviews goes on and one about phallic references in a Superman movie. Am I supposed to take that with any level of seriousness?
Then again, i could try to think of a clever way to call someone an idiot, but I think I'll leave that to you.

Jun 13 - 02:41 PM

Payton Kiesewetter

Payton Kiesewetter

I find it funny how you run out criticizing someone for snapping at somehow for having in opinion, and then you immediately turn around and bash the critics who have their own opinions on the film. Hypocrite.

Jun 13 - 06:48 PM

Shane Garis

Shane Garis

The person who started this thread clearly has more brain cells than you. What, is english your second language?

Jun 14 - 12:28 PM

Hipster Elitist Nyland

Hipster Elitist Nyland

The person who started this thread is actually well spoken, unlike you.

Jun 15 - 08:10 AM

SE

S E

I find it funny that everyone has been waiting for more of a serious and darker Superman movie. Yet most of the negative reviews I've read say(in a crybaby tone)"it's too dark. Where's the joy in it? Why so serious!?"
It's like these are the same idiots who gave Batman and Robin a positive review, then watched the Dark Knight trilogy and gave each film a negative review. As for Rotten Tomatoes, this site is slowly becoming more of a joke. Ever since people were allowed to post threads, over half of them are mostly trolls wanting to piss people off for their own pleasure. What a fucking joke of a site.

Jun 13 - 09:26 AM

Max M.

The Dude

Don't rant, man. It's useless.

Jun 14 - 07:52 AM

Seth Appelgate

Seth Appelgate

I agree. Most of these critics cry about minor details and it's ridiculous, they don't mention a lot of things that are really good about the movie. I'm so sick of seeing a movie that actually sucks when critics said it was good because all the lighting was nice and it made them laugh a little or it was bad because of some stupid minor detail like there wasn't enough humor for them or it's just a bunch of action (in a friggin action movie!, go figure!) Bad Boys 2 was not a very well rated movie by critics but you know what, there was lots of awesome action, it was very funny with a lot of memorable scenes and quotes. If you want a real review of Man of Steel go check out IGN, I laugh at most of these silly critics, they're just adults who grew up and became old and cynical, someone told them there was no Santa Claus while they were still in the womb.

Jun 13 - 08:40 AM

Markus Angberg

Markus Angberg

No, we don't.

Jun 13 - 06:59 AM

Ash Gilmore

Ash J. Gilmore

You do realize you're on a website dedicated to critics and reviews right?

Jun 13 - 07:00 AM

Jeffery J.

Jeffery Jospeh

@Debra Wells i agree and i enjoyed MOS and has a superman fan i loved it but this film will be divisive cause its not Donner continuity. I already knew MOS and IM3 would go down has the most divicise superhero films to come out period. For those who are bashing MOS sorry to break your bubble but MOS is making more money in the Philippines then Iron Man 3 so any marvel troll tries to pull this bullshit chill with that period. Second MOS is a great movie it has issue i wont lie the action should have been toned down a bit but the audience will really love it that's for sure. I already road off DC trolls that tried saying stupid shit about the film im not a fanboy i love DC and Marvel. From what i see MOS and Iron man 3 will go down has very divisive films of this summer i already see it happening Iron Man 3 is NOT Excempt from this has these fanboys claim do not pull that with me IM3 and MOS has far has im concerned are on the same boat being its a hate it or love it with those two films period MOS i loved it , IM3 hated it.

Jun 13 - 06:12 AM

Michael Indo

Michael Indo

Iron Man 3 finished its run with a certified fresh rating. Man of Steel will almost certainly finish rotten.

Jun 13 - 07:08 AM

scifimark

scifi mark

iron man 3 isnt anything to write home about either

Jun 13 - 10:50 AM

Herson Cruz

Herson Cruz

Bunch of crybabies! All year I've heard MOS c*ck-riders that this movie would be "Movie of the Year". Well boys and girls, it's not going to happen.

Jun 13 - 06:07 AM

Ash Gilmore

Ash J. Gilmore

Seriously man? I get that you're not excited about the film, but you on't have to be a dick to the people that are. And you are making assumptions about a group of people based on a troll's opinion.

Jun 13 - 06:09 AM

Herson Cruz

Herson Cruz

My apologies. I am excited for this movie (I am seeing it tonight), but I wasn't screaming "Movie of the Year" or made other insane predictions. It does suck that MOS is rated rotten here and mixed on Metacritic.

Jun 13 - 01:33 PM

Ash Gilmore

Ash J. Gilmore

All is forgiven. I agree with you though some people were a little over zealous about it.

Jun 13 - 11:39 PM

Ash Gilmore

Ash J. Gilmore

Also *cock-riders. You don't need to censor yourself.

Jun 13 - 06:10 AM

Debra Wells

Debra Wells

I, too, am prepared to thoroughly enjoy MoS, critics notwithstanding. Insofar ss the film not being joyous enough or fun enough, anyone who has followed the Superman story throughout the decades is fully cognizant that a substantial part of the saga is not fluffy, is not 60s Batmanesque. There have always been serious storylines and more soul-searching than, perhaps, a more contemporary audience realizes. I'm not comparing the Reeve movies to this. They are entirely different takes on the story and any good material allows for the development of more than one perspective. I intend to view this as a separate work, another take on a familiar story. I believe it will add to, rather than detract from, the fuller scope of the Superman mythos.

The unfortunate part about the weight ascribed to RT reviews is that, regardless of the subjectivity with which most are written, thus allowing for misinterpretation, overall, media constantly mentions "It has a -- rating on Rotten Tomatoes" and this persuades viewers or readers that this site is the Oracle of All Wisdom regarding the movie world.

Unfortunate but true.

Jun 13 - 05:37 AM

Abhay Kanwar

Abhay Kanwar

this is actually true, critics have started to cry alot nowdays, its actually sad.

Jun 13 - 01:57 AM

Bazooka Jew

Bazooka Jew

This thread is a childish tantrum.

Jun 12 - 11:23 PM

billfaces

h h

Well said.

The funny thing is that if MoS would have gotten great reviews, the fanboys here complaining about critics would have been using the RT score as proof of the film's "objective greatness". So much for that.

Jun 13 - 07:43 AM

Jacob S.

Jacob Stevenson

97% of the time, I agree with the consensus on here. However, even though I haven't seen it yet, it seems that a lot of these critics don't understand that this reboot is supposed to be a more serious take on the character. However, early responses from audience members have shown nothing but positivity, that this is the Superman movie everyone's been waiting for. So if the people love it and it makes a bunch money, then the franchise shall continue, making the critic's opinions moot

Jun 12 - 09:18 PM

Ben R.

Ben Rodgers

Professional critic have more insight and understanding of what makes good drama than the average drooling idiot who would pay to see Man of Steel.

You should beg for their collective forgiveness.

Jun 12 - 08:44 PM

Matt McKenzie

Matt McKenzie

and you should grow more backbone. Critics have their heads so far up their own asses that they're noses are covered in crap. That's not to say there's a lot of stupid consumers (Transformers proves this alone), but if you really can't think for yourself, than what are you?

That said, critics who don't read comic books who review comic book movies should immediately be discredited in their review because they clearly DON'T READ COMICS and don't grasp that this genre of film is shifting to BE more and more like comic books in both style and pace, which in a post Transformers/Avengers world, is very action set-piece heavy and escapist fantasy, which critics, who are so uptight that most filmmakers tell them to "get the fuck out!" these days (I've seen more and more films not allowed to be critiqued before released these days, I wonder why...)

If you're going to cover a subject, go into it with a passion for it, or at least with a well-developed background on the subject so you can truly say if something works and what doesn't.

Jun 12 - 08:55 PM

Chinedu Opara

Chinedu Opara

I've been saying this for a long time. Critics who don't enjoy or at least understand a particular genre, should NOT review movies in said genre. Example: I loathe "pure" romance movies. I am indifferent to most "feel good" dramas. So why the eff would I review either of those genres? Why would I do that???

I'm gonna be at the theater on Saturday night, with my posse, consuming Man of Steel with my eyeballs. Regardless of tomatometer score. These "rotten" critics should just effin' DIE.

Jun 12 - 10:10 PM

Justin Daugherty

Justin Daugherty

"So why the eff would I review either of those genres?"

Professional obligation?

Jun 13 - 12:24 AM

scifimark

scifi mark

This is a good idea in practice but its their job to review all movies not just movies in a genre they like

Jun 13 - 04:01 AM

J.D Dean

J.D Dean

So any critic that doesn't like Man of Steel should die? And here I thought we were above that.

Jun 13 - 01:37 PM

Market Man

Eric Shankle

Books and comics don't matter. You should judge films as films, not by how well they represent their source material. Comic book films have gotten good reviews, just look at TDK and Iron Man. Are you saying the 94% TDK got doesn't matter? Those are the same critics that are reviewing this film. Maybe MOS just isn't that good which is why it's getting mixed reviews.

Jun 12 - 10:30 PM

Jarek Mazur

Jarek Mazur

Well, tell me where they get The Avengers score ? This movie was really averange with plot holes and many stupid situations and some soulless characters.

Jun 13 - 12:23 AM

All-Knowing Panda

The Panda

Believe it or not avengers was a fun and universally enjoyed film. You shouldn't have to read the comics to make a film enjoyable. Sure maybe it's nice to respect the source material, but not reading the source material shouldnt mean you can't see the movie. That is ridiculous fanboyism of somebody who doesn't understand this industry and how it works.

Man of Steel is being considered mediocre, sorry but that's life, sometimes movies don't live up to their trailers (especially Snyder movies), you might still enjoy the film but the opinions of all the critics is not void just because you disagree with the overall consensus.

Jun 13 - 07:05 AM

Tcha Dawei Yang

Tcha Dawei Yang

I agree with Travis.

Jun 15 - 08:56 AM

scifimark

scifi mark

I see where you are coming from but they dont have any more insight than you or me. Unless they are trained in film making which most of them are not. A good amount of critics now are just people who run blogs now and most reviews are extremely poorly written in general. They dont know how to grade an entire movie properly and sometimes fixated on one or two points to make judgment if its good or bad. I use this site to actually see what critics say good or bad collectively. If they are all saying the same thing then i would value that particular opinion. I could care less about the score to be honest. Ive seen movies in the 50 range that i really liked and movies in the 80's that i havent. Although i will say if its under 20-30 then its probably a bad movie

Jun 13 - 04:13 AM

Shane Garis

Shane Garis

You might want to get off the "professional critics" dick, there is nothing professional about them, as a matter of fact they are clearly out of touch with reality, just like you.

Jun 18 - 12:49 PM

EntertainMeOrDie

Liam Neeson Trollfighter

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mm8xRvoQkc0

Jun 12 - 08:35 PM

Ben Hunt

Ben Hunt

I couldn't agree more man, 80% of these rotten reviews are actually positive if you read them but than they give it a bad score..? And the other 20% are people nitpicking the hell out of the movie. From someone that reads DC comics I love the fact that superman is no longer corny, tons of action, good character development and villain. These reviewers need to get there head out of their asses and go into these movies seeing them for what they are, not what they want them to be.

Jun 12 - 08:28 PM

Shane Garis

Shane Garis

They remind me of the morons who thought the Hulk was Lou Ferrigno from the television show. I knew Snyder would do this right knowing he is a true fan of comics.

Jun 18 - 12:54 PM

Luis Perfecto

Luis Perfecto

We can think and act for OURSELVES. We do not need critics. We are not drones.

Jun 12 - 07:56 PM

Alex Marshall

Alex Marshall

Is that why The Hangovers II and III made so much money?

Jun 13 - 12:33 PM

Stefen Echols

Stefen Echols

Seriously go read all the reviews posted about Man of Steel and tell me it makes since that The Avengers got such a high rating.

Jun 12 - 07:35 PM

WS S.

WS Shannon

I watched Man if Steel the night before, and I can say it was not as good as The Avengers AT ALL. The Avengers knew what it was, an action flick with a light and humorous tone, and ran with it. Man of Steel has an identity crisis either being a serious character piece (which it failed at I might add) and it's constant action in the third act. You see, Man of Steel's third act is basically a third of the ENTIRE film, which doesn't include the action before it. The Avengers on the other hand had a more controlled pace between the action and the slower parts which basically established the characters and their plot development, and Joss Whedon (who's a very solid story teller) understood that. Zack Snyder on the other hand is like a Michael Bay who desperately wants to be an amazing story teller, but doesn't have it in him and it results in a ridiculous amount of explosions, destruction, noisy action bits that go on for far too long.

Jun 13 - 05:11 AM

Caleb P.

Caleb Paasche

Um, the third act of the Avengers was pretty much one giant action set piece.

Jun 13 - 07:19 AM

Ash Gilmore

Ash J. Gilmore

And it was fucking epic.

Jun 13 - 07:20 AM

Tcha Dawei Yang

Tcha Dawei Yang

I totally agree with you on Joss Whedon being a great story teller.

And about Zack Snyder, the only movie he made that was enjoyable to me was 300. Sorry but when they announced that Snyder was directing MOS, I was disappointed, he just did Sucker Punch and I didn't like it...

Jun 15 - 09:01 AM

Stefen Echols

Stefen Echols

Okay so critics are saying man of steel is too big of spectacle and too many explosions in the action scenes...Okay so how in gods name did The Avengers get above a 90% by the critics. Seriously they make absolutely no sense. Thats literally the whole last fight scene in the Avengers. I loved The Avengers movie but the critics contradict themselves way to much.

Jun 12 - 07:34 PM

All-Knowing Panda

The Panda

Becuause the Avengers had more going for it than just explosions and actions, it was controlled and used effectively and balanced the action and character development nearly perfectly. It also was not trying to be dark and serious but fun and light and succeeded greatly.

Jun 13 - 07:09 AM

scifimark

scifi mark

One other thing the avengers had going for it is the characters are already well established in their own movies so they didnt need to spend as much time in that area. That being said avengers is a good movie but i dont think its worthy of it final score

Jun 13 - 10:55 AM

Cameron Ballanfonte

Cameron Ballanfonte

And so does Man of Steel.
Serious? Yes. Dark? Unless we're talking strictly about Zod's plot and how he tries to get to Superman, then no. This is a movie about a guy who struggles to find himself. When he does...the guy is happy. He smiles. He offer peace and help to those who need it. He goes home to see his mother, he gives a reassuring smile to someone who needs it. He protects the innocent at high cost to himself. And never once does he lose being Superman. Never once is the feeling of hope lost. The opposite in fact, there are several scenes in the movie where you see the character inspire hope in others.
This "gloom and doom" stuff being spouted by some of these critics is pure nonsense. Clark Kent, in this film, has some things to deal with, questions about who he is. But he doesn't let those things hang over him or rule his life. He finds his answers, and becomes Superman, he become the shining light against the darkness that is Zod. But because this movie shows him struggling with his identity at all, it's thrown into the dakr and gloomy bin, when really it's only crime is humanizing Superman by showing the world the struggles the character had in his past. It's not dark, it's human.

Jun 13 - 02:48 PM

Stefen Echols

Stefen Echols

I like that Avengers was fun and light. But the tongue in cheek humor gets a little cheesy. Im finally glad to see super hero movies that are serious and gloomy. Its not all about fun. If these things happened in real life you wouldnt be making jokes during the whole fight scene like they did in almost every action scene of the Avengers. Like i said Avengers was an awesome movie and fun. But thats because thats what THAT movie is. Man of Steel is a character study as well as an action packed super hero movie. I think the critics are ripping it was too hard. There were many cheesy parts in Avengers but all in all it was a great movie but getting above a 90% on the rotten tomatoes scale and Man of Steel getting at 58% as of right now is pretty ridiculous.

Jun 13 - 03:04 PM

Richard Bunch

Richard Bunch

Zach Synder sucks anyways. Everyone should have expected this. To bad!

Jun 12 - 07:20 PM

Cameron Ballanfonte

Cameron Ballanfonte

I expected it to be bad when it was announced. And I was wrong. The movie is terrific.

Jun 13 - 02:49 PM

Shane Garis

Shane Garis

Zach Snyder is a bad ass, you suck at life.

Jun 18 - 12:41 PM

Richard Bunch

Richard Bunch

I've enjoyed hundreds of rotten movies, but the plain fact is nearly every movie in every genre that is considered great movie has a high rating. Sure they get it wrong some, But 95% of the time they are right.

Jun 12 - 07:19 PM

Matt McKenzie

Matt McKenzie

I personally found 90% of the "critiques" of this film superfluous at best, and downright laughable to the point I question their sanity at worst. But remember, the film isn't even out yet, which means a bulk of the film's reviews haven't either. A few are out yes, but many still to come. For all we know, all the "Top Critics-we-are-so-anal-we-watch-films-about-african-incest-rape-crime-fiction-gay-foreign-films-with-our-brows-held-high-and-never-read-comics" crowd are just the first to get dibs and then the more, shall we say, realistic reviews, will be coming to light.

And if anyone thinks this is going to be a major flop on the critical level, just remember: So far holding far better than Green Lantern (in fact more than double the rating) and most from both audiences of comics and non-comics saw the film as "meh" by and large.

Sure, some reviews (like Rex Reed's) made my blood boil, but outside of him really, I'm going to take the optimistic approach. I mean look what happened with Star Wars: Empire and Jedi weren't as well-received upon release than they were much later into today after things settled. Episodes 1 thru 3 are the same (with 1 really being the only one that still gets a room of nerds into a foaming frenzy.)And personally, as a fan of Superman, comic books, and having seen enough clips from the film to get at least a half hour of footage out of it, I can safely say I will be head-over-heels in love with the film and the DC Cinematic Universe to follow, as it undid my one complaint with the Superman live action franchise in 1 minute: He punches someone repeatedly at superspeed and actually FIGHTS.

Jun 12 - 07:13 PM

scifimark

scifi mark

The movie has 80 reviews so its a fair bet its probably going to stay in the range it is now and i think about 50 or so when you wrote your comment. In my opinion you need about 50 to get an idea where the critics are leaning with a particular film

Jun 13 - 04:53 AM

Mike Daws

Mike Daws

I have never relied on another persons OPINION for a film. This site has gave bad scores to movies that I thought were excellent and given great scores for movies that I thought were terrible. The main point is I have never let the score on here influence whether I watch a film or not. Its nice to read reviews but they all contradict each other most of the time. It seems the people who did not like this movie are mad because it isnt the 1950s version of the good ole Superman.

Jun 12 - 06:33 PM

OG Cutler

Cutler's 5th Account

U MAD BRO! TROLLOLOLOLOLOLOL

Jun 12 - 06:33 PM

Diego Tutweiller

Diego John Rottweiler

This is an online professional ratings aggregator, so... yes.

Jun 12 - 12:57 PM

Rotten tomatos fails R.

Rotten tomatos fails Rt fails

Their so professional that a critic on the front page says "Man of Steel has a scope that's hard to resist, but what's missing is a sense of lightness, of pop joy"...wtf is that? Pop joy? Someone give these critics a pacifier.

Jun 12 - 05:00 PM

Cole Jaeger

Cole Jaeger

That makes sense. He thinks it needs more of a light tone to give it more joy.

Jun 12 - 05:31 PM

Rotten tomatos fails R.

Rotten tomatos fails Rt fails

Im just going to suspend further comments. If Man of Steel got any lighter... then it would be Mary Poppins...where superman would drift into the clouds with an umbrella. Their going for realism here...their are already many 'light' versions of the film...and most people complained that they had little grit to them. Anyhow..I suppose any further concerns I have for RT's relative accuracy is best suspended untill more people have seen it. Unless I can respond briefly to anymore concerns people have about the matter.

Jun 12 - 06:06 PM

Cole Jaeger

Cole Jaeger

No, the critic probably wishes for it to be lighter in tone like The Avengers for example.

Jun 12 - 08:03 PM

Cameron Ballanfonte

Cameron Ballanfonte

Cole...it can't get much lighter, especially with what Superman is up against in this film. He's facing a being of unimaginable evil and never once does he lose his hope or his desire to protect people. The film is filled with light moments. The way some of these critics sound, it seems they want to go back to Superman IV: The Quest for Peace. It doesn't sound like they want the kind of lightness in Avengers, they want goofy nonsense because it's what they expect Superman to be.

Jun 13 - 02:51 PM

Diego Tutweiller

Diego John Rottweiler

Okay, so... *They're, *I'm, *Superman, *They're, *they're, *until.

TO USE THE DICTIONARY DEFINITION:

1) Use there when referring to a place, whether concrete ("over there by the building") or more abstract ("it must be difficult to live there").
The science textbooks are over there on the floor.

2) Also use there with the verb BE (is, am, are, was, were) to indicate the existence of something, or to mention something for the first time.
There is an antique store on Camden Avenue.
There are many documents that are used in investigations.
There is a picnic area over here, and a monster and a campground across the river.
"I see there are new flowers coming up in your garden." "Yes, they are the ones my grandmother gave me last year."

3) Use their to indicate possession. It is a possessive adjective and indicates that a particular noun belongs to them.
My friends have lost their tickets.
Their things were strewn about the office haphazardly.

4) Remember that they're is a contraction of the words they and are. It can never be used as a modifier, only as a subject (who or what does the action) and verb (the action itself).
Hurry up! They're closing the mall at six tonight!
I'm glad that they're so nice to new students here.

5) Test your usage. When you use any of these three words, get in the habit of asking yourself these questions, but remember that they will not work in all cases though:
If you wrote there, will the sentence still make sense if you replace it with here? If so, you're using it correctly.
If you chose their, will the sentence still make sense if you replace it with our? If so, you've chosen the correct word.
If you used they're, will the sentence still make sense if you replace it with they are? If so, you're on the right track!

6) Recognize incorrect examples and learn from the mistakes. By looking over others' work with a critical eye, especially by offering proofreading or copyediting help, you can become more sensitized to correct usage and practice it yourself.
Wrong: Their is no one here.
Wrong: Shelley wants to know if there busy.
Wrong: The dogs are happily chewing on they're bones.
RIGHT: I can't believe they're leaving their children there, alone!

7) Practice, practice, practice! Get your English teacher or friend to say several sentences aloud that include one of these three words and write down which version they are using. Hire a private English tutor if you're still having trouble.

Jun 12 - 06:34 PM

Max M.

The Dude

I can't believe you remembered all that. Respect.

Jun 14 - 10:15 PM

Shane Garis

Shane Garis

They wanted campy bullshit, they no nothing about the comic universe.

Jun 18 - 12:57 PM

Andrew StClair

Andrew StClair

When are you going to start threatening to kill those critics?

Jun 12 - 11:27 AM

Ash Gilmore

Ash J. Gilmore

Oh shut up.

Jun 12 - 11:57 PM

WS S.

WS Shannon

It's a joke, bro.

Jun 13 - 05:00 AM

Hipster Elitist Nyland

Hipster Elitist Nyland

It's not funny, bro.

Jun 13 - 07:03 AM

Andrew StClair

Andrew StClair

Well? When? It's not a joke. It's a serious question. It wasn't meant to be funny.

Jun 13 - 07:38 AM

Lee Augustus

Lee Augustus

you're a dumbfuck

Jun 14 - 02:45 PM

Andrew StClair

Andrew StClair

Ha! Now that the film isn't getting the raves everyone told themselves that they knew it was going to get, so now everybody just tells you to ignore the critics. Good job comic book fans....

Jun 12 - 11:26 AM

Shane Garis

Shane Garis

Yep, especially when they are ignorant to the actually source material.

Jun 18 - 12:58 PM

Nykirnsu 1.

Nykirnsu 1

So? Their job is to judge the movie itself, not how it compares to the rest of the franchise.

Jul 6 - 11:41 PM

Market Man

Eric Shankle

The real question is: what did you think of the film? Have you even seen it? If not, then you may not even like it! It seems like you've already made up your mind that this is destined to be a masterpiece without even seeing it. I've read a majority of negative reviews and they are well written. You just can't cope with the fact that this doesn't have a 90% on RT like you expected it to have.

Jun 12 - 10:57 AM

Rotten tomatos fails R.

Rotten tomatos fails Rt fails

Yes, I have. I do not wish to include more specifics because most of the arguments against critics invlove spoilers. As for it being a Masterpiece, no, it is an origin story. If it doesn't have 90% why would I care, blockbusters are rather unaffected by these critics and a sequel has already been confirmed, so its fine in that department. Im mostly speaking on behalf of countless other films, but MOS seams to be dealing with this matter (not quite to the extent of other films). Have you seen it?(bitterness not implied) Because how can they be 'well written' if you haven't seen it...or did you like their use of Thesaurus.com.

Jun 12 - 11:22 AM

Market Man

Eric Shankle

I haven't seen the film, but even for films I like I respect the negative reviews. I love LOTR, but I can see why people don't like it.

For MOS, it seems like it's a typical Snyder film: bloated, too much action which overshadows story and character, bad action, bad CGI, cheesy lines, and so on. These are what I get from the negative reviews and these are valid complaints. Granted, I may see the film and like the action and CGI, but some critics didn't and that's their opinion so leave them be.

Jun 12 - 11:28 AM

Rotten tomatos fails R.

Rotten tomatos fails Rt fails

Oppinions are fine...but some are laughable. Not just the rotten ones mind you. Some of the Fresh reviews dont seam to write the most prestigious arguments either. Read the first review on RT...it says "Man of Steel has a scope that's hard to resist, but what's missing is a sense of lightness, of pop joy"...wtf is that? Pop joy? Idk anymore, I suppose your right, and just leave them be.

