NewEnglandGothic

Tom Welling?

I loved the dialogue. Kara: What happened to Siobhan? Winn: Oh, well after she went like all Mariah Carey on you, she just split. Barry: Oh, so we both have Mariah Carey. That’s something. Cat: All four of you standing there doing nothing. You look like the attractive yet non-threatening, racially diverse cast of a CW show. Who are you? Cat: Okay, tell Mr. Allen to have a good time zipping around in his red outfit. Kara: What? You knew he was The Flash? Cat: Oh, please. Barry shows up. The Flash shows up. His insistence on that silly name. And he was so unfailingly charming and nice that he had to either be a superhero or a Mormon. Keera, I can spot the extraordinary pretending to be a nobody in my midst just like that. Now, my eyebrow waxing with Arabella tomorrow morning is not going to book itself. Feel how good it feels to dial. Siobhan’s Aunt Sinead: How is my least hated niece?

A trailer to the movie. http://variety.com/2016/film/news/miss-peregrines-home-for-peculiar-children-trailer-tim-burton-1201730867/#

They did. 26 years ago.

Supergirl was a great watch tonight.

I bought the 60th Anniversary Edition of a movie that critics killed at the time as well as fellow filmmakers... High Noon. When released, critics were turned off to a "cowardly" cowboy begging for help and finally saved (SPOILER ALERT!) by his bride. Just a perspective to share (please nobody who just looked it up wiki to tell me it was always a Best Picture classic). Try to find a similiar thumbs down movie that turned out to be a classic (In the commentary of The Fog, Carpenter stated critics intially panned Halloween before revision reviews came). It's a Wonderful Life, Psycho, Wizard of Oz, and Citizen Kane were all panned by critics. All went on to become something more as the years rolled by. Yes, I looked these up to see what great movies received poor reviews when they were released after you posted this. And no, I don't think Batman v Superman is in the same category. But I do think the critics were wrong and so does apparently much of the paying audience. It was just a very thin point I was trying make. Practically anorexic actually.

Green Lantern...? Oh Hell no! Its one of those movies that has fallen from of my subconcious forever. I'll either watch First Flight or Emerald Knights before that one again. I will watch Smokey and the Bandit 3 before I ever watch that one again.

It won't drop 80%. Probably drop somewhere in the 60% range give or take a couple of points. Which is to be expected given how big it opened, the negative reviews scare off a few people and the fact that it is not a holiday weekend and last weekend was (kind of). It will still be considered a hit by any monetary measure once all is said and done. As I said earlier, doesn't matter what the critics have to say, this is a critic proof type of movie. ...and with the big opening it got, its almost a guarantee they'll be more down the pipeline now. A huge audience demand for their properties has been established for Warner/DC now.

Well now on to some DC goodness tonight. I've been home all day watching the Insidious movies (which weren't bad, but I'm looking for a new genre now ).

I bought the 60th Anniversary Edition of a movie that critics killed at the time as well as fellow filmmakers... High Noon. When released, critics were turned off to a "cowardly" cowboy begging for help and finally saved (SPOILER ALERT!) by his bride. Just a perspective to share (please nobody who just looked it up wiki to tell me it was always a Best Picture classic). Try to find a similiar thumbs down movie that turned out to be a classic (In the commentary of The Fog, Carpenter stated critics intially panned Halloween before revision reviews came). The Shining comes to mind. Regarded as a classic now but it deviated so much from the book I think people took it to task. Obviously, iconic director too. Oh good one. I remember how that movie was out like forever. Saw it in a shoebox when I was six. Personal note: Ghosts at the Stanley Hotel, yeah like that could be captured on camera.

I bought the 60th Anniversary Edition of a movie that critics killed at the time as well as fellow filmmakers... High Noon. When released, critics were turned off to a "cowardly" cowboy begging for help and finally saved (SPOILER ALERT!) by his bride. Just a perspective to share (please nobody who just looked it up wiki to tell me it was always a Best Picture classic). Try to find a similiar thumbs down movie that turned out to be a classic (In the commentary of The Fog, Carpenter stated critics intially panned Halloween before revision reviews came).

But, its just a theory as you said, from my viewpoint. Everyone's opinions are alway welcome. Afterall, why the Furious 7, Superman Returns and Age of Ultron praise will befuddle the rest of my life as why they aren't lumped together with Godzilla '98 or Batman & Robin.

Extended franchises of expensive pre-greelit projects before completed scripts and lengthy actor deals that will lead to little lower-budgeted movies getting lost in release schedules or ignored art-house films is a general reason. Nothing immediately do to the Academy Awards in general, a poster had implied about 40 pages back (that's more film folks). I think the critics just prefer the quieter ones about little kids chasing balloons in a city while in black and white or something. They find more meaning and tend to root for movies like that in general. I'm not sure the word jealousy would be right. Its more like a "disgust", especially when the mainstream embraces them. this theory probably sounded good as you typed it. however, going just off memory, it seemed to me that in addition to this barker, the last several huge budget, extended franchise "non-kids chasing balloons b+w flicks" were jurassic world, furious 7, ultron and the force awakens. i just checked, and every one of them had 70+ rt scores. I extended my original response. ^ There wasn't a Rotten Tomatoes when I was a kid, but I remember the slasher films in the early eighties after "Halloween", were fairly critic proof. I have been studying the RT scores of them a little bit and concluded audience just didn't care about what they said back then in newspaper columns and "chose" what they wanted to see every weekend regardless of the one star ratings and accusations of immorality.

