I don't know if it is losing it's credibility as I don't use Rotten Tomatoes/critical opinions for a gauge to tell me if a movie is bad as I would rather see for myself and make my own determination. That said for the second time in a row there seems to be a vast disconnect in reviews between the critics and fans when it comes to a Superman movie and it's quality. Last time out with Superman Returns the critics liked it for the most part. Problem was the common movie goer didn't and they trashed it. This time the dynamic is completely opposite. If you follow the reaction of the common movie goer on facebook, twitter, youtube, ect... the reaction is almost unanimous that this is a great movie. That said now the critics seem to be divided on this movie with half agreeing with the common fan and the other half basically trashing the movie becuase it is an origin story, and that is not more Donnerverse like (with already complete characters) which it most certainly isn't. As I mentioned before this time they went the comicbook route with some changes to some of the key fundamentals of the story in an attempt to modernize the story. Spoilering this next part as it goes to the tone and some of the aspects of the movie in a lightly spoilerish way. Spoiler When it comes to being Donnerverse like I think most critics where expecting to see a fully developed Superman right out of the gate saving kittens out of trees and little boys from falling into Niagra Falls while maintaing a campy but sorta serious tone. They didn't get that...so they really didn't like it. Instead you get a comic book movie that sorta takes the route of the Tv series Smallville. The tone is more serious and except for a few instances the camp is gone. Is he wearing the suit and flying? Yes....but for the most part you can tell it is just Clark/Kal-El going through growing pains on his way to becoming Superman in the most dire and catastrophic of situations. You see growing pains here and some of the situations and actions that lead him to become who we know him as today. In my opionion it isn't until the end of the movie you see him truely convert into the "Man of Steel" thus completing the new origin story. You can definitely tell they used Smallville as a ten year test audience when it came to molding some of the aspects of this movie and what they felt they could getaway with in some of the alterations to the storyline and characters (ala Johnathan Kent, Lois Lane, Krypton, Zod, ect.) while not pissing off it's core fanbase and hence you are getting a story that the fans are taking to because lets face it they have sorta been already watching it for 10 of the last 12 years.
It was sorta split but not as bad as we are seeing now. A lot of the negative reviews thought it was just an average nothing to talk about movie. Right now the critics seem to be at civil war with each other. Case in point right now as to the atmosphere between critics is best highlighted with this example. Crave Online had two reviewers see the movie and review it and what the reviewers came away with couldn't be more different. The first review Crave Online posted: Review: Man of Steel - “Man of Steel is, by far, the best Superman movie ever made.” and an hour later this pops up: Second Opinion: Man of Steel - “Whatever.”
75% positive on RT and 67% from the audience reviews. http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/superman_returns/ 72 of 100 on Metacritic http://www.metacritic.com/movie/superman-returns
On the subject of Superman Returns. <iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/ZIPqV4Z0Vu8" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
If Zack Snyder was the director for Kingdom of the Crystal Skull it would have gotten a 50% on RT but instead Spielberg name alone got it 78%. That's critics for you.
This is the type of movie one sees even if it gets shat on by the critics. But wow, it's sitting at 57% right now on RT.
Just got home from the Walmart screening. I can see why critics rate it so low. It is not a movie for them. This is a movie for the casual moviegoer. That being said, it was a beautiful thing to watch to finally get a Superman movie that uses its source material very well. Of course it was no Dark Knight but don't let that keep you from enjoying it. Superman just isn't as complex and deep of a character that Bruce Wayne is. Zack Snyder did a very good job and if you enjoyed Avenger you'll more than likely enjoy this. It just happens to be a mid more darker imo.
i just really dont understand how this can have even one negative review, this is one of the most amazing things ive ever seen.
So did you guys saw it in 2D or 3D? I'm planning on taking my nephews to the 2D this Saturday because lots of shaky camera and actions on a 24fps is a no no for 3D.
Went and saw it... One suggestion is to bring a rain coat, the theatre gets very humid from all the moist ladies.... Seriously, the movie could suck and 75% of the theatre wouldn't care, they were there to see Henry Cavil as Superman..