Jun 12 - 04:04 PM

WS S.

WS Shannon

@ Rotten tomatos fails Rt fails

Pop joy refers to the older days where Superman was in serial form as pulp entertainment which became a classic. Indeed Superman had its darker moments, but the only great Superman graphic novels never failed to shed characterization, drama, and humor.

I haven't watched Man of Steel yet, but from the words of the critics I'm not surprised why it's a disappointment. Zack Snyder's films at first seem like character pieces with raw power and emotion (Legend of the Guardians, Watchmen, and even Sucker Punch), but end up getting lost in the overly stylized and constant action sequences which overshadow his stories. And Zack Snyder I can guarantee isn't a good story teller.

I think you need to calm down and relax. If you don't agree with the critics, it's perfectly fine. But calling them out for their 'childish tantrums' is a bit ironic, considering your post. It's not tantrum, its opinions. If they don't like it because it lacks certain elements that THEY wanted, fine. Whatever. Who's to say their right or wrong. Just like your words. If you think Man of Steel is a masterpiece, okay. Whatever. Nobody has the right to argue. I think becoming obsessed over this is a pointless thing. I was extremely disappointed with The Hobbit's 65% score, yet I didn't call out the critics on a website devoted to them.

Jun 12 - 05:32 PM

Cameron Ballanfonte

Cameron Ballanfonte

I'm sorry Eric, but these negative reviews are laughable, at best. There's one that goes on for two paragraphs on phallic imagery as opposed to the actual goings on of the film and several others that can't seem to let go of the Reeve era and allow Superman to move forward in film. Still others complain about the high action when one of the chief complaints about the previous Superman film was too little action. It comes across that there are people who don't want to give Superman a chance and leave the character in the past, or in a lot of cases see something on screen that isn't even in the movie.

Jun 13 - 02:54 PM

Alivia Smith

Alivia Smith

RT critics are very harsh, so if you do not like it you might want to go to another website.

Jun 12 - 10:12 AM

Hipster Elitist Nyland

Hipster Elitist Nyland

Hey! How about that? You hit it right on the head, Alivia. If you don't like the reviews on this site, don't read them! It isn't hard. No sense in voicing a garrulous opinion about something so trivial. The film is still fresh and those looking forward to the movie are going to see it anyway. No idea why we all have to be bombarded with whiny threads like this.

Jun 12 - 10:26 AM

Rotten tomatos fails R.

Rotten tomatos fails Rt fails

RT is basically a monopoly (in a VERY loose sense of the word) on movie reviews lol. It's too convenient to just look at a percentage (thats poorly calculated) and see if its worth watching. By poorly calculated I mean that second reviews of a site are factored in, and not the sites first review...when the first review was much more positive. As for 'Why' you should voice oppinions on here it's rather obvious...RT is used too much for its relative accuracy...forget MOS (as i've already stated...petty reviews don't impact major blockbusters). This thread is mostly due to the MASSVIE accumulation of BS that has gone on long enough on this site.

Jun 12 - 10:34 AM

Hipster Elitist Nyland

Hipster Elitist Nyland

Ok, but what does this thread solve? What are you accomplishing?

Jun 12 - 10:37 AM

Rotten tomatos fails R.

Rotten tomatos fails Rt fails

It is mostly a question... if you bothered reading the title. That no ones been able to successfully answer thus far. As for accomplishing...I'd say im accomplishing just as much as you are by 'protecting' this site. Which has already lost much of its credibility amongst most people...so I suppose you've asked a good question lol. Ive made 1 thread. You've posted on hundreds rofl...the real question here is why do you bother protecting this site like a keyboard warrior on literally every thread rofl?

Jun 12 - 10:50 AM

Hipster Elitist Nyland

Hipster Elitist Nyland

Wow, you really love to laugh at your own posts. Especially when they're not even funny. I'm not "protecting" this site. I admit, I post on numerous threads because I'm a little pretentious. I'm a writer, you see. But I'm certainly not a "keyboard warrior" as you put it. I'm just sick of the bitching and moaning about critics on this site even though we ALL belong to a site dedicated to movie reviews created by those critics.

Jun 12 - 10:51 AM

Rotten tomatos fails R.

Rotten tomatos fails Rt fails

So you deny that it has any flaws? Ill respect the fact that you're not a 'keyboard warrior' so I wont use that term. I get that you see it as dedictaion to the site...which is fine. I only take issue with the "sick of the bitching and moaning" argument you make. For a site of this stature...questioning should be permitted. As should anything with this type of power...this is primarily where I am comming from. I probably wont bother doing this again, but questioning...I do believe it is well worth it. Certainly at least once.

Jun 12 - 11:01 AM

Hipster Elitist Nyland

Hipster Elitist Nyland

Ok, I respect and agree with your right to question. I wouldn't say that the site doesn't have any flaws because it certainly does. I was displeased with the final rating of the Evil Dead remake but I kept my comments to myself and had a blast at the movies that weekend. Perhaps I took my frustrations out on the wrong person. You clearly are intelligent and you must understand that I am simply bored and fed up with the incessant whining on this site about how Man of Steel deserves a higher rating. Granted, most of the other arguments were uninformative and sophomoric which is why I lost my temper today. What I should have done is thoroughly read your posts without judging you right away, so for that I apologize.

Jun 12 - 11:05 AM

Francesco F.

Francesco Fortuna

This site lost it's credibility a long time ago when it thought it was a good idea to merge the Rottentomatoe community with the flixter community. Thanks to this movies like Twilight and Transformers have higher audience ratings than movie likes Rocky. That's why we need critics, because half of the people on this site are dumb fanboys/fangirls. Sorry, to kind of butt-in but when you said that this site has already lost much of it's credibility, that kind of set me off. I'm not calling anyone here dumb fanboys/fangirls just to make myself clear. Okay, I'm done.

Jun 12 - 11:38 AM

Cole Jaeger

Cole Jaeger

The occasional mistaken rating and double review do not make the number off by more than a percent so it's pretty accurate.

Jun 12 - 05:34 PM

Rotten tomatos fails R.

Rotten tomatos fails Rt fails

Not so much harsh...harsh would imply 'critical' examination of the movie and its plot points. Rt critics seam to speak like 10 year olds with a thesaurus at hand. They make very rudimentary arguments about how "this looked like that"...and "Superman didn't make me laugh...and batman did." I like some humor in dark films because they do allow some 'breathing' time...but if it doesn't seam to work then DO NOT force it because it comes off as cheesey. Other 'agruments' of theirs include stuff like "The superman should have been more soft and "saved a cat from a tree." (If i find that review, which was on RT btw, ill put a link here)

Jun 12 - 10:27 AM

Hipster Elitist Nyland

Hipster Elitist Nyland

You have no room to talk. You mention that the critics speak like 10 year olds when you, yourself, have terrible grammar.

Jun 12 - 10:30 AM

Rotten tomatos fails R.

Rotten tomatos fails Rt fails

I figured I'd dumb it down for the sake of this crowd lol.

Jun 12 - 10:36 AM

Hipster Elitist Nyland

Hipster Elitist Nyland

Nice try.

Jun 12 - 10:52 AM

Alivia Smith

Alivia Smith

ok

Jun 12 - 06:22 PM

John Stovall

John Stovall

Maybe just look at the audience ratings. I know they aren't a "sophisticated " opinion but they understand much better if a movie is entertaining or not.

Jul 4 - 12:23 PM

Alivia Smith

Alivia Smith

Oh.

Jun 12 - 10:11 AM

Hipster Elitist Nyland

Hipster Elitist Nyland

Holy fucking shit! I never whined this much even as a child! For the love of God, can some of you PLEASE stop your bitching and moaning?? The only user upset about the ratings who isn't complaining is Ashley Taken. Just watch the fucking movie when it comes out. We all know you will so just shut the hell up about it. Jesus Christ...

Jun 12 - 10:06 AM

Mike Daws

Mike Daws

You seem to be whining in most of your posts about other people whining. If you do not want to see the bitching and moaning you can always not post on this topic or read it. You told people to not read these reviews if they did not like them so you can do the same here. Just saying.

Jun 12 - 06:36 PM

Mike Daws

Mike Daws

Oh I should clarify that I do not really care about this movie being good or bad. I liked Superman as a child and thought it would be cool to watch the movie.

Jun 12 - 06:37 PM

Lee Augustus

Lee Augustus

Why are you on a website about critics, you dumbfuck?

Jun 12 - 10:02 AM

Rotten tomatos fails R.

Rotten tomatos fails Rt fails

U mad bro lol

Jun 12 - 10:36 AM

Bazooka Jew

Bazooka Jew

Ugh....

Jun 12 - 11:21 PM

All-Knowing Panda

The Panda

I'm looking at their complaints and it's saying things like, "There is to much action that character development is pretty weak."

Which honestly if you look at the trailer it is showing off something that appears to be awesome, but if it ends up only good then you just underwhelmed a bunch of people and the rating will be lower.

Jun 12 - 09:07 AM

All-Knowing Panda

The Panda

Just go see the movie before you complain about their opinions, they are probably somewhat justified. And if you don't think so, good for you, you enjoyed a movie.

Jun 12 - 09:11 AM

Jao Romero

Jao Romero

RT has 2 ratings. critics' and audiences'. if you don't agree with the critics' and you find yourself agreeing more often with audiences', then that's what you use as a basis for your decision to see or not see a film. i for myself makes use of both. sometimes i agree with critics and sometimes i find the audience gets it better. needless to say, when both critics and audiences concur, i trust that rating more.

Jun 12 - 08:11 AM

John Stovall

John Stovall

I agree. Often reading the critics reviews also you can tell elements they disliked are elements you would like also. I'm way more an audience man myself. The critics and I tend to not look at the same things that make an enjoyable film. Strangely the audience also seems better at getting plot points than the crtics

Jul 4 - 12:20 PM

Francesco F.

Francesco Fortuna

I knew eventually these threads were going to start coming in. Yes we do need critics, because of them I've managed to avoid pretty shitty films. Also, if the tomatoemeter is bothering people right now, just look at the average score which is a better indicator, it's at 7.0/10. Granted I was expecting it to be higher but for a movie at only 67%, that's pretty good.

Jun 12 - 08:01 AM

Rotten tomatos fails R.

Rotten tomatos fails Rt fails

I too have been able to pass on some crappy films due to this site...on the contrary I have missed out on alot of good films that were heavily weighed down due to poor reasoning/film watching skills. Its a double edge blade is more to my point. As for 67% being good...Iron Man 3 has 78% lol...hmmm Mandrin or Zod. I see RT favors the Mandrin!

Jun 12 - 09:52 AM

Francesco F.

Francesco Fortuna

Oh I meant that a 67% with a 7.0/10 average was good haha, sorry for the confusion.

Jun 12 - 09:54 AM

Rotten tomatos fails R.

Rotten tomatos fails Rt fails

O in that case Yes lol, I suppose

Jun 12 - 10:20 AM

Shane Garis

Shane Garis

Iron Man 3 was not even close to being worthy of a 78%. The critics have no credibility when it comes to rating movies based on Graphic Novels, or the comic book source material. They favor hacks like Bryan Singer who shit on the source material over Zach Snyder who goes above and beyond to bring the comic book to life.

Jun 18 - 01:06 PM

Cole Jaeger

Cole Jaeger

They might sound like they focus on minor details but I don't think they do. They watch the movie as a whole and if they feel that it isn't the best it can be then they are able to figure out why. I am agreeable with critics so I think I understand their process for the most part.

Jun 12 - 07:15 AM

Rotten tomatos fails R.

Rotten tomatos fails Rt fails

If they watched the movie as a whole then there would be FAR less rotten reviews, because they understand the fact that it is going to be a series...and not just 1 film. It is a setup, base, origin, whatever you want to call it. It easily achieved that standard and WELL above it while inventing/modifying new characters to fit in perfectly with the lore of superman. For the bulk of the 'rotten' reviews the critics actually like MORE aspects of the film than they dislike. One critic seamed to enjoy the film for the entire review then basically said "But he looked like Jesus in one scene..." and the entire review was deemed rotten. Im saying WTF type of system is that...especially for one that is so widely used.

Jun 12 - 10:01 AM

Cole Jaeger

Cole Jaeger

No I think the critics honestly feel that the movie is leaving them cold or is lacking in story departments etc. PLENTY of critics have said, but hey, the movie is a good time.

Jun 12 - 12:06 PM

Bazooka Jew

Bazooka Jew

tl;dr

Jun 11 - 10:28 PM

Market Man

Eric Shankle

If the film was getting good reviews then you would like critics. It seems like you're just mad that your beloved Superman movie isn't getting the rave reviews that you believe it should be getting. It's a summer blockbuster, not the next Best Picture winner. What did you think of the film? From your post it seems like you liked it a lot. Or have you even seen it? If not, then this invalidates your entire post because you may not even like the film.

Jun 11 - 10:24 PM

Ash Gilmore

Ash J. Gilmore

Correctamundo.

Jun 11 - 10:30 PM

Rotten tomatos fails R.

Rotten tomatos fails Rt fails

If it was getting good reviews, then the case that I try to make can be seen in countless other films. Perhaps some favorites of your own? What im mostly saying is that they ignore the more important factors of film over minor details. For Man of Steel, as i've stated before, critic reviews don't matter at all considering Superman is one of the top 5 most recognizable logos on the planet. Not to mention it easily lives up to expectations. Unless you expect a constantly bright cheery fellow saving cats from trees while whistling and cracking the occasional pun referencing past versions of his character. The rotten critics seamed to reeeaaaally want that. The main point I was trying to make was that this subpar tomatometer has more influence on a films success than it really should. Huge names like these are rather unnaffected by petty critics (good or bad)because people are still going to see it to have a kick ass time...or for others...sit there and throw a histy fit/tantrum/red faced extravaganza about how its dark (which it isn't really). There's alot more story to it if the critics actually looked

Jun 11 - 11:30 PM

Market Man

Eric Shankle

Well, I haven't seen the film so I can't judge how well the story is told. But with most Snyder films it's always been style over substance. Complaints about too much action are valid because it can overshadow story and character. Now, that doesn't mean I want some kiddie Superman film where he only rescues cats and helps old ladies cross the street, but I prefer action to well balanced, easy to follow, and crucial to the story. Overuse of action and CG effects is one of the reasons I didn't like The Hobbit; it really can be distracting.

Jun 12 - 12:30 AM

Chris Etrata

Chris Etrata

For the hobbit, the main problem was overuse of exposition and the 48fps. As for the Man of Steel, I also thought it was going to be acclaimed according to early buzz. But, it's your judgement, not others that count for you.

Jun 12 - 09:18 AM

Chinedu Opara

Chinedu Opara

For all it's worth, I agree with you 100%. Some of these critics have no business reviewing certain genres of movies.

Jun 12 - 10:16 PM

Cole Jaeger

Cole Jaeger

Critics judge movies on how well they serve the art form. Therefore they have the right and business to review any movie.

Jun 18 - 03:33 PM

Find us on:                     
Help | About | Jobs | Critics Submission | Press | API | Licensing | Mobile