Extended franchises of expensive pre-greelit projects before completed scripts and lengthy actor deals that will lead to little lower-budgeted movies getting lost in release schedules or ignored art-house films is a general reason. Nothing immediately do to the Academy Awards in general, a poster had implied about 40 pages back (that's more film folks). I think the critics just prefer the quieter ones about little kids chasing balloons in a city or a librarian battling dyslexia while in black and white or something. They find more meaning and tend to root for movies like that in general. I'm not sure the word jealousy would be right for Batman v Superman. Its more like a "disgust", especially when the mainstream embraces them. I'm sure, "Civil War" will have a "certified" fresh rating if not for quality, but because you guys are going to it anyway as you proved with BvS. A message was sent and most likely received.

Better have a back-up movie, like Jaws: The Revenge. ...Batman, Batman Returns, Batman Forever, Batman & Robin... no wait, scratch that last one. You know I've been hanging Joel Schumacher with excessive use of neon since The Lost Boys-Flatliners to his neon-filled Batman opuses. But I was watching Tim Burton's Nightmare Before Christmas last night (I found a rare Special Edition to replace my old one) and I noticed Oogie Boogie's lair was all neon. Perhaps that was really coming for the Batman movies if Burton worked on them too.

Better have a back-up movie that's slight better, like Jaws: The Revenge.

Yeah, has anybody announced that the Blu Ray will be released on July 16, 2016 with both a PG-13 and R rating versions?

That's wicked good news!

The problem I had when watching Superman and Superman II was I quite liked Gene Hackman's Lex Luthor (that'll get me some stick ). You have to hand it to Eisenberg. He certainly makes it easy to hate the villain Gene Hackman's "used car salesman" approach was a proper fit for kid's watching it at the time. Just threatening enough. I always thought he was a hoot, playing it to the line of camp, while dressed up looking like the seventh Doctor (Sylvester McCoy). But did men in there 40s and 50s at the time who grew up reading superman like that gene Hackman lex? I was hoping for a more tony stark type w less sarcasm Yeah, I was five when I saw it in a reissue at a local shoebox theater, so I really don't know. Although my parents gave me a very Kryptonian first name, they weren't into the universe like one would think. I just always assumed the first Superman was produced for an all-ages family audience at the time and not made to be taken as serious as it was. I watched countless docs on a couple special editions that somewhat confirmed this. Lex's sidekick was practically a clown for kids. Christopher Reeve took the role seriously though, giving those films something the later films failed to recapture (still haven't seen B v S).

The problem I had when watching Superman and Superman II was I quite liked Gene Hackman's Lex Luthor (that'll get me some stick ). You have to hand it to Eisenberg. He certainly makes it easy to hate the villain Gene Hackman's "used car salesman" approach was a proper fit for kid's watching it at the time. Just threatening enough. I always thought he was a hoot, playing it to the line of camp, while dressed up looking like the seventh Doctor (Sylvester McCoy).

Real life is not a Disney movie. Eventually that Disney audience will grow up and reject the fantasy that was sold to them. Snyder and company might be ahead of the curve when we look back on it. My entire adult life is practically out of Disney movie. Animal sidekicks, Wiccan princesses, snowed in kingdoms, you name it. I had to start writing about it in regional papers to better grasp it. I'm not bashing B v S (because I can't wait to see it), but cynicism and darkness isn't in my neck of the woods.

Rotten Tomatoes and Batman through the years... Batman '66 80% (30 reviews) Batman '89 72% Batman Returns 80% Batman Forever 41% Batman & Robin 11% Batman Begins 85% The Dark Knight 94% (341 reviews) Dark Knight Rises 87% B v S 30% (so far at 194 reviews) It looks like the new Batman might reside as the second worst interpretation amongst critics. It doesn't mean you won't like it. I really didn't care for Batman '66, I find Batman Forever unwatchable now and although I liked Dark Knight Rises, I did find it overrated.

I felt like I was the only one seeing Spotlight winning Best Picture. I thought McCarthy really directed a riveting masterpiece and was surprised to see Iñárritu up there again. The only other movie that could have took The Revenant and Spotlight was Brooklyn. Nothing against The Revenant (I'm somebody that spends an unusual amount of time around bears myself ), but I just couldn't bring myself to catch it. I'm sure its a great movie and I'll see it eventually. It was actually nice talking to someone about decent movies in this thread.

He never won Best Director. I'm not sure if he was even nominated. Ever. Even though Gone Baby Gone, The Town and Argo are top-notch movies.

It's a shame really. I really loved the frantic filmmaking style he did in "Dawn of the Dead." You felt like you were right in the middle of things with Sarah Polley. Then stuff started looking fakey and a 2nd unit videogame style of directing took over. I thought parts of 300 and Man of Steel were good and I really enjoyed Watchmen: Director's Cut, everything else has felt too noisy and having the same amount of substance you would see in a Ghost Rider movie. I never go to the theaters anymore, but I'm still interested in seeing the Ultimate Cut of this movie on Blu Ray despite the critical panning